Rebecca Curtis, M.Ed.
LEARNING DISABILITIES RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER
Research Director
Roosevelt Warm Springs Institute for Rehabilitation
Warm Springs, Georgia
Internet: rcurtis@moe.coe.uga.edu

The issue of accommodations and modifications for adolescence and adults with learning disabilities attending postsecondary institutions and/or participating in our workforce is a critical problem for consumers, service providers, faculty and administration. The profile of many adults with learning disabilities has been documented to be one of an early history of academic, social and organizational problems, as well as high unemployment (Malcolm, Polatajko & Simmons, 1990). Unfortunately, the profile of the successful adult with learning disabilities studied by researchers (Ginsberg, Gerber &Reiff, 1994) is not often typical for the majority of adolescence and adults attempting to find financial security in today's world (Gerber, Schnieder, Paradise, Reiff, Ginsberg, & Popp, 1990; Gregg, in press; Minskoff, 1996).

Work on-going at the University of Georgia/Roosevelt Warm Springs Institute for Rehabilitation Learning Disabilities Research and Training Center (LDRTC) is focusing on the match between subgroups of learning disabilities and appropriate accommodations and modifications. The success of any high or low technology accommodation is the match between an individualÕs profile and the accommodation. Not all accommodations are appropriate for all individuals with learning disabilities. Very little empirically-based research is available that correlates type of learning disability to appropriate accommodations. However, this is exactly the information that consumers attending colleges, as well as their service providers or faculty are requesting. In addition, the LDRTC is conducting a research project that is teaching professionals across disciplines how to match profiles to accommodations and modifications. A critical training need for service providers across disciplines is the opportunity to match consumer profiles, based on empirical research, to the appropriate accommodations and modifications for individual independence.

Many individuals with learning disabilities attending postsecondary institutions and/or engaged in the workforce make use of self- accommodations. Self-accommodations are those accommodations that the individual provides themselves based on their own knowledge of how they learn which do not require any program or environmental modifications (e.g., lap top computers). It is equally if not more important for consumers to have a clear idea of their strengths and weaknesses so that they can identify the type of accommodations necessary for success across tasks and contexts.

Litigation related to higher education cases and learning disabilities appear to be addressing issues of reasonable accommodations for an academic program of study, undue hardship on an institution providing reasonable accommodations, testing accommodations, and whether the institution bears responsibility for an instructor who refuses to allow an accommodation (Gregg, Johnson & McKinley, 1996). Consumers and professionals must always keep in mind that accommodations are determined on a case-by-case basis.

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

Learning according to some theorist is acquired through a process of social interactions resulting in complex dialogues (Bakhtin, 1986; Vygotsky,1962, 1978). Language, whether that is nonverbal or verbal communication, becomes the tools to accomplish learning tasks. Wertsch (1991) has stressed Vygotsky's (1962) theory of learning privileges verbal social interaction, thus, ignoring the nonverbal indices by which we communicate with each other. While some individuals choose to utilize verbal over nonverbal, one mode of communication is not more important than another. Using different tools, verbal or nonverbal, we all apply tools in a myriad of approaches across tasks and contexts. Sensitivity to individual choices, learning style, personality and cognitive profile is the key to the success of a given tool. Whether one is using a low technology accommodation (i.e., taperecorder) or a high technology accommodation (i.e., word processor), the crucial variable is the match between the individual person, the context, the task and the tool. Considering the whole person in a given time and place is necessary for successful accommodation and modification of school or work tasks. Far too often, professionals and consumers seek a recipe book that identifies isolated variables with no consideration given to the interaction of the total person, place and task. For instance, if you are choosing an interactive video disk to help an individual with social skills and do not consider the level of reading or oral language competence required to understand the information presented, the technology could be counterproductive to the outcome.

Accordingly, Hawkrdige, Vincent, & Hayes (1985) outline three categories essential to consider in the needs assessment for adults with disabilities; the nature of the disability; the stage of the individual's intellectual, social, and physical development; and his or her educational level. In addition to these categories focusing on the individual, it is imperative to evaluate the demands of the cultural context and the task. For instance an instructional setting that requires quick motor responses might require a different adaptive device than a setting where the student is unlimited in their response time. Setting can impact on type of adaptive need, leading to different resource needs and adjustments.

Cluster analyses completed at the University of Georgia/Roosevelt Warm Springs Institute for Rehabilitation LDRTC identified three subgroups of profiles most common among adults with learning disabilities (Gregg & Curtis, in review). Data was collected on all the individuals included in the study that integrated information across background, cognitive, language, academic and behavior variables. Group one consists of individuals whose underlying cognitive processing problems impact on the acquisition and expression of oral language. The second group are individuals for whom memory is the significant process impacting on learning. Group three are those individuals for whom reasoning, in particular, nonverbal reasoning is the significant cognitive barrier to learning. Through a participatory action research model, identified profiles of adults with learning disabilities have been matched to high and low technology most effective for that profile. The focus is to identify the connection between the function of the technology and the needs of the adult (Raskind & Scott, 1993).

In an attempt to illustrate briefly the connection between a personÕs cognitive/emotional profile, as well as the cultural context, a portion of a case from the LDRTC Functional Assessment, Accommodation and Assistive Technology Manual (Gregg, Curtis & McPeek, 1996) will be presented. Individuals interested in obtaining further information should contact the LDRTC for a more indepth discussion of the manual. The following case, Mary, is only one of the three major profiles identified as frequently observed among the adult population with learning disabilities. MaryÕs weaknesses impact significantly on both social and academic success.

CASE EXAMPLE: REASONING/LEARNING DISABILITIES MARY

Mary is currently 19 years old and receiving services from vocational rehabilitation. When in middle school, Mary was identified as demonstrating learning disabilities was was served by special education throughout her schooling. She graduated from high school at the age of eighteen. Since that time, Mary has unsuccessfully maintained employment. During the period of time since graduation, her job history has indicated that she has lost five jobs. Careful inspection of her working history reveals that problems interacting with peers and supervisors was noted across all attempts at employment.

Cognitive Profile

Based on Mary's cognitive profile, she fits the Reasoning Profile (Gregg & Curtis, in review). Being able to interpret facial gestures, read body language, complete visual puzzles or interpret signs using symbols not involving letters or words are all examples of her deficits across nonverbal tasks. Mary's strength in solving problems was demonstrated when she could use language to solve the task. Difficulty was also noted with MaryÕs ability to be cognitively flexible which resulted in significant rigidity and difficulty with change.

Weaknesses seen in the area of cognitive processing include difficulties with visual processing skills. Mary demonstrated such problems as seeing the differences in similar looks figures, remembering what was visually taken in, and orienting herself in time and space. Problems were also noted with fine motor skills and processing information quickly, particularly if the task required visual or motor components. Cognitive strengths for Mary center on her auditory and short term memory skills.

Oral communication problems were noted across discourse and pragmatic skills. Problems with discourse were noted in her difficulty organizing what she wants to say in an a way that takes into account the listenerÕs needs. Closely aligned to these problems were difficulties in using language appropriately in a social situation (pragmatics). However, Mary's syntax and vocabulary levels are well within the normal range.

Across the achievement areas, specific problems were noted in her ability to organize her writing, as well as remaining sensitive to the needs of the reader. Spelling and handwriting were also a problem for Mary. Her lowest area of underachievement was in the area of mathematics. Both calculation and applied problem solving were difficult for Mary.

Accommodation/Modification Needs:

1. nonverbal reasoning
2. cognitive flexibility
3. pragmatics
4. written expression (spelling, handwriting, organization, sense of
audience) 5. mathematics
6. social/emotional

Cultural Contexts Difficult for Mary:

1. Visual environments
2. Abstract-visual environments
3. Environments requiring holistic problem solving
4. Novel environments
5. Fast-paced environments

Select High Technology Accommodations:

1. Modified Keyboard
2. Modified mouse pad
3. Dragon Dictate or Power Secretary
4. Computerized calendar
5. CD-Rom program (math and social skills training)
6. Talking calculator
7. Switches (push)
8. Overlays

Select Low Technology Accommodations:

1. Extension of time on tests
2. Utilization of verbal direction (oral or written)
3. Frequent opportunities for Mary to paraphrase to ensure accuracy of information being processed
4. Breaking tasks into small, sequential steps.
5. Directions or lectures should avoid the sue of sarcasm, indirect equests and double meaning words.
6. Encourage the learner to utilize self-vocalization during problem solving.
7. Notetakers
8. Job coach

Mary is only one profile (type) of learning disabilities commonly observed among the population of adults with learning disabilities. We chose her from the manual because she demonstrated that learning disabilities impact on areas other than just academics. Assistive technology can be used to enhance social and academic success for individuals with learning disabilities.

Research is greatly needed related to appropriate accommodations and modifications for individuals with learning disabilities. Advancements being made in the area of assistive technology are enhancing the success of many students with learning disabilities in meeting the demands of postsecondary schooling, as well the world of work. While current legislation and litigation provide the policy and process for adults with learning disabilities to access services, the individualization of accommodations and modifications will require more focus on successful outcomes. Matching types of profiles to specific assistive technology for a given person in a chosen context working on a particular task is the key to success. Professionals and consumers together are the key to success in the matching of high and low technology to successful outcomes.

REFERENCES

Return to SEM Page

Home