High Tech
vs Low Tech Assistive Technology
The purpose of AT is to remove or reduce the effects of functional limitation.
When discussing AT, the conversation often centers on
the most recent, most complicated, and most expensive
technologies. Such discussions often neglect low tech AT options that
could be a better fit. The benefits of high tech
AT are obvious and have been discussed frequently throughout
these modules. Although they benefit many people with disabilities, high
tech AT devices can be costly and require extensive training
time. Low tech AT devices, however, are often readily
available, and do not require extensive training. It should be noted the choice between high tech and low
tech options depends on the individual and his/her abilities. The
following case studies present two similar scenarios, however one
recommends a low
tech accommodation while the other would benefit from a high tech
solution.
|
Case Study: Choosing Low Tech over High Tech
Mary has a disability that inhibits her ability
to grasp small items, such as pencils, due to their diameter.
She has no other physical or cognitive disabilities that effect her
ability to write. To help Mary compose papers, one AT solution to
consider is voice recognition software. This would allow Mary to
write by dictating text into the computer without having to grasp a
pencil. Although this would be an effective solution, accommodation
could be achieved with a low tech solution. A more practical
accommodation would be to put a
pencil grip on a pencil, which would increase the diameter of the pencil to a
size, allowing Mary to better grasp it, and allow her to write. This is
a better solution for Mary because it would allow her to use her
abilities, cost significantly less than voice recognition software,
and would not require training.
Case Study: Choosing High Tech over Low Tech
William is a student with multiple disabilities.
He has a physical disability that prevents him from grasping a
pencil due to the pencil's small diameter. This disability
also causes him to fatigue quickly when writing. William also has
dyslexia, making writing a difficult and taxing cognitive task.
Providing William with a pencil grip alleviates the problem of not
being able to grip a pencil, however it does not address his
physical fatigue when writing or his cognitive disability. In this
case, William should be provided with a high tech option such as
voice recognition software. This software will allow William to
write without physically using his arms, thus preventing fatigue. By
automatically spelling words correctly, it will also help William
increase writing speed and quality. Also, the playback function of
this software will provide an audio
means of double checking his work without having to rely on his
reading skills. In this case, the added expense and training
benefits the user. |
When determining someone's AT needs,
it is important to remember one size does
not fit all (Bryant & Bryant, 2003).
Low tech options may work for some while others require high tech
solutions.
As demonstrated in these case studies, recommending a high-tech
technology when low tech would be sufficient is not cost-effective, and
does not tap into the user's abilities. Conversely,
providing someone with low-tech technology when high tech is necessary
may save money, but it does not provide the individual with the tools
necessary to reduce his or her functional limitation(s). People with disabilities
are individuals and have individual
needs, even if they have the similar disabilities. Therefore each
individual user's needs, abilities, and limitations determines which type
of technology is most appropriate, not their disability category.
Back -
Next
|