|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|
||||
|
|
Back to Models and Taxonomies Relating to Assistive Technology Report ATOMS Project: Table of Contents Summary Chart
Individual Detail on Models and Taxonomies1. Parallel Interventions ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1989 Author(s): Angelo, J., & Smith, R. O. Reference: Angelo, J., & Smith, R. O. (1989). The critical role of occupational therapy in augmentative communication services, Technology Review '89: Perspectives on Occupational Therapy Practice (pp. 49-53). Rockville: American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The Parallel Interventions Model helps to describe the dynamics of matching technology to an individual's needs. The model highlights two parallel tracks: adaptation and training. The model also highlights the fact that as an individual improves his or her skills, two different outcomes can result relating to the individual's need for technology. As individual skills improve, he or she will either be able to use a more advanced and powerful form of AT, or may depend on less or lower technology AT. The Parallel Interventions Model contains two postulates: 1) AT cannot be implemented without a parallel training track, and 2) This training has a profound impact on the type of technology needed. It either increases the sophistication of the technology needed or decreases the need for AT. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 51 Components and Levels: There are 10 components of this model. Examples of Categories: I. Movement: Gross Motor (2-Way) Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model provides two interventions to be used together in treatment in order to increase the individual's functional ability to use an assistive device. For example, if the goal is to use a single switch then along with working with the individual and his/her use of the device the therapist would also focus on the hand movements that are necessary to use the device. The model provides four examples of parallel interventions. The first is that of a single switch in which the therapist would also focus on gross motor movement in the hand. Another is the use of a joystick in which the therapist would work on four way gross motor movement on the hand. If the individual was going to use an expanded key board the therapist would work on gross pointing and if he/she was going to use a standard keyboard the therapist would work on find pointing. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: At the top of the left column of this figure is a hand with the palm side down. An arrow curves away from the pinky finger, pointing downward. An arrow also curves away to the right from the top of the index finger, also pointing downward. Underneath the hand are the words "Movement: Gross Motor (2-Way)". Another hand is located below this first one and the fingers are curled together, with the index finger and thumb meeting at the tips, forming a circle. 4 arrows extend outward from this hand, one from the left side of the hand, one below the thumb, and two from the index and middle finger area. Underneath this picture are the words "Movement: Gross Motor (4-way)". Another picture of a hand is located below this, with the fingers still curled, except for the index finger, which is pointing at a circle that is equally divided into 4 parts. Underneath this picture are the words "Movement: Gross Pointing". Underneath this is another picture of a hand with the index finger still pointing, but the thumb is drawn upward right under the index finger. The other fingers are still curled. The index finger and thumb are still pointing to a the equally divided circle. Underneath this picture are the words: "Movement: Fine Pointing". In the right column, lined up with the pictures to the left are another set of pictures. The top picture is a round, slightly raised push button with a cord. Underneath this picture are the words "Device: Single Switch" and " Selection Technique: Scanning". Underneath this is a picture of a small 2 dimensional box, with a small rod and a ball sticking up out of the center of the top of the box. A cord is also present. Underneath this picture are the words, "Device: Joystick" and "Selection Technique: Directed Scanning". Underneath this is another picture. A large, flatter 2 dimensional rectangle with one line drawn horizontally on the top, and 2 lines drawn vertically and evenly spaced on top. A cord extends out of the back right of the rectangle. Underneath this picture are the words, "Device: Expanded Keyboard" and "Selection Technique: Direct (Large Target)". Underneath this is another picture of a smaller, 2 dimensional rectangle with forty small squares located on the top of the rectangle. There are arranged into 4 rows and ten columns. A cord extends out of the back of the rectangle. Underneath this picture are the words "Device: Standard Keyboard" and "Selection Technique: Direct (Small Target)".
2. Three domains of wheelchair evaluation and their interactionsType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2001 Author(s): Batavia, M., Batavia, A. I., & Friedman, R. Reference: Batavia, M., Batavia, A. I., & Friedman, R. (2001). Clinical commentary. Changing chairs: Anticipating problems in prescribing wheelchairs. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23(12), 539-548. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The purpose is to present a client-centered framework for "prescribing, ordering, and adapting a new wheelchair." It displays issues about the acquisition and adjustment an individual experiences when switching to a new wheelchair. It represents the relationships among three domains of wheelchair evaluation: 1) individual, 2) wheelchair, and 3) environment. The ability of the individual to adapt to a new wheelchair depends on these personal characteristics: disability level, psychological issues, prognosis, anthropometric measurements, and medical history. Issues to be addressed regarding the the wheelchair are: mobility base, interface and controllers, and the seating system. Finally, environmental considerations are: climate, gravity, residence, terrain, caregivers and sources of electronic and sonic interference. The interactions between the three domains also need to be considered: the fit between the wheelchair and the individual; the access of the wheelchair in the environment; the extent of the user's disability in the environment; and the intersection represents the wheelchair user's functional ability. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 540 Components and Levels: The model is comprised of 3 primary components and 3 secondary components surrounding one main component (function). The text is in three interlocking circles. Examples of Categories: 1 Main Component: Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure represents how the wheelchair, environment, and individual need to interact in order to function properly with a wheelchair by diagramming three circles. The model provides a link between the wheelchair and individual showing that there needs to be a fit between these two. There is another link between the wheelchair and the environment showing that there needs to be access within the environment for the wheelchair. There is one last link between the individual and the environment showing how the individual's disability might influence this interaction. Finally, the model links all three together to show that if everything works together the ultimate outcome of the wheelchair use will be function. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Three circles are laid out so one is on top and two are on the bottom. The three circles overlap the same amount. The top circle is labeled "Wheelchair", while the bottom left circle is titled "Individual" and the bottom right is labeled "Environment". Where the three circles intersect is shaded dark gray and labeled "Function". The area where "Wheelchair" and "Individual" intersect is shaded light gray and labeled "Fit", and the area where "Wheelchair" and "Environment" overlap is labeled "Access" and is also shaded light gray. The bottom two circles overlap, "Individual" and "Environment" and this area is shaded light gray and labeled "Disability". 3. Education Tech PointsType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1998 Author(s): Bowser, G., & Reed, P. Reference: Bowser, G., & Reed, P. (1998). Education TECH points: A framework for assistive technology planning. Winchester, Oregon: Coalition for Assistive Technology in Oregon. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The Education TECH Point system can be used by school districts as a tool to develop effective assistive technology delivery systems for all students with disabilities. This model highlights the points at which the need for AT should be addressed. These points are: Referral, Evaluation, Extended Assessment, Plan Development, Implementation, and Periodic Review. At each point, key questions are considered about a student's needs for AT. This structure provides a way to effectively organize and monitor AT services while enabling programs to tailor activities to match the needs of each student. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 327 Components and Levels: This model is comprised of 16 components arranged in a flow chart with various pathways as appropriate. Examples of Categories: I. Pre-Referral Process Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model highlights the points at which the need for assistive technology should be addressed. The TECH points then lead the decision makers through the specific issues that need to be considered. Each TECH Point represents a place in the process of referral, evaluation and IEP development where consideration of technology utilization should occur. This provides a way to effectively organize and monitor assistive technology utilization while enabling programs to tailor activities to match the needs of each student. This model does this by breaking itself up into the three parts listed above, process of referral, evaluation, and IEP development. At each stage the model provides a circular marker with a number in it signifying the TECH Point question that the evaluator needs to consider. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: The figure is titled “Education TECH POINTS”. Below are four figures in a vertical line. From top to bottom they are titled “Pre-Referral Process”, “Referral, “Evaluation”, “Eligible for Special Ed”. To the left of Referral is a circle with the number “1” in it. To the left of Evaluation is a similar circle with the number “2” in it. From the last descriptor are three paths. To the right is a horizontal arrow labeled “Yes” leading to five boxes situated vertically and connected by arrows. They are from top to bottom, “IEP/IFSP Development”, “IEP/IFSP Written with Team”, “Implementation”, “Periodic Review”, “Modification Needed?”. Next to “Implementation” is a circle with the number “5” and next to “Periodic Review” is a circle with the number “6”. From the last descriptor are two paths, “yes” and “no”. “Yes” path leads back up to “IEP/IFSP Development”. The “No” path leads back up to “Periodic Review”. The second path from “Eligible for Special ed” is to the left and is labeled “No”. The arrow leads to “Eligible under 504” which has two paths, “yes” and “no”. “No” leads down to “Closure”. “Yes” leads to four boxes situated vertically labeled from top to bottom, “Develop Plan following 504 district guidelines” with a circle labeled “4” above it, “Implementation” with a circle labeled “5” above it, “Monitor” with a circle labeled “6”, and “Modification Needed”. From the last descriptor are tow paths, “yes” and “no”. “Yes” returns to “Develop Plan following 504 district guidelines” while “No” returns to “Monitor”. The third path below “Eligible for special ed” is “Maybe” and leads to “Extended assessment” with a circle labeled “3”. From here arrows point to the first and second paths. 4. The Social Cognition ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1990 Author(s): Carter, W. B. Reference: Carter, W. B. (1990). Health behavior as a rational process: theory of reasoned action and multiattribute theory. In K. Glanz & F. M. Lewis & B. K. Rimer (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research and practice (pp. 63-92). San Francisco: Jossey-Boss. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This model contends that behavior is preceded by intentions that are influenced by the individual's attitude toward the behavior and the immediate social environment. Personal attitudes toward behavior are formed by the perceived positive and negative consequences of the behavior which are modulated by personal motivation. The influence of social environment includes the effects of normative beliefs held by salient others (spouse, coworkers, and practitioners). Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 69 Components and Levels: There are 6 components to this model. Examples of Categories: I. Beliefs and Evaluations of Behavioral Outcomes Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model can be used to predict a person's intention to perform a behavior in a well-defined setting. Virtually any behavior over which an individual has volitional control can be described by this model. The model suggests that behavioral intention is the first determinant of behavior. The strength of this intention is determined by the individual's attitude toward the behavior and the influence of the social environment. Lastly, the model shows how an individual's normative beliefs about what others think he/she should do influence the social norm, which in turn also influence behavioral intention. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure is titled "Theory of Reasoned Action". From the left of the figure, there is a rectangle with the words "Beliefs and Evaluations of Behavioral Outcomes" in it. An arrow leads from this one to the right to a rectangle with the words "Attitude toward the Behavior". An arrow leads downward to the right to a rectangle labeled "Behavioral Intention". An arrow points to the right from this rectangle to another rectangle labeled "Behavior". A rectangle is located down and to the left of the Behavioral Intention" rectangle labeled "Subjective Norm". An arrow leads up from this rectangle to the "Behavioral Intention" rectangle. To the left of the "Subjective Norm" rectangle is a rectangle labeled "Normative Beliefs". An arrow pointing to the right leads to the "Subjective Norm" rectangle. 5. Consideration ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1997 Author(s): Chambers, A. C. Reference: Chambers, A. C. (1997). Has technology been considered? A guide for IEP teams. Reston, VA: CASE/TAM. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: Chamber's model is a flowchart of the consideration process that illustrates key questions and decisions that must be made when considering AT. Assessment is focused on currently effective practices in the student's program, the knowledge base of the AT team, the interactions between the AT decisions and the instructional plan, and ongoing updates to the student's program. The use of this model provides an accountability paper trail concerning the efforts associated with AT consideration. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 20 Components and Levels: There are 13 components to this model in a flowchart. Examples of Categories: Sample Pathway: Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents how assistive technology is implemented. The model begins by asking a couple of general questions including "what is it we want the child to be able to do within the educational program, that he/she isn't able to do because of his/her disability?", and " what has been tried to meet the special education needs?" The next question is "Is it working?" From here the individual can answer yes or no and the the diagram leads the individual through a variety of questions that will help find the answers to what the child needs to increase function. Assistive technology is then easier to implement. The model also recognizes that this is an ongoing process which may be influenced by a change in the environment, a change in student needs/skills, and by new technology. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This is a flowchart of primary questions. On the top is the question labeled A “What is it we want the child to be able to do within the educational program, that he/she isn’t able to because of his/her disability?”. An arrow points down to B “What has been tried to meet the special education need?”. An arrow points down to C “Is it working?”. To the left is D “Yes” leading down to E “Provide documentation and evidence to support this conclusion” which leads to M “Consideration is an ongoing process. Factors which may influence the process: change in environment, change in student needs/skills, or new technology”. To the right is F “No” leading down to G “What was tried? How long was it tried? How was it tried?” which leads to H “Do we as a collaborative team have the necessary knowledge and resource to try and meet the child’s special education need through alternative interventions, inclusive of strategies and/or modifications, as well as AT devices and/or services?” This leads to I “No” and K “Yes”. I leads to J “Seek additional assistance” which leads to L “What will be tried? Under what conditions will it be tried? In what environment will it be tried? How long will it be tried? What is the criteria for determining whether or not the need is being met?”. K, “Yes”, leads down to L also. L leads down to the M at the bottom. 6. Technology and Media (TAM) ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2001 Author(s): Chau, P. Y. K. & Hu, P. J. Reference: Chau, P. Y. K. & Hu, P. J. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699-719. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This model was designed specifically to predict and explain individual acceptance of computer technology. A person’s perception about the usefulness of technology and attitude towards the use of this technology can be explained mutually with the intensity of an individual’s attention to use a technology. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 702 Components and Levels: This model is comprised of two integrated models (the TAM Model and the TPB Model) with a total of 7 components. These are within ovals connected by arrows. Examples of Categories: I. Compatibility (COM) Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents an individual's intention to use a technology based on his/her perceived usefulness of the technology, perceived ease of use of the technology, attitude, and behavioral intention. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure is located on the top half of the page. In the left corner is the description "The Decomposed TPB model". Below is one large horizontal box labeled "The TAM Model" and one large vertical box labeled "The TPB Model". They overlap. Three ovals lie outside of the horizontal box, one to the left and two below. The one to the left is titled "Compatibility (COM)" and has two arrows that point at 30 degrees each, one up and one down. The up arrow points to one of the four ovals in the horizontal box and is titled "Perceived Usefulness" (PU). The down arrow points to another of the four ovals in the box titled "Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)". From the PU oval, two arrows point to two ovals that lie in the overlap of the boxes. The first oval is titled "Attitude (ATT)" and the second is "Behavioral Intention (BI)". From the PEOU oval are two arrows, one points to the oval titled PU and the other to an oval that titled ATT. The oval titled ATT also points to the oval titled BI. Below the horizontal box and within the vertical box are two ovals. One is titled "Subjective Norms (SN)" and points to the oval titled BI. The other oval is "Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC)" and also points to BI. 7. Human Activity Assistive Technology (HAAT) ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2002 Author(s): Cook, A. M., & Hussey, S. M. Reference: Cook, A. M., & Hussey, S. M. (2002). Assistive technologies principles and practice (2nd ed.). St. Louis: Mosby, Inc. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This is a framework describing the major elements of an assistive technology system. It consists of four parts: 1) activity, 2) context, 3) human, and 4) assistive technologies. Activities are categorized within three basic performance areas: 1) activities of daily living, 2) work and productive activities, and 3) play and leisure. The context includes four major categories: 1) the setting (e.g., at home, at work, in the community), 2) social context (with peers, with strangers), 3) cultural context, and 4) physical context (light, sound, heat). The person with a disability who needs assistive technology is viewed as the operator. The general underlying abilities that individuals use to perform activities and tasks are termed intrinsic enablers. Intrinsic enablers are grouped into three categories: 1) sensory input, 2) central processing, and 3) effectors (motor). The final component is the assistive technology. The assistive technology is described as the extrinsic enabler because it provides the basis by which human performance is improved in the presence of a disability. The assistive technology domain consists of four interacting components: 1) the human/technology interface, 2) the processor, 3) the environmental interface, and 4) the activity output. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Yes, pg. 61 Components and Levels: This model has 4 components with 4 subcomponents. The components are listed in pie pieces of a circle that lie within a larger box. Within one of the pieces are the subcomponents with arrows connecting and directing them. Examples of Categories: I. Context Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model shows how the components of assistive technology, human interface, processor, environmental interface, and activity input, interact with each other and then how those components relate and interact with the human and the activity that is being completed. The model shows the human and activity separate but as one piece of the pie that is completely separate from assistive technology. The aspects of the assistive technology are what link assistive technology, and the human and activity together. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model consists of four components: Context, Human, Activity, and "Assistive Technology". This figure contains a large square with the label "Context' in the upper left corner. Inside this square are the other three components presented in pie-chart shaped pieces. A quarter of a circle shaped triangle is labeled "Human". Underneath and attached to this peace is a larger triangular shape labeled "Activity". To the right is the what would make up the rest of the circle, a little less than half of this circle. This portion is labeled "Assistive Technology" and is separated from the other two pieces. Inside this section are four rectangles. The top rectangle is labeled "Human/Technology Interface". A curved arrow leads from this rectangle to the "Human" shape and another rectangle leads back to this rectangle. Underneath this rectangle and connected by an ascending and descending arrow is a second rectangle labeled "Processor". Underneath this rectangle and to the right is a third rectangle labeled "Environmental Interface". An arrow leads diagonally upward, to the left and leads back to the "Processor" rectangle. A curving arrow leads up to the "Environmental Interface" rectangle as well. Underneath this rectangle and to the left is a fourth rectangle labeled "Activity Output". A curved arrow leads to the "Activity" section, and an arrow points to the "Activity Output" section from the "Processor" rectangle". 8. Rehabilitation IndicatorsType (model or taxonomy): Taxonomy Year: 1983 Author(s): Diller, L., Fordyce, W., Jacobs, D., & Brown, M. Reference: Diller, L., Fordyce, W., Jacobs, D., & Brown, M. (1983). Rehabilitation Indicators: Final Report. New York: Rehabilitation Indicators Project. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The Rehabilitation Indicators family of assessment instruments were designed to address the needs of both groups and potential users. Each of the RI instruments provide a detailed picture function that can be summarized systematically to form broader images and profiles of an individual's or of a group's functioning. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: There are 4 components to this Taxonomy. Examples of Categories: I. Skill indicators Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 9. Characterization of Rehabilitation ServicesType (model or taxonomy): Taxonomy Year: 1997 Author(s): Duncan, P., Hoenig, H., Samsa, G., & Hamilton, B. Reference: Duncan, P., Hoenig, H., Samsa, G., & Hamilton, B. (1997). Characterizing rehabilitation interventions. In M. J. Fuhrer (Ed.), Assessing Medical Practices (pp. 307-317). Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This taxonomy defines rehabilitation interventions by meticulously characterizing the rehabilitation services by considering individually and collectively all of the components involved. Micro and macro levels help to define the characteristics of the interventions. The micro level concerns the patient and the immediate factors related to the patient and his or her care, while the macro level deals with group-level effects and addresses the process of structuring care and providing services. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Yes, pg. 309 Components and Levels: There are 3 levels with a total of 27 components and subcomponents. This taxonomy is represented on a 3-axis graph. Examples of Categories:
I. MICRO (individual) LEVEL Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model provides both a micro and macro level look at rehabilitation services. At the micro level three questions are asked: "why is the intervention being selected?", "what is the structure of the intervention?", and "how is the intervention being done?" These three questions are represented on an XYZ axis. At the micro level this diagram seeks to define rehabilitation interventions by meticulously characterizing rehabilitation services by considering collectively and individually all of the components involved. This model focuses on the patient and the immediate factors related to the patient and his or her care. The macro level, on the other hand, represents these same questions but deals more at a group level and with group-level effects. It addresses the process of structuring care and providing services. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure is of the Macro level. At the top of this figure is the letter Y, and the words "How (Intervention Process) underneath it. A vertical line is locat3ed below the words mentioned above. To the right of this line and at the top are the words "Progress and Order of Interventions". Half down the line are the words, "Timing-Frequency, Duration". Below these words are the words "Specificity/Individualization". At the bottom of the vertical line is a horizontal line leading to the left. At the end of this horizontal line is the letter "Z". Above this line are the words "WHAT (Intervention Structure)". Below this line are the words "Environment, Family, Patient". A line extends diagonally upward, to the right, where the horizontal and vertical line meet. At the bottom of this line is the word "Disease". Further up the line is the word "Impairment", then "Disability", "Handicap/Quality of Life", "(Intervention Outcome)", and then "WHY". These words go upward in a step like incline. At the end of this line is the "X". This second figure is of the Micro level. At the top of this figure is the letter Y, and the words "How (Intervention Process)" underneath it. A vertical line is located below the words mentioned above. To the right of this line and at the top are the words "Continuity". Half down the line are the words, "Attributes of Care". Below these words are the words "Access". At the bottom of the vertical line is a horizontal line leading to the left. At the end of this horizontal line is the letter "Z". Above this line are the words "WHAT (Intervention Structure)". Below this line are the words "System", "Setting", and "Provider". A line extends diagonally upward, to the right, where the horizontal and vertical line meet. At the bottom of this line is the word"Clinical Significance". Further up the line is the word "Cost-Effectiveness", then "Social Value", "(Intervention Outcome)", and then "WHY". These words go upward in a step like incline. At the end of this line is the "X". 10. Edyburn's Model of the Technology Integration ProcessType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1998 Author(s): Edyburn, D. L. Reference: Edyburn, D. L. (1998). A map of the technology integration process. Closing the Gap, 16(6), 1,6,40. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: Edyburn developed this model to describe tasks involved in integrating software into the curriculum, to provide a planning guide for individuals interested in technology integration, to serve as a tool for discussing the process among the major stakeholders, and to assist in the identification of methods and resources for facilitating the process. The Selection Phase includes: planning, locating, reviewing, and deciding. The Acquisition Phase includes: previewing, evaluating, and purchasing. The Implementation Phase includes: organizing, teacher training, and student training. The final stage, the Integration Stage, includes: linking (examining the curriculum and determining when a product should be used), managing (providing time for students to use a product), assessing (evaluating the results of instruction and determining whether any changes should be made), and extending (recognizing the need to create additional instructional applications for a new tool). Is it AT specific?: Somewhat Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 203 Components and Levels: This model consists of 4 phase components and 16 sub-components. Examples of Categories: I. Selection Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model depicts a way to integrate technology into curriculum. This model describes the major tasks involved in selecting, acquiring, implementing, and integrating instructional technologies into the curriculum. This process is divided into four phases which are comprised of 3-4 tasks which must be completed in working through the activities of a given phase. Each phase must be completed for each new product. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model is in a table format. The top row of the chart is labeled horizontally from left to right. There are 4 phases to this model. The first part is labeled "Phase 1: Selection". The second part is "Phase 2: Acquisition". The third part is "Phase 3: Implementation", and the fourth part is "Phase 4: Integration". Under Phase 1 are the terms "Planning", "Locating", "Reviewing", and "Deciding". Under Phase 2 is "Previewing", "Evaluating", and "Purchasing". Under Phase 3 are the terms "Organizing", "Evaluating" and "Purchasing". The fourth phase has the terms "Linking", "Managing", "Assessing" and "Extending". 11. The new Institute of Medicine (IOM)Type (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1997 Author(s): The New Institute of Medicine (IOM) Reference: The New Institute of Medicine (IOM). (1997). Enabling America assessing the role of rehabilitation science and engineering. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: Modifies the IOM model (1991) to improve it and tailor it more towards rehabilitation. The enabling-disabling process. The interaction of the person with the environment. Possibility of movement toward rehabilitation. The new model is three dimensional. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 4 Components and Levels: There are 8 components to this model with more detailed information below each component. 4 of the components are figures representing the person and the environment and represents the impact of the other four components on this. Examples of Categories: I. Person fits well in environment Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model emphasizes the role that the environment plays on pathology, impairment and functional limitation. In this model of the enabling-disabling process the term disability is omitted because it is not inherent in an individual, but is a unique combination of the individual and the environment. It is this combination of performance that leads to quality of life. The model shows the person in the environment, then the person's needs increase due to the environment, and then the enabling process occurs. From this point the individual either increases function due to environmental modification or due to their own personal functional restoration. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Starting from the left side of this figure is a square with a picture of a person with arms at 90 degree angles to each side in it (a). The bottom of the square has the words "The "person" in the "Environment". Above this square is the label "The Environment (physical and social). An arrow point to the left away from this square. The words "Disabling Process" is located above the arrow and the words "Person's needs enlarge relative to existing environment" are located above this arrow. This arrow points to another square, with another picture of a human with arms at 90 degrees (b). The head, feet, and hands of this person extend past the parameter of the square. An arrow pointing diagonally upward and to the left reaches to another square, but this one is larger (d). Located above this arrow are the words "Environmental Modification, Ramps; universal design". Below this arrow are the words "Enabling Process". The picture of the human with arms at 90 degrees is located totally inside this square. The words "'Enlarge' the environment to make it more accessible" are found underneath this square. Underneath the words "Enabling Process" is an arrow pointing diagonally downward and to the right. Below this arrow are the words "Functional Restoration, Neural repair; Range of motion; Artificial Hip Replacement". This arrow leads to another square identical to the first square in the figure, but without the captioning in the bottom of the square (c). Underneath this square are the words "Restore a person's functionality". 12. Hierarchy of Patient OutcomesType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1990 Author(s): Fries, J.F. & Spitz, P.W. Reference: Fries, J.F. & Spitz, P.W. (1990). The hierarchy of patient outcomes. In B. Spiker (Ed.), Quality of Life Assessments in Clinical Trials. New York: Raven Press, Ltd. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This hierarchy allows a variety of assessment techniques to be mixed as appropriate to the particular situation. This hierarchy also allows for elaborations in specific areas of deficit for each patient assessed. Overall this hierarchy is used to create quality of life assessments and provides a base for the areas that need to be addressed in all assessments of these sorts. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 35 Components and Levels: This model has 4 components with 22 subcomponents. Examples of Categories: I. Global Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This diagram represents a hierarchy of a patient's treatment. It includes global, dimensions, subdimensions, and component factors of the patient's treatment. The Hierarchy progresses downward from the highest level, outcome, to the lowest level, components. It allows therapists to break down an individual's disability to the components that are causing it. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: The hierarchy is displayed in a box with four rows. The top row is labeled in the top left corner as "Global" and the entire row says "Outcome." The second row is labeled in the top left corner as "Dimensions" and from left to right the row reads in five separate boxes "death," "disability," "discomfort," "Iatrogenic," and "economic." The third row is labeled in the top left corner as "Subdimensions" and is separated into four separate boxes. Each box consists of two items separated by a dotted line. The first box has upper and lower, the second box has physical and psychological, the third box has medical and surgical, and the fourth box has direct and indirect. The fourth and final row is labeled in the top left corner as "Components" and consists of four boxes that correspond to the four boxes in the "Subdimensions" row. Each box has several items within it, each separated by a dotted line, and a bolded dotted line in the middle that corresponds to the dotted line in the "Subdimensions" row. The first box reads from left to right as grip, feed, etc, and then a bold dotted line and continues as walk, climb, etc. The second box reads from left to right as pain, fatigue, etc, and then bold dotted line and continues as depression, anxiety, etc. The third box reads from left to right as GI, blood, etc, and then a bold dotted line and continues as infection, bleeding, etc. The fourth box reads from left to right as drugs, visits, etc, and then a bold dotted line and continues as work loss, social, etc. 13. Framework for conceptual modeling of AT device outcomesType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2003 Author(s): Fuhrer, M. J., Jutai, J. W., Scherer, M. J., & De Ruyter, F. Reference: Fuhrer, M. J., Jutai, J. W., Scherer, M. J., & De Ruyter, F. (2003). A framework for the conceptual modeling of assistive technology device outcomes. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(22), 1243-1251. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The first event occurring is the "procurement of device-type" and includes three considerations:1) need for a device, 2) type of device, and 3) the services involved. Next is "introductory use" and results in "shorter-term outcomes" and includes effectiveness, efficiency, device satisfaction, psychological functioning, and subjective well-being. Shorter-term outcomes result from an interaction between introductory use and moderating co-factors including the ICF domains of body functions and structures, activities and participation, environmental factors, personal factors, as well as concurrent interventions, continuing ATD services, co morbidities, and costs. The shorter-term outcomes result in longer-term use or discontinued use. Longer-term use interacts with the moderating co-factors to produce longer-term outcomes. These longer term outcomes are the same as the shorter-term outcomes. The interaction of longer-term outcomes and moderating co-factors results in either continued use or discontinued use. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 1246 Components and Levels: This model is comprised of 9 main components with 18 subcomponents. They are written in text rectangles connected and organized by arrows. Examples of Categories: List of 9 Main Components: Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents a framework showing that outcomes are viewed as resulting from an interaction among characteristics of an intervention, the recipients of the intervention, and the environment. The model highlights the procurement of device-type as the first event for the intervention processes and outcomes that follow. Following device procurement the model assesses short-term outcomes and then long-term outcomes. The model also proposes along this path that device discontinuance may occur after which the individual will be back to square one or procurement of a device-type. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure is located in the bottom of the page. On the left is a horizontal pentagram titled "Procurement of a Device Type" and is pointing to the right. A small arrow off the point continues right to a small, horizontal rectangle titled "Introductory Use". Another small arrow extends from the right side of the rectangle to a larger, vertical rectangle titled "Shorter-Term Outcomes." 5 items are listed under this title in the rectangle: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Device Satisfaction, Psychological Functioning, and Subjective Well-being. Two arrows extend from this box. The first is at 30 degrees, and extends away from the right side of the rectangle to a wider, horizontal rectangle titled "Discontinued Use." From the center and top of this rectangle, there is a tiny arrow pointing up and meets with a horizontal line. The second arrow Another smaller arrow extends from the center to a smaller horizontal rectangle titled "Longer-Term Use." From here, a small arrow extends to the right to a larger, vertical rectangle titled "Longer-Term Outcomes." 5 items are listed under this title in the rectangle: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Device Satisfaction, Psychological Functioning, and Subjective Well-being. Two arrows diagonally extend up and down at 30 degrees from the right side of this rectangle to two small, horizontal rectangles. The rectangle below is titled "continued use" and the rectangle above is titled "Discontinued Use." From the latter rectangle a small arrow extends upward, leading to a long horizontal arrow that travels across the top of the figure to the left and makes a 90 degree downward turn to reach the starting box, "Procurement of a Device-Type". Centered below this figure is a large horizontal rectangle with dashed lines. This rectangle is titled "Moderating Co-Factors". There are 8 items listed in this rectangle; ICF Body Functions and Structures, ICF Activities and Participation, ICF Environmental Factors, ICF Personal Factors, Concurrent Interventions, Co morbidities, Continuing ATD Services, and Costs. Two vertical arrows extend up from the top left and right corners of the rectangle towards the rest of the figure, but do not connect. 14. Theoretical career path of first-time AT device users and factors influencing each stageType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1998 Author(s): Gitlin, L. Reference: Gitlin, L. (1998). From hospital to home: Individual variations in experience with assistive devices among older adults. In D. B. Gray & L. A. Quatrano & M. L. Lieberman (Eds.), Designing and using assistive technology (pp. 117-135). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This model suggests the stages of a career as an AT device user and the interrelated factors that may influence the path that the user takes. A novice user is introduced to the need and use of assistive devices and has opportunities to practice within the hospital setting. In this stage, four factors may influence device acceptance: 1) device need, 2) device instruction, 3) initial device appraisals, 4) projection self-care needs. The AT user can be characterized as an early device user during the first six months at home. Factors that may affect this stage of adjustment to device use are: 1) new device needs, 2) emerging biopsychosocial risk factors, 3) environmental fit issues, 4) self-care goals and practices. During the next 6 months at home, the client would be characterized as an experienced device user. By the second year of use, the client would become an expert AT device user. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 129 Components and Levels: This model has 8 components with 12 subcomponents. It is in flowchart format. Examples of Categories: I. Novice User – Hospital Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents the stages that an individual might go through in their AT device user career. It also points out interrelated factors that may influence the path that the user takes throughout this career. Examples of the stages including going from a novice user, to an early user, to an experienced user, and then to an expert user. Each stage represents where the individual is at in his/her recovery. For example, a novice user will still be in the hospital while an expert user will have been home for one or more years. The model points out the factors that a provider needs to consider for each user type, especially when the individual is transitioning from novice to early user, such as device need, instruction, environmental fit issues, etc. Once the individual is at home (early user and on) the frequency of use needs to be considered as well. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure is titled “Theoretical career path of first-time AT device users and factors influencing each stage”. A horizontal box divided by top and bottom begins the horizontal aspect of the flowchart. Above is “Novice User” and below is “Hospital”. Above this is a descending arrow that has four branches (from top down): “Device Need”, “Device Instruction”, “Initial Device Appraisals”, and “Projection of Self-care Needs”. The horizontal box’s arrow points to an identical box but the top says “Early User” and the bottom says “Home mo. 1-6”. There is a dashed line connecting the first and second boxes labeled “Transition”. This second box has a descending arrow with four branches (from top down): “New Device Needs”, “Emerging Biopsychosocial Risk Factors”, “Environmental Fit Issues”, and “Self-care Goals and Practices”. A line with three components descends from the box (from top down): “consistent users”, “Inconsistent Users”, and “Non-Users”. The last one has a dashed box around it. The box’s arrow points to another horizontal divided box where the top says “Experienced User” and the bottom “home mo-7-12”. This box’s arrow points to the last divided box where the top says “Expert User” and the bottom “Home 1+ years”. These are dashed. 15. The AT CoPlanner ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2000 Author(s): Haines, L., & Sanche, B. Reference: Haines, L., & Sanche, B. (2000). Assessment models and software support for assistive technology teams. Diagnostique, 25(3), 291-306. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This model is a synthesis of four common individual special education technology models wrapped into a coherent framework that provides the basis to facilitate communication, collaboration, and co-planning of AT in the schools within a time efficient manner. The model is conceptualized around four stages: 1) Orientation, 2) Assessment and Planning, 3) Implementation and Evaluation, and 4) Reporting. In the Orientation stage, the student in need of AT services is identified and the AT team is established. The Assessment and Planning stage involves gathering information about the student and the learning context. During the Implementation and Evaluation stage, the team translates the assessment information into action to determine the effectiveness of instruction. The Reporting stage involves deciding who should receive reports of the work of the IEP team. The Assessment and Planning, Implementation and Evaluation, and Reporting stages are cyclical. Ongoing monitoring and assessment are used to determine subsequent adjustments needed to the instructional plan and the AT component. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 297 Components and Levels: This model is comprised of 4 components with 4 subcomponents. The main components are in boxes with the subcomponents in ovals with arrows pointing to various boxes. Examples of Categories: 4 Main components: Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This figure serves as an organizing structure to guide the AT team as it develops assessment and instructional plans. This model is comprised of four stages: orientation, assessment and planning, implementation and evaluation, and reporting. Throughout these four stages this model shows how different assistive technology models can play a role in the assessment process and at what stage each model would be most beneficial to the team. The large semicircular arrow at the top of the model shows that the model can be recycled back to the beginning and begin again. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: At the top of the figure is a looped arrow starting and ending on the left. Below are four boxes aligned horizontally with arrows connecting them from left to right. They are labeled from the left “Orientation”, “Assessment and planning”, “Implementation and evaluation”, “Reporting”. Below are four labeled circles that point to the above boxes. The circle labeled “SETT model” points to “Assessment and planning”. The circled labeled “QIAT model” points to “Assessment and planning”, “Implementation and evaluation”, and “Reporting”. The circle labeled “Consideration model” points to “Assessment and planning”, and “Implementation and evaluation”. The circled labeled “Technology integration model” points to “Assessment and planning” and “Implementation and evaluation”. 16. RESNA Technical Assistance Project ModelType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 2000 Author(s): Haines, L., & Sanche, B. Reference: Haines, L., & Sanche, B. (2000). Assessment models and software support for assistive technology teams. Diagnostique, 25(3), 291-306. Website: http://www.resna.org/taproject/ Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The model seeks to enhance communication between providers of AT and consumers, while supporting the user. It consists of nine steps: 1) Identify the need for AT, 2) Seek venue for problem solving, 3) Conduct assessment/evaluation, 4) set goals and identify possible solutions, 5) Carry out product trials, 6) Identify and specify intervention components, 7) Seek and obtain funding, 8) Provide product, and 9) Ensure delivery and support. This model serves as a useful general model to enhance the relationship between providers and consumers of AT products and services. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: This model consists of 9 steps. Examples of Categories: 1. Identify need for AT Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 17. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps - 2 (ICIDH-2)Type (model or taxonomy): Taxonomy Year: 1999 Author(s): World Health Organization Reference: ICIDH-2: International classification of functioning and disability. Beta-2 draft. (1999). Geneva: World Health Organization. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: "ICIDH encompasses the universe of "health-related experiences". It captures and classifies the disablement phenomena. It is therefore a health classification, and chiefly describes the three aspects of health conditions, that is "functioning at the level of the body, person and society" in relation to diseases, disorders, injuries and other health-related problems. It serves as a framework to organize this information to present it in a meaningful, interrelated and easily accessible way. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 12 Components and Levels: This taxonomy breaks down into five components: function, structure, activities, participation, and environmental factors. Each of these components has five levels listed first by chapter and then by code. Examples of Categories: Sample Pathway Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents the then current understanding of interactions between the dimensions of the ICIDH-2, which include disease or disorder, body functions and structures, activities, participation, environmental factors, and personal factors. It shows how the health condition effects the activity, the impairment, and the participation of the individual being assessed. These three concepts interact and influence each other within the model. The last concept that is taken into account is the contextual factors shown at the bottom of the diagram. Contextual factors both influence and are influenced by the interactions of activity, impairment, and participation. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: At the top of this figure are the words "health condition (disorder/disease)". A line descends from these words, and branches into 3 arrows. The left arrow leads to the word "Impairment", the middle arrow leads to the word "Activity", and the third arrow leads to the word "Participation". 2 bolded, 2-way arrows lay in between these 3 words. Two arrows point up to these 2 bolded arrows, and also connect to form an arrow pointing downward to the words "Contextual Factors, A. Environmental, B. Personal". 18. Guidelines to address the needs of older persons and people with disabilities when developing standards (ISO/IEC Guide 71)Type (model or taxonomy): Taxonomy Year: 2001 Author(s): International Organization for Standardization Reference: International Organization for Standardization. (2001). ISO/IEC guide 71: Guidelines for standards developers to address the needs of older persons and persons with disabilities, 1. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This guide is intended to be part of the overall framework that standards bodies can use in their efforts to support the need for more accessible products and services. It is important for all society that all people have access to products, services, workplaces and environments. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: This is a guide that is broken down into 9 main components. Each component has a total of four levels. Tables are provided in order to best use this guide. The guide is numbered. Examples of Categories: Sample Pathway Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 19. Technical aids for persons with disabilities--Classification and terminologyType (model or taxonomy): Taxonomy Year: 2002 Author(s): International Organization for Standardization Reference: International Organization for Standardization. (2002). ISO 9999: Technical aids for persons with disabilities - classification and terminology. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: This International Standard creates a classification for people with disabilities, specifically of technical aides. These technical aides are primarily used by the person with a disability, but also include those aids which require assistance of a helper for their operation. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: This guide is broken down into 7 main components, the last of which being the taxonomy of technical aids. Each component has a total of four levels. This guide is numbered. Examples of Categories: Sample Pathway Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 20. Person-In-EnvironmentType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1989 Author(s): Karls, J., & Wandrei, K. Reference: Karls, J., & Wandrei, K. (1989). Person-In-Environment (PIE): National Association of Social Workers, Inc. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: PIE is a comprehensive description of the problems of social functioning experienced by the clients of social workers. The system requires that every client be described on several dimensions called "factors." Each factor refers to a different class of information. In order for the system to have maximum usefulness and to provide a comprehensive picture of the client's problems all four factors are needed. The four factors are: social role problems, environmental problems, mental disorder, and physical disorders. Is it AT specific?: No Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: There are 4 components to this model. Examples of Categories: • Social relationship problems Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 21. Kings adaptation of Baker's basic ergonomic equationType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1999 Author(s): King, T. W. Reference: King, T. W. (1999). Assistive technology: Essential human factors (pp. 59-86). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: To adapt Baker's equation in order to display the major factors (motivation, physical effort, cognitive effort, linguistic effort, time load) that impact whether or not a person will use AT. Is it AT specific?: Yes Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): No figure Components and Levels: There are 5 components that comprise this model and are in an equation format. Examples of Categories: Equation Description: Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: 22. Human Performance Measurement SystemType (model or taxonomy): Model Year: 1990 Author(s): Kondraske, G. Reference: Kondraske, G. (1990). Quantitative measurement and assessment of performance. In R. V. Smith & J. Leslie (Eds.), Rehabilitation Engineering. Boston: CRC Press Inc. Website: N/A Brief Description of Model/Taxonomy: The model of the Human Performance Measurement System (HPMS) embodies the concept of engineering design methodology in which performance measurement plays an unavoidable and integral role. An initial set of basic elements of performance (functional units and performance dimensions) has been identified. This model employs measurement methods which stress the individual's functional units along each of the dimensions of performance to determine the amount of performance resources available. This model also tests the "coordination" of multiple functional units. The overall model is composed of three components: an application-independent measurement laboratory, a human performance database, and application software packages for measurement presentation and interpretation. Is it AT specific?: Somewhat Figure Location of Model/Taxonomy in Original Source (if applicable): Figure on pg. 112 Components and Levels: There are 3 components to this model. Examples of Categories: I. Performance measurement laboratory Summary Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: This model represents the sequence of events that occur in measuring human performance. It shows that an application independent performance measurement laboratory is necessary first. The human performance data base is required next. Once these two items are established, various software packages for application dependent assessments can be applied to measure human performance. Detailed Text Description of Model/Taxonomy Figure: At the top of the figure is a rectangle labeled "PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT LABORATORY (application-independent data acquisition)". An arrow leads downward from this rectangle to another rectangle with the words "HUMAN PERFORMANCE DATA BASE" in it. Six arrows branch out from this rectangle to six squares labeled "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", and "N". Underneath these squares are the |
