Alan M. Hofmeister

Microcomputers in Perspective

Although microcomputers will undoubtedly make a contribution to special education, educators face problems because of the poor quality of some of the available computer-assisted instruction (CAI) software and the limited supply of hardware. The primary contribution of computers may occur through other applications such as computer literacy and computer-managed instruction. The potential for inappropriate applications of the computer exists, and some special education pupils may suffer because of poorly conceptualized computer projects. Careful implementation of the strengths of computer technology is necessary. The existing research base should not be ignored in planning for the application of microcomputers in special education.

EXPERT SYSTEMS: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF LEARNING DISABILITIES

Application of artificial intelligence to the problems of education is a relatively recent endeavor. This article will focus on one of the most promising aspects of artificial intelligence — expert systems technology — and some of the characteristics that make expert systems “intelligent”. Selected present and potential applications of expert systems to the field, of learning disabilities are presented along with examples of specific expert systems.

Technological Tools for Rural Special Education

Many of the problems of education relate to communication issues. The developing new technologies offer considerable promise because of their information orientation. The realization of these promises will depend on the degree to which rural educators prepare themselves to capitalize on the advantages and avoid the problems associated with the new technologies. One of the advantages of the new information technologies is the potential to support the concept of “universal excellence” in instructional delivery systems.

Development and Validation of an Expert System for Special Educators

The authors describe the development and initial validation of a computer-based expert system, Mandate Consultant (Parry, 1985), designed to review the regulatory procedures for developing Individual Education Programs (IEP). The formative process involved three phases: (a) definition of need and proposed solution, (b) design of a prototype, and (c) progressive refinement through field-testing and revision cycles. The summative component included a two-phase experimental design for validating the accuracy of expert system output through comparisons with human experts. The findings indicated that the expert system-generated conclusions matched the conclusions of the “better” human experts, and were considered more appropriate than the conclusions of the majority of experts. Furthermore, “blinded” evaluators judged the expert system-generated conclusions as being equally acceptable as those produced by the “better” human experts, and more acceptable than those of the majority of experts.

Expert Systems and Special Education

Expert systems are computer programs designed to replicate human expertise in a variety of areas. This article discusses the characteristics of these programs as well as recently available expert system development tools. The article also suggests potential applications for expert systems within the field of special education. Finally, the article reviews recent efforts to apply expert systems technology to special education problems.

Formative evaluation in the development and validation of expert systems in education

Researchers developing and validating educational products often expect the same field‐test activities to provide information on product improvement and product effectiveness. For effective and economical use of resources, these two goals, product improvement and product validation, must be stressed at different times and with different tools and strategies. This article identifies the difference in procedures and outcome between formative and summative evaluation practices and relates these practices to the development and validation of expert systems in education.

Videodisc Technology and the Preparation of Special Education Teachers.

Alan M. Hofmeister is Dean of the School of Graduate Studies, Assistant Vice President of Research, Professor of Special Education, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322. Ron J. Thorkildsen is Adjunct Professor, Department of Instructional Technology, and Business Administrator with Exceptional Childrens’ Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322. instructional technology has affected the fie’d >f speclal education in two ways: (a) through the of hardware and (b) through the application of systems technology. Extensive applications have been noted in the area of systems technology (Blackhurst & ~ofmeister, 1980). The programmatic nature of the IPP process, with its emphasis on specific objectives and monitoring processes, is one example,. in teacher education, extensive use of systems technology is evident in behavioral approaches to program evaluation, structured approaches to instructional procedures, and an emphasis

Videodisc Technology: Providing Instructional Alternatives.

As special educators search for effective and flexible instructional alternatives, consideration must be given to videodisc programs built on the characteristics of effective instruction. The different types of instructional videodisc programs are described and discussed in relation to the needs and resources of the public school. In discussing needs, both staff development and student achievement goals are considered.

A method for assessing the treatment validity of tests in special education

Abstract Several tests in special education are used as a basis for describing education treatment. When tests are used in this fashion, it is necessary to assess their treatment validity, i.e., to assess the degree to which they enable educators to accurately prescribe an effective treatment. This article outlines a procedure for estimating the treatment validity of a test and uses two tests as examples.

Individual Differences and the form and Function of Instruction

Selected approaches to the individualization of instruction are reviewed and compared to the findings of the effective teaching literature. The instructional setting, as a salient variable in instructional adaptations for individual differences, is questioned. Special educators should focus on the needed, validated, student learning experiences. To accomplish this, the special educator should emphasize the function, not the form, of instructional treatments. It is recommended that the effective teaching literature be viewed as a source of practical information on cost-effective approaches that address instructionally relevant individual differences.