Search results

Despite the positive impact that assistive technology (AT) can have on the academic success of students with learning disabilities, it is often inconsistently implemented or abandoned. It has been established that teachers' perceived usefulness of AT can act as a barrier to classroom AT implementation. The purpose of this study is to expand the current understanding of the challenges with implementation of AT within the classroom environment to inform teacher training on AT tools, improve professional development around AT and address the systemic and practical barriers that impact AT implementation within Ontario classrooms.

This research examined Grade 6–10 Ontario-certified teachers' (N = 111) perceptions of AT and the variables that predict perceived usefulness of AT. The study used a mixed methods design including a survey consisting of open- and closed-ended items that elicited information about teachers' AT knowledge and training, their access to AT resources, their perception of administrative support for access to and implementation of AT, the usefulness of AT and the barriers to AT use in the classroom.

An exploratory linear regression was conducted to predict perceived usefulness of AT from AT training, AT resources and AT knowledge and revealed that AT resources and AT knowledge added statistically significantly to the prediction, whereas AT training did not. A thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses and interview data further identified that access, training, Internet and student motivation may influence AT use.

Implications for teachers’ AT training and provision of AT resources are discussed.

Editing assistance software programs are computer-based tools that check and make suggestions for the grammar, spelling and style of a piece of writing. These tools are becoming more popular as recommendations for students who struggle with written expression, such as English language learners (ELLs). The purpose of the present study is to compare the performance of four different programs with embedded editing assistance tools in their ability to identify errors in the writing of ELLs.

Repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted to determine whether there were differences in the number of errors (i.e. spelling, grammar, punctuation and errors that change the meaning of the text) identified by editing assistance programs (i.e. Grammarly, Ginger, Microsoft Word, Google Docs and human raters) for writing by ELLs.

The results of the present study indicate that the four programs did not differ in their identification of spelling errors. None of the editing assistance programs identified as many errors as the human raters; therefore, editing assistance cannot yet replace effective human editing for ELLs.

Limitations with the present study include manual verification of errors flagged by editing programs, multiple raters, a small sample size and a young sample of students.

The paper includes practical factors to consider when integrating editing assistance software into the classroom, including the development needs of students, the impact of students' first language and student training on the technology.

This paper provides school psychologists, teachers and other professionals working with students with specific, evidence-based recommendations for implementation of editing assistance AT.