A longitudinal exploration of assistive technologies and educational technologies in special education: Reflections from a half century

Öz

This study provides a longitudinal exploration of assistive and educational technologies in special education, reflecting on 60 years of research (1965-2025). The field lacks a review that bridges broad bibliometric structure with deep pedagogical substance. We address this gap by integrating a systematic review of 334 Scopus publications with a multi-method triangulation using bibliometrics, t-SNE, text mining, and social network analysis (SNA). Bibliometric findings briefly confirm a recent, rapid acceleration in research and a significant geographical imbalance, with the USA dominating the field (39%). The thematic analysis, which forms the core of this study, reveals a clear conceptual journey. The research evolved from foundational, parallel themes (1965-2010) to a consolidated hub (2011-2021) centered on "special education" and "educational technology". This hub recently "fractured" into highly specialized, applied topics (2022-2025) like "adaptive learning technologies," "accessibility," and "autism spectrum disorders". Six triangulated themes were identified, including: (1) the foundational AT-Special Education nexus; (2) the critical role of teacher training, self-efficacy, and TPACK; (3) the pivot to inclusive pedagogy via UDL; (4) a distinct focus on autism; (5) support for sensory impairments ; and (6) the new frontier of AI, VR, and e-learning. This study maps the field's maturation from foundational concepts to solving complex, practical challenges.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• special education
• individuals with special learning needs
• assistive technology
• educational technology
• edtech.

Destekleyen Kurum

Anadolu University

Proje Numarası

2304E022

Etik Beyan

Ethical review and approval were waived for this study because it is a systematic review based on the analysis of publicly available secondary data and does not involve human or animal subjects. Based on Academic Integrity and Transparency in AI-assisted Research and Specification Framework, the authors of this paper acknowledges that the paper was proofread and reviewed with the assistance of DeepL and Anthropic’s Claude (Versions as of May 2026), complementing the human editorial process. The human authors critically assessed and validated the content to maintain academic rigor. The authors also assessed and addressed potential biases inherent in the AI-generated content. The final version of the paper is the sole responsibility of the human authors.

Özel eğitimde yardımcı teknolojiler ve eğitim teknolojilerinin boylamsal bir incelemesi: Yarım asırdan yansımalar

Öz

Bu çalışma, 60 yıllık bir araştırma dönemini (1965-2025) temel alarak, özel eğitimde yardımcı ve eğitim teknolojilerinin boylamsal bir incelemesini sunmaktadır. Alanyazında, geniş kapsamlı bibliyometrik yapıyı derin pedagojik içerikle ilişkilendiren bir inceleme eksikliği bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma; Scopus veri tabanındaki 334 yayının sistematik incelemesini bibliyometri, t-SNE, metin madenciliği ve sosyal ağ analizi (SAA) yöntemlerini içeren çoklu yöntemli bir üçgenleme (triangülasyon) ile bütünleştirerek söz konusu eksikliği gidermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bibliyometrik bulgular, son dönemde araştırmalarda yaşanan hızlı ivmelenmeyi ve ABD’nin alana hakim olduğu (%39) belirgin bir coğrafi dengesizliği kısaca doğrulamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın özünü oluşturan tematik analiz ise net bir kavramsal dönüşümü ortaya koymaktadır. Araştırmaların; temel düzeydeki paralel temalardan (1965-2010), "özel eğitim" ve "eğitim teknolojisi" odaklı konsolide bir merkeze (2011-2021) evrildiği görülmektedir. Bu merkez yakın zamanda (2022-2025) "uyarlanabilir öğrenme teknolojileri", "erişilebilirlik" ve "otizm spektrum bozuklukları" gibi son derece uzmanlaşmış, uygulamalı konulara ayrışmıştır. Üçgenleme yöntemiyle belirlenen altı ana tema şunlardır: (1) temel nitelikteki Yardımcı Teknoloji (YT)-Özel Eğitim ilişkisi; (2) öğretmen eğitimi, öz-yeterlik ve Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi'nin (TPAB) kritik rolü; (3) Evrensel Tasarım Rehberliği (ETR) aracılığıyla kapsayıcı pedagojiye geçiş; (4) otizm üzerine belirgin bir odaklanma; (5) duyu yetersizliklerine yönelik destekler ve (6) yapay zeka (YZ), sanal gerçeklik (SG) ve e-öğrenmeyi kapsayan yeni ufuklar. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, alanın temel kavramlardan karmaşık ve pratik sorunların çözümüne doğru geçirdiği olgunlaşma sürecini haritalandırmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• özel eğitim
• özel öğrenme gereksinimi olan bireyler
• yardımcı teknoloji
• eğitim teknolojisi

Proje Numarası

2304E022

Kaynakça

1. Abdelwahab, M. M., Al-Karawi, K. A., & Semary, H. E. (2025). A systematic review of assistive technology for enhancing the students with disabilities. Journal of Disability Research, 4, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.57197/JDR-2024-0117
2. Alper, S., & Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340602100204
3. Bozkurt, A., Crompton, H., Farrow, R., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Dron, J., West, R., Palalas, A. (Aga)., Bower, M., Xiao, J., Tlili, A., Henriksen, D., Pazurek, A., Huijser, H., Chiu, T. K. F., Jandrić, P., Jordan, K., Curry, J., Kimmons, R., Cukurova, M., Reeves, T., Hwang, G.-J., Shea, P., Lodge, J., Weller, M., Ng, D., & Asino, T. I. (2026). Redefining educational technology: A critical collaborative inquiry. Open Praxis, 18(2), 192–211. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.18.2.1117
4. Buli-Holmberg, J., & Jeyaprathaban, S. (2016). Effective practice in inclusive and special needs education. International Journal of Special Education, 31(1), 119–134. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1099986
5. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers’ development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63–73. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.13.4.63
6. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
7. Elumar-Efe, E., Sagdic, A., Yiğit, H., Canpolat-Çiğ, N., & Sani-Bozkurt, S. (2026). GenAI and robots in autism spectrum disorder: A new frontier in the age of human–AI interaction. In A. Bozkurt (Ed.), Rethinking education and agency in the age of human–generative AI interaction (pp. 1–26). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-1195-1.ch012
8. Feldman, R., & Sanger, J. (2007). The text mining handbook: Advanced approaches in analyzing unstructured data. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511546914

9. Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., & García-Martínez, I. (2022). Assistive technology for the inclusion of students with disabilities: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(5), 1911–1930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10127-7
10. Filiz, A., & Albay, C. (2025). Global trends in STEM-based special education research: Bibliometric mapping of the literature. British Journal of Special Education, 52(3), 300–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.70056
11. Florian, L. (2004). Uses of technology that support pupils with special educational needs. In ICT and special educational needs: A tool for inclusion (pp. 7–20).
12. Gallud, J. A., Carreño, M., Tesoriero, R., Sandoval, A., Lozano, M. D., Durán, I., Penichet, V. M., & Cosio, R. (2023). Technology-enhanced and game-based learning for children with special needs: A systematic mapping study. Universal Access in the Information Society, 22(4), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00824-0
13. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. Sage.
14. Grynszpan, O., Weiss, P. L., Perez-Diaz, F., & Gal, E. (2014). Innovative technology-based interventions for autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis. Autism, 18(4), 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313476767
15. Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. A. (2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann.
16. Heredia-Solórzano, M., & Villafuerte-Holguin, J. (2025). Inclusive education and the use of assistive technologies: A systematic review. Education Quarterly Reviews, 8(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.08.02.574
17. İnci, G., & Köse, H. (2024). The landscape of technology research in special education: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Special Education Technology, 39(1), 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434231180582
18. Kaplon-Schilis, A., & Lyublinskaya, I. (2020). Analysis of relationship between five domains of TPACK framework: TK, PK, CK Math, CK Science, and TPACK of pre-service special education teachers. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09404-x
19. Kouroupa, A., Laws, K. R., Irvine, K., Mengoni, S. E., Baird, A., & Sharma, S. (2022). The use of social robots with children and young people on the autism spectrum: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 17(6), e0269800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269800
20. Lin, C. Y., & Chang, Y. M. (2015). Interactive augmented reality using Scratch 2.0 to improve physical activities for children with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.10.016
21. López-Belmonte, J., Segura-Robles, A., Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J., & Parra-González, M.-E. (2021). Robotics in education: A scientific mapping of the literature in Web of Science. Electronics, 10(3), 291. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10030291
22. Lorenzo, G., & Lorenzo-Lledó, A. (2024). The use of artificial intelligence for detecting the duration of autistic students’ emotions in social interaction with the NAO robot: A case study. International Journal of Information Technology, 16(2), 625–631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-023-01682-0
23. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. McGraw-Hill.
24. Mendes, F. H., Bucci, G. de F. F. B., Chagas, A. L. de B., Felix, J., & Soares, F. (2025). Assistive technologies for teaching programming to visually impaired learners: A systematic review. In 2025 IEEE 49th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC) (pp. 2082–2087). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC65507.2025.00291
25. Mishra, P., & Bozkurt, A. (2026). TPACK in the age of context and artificial intelligence: Punya Mishra on the “wicked problem” of AI and why algorithms can’t replace context. Open Praxis, 18(2), 398–407. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.18.2.1093
26. Mukhtarkyzy, K., Smagulova, L., Tokzhigitova, A., Serikbayeva, N., Sayakov, O., Turkmenbayev, A., & Assilbayeva, R. (2025). A systematic review of the utility of assistive technologies for SEND students in schools. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1523797. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1523797
27. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
28. Pamuk, S., Ergun, M., Cakir, R., Yilmaz, H. B., & Ayas, C. (2015). Exploring relationships among TPACK components and development of the TPACK instrument. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9278-4
29. Park, J., Gremp, M., & Ok, M. W. (2024). Effects of assistive technology instruction on pre-service teachers: A systematic review. Journal of Special Education Technology, 39(3), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434231210988
30. Pennington, R. C. (2010). Computer-assisted instruction for teaching academic skills to students with autism spectrum disorders: A review of literature. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 25(4), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357610378291
31. Rahim, N., Mokmin, N. A. M., & Wang, J. (2025). Empowering students with dysgraphia: The educational benefits of assistive technologies. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2025.2493737
32. Rodríguez Jiménez, C., Sanz Prieto, M., & Alonso García, S. (2019). Technology and higher education: A bibliometric analysis. Education Sciences, 9(3), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030169
33. Sagdic, A., Elumar-Efe, E., & Sani-Bozkurt, S. (2024). GenAI, robots, and inclusive special education: Autism spectrum disorder in the age of generative AI. In Transforming education with generative AI: Prompt engineering and synthetic content creation (pp. 309–326). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch015
34. Saini, R., Nordin, Z. S., Hashim, M. H., & Abol, M. T. (2025). 20 years (2004–2024) exploring research trend in intellectual disabilities towards inclusion: A bibliometric study. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 19(3), 1279–1287. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v19i3.22691
35. Sánchez, J., Reyes-Rojas, J., & Alé-Silva, J. (2023). What is known about assistive technologies in distance and digital education for learners with disabilities? Education Sciences, 13(6), 623. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13060623
36. Sani-Bozkurt, S. S. (2017). Özel eğitimde dijital destek: Yardımcı teknolojiler. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 37–60. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/403817
37. Sinha, D. B., Sinha, S., Anu, G. S., Islam, M. T., & Sahoo, D. (2024). Twenty-five years of research in the Journal of Special Education Technology: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Special Education Technology, 39(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434231187095
38. Soeprapto Putri, N. K., Yuhana, U. L., Siahaan, D. O., Rahayu, W., & Pardede, E. (2025). Assistive technology classification for students with disabilities in higher education: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 13, 15193–15217. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3538322
39. Thurmond, V. A. (2001). The point of triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(3), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00253.x
40. UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education—All means all. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718
41. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf
42. van der Maaten, L., & Hinton, G. (2008). Visualizing data using t-SNE. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9, 2579–2605. http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume9/vandermaaten08a/vandermaaten08a.pdf
43. Woodward, J., & Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 503–536. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067004503
44. Wu, W.-H., Wu, Y.-C. J., Chen, C.-Y., Kao, H.-Y., Lin, C.-H., & Huang, S.-H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 59(2), 817–827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.016
45. Yang, Y., Chen, L., He, W., Sun, D., & Salas-Pilco, S. Z. (2025). Artificial intelligence for enhancing special education for K–12: A decade of trends, themes, and global insights (2013–2023). International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(4), 1129–1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00422-0
46. Zhou, K., Richard, C., & Kim, J. (2025). Employment-related assistive technologies for autistic individuals: A scoping review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 62(2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/105222342312742