1/19/2023
Bree Loveland 2:33 PM
Today a colleague told me that hearing aides do not count as assistive technology for the purposes of the AT consideration section of the IEP. When reviewing the definition of AT, it does specifically mention medically implanted devices (such as cochlear implants) do not count. My thought process is yes hearing aides may be medical, but they aren’t implanted. Does anyone have thoughts or ideas on if hearing aides should or should not be included in this consideration?
Travis Chamberlain 1 month ago
Hi Bree, the confusion may come from the Special Ed Rules book. I believe schools are not required to purchase cochlear implants, even though they can be considered AT. Perhaps the question about HA stems from this section in the Rules?
Julia Pearce
Here is what I found on ASHA: https://www.asha.org/advocacy/idea/04-law-assist-tech/
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
IDEA: Assistive Technology Definition Revision
IDEA includes a change to the definition of "assistive technology device." The Congress added an exception to the existing definition.
Julia Pearce 1 month ago
(same link from ASHA) IDEA does not address lingering questions about what is and is not school responsibility regarding assistive technology devices that serve both educational and medical functions (e.g., augmentative communication systems, eyeglasses, traditional hearing aids, respirators, suctioning equipment, nebulizers). The new language may also affect longstanding U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) policy interpretation (circa 1977) that "personal use devices" are not school responsibility—unless of course they are needed to provide FAPE. This personal use exclusion, with the caveat that such devices must be provided if needed for FAPE, continues to confuse both schools and families. (edited)
Erek Engar - Davis
In the Myths and Facts from OSEP that @Julia Pearce shared, Myth 18 talks about options for personal devices.