Problems with Labeling Technology
Friday, January 28th, 2005
© Richard Wanderman
The biggest problem with technology that is classified as “assistive” rather than just everyday technology that anyone uses is the branding/labeling/stereotyping that can take place.
I’d have to say that this is the single biggest reason that certain tools don’t get used enough in inclusive classrooms.
The social stigma of being different generally outweighs the benefits of using a great tool.
And the sad part is that many of the tools this happens to are not “special ed” tools; they’re general writing and productivity tools yet if they are somehow linked to “special ed” they carry the stigma.
Solution for an inclusive classroom: everyone uses these tools including the teacher.
Solution for the educational establishment: don’t classify technology just for funding purposes because that classification will come back to haunt you later in non-use.
Eyeglasses are assistive technology. All technology is assistive so get rid of the entire term “assistive technology” and aside from stupid funding issues, the problem goes away.
I’m not very PC but if you want to look at people as people and not as groups based on ability and disability then you have to drop the classification of tools for each group.
I agree with you on this, and have other examples/rationale for this approach.
First, “special” sofware can conlict with other software.
You can expect standard software (like MS Office) avanilable in most environments. I use auto-correct in Word as abbreviation expansion.
Finally, from the development point of view, disability is irrelevant. It’s about user functional requirements.
I totally agree: special software ought not be special (the software inclusion model, or universally accessible OSs) and when one adds it rather than asking the maker of the OS to add a feature one adds to the pile of stuff the computer has to deal with.
Some special stuff, however, is well designed and puts little load on the OS or computer and makes the computer useable for someone who couldn’s use it otherwise and doesn’t want to wair for Bill or Steve to take a hint.