CHILD DEVELOPMENT THEORY AND ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY IN SPECIAL EDUCATION

ELISA GOPIN, LISI@LIFELONG-LEARNER.COM, MAY 11, 2010

Abstract

Assistive technology (AT) provides unique learning opportunities to students with special needs. Through the use of scaffolding, an educational technique derived from the work of Vygotsky, AT can encourage students to learn skills that they are struggling with. Piaget's research with children led to the belief that education must provide an active learning environment for students to allow them to develop naturally from one stage to the next. Vygotsky emphasized the idea that children require some form of adult mediation in order to move from one developmental stage to the next. Feuerstein extended this idea to work with students with learning disabilities and proposed that intelligence is not fixed; through mediated learning experience (MLE) a child's underlying cognitive structures can be changed. Technology can help promote this cognitive growth, but it can also hinder it. Excessive scaffolding can discourage a child from developing necessary skills, and put them at a disadvantage with their non-disabled peers. AT must be evaluated in the specific situations in which it is being utilized in order to determine whether it is encouraging skill development by providing an appropriate level of scaffolding.

Assistive technology (AT) for students with disabilities can increase learning options for students with special needs. It allows them to accomplish learning goals they would not otherwise be able to meet (Rapp, 2005). The goal of education is to provide mediated activities that encourage development of skills in children (Leat & Nichols, 2000) and AT is a powerful tool for meeting that goal. Technology can be viewed as a form of scaffolding, a legitimate method of student support. It is particularly useful for students with learning disabilities (Stone, 1998), however, it is vital to evaluate whether or not the use of a specific technology will help a student meet their specific learning goals. Appropriate AT encourages students with disabilities to develop independent skills; inappropriate AT encourages students to rely on the technology like a crutch, potentially preventing development of skills (Rapp, 2005).

Early Child Development Theory

Jean Piaget was the first researcher to systematically study child development and his theories have had perhaps the greatest influence on the field of cognitive development (Vasta, Haith, & Miller, 1995). He developed a theory of cognitive development that describes several, discrete stages through which all children pass as they mature. Piaget did recognize individual differences in development and wrote that although the stages progress in a set order, not all children pass through each stage at the same age (Schunk,1999).

According to Piaget, development happens when children are presented with new information about the world. If the information fits in with an existing cognitive structure, the child assimilates the new information into the old scheme. If, however, the new information presents a conflict for the child, they can modify their existing cognitive structure to accommodate the new information. This dialectical process drives the child's progress through the stages of development (Vasta, Haith, & Miller, 1995).

Piaget was a strong proponent of the idea that active learning is crucial for proper cognitive development. An educator's job is to provide an environment filled with activities that will help children get to the next developmental level (Schunk,1999). Piaget wanted to revolutionize the education system to create an environment where children would be able to explore the world and construct their own cognitive schemes to explain what they see. He believed that without creating their own understanding children would not be able to develop higher-level cognitive abilities (Vasta, Haith, & Miller, 1995). However, Piaget viewed learning as an individual activity and did not think that it requires any mediation by parents or teachers (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995).

Socio-cultural influences on development

Lev Vygotsky shared Piaget's view that cognitive development occurs in stages. However, he believed that social mediation is required to propel development to the next stage. He also recognized the importance of cultural influences on development. Instead of describing the stages that children go through, Vygotsky focused on the potential rather than actual cognitive development. He described the zone of proximal development (ZPD), which is the difference between what a learner can do without help, and with help. He believed that cognitive functions arise out of mediated activities and that an educator's job is to provide activities that fall within a learner's ZPD (Leat & Nichols, 2000). Vygotsky was a strong proponent of learning occurring on an individual level and recognized that development does not happen at the same pace for all learners (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995).

While Vygotsky never mentioned the concept of scaffolding in any of his writings, it fits in nicely with his description of ZPD. Scaffolding is adult or peer assistance that helps a child carry out a task or solve a problem they would not be able to achieve on their own. More importantly, it helps the child reach a new level of understanding regarding that particular problem or task (Forman, Minick & Stone, 1996). Scaffolding is characterized by affective engagement, shared understandings, graduated assistance, and transfer of responsibility. Scaffolding is particularly helpful with instructing students with learning disabilities. Ideally, scaffolding is temporary help that can be removed once the child is able to perform the task on their own (Stone, 1998).

Mediated learning experience

A successful method of education based on Vygotsky's ZPD is mediated learning experience (MLE), proposed by Reuven Feuerstein. The central question that MLE deals with is the cause of individual differences in cognitive development (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995). Development is viewed as the interplay between the individual and the environment. Mediation is the interposition of an adult between the child and the environmental stimulus. Mediated learning helps the child develop the cognitive structures necessary to replace mediated learning with direct learning (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995).

A popular application of MLE is called instrumental enrichment (IE). IE describes a cognitive education system that provides the learner with intensive mediated learning experiences. IE utilizes higher order psychological tools in an attempt to change the underlying cognitive structures of the learner. Feuerstein developed a series of tasks that help students build cognitive skills they can use for more independent learning. Using this system, learners are able to apply newfound learning strategies to related, novel learning tasks (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995).

We can make several conclusions from Feuerstein's work with MLE. Cognitive functions do not appear spontaneously in all children, therefore cognitive education needs to be part of schooling in order to develop independent thinking and problem solving skills. Because of the additional challenges present in teaching students with learning disabilities, IE is indispensable for developing cognitive skills in this population (Kozulin & Pressiesen, 1995). IE can be viewed as a method for learning how to learn, via mediation. A student who has been taught using heavily mediated instruction can become better at learning through direct instruction (Feuerstein, Klein & Tannenbaum, 1994). This should be the goal of special education.

AT can make the job of mediation easier. Technology can take on roles a teacher does not want or can't do, such as allowing for unlimited, repetitive practice or amplifying speech for a child who is hard of hearing. Problem based learning (PBL) software, for example, encourages critical thinking skills in students through scaffolding and active participation, which are useful techniques to use when teaching students with disabilities (Cote, 2007). A major goal of educating students with disabilities is to prepare them to compete in the job market. In order to do that, students must possess the same problem solving skills of their non-disabled peers. PBL software can help students become more independent and self-determined (Cote, 2007).

Special education can benefit from technology in a variety of ways. Several software titles are being developed that cover a most topics in a traditional curriculum. Simulations and virtual reality provide a more immersive environment for students who learn best experientially. Technology can give students access to situations that would otherwise be too scary or dangerous, for example handling chemicals. Content can be presented in a variety of modalities, and can be repeated as many times as desired by the student with no additional cost (Smedley & Higgins, 2005). However, it is important to analyze how the technology is helping in order to determine whether it is helping or hindering a student's progress (Rapp, 2005). There is a fine line between AT helping students develop their own independent skills and AT becoming a crutch on which student rely to help them complete tasks. Rapp concludes that "Innovative AT helps students with disabilities interact with curricular content to develop independent knowledge and skills" (p. 194).

Self-determination is a set of skills such as decision making and problem solving that revolve around the student's independence, and is considered by some to be the goal of all education (Wood, Karvonen, Test, Browder, & Algozzine, 2004). An Individualized Education Program (IEP) plan must incorporate goals that promote a student's general independence. Part of a student's IEP planning should be to list skills the student would like to develop, with the help of technology. The goals should be broken down into substeps and steps should be analyzed to make sure the technology is being used to support development of skills and not circumvent it (Wood, Karvonen, Test, Browder, & Algozzine, 2004).

Discussion

A pivotal question in determining the usefulness of a specific AT in a specific academic environment is whether or not it supports skill development in the student. Sometimes, the same technology can be appropriate in one situation and inappropriate in another. The question is whether or not it is in line with a student's IEP goals. For example, anchored instruction using video can facilitate a high-level, analytical conversation in a class. However, used in a class of struggling readers, this technique can encourage avoiding reading instruction and become a crutch for students

who should be developing higher reading skills. Used in conjunction with reading practice, anchored instruction with video can allow deeper interaction with material while still building necessary reading skills (Rapp, 2005).

Reith et al. (2003) also discuss the results of using technology to provide anchored instruction in a ninth grade class of students with high incidence disabilities. Students were more successful and more confident when presented with a video version of a story instead of text and were able to perform deeper analysis of themes contained within the story. Additionally, they required less direction from the teacher and reported fewer complaints about learning the material.

When the goal of a class is to analyze themes in literary works, this is an appropriate use of technology. On the other hand, if the class goal is to improve reading comprehension, using video would undermine this goal. Technology should be used to increase student access to and interaction with learning materials, rather than taking away the burden of hard work from the student (Reith et al., 2003).

Scruggs & Mastropieri (2007) examined relative merits of using instructed versus constructed methods of teaching. They concluded that the selection of teaching methods, which can be extended to selection of teaching tools, should be based on what will facilitate the greatest amount of learning. A teacher with a strong constructed learning background will lose out on valuable teaching methods if they ignore instructed learning methods (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2007). Similarly, a teacher with a negative attitude towards certain technologies, for example the overly social aspects of Web 2.0 tools, will lose out on its potential for improving education.

Technology should increase a student's learning opportunities. Many students with language disorders have trouble understanding and expressing science concepts because of their lack of language skills, rather than any lack of ability to learn science concepts. Science is not always a priority in special education because reading and writing are such important and basic skills (Cawley & Parmar, 2001). However, it is worthwhile to teach a science curriculum to learners with disabilities, despite the challenges, because it encourages the development of useful skills such as imagination and rational thought (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2007). Alternate methods of instruction, for example utilizing more technology and fewer textbased resources, can open new educational paths for students with disabilities (Cawley & Parmar, 2001). The educational goal should be focused on the methods that will increase the overall learning of the student and development of skills that can be transferred to new learning situations.

King-Sears and Evmenova (2007) consider the principles that should affect decisions about integrating technology into special education instruction. The authors outline three premises that educators should have when designing instruction with technology in mind. The first is that learning technology in school can prepare students with disabilities for professional careers that require aptitude with technology. The second premise that technology should enhance learning but should not itself be the focus of the learning process. Finally, educators need to keep up with the latest advances in relevant technology.

King-Sears & Evmenova (2007) also suggest four guiding principles that can help educators properly integrate technology into instruction. First, the technology used should be a natural fit for the learning goal so it will complement instruction. Second, technology has to match students' needs and levels of learning. Third, technology should help students blend in with their peers rather than make them stand out. Fourth and final, the most efficient and cost effective technology should be chosen for the job.

The authors then outline the process for integrating technology, called TECH, which guides educators so that the above premises and principles are met. The key to integrating technology into instruction is to maximize the effective use of that technology, and the purpose for which it is being used (King-Sears & Evmenova, 2007).

For example, students with a language disorder using a communication device to participate in a language arts class is an appropriate focus. Designing an IEP plan including a goal of learning to use a communication device with 90% accuracy is not appropriate. Although the student may need instruction in using the device, the ultimate purpose is for the student to use the device to enhance learning in a certain content area (Rapp, 2005).

Although the goal is to use technology to teach skills, and to reduce reliance on an aid, sometimes it is not possible to limit a disability. For example, when a student has a physical disability that limits the student's ability to participate in a class activity, in order to increase learning it would be acceptable to rely on technology to allow the student to do what a student without a disability would be able to do (Smedley & Higgins, 2005). Part of education has to include dealing with a students limitations and assisting them to cope emotionally.

Conclusion

Child development theory, as developed by Piaget, Vygotsky, Feuerstein, and others, leads to the idea that education should focus on building cognitive skills in students that will allow for greater independence of thought and action and encourage an ongoing exploration of the world. Techniques such as scaffolding and IE are vital to developing these skills among students with learning disabilities. There are many forms of technology that can be helpful in the classroom, but each one must be evaluated to determine whether its intended use will enhance independence in the learner, or encourage further dependence on the technology.

Technology in its many forms is a powerful tool in pursuing the goal of cognitive independence and should be incorporated into any environment that deals with educating students with learning disabilities. However, we must bear in mind a few principles when deciding whether or not to use a specific tool. Does the tool support skill development, or eliminate the need for the skill? Does the tool support the student's IEP goals in some other way, while still allowing for skill building with other methods? Does the technology increase student interaction with the learning material, or remove the burden of hard work from the student? Does it encourage the student to become more independent and self-determined, or more reliant on the technology? Is the content learning the focus of the tool use, or is learning the tool the focus? Finally, if there is no way to reduce a disability, for example a physical disorder that cannot be cured, does the technology chosen increase student access to learning? These are important guiding questions that can help evaluate whether a specific technology is being used appropriately in a specific situation. References Cawley, J. F., & Parmar, R. S. (2001). Literacy proficiency and science for students with learning disabilities. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 17(2), 105125. doi:10.1080/105735601300007589 Cote, D. (2007). Problem-based learning software for students with disabilities. Intervention in School & Clinic , 43(1), 29-37. Feuerstein, R., Klein, P. S., & Tannenbaum, A. J. (1994). Mediated learning experience (MLE). Freund Publishing House Ltd. Forman, E. A., Minick, N., & Stone, C. A. (1996). Contexts for learning. Oxford University Press US. King-Sears, M. E., & Evmenova, A. S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for integrating technology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 6- 14. Kozulin, A., & Presseisen, B. Z. (1995). Mediated learning experience and psychological tools: Vygotsky's and Feuerstein's perspectives in a study of student learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 67. Leat, D., & Nichols, A. (2000). Observing pupils mental strategies: Signposts for scaffolding. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 9(1), 19. doi:10.1080/10382040008667627 Rapp, W. H. (2005). Using assistive technology with students with exceptional learning needs: When does an aid become a crutch?Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(2), 193-196. doi:10.1080/10573560590915996 Rieth, H. J., Bryant, D. P., Kinzer, C. K., Colburn, L. K., Hur, S., Hartman, P., & Choi, H. S. (2003). An analysis of the impact of anchored instruction on teaching and learning activities in two ninth-grade language arts classes. Remedial and Special Education, 24(3), 173-184. Schunk, D. H. (1999). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2007). Science learning in special education: The case for constructed versus instructed learning.Exceptionality, 15(2), 57-74. doi:10.1080/09362830701294144 Smedley, T. M., & Higgins, K. (2005). Virtual technology: Bringing the world into the special education classroom. Intervention in School & Clinic, 41(2), 114-119. Stone, C. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 344-364. Wood, W. M., Karvonen, M., Test, D. W., Browder, D., & Algozzine, B. (2004). Promoting student self-determination skills in IEP planning.Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(3), 8-16. Vasta, R., Haith, M. M., & Miller, S. A. (1995). Child psychology: The modern science (2nd ed.). John Willey & sons, inc.