Document Type

Presentation

Loading...

Media is loading
 

Publication Date

12-13-2025

Keywords

assistive technology, special education, transition planning, intellectual disability

Comments

Presentation: 21:18

Presentation completed in partial fulfillment of a Post Professional Occupational Therapy Doctorate degree at Thomas Jefferson University.

Abstract

Introduction
In the United States, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act mandates that schools consider assistive technology (AT) during transition planning for students with intellectual disability (ID) as they move from school to adult life (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004). AT can improve outcomes for adults with ID across multiple areas, including vocational, daily living, and communication (Johnson et al., 2023; Morash-Macneil et al., 2018). However, AT is often underutilized by adults with ID (Boot et al., 2017; Alshamrani et al., 2025). The Quality Indicators Assistive Technology (QIAT)-Transition framework provides best practice guidelines, in the form of six quality indicators, for facilitating AT transitions into adulthood (QIAT, 2015). However, no research has used these guidelines to explore the quality of AT transitions.

Objective
Thus, this study examined how special education teachers and related service providers perceive the quality, supports, and barriers of AT transitions from school to adult life for students with ID in the United States.

Methods
The study used a descriptive e-survey and collected data from a convenience sample of 143 special education teachers and related service providers. Quantitative survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and open-ended responses were analyzed using directed content analysis based on the modified version of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) (Damschroder et al., 2022).

Results
For each of the six QIAT-Transition quality indicators, approximately half (40.6%–66.5%) of the respondents reported that their practice was aligned with the stated indicator. Participants reported that their practice was least aligned with quality indicator 4 (43.4%), which refers to identifying AT needs in the adult environment, and indicator 6 (40.6%), which refers to addressing specific equipment, training, and funding issues. Supports and barriers were primarily identified within CFIR’s Inner Setting domain, although they were also represented across all five domains. Key supports included Improving Documentation (Inner Setting domain), Training (Inner Setting domain), and Increasing Family Knowledge (Individual domain). Key barriers were Barriers to Adult Services (Outer Setting domain), Policies & Procedures (Inner Setting domain), Challenges with AT Use (Inner Setting domain), Staff Characteristics (Individual domain), and Challenges with Team Collaboration (Implementation domain).

Conclusion
Results indicate limited alignment of practice with QIAT-Transition, which may impact AT use as young adults transition from school to adult life. School teams should consider how the identified supports and barriers can guide AT transition planning in their school(s). These findings can inform professional development initiatives and policies aimed at strengthening AT transition planning and ensuring continuity of support for students with ID.

References

Alshamrani, K. A., Roll, M. C., Taylor, A. A., Sharp, J. L., & Graham, J. E. (2025). Assistive technology services for transition-aged young adults with disabilities in state-federal vocational rehabilitation programs. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 20(8), 2804–2820. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2025.2532702

Boot, F. H., Dinsmore, J., Khasnabis, C., & MacLachlan, M. (2017). Intellectual disability and assistive technology: opening the GATE wider. Frontiers in Public Health, 5(19), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00010

Damschroder, L.J., Reardon, C.M., Widerquist, M.A.O. (2022). The updated consolidated framework for implementation research based on user feedback. Implementation Science, 17(75), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108–446, § 1400 et seq. (2004)

Johnson K.R., Blaskowitz, M.G., & Mahoney, W.J. (2023). Technology for adults with intellectual disability: Secondary analysis of a scoping review. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 90(4), 395-404. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084174231160975

Morash-Macneil, V., Johnson, F., & Ryan, J. B. (2018). A systematic review of assistive technology for individuals with intellectual disability in the workplace. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(1), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417729166

Quality Indicators Assistive Technology (QIAT), 2015. Quality indicators assistive technology-transition. https://qiat.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/QI-6_-Assistive-Technology-Transition.pdf

Synopsis
Schools are required to consider assistive technology when helping students with intellectual disability transition from school to adult life. However, assistive technology is often underused in adulthood for this population. This study surveyed special education teachers and related service providers to determine how closely their practices aligned with best practice quality indicators. About half reported following best practices. Common challenges included limited adult services, district policies, and difficulty collaborating. Helpful supports included better documentation, staff training, and increased family knowledge. The findings suggest schools can improve planning to help students use AT more successfully in adulthood.

Acknowledgments
Marie-Christine Potvin, PhD, OTR/L; Pamela Talero-Cabrejo, OTD, BSOT(Col), OTR/L, CPAM, COT

Language

English

Download

Share

COinS