Many research studies and meta-analyses of studies with an equity focus concentrate on computer use and the effects of race, gender and social class difference and more rarely students with learning disabilities. Very rarely do students with intellectual disabilities rate a mention. Sutton (1991) reviewed a decade of research concerning computers and equity but in her otherwise comprehensive report did not include anything at all about computers and children with intellectual disabilities. Likewise in the U.S. Becker and Sterling’s (1987) review concentrated on race, gender and social status, while an Australian review by Chambers and Clarke (1987) also followed the same themes without considering equity issues related to students with intellectual disabilities.
Gardner and Bates (1991, p.98) highlighted that "although numerous remarks from special education teachers and professionals assert that computers motivate learning and improve the attitudes of exceptional students, detailed empirical analysis or validation of comparable themes has generally been absent in the literature." A search of the ERIC database with the terms ‘computers’ and ‘intellectual disabilities’ fetched a total blank whereas ‘mental retardation’ and ‘computers’ revealed only 98 articles. When these were examined to determine studies concerning students with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities, less than 10 remained. Out of these only two looked at interventions based on higher order or challenging computer tasks and these reports did not contain compelling quantitative or qualitative evidence. These students with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities are the students most likely to be included in regular schools as a result of changing parental preferences, societal expectations or new legislation and this is an area where many teachers are not confident about developing educational programs of any kind, especially in areas such as computing where they may also lack confidence.
A recent article in the Queensland Government magazine, Education Views (Anderson, 1997) led to a flood of E-mail to the author from teachers across the state requesting the text of previous journal articles on implementing a technology plan with a focus on students with disadvantages. Requests were also received from university students and a ministerial committee on equity matters. This is a strong indication, at least on the local level, that a need exists to more fully explore and document this area.
The area of computer attitudes, defined as students’ likes and dislikes about computer work, have been well researched with the general school population, although only a few studies exist in relation to students with intellectual disabilities. Gage and Berliner (1984) found that attitudes played a significant role in special needs students’ arousal to action and the successful performance of purposeful activities.
Given that this study focuses on an intervention that seeks to capitalise on positive computer attitudes, it is important to examine the findings of the few studies that have been conducted in this area. Gardner and Bates (1991, p.101) studied 59 American students with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities from four different geographic areas. Public and private schools were covered, so a wide range of socio-economic differences were evident. The students were predominantly girls (68%) and were in the older age group of 13-23. A structured interview technique was used and the data were categorised to determine the students’ attitudes and attributions of these attitudes. The following is a summary of the findings:
1) Computer work was considered easier than other kinds of school work.
2) Students thought they learned more when they used computers
3) Students thought that the computer was a good teacher
4) Students liked using computers in school.
5) Students believed that it was easy to know when they got things right on the computer, however it was harder to know if they got things wrong.
6) Students felt smart when they used computers
7) Students wanted to use computers more during the school day.
8) Students believed that using computers represented work not play.
9) Computer work was considered more enjoyable than other kinds of school work.
10) Despite student’s attraction to computer work, the majority felt that they did their best schoolwork at their desks versus the computer,
The last finding could be related to the fact that in all sites studied, the principal focus of computer use was in the domain of skill building using ‘drill and practice’ type software and on the average the students accessed the computers only twice a week in sessions of 22 minutes. This study provided useful information but may not necessarily equate to students with intellectual disabilities in regular classroom settings, the students are of an older age group and were not involved in computer activities engaging the students in higher cognitive skills. Further examination of students’ computer attitudes where the students with intellectual disabilities are included in regular class settings is long overdue considering the ever increasing placement of these students in mainstreamed situations.
During 1994 a program involving the use of technology was devised to meet the special needs of a 10 year old student with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities who had been ‘included’ in a regular Year Five classroom. This program utilised ‘Microsoft Publisher’ as a means of providing higher order cognitive challenges to a female student with an obvious technology interest. The basic plan was to build up the student’s skill level using this software to a level above that evident in her regular class peers and to encourage her to develop and use peer tutoring skills to share this expertise with her classmates. Through this process it was hoped that she would overcome her fear of text, her lack of confidence with classmates and her poor verbal communication skills and her perceived low levels in some self-concept areas. The success and details of this program has been outlined elsewhere (Anderson, 1995a; Anderson, 1995b; Lankshear & Bigum, 1998).
The shortcomings of the program (from a research point of view) include a lack of evidence about the student’s academic and social skills at the outset of program implementation and a lack of rigorous data collection to support the claim that positive changes occurred in the areas of academic, social and self-concept. Although the anecdotal evidence collected was compelling and echoed by independent observers, the literature about the program could easily be described by critics such as Gerber (1995) as ‘testimonials’ rather than effective research. Despite the shortcomings, the program offered an effective platform for the development of a more formalised plan to be developed for implementation with a larger group. The problems faced by the original student such as fear of text, lack of social confidence and poor communication skills appeared to be common to other students with intellectual disabilities. Objectives developed for the program include:
a. Developing a framework for the intervention based on the pilot study (Anderson, 1995c)
b. Investigating the characteristics considered to be critical in the success of the pilot study :- the inclusion process, peer tutoring, constructivist learning theory, self-concept and computing for students with intellectual disabilities.
c. Modifying the framework according to information ascertained from the literature review.
d. Investigating the pre-intervention levels of reading, spelling computer skills and self-concept areas.
e. Implementing the intervention and conduct a case study focussing on communication
f. Investigating post-intervention measures for reading, spelling computer skills and self-concept areas.
g. Extracting and analysing data concerning student outcomes.
h. Drawing implications for instruction.
After the formalised program was developed and test instruments selected, six participants were chosen from three schools in a small rural town in Queensland to take part in the program. These students have been acquiring skills in desktop publishing and multi-media authoring over the past 18 months and have been developing and using peer tutoring skills. After July, 1998, the quantitative and qualitative data collected will be analysed in the light of the research questions: 1) Are any changes to self-perception evident after the program ?
2) Are any changes to academic performance in reading or spelling or computer skills evident after the program?
3) How does the communication of the participants develop during the peer tutoring section of the intervention? Why does the communication pattern change or not change during the intervention?
Although much work remains to be completed in the data collection and analysis, tentative results suggest that the program has been successful in increasing the students academic skills in several areas and enriching their social and communication skills. An obvious change in the student’s work habits has been an increasing independence with both computer operations and text construction. In the early stages of the intervention several of the participants would not continue typing until the teacher answered a question such as, "How do you spell …..?" The program steps successfully aimed reducing unnecessary teacher input and encouraging the students to make their own decisions with design and text production, to consult with each other and to share their knowledge and skill with their peers. Skill building through drill and practice software may be a valuable tool in certain situations but it should not be overutilized at the expense of software or programs designed to enhance higher order
thinking skills.
References
Anderson, N. (1995a). Inclusive education: Using technology to provide higher cognitive challenges. Australian Disability Review, 2, 32-39.
Anderson, N. (1995b). Beyond drill and practice: higher order thinking skills through technology. Proceedings of Second Australian Conference on Technology for People with Disabilities. Adelaide, 167-170.
Anderson, N. (1995c). No, Belinda set everything up ... QUICK - Journal of the Queensland Society for Information Technology in Education, 54, 8-12.
Anderson, N. (1996). When Technology and Equity Become Partners. Wide Bay Regional SPSS Project.
Anderson, N. (1997). Implementing a technology plan. Education Views, 6, 17, 8.
Sutton, R. (1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 61, (4), p. 475-503.
Becker, H., & Sterling, C. (1987). Equity in school computer use: National data and neglected considerations. Journal of Educational Computer Research, 3, (3), 289-309.
Chambers, S., & Clarke, V. (1987). Is inequity cumulative? The relationship between disadvantaged group membership and students’ computing experience, knowledge, attitudes and intentions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, (4), 495-517.
Gardner, J., & Bates, P. (1991). Attitudes and attributions on use of microcomputers in school by students who are mentally handicapped. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, March, 98-107
Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1984). Educational Psychology (3rd Ed.). Dallas: Houghton Mifflin.
Lankshear, C., & Bigum, C. et al, (1998). "Digital Rhetorics , Changing Literacies." DEETYA Federal Government Report.
Gerber, M. (1995). Inclusion at the High-Water Mark? Some Thoughts on Zigmond and Baker’s Case Studies of Inclusive Educational Programs. The Journal of Special Education, 29 (2), 181-191.