As you can tell, I thought that the SETT approach was great. I prefer the systematic approach to - it takes the guess work and the subjectivity out of the situation. An IEP meeting is potentially an emotionally charged situation so bringing transparency and clear, concise questions and answers allows for the facts to the forefront. It is like a mathematical equation in the beginning - then the human side is added with the discussions among parents, teachers, student and specialists.
I thought the other tools - AT feature match and tech matrix brought another level of straightforwardness to the situation and made it easier to reach the goal of a well written AT aspect to an IEP.
I thought the independent consultant that said - it doesn't matter where you put the AT part of the IEP - it is more important that you write it well and cover all the tools that the student may need - from pencil grips to the more expensive high tech tools, if that is what the student needs to be successful in the educational setting and in his life.
www.atinternetmodules.org/mod_list.php
I agree Karen I like the systematic approach to the SETT framework. Prior to learning the SETT framework I as very intimidate by the idea of finding/considering AT devices for students. Then I became even more intimidate when I thought about writing an IEP that include AT; however, the consultant that discussed the how to include AT in IEP put my concerns to rest. As educators of children with special needs, we need to make sure that our students needs are being met in all classrooms across all subject areas.
ReplyDelete