Assistive Technology and Rural Settings: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to scope the existing research literature that describes educational interventions using mid- and high-tech assistive technology (AT) for students with disabilities in rural settings. The authors conducted a systematic literature search and then analyzed the included studies to develop descriptions of current conceptualizations of rurality in the research literature that report on educational interventions using AT, types of AT-supported educational interventions used in rural settings, and characteristics of participants and interveners. Results from 22 studies suggested that intervention research studies using AT in rural settings were primarily focused on students with similar demographics, grade levels, and disability category. Further, the studies evaluated lacked a robust focus on the unique characteristics of rural educational settings, their teachers, or their students with disabilities. The findings of this scoping review may inform the purpose and methods of future research activities, such as systematic reviews of the literature, that target specific instructional interventions using mid- and high-tech AT in rural U.S. schools.

Keywords

rural assistive technology disability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

* Ahlgrim-Delzell

Browder

D. M.

Wood

Stanger

Preston

A. I.

Kemp-Inman

(2016). Systematic instruction of phonics skills using an iPad for students with developmental disabilities who are AAC users. The Journal of Special Education, 50(2), 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466915622140

Ahmed

(2018). Perceptions of using assistive technology for students with disabilities in the classroom. International Journal of Special Education, 33(1), 129–139. Retrieved from. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/188646/

American Psychological Association Working Group for Journal Reporting Guidelines for Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Justice in Psychological Science . (2023). Executive summary: Journal article reporting standards for race, ethnicity, and culture. American Psychological Association. https://apastyle.apa.org/jars/race-ethnicity-culture-executive-summary

Bouck

E. C.

Doughty

T. T.

Flanagan

S. M.

Szwed

Bassette

(2010). Is the pen mightier? Using pentop computers to improve secondary students’ writing. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(4), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341002500403

Bouck

E. C.

Long

(2021). Assistive technology for students with disabilities: An updated snapshot. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(4), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643420914624

Bouck

E. C.

Maeda

Flanagan

S. M.

(2011). Assistive technology and students with high-incidence disabilities: Understanding the relationship through the NLTS2. Remedial and Special Education, 33(5), 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932511401037

* Bouck

E. C.

Bassette

Shurr

Park

Kerr

Whorley

(2017). Teaching equivalent fractions to secondary students with disabilities via the virtual-representational-abstract instructional sequence. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(4), 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417727291

* Bouck

E. C.

Bouck

M. K.

Hunley

(2015). The calculator effect: Understanding the impact of calculators as accommodations for secondary students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643415617371

* Bouck

E. C.

Long

(2020). Teaching students with intellectual and developmental disabilities to calculate cost after discounts via schematic diagrams. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 102(4), Article 103656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103656

10.

* Bouck

E. C.

Long

H. M.

Park

(2021). Using a virtual number line and corrective feedback to teach addition of integers to middle school students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Physical and Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-020-09735-z

11.

* Bouck

E. C.

Maher

Park

Whorley

(2020). Learning fractions with a virtual manipulative based graduated instructional sequence. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 55(1), 45–59. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/26898713

12.

* Bouck

E. C.

Park

Levy

Cwiakala

Whorley

(2020). App-based manipulatives and explicit instruction to support division with remainders. Exceptionality, 28(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2019.1586709

13.

*Bouck

E. C.

Park

Sprick

Shurr

Bassette

Whorley

(2017). Using the virtual-abstract instructional sequence to teach addition of fractions. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 70, 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.09.002

14.

* Bouck

E. C.

Park

Stenzel

(2020). Virtual manipulatives as assistive technology to support students with disabilities with mathematics. Preventing School Failure, 64(4), 281–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2020.1762157

15.

* Bouck

E. C.

Satsangi

Long

Jakubow

O’Reilly

(2022). A virtual number line intervention package to support addition and subtraction for students with intellectual disability. Journal of Special Education Technology, 38(4), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643422113514

16.

* Bouck

E. C.

Shurr

Bassette

Park

Whorley

(2018). Adding it up: Comparing concrete and app-based manipulatives to support students with disabilities with adding fractions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(3), 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418759341

17.

* Bouck

E. C.

Shurr

Park

(2020). Virtual manipulative-based intervention package to teach multiplication and division to secondary students with developmental disabilities. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 35(4), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357620943499

18.

* Chai

(2017). Improving early reading skills in young children through an iPad app: Small-group instruction and observational learning. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36(2), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870517712491

19.

* Chai

Vail

C. O.

Ayres

K. M.

(2015). Using an iPad application to promote early literacy development in young children with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 48(4), 268–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913517554

20.

Chambers

(2020). Assistive technology supporting inclusive education: Existing and emerging trends. International Perspectives on Inclusive Education, 14, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-363620200000014001

21.

Council for Exceptional Children . (2020). Initial practice-based professional preparation standards for special educators. https://exceptionalchildren.org/standards/initial-special-education-preparation-standards

22.

Dunst

C. J.

Trivette

C. M.

Hamby

D. W.

(2012). Assistive technology and the communication and literacy development of young children with disabilities. Center for Early Literacy Learning, 5(7), 1–13. https://www.earlyliteracylearning.org/cellreviews/cellreviews_v5_n7.pdf

23.

Gage

N. A.

Cook

B. G.

Reichow

(2017). Publication bias in special education meta-analyses. Exceptional Children, 83(4), 428–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917691016

24.

* Horn

C. K.

Ackerman

K. B.

Hitch

E. J.

(2022). Applying high leverage practices to increase active engagement and on-task behavior of students with intellectual disabilities during literacy activities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37(3), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434211019395

25.

* Hott

Randolph

K. M.

Josephson

Heiniger

(2021). Implementing electronic check-in/check-out to reduce challenging school bus behavior. Journal of Special Education Technology, 36(3), 152–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434211004446

26.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 . (2004a). 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (1) (A). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statute-chapter-33/subchapter-i/1401/1/A

27.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 . (2004b). 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (2). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statute-chapter-33/subchapter-i/1401/2

28.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 . (2004c). 20 U.S.C. § 300.8. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/regs/b/a/300.8

29.

Jameson

J. M.

Stegenga

S. M.

Ryan

Green

(2020). Free appropriate public education in the time of COVID-19. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 39(4), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870520959659

30.

* Jimenez

B. A.

Alamer

(2018). Using graduated guidance to teach iPad accessibility skills to high school students with severe intellectual disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(4), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418766293

31.

Jornevald

Pettersson-Roll

Hau

(2024). The good behavior game for students with special educational needs in mainstream education settings: A scoping review. Psychology in the Schools, 61(3), 861–886. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23086

32.

* Knight

V. F.

Creech-Galloway

C. E.

Karl

J. M.

Collins

B. C.

(2018). Evaluating supported etext to teach science to high school students with moderate intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33(4), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357617696273

33.

Laubscher

Raulston

T. J.

Ousley

(2022). Supporting peer interactions in the inclusive preschool classroom using visual scene displays. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37(2), 318–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643420981561

34.

Ledford

J. R.

Lambert

J. M.

Pustejovsky

J. E.

Zimmerman

K. N.

Hollins

Barton

E. E.

(2023). Single-case-design research in special education: Next-generation guidelines and considerations. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221137656

35.

Levac

Colquhoun

O’brien

K. K.

(2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69

36.

Longhurst

(2022). Developing, utilizing, and critiquing definitions of “rural” in rural education research. In Azano

A. P.

Eppley

Biddle

(Eds.), The Bloomsbury handbook of rural education in the United States (pp. 1–18). Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350172036.0008

37.

* McKissick

B. R.

Davis

L. L.

Spooner

Fisher

L. B.

Graves

(2018). Using computer-assisted instruction to teach science vocabulary to students with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518784270

38.

McLeskey

Maheady

Billingsley

Brownell

M. T.

Lewis

T. J.

(Eds.), (2022). High leverage practices for inclusive classrooms. Routledge.

39.

* Mims

P. J.

Stanger

Sears

J. A.

White

W. B.

(2018). Applying systematic instruction to teach ELA skills using fictional novels via an ipad app. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518784711

40.

Moher

Shamseer

Clarke

Ghersi

Liberati

Petticrew

Shekelle

Stewart

L. A.

PRISMA-P Group . (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

41.

* Muharib

Correa

V. I.

Wood

C. L.

Haughney

K. L.

(2019). Effects of functional communication training using GoTalk NowTM iPad® application on challenging behavior of children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418783479

42.

Munn

Peters

M. D. J.

Stern

Tufanaru

McArthur

Aromataris

(2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

43.

National Center for Education Statistics . (2023a). Enrollment and school choice in rural areas: Condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/lcb

44.

National Center for Education Statistics . (2023b). Students with disabilities: Condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgg

45.

Okolo

C. M.

Diedrich

(2014). Twenty-five years later: How is technology used in the education of students with disabilities? Results of a statewide study. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900101

46.

Quinn

B. S.

Behrmann

Mastropieri

Chung

Bausch

M. E.

Ault

M. J.

(2009). Who is using assistive technology in schools? Journal of Special Education Technology, 24(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340902400101

47.

Rhinesmith

Anglum

J. C.

Park

Burrola

(2023). Recruiting and retaining teachers in rural schools: A systematic review of the literature. Peabody Journal of Education, 98(4), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2023.2238491

48.

Robertson

R. E.

Sobeck

E. E.

Wynkoop

Schwartz

(2017). Participant diversity in special education research: Parent-implemented behavior interventions for children with autism. Remedial and Special Education, 38(5), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516685407

49.

Rude

Miller

K. J.

(2018). Policy challenges and opportunities for rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870517748662, https://journals-sagepub-com-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/doi/abs/10.1177/8756870517748662

50.

Showalter

Hartman

Eppley

Johnson

Klein

(2023). Why rural matters 2023: Centering equity and opportunity. National Rural Education Association. https://www.nrea.net/why-rural-matters

51.

* Shurr

Bouck

E. C.

Bassette

Park

(2021). Virtual versus concrete: A comparison of mathematics manipulatives for three elementary students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 36(2), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357620986944

52.

Sinclair

Hansen

S. G.

Machalicek

Knowles

Hirano

K. A.

Dolata

J. K.

Blakely

A. W.

Seeley

Murray

(2018). A 16-year review of participant diversity in intervention research across a selection of 12 special education journals. Exceptional Children, 84(3), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918756989

53.

Sundeen

T. H.

Kalos

(2022). Rural educational leader perceptions of online learning for students with and without disabilities before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Theory and Practice in Rural Education, 12(2), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.3776/tpre.2022.v12n2p105-128

54.

The

IRIS Center.

(2020). Assistive technology: An overview. https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/at/

55.

Thier

Longhurst

J. M.

Grant

P. D.

Hocking

J. E.

(2021). Research deserts: A systematic mapping review of U.S. Rural education definitions and geographies. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 37(2), 24. https://doi.org/10.26209/JRRE3702

56.

U.S. Census Bureau . (2023). Urban and rural. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/urban-rural.html#:∼:text=Rural_encompasses_all_population%2C_housing,and%2For_population_density_requirements

57.

U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences National Center for Education Statistics . (nda). Locale classifications. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/Geographic/LocaleBoundaries

58.

U.S. Department of Education. IESNCES . (ndb). Definitions for new race and ethnicity categories. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/report-your-data/race-ethnicity-definitions

59.

Vogels

E. A.

(2021). Some digital divides persist between rural, urban and suburban America. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/08/19/some-digital-divides-persist-between-rural-urban-and-suburban-america/

60.

Walker

V. L.

Conradi

L. A.

Strickland-Cohen

M. K.

Johnson

H. N.

(2023). School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports and students with extensive support needs: A scoping review. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 69(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2022.2116232