Assistive Technology

ABLEDATA is a database of information on assistive technology available in the United States. Funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, it contains almost 30,000 product listings of a variety of equipment.

Assistivetech.net is an information resource created by Georgia Tech’s Center for Assistive Technology and Environmental Access, under funding which provides information on assistive technology and related resources.

The Boulevard contains the Disability Resource Center, “a directory of products and services for the physically challenged, elderly, caregivers, and healthcare professionals." It links to assistive listening devices, adaptive telecommunications products, and accessible software and hardware, among other products.

EnableMart offers computer access solutions by locating, supporting, and selling computer hardware, software and related technologies designed for specific needs.

California State University-Northridge (CSUN) Center on Disabilities Training Program provides a series of advanced training workshops to offer in-depth training on specific areas of AT; an Assistive Technology Applications Certificate Program; and customized training courses.

EASI offers online and onsite-training courses about accessible information technology, focusing on making software, hardware, and online information available to people with various disabilities.

Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA) has two-day fundamentals course in assistive technology that is designed for newcomers as well as experienced professionals looking to expand their perspective at AT.

University at Buffalo has a free Assistive Technology Training Online Project which provides internet-based training in both general and specific areas of adapted computer use. The focus is on AT applications that address the needs of students with disabilities.

Fichten, C., Asuncion, J., Barile, M., Fossey, M., & Robillard, C. (2001). Computer technologies for postsecondary students with disabilities I: Comparison of student and service provider perspectives. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 15(1), 28-58.

Abstract: Three studies examined the computer needs and concerns of Canadian postsecondary students with disabilities. Data detail differences in students' and disability service providers' perspectives, which computer technologies students need and use, what advantages and disadvantages these have, what factors help or prevent students from using these technologies, and what can be done to enhance opportunities and remove barriers.

Fichten, C., Asuncion, J., Barile, M., Fossey, M., Robillard, C., & Wolforth, J. (2001). Computer technologies for postsecondary students with disabilities II: Resources and recommendations for postsecondary service providers. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability,15(1), 59-83.

Abstract: Uses the results of a series of empirical studies of the computer-related needs and concerns of students with disabilities and the individuals responsible for providing services to them to discuss evolving issues, provide a list of resources, and make practical recommendations about what postsecondary personnel can do to facilitate access to computer and information technologies.

Fossey, M. E., Asuncion, J. V., Fichten, C., Robillard, C., Barile, M., Amsel, R., Prezant, F., & Morabito, S., (2005). Development and Validation of the Accessibility of Campus Computing for Students with Disabilities Scale: Service Providers’ Perspective. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 18(1), 23-33.

Abstract: Responses by 156 Canadian college and university professionals who provide disability-related services to students were used to construct, develop, and validate the Accessibility of Campus Computing for Students With Disabilities Scale (ACCSDS): Service Provider Version. This is a 19-item, self-administered tool that evaluates institutional computing accessibility for students with disabilities from the perspective of disability service providers. The measure contains 4 empirically derived subscales: Access to Adaptive Computers, Infrastructure and Collaboration, Academic Inclusion, and Adaptive Technology Competence. Results indicate that these 4 factors account for 54% of the variability in total scores. The data also show good internal consistency for the subscales and the full scale. Data concerning validity show strong relationships between scores and a key criterion variable. The ACCSDS can be used to evaluate disability service providers’ views about an institution’s technology accessibility, to provide empirical data to influence information and instructional technology policy, and to pinpoint areas of strength as well as areas needing improvement.