Chew The P.H.A.T.
Procedures and How-To’s
in Assistive Technology
Christopher Bugaj, MA CCC-SLP
Sally Norton-Darr, MS CCC-SLP
Loudoun County Public Schools
http://tinyurl.com/lcpsatvste09
February 2009
A Description of
Loudoun County

Once upon a time in a county far, far away…
– Loudoun County Public Schools
 Currently 75 schools (51 ES, 13 MS, 1 Intermediate, 10 HS)
 Current student population: 57,317+
 Current teacher population: 4500+
 Student and teacher population has increased by
approximately 10% each year for at least the last 9-10 years.
 Special education population is typically 10% of the student
population.
 The county is geographically and demographically diverse
(spanning 517 sq. miles).
 Generally, the western portion of the county is more
rural while the eastern portion of the county is more
suburban.
History of
AT in LCPS
–
Pre-1999 AT team was on a volunteer basis to meet the need
mandated by IDEA that AT is considered for each
Individual Education Program
 Mostly Occupational Therapists and Speech-Language
Pathologists
 Individuals donated time to participate in trainings and
would unofficially consult when educators had questions
about AT
 Team members made recommendations to county
administrators regarding purchase information for
specific devices and software
 County computers were both Mac and PC
History of
AT in LCPS
–
1999-2001
 Special Education hired one full-time Assistive
Technology person (SLP)
 Volunteers still participated in trainings and met with the
full-time individual
 No official procedures were implemented
 Request for evaluation forms and county-wide staff
development workshops were developed
 Individual staff and student trainings on
devices/software were offered on a case-by-case basis
 Equipment selection and ordering was handled by the
full-time AT individual
History of
AT in LCPS
–
2002 Special Education hired a 5 person team
– 2 Full-time members (both with special education
backgrounds)
 1 of these members was deemed “Team Leader” and met
with a special education supervisor to give team updates
– 3 Part-time members (1 - SLP, 2- OTs)
 The team was asked to develop consistent policies and procedures
for county-wide implementation. The only directive given by
Special Education administration was that an evaluation process
needed to be linked to a student’s Individualized Education
Program.
History of
AT in LCPS
–
2002 continued Other initial objectives determined by the team included:
– Identifying a Service Delivery Model
– Establishing a Staff Development Model
– Coordinating services with Instructional Technology
– Developing an inventory tracking system
– Developing a caseload/student tracking system
– Promoting assistive technology services
– Procuring additional equipment as needed for students and
classrooms
– Further defining the role of assistive technology services in
LCPS (our district)
Team
Progression
–
–
–
–
2003-2004
 3 Full-Time team members (2 – Special Education, 1-SLP)
– 1 full-time team member is “team leader”
 3 Part-Time team members (1-SLP, 2-OTs)
2004-2005
 5 Full-Time team members (1- Special Education, 2-SLPs, 2-OTs)
– 1 full-time team member is “team leader”
2005-2008 (Three Years) –
 Switched to a school-based workload model (05-06)
 1 Full-time Coordinator (12 months)
 7 Full-Time team members (2-Special Education, 2-SLPs, 2-OTs, 1-TRT),1
Support Staff
2008-2009
 1 Full-time Coordinator (12 months)
 9 Full-Time team members including 1 Support Staff
Individualized
Evaluation

IEP Team meets and requests Individual AT Evaluation
– “An AT evaluation is requested by the IEP 1x in the
customary educational environment to be completed
within 65 days.”

Case manager fills out Request for AT
Evaluation form linking request to specific
IEP goals
–

NOT A FISHING EXPEDITION
AT Trainers (Primary & Back-up) conduct the evaluation
including an observation(s), student interview (if
appropriate), case manager interview, and related
services interview
–
IT’S ALL ABOUT TEAMING
Individualized
Evaluation (Cont.)

AT Trainer generates a report containing observations,
recommendations, and other resources. AT Trainer
discusses recommendations with case manager
–
DO NOT ATTEND IEP MEETING!

IEP reconvenes to discuss implementation of
recommendations

AT Trainer provides training and expects follow-up
contact from the case manager
–

CASE MANAGER COLLECTS DATA ON GOALS
The process is dynamic
–
IT NEVER ENDS but it does get slower
Classroom
Evaluation
–
QUICK AND EASY
 Special Education teachers request an observation
 General Education teachers who have a class with 2 or more
students in special education request an observation
 Recommendations are generated that would benefit most (or
all) students in the classroom
 Report generated is in E-mail form
– INFORMAL & FRIENDLY
 Many students become familiar with strategies with or
without the teacher support.
– STUDENTS JUST USE THE STUFF
 Strategies and devices are used in a classroom as a whole
– PRE-EMPTS POTENTIAL FUTURE INDIVIDUAL EVALS
Pre-IEP Meeting
Discussions


After doing many individual evaluations, over 90% of our
recommendations were for items/strategies that were already
available in the school
Examples of strategies:
•Record Sound Feature in Microsoft Office
•Graphic Organizing Templates
•Pacing Boards for Communication
•Communication Notebooks

•High Contrast Feature of Windows
•Visual Schedules
•Text-To-Speech
•Social Situation Stories
Promotion of service delivery model changed from “Do an Individual
AT Evaluation” to “Just call us! Don’t write anything in the IEP until
you call us!” This resulted in
–
Less paperwork for teachers
– Less paperwork for AT Trainers
– Students getting to use strategies much faster
“Traditional”
Staff Development


AT Overviews
– Offered by each AT Trainer at every school
– Discuss how service delivery model works
Workshops
– Approximately 1 after-school workshop a week
– Initially, all workshops at AT Lab. To increase attendance,
workshops moved to schools (cut down on drive time)
– Provide individual school workshops by request
– Teachers are paid to attend (not much, but they are paid)
– ALL workshops center around tools currently available in
the school (No “Co:Writer” workshops because
“Co:Writer” is not universally installed throughout the
county)
– Fun and informal (snacks provided too)
– Count toward re-certification points
“Alternative”
Staff Development

AT Website – (No more newsletter)
–
Goal: To be convenient and helpful (not too much stuff!)
 Handpicked Resources
 FAQs
 Training Videos
AT-A-Day Calendar
– One strategy a day, rip-off calendar
– Distributed to all special education staff (800)
– Coordinating with IT and others
AT Tonight DVDs
– 2 DVDs containing 5 short videos each
– Teachers check out the DVD, watch the videos, answer questions and
return to get 1 hour of staff development credit
–


www.loudoun.k12.va.us/at
Other Team
Initiatives
-Student Clubs
-Pilot Programs
-Blackboard Facilitation
-Participation on County-Wide Technology Committees
-Software Integration (Read&Write Gold, Boardmaker)
-Assistive Technology Awareness
-School Career Day
-Parent Resource Workshops
-Administrative Workshops
-Technology Conference Participation and Presentations
-Regional and State Consortium Involvement
-AT Lab
World Premiere!!
The Practical (and Fun)
guide to Assistive
Technology in the
Public Schools
Contact Us

Christopher Bugaj
–

Sally Norton-Darr
–

[email protected]
[email protected]
AT Office: 571-252-2111
Thank you for joining us!