To understand the role of early intervention (EI) practitioner confidence in the use and application of assistive technology (AT), a 24-item Assistive Technology Confidence Scale (ATCS) was developed and distributed to EI personnel. This article reports on the development and psychometric properties of the ATCS and the relation between scores on the ATCS, years of experience, education, and overall practitioner self-efficacy. Analyses revealed that the ATCS is a reliable measure of AT confidence in three service domains: application and use of AT, AT assessment, and accessing information about AT and AT resources. EI practitioners with more than 10 years of experience were more confident in AT service provision than EI practitioners with less experience. The ATCS was positively related to overall EI practitioner self-efficacy. Implications for the application of the ATCS for EI research and training are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allinder, R.M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 86—95.
2.
Armor, D.J., Conry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M.A., King, N., McDonnell, L.M., Pascal, A.H., et al. (1976). Analysis of the school referred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools (Report No. R-2007-LAUSD) . Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 130243)
3.
Ashton, P.T., & Webb, R.B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
4.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191—215.
5.
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25, 729—735.
6.
Batavia, A.L., & Hammer, G.S. (1990). Toward the development of consumer-based criteria for the evaluation of assistive technology devices. Journal of RehabilitationResearch and Development, 27, 425—436.
7.
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. 3. Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Report No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 140432)
8.
Berry, J.M., & West, R.L. (1993). Cognitive self-efficacy in relation to personal mastery and goal setting across the life span. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 16, 351—379.
9.
Brookover, W., Schwitzer, J., Schneider, C., Beady, C., Flood, P., & Wisenbaker, J. (1978). Elementary school climate and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal , 15, 301— 318.
10.
Cannon, J.R. (1999). Influence of an extended elementary science teaching practicum experience upon pre-service elementary teachers' science self-efficacy . Science Educator, 8, 30—35.
11.
Derer, K., Polsgrove, L., & Rieth, H. (1996). A survey of assistive technology applications in schools and recommendations for practice. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 62—80.
12.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M.H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 569—582.
13.
Gross, D., Fogg, L., & Tucker, S. (1995). The efficacy of parent training for promoting positive parent-toddler relationships. Research in Nursing &Health, 18, 489—499.
14.
Guskey, T.R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63—69.
15.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004) (reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1990).
16.
Judge, S.L. (1997). Parental perceptions of help-giving practices and control appraisals in early intervention programs. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 17, 457—476.
17.
Judge, S. (2002). Family-centered assistive technology assessment and intervention practices for early intervention. Infants and Young Children, 15, 60—68.
18.
Kaiser, H.F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 111—117.
19.
Lamorey, S., & Wilcox, M.J. (2005). Early intervention practitioners' self-efficacy: A measure and its application. Early Childhood Research Quarterly , 20, 69—84.
20.
Langone, J., Malone, D.M., & Kinsley, T. (1999). Technology solutions for young children with developmental concerns. Infants and Young Children, 11, 65—78.
21.
Lesar, S. (1998). Use of assistive technology with young children with disabilities: Current status and training needs. Journal of Early Intervention, 21, 146—159.
22.
Long, T., Huang, L., Woodbridge, M., Woolverton, M., & Minkel, J. (2003). Integrating assistive technology into an outcome-driven model of service delivery. Infants and Young Children, 16, 272— 283.
23.
Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2001). Teacher induction and elementary science teaching: Enhancing self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 243—261.
24.
National Assistive Technology Technical Assistance Project. (2000, July). TAP Bulletin: Update on the use of assistive technology among infants and toddlers. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://www.resna.org/taproject/library/bulletins/jul00.html
25.
Parette, H.P., & Murdick, N.L. (1998). Assistive technology and IEPs for young children with disabilities. EarlyChildhood Education Journal, 25, 193—198.
26.
Ramey-Gassert, L. (1996). A qualitative study of factors influencing science teaching self-efficacy of elementary level teachers. Science &Education, 80, 283—315.
27.
Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher's science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science &Education, 74, 625—638.
28.
Sharma, S. (1996). Applied multivariate techniques. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
29.
Snook, S.C., & Gorsuch, R.L. (1989). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. Psychological Bulletin,106, 148—154.
30.
Soodak, L.C., & Podell, D.M. (1993). Teacher efficacy and student problem as factors in special education referral. The Journal of Special Education , 27, 66—81.
31.
Stremel, K. (2000). Recommended practices in technology applications . In S. Sandall, M. E. McLean, & B. Smith (Eds.), DEC recommended practices in early intervention/early childhood special education (pp. 55—61). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
32.
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
33.
Tucker, S., Gross, D., Fogg, L., Delaney, K., & Lapporte, R. (1998). The long-term efficacy of a behavioral parent training intervention for families with 2-year-olds. Research in Nursing &Health, 21, 199—210.
34.
Wehmeyer, M.L. (1998). National survey of the use of assistive technology by adults with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 36, 44—51.
35.
Wehmeyer, M.L. (1999). Assistive technology with students with mental retardation: Utilization and barriers. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14, 48—58.
36.
Wells-Parker, E., Miller, D.I., & Topping, S. (1990). Development of control of outcome scales and self-efficacy scales for women in four life roles. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54, 564—575.
37.
Zillmer, E.A., & Vuz, J.K. (1995). Factor analysis with Rorschach data. In J. E. Exner, Jr. (Ed.), Issues and methods in Rorschach research (pp. 251—306). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38.
Zuckerman, J.T. (1999). From dependence to self-reliance and competence: One first-year science teacher in a mentoring relationship. American Secondary Education, 28, 17—22.
