Digital literacy of youth and young adults with intellectual disability predicted by support needs and social maturity.

This study investigated relationships between digital propensity and support needs as well as predictors of digital propensity in the context of support intensity, age, gender, and social maturity. A total of 118 special education teachers rated the support intensity, digital propensity, and social maturity of 352 students with intellectual disability. Leveraging the Digital Propensity Index, Supports Intensity Scale, and the Social Maturity Scale, descriptive statistics, correlations, multiple regressions, and regression analyses were employed. The findings revealed significant relationships between digital propensity and support needs. In addition, significant predictors of digital propensity were found with regard to support intensity, age, gender, and social maturity.

Introduction to the special series: Technology and disabilities in education.

In the nearly 30 years since the passage of the Technology-Related Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, technology-mediated instruction has been implemented successfully with both students without disabilities and students with a range of disabilities to help them meet the demands of instruction. In this special issue of Assistive Technology, a number of noted scholars contribute research findings designed to add to the growing body of knowledge validating the use of assistive and instructional technology in the classroom.

Development and standardization of an assistive technology questionnaire using factor analyses: eight factors consisting of 67 items related to assistive technology practices.

The purposes of this study were to identify the factors that underlie assistive technology (AT) and to validate items to be used in an instrument to evaluate AT use. The study consisted of four phases. First, 99 items were developed though a comprehensive literature review. Second, the items were refined through three layers of review. Third, 1,467 respondents rated the results of the reviews. Fourth, exploratory factor analysis, and three confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were employed to analyze the data. The results of the CFA were statistically significant (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.036, p = 0.00) with a total of 67 items across 8 factors (effectiveness, affordability and dependability, utility, external support, operations, longevity, discomfort, and compatibility).