Year of Publication

2007

Document Type

Dissertation

College

Education

Department

Special Education

First Advisor

Ted S. Hasselbring

Abstract

Survey research was used to conduct a formative evaluation of Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology Services (QIAT) by 120 leaders in the field of assistive technology. Survey respondents represented five different types of assistive technology interest and responsibilities: consumers of assistive technology services and family members, district and regional assistive technology leaders, state and national assistive technology leaders, assistive technology leaders in higher education, and assistive technology policy leaders. Respondents reviewed QIAT and completed either print or online electronic versions of a survey in which they provided their perspectives on the need for quality indicators, the importance of each quality indicator contained in QIAT, the clarity of each accompanying intent statement, and the usefulness of QIAT to people with assistive technology interests and responsibilities similar to their own. Results of this investigation suggested that quality indicators are needed to guide the development and delivery of assistive technology services, that the 39 quality indicators contained in QIAT are important, and that QIAT would be useful to people with varied interests and responsibilities in assistive technology. The perceptions of the majority of the participants about QIAT were positive. Analysis of the rankings indicated that every quality indicator contained in QIAT was considered important by greater than 92% of the participants and every intent statement was considered clear by greater than 82% of the participants. Results also indicated that participants believed that some revisions in the wording and reordering of the items contained in QIAT would increase clarity and that the identification and development of training and products aligned to QIAT could aid in the development and delivery of effective assistive technology services. Proposed revisions were made in QIAT as a result of respondent recommendations. Implications for practice, future development, and additional research also were proposed.

Share

COinS