that any legislation contain provisions to authorize the state and federal governments the authority to fund competitively awarded research and development grants related to technology applications for persons with handicaps.

6. Education is lifelong. P.L. 99-457 has already expanded special education intervention to birth and transition programs are developing to assist persons moved from schools to the world of work. Society is moving from an industrial base to an information base illustrating that new knowledge and skills are necessary for maintaining a productive life. Therefore, this legislation must recognize the important role of education throughout the lifespan from birth to the grave.

7. While legislation should appropriately contain minimum criteria, it is essential, however, that the criteria be sufficiently flexible to accommodate variation among the programs and services offered by different states and the diverse and sometimes idiosyncratic technology assistance needs required by individual states.

8. Federal Role. The federal government has a number of critical roles it must play beyond helping states. We recommend that the federal government:

a. Coordinate and monitor common features among the states to reduce duplication of efforts (e.g., software resource guides).

b. Assist in the process of evaluating and certifying hardware and software products developed to provide technology assistance.

c. Fund competitively awarded grants to prepare personnel to assist in the development and delivery of technology assistance. There is a continuing need to prepare personnel to competently employ technology to assist persons with handicaps to learn, work, communicate, or recreate.

d. Fund competitively awarded grants to agencies to demonstrate exemplary applications of technology assistance and systems for delivering technology assistance services. The purpose is to foster the development of model programs and applications that can be replicated across states.

e. Fund competitively awarded research and development grants in the area of technology assistance. The purpose is to identify new technologies and to develop new technology applications.

f. Encourage through incentives private sector development and marketing of technology and technology products.

g. Not develop overly prescriptive regulations that provide a disincentive to private sector firms interested in developing and marketing hardware and software devices or technology assistance delivery systems. The private sector must be an ally in the development and creation of systems to deliver technology assistance to persons with handicaps.

9. The ultimate success of technology for persons with handcaps is dependent on their participation in the selection and adoption of the system. Consumers should be members of Advisory Councils and in other leadership and decision-making roles pertaining to the provision of technology assistance.

Mr. Chairman, we thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement and we stand ready to assist you and the Committee as you develop legislation on this most important issue.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Becker, H. (1986). Instructional Uses of School Computers (Issue 1). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools.

Behrmann, M.M. (1984). A Brighter Future for Early Learning through High Technology. Pointer, 28 (2), 23-26.

Behrmann, M., & Lahm, L. (1984). Critical Learning: Multiply Handicapped Babies Get On-line. Proceedings of the National Conference of the Use of Microcomputers in Special Education. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children, 181-193. Budoff, M., Thormann, J., & Gras, A. (1984). Microcomputers in Special Education. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Cain, E., & Taber, F. (1987). Educating disabled people for the 21st Century. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.

Carman, G.O. & Kosberg, B. (1982). Educational Technology Research: Computer Technology and the Education of Emotionally Handicapped Children. Educational Technology, 22 (2), 26-30.

Chiang, B. (1986). Initial Learning and Transfer Effects of Microcomputer Drills on LD Students' Multiplication Skills. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9 (2), 118-123. Collins, M., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1987). Elaborated Corrective Feedback and the Acquisition of Reasoning Skills: A Study of Computer-assisted Instruction. Exceptional Children, 54 (3), 254-262.

Cosden, M., & Semmel, M. (1987). Developmental Changes in Micro-Educational Environments for Learning Handicapped and Non-Learning Handicapped Elementary School Students. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8 (4), 1-13.

Dickson, P. (1986). Computers Build Friendships for Disabled Preschoolers. Education Computer News, 6.

Ellis, E.S. (1986). Effective Instruction with Microcomputers: Promises, Practices and Preliminary Findings. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19 (4), 1–16.

Farr, S.D., Hummel, J.W., Jadd, E. & Stein, R.H. (1985). The Development and Educational Application of a Communications Prothesis for Severely Involved Children. Closing the Gap's Computer Technology for the Handicapped: 1985 Proceedings. Henderson, MN: Closing the Gap, 298-304.

Gagne, R. (1983). Some Issues in the Psychology of Mathematics Instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14 (1), 7-18.

Goldenberg, E. (1979). Special Technology for Special Children. Baltimore: University Park Press.

Hamre, N.S. (1984). Leisure Skills Instruction in a Community residential Setting with Young Adults Who are Deaf & Build Severely Handicapped. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 9, 49-54.

Haring, T.G. (1985). Teaching between Class Generalization of Toy Play Behavior to Handicapped Children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18 (2), 127–39. Hartley, S.S. (1977). Meta-analysis of the effects of individually paced instruction in mathematics. Unpublished manscript.

Hasselbring, T. (1982). Remediating Spelling Problems in Learning-handicapped Students through the Use of Microcomputers. Educational Technology, 22, 31-32. Hasselbring, T. (1984). Using a Microcomputer for Imitating Student errors to Improve Spelling Performance. Computers, Reading and Language Arts, 1 (4), 12-14. Hasselbring, T., Goin, L. & Bransford, J. (1987). Assessing and Developing Math Automatically in Learning-disabled Students: The Role of Microcomputer Technology. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

Haus, G.J. (1983). The Development and Evaluation of a Microcomputer-based Math Assessment and Remediation Program for Mildly-Mentally Handicapped Junior High School Students (Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, (1983). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 83-17165.

Holleman, J.J. (1986)., Expanding Opportunities: Disabled Students and Microcomputer Instruction at Berkeley's Vista College. Technological Horizons in Education, 13 (6), 68-71.

Jamison, D., Suppes, P., & Wells, S. (1974). The Effectiveness of Alternative Instructional Media: A Survey. Review of Education Research, 44, 1–61.

Johnson, R.T. (1986). Comparison of Computer assisted Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic Learning. American Educational Research Journal, 23 (3), 38292.

Jones, K., Torgesen, J., & Sexton, M. (1987). Using Computer Guided Practice to Increase Decoding Fluency in Learning Disabled Children: A study Using the Hint and Hunt I Program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(2), 122-128.

Kelly, B., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., & Grossen, B. (1986). The Effectiveness of Videodisc Instruction in Teaching Fractions to Learning-disabled and Remedial High School Students. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8(2), 5–7.

Kehr, K., Morrison, P., & Howard, J. (1986). The Use of Microcomputers with Young handicapped Children: A Model of Interagency Collaboration. Computer Technology for the Handicapped. Hutchinson, MN: Crow River Press, 255-267.

Keogh, B.K. & Glover, A.T. (1980). The Generality and Durability of Cognitive Training Effects. Exceptional Education Quarterly 1(1), 75-82.

Kimbler, D.L. (1984). Robots and Special Education: The Robot as Extension of Self. Peabody Journal of Education, 62(1), 67-76.

Kulik, J.A., Bangert, R.L., & Williams, G.W. (1983). Effects of Computer-based Teaching on Secondary School Students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 19

26.

LeFave-Ferrara, J. (1988). Ipswich Author Apple of Teacher's Eye. Computers and Special Education, 4/5, 1.

Lewis, D., Nail, B., Henschel, M., & Panyan, M. (1988). A Study of Difference between the Use of a Language Board and the Computer on Communication. Submitted to Augmentative and Alternative Communication.

Lesgold, A.M. (1983). A Rationale for Computer-based Reading Instruction. In A.C. Wilkenson (Ed.), Classroom Computers and Cognitive Science. New York: Academic Press, 165-181.

Maddux, C.D. (1984). Using Microcomputers with the Learning Disabled: Will the Potential be Realized?. Educational Computer, PP.31-32.

Morocco, C., Neuman, S. (1987). Teachers, Children and the Magical Writing Machine (Final Report). Newtom, Ma: Writing Project, Education Development Center, Inc.

Okolo, C.M., Rieth, H.J., & Bahr, C.M. (1988). Microcomputer Implementation in Secondary Special Education Programs: A Study of Special Educators', Mildly Handicapped Adolescents' and Administrators' Perspectives. Journal of Learning Disabilities.

Peet, W. (1985). Training the Disabled Young Adult to Word Process Competitively. Closing the Gap's Computer Technology for the Handicapped: 1985 Proceedings. Henderson, MN: Closing the Gap, 231-236.

Plienis, A.J., & Romanczyk, R.G. (1985). Analysis of Performance, Behavior, and Predictors for Severely Disturbed Children: A Comparison of Adult vs. Computer Instruction. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5, 345–356.

Rieth, H., Bahr, C., McCarthy, T., & Polsgrove, L. (1988). A comparison of the efficacy of computer-based and teacher-based spelling programs: (Research report #221). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.

Rieth, H., Bahr, C., Okolo, C., Polsgrove, L., & Eckert, R. (1987). An Analysis of the Impact of Microcomputers on the Secondary Special Education Classroom Ecology. Journal of Educational Computing Research.

Rieth, H., & Polsgrove, L. (1983). Evaluating and providing feedback on the effectiveness of instruction for handicapped children integrated in inner-city schools: (Final Report). Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University.

Russell, S.J. (1986). But What Are They Learning? The Dilemma of Using Microcomputer in Special Education. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 100-104.

Schiffman, G., Tobin, D., & Buchanan, B. (1982). Microcomputer Instruction for the Learning Disabled. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 557-559.

Stokes, T.F. & Baer, D.M. (1977) An Implict Technology of Generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), 349–368.

Teague, G.V., Wilson, R.M., & Teague, M.G. (1984). Use of Computer Assisted Instruction to Improve Spelling Proficiency of Low Achieving First Graders. AEDS Journal, 17(4), 30-35.

Thorman, J., Gersten, R., Moore, L. & Morvant, M. (1986). Microcomputers in Special Education Classrooms: Themes from Research and Implications for Practice. Computers in the Schools, 3(4), 97-109.

Torgesen, J. (1984). Instructional Uses of Microcomputers with Elementary Aged Mildly Handicapped Children. Specialized Services in the Schools, 1(1), 37-48. Trifiletti, J.K. Frith, G.H., & Armstrong, S. (1984). Microcomputers versus Resource Rooms for Learning Disabled Students: A Preliminary Investigation of the Effects on Math Skills. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 69–76.

Turkel, S.B., & Podell, D.M. (1984). Computer-assisted Learning for mildly Handicapped Students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 16(4), 258-262.

Trachtman, P. (1984). Putting Computers into the Hands of Children without Language. Smithsonian, 14(1), 42-51.

Vanderheiden, G. (1982). Computers can play a dual role for disabled individuals. Byte, 7(9), 136-162.

Vanderheiden, G.C. (1983). The Practical Use of Microcomputers in Rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Literature. Technology and Disability, 44, 3-4.

White, R.C., Cormier, R.J. (1986). The Rehabilitation Project in Data Processing: A Prototype Demonstration Project of University, State Government and Industrial Cooperation. Technological Horizons in Education, 13(6), 72–76.

Woodward, J., Carnine, D., & Collins, M.T. (1986). Closing the Performance Gap in Secondary Education. University of Oregon, Eugene.

о

90-417 (140)