Universal Design, Technology and Assessment CAST National Center for Accessing the General Curriculu

1
Universal Design,Technologyand
AssessmentCASTNational Center for Accessing
the General Curriculum ASES SCASS May 22, 2002
2
CAST

• Founded in early 80s as adjunct to Bostons
  North Shore Childrens Hospital
• Provided evaluation services and assistive
  technology solutions for children with
  disabilities
• Moved into RD to reach larger audience
• Proposed Universal Design for Learning to guide
  curriculum creation and teacher training toward
  increased accessibility for all students
• Awarded the National Center for Accessing the
  General Curriculum (NCAC) grant from DOE

3
Principles of Universal Design

• Not one-size-fits-all, but rather provides users
  with alternatives.
• Designed in from the beginning, not added on
  later.
• Increases access opportunities for everyone.

4
Importance of Precisely Defined Constructs

• Test items that inadvertently cover multiple
  constructs are inherently less accessible because
  the intended constructs are surrounded by
  assumptions of student abilities and background
  knowledge.
• Examples
• Read earth science passage and write essay
• Math symbols and read-alouds

5
Accommodations As Retrofits

• Acid test of accommodations Differential effect
  on students with target disabilities.
• Problem Current item design practices make broad
  assumptions of student background abilities, and
  thus tap broad constructs (e.g. importance of
  reading writing skills outside of language arts
  assessments).
• Result Accommodations can both invalidate
  measurements of some students and be insufficient
  support for others (as retrofits).
• Bottom Line It is not always possible to create
  a level playing field with accommodations alone.

6
Why Technology?

• Provides flexibility necessary to implement
  universal design.
• Provides matching between what students are
  increasingly using in the classroom and what
  tools are available on test day.

7
Universal Design for LearningTenets

• Consider diverse learner characteristics from the
  beginning.
• Provide access to learning through the use of
  scaffolds

8
Scaffolds

• Based on Vygotskys zone of proximal
  development
• Adjustable customizable
• Temporary (ideally)
• Can range from assistive technologies through
  embedded learning supports

9
Universal Design for Learning Implementation

• Based upon parallel networks model of cognition
• Recognition networks (occipital / temporal
  cortex)
• Strategic networks (frontal cortex)
• Affective networks (limbic system)
• Thus, UDL environments provide students with
• Multiple means of recognition
• Multiple means of expression
• Multiple means of engagement

10
Multiple Means of Representation

• Providing Alternatives for Text
• Text-to-Speech, Text-to-Braille, Large Type,
• Providing Alternatives for Sound
• Captions, Visual Alerts,
• Providing Alternatives for Images
• Textual Descriptions (e.g. HTML Alt Tags andLong
  Descriptions),

11
Multiple Means ofExpression

• Alternatives for Physical Access
• Single Switches, Alternative Keyboards,
• Alternatives for Mode of Expression
• Speech-to-Text, Keyboarding, Illustrating,

12
Multiple Means of Engagement

• Use of multiple media in curricular materials
  inherently tends to be more engaging to students.
• Allow students choice of content whenever
  possible.

13
Improving Assessment Accessibility with Technology

• Existing technologies that can provide
  flexibility during testing
• Variable print size
• Variable presentations (e.g. simplified)
• Independent read-aloud and navigation
• Keyboarding and voice recording for responses
• Respond directly on questions (i.e. no bubble
  sheet)
• Glossaries, word-prediction,

14
Computer-based Assessment Exemplar

• Gates-MacGinitie Reading Comprehension
• Converted to accessible HTML
• Presented in talking web browser

15
IDEA and Assessment
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

• Supports provided during testing should be
  consistent with supports provided during
  instruction.
• As universal design and technology become a
  solution for supporting curriculum accessibility,
  they should also become a solution for assessment.

16
Importance of MatchingLearning and
AssessmentEnvironments

• Boston College School of Education study (Michael
  Russell Walt Haney)
• Significant improvement in MCAS scores for
  typically-achieving 4th, 8th, and 10th graders
  when allowed to use keyboard foropen-response
  questions.

17
Mean Writing Scores ImprovementPaper vs. Computer
18
MCAS Score ImprovementPaper vs. Computer
19
Technology Limitations

• Students must not be introduced to new
  technologies on test day!
• Consider tradeoff between allowing students to
  use familiar technologies vs. standardizing
  presentation.
• Scoring inequities exist across different
  modalities (e.g. handwritten vs. keyboarded)

20
Limitations of Current Testing Potential of
Technology

• whereas our tests have incorporated many
  psychometric advances, they have remained
  separated from equally important advances in
  cognitive science, in essence measuring the same
  things in ever more technically sophisticated
  ways. Although decades of research have
  documented the importance of such cognitive
  constructs as knowledge organization, problem
  representation, mental models, and automaticity,
  our tests typically do not account for them
  explicitly. As a result, our tests probably owe
  more to the behavioral psychology of the early
  20th century than to the cognitive science of
  today.

Randy Elliot Bennett (2001). How the Internet
Will Help Large-Scale Assessment Reinvent Itself,
Ed. Policy Anal. Archives, 95.
21
Universal Design for Learning Exemplar

• Thinking Reader Project
• Supported reading environment for expository
  texts.
• Administered in middle-school classrooms,
  integrated into teaching.
• OSEP-supported research.

22
(No Transcript)