Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA) has required that families of students with disabilities (SWD) are full and equal partners in the individualized education program (IEP) planning team. These laws require educators to engage parents and families in meaningful ways. Emerging research on engaging families in technology planning and use for their children and youth with disabilities would suggest that there are continued barriers to explore. Morgan (2022) surveyed over 300 parents and families of students with disabilities being served under IDEA or Section 504 from across the United States. Results illustrated that only 20% of families had been provided information about AT by district leaders. The same study illustrated that about half of classroom educators are collecting and using information about learner-preference and -need to select appropriate inclusive technology strategies and features. These figures suggest, perhaps, both a lack of information flowing to and from parents about the use of AT to support the learning experience. This could lead to parents of SWDs being perceived as an antagonist versus a protagonist in their child’s educational journey. So how does information, support, and feedback flow to and from parents and children and youth with disabilities? IT’S ECOLOGY, DEAR WATSON Psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory conceptualizes human development as influenced by nested layers within their environment (Figure 1). The innermost layer is the child, followed by the microsystem (immediate face- to-face environment), mesosystem (relationship between the child and their microsystem), exosystem (indirect influences on the child within the microsystem), macrosystem (cultural norms, policies, beliefs, legal influences), and chronosystem (events and transitions in the child’s life, including sociohistorical impacts).
Bronfenbrenner’s theory illustrates the various contextual factors shaping a child’s development, encompassing self- identity components such as race, gender, disabilities, and health. The microsystem involves family, educators, therapists, and peers. The mesosystem includes the IEP team and educational and AT specialists. Exosystem elements encompass school and district leaders, teacher preparation programs, and family work commitments. The macrosystem layer considers cultural norms, belief systems, educational laws, and policies affecting equitable access to learning technologies. The chronosystem examines temporal influences, including historical education practices, transitions between school levels, technological evolution, and the impact of events like the COVID-19 pandemic. Parents and families of children and youth with disabilities are no longer interacting solely with the classroom educator in the microsystem. Families are receiving loads of information across the levels of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Daily notifications via the learning management system; weekly classroom-wide, building-wide, and district-wide newsletters and emails; interfacing with technology help desk staff to troubleshoot a glitchy device; and social media announcements and trends all make up the communication flowing to parents. There is an inundation of information and influence. Yet, are parents and family members able to be the squeaky wheel and use the information they are receiving to advocate for their child’s AT needs? AN EQUITY ISSUE Despite the amount of information flowing to parents, educators, and educational leaders, there is still a lingering discrepancy between what we know works and what actually occurs during the learning experience. This gap in research (i.e., what the evidence base tells us works) to practice (i.e., what is occurring on the ground in schools) rears its head in not only a technical, knowledge and skills gap, but also a gap in mindset and culture. A squeaky wheel requires both a level of technical knowledge and an individual mindset in order to influence the use of inclusive technologies for learners who require them. So, what happens when one of these critical components of a squeaky wheel is missing? Imagine walking into a 6th grade ELA classroom. The educator is floating around the classroom checking in with the learning experience her students are engaged in. She comes to one particular student and quietly whispers, “Your mom wanted me to remind you that this would be a great opportunity to use your text to speech tool to help you read.”The student reaches into their backpack and pulls out their earbuds to plug into a device. Success! This student’s parent, in partnership with his educator, had identified opportunities within the learning
Diagram representing the contextual influences on a child’s devel- opment. Child at the center, with concentric circles moving out, labeled Microsystem, Mesosystem, Exosystem, Macrosystem, and Chronosytem
February / March, 2024 | https://www.closingthegap.com/benefits-of-membership/ 15 Closing The Gap © 2024 Closing The Gap, Inc. All rights reserved.
BACK TO CONTENTS
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator