See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324898050

Assistive Technology for Managing Learners with Special Needs in Makueni

County, Kenya

Article · May 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 1,921

2 authors:

Lazarus Ndiku Makewa Josephine Mbithe Mutie

Center for Research Implications and Practice Kenya Independent Researcher
76 PUBLICATIONS   187 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Curriculum and teaching View project

RESEARCH View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lazarus Ndiku Makewa on 02 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 website: www.jriie.com ISSN 2520-7504 (Online) Vol.2, Iss.1, 2018 (pp. 32-43)

Assistive Technology for Managing Learners with

Special Needs in Makueni County, Kenya
Prof. Lazarus Ndiku Makewa, PhD, 1 Josephine Mbithe Mutie, PhD2*,
1
Professor of Educational Technology, Lukenya University, Kenya
2
Teachers Service Commission, Kenya

*Corresponding author: Jsephinembithe50@gmail.com

Received March 5, 2018; Revised April 6, 2018; Accepted April 8, 2018

Abstract: Assistive technology is a great equalizer in a classroom with diverse learners. The study aimed at finding out
the availability and the usage of assistive technology (devices and software to assist students with disabilities) in the
county and how teachers personalize lessons and skills enhancement to each child giving access to learning opportunities
to learners with special needs previously closed to them and any student with motivation, academic skills, and social
development. This is because Teachers find it difficult to differentiate instruction for forty plus students all with different
needs and abilities in one class. Children with learning disabilities often have better technology skills than their teachers
and are drawn to computers and other gadgets, so using them in the classroom make a meaningful change both to
themselves, the administrators, teachers and the society at large. The study used concurrent mixed methods design.
Purposively the study selected the respondents. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and content
analysis. Descriptive statistics makes use of summary measures such as means and standard deviations. This helps in
understanding the data, show the patterns and relationships and therefore, very important in reporting the outcomes.
Content analysis was done to analyze the qualitative data collected through interviews; it helped in categorization of
verbal data, summarization and reporting the responses of the County Director of Education, head teachers, teachers,
support -staff and learners with and without disability towards the management of learners with special needs using
assistive technology in the Inclusive system of Education.

Key words: Assistive technology, inclusive education, instruction, disability, Learners, special needs, change.

requires a great deal of planning effort, human power and

resources (Ahamad, 2015).
1. Introduction
Assistive technology is any item, piece of equipment, or 2. Literature Review
product system, whether acquired commercially off the
This section reviewed literature and studies related to the
shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase,
role of innovation and technology in managing learners
maintain, or improve functional capabilities of students
with special needs, assistive technology and classroom
with disabilities (U.S. Department of Education, 2000).
applications and barriers to the use of assistive technology
for children with multiple disabilities.
Bell (2002) documents that Assistive Technology (AT)
provides all students with options and choices by
increasing students’ independence, creating classrooms 2.1 Role of innovation and technology in
that support the diverse learning needs of all students.
managing learners with special needs
Ahamad (2015) states that the line between general digital
technologies, such as iPads and “assistive technologies” is
becoming blurred. An increasing number of tools meet the Most students with disabilities can benefit from
needs of more people. Consider how standard devices can technology in the classroom because incorporating
support all students. Establishing an innovative school technology increases students’ motivation to learn and
32
personalizes lessons to a student’s individual needs. Even
the students with the most severe and profound disabilities
can use assistive technology to join a classroom of typical
students, and their potential can be reached in ways we
didn’t have before (Kirk, Gallagher, Coleman, &
Anastasiow, 2008).
Peck and Domcott,1994&Ahamad ( 2015) outlined ten
reasons that technologies should be used in schools: (1)
Technology enables teachers to individualize instruction,
which allows students to learn and develop at their own
pace in a non-threatening environment; (2) Students need
to be proficient at accessing, evaluating and
communicating, and information; (3) Technology can
increase the quantity and quality of students' thinking and
writing through the use of word processors; (4)
Technology can develop students’ critical thinking and
allowing them to organize, analyze, interpret, develop, and
evaluate their own work; (5) Technology can encourage
students' artistic expression; (6) Technology enables
students to access resources outside the school; (7)
Technology can bring new and exciting learning
experiences to students; (8) Students need to feel
comfortable using computer, since they will become an
increasingly important part of students' world; (9)
Technology creates opportunities for students to do
meaningful work, and; (10) Schools need to increase their
productivity and efficiency. Thus, teachers are expected to
make good use of modem teaching technology and
develop effective teaching resources
Morgan (1997) claimed that when computers are used,
there are many learning processes engaged such as: (1)
gather information; (2) teacher as facilitator; (3)
involvement in experiential learning; (4) face-to-face
communication; (5) expanded creativity, and (6) testing of
new knowledge. Murphy (1995) summarizes the learning
outcomes that result from the use of technology in
classroom as following: (1) social growth, (2) problem
solving, (3) peer teaching, (4) independent work, and (5)
exploration. Technologies have played a dictating role in
the field of education.
Researchers have shown technology integrated into
mainstream classrooms support higher-level learning and
thinking skills among students. Technology has been
proved to have positive effects in language learning and it
becomes as an integral part of education and contributed
as teaching tools in the language classroom (Tsou, Wang
& Tzeng, 2006). There is a great deal of interest to learn
more about the potential use of ICT in schools. Pelgrum
(2001) identified several reasons why technologies in
general and computers in particular might be important to
schools. These included rationales relating to social and
economic interests, such as reducing the costs of
education, supporting the computer industry, preparing
students for work and for living in a society permeated
with technology, and making the school more attractive to
its potential clients. Public initiatives have intended to
33
spread the use of computer technology in schools by
implementing computer laboratories and embedding
actual classrooms with digital technologies to assist and
support current inclusive classroom learning (Kozma,
2003).
Boone & Higgins (2007) posit that Assistive technology
(AT) devices can decrease students’ isolation and allow
them to become part of regular subject area classrooms.
As a result Assistive technology then becomes a tool that
provides a method for an individual who is experiencing a
disability or other issue to still participate in a classroom
(Mulhern, & Wylie, 2006). The application of assistive
technology in schools for students classified as having a
disability is required through laws such as Individual with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). As the inclusive
education of all students occurs more frequently within the
standard classroom, then it becomes important that the
knowledge/experience base for all teachers needs to be
expanded to incorporate assistive technology approaches
and accommodations (Boone & Higgins, 2007). Ahamad
(2015) posits that the changes in the student population of
special needs students, such as students with disabilities
and language issues, which have occurred in schools in
recent years, are having a major impact of changing the
learning goals, the teaching methods, and the means of
assessment for all students. Arsen & Lundah (2008)
document that teachers today, more than ever before, are
teaching more students with special needs, such as
students with physical or learning disability, emotional
disabilities and English as second language
students(Ahamad,2015). These teachers working with
these populations are not just the special education or
special English language acquisition teachers, instead
more and more of these students are placed in the general
student population with regular teachers(Alpers,2006).
Teacher preparation programs then need to ensure that
teachers are educated in special needs pedagogy and
assistive technologies as they relate to general education
(Mulhern, & Wylie, 2006). Ahamad (2015) holds that the
educational environment needs to be designed or adapted
for all students have the opportunity for success, even
those students who may need modifications and
accommodations.
Assistive technology (AT) can act as a cognitive
prosthesis, which enhances students’ abilities to access,
participate, and make progress in the general education
curriculum ( Boone & Higgins, 2007;Edyburn, 2000,
Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose, &Jackson, 2002; Lange,
McPhillips, Mulhern, & Wylie, 2006; MacArthur, Ferretti,
Okolo & Cavalier, 2001).
Ahmad, (2015) documents that the size and growth of
numbers of students classified as special needs students,
assistive educational technology in schools is also
growing in importance. Special needs students are now
having a greater impact on the general education teacher
as, during the past 10 years, the percentage of students
with disabilities served in schools and classes with their
nondisabled peers has gradually increased. In the 1997-98
school year, US states reported that between 94.7 and 97.8
percent of students (depending on age) with disability
were served in schools with their nondisabled peers as
compared to just four years before when only 43.4 percent
were included. As the percentage of special needs students
served in an inclusive setting along with nondisabled
students rises, the number of special education and regular
education teachers prepared to provide an inclusive
environment must also increase (US Dept. of Education
2000, US Dept. of Education 1996).
2.2 Assistive Technology and Classroom
Applications
Assistive Technology Education Network-ATEN (2002)
hold that Assistive technology has the capacity for
increasing student independence, increasing participation
in classroom activities and simultaneously advancing
academic standing for students with special needs,
providing them the ability to have equal access to their
school environment. Ahmad, (2015) insists that Assistive
technology is often discussed by technology levels as
being high-, middle-, or low-tech. A low-tech assistive
technology option is usually easy to use, has low cost and
typically does not require a power source. Mid-tech
assistive devices are also easy to operate but typically
require a power source.
An analysis was completed of the categories of assistive
technology concerning uses or applications as identified
by organizations such as Rehabilitation Engineering and
Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA,
2000), Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST),
Assistive Technology Education Network (ATEN), and
others. The resulting compiled list contained fourteen
different major application areas for assistive technology.
While all fourteen areas could apply in some way to the
educational setting only six directly apply to common
educational activities, and as such teachers will need
knowledge of the assistive technology options as they
relate to his/her own teaching of students with special
needs. These six areas are concerned with the common
student activities which students do on a regular basis, and
include learning and studying, reading, writing,
mathematics, and computer access. Assistive Educational
Technology (AET) is the theory and practice of design,
development, utilization, management, and evaluation of
processes and resources that are used to increase,
maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals,
with or without disabilities, for learning (Cavanaugh,
2000).The distinction between assistive technologies and
general educational technologies is becoming less clear as
the concept of universal design is incorporated into more
and more conventional technologies. Most of the assistive
technologies within the six areas as identified for common
classroom applications are excellent examples of assistive
educational technologies, which also indicate their
importance in universal design.

The high-tech device is usually complex and

2.3 Barriers to the use of assistive technology for
programmable, and usually includes items that require
children with disabilities
computers, electronics or microchips to perform a
Ahmad (2015) documents that Assistive technology has
function. An example of the application of technology
aided children with multiple disabilities to improve access
could range from having a voice input word processor
and participation in their school and home environments.
(high tech) to a student using an adapted pencil grip (low
Effective educational outcomes from assistive technology
tech) to assist during writing (ATEN, 2002). Another view
use are dependent upon a coordinated assessment and
of assistive technology focuses on the levels in applying
implementation process (Ahmad, 2015). The literature on
the assistive technology personally, developmentally, or
assistive technology with children was reviewed in order
instructionally necessary (Judd-Wall 1999).Of these three
to identify current barriers to its effective integration
the most important to the general teacher is instructionally
within schools. Bell(2002) states that these barriers were
necessary level. The personally necessary level is
found to include lack of appropriate staff training and
concerned with assistive technology devices that are for
support, negative staff attitudes, inadequate assessment
the use of an individual student, and the suggestion and
and planning processes, insufficient funding, difficulties
evaluation of such devices are left to experts (Ahmad,
procuring and managing equipment, and time constraints.
2015). Developmentally necessary assistive devices can
A team model for assistive technology assessment and
be shared among individuals. These devices help meet an
planning is proposed to optimize the educational goal
educational need based on a developmental delay, which
achievement of children with multiple disabilities Ahmad
ideally would be improved, thereby eliminating the need
(2015). Such a model can help target the allocation of
for the item in an individual’s future (ATEN, 2002. The
occupational therapy resources in schools to best promote
instructionally necessary devices are the devices that assist
educational and broader functional (Bell, 2002). More
in the instructional process at a course or grade level, and
than twelve million students in the United States
this level has important implications for the standard
experience significant difficulties learning to read
classroom teacher. The modification or technology
(National Center on Educational Statistics [NCES], 2003).
applications would not need to accompany the student as
The majority of these students are educated in general
he or she progresses to the next course or academic level,
education classrooms (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, &
and instead the assistive technology device could remain
Levine, 2006). This practice, commonly referred to as
at the course or grade levels teacher (Ahmad, 2015).
inclusion, is part of the least restrictive environment
mandate included in the Individuals with Disabilities
34
Education Act, a federal law that ensures the rights of
individuals ages 3 – 21 with disabilities. The inclusion
movement offers a variety of positive academic, social,
and behavioral opportunities for students with special
needs (Bond & Castagnera,2006). Despite these positive
attributes, current research clearly indicates that students
with reading difficulties often fail to make adequate yearly
progress toward their annual learning goals (De La Paz &
MacArthur, 2003; Gersten, Fuchs, Williams,& Baker,
2001; Mastropieri, Scruggs, & Graetz, 2003).
While policy and research examining the efficacy of AT
overwhelmingly supports the notion that all IEP teams
should consider AT, implementation by practitioners has
been limited due to institutional, situational, and
dispositional barriers. Students with disabilities are found
to be frequently trapped in a vicious cycle of exclusion
from education, society and mainstream development
programmes due to lack of necessary support and the
means for equal participation (Ahmad, 2015). Elective
technology integration can help provide all learners the
ability to access the general education curriculum, offering
them multiple means to complete their work with greater
ease and independence in performing tasks that they were
formerly unable to accomplish, or had great difficulty in
accomplishing (Roberts, Kean and Clark,2008).Use of
Assistive Technology in Inclusive Education addressing
the 'functional barriers' by increasing, maintaining, or
improving their learning outcomes in a diverse world of
abilities and expectations(Van, 2007).
2.4 Institutional, Situational, and
Dispositional Barriers
One of the primary institutional barriers associated with
AT is the definition. IDEA defines an AT device as “any
item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether
acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or
customized, that is used to increase, maintain or improve
the functional capabilities of a child with a disability”
(Pub. L. No. 108-446, § 300.6). This definition has
remained virtually unchanged since its inception twenty-
years ago because advocates for the definition argued that
the ambiguity inherent in the language allowed IEP teams
to use their best judgment in determining which types of
AT were most appropriate for individual students.
Unfortunately, the ambiguity led to diverse interpretations
of the policy, which in turn have undermined the
continuity of AT services for students with disabilities
(Edyburn, 2004).Numerous examples of the gap between
assistive technology policy and practice are evident Office
of Superintendent of Public Instruction, (2004). A student
can utilized assistive technology software to compensate
for her disability in many area in their academic circle.
Lack of teacher training is a major challenge (Cavanough,
2002;Todis, 1996). Despite the inclusion of technology
standards for teachers (e.g., the Interstate New Teacher
Assessment and Support Consortium [INTASC], National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards, and the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
[NCATE]), there are limited opportunities for teachers to
35
learn appropriate strategies for selecting, purchasing,
evaluating, and customizing AT devices (Nelson, 2006).
In fact, many teachers have only limited knowledge of the
most basic AT devices (Pucket, 2004).
School districts have traditionally contracted with
consultants to ensure they are incompliance with federal
policy under IDEA .Edyburn (2004) points out that there
has been little to no increase in the number of AT
specialists who are currently employed in U.S. schools
over the past decade. As a result, many students with
reading disabilities who would benefit from AT services
are advised by IEP teams. The goal of AT policy for
students with disabilities is to provide the supports
necessary for students to access, participate in, and learn
from the general education curriculum (Rose, Meyer,
&Hitchcock, 2005). Despite the barriers highlighted
previously, a review of AT literature indicates a number of
common themes in districts that successfully implement
AT policy. The ambiguity of AT’s definition can be
addressed at the district level by developing a policy that
explicitly identifies the devices the district will consider as
AT. A starting point for this policy could be the Assistive
Technology Quick Wheel, a tool that identifies a range of
devices ranging from low-tech to high-tech (Technology
and Media Division of the Council for Exceptional
Children, n.d.).A final barrier is the lack funding for AT.
2.5 Lack funding for AT
Despite specific plans to fully fund IDEA policy mandates
(IDEA Funding Coalition, 2006), historical trends indicate
that States and school districts will continue to be required
to fund a considerable proportion of AT expenditures.
This can be done effectively if districts invest strategically
in AT devices that hold the potential to benefit a
maximum number of students. For example, many
students with reading disabilities benefit from text
modification software (Edyburn, 2006). A school district
can ask teachers to create a profile of students’ reading
needs a teach grade level in the general education
curriculum. This profile should include details such as
whether students need assistance with compensatory or
remedial instruction that is specific to the reading process.
For example, the district might ask middle level
classrooms teachers to identify the percentage of their
student population who would benefit from graphic
organizing software.
2.6 Circumventing Barriers to Achieve AT
Policy Goals
The goal of AT policy for students with reading
disabilities is to provide the supports necessary for
students to access, participate in, and learn from the
general education curriculum (Rose, Meyer, &Hitchcock,
2005). Despite the barriers highlighted previously, a
review of AT literature indicates a number of common
themes in districts that successfully implement AT policy.
Mastropieri, Scruggs, &Graetz (2003) hold that the
ambiguity of AT’s definition can be addressed at the
district level by developing a policy that explicitly
identifies the devices the district will consider as AT. A
starting point for this policy could be the Assistive
Technology Quick Wheel, a tool that identifies a range of
devices ranging from low-tech to high-tech (Technology
and Media Division of the Council for Exceptional
Children, n.d.). Another useful tool in this process is the
Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative’s Assistive
Technology Checklist (http:wati.org/loan
library/checklist.html), a two page guide to AT devices
that support students’ in areas such as reading, writing,
and mathematics (Charema, 2007. This checklist can be
helpful by providing specific examples of AT devices
based on common areas of student need. For success
policy decision should include all stakeholders in the
educational process including community members and
students with disabilities (Marino, Marino, and Shaw,
2006). Once the document is ratified, teachers,
administrators, and IEP team members should receive
training that enables them to make an appropriate decision
regarding the selection, implementation, and evaluation of
all ATitems included in the policy.IEP teams must
understand student’s individual needs, the classroom
environment, and the tasks a student must complete as
they evaluate whether AT is necessary (Zabala,1995).
Marino, Marino, and Shaw (2006) present a summary of
questions that can guide this initial AT conversation
including: “Is the physical arrangement of the learning
environment conducive to student success? What activities
must the student complete as an active member of the
learning community? Would assistive technology improve
the student’s ability to participate in the general education
curriculum?” (p. 22).It is important to point out that
students’ baseline performance in the classroom where the
AT will be used must be documented prior to selecting
and implementing any AT intervention. This will enable
team members to analyze the efficacy of the AT once it
has been implemented. The assessment procedures for
determining the longitudinal viability of the AT device
should also be documented in the child’s IEP (Raskind &
Bryant, 2002). The student’s progress can then be
monitored using curriculum-based measures or other valid
assessment instruments at regular intervals.
Bowser and Reed (1998) offer Education Tech Points as a
framework for collecting student performance data at six
strategic points. The framework assists teams dealing with
AT in the context of broad educational experiences, as
opposed to a single question: “Does the student still need
AT?. Monitoring students’ progress allows the team to
make data-based decisions regarding future AT use and
transition plan development.
Researches on inclusive education and AT, have
predominantly focused on the success stories of inclusion
in developed countries in North America and the Western
Europe, that have made significant progress in inclusive
education (Arnsen and Lundahl, 2006; Ferguson, 2008;
,;Kearney,2010,Gronlund, Ake., Lim, Nena and Larsson,
Hannu. (2010): and Kane, 2006; Meijer, Soriano, Vand
Watkins, 2007; Norwich, 2008); however, the status of
36
inclusive education in the developing countries in Africa,
Asia and the Eastern Europe, typically highlights
difficulties in the implementation of inclusive education
(Charema, 2007; Chitiyo and Chitiyo,2007; Singal, 2006).
Among the prevalent barriers to the successful
implementation of inclusive education like - limited
governmental support, infective policies and legislation,
inadequate funding, insufficient trained teachers and
support staff, political instability, and economic crisis; the
ineffective and inefficient use of assistive technologies is
seen to be a major obstacle hindering inclusion (Chitiyo,
2007; Ellsworth and Zhang, 2007; Gronlund et al., 2010;
Singal, 2008).
3. Research Design
The study used a concurrent mixed methods research
design. This is because it allowed the researchers an
opportunity to collect quantitative and qualitative data
simultaneously giving both equal priorities. In addition, it
has the advantage of offsetting weaknesses inherent to one
design by using both (Gay, Mills, G. & Airasian, 2008).
The use of both quantitative and qualitative approaches,
equipped the researcher with a more detailed
understanding of the research problem than any approach
alone (Somekh & Lewin, 2011). Mixed research design
involves collecting and analyzing quantitative and
qualitative data (Kothari, 2011). According to Mugenda
and Mugenda (2003), quantitative approach was used to:
describe, explain and explore the existing status of the
given variables at the time. Further, qualitative research
approach was used because it allowed the researchers to
gain insight into the problem by having one to one
interview with the county director, sub-county officers in
charge of special needs, the head teachers, teachers, and
support staff and learners with special needs.
Interviews also helped the researchers to understand more
on the role of innovation and technology, assistive
technology and classroom application and barriers to use
of innovations and technology in managing learners with
special needs inclusively. Observation period was used to
establish how learning takes place in a classroom setting,
how the special and none special learners interact with
technology, each other, the teachers and support staff.
Further, the researcher observed the school compound, the
terrain, buildings, and structures and finally viewed vital
documents in the schools to ascertain policy issues related
to inclusion to chart a way forward towards the
management of special need learners in Inclusive
Education.
3.1 Population and Sampling Techniques
The target population for this study included the 300
schools in the county that had embraced Inclusive
Education, the County Director of Education, 9 sub-
county officers (EARC Officers) in-charge of special
needs, 300 head teachers, 2900 teachers,7500 learners,
and 600 support staff as per Makueni county education
office statistics 2017.
3.2 Sample Selection and Size Four learners with/without special needs from every
school who are cube mate in the hostel and a confidant in
The sample size, for this study, was selected purposively class for they were assumed to understand each other
to allow the researcher to target the county, persons and better. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2009) support this
schools with vital information for the study which and documents that researchers may handpick a specific
included: Makueni county which was purposively chosen sample for given purpose.
to represent the 47 counties in Kenya because it had the
right content required for the study. In addition,
Table 2: Summary of Respondents
geographically, it was convenient to the researchers in
terms of time, distance and cost. Further, no related
studies had been done in the county. The county Director Category of Respondents Number
of Education was purposively chosen due the virtue of his County Director of Education 1
office as the overseer of education in the county. 9 sub- Sub-County officers (EARC officers) 9
county officers in charge of special education in every Head-Teachers 9
sub-county were choosen because they were trained in Teachers with special needs training 18
special education and inclusion in general, therefore, Support staff 18
deemed knowledgeable as respondents to the study. 9 Teachers who responded to the 107
schools, which had boarding facilities and the highest questionnaire
population of learners with special educational needs, that Learners With Special Needs 36
is, one school in every sub-county were choosen for they Learners Without Special Needs 36
were assumed to have the right innovations and Focus group of learners with special 54
technology facilities for managing learners with special needs
needs. 9 head teachers from those 9 selected schools were Focus group of learners without 54
choosen by the virtue of their offices for they are the special needs
human resource and financial managers, therefore well TOTAL 351
placed to participate in the study. 18 teachers with special
educational needs training were choosen because it is a
policy requirement for every school to have at least two. 9 4. Results And Discussion
teachers without special needs training, that is, one teacher
per school selected in every sub-county who had many The study was conducted in all the nine sub-counties in
years of service in the school for it was deemed vital due Makueni County. One school in every sub-county was
to long period of experience, 18 support staff, 2 from purposively chosen. The respondents of the study
every selected school in every sub-county, that is the comprised the county Director of education, 9 Officers
house mother/matron and the cook for they are always in (EARCS) in charge of special needs education in every
touch with the special learners. A focus group of 6 sub-county, 9 head teachers from the nine schools selected
learners, with special needs per category of disability, was one per every sub-county 107 teachers, that is the total
randomly choosen from class 3-8, at least one per class, to population of teachers in the nine schools selected,18
present the views of each category of disability/special teachers with special needs training, two per school,9
needs and a focus group of 6 learners without special teachers without special needs training one per school who
needs in every class that has the highest population of had long period of service in the school,18 support staff,
special need learners for they were assumed to have a that is 9 cooks and 9 house mothers/ matrons. 36 learners
wealth of experience due to their daily interaction with with special needs and 36 learners without special needs
learner who had special needs per the selected school in who are close cofidants to the special learners in their
every sub-county. classes and hostels. A focus group of 6 learners with
special needs per school but with different disabilities
Table 1: Population of the Selected Inclusive Schools
making 54 learners with special needs. A focus group of 6
learners without special needs totaling to 54 learners. All
Sub-Count School Special Need the above made a total of 351 respondents.
Learners
Kathonzweni A 30 Table 3: Gender of Primary School Teachers
Kibwezi B 42 Respondents
Kilungu C 47
Makindu D 50 Category Frequency Percent
Makueni E 70 Male 44 58.9
Mbooni East F 20 Female 63 41.1
Mbooni West G 50 Total 107 100
Mukaa H 44
Nzaui I 23
Total 176 Out of the 107 primary school teachers who participated
in this study, 44 (41.1%) were male and 63 (58.9%) were

37
female as shown in table 3. This revealed that there was a When asked to indicate their level of education in special
slight imbalance in participation because of having more needs and technology, 66 (61.7%), teachers indicated that
female teachers in the selected schools than males. they had no special education and technology as shown in
table 6. This discloses that majority of the teachers in the
Table 4: Age of Primary School Teachers Respondents county have received no training on the management of
learners with special needs in the Inclusive system of
Education therefore was a great challenge. These findings
Category Frequency Percent concur with Pucket, (2004) who found that teachers had
25 or Less 11 10.3 limited knowledge on the use of assistive technology in
26 to 30 16 15.0 managing learners with special needs inclusively.
31 to 35 15 14.0
36 to 40 14 13.1
41 and above 51 47.7 4.1 Availability of Assistive Technology
Total 107 100 resources in schools

For the age, the respondents had a diverse age categories When interviewed the County Director of Education and
that ranged from 25 years of age to 41 years and above as Sub-County Officers in charge of special needs/head
indicated in table 4. The study findings disclosed that 11 teachers/teachers and learners with and without special
(10.3%) teachers aged 25 years and below, an indication needs said that some schools had:
that in the county very few teachers are young and  Adapted books for learners with reading and writing
inexperienced. 16 (15%) teachers age between 26-30 years difficulties
of age that is significantly higher than the first cadre, 15  Electronic books
(14%) teachers aged 31-35 years and 14 (13.1%) teachers  Talking electronic devices
aged 36-40 years. From these findings, one can deduce  Pen/pencil grips
that over half of the teachers in the county are young and  Adapted pens for learners with writing challenges
energetic for they range from 25-40 years of age so, if  Word cards
well equipped, they can effectively use innovations and  Scientific calculators for learners with
technology to manage learners with special needs more computational challenges
better and for a longer period of time. 51 (47.7%) teachers  Talking clocks for learners with sight challenges
aged 41 years and above and were significantly higher  Enlarged worksheets
compared to the other age blankets of teachers. This is an  Brailles for learners with sight challenges
indication that the teachers who are experienced in the  Audio lesson tapes
management of learners with special needs are retiring  Hearing Aids for learners with hearing difficulties
soon therefore the county should be on the watch to equip
the young teachers with skills, innovation and technology This is an indication that in this county there is at least
so that the learners with special needs are not left suffering availability of assistive technology that help learners with
in the inclusive setting. diverse challenges in schools to achieve their academic
dreams successfully.
Table 5: Training on Education Needs and Technology
4.2 Role of innovation and technology in
Category Frequency Percent managing learners with special needs
With 41 38.3
Without 66 61.7
Total 107 100 When asked the role of innovation and technology in
managing learners with special needs, the County Director
of Education felt that innovation and technology play a
vital role in managing learners with special needs by:
When asked if they had any special training and
technology to handle learners with special educational
needs 41 (38.3%) teachers said yes, an indication that few 1. Assisting learners with special needs to access
teachers in the county had special needs training and school
technology, therefore, a likelihood of such learners not 2. Bringing new and exciting experiences to the
being properly managed due to lack of enough trained special learner
teachers. 66 (61.7%) teachers said no as denoted in table 3. Empowering the special learner to perform
5. This is a manifestation that more than half of the physical activities normally
teachers in the county have no special training and 4. Enabling teachers to individualize instructions
technology to handle learners with special needs in the 5. Helping teachers in developing effective teaching
inclusive system of education, a sign of poor management. learning resources
6. Making the schools to grow in importance
7. Acting as a cognitive prosthesis

38
 8. Making the education officer/head teachers/
teachers/ learners and parents develop a
more disability friendly language
The Sub-County Officers in charge of special needs
suggested that innovation and technology:
 Guide teachers and support staff in handling the
special learners in a human manner.
 Motivates the special and non – special learners to
realize their unforeseen potentials.
 Enables the house mothers and fathers manage the
learners with special needs effectively in and
outside the hostels.
 Brings unity among the students.
 Acts as an eye opener to the community to
appreciate and support learners with special needs.
The Head teachers said that innovation and technology
Support the learners with special needs in doing many
meaningful work like:
1. Walking
2. Playing
3. Reading
4. Drawing
5. Doing assignments
The teachers with and without special needs training felt
that innovation and technology:
 Increases the quality and quantity of the students
critical thinking
 Brings new and exciting learning/teaching
experiences
 Helps the schools in increasing productivity and
efficiency
 Motivate teachers to became facilitators
 Lead to the development of peer and collaborative
teaching
 Allows them an opportunity to test new knowledge
 Inspires them to test and use new and quality
knowledge
 Enables them to cater for individual differences
within a learning environment
The support staff stated that innovation and technology:
 Help learners with mobility challenges to move
freely to/ from/ within the school
 Enable the learners with physical challenges to
access physiotherapy services for better improved
life
 Help the learners in doing their assignments in a
more effective and digital manner
 Empower learners with hearing challenges to learn
systematically
 Enable learners with sight issues to learn with lesser
challenges
39
The students with /without special needs said that
innovation and technology:
 Enable them to learn and develop systematically at
their own pace
 Create a non threatening learning environment
 Empower them to analyze, organize, interpret,
develop and evaluate their work
 Encourage them to develop their artistic expression
 Support them in accessing resources in their homes,
schools and outside the school
 Helps the learners with special needs to compete for
academic/economic, political and social resources
with their normal counterparts
 Reduce the special learners isolation
 Help them in changing their learning goals
 Act as an important learning tool
 Make them feel comfortable in a learning situation
 Assist them in developing a high learning and
thinking level
4.3 Assistive Technology and Classroom
Applications
When asked how assistive technology can be applied in a
classroom situation, the teachers/ support staff and
students stated that assistive technology like:
 Adapted pencil grips are used to assist learners with
writing challenges to write better, therefore
increasing their class participation
 Brailesassist the special students in academic
performance, like doing assignments, writing notes
 Wheel chairs and walkers gives the special learners
an equal opportunity in accessing the class and
learning resources
 Computers/ ipads/ Tablets help, the special learners
to analyze, do home assignment, forward and
receipt marked assignment and instructions easily.
 Hearing gears helps learners with hearing
impairments in communicating with the
administration, teachers and fellow students
4.4 Barriers to the use of assistive technology
for children with multiple disabilities
When asked what bars the use of assistive technology for
children with disabilities in inclusion the County Director
of education/the sub-county officers stated tha they are
barred by:
 Institutional, situational and dispositional barriers
 Lack of enough funds
 Circumventing barriers
 Policy issues
  Negative attitude of the head teachers, teachers
,support staff and students with and without
disability
The teachers stated that lack of:
 Proper and co-ordinated assessment
 Insufficient funding
 Difficulties in procuring and managing the assistive
technology equipment
The students said that:
 Bad attitude from parents, teachers, support staff
and learners with and without special needs
 Lack of assistive technology for learners with
multiple disability
 Poor school environment
 Shortage of language labs for learners with speech
challenges
 Poor sitting arrangement barring the learners with
wheel chairs from accessing learning facilities
5. Conclusion and Recommendations
From the findings of this study it was concluded that
Assistive technology is a great equalizer in a classroom
with diverse learners because it helps the special learners
by: assisting them to access school, bringing new and
exciting experiences to the special learner, empowering
the special learner to perform physical activities normally,
enabling teachers to individualize instructions, helping
teachers in developing effective teaching learning
resources, making the schools to grow in importance and
acts as a cognitive prosthesis. The use of Assistive
technology in managing learners with special needs
inclusively is barred by: Institutional, situational and
dispositional barriers, lack of enough funds,
circumventing barriers, policy issues and negative attitude
of the head teachers, teachers ,support staff and students.
From literature review and findings from this study it is
recommended that:
 The Government finance and support in procuring
assistive technology resources for learners with
special needs in the inclusive system of education.
 The Government employs more male teachers to
help in managing learners with special needs.
 The Government sensitizes the parents, support
staff, children with and without special needs,
teachers, head teachers to have a positive attitude
towards learners with special needs in the inclusive
system of education.
 Schools construct language labs for learners with
speech challenges.
 Schools adopt their environments to be special
learner friendly.
40
References
Ahmad, Fouzia Khursheed (2015): "Challenging
Exclusion: Issues and Concerns in Inclusive
Education in India." Researchpaedia, 2(1),15-32.
Ahmad, Fouzia Khursheed (2014): "Assistive Provisions
for the Education of Students with Learning
Disabilities in Delhi Schools." International
Journal of Fundamental and Applied Research,
2(9), 9-16.
Alper, S. &Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology
for individuals with disabilities:
A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special
Education Technology, 21(2), 47-64.
Al-Zaidiyeen, N., Mei, L. &Fook, F. (2008).In-service
teachers’ attitudes towards the use of information
and communication technology in teaching
practice: the case of Jordan. Conference
IMETC2008 Kuantan Malaysia.
Arnsen, A. and Lundahl, L. (2006): "Still social and
democratic? Inclusive education policies in the
Nordic Welfare States." Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research 50( 3), 285-300.
ATEN - Assistive Technology Education Network
(2002).Assistive Technology, Unlocking Human
Potential. Seminole County Public Schools.
Bell, L. (2002) `Strategic Planning and School
Management: Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying
Nothing?', Journal of Education Administration
40(5): 407-24.
Bond, R. &Castagnera, E. (2006). Peer supports and
inclusive education: An underutilized resource.
Theory into Practice,45(3), 224-229.
Boone, R. & Higgins, K. (2007). The role of instructional
design in assistive technology
research and development. Reading Research Quarterly,
42(1), 135-139.
Bowser, G. & Reed, P. (1998).Education Tech Points: A
Framework for Assistive Technology Planning.
Retrieved October 24,2005,
fromhttp://www.edtechpoints.org/manual.htm
Cavanaugh, T. (2000).Assistive Technology and its
Relationship with Instructional/Educational
Technology.Retrievedfrom: http://www.unf.edu/~
tcavanau/research/aet/index.htm .
Charema, J. (2007): "From special schools to inclusive
education: The way forward for developing countries
south of the Sahara" The Journal of the International
Association of Special Education, 8(1), 88-97.
Chitiyo, M. (2007): "Special education in Zimbabwe:
Issues and trends" The Journal of the International
Association of Special Education, 7 (1), 22-27.
Chitiyo, M. and Chitiyo, G. (2007): "Special education in
Southern Africa: Current challenges and future
threats" The Journal of the International
Association of Special Education, 8(1), 61-68.
De La Paz, S., & MacArthur, C. (2003). Knowing the how
and why of history: Expectations for students
with and without learning disabilities. Learning
Disability
Education Press. Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (2004).
Special Education Citizen Complaint No. 04-01.
Retrieved January 3, 2008
from:http://www.k12.wa.us/specialed/CC_decisions/04-
01.pdf
Edyburn, D. L. (2006a). Failure is not an option:
Collecting, reviewing, and acting on
evidence using technology to enhance academic
performance. Learning and Leading with Technology, 9,
20-23.
Edyburn, D. L. (2006b). Evaluating academic
performance with and without technology,
MACUL Journal, 2, 36-48.
Edyburn, D. L. (2004). Rethinking assistive technology.
Special Education Technology.
Edyburn, D. L. (2000).A brief history of special education
technology. Special Education Technology
Practice, 2(1), 21-36.Quarterly, 26, 142-154.
Edyburn, D. L. (2000).Assistive technology and students
with mild disabilities. Focus on Exceptional
Children, 32(9), 1-23.
41
Ellsworth, N. J. and Zhang, C. 2007. "Progress and
challenges in China's special education
development" Remedial and Special Education,
28(1), 58- 64.
Ferguson, D. L. (2008): "International trends in inclusive
education: The Continuing Challenge to Teach
Each one and Everyone" European Journal of
Special Need Education, 23(2),109-
120.
Gal, Eynat.,Schreur, Naomi. and Engel-Yeger, Batya.
(2010): Inclusion of Children with Disabilities:
Teachers' Attitudes and Requirements for
Environmental Accommodations. International
Journal of Special Education 25(2).
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.e&Airasian,p.(2006).Educational
research competencies for analysis and
applications(9thed).Upper Saddle River NJ:
Pearson Education, Inc. Practice, 5(4), 16-23
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., &Jackson, R. (2002).
Providing new access to the general curriculum:
Universal design forlearning. Teaching
Exceptional Children,35(2), 8-17.
Judd-Wall, J. (Last accessed September 1999). Necessary
categorizations.Retrieved
from: http://www.aten.scps.k12.fl.us/ .
Kearney, A. and Kane, R. (2006): "Inclusive education
policy in New Zealand: Reality or Reuse"
International Journal of Inclusive Education,
10(2-3), 201- 219.
Kirk, S., Gallagher, J., Coleman, M.R., &Anastasiow,
N., Educating exceptional children (Florence,
KY: Wadsworth, 2008).
Kozma, R. B. & McGhee, R. (2003).ICT and innovative
classroom practices. In R. B.Kozma (Ed.),
Technology, innovation, and educational change:
A global perspective (pp. 40–80). Eugene, OR:
International Society for Educational
Technology.
Kothari, C. R .(2011).Research Methodology: Methods
and Technique (2nded) New Age International
Publishers: New Dheli, India
Lange, A. A., McPhillips, M., Mulhern, G.,& Wylie, J.
(2006). Assistive software tools for secondary-
level students with literacydifficulties. Journal of
Special Education Technology, 21(3), 13-22.
MacArthur, C. A., Ferretti, R. P., Okolo, C.M., &
Cavalier, A. R. (2001). Technology applications
for students with literacy problems: A critical
review. The Elementary School Journal, 101,
273-301.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E. &Graetz,J. E. (2003).
Reading comprehension instruction for secondary
students: Challenges for struggling students and
teachers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26,103-
116.
Meijer, C., Soriano, V., and Watkins, A. (2007):
"Inclusive education across Europe: Reactions
upon 10 years of work from the European
Agency for Development in Special Needs
Education" Childhood Education, 83(6),361-365.
Mugenda,O.M.,Mugenda,A.l.(2003).Research Methods:
Quantitative and Qualitative approaches.
Nairobi: Acts Press.
Marino, M. T., Marino E. C., & Shaw, S. (2006). Making
informed assistive technology decisions for
students with high incidence disabilities,
Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(6), 18-25.
NCES (National Center for Educational Statistics)(2002).
NECS Fast Facts on Bilingual education /
Limited English Proficient students. Available
online
at http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=96
Norwich, B. (2008).Dilemma of difference, inclusion
and disability: International Perspectives on
Placement." European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 23(4), 287-304.
Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT
in education: results from a worldwide
educational assessment. Journal of Computers
&Education, International Education Studies
3(2), 163 -178.
Pelgrum, W. and Plomp, T. (1993).The IEA study of
computers in education: Implementation of an
innovation in 21 education systems, Pergamon
Press.
Puckett, K. S. (2004). Project access: Field testing an
assistive technology toolkit for students with
mild disabilities. Journal of Special Education
Technology.19(2), 17.
42
Raskind, M. H., & Bryant, B. R. (2002).Functional
evaluation for assistive technology: Examiners
manual. Austin, TX: Psycho-Educational
Services.
Reed, P. and Bowser, G. (2005): "Assistive technologies
and the IEP" in Edyburn,D., Higgins, K., Boone,
R. (Eds.) Handbook of Special Education
Technology
RESNA - Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive
Technology Society of North
America (2000).Assistive Technology
Categories.Retrieved
from: http://www.resna.org/.Research and
Practice.Knowledge by Design Inc. White_sh
bay.
Roberts, J. M. A., Keane, E., and Clark, T. R. (2008):
"Making inclusion work: Autism Spectrum
Australia's satellite class project" Teaching
Exceptional Children 41(2), 23-27.
Rose, D. E., Meyer, A., & Hitchcock, C.(2005) The
universally designed classroom: Accessible
curriculum and digital technologies. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard Singal, N. (2008):"Working
towards inclusion: Reactions from the classroom"
Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1516-
1529.
Singal, N. (2006): "Inclusive education in India:
International concept, national interpretation"
International Journal of Disability, Development
and Education 53(3), 351-369.
Somekh, B., &Lewin, C (Eds) (2011).Theory and methods
in social research (2nd ed.).Washington, D.C: Sag
U.S. Department of Education (1996). To assure the free
appropriate public education of all children with
disabilities .Eighteenth annual report to
Congress on the implementation of
IDEA. Washington, DC: author. Retrieved from:
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OSEP96AnlRpt/ .
U.S. Department of Education (2000). To assure the free
appropriate public education of all children with
disabilities. Twenty second annual report to
Congress on the implementation of
IDEA. Washington, DC: author. Retrieved
from:http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/P
roducts/OSEP2000AnlRpt/index.html .
 Van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2007): "School and classroom
practices in inclusive education in Australia"
Childhood Education, 83(6), 390-394.

Zabala, J. (1995). The SETT Framework: Critical Areas to

Consider When Making Informed Assistive
Technology Decisions. Paper presented at the
Closing the Gap Conference on the Use of
Assistive Technology in Special Education and
Rehabilitation, Minneapolis, MN.

43

View publication stats