An additional challenge with the ATLC model was that it employed selection in the acceptance of students. Only students identified as learning disabled were considered; students receiving services but without this classification were not included. Also, in the opinion of one teacher, the ATLCs were only able to support students who “need the most help” due to the limitation of the size of the program.134At the same time, the program also excluded students with disabilities considered to be too severe, including those currently taught in a contained classroom.Candidates were also evaluated and admitted based on levels of parental support and of support from students’ home schools. Paradoxically, the ATLCs’ limitations on participation were somewhat non-inclusive even though the program was aiming to support classroom inclusion. As one teacher expressed it:

“When the whole class feels comfortable in using laptops and assistive technology on a daily basis then it is more likely that students who attended the Center, will feel comfortable in advocating for their use as well.”131They are “able to participate more fully in the day-to-day curriculum with confidence.”132Where this was not the case, andthe regular classroom teacher used little or no new technology, then as learning disabled students needing special devices, these students “stuck out like a sore thumb” and quickly abandoned the very tools and strategies that could help them.

One board did not invest enough in a coherent professional development plan and did not provide sufficient computer practice time for teachers. This led to frustration among teachers who were “not versed in technology, (were) frequently forgotten in training sessions (and felt they did) not have the expertise to help (students) with problems.”127

Assistive technologies have been used most successfully when they are placed in the service of the primary learning goals of the school system. Their greatest impact has been when they have been integrated into classroom teachers’ practice with all students rather than just providing a form of separate (and sometimes stigmatized) source of support for individual students with identified special needs.