 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
||||
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
|
||||
 |
|
||||
| |
|
|
|
||
| |
|
|
|
||
| |
|
||||
| |
|
|
|||
| |
|
||||
| |
|
||||
Setting the Context for Universal Design for Learning
and Universal Accessibilityby John Castellani and Linda Tsantis
It is the beginning of the new school year, and Elaine has come back from a much deserved summer break. As she walks into her classroom, she dreams of all the possibilities for the new school year. Who will be in her class and how many? How will the room be arranged? What new initiatives will be waiting around the corner?
As she sits down to map out her strategies for getting her classroom ready, she is called into a meeting to discuss a new special education initiative around instructional and assistive technologies. She is inundated with new information meant to help her modify curriculum and assist students with their learning needs. As she walks out of the office, she picks up her class roster from her mailbox. She has a new student, Eric, in her class. Elaine just happened to sit on in his placement meeting at the end of the last school year. Although she is committed to all her students, she realizes that some require more planning than others. This particular student has a designated learning and emotional disability. There is technology on Eric's Individualized Education Plan, technology she is not accustomed to using.
As she arrives back at her classroom, her dreams of what is going to happen on the first day of school, and subsequent days after that, become slightly overwhelming. Where will she go for information on accommodating this student? Is the parent/caregiver or related service personnel able to assist with working with a student? How will she learn the new technology and integrate it into her curriculum planning? How much time is planning for the new student, initiative, and everything else going to take-- (there are only four days to get ready)?
The primary purpose of this article is to outline the models and tools for accommodating individual learners through sound, research-based, instructional strategies. This article outlines a framework for the following ideas:
- Students with disabilities are educated with their non disabled peers in increasing numbers and are entitled to the same high standards, effective instruction, and good leadership that is offered to students without disabilities.
- Teachers and students need practical tools to help them discover effective strategies to help students with disabilities access the general education curriculum.
- General educators need increased knowledge and practices to use instructional support devices and routines to improve learning outcomes for all students.
This article will use describe proven models developed through scientifically based research and exemplary practices for technology integrated into effective strategies and methods used to deliver educational, related, or early intervention services.
Exemplary practices are described under scientifically-based research models for instruction.
The authors have taken the view that assistive and instructional technologies are a part of larger research-based intervention strategies. This is partly due to 1) the existing influence of empirically based research curriculum strategies on the development of accommodations, 2) definitions in IDEA that see assistive technology as ANY device or service used as a requirement for individual function, and 3) the development of software that is linked directly to this existing research (i.e. Inspiration as tool for summarizing big ideas). In addition, new and existing legislation, such as No Child Left Behind and current IDEA mandate empirically based links between intervention strategies and individual student performance.
The authors believe that technology is another strategy for teaching and learning – for example, for an idea like summarizing big ideas, there are several specific strategies they can use under this broader concept of instruction. Options include 1) reviewing the main ideas at the beginning of a book chapter (non-technology) or 2) using an electronically based graphic organizer to brainstorm big ideas (instructional technology), or 3) programming a specific technology device so that it includes the main vocabulary of a lesson because the device is a requirement for communication (assistive technology).
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA 97) states that students with disabilities must have access to the general education curriculum, which includes both participation and progress, requiring increases in both teacher, administrator and parent understanding of the general education curriculum and strategies for promoting student access, progress, and participation. Although this requirement is mandated by IDEA 97, the definitions for access, progress, and participation are not clearly defined (OSEP, 2003). However, OSEP has noted barriers for implementing individualized education programming in general education settings.
Most districts do not offer the strategies or supports necessary to promote students with disabilities, teachers are not provided with strategies to work in these settings, and parental support is often not strong enough to support access, progress, and participation in schools. In the Amendments of IDEA 97, Congress encourages "strengthening the role of parents and ensuring that families of such children have meaningful opportunities to participate in the education of their children at school and at home" can improve the education of children with disabilities (Section 601(c)(5)(B)).
Access to the general education curriculum involves placing students with disabilities in general education classrooms as well as adapting curriculum content that is meaningful to every student. With the increase in available instructional and assistive technology tools, access to the general education curriculum means modifying the classroom, such as equipping students with disabilities with graphic organizers or concept mapping software, or allowing students who have difficulty writing to respond verbally to a peer rather than producing a written report. It may also mean using talking text readers, accessibility features built into operating systems, or specific assistive technology communication devices designed for receptive and expressive communication.
Access to the general education curriculum also means providing students with disabilities any special services they may require outside the general or special education classroom to support their academic needs. While strategies and supports for access, participation, and progress through technology exist, providing teachers with access to evidenced based strategies and resources is very difficult. This is primarily due to the lack of training available to general and special education teachers on the use of assistive, instructional, and accessible technologies. As a result, many teachers do not know how to access supporting resources.
While technology has proven to be an effective method for accessing instructional materials, identifying technologies as a requirement for student functioning is difficult. As students with disabilities move from into the general education curriculum or access general education materials in the special education classroom, methods for supporting teachers, parents, and technology specialists warrant understanding. In addition to the presence of technology tools in the classroom, individuals have been promoting universal design strategies that work in conjunction with these tools. The main tenants of universal design are: providing multiple modes of representation, expression, and control in relation to curriculum materials and assessment.
In this age of educational reform, students with disabilities are expected to progress in the general education curriculum and participate in high stakes, outcome-based testing. The authors of IDEA '97 recognized the role that instructional and assistive technology (IT and AT) could play in helping students with disabilities meet these educational goals. IDEA legislation specifically requires that teams developing Individual Education Programs (IEPs) purposefully consider the student's instructional (IT) and assistive technology (AT) needs, across disabilities to include any device or service necessary for educational access and progress.
The need to address the issues of instructional technology and universal accessibility is multiplied by the vast amount of digital and electronic material available on the Internet with the appropriate IT and AT tools. This opportunity has the potential to enhance the development of customized electronic instructional materials and techniques that provide student access to textual information in universally accessible formats necessary for individualization and accommodation (Orkwis &Mclane, 1998). The legal obligations of schools to provide appropriate technology to support learning and the impact of emerging technology on current special education programming require responsiveness by the educational community (Julnes & Brown, 1993; Behrmann, 1998). As one essential segment of society, the educational system is responsible for training teachers and students in the new information age, and as the age unfolds, the focus on information technologies continues to increase (U.S. Department of Education, 1996).
The U.S. Department of Education estimates that there are between 3.8 and 4.5 million at-risk learners in the United States and approximately 12 1/2 percent of the entire student population has disabilities (NCES, 2000). Consistent with national trends, there is a shortage of qualified special education teachers in the state of Maryland (MHEC, 2000). Because the authors work within the state of Maryland, a review of current conditions in MD are as follows:
A most recent study completed by the Maryland Higher Education Commission, released in October 2000, reveals the following:
- Maryland public schools estimate that they will need to hire 8,743 new teachers in 2001-2002.
- The certification subjects identified by MSDE as constituting critical shortage areas for the next academic year include art, math, science, and special education
In addition to meeting the shortage of teachers, the MSDE has developed a plan for technology in school by realizing 6 key objectives by the year 2003, three of which are to:
- Ensure access for all learners,
- Provide ongoing professional development for technology, beginning at the pre-service level, and
- Integrate the most appropriate and effective technology into all aspects of the education process. (MSDE, 2000).
To date, agencies across the country have been working to disseminate information on assistive and instructional technologies in order to promote access to the general education curriculum. However, many of these resources remain local to the jurisdictions that developed them or are completely unknown to the broader education environment. This results in the replication of activities and models used to assist children and youth with disabilities. The main goal of this project will be to coordinate these models and disseminate research-based practices that utilize other grants products and information materials.
The status of training across the country related to the use of assistive and instructional technologies remains at a critical level. In addition to understanding how IT and AT can be used for individual accommodation, teacher knowledge about curriculum design, development, and implementation for students with disabilities remains scarce (CAST, 2000). The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services has encouraged the development of appropriate models for technology integration and training in special education through grant funded opportunities targeting training, outreach, and technical assistance (Office of Special Education Rehabilitation Services, 1997).
The Office of Special Education Rehabilitation Services (OSERS) has increased the funding available for technology development and research regarding the use of technology and for training and technical assistance. However, OSERS has stated that one of the major barriers to successful technology integration is "the lack of training and support regarding how to apply technology tools to help persons with disabilities"(Osher, 1996). In addition, models for successful technology integration in special education are not widely available.
The field of special education has been affected significantly by the reauthorization of the IDEA in 1997. IT and AT can serve as the vehicle that allows students with disabilities to successfully navigate through the general education curriculum and to receive educational benefit. Early efforts to include children with disabilities in public education focused on insuring access to school for those children. These laws for the first time required schools to provide education to children with disabilities by introducing the concept of entitling children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (P.L. 93-280, The Education Amendments of 1974).
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 (IDEA '97) further defines strategies for teaching and learning by stating that IEP teams must consider the use of assistive technologies to facilitate the learning process. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 contain several provisions directed at providing students with disabilities greater access to the general education curriculum and call for a broader focus in educational planning.
Students with disabilities are educated with their non disabled peers in increasing numbers and are entitled to the same high standards, effective instruction, and good leadership that is offered to students without disabilities.
The past three decades have witnessed the movement of large numbers of students with disabilities into general education classrooms. In 1975, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, reauthorized in 1990 as The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), made free and appropriate public education in the "least restrictive environment" public policy. More recent legislation, the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, promised to make "IDEA a reality for students with disabilities" (Turnbull & Turnbull, 1995, p.104). Goals 2000 states explicitly that students with disabilities are entitled to the same high standards, effective instruction, and good leadership that is offered to students without disabilities (S. Rep. no. 103-85, 1994). According to the Twenty-Second Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 75% of the more than 5.5 million 6- through 21-year-olds with disabilities served under IDEA in 1997-98 were educated in regular classrooms, with their non disabled peers.
The number of students being included in the general education classrooms is on the rise. That is promising. But it is not merely a question of inclusion; as more students with mild disabilities (i.e., those students with learning disabilities, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, mental retardation, speech and language disorders, and behavioral disorders) are engaged in general education learning opportunities, more support must be given to students and teachers so all students may achieve their full academic potential. Because students with mild disabilities typically exhibit problems with comprehension skills, vocabulary, and abstract reasoning (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1989) they are unlikely to learn best in typical or "traditional" instructional settings. Sadly, many of these students are not reaching average achievement levels in content area courses (Lerner; 1997; Mainzer, 1999; Turnbull & Turnbull, 1995). Studies conducted during the past decade find that students with learning disabilities perform poorly in content area subjects (Deshler, Ellis, & Lenz, 1996).
The number of students with disabilities served under IDEA continues to grow at a greater rate than both the resident population and school enrollment (22nd Report to Congress 2000). State-reported reasons for this continued increase include better diagnoses and identification. That is only half of the battle. Now we must make certain that eligible students receive the scaffolds they need for academic success. While the benefits of early intervention are well noted, in practice students with disabilities are not performing as well as they should in general education classrooms. As more students experience frustration at their own inability to make progress in the general education curriculum, the consequences for the individual and for society--loss of self-esteem and, consequently, school dropout, juvenile delinquency, illiteracy and other critical problems--will become more serious (National Center for Learning Disabilities Statistics, 2000). Technology offers educators the chance to enhance learning strategies and prevent students from falling into this downward spiral. We must act now to provide appropriate supports for these students so they may achieve their best at both academic and social levels.
Teachers and students need practical tools to help them discover effective strategies to help students with disabilities access the general education curriculum. Educators must develop practical instructional tools to help students with disabilities keep pace with their peers in general education classes. Researchers have suggested that instruction for students with mild disabilities focus on helping them gain knowledge of how to use self-regulation skills and orchestrate cognitive processes in relation to understanding their own skills and the demands of the task (Ellis, 1995). Components of self-regulation include self-instruction, self-monitoring (self-assessing and self-recording), goal-setting, and self-reinforcement. Effective scaffolds can help students with mild disabilities engage in self-regulated learning and discover ways of actively taking charge of their education. Teachers with access to these practical tools will see the value of student self monitoring and discover additional ways to help students with disabilities access the general education curriculum.
When integrated in the dynamics of the general education curriculum, instructional tools keep expectations high and enthusiasm for learning strong for all students. As student learning improves, the need for services and interventions decreases. State and local school systems benefit in numerous ways including increased student and teacher productivity, higher IDEA97 compliance rates, fewer complaints from parents, and decreased spending on more intensive services.
General educators need increased knowledge and practices to use instructional support devices and routines to improve learning outcomes for all students. Powerful instructional tools are available that can truly help students with disabilities learn to mediate their own learning. Evidence shows that teachers use resources, such as instructional devices and routines that can help students with mild disabilities take responsibility for their own learning (Dixon, Carnine, & Kameenui, 1996); yet, barriers maintained by general educators (e.g. time constraints, lack of knowledge, lack of support) often thwart efforts to integrate cognitive strategies into daily instructional routines. The barriers to using specialized instructional tools in content area classes are even higher when special education teachers are not available to help students apply the strategies in general education settings. In short, general education teachers are more focused on "covering the curriculum," particularly in this age of information explosion, even if many students are not understanding it (Newman, 1988).
Despite the promise of instructional support devices and routines, general educators often hesitate to try new endeavors that seem to "steal time" from instruction. Since secondary teachers view their main role as "content expert," they typically lecture to impart information to their students (Goodlad, 1984: Putnam, Deshler, & Schumaker, 1992). In addition, the complexity of balancing the amount of time spent on content and process during instruction heightens among general education teachers as diversity in their classroom increases (Bulgren & Lenz, 1995). A prevailing attitude among secondary teachers is that even though learning strategies and devices may be helpful for students with mild disabilities, these instructional devices may be too time intensive and impractical for use in the general education classroom (Dixon, Carnine, & Kameenui, 1996).
Furthermore, many teachers believe that they do not have the necessary time or skills to differentiate learning in ways that would ensure success for academically diverse learners (Baker & Zigmond, 1990; Dixon, Carnine, & Kameenui, 1996). All of these issues are compounded by the limited time content area teachers have for collaborating with special educators or for learning how to assess the diverse needs of their students.
There is a distinct need for researchers, practitioners, and groups of individuals who represent persons with disabilities to identify ways to encourage the development of tools and strategies that will address the issues in this article. There is a need for districts and universities to work together on research to practice issues surrounding the use of technology for including persons with disabilities within the general education environment.
Resources
http://cte.jhu.edu/accessibility/primer/resources/org_resources/org_resources.htm
John Castellani and Linda Tsantis are both faculty members of the Department of Teacher Development and Leadership at Johns Hopkins University.
For more information about John Castellani: jcastellani@jhu.edu" http://education.jhu.edu/grad_edu_biocv.cfm?ID=117&type=Bio Email: jcastellani@jhu.edu
For more information about Linda Tsantis: http://education.jhu.edu/grad_edu_biocv.cfm?ID=155&type=Bio Email: tsantis@jhu.edu. Also, see another article by Linda Tsantis on the New Horizons' website: Technology as the Catalyst.
©September 2005 New Horizons for Learning
This information is provided by:
Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Special Education
P O Box 47200
Olympia, WA 98504-7200
(360) 725-6088
Fax (360)586-1631
E-mail: dgill@ospi.wednet.edu
You
are here: 