Curriculum what should be taught

These are the sort of questions that underpin curriculum development and that, as a Curriculum Programmes Manager for Cambridge International, I grapple with regularly. They are also issues that I will be discussing with global education leaders at the Cambridge Assessment Summit for Education on 17 September. National curricula, which define the subjects to be covered and in what depth, are developed on long time scales.

For example, the national curriculum in England started development in We must also consider how long a national curriculum should be in place for. In A Cambridge Approach to improving education , Cambridge Assessment noted that many nations tend to change their national curriculum around every 10 years. While there is no fixed recommendation, curriculum content does have a fixed lifetime and decisions on change need to be made several years in advance. The final consideration is how the curriculum prepares learners for the next phase of life, whether that is further study or the world of work.

A learner who leaves school in having studied a curriculum that was conceptualised in is entering a world that the curriculum developer could only imagine. Identifying trends and predicting the future that learners will face is integral to our approach to effective curriculum development at Cambridge International.

So, what are these trends? Broadly they fall into the following categories:. While it can be tempting to find reasons to change a curriculum, it is important to remember that the existing curriculum is most likely already developing learners who can read, write, be mathematically literate, and more.

This means there are barriers that will restrain impulses to radically overhaul the system or allow change. These include:. Despite these barriers, the art of curriculum development is about finding solutions to ensure curricula remain relevant to learners and the modern world while providing learners with the knowledge and skills to live in society.

If you look at a school from , the curriculum would look similar in places, but very different in others. However, a lot of curriculum content is stable over very long periods of time. When judging curriculum change, we should consider the balance between emerging knowledge and skills against fundamental, tested knowledge and skills that continue to underpin human endeavour. At Cambridge International, we support Ministries of Education and schools in identifying trends and considering key questions in their specific contexts.

We work with them to review existing curricula, provide feedback and recommendations, write curricula and providing training on curriculum design and development.

Trends we have already started to identify include a greater focus on competencies, digital technology, gender equity and sustainability. More information can be found on our website.

We are already approaching a point where we should consider what to teach in — now is the time to start the conversation! How is the curriculum going to be assessed? Often an educator or curriculum specialist believes that a certain skill or concept is less important or does not need to be covered.

Sometimes what is left out, intentionally or unintentionally, can shape students as much as what is included.

For example, students might not be taught about an ongoing debate among experts in the field or not encouraged to think critically about a text.

A learned curriculum refers to what students walk away with from a course. This includes the subject matter and knowledge they learned from a course, but it can also include additional changes in attitude and emotional wellbeing.

Teachers need to shrink the gap between what they expect students to learn and what students actually do learn. Blending these approaches and adopting a wide range of tools, resources and kinds of experiential learning is critical. This is especially true for teachers who want to better reach more students in their classrooms.

For example, on its own, the assessed curriculum can seem one-dimensional. However, this is a critical layer to add to the written and taught curriculum because it evaluates how successful those curriculums are. Without an assessed curriculum, a teacher might not realize what concepts students are struggling with. In addition to giving teachers, administrators and parents insights, it also lets the student understand how well they are understanding what is being taught and how they are progressing and growing.

Creating an impactful experience for every learner is essential. Get a Program Brochure This will only take a moment. Program of Interest. Text input field. A total of 32 of the frameworks provided pedagogical guidance within the standard and 30 of them included pedagogical strategies that were considered as "constructive and active" lessons. This pedagogical influence reflects recent cognitive research on such questions as how to present and sequence information, how to organize practice, how to motivate students, and how to assess learning.

Findings from cognitive research have challenged the traditional view that most knowledge can be transferred more or less intact from teacher to learner. This research proposes that, in order for some kinds of learning to occur, students must play an active role in. This cognitive approach to instruction, called constructivism, asserts that the learner is the most important element in the teaching-learning situation—more important than materials, lessons, teachers, and other external factors.

The influential standards developed by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics NCTM exemplify how many of the new standards have embraced pedagogical principles such as constructivism: "This constructive, active view of the learning process must be reflected in the way much of mathematics is taught" National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, The NCTM standards call for problem solving to become the basis of instruction. They also recommend increased attention to areas such as teaching students to develop a sense of what numbers signify, to understand the meaning behind mathematical operations, to develop strategies for learning basic facts, and to be able to justify their thinking p.

Examples of areas to receive decreased attention include isolated treatment of paper-and-pencil computations, use of clue words to determine which math operations to use, an emphasis on one right answer and one correct method, and teaching by telling. Similar principles are evident in the national science standards, which reflect a more experiential approach to learning National Research Council, It is important to note that the impacts of content standards on actual classroom curriculum and instruction are largely unknown at this time and are likely to be influenced by the extent to which the standards are mandated or voluntary and whether they are linked to assessment.

In order to consider the potential impact of participation in standards-based reform on students with disabilities, it is first necessary to understand the kinds of post-school outcomes, curriculum, and instruction that currently characterize special education. This section describes the post-school outcomes traditionally valued in special education for many students with disabilities and their instructional implications. It also provides an overview, drawn from empirical literature, of the characteristics of effective instruction for many students with disabilities.

Historically, many of the outcomes expected of human service programs for people with disabilities were primarily oriented to protection and care. This philosophy resulted in services that often isolated the individual and provided physical care rather than preparation for life in a heterogeneous world.

With the civil rights movement of the past two decades, one aspect of which focused on educating students with disabilities in public schools, traditional outcomes were reconceptualized to encompass: 1 employment, useful work, and activity valued. This broader set of outcomes aims to better prepare students with disabilities to become productive and independent adults. The importance of explicitly focusing the education of students with disabilities on the transition to adult life has been well documented Rusch et al.

The National Center on Educational Outcomes NCEO , in consultation with state directors of special education, teachers, parents, policy groups, and local school administrators, has developed a model for conceptualizing the broad range of educational outcomes relevant to special education and the goal of productive adult status. The model has eight outcome domains: 1 presence and participation, 2 accommodation and adaptation, 3 physical health, 4 responsibility and independence, 5 contribution and citizenship, 6 academic and functional literacy, 7 personal and social adjustment, and 8 satisfaction.

A set of indicators has been developed to measure progress toward attainment of the desired outcomes. This model suggests that these outcomes should be applicable to all students, not just those with disabilities Ysseldyke et al. A successful schooling experience will provide the student with the tools and skills necessary to make the transition effectively to the next stage of life. For some, this means going on to college or another educational experience.

For others, it means entering the workforce. The NCEO outcomes takes into account the skills students need to succeed in each domain.

For students with severe disabilities, the "criterion of ultimate functioning" is often used to guide instructional and curricular planning Brown et al.

In this approach, each student's long-term outcomes e. The premise is that effective instruction involves systematic planning to determine the kinds of skills to be taught and the most effective contexts in which to teach and apply them. Based on the criterion of ultimate functioning, instruction for students with severe disabilities has evolved into an ecological approach, meaning that the student's learning needs and functioning level are considered in conjunction with. The statutory meaning of the term transition services is "a coordinated set of activities for a student, designed within an outcome-oriented process, which promotes movement from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education, vocational training, integrated employment including supported employment , continuing education, adult services, independent living, or community participation" Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments, , Section [A], 20 U.

For elementary-school-age students, curricular priorities most often involve communication, socialization, self-help, motor skills, and functional academics Fredericks, ; Fredericks and Brodsky, ; McDonnell et al. For secondary-school-age students, curricular priorities include employment preparation and placement, personal management, and leisure McDonnell et al.

For students with mild disabilities, a combination of academic, vocational, and functional outcomes is often selected with the specific mix of components dependent on individual student goals and needs. Although several researchers have suggested that students with mild disabilities, particularly those identified as having a learning disability, may well be able to achieve beyond their current performance levels in academic content areas Carnine et al.

As students with mild disabilities enter junior and senior high school, they face an array of expectations similar to those of students without disabilities. In many schools, these students are expected to earn high school diplomas and to meet the same coursework requirements as students without disabilities.

Research has identified several important components of effective programming that can help high school students with mild disabilities meet these expectations. For those who intend to move on to postsecondary education, these elements include curricula that use a variety of approaches and instruction that teaches students "how to learn"; a system for coordinating the efforts of teachers, school administrators, parents, and community agencies; a transition component that teaches decision-making, problem-solving, and goal-setting skills; and an evaluation component that enables school personnel to systematically assess and refine the specific educational strategies being used for a student Schumaker et al.

For students whose primary option is to enter the work world immediately after school, the curriculum will focus more on the development and application of functional or compensatory skills. A growing body of research suggests that training in natural environments is an important instructional tool for the skill to be useful and maintained over time in community work settings McDonnell et al.

There also has been considerable research during the past decade about strategies for improving the employment potential of students with disabilities. Research and demonstration programs have shown that many individuals can take their place in the community workforce if provided with comprehensive employment training.

Results suggest that these training programs are best initiated while the student is still in school, so that valuable instructional time is not lost.

Research has suggested that students with disabilities who were successful in obtaining and maintaining paid work in the community after they exited high school were those who received ongoing opportunities for direct training in community employment sites throughout their high school careers and obtained a paying job prior to graduation Hasazi et al.

Research has indicated further that effective employment preparation programs for students with disabilities include: 1 a curriculum that reflects the job opportunities available in the local community, 2 training that takes place in actual job sites, 3 training that is designed to sample the individual's performance across a variety of economically viable alternatives, 4 training that provides opportunities for interaction with people without disabilities in a work setting, and 5 training that culminates in a specific job placement McDonnell et al.

Students with disabilities may find their employability affected by another issue above and beyond the actual skills that they have achieved—namely, whether they have received a high school diploma.

States take various approaches to awarding high school diplomas or other school completion credentials to students with disabilities who do not meet traditional criteria.

Some students, for example, receive a nonstandard diploma or certificate of attendance see Chapter 3. This issue of credentialing is likely to assume greater importance in a climate of standards-based reform because some states are linking receipt of a diploma to attainment of state content and performance standards.

Some students with disabilities who do not reach state standards, and thus do not meet high school diploma criteria, may find themselves disadvantaged in the job market regardless of the educational outcomes they can demonstrate Box In sum, special education has long valued educational outcomes that are broader than the academically oriented outcomes exemplified in state content standards developed thus far. The emphasis on post-school outcomes has shaped the curricular and instructional experiences of many students with disabilities.

Research provides a great deal of information about what constitutes an effective instructional environment for students with disabilities. We discuss three broad characteristics of effective instruction, each supported by research as important for enhancing learning among many students with disabilities: 1 a focus on the individual student as the unit for instructional decision making, 2 intensive instructional delivery, and 3 explicit contextualization of skills-based instruction.

The credentialing issue is critical in standards-based reform because credentials are the means for communicating students' high school performance to the public. Since a high school diploma is the minimum requirement for a variety of employment opportunities, some educators are concerned about the impact standards-based reform could have on the high school credentialing process for a number of students, including some with disabilities.

Over the last several decades, as the proportion of high school students receiving a high school diploma has increased, not having a diploma is regarded as damning to one's job prospects. At the same time, having a diploma has seemed, for some time now, to be only minimally impressive to employers Bishop, ; Hawkins, ; Pedulla and Reidy, Some argue that there is no substantive relationship between academic content and the awarding of a high school diploma Bishop, , ; Sedlak et al.

They see the move to ratchet up standards required for a diploma as an attempt "to hold schools to standards that the lay public could easily measure and understand" Sedlak et al.

Raising standards in a credible way is thus a response to employer concerns about the devaluing of a diploma, as well as to more general concerns about U.

Some students with disabilities in certain states receive differentiated diplomas, which distinguish students following a rigorous academic track from those following a minimally academic or vocational track. The latter group receives certificates of attendance or other nonacademic diplomas see Chapter 3.

Thus, students with disabilities operate in a credentialing universe much more complex than their general education counterparts. Potential employers may face difficulty in putting an applicant's credential in the appropriate context, given the diversity in the credentialing of students with disabilities. This diversity makes it that much harder for students with disabilities to showcase their achievements and abilities.

A number of issues about credentialing for students with disabilities warrant attention. First, if standards for a high school diploma are increased, more students—including those with disabilities—may not receive diplomas and, more to the point, they will not easily be able to convey to potential employers what they have achieved in high school. Some students, including some with disabilities, who currently receive certificates of attendance face this problem.

All students—whether they currently would receive a diploma, certificate of attendance, or no certification whatsoever—deserve to leave high school able to signal credibly. In the medium to long run, job requirements will presumably adjust to the new standards, although what form of readily ascertainable certification will replace the high school diploma is unclear.

Second, as one changes the nature of the credentialing process, whether by increasing standards or by requiring minimum competency tests, students must first be adequately prepared to meet the challenges posed by the new credentialing process. In other words, the K curriculum ought to provide students with opportunities to learn the material required for the credential.

This concept has proved controversial and subject to litigation Debra P. Turlington F. The issue is further complicated by the laws requiring accommodations for students with disabilities.

Phillips and Vitello discuss issues relevant to this debate in more detail. Third, it is important to recognize that employers are constantly looking for ways to lower costs. To the extent that the credentialing system makes it more, rather than less, costly for business to evaluate the capabilities of students with disabilities, the system makes the transition to employment harder.

The importance of providing clear and credible evidence of what students have achieved and are capable of should not be underestimated. Bishop sees students having the opportunity to signal higher achievement to potential employers as providing an important incentive. Michigan, New York, and Tennessee have honors diplomas to acknowledge those whose achievements sufficiently surpass the basic requirements Bond et al.

In considering the three characteristics of effective instruction, it is important to note six assumptions. These characteristics apply to the large subset of students whose disabilities involve cognitive rather than physical or sensory impairments. We considered only students with cognitive disabilities because they represent the majority of students identified as having a disability.

Among individuals with cognitive disabilities, the characteristics apply to the entire range of students, from those with mild to those with severe disabilities. These characteristics represent broad principles that, in light of the heterogeneity of the population of students with cognitive disabilities, must be particularized to meet individual student needs. These characteristics are placement-neutral; that is, they describe how instruction occurs, not where instruction takes place.

Research on these characteristics is limited to how student acquire and use a range of relatively basic or middle-order skills, from functional personal management skills, to the achievement of literacy and numeracy, to the extraction of conceptual themes or "big ideas" Carnine and Kameenui, Research has not been conducted to determine the extent to which these characteristics apply when students with cognitive disabilities learn content that requires high levels of abstraction or creativity.

Although research on positive educational interventions supports the effectiveness of these characteristics and demonstrates that they can be applied in actual school settings, a gap exists between what is known about effective special education instruction and the typical state of practice. The characteristics we describe may apply, to varying extents, to students with and without disabilities alike. Research shows that, in general education, teachers typically judge the success or failure of an instructional activity primarily by its capacity to maintain classroom flow, orderliness, and cooperation Clark and Elmore, ; Yinger, At critical junctures, the teacher may determine whether reteaching is necessary for the entire class by assessing learning among a steering group of children who perform near the middle of the class Clark and Elmore, Instructional adaptation to address individual learning problems, however, occurs rarely in the regular classroom and in minor ways Baker and Zigmond, ; Kagan and Tippins, ; McIntosh et al.

By contrast, effective practice in special education, as measured by teacher decision making about instructional modifications and student achievement in reading, math, and spelling, centers instructional decision making on the individual student Fuchs and Fuchs, Research has specified methods for tracking student progress and for using the resulting database to formulate ambitious learning goals Fuchs et al.

Over time, the special educator empirically tests and develops an instructional. Many low-achieving students do well with general classroom instruction that incorporates some elements of these principles. However, for many students with disabilities, the level or intensity of application that is necessary may exceed what can reasonably be provided through general education programming.

This process is called individually referenced decision making. Individually referenced decision making is perhaps the signature feature of effective special education practice, exemplifying a basic value and representing a core assumption of special educators' professional preparation.

Individually referenced decision making requires teachers to reserve judgment about the efficacy of an instructional method for a student until the method proves effective for that individual and fosters high expectations of learning. It requires teachers to plan and make ongoing, major adjustments and revisions in response to an individual student's learning, and it requires knowledge of multiple ways to adapt curricula, modify instructional methods, and motivate students.

Corroborating evidence documents how individually referenced decision making enhances learning for students with cognitive disabilities. A meta-analysis of a number of studies summarized the efficacy of individually referenced decision making for students with cognitive disabilities with an effect size of.

More recent studies in reading, spelling, and mathematics corroborate earlier evidence of positive effects Fuchs et al. Stecker in press , for example, sought to assess whether individually referenced decision making had benefits over and beyond the effects of less individualized methods for regularly revising instruction and routinely measuring student performance.

Pairs of students with cognitive disabilities were matched. The performance of one randomly selected student in each pair was measured twice weekly, and the teacher formulated instructional decisions for both students in the pair based on the one student's assessment results. Moreover, half the matched students were also measured, but teachers had no access to their assessment profiles. Results showed that students whose instructional decisions were tailored to their own ongoing assessment results achieved consistently better than the other of their matched pais, and that measurement alone contributed little to student achievement.

Intensive instruction refers to a broad set of instructional features that includes, but is not limited to, a high rates of active responding at appropriate levels, b careful matching of instruction with students' skill levels, c instructional cues, prompts, and fading to support approximations to correct responding, and d detailed, task-focused feedback—all features that may be incorporated into group lessons see the work of Wolery and colleagues, e.

Meta-analyses and narrative syntheses Cohen et al. Glass et al. Torgesen , for example, has studied students with phonological processing deficits, who had been predicted to experience serious problems in learning to read. Children were assigned randomly to four conditions: a conventional general education control group and one of three experimental conditions, which represented a range of methods but shared the feature of one-to-one tutoring that fostered intensive instruction.

Preliminary results of this longitudinal study indicate that children in all three intensive instruction treatments had comparable achievement, significantly better than the control group. Just as for students with mild disabilities, research indicates that one-to-one intensive instruction helps develop the skills of students with more severe cognitive disabilities, particularly in the area of personal management, including dressing, personal hygiene, money management, and sexual behavior Billingsley et al.

Researchers have demonstrated that teaching these skills in group settings often dilutes the intensity of the instruction and proves unsuccessful in terms of both acquiring and generalizing the skills e.

It is important to note that, although one-to-one tutoring may be necessary to achieve instructional intensity and promote learning within certain domains of functioning, such as reading acquisition and personal management, intensive instruction is not synonymous with one-to-one delivery. In fact, meaningful participation by students with cognitive disabilities among normal, age-appropriate peer groups for instructional activities can be critical for promoting social development and communicative competence Haring and Ryndak, ; Nietupski and Hamre-Nietupski, ; Snell and Brown, As noted by Billingsley et al.

Research demonstrates that many students with cognitive disabilities need extensive, structured, and explicit instruction to develop the processes and understandings that other children learn more easily and naturally Bransford et al.

For example, in order to learn to read, many children with cognitive disabilities require explicit, structured instruction Stanovich, Similarly, without explicit instruction, the language development of many children with cognitive disabilities suffers Warren and Yoder, Parallel findings occur in other areas see Harris and Graham, As noted above, constructivism is an important philosophical influence in the current education reform movement.

Three assumptions of constructivism are particularly relevant to this discussion of effective special education. Second, constructivism holds that segmenting the curriculum into a hierarchy of discrete skills runs counter to how children learn Harris and Graham, Third, in constructivism, success in basic skills is not necessarily a prerequisite to more advanced learning and higher-order thinking Means and Knapp, As noted above, these assumptions are reflected in major general education reform initiatives and many content standards.

But they contrast with special education practice that has maintained a strong focus on the explicit teaching of basic skills. Indeed, three empirical literatures question the tenability of constructivist principles for many students with disabilities. First, the assumption that the appropriate role of the teacher is that of guide rather than provider of explicit instruction appears tenuous in light of research showing that many children with cognitive disabilities cannot be viewed as active, self-regulated learners.

Studies demonstrate that students with persistent histories of learning failure experience negative feedback that interferes with their motivation, making them more likely to suffer the phenomenon of learned helplessness Deci and Ryan, , ; Garber and Seligman, These experiences can result in behavioral patterns characterized by challenge avoidance and low persistence, which necessitate more structured, teacher-directed approaches to learning Dweck and Leggett, The second tenet of constructivism that appears somewhat problematic for students with cognitive disabilities is the assumption that cognitive components should not be isolated or fractionated and that the curriculum should not be taught as a series of discrete skills.

Research indicates that analyzing and teaching tasks in their component parts is effective and often necessary for many students with cognitive disabilities. The primary problem characterizing children with reading disabilities, for example, is a phonological processing deficit that impedes word learning and word recognition Adams and Bruck, ; Gough and Tunmer, ; Perfetti, ; Siegel, ; Stanovich, ; Vellutino and Scanlon, To overcome this deficit, these students require explicit instruction in recognizing discrete speech-sound segments and recognizing words Stanovich, Analogous research suggests the efficacy of related approaches that analyze and teach reading comprehension and written expression by teaching skills as components Harris and Pressley, Third, the assumption that mastery of basic skills is not a prerequisite for advanced learning appears tenuous for many students with cognitive disabilities.

For many of them, there does appear to be a hierarchy of learning, whereby students do better if they first learn number concepts and then learn to apply them. When these students fail to acquire early mathematics proficiency, they do not succeed in an academic track which requires high-order, problem-solving applications of earlier math content or a basic track which requires applications to.

The failure to learn to read undoubtedly puts individuals at risk for poor outcomes in the middle and high school curricula, for which reading proficiency is assumed and required. Despite some questions about the pertinence of constructivist assumptions to programs for some students with cognitive disabilities, constructivist philosophy nevertheless has influenced concepts of effective special education practice in substantial ways.

The notion of isolated skills instruction has been replaced with more contextualized presentations, in which strategies for applying skills in generalized contexts are taught explicitly. Research documents the potential value of situating explicit skills instruction within structured, motivating, and authentic contexts to help students learn how to apply knowledge. For example, Cunningham experimented with two approaches to help students develop phonemic awareness i.

Phonemic awareness was chosen because there is a large body of research demonstrating its importance in helping students learn early word decoding skills e. To teach phonemic awareness, the experiment contrasted a conventional ''skill-and-drill" approach, whereby students learn skills through drill and practice but not in an explicit context, with a "metalevel" approach, which teaches skills through learning experiences situated within particular contexts.

In this latter approach, students were taught to reflect on the usefulness of phonemic awareness and were taught how to integrate the skill with other strategies. They explicitly discussed the goals and purposes of the training, observed teachers modeling the skill in hypothetical reading contexts, and had routine opportunities to apply the skill under the teacher's direction.

Cunningham found that first graders in the metalevel phonemic awareness group displayed greater reading comprehension growth than their peers in the skill-and-drill treatment. Consequently, for many students with cognitive disabilities, data-based arguments support a situated approach to teaching, which blends explicit teaching of skills with contextually rich learning experiences, a position that echoes important principles of constructivism.

Nevertheless, it is clear that explicit teaching is fundamental even within this situated teaching approach: the teacher reveals or makes transparent the connections between knowledge acquisition and knowledge application, rather than leaving the student to discover those connections more incidentally.

The focus on situated context and explicit teaching for transfer is illustrated in the criterion of ultimate functioning, which, as noted earlier in this chapter, is a strategy commonly used to establish and teach valued outcomes for students with severe disabilities.

Applying explicit, intensive instruction in a contextualized setting results in more meaningful participation and performance in normal, age-based routines for children with severe disabilities Nietupski and Hamre-Nietupski, ; Snell and Brown, and helps them develop general social.

Together, these three broad characteristics of effective special education instruction—individually referenced decision making, intensive instruction, and explicit contextualization of skills-based instruction—represent a potent set of practices, which have been demonstrated to enhance the learning for students with cognitive disabilities.

Research on specific interventions that applied these three characteristics to teach students with cognitive disabilities documented positive effects ranging from.

We note that these three instructional characteristics represent practices that often differ from those of general education. Model special education instruction focuses on the individual as the unit of analysis, whereas general education relies on the group. Students with cognitive disabilities require intensive instruction, whereas carefully designed nonintensive instruction appears to meet the needs of most students without disabilities. Model special education practice relies on skills-based instruction, making explicit the connections between knowledge acquisition and application; by contrast, some current content standards and curricular reforms have been influenced by a constructivist philosophy, which deemphasizes explicit instruction of discrete skills.

A discussion of effective instruction would be incomplete without mentioning the use of technology, which can produce dramatic educational benefits for many students with disabilities both as an assistive device and as an instructional tool Box Increasing the participation of students with disabilities in standards-based reform will mean that they will be taught and held accountable for the new kinds of knowledge and skills reflected in state content standards. It is important to understand the extent to which many students with disabilities are already involved in the general education curriculum and thus will be held to new standards once they are put into place.

It is also important to understand the extent to which students with disabilities have or have not been considered in the design of standards-based reforms, particularly content standards.

As noted in Chapter 3 , nationally representative data are limited regarding how many and to what extent students with disabilities currently participate in the general education curriculum and instruction. Data are mostly confined to vari-. Technology is an extremely promising tool for improving the education of students with disabilities and is already an effective component of special education instruction in many classrooms.

Advances in technologies that are useful for individuals with disabilities are being made continually. Unfortunately the training of teachers, therapists, and parents to use technology for students with disabilities lags far behind the advances that are being made. Nevertheless, much has been achieved and the future holds greater promise. Clearly, technology can improve the quality of life for most individuals with disabilities.

Historically, two kinds of relevant technologies have been developed: assistive and instructional. Assistive technology refers to mechanical, electrical, or computerized tools for enhancing the routine functioning and communication capabilities of people who have physical or sensory disabilities.

Instructional technology refers to the use of computers and other related technologies to deliver and support instruction. It has been used traditionally with students who have milder disabilities as well as with those without disabilities. Some of the most successful examples of technology use for students with disabilities have occurred with assistive technology devices.

Assistive technology includes both high-tech and low-tech devices. High-tech assistive technologies include sensory devices for individuals with hearing disabilities, voice output devices for individuals who are unable to speak for themselves, computer screen readers and braille printers for people with visual impairments, and even speech recognition systems and robotic devices for people with severe physical disabilities.

Low-tech devices, which can also be extremely useful, include head pointers and key guards for use with standard computer keyboards, adaptive eating utensils, and even Velcro. Not only do these applications directly affect quality of life, but they also increase the individual's access to the environment, expanding the ability to gain maximally from such opportunities as education.

Over the years, the use of assistive devices has produced dramatic benefits for many individuals with disabilities. For example, positioning devices have allowed students with physical disabilities to join classmates at tables, on the floor, or in a standing position.

Auditory trainers have allowed students with hearing disabilities to remain in classrooms with their nondisabled peers. Portable Kurtzweil reading devices have allowed individuals with visual impairments to independently access text information from libraries and other sources.

In laboratories around the world, engineers and other researchers are looking for ways to make assistive devices faster, more intuitive, and easier to use. Although much has been done in the field of assistive technology, it is in instructional technology that most of the attention has been directed, especially for students with mild disabilities.