My job title is “special education teacher” and I teach “students with special needs.”

My students’ abilities move about the continuum of learner variability, depending upon the lens being used to evaluate them. For over ten years, I’ve armed them with “assistive technology” and written it as an accommodation in their Individual Education Plans. It was necessary to facilitate inclusion. The goal has always been to provide access to curriculum, especially when it involved reading and writing. That goal hasn’t changed, but now there is a changing perception of the tools my students are using.

Years ago, software like Kurzweil, built-in text-to-speech capability of computers, and audio versions of text were useful, but these also made students stand out. They were usually the only ones doing something differently, and sometimes they resisted. Who wants to be the only kid in the room using a computer to read and write? Students with special needs don’t necessarily want to make themselves look different.

Along came Universal Design for Learning, Blended Learning, and a 1:1 iPad initiative to our middle school. As time went on, more students were doing things differently. Lessons created with Universal Design contain options for representation, engagement, and expression of learning. Teaching to the margins as the norm has helped our students with special needs blend in. With the addition of Blended Learning and 1:1 devices, no longer is it just special education teachers accommodating a few students with assistive technology. By allowing and providing options for everyone, no one looks different.

UDL and technology together help include all students; the possibilities are endless.

Varied reading ability has less impact on learning outcomes when technology empowers students. A colleague recently said, “It all goes back to the learning goal, doesn’t it?” So simple and so true. If the learning goal is understanding content, and students have the choice of listening to and following highlighted text, then the challenges are diminished. We can take the disability out of the curriculum by planning ahead and providing digital text as an option. Why not let every student choose from technology options if the essential question relates to content understanding, not learning to read?

Students can focus on content when information is represented using online textbooks, resources like Bookshare.org, and iPad apps like Read2Go and Subtext. These options have made my students more engaged and more active classroom participants.

Varied communication, executive functioning, and writing ability has less impact on performance when technology empowers students. If the learning goal is demonstrating understanding, and students have the choice of creating a screen cast, a video, a slide, or an e-book, then some challenges are diminished. For students with organizational, motor or expressive language difficulties, is there a benefit to struggling through writing a traditional essay when options like creating an Infographic, storyboard, or slide allow them to better show what they know?

My students have been successful using iPad apps like Popplet and Tools4Students to organize ideas. Book Creator,  iMovie, ScreenChomp, Educreations, Explain Everything, and ThingLink increase their engagement and enable them to demonstrate learning.

There will always be students with a variety of needs in any educational environment. When considering inclusion, the concept of empowering – rather than assisting – students with technology, promotes a shift from focusing on disability to focusing on ability.

UDL and technology together make special education feel a little more general.

I’ve seen the amazing things my students with special needs CAN do. I would be quite happy someday just being called a “teacher,” who teaches “students.”