Assistive Technology, Accessible Materials, and Sensory Tools
Assistive Technology, Accessible Materials, and Sensory Tools
This domain tests the AT decision-making process, the range of tools from a typoscope to a refreshable braille display, and how accessible materials reach students. Items often describe a task and ask for the best feature match, or ask what is missing from an AT plan.
Definitions and process
- IDEA defines AT as any item, equipment, or product system used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities, and AT services as evaluation, acquisition, training, and maintenance.
- The IEP team must consider AT for every student with a disability; consideration is not the same as a full evaluation.
- SETT (Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools) and feature matching prevent device-first decisions: describe the student's needs and task demands, then choose tools.
- A device without training, mounting, maintenance, and data on use is not an implemented AT plan.
The continuum
- No-tech and low-tech: typoscope, bold-line paper, slant board, book stand, filters, task lighting, tactile labels, signature guides.
- Optical devices: hand-held and stand magnifiers, monocular telescopes; prescribed through a clinical low vision evaluation and trained by the TVI.
- High-tech: video magnifiers (CCTV), screen magnification (ZoomText), screen readers (JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver), refreshable braille displays, braille notetakers, OCR and scanning apps, GPS.
- Accessible instructional materials: NIMAS is the national source-file standard; NIMAC stores files; Bookshare and Learning Ally distribute accessible formats. Specialized formats include braille, large print, audio, and digital text.
Producing and choosing materials
- Embossers, swell paper, thermoform, and 3D printing create tactile graphics; follow tactile graphics standards and proofread by touch.
- Digital accessibility matters: WCAG and Section 508, alt text, headings, accessible PDFs, keyboard navigation.
- Consider portability, lighting, power, durability, and student preference, not just the newest device.
Worked example
A high school student with low vision must read long PDFs for history and take notes in class. Reasoning: specify tasks first, namely sustained reading, searching text, note-taking, and portability. A tablet with reflow, magnification, OCR, and a keyboard may fit better than a desktop CCTV, which is strong for worksheets but not for carrying between classes. Trial both, collect data on reading speed and fatigue, then write the AT into the IEP with training and a backup plan.
Traps that cost marks
Choosing a device before defining the task; purchasing without training or maintenance; assuming one tool covers all environments; ignoring inaccessible websites and PDFs; forgetting that low-tech tools are AT too; failing to document AT consideration.