• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

The Promise of New Learning Environments for Students With Disabilities

Posted on: Tuesday, 22 November 2005, 03:02 CST

By Pisha, Bart; Stahl, Skip

With fixed, uniform learning materials, teachers are left with the burden of individualizing instruction by providing supplementary adaptations or accommodations for students with special learning needs. Unfortunately, few teachers have either the time or expertise to adequately adapt the curriculum materials to meet the diverse needs of their students. The new view of curriculum and instruction that is a key feature of Universal Design has the potential to improve outcomes for all learners. For the first time in the history of federal special education legislation, the appropriateness of core instructional textbooks to meet the needs of students with disabilities is being addressed. This initiative creates the foundation for expanding learning alternatives to every student with a disability, and even to those students who might simply prefer to work with more flexible and supportive materials.

November, Sixth Grade

Tuesday morning, 9:45 a.m., 28 chattering students file into Mr. Gunderson's sixth-grade history classroom. Mr. Gunderson's general education classroom is bright and tidy. He is proud of the curriculum he has carefully developed over his 15-year teaching career. He has divided the 6pound history textbook into fourths, each part corresponding to one of the academic calendar's quarters, and he has painstakingly drawn explicit connections between the text, daily PowerPoint lecture presentations, the 18 videos he uses each year, weekly quizzes, and quarterly hour exams. Three computers with Internet connection are available to his students, but these are used only intermittently for carefully guided online resource explorations.

By all accounts, Gunderson is a dedicated and skilled professional. He knows his subject, he enjoys his students, and he does everything that he can think of to ensure that his kids are prepared for the state-mandated high-stakes test each spring. Still, he is troubled by the annual 15% to 20% of his students who do not pass. He knows that the high-stakes testing his state has adopted mandates serious consequences for failure, with potentially lifelong implications, whether the youngsters realize it or not. He takes the task of teaching his five daily classes of diverse learners seriously-and is at his wit's end. How can anyone teach classes where many of the students speak a language other than English at home; several have part-time jobs to help keep their families afloat; and the never-ending deluge of television, the Internet, video games, and MTV absorb up to 30 hours of students' time weekly?

The class sits down and the students drag out notebooks and pencils, in anticipation of Mr. Gunderson's opening remarks and an account of the fundamental underlying causes of the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794. Eric takes a seat in the front of the room, prearranged for him to help compensate for his medical diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Mr. Gunderson paces in front of him, showing the passion with which he approaches both history and teaching. At this moment, Eric's attention follows Mr. Gunderson. The teacher sketches a map and several bushels of corn on the chalkboard. Dutifully, Eric copies the names of key players and dates of key events into his tattered notebook.

Sun streams in strongly through the window, steadily warming the room to an uncomfortable level. Eric's pencil vaults from his grasp, landing on the desktop. Eric rolls the wayward pencil forward and back, then spins it like a compass needle, hoping to predict what the pencil will point at when it comes to rest.

Eric's concentration is broken by a query from Mr. Gunderson, "Eric, were the Pennsylvania farmers right or wrong to object to the whiskey tax imposed on them in 1791?"

Eric responds, "Yes, absolutely!" and is rewarded by gales of laughter from the class. It's better to be a clown than to be viewed by friends as stupid.

Ellen is seated two rows from Eric, and she pays as little attention as possible to him. She has no patience for class clowns, who threaten to distract her from the lecture. She is concentrating on Mr. Gunderson and scribbling furiously in her notebook, struggling to capture every fact-every name and every date-that might appear on a test. Unlike Eric's notebook, Ellen's is clean and crisp-evidence of her excellent motivation and desire to succeed. However, as a result of Ellen's learning disability (LD), the writing in her notebook is indecipherable to anyone but Ellen herself. Sometimes even she cannot read what she has written, only hours earlier. She knows that her handwriting does not compare favorably with the other girls' cursive, and to make matters worse, Mr. Gunderson's passionate and high-speed lecture style forces her to write as fast as she can.

Nonetheless, this notebook is Ellen's primary study tool. Every Thursday after supper Ellen and her mother read these class notes, and her mother asks her questions about their contents in preparation for Friday's quiz. The history textbook is written at a reading level well above Ellen's; she struggles to read it, and she remembers little of it afterward. Ellen has been identified as having LD and has received special education support since second grade. Nonetheless, she struggles daily to complete assignments, study for tests, and keep up with her peers.

Ellen is floundering in the class, despite her good effort and adults' support. She dreads Friday quizzes, largely because she often cannot read the questions well enough to understand what Mr. Gunderson is asking. If she doesn't pass the state history exam, she will graduate with only a certificate, in lieu of a "real" diploma. Without a "real" diploma, she will be ineligible for admission to public colleges in her state, and because the cost of private colleges far exceeds her family's modest means, Ellen faces the prospect of adulthood without a professional career and the middle- class lifestyle that goes with it.

At 10:00 Andy walks in and noisily drops his book on top of an unoccupied desk in the last row. Mr. Gunderson scowls, and Andy declares that he is sorry and that it will not happen again. A wave of giggles passes through the room; they have heard that one before. As Mr. Gunderson turns to the chalkboard to continue his lecture, Andy slips a stick of gum into his mouth. He quickly settles into boredom and restlessness. In the past, he has found that by making a few off-the-cuff comments, or by asking ridiculous questions, rephrasing them, and asking again, he can force Mr. Gunderson to cease lecturing and focus on him. Andy decides that today he will shout out incorrect answers to Mr. Gunderson's questions, and ask follow-up questions as well, pretending to be sincerely interested in history. As Andy expects, Mr. Gunderson chides him repeatedly for speaking out of turn.

With each of Andy's wisecracks, Mr. Gunderson's anger increases. Try as he might, he cannot conceal this from his students, and soon a wave of grins and giggles follows each of Andy's outbursts. Fortunately, the bell signaling the end of the class period rings, and the class spills out into the hall. Mr. Gunderson shouts to Andy that he wants to speak to him, but Andy ignores him and is gone. With a sigh, Mr. Gunderson reaches for his lecture notes for the next period's class. He's not certain how long he can continue in this way. Many of his students are clearly not learning, and he is discouraged. He knows that most of them struggle to read and understand the textbook, and they do not seem to be paying attention when he tries to present the information verbally accompanied by PowerPoint. His goal for his students-to understand the historical material specified by his state's learning standards- seems far out of the reach of many of the youngsters in his class. But what is he to do? They seem incapable of learning from the textbook that they cannot read, and the class's attention wanders when he lectures. What is he supposed to do? The only bright spot in Gunderson's professional world is the possibility that he will pick up some helpful tips during the professional development course in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) that he is enrolling in next week. UDL is a blueprint for providing flexible goals, methods, materials, and assessments to meet the learning needs of all students, including those with disabilities (Rose & Meyer, 2002). The four teachers in his building who participated last semester seem to have enjoyed the course.

The Big Picture

As of 2001, students with a specific LD, such as dyslexia or ADHD, constituted slightly more than 45% of all K-12 students with disabilities (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2002). Although not all of these students struggle to extract meaning from print, they all evidence unique and challenging learning needs of varying degrees of intensity. A large majority of students with LD struggle with print materials, however, and both special education legislation (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA]) and civil rights laws (American with Disabilities Act [ADA], Section 504) have repeatedly reinforced the rights of students with disabilities to equal learning opportunities, which includes access to appropriate and accessible textbooks.

In addition to the longst\anding requirements of IDEA and civil rights legislation, No Child Left Behind has operationalized these "equal opportunity" requirements within the context of the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) mandates. AYP is the annual benchmark against which schools are measured. All schools must provide achievement data in four separate areas: reading/language arts, mathematics, and either graduation rate (for high schools and districts) or attendance rate (for elementary and middle/junior high schools). Schools that do not meet AYP goals (as established by individual states) in each of these three areas may be identified as "needing improvement." Finally, AYP requires a disaggregation of student achievement data by economic background, race, ethnicity, English proficiency, and disability. The intent of separately assessing the progress of students in these subcategories is to ensure an eventual parity in achievement for students perceived as disadvantnged.

The specifies of annual progress monitoring that emphasize the achievement of students with disabilities have moved into the educational spotlight. As states have implemented various forms of large-scale assessment to gather AYP data, it has become increasingly clear that the majority of these assessments have not been designed to address the needs of students with disabilities. They have also discovered that the core curriculum resources available to these students are often ill-suited to meet their learning needs. What is now apparent is that the achievement of students with disabilities is to be assessed by the same instruments that chart the progress of general education students and that these instruments need to be accessible and flexible enough to accurately measure these students' skills. Concomitantly, the curriculum resources (e.g., textbooks) that these students are provided with to acquire these skills also need to be appropriate for their use; otherwise, these students are denied the opportunity to learn.

The Limits of Print

In much the same way that students with visual impairments cannot read a standard sixth-grade history textbook because they cannot see it, students with learning and attcntional disabilities and those with limited motivation cannot keep pace in the same class-not because they find the history content too challenging, but because they cannot read or attend sufficiently to keep pace with their nondisablcd peers. In such circumstances, if these students have access to alternative representations of the printed work (i.e., audio versions via synthetic speech or recorded human voice), they will not be denied access to educational achievement opportunities solely on the basis of their print disability.

The debilitating impact of print disabilities has continually emerged through the data compiled from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2). On Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) or Section 504 plans, 41.2% of students with LD had tests read to them as an accommodation. This same accommodation was requested by only 35.5% of students with visual impairments (Levine & Wagner, 2003). Similarly, 65% of students with LD required additional time to complete assignments (Levine & Wagner, 2003). Clearly, the reliance on print materials in the process of education has a profound and compromising impact on students with LD.

Increased Expectations

No Child Left Behind mandates increased expectations and accountability for all students, including those with disabilities, to access, participate in, and progress in the general curriculum. To ensure that each student is able to achieve in the general curriculum, teachers must individualize instruction to the greatest extent possible.

One critical barrier to individualizing instruction is the curriculum itself. Rather than offering multiple gateways to learning and understanding, the "one size fits all" printed textbooks and other resources that make up the general curriculum often serve as barriers (Rose & Meyer, 2002). While conventional materials are reasonably accessible to many students, they clearly present significant barriers for students with sensory or motor disabilities. They also present a challenge to students with low cognitive abilities and those with attentional and organizational problems, and they produce more subtle, yet equally pervasive, barriers for the largest population of identified special education students-those with LD (Pisha, 2003; Pisha & Coyne, 2001).

With fixed, uniform learning materials, teachers are left with the burden of individualizing instruction by providing supplementary adaptations or accommodations. Unfortunately, few teachers have either the time or expertise to adequately adapt the curriculum materials to meet the diverse needs of their students (Ellis & Sabornie, 1990; Moon, Callahan, & Tomlinson, 1999). Moreover, although some teachers are able to adapt materials for accessibility, adapting them for instruction is a different matter. Doing so requires careful attention, to ensure that the goals for instruction are preserved in spite of the adaptations and to ensure that adequate learning progress has been achieved (Edyburn, 2003; Rose & Meyer, 2002). Furthermore, teachers' efforts are sometimes ineffective because if students perceive the adaptations as "different" or feel stigmatized by them, they may be reluctant to use them (Ellis, 1997).

If students with print-related disabilities are not provided with accessible and appropriate instructional materials at the same time as their nondisabled classmates, the potential that these students will meet standards-based achievement expectations is slim.

In the classroom, these pressures-awareness that the fixed nature of most core instructional materials limits students' opportunity to learn and the increasing accountability expectations of NCLB-prompt and, in some cases, propel, teachers to seek solutions. The irony of the situation is that most teachers are increasingly provided with well-researched, thoughtfully edited, engaging, standards-aligned core instructional materials that, because the content they present is "trapped" in an inflexible medium, must be either retrofitted or transformed into a more accessible format for student use. Consuming teacher time, or that of paraprofessionals, special education personnel, or administrators, with the process of retrofitting (or re-creating) curriculum materials detracts from preparation, planning, and, in the worst case, instruction.

The Benefits of Universally Designed instructional Materials

Modern digital materials can present the same content as printed books in a format that is much more flexible and accessible. For students who cannot see the words or images, the digital version can be produced in Braille or voice, and text-based descriptions of images can be provided. For students who cannot hold the printed book or turn its pages, the virtual pages of a digital book can be turned with the slight press of a switch. For students who cannot decode the text, any word can be automatically read aloud. For students who lack the background vocabulary in the text, definitions (in English or another language) can be provided with a simple click (Rose & Meyer, 2002).

The advantage of digital formats is that these alternatives, and many others, are available on an individual basis-available for students who need them and invisible or unintrusive for those who do not. Such customizable alternatives can substantially lessen the barriers found in traditional texts, which in turn would reduce the effects of print disabilities.

Digital text is not available for the vast majority of students with disabilities because (a) its benefits are not widely known and (b) acquiring these materials can be a challenge. In schools throughout the country, highly motivated teachers put forth Herculean efforts to adapt individual books by scanning them into an electronic format that would accommodate their students. Some schools and districts are even "digitizing" their entire curriculum. Although beneficial for individual students, these local efforts are often costly, redundant, and lacking in a research basis (Stahl & Aronica, 2002).

Some states and nonprofit organizations are building more systemic strategies for providing flexible, alternate-format materials. Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic, American Printing House for the Blind, and American Foundation for the Blind have supported schools by producing alternate-format materials, such as audiobooks and Braille books. These solutions, though important, are designed for students with specific (in most cases, visual) disabilities and are not sufficiently flexible to reach all students.

Nationally, a systemic research-based approach to creating and disseminating digital curriculum materials is emerging. Barriers to developing such an approach include technical, commercial, and legislative factors. Inconsistency of file formats used by publishers and others creating digital materials impedes the creation of flexible digital formats that can be adapted for each individual learner. Educational publishers face challenges in both production and distribution: A conflict between copyright law and federal disability statutes creates problems with permissions and intellectual property-and the novelty of the market for digital materials makes it difficult to create a robust business solution to these challenges.

The NIMAS initiative

In the fall of 2002 the Department of Education created the National File Format Panel to develop a National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard (NIMAS) for students with disabilities. This panel brought together key stakeholders, including disability advocacy groups, publishers, technology experts, and production and distribution experts.

The goals of this initiative were numerous. The overarching goal was to make appropriate and accessible ver\sions of print textbooks available to every student who needs them. This goal is currently undermined by the inefficiency of the development and distribution system for these materials, which leaves schools struggling to provide instructional materials on an individual basis (particularly for students with print disabilities). Because the system's inefficiency is derived in large part from the multiplicity of file formats, the specific aim of this work was to make progress toward standardization.

During the course of the three meetings, the Technical Panel built a consensus around the need for a NIMAS to improve access to educational materials for children with disabilities. Consensus was reached on four issues: (a) guiding principles for a NIMAS, (b) baseline format for the NIMAS, (c) application of the format for the NIMAS, and (d) limitations of and restrictions on the NIMAS.

In July of 2004, the U.S. Secretary of Education took the precedent-setting step of endorsing the specification recommended by the Panel for NIMAS Version 1.0. Version 1.0 of NIMAS details the baseline technological specifications for the creation of valid digital source files of pre-K-12 textbooks and related instructional materials. NIMAS Version 1.0 is sufficiently flexible to create multiple student-ready versions (e.g., Contracted Braille, Digital Talking Book) from the same publisher-provided source file package, eliminating the need for repetitious and inefficient transformations (e.g., print-to-Braille; print-to-ebook). The current standard codifies the minimum requirements for a subset of students with disabilities, particularly those with blindness/low vision and other print disabilities.

NIMAS Mandate in IDEA 2004

In December of 2004, NIMAS was included as a mandate for states and publishers in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004), upgrading the NIMAS specification from voluntary to required. The MMAS provisions in IDEA 2004 require SEAs and LEAs to create both a purchasing methodology and a distribution plan for acquiring accessible, alternate-format student-ready versions of core instructional materials (textbooks) from publishers by December of 2006. To facilitate this process, The U.S. Department of Education will establish a National Instructional Materials Access Center (NIMAC) as a repository for NIMAS source files provided by publishers. These files will be made available to third- party organizations (e.g., Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic, American Printing House for the Blind) for transformation into student-ready versions.

To provide an additional means for states and districts to acquire accessible versions created from NIMAS source files, state and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) may also purchase alternate-format versions directly from publishers.

NIMAS marks a major step toward ensuring that the ubiquitous textbook will be accessible to students with disabilities at the critical point of instruction. NIMAS will therefore begin to serve the needs of states and local authorities as they endeavor to provide students with disabilities with opportunity to learn, a prerequisite for participation in standards-based reform and accountability (Elmore & Fuhrman, 1995; Guiton & Oakes, 1995).

Source File Versus Student-Ready

NIMAS 1.0 provides the foundation for the subsequent creation of a variety of alternate-format versions designed to meet the needs of students with a range of disabilities. Extensions to the standard will be required, however, to address the needs of a wider range of students with disabilities. In addition, a "free market" model that provides high-quality, evidenced-based, accessible curriculum materials, while simultaneously compensating the publishers who create them, needs to be established.

NIMAS reflects a national consensus of disability advocacy groups, publishers, technology experts, and production and distribution experts. NIMAS details the XML specifications for the creation of valid digital source files of pre-K-12 textbooks and related instructional materials. Combined with a package file containing descriptive metadata and PDF files (depicting the layout of the print work), NIMAS files are a flexible foundation for the creation of multiple student-ready versions (e.g., Braille, Digital Talking Book).

Challenges Remain

The National File Format Technical Panel recognizes that NIMAS will not meet the accessibility needs of all students with disabilities. During the Technical Panel meetings, there was tension between developing a standard that is capable of providing for the accessibility needs of all students with disabilities and dealing with the realities of other provisions, such as copyright laws. The publisher members of the Technical Panel expressed concern about adopting a standard that could potentially encourage violations of the copyright laws. Other members of the panel, however, wanted to ensure that the standard would address the needs of a more comprehensive group of children with disabilities, notwithstanding copyright constraints.

This dilemma affects educators as well, because in spite of the copyright exemption, they have a legal obligation to provide educational materials to all students with disabilities. There is no law that restricts educators from requesting and purchasing accessible versions of educational materials that all students, including those with disabilities, can use, but limited market demand restricts the feasibility of this approach-few publishers have commercially available accessible instructional materials that educators may purchase. Moreover, there is not currently a standard for accessible instructional materials for use by all students with disabilities.

Aware of these issues, the Department of Education has extended the NIMAS initiative by awarding two national centers to continue the NIMAS work: the NIMAS development center and the NIMAS Technical Assistance Center. The NIMAS Development Center will improve the original standard by identifying new research and technological advances relevant to the standard and will explore existing and new distribution models for the provision of accessible materials to students with disabilities. The NIMAS Technical Assistance Center will work with key stakeholders, such as states, school boards, and publishers, to raise awareness of the benefits of accessible materials. It will also advise stakeholders on the efficient production and distribution of NIMAS-compliant materials.

The NIMAS Initiative, focused on a subset of students with disabilities and on the accessibility of core instructional materials, lays the foundation for instructional environments that encompass UDL. NIMAS provides incentives for publishers to create and market accessible, alternate-format versions of core instructional materials and for states to request these materials as options for student use. This market approach promises to be free from the existing copyright constraints, meaning that these additional versions can be made available to all students-those who require them and those who prefer them. The availability of these materials will expand the range of instructional opportunities for skilled and committed teachers like Mr. Gunderson, and significantly increase the opportunity to learn for students like Eric, Ellen, and Andy.

March, Sixth Grade

This week, Mr. Gunderson has been teaching lessons that he created during his participation in a semester-long professional development course in the theory and practice of UDL. He believes that the new view of curriculum and instruction that is a key feature of Universal Design has the potential to both improve outcomes for all learners in his classroom and help him once again love his job. Even though he has only three computers in his classroom, he is convinced that with smart planning, technology can favorably affect student outcomes. He has designed this new teaching unit with the needs of a wide range of learners in mind, and following the principles of UDL, he has built unprecedented flexibility into his goals, assessments, methods, and materials. This has required considerable thought and hard work, but Mr. Gunderson believes that the results will more than outweigh the cost to him. Even after 15 years in his profession, he still believes that education is key to success in life and that every child has a right to an excellent education.

As today's 9:45 class files in, they notice that the classroom's arrangement has been changed. Instead of rows facing the chalkboard, desks are arranged in clusters. The classroom's three computers are no longer lined up against the rear wall, but arec distributed throughout the room for convenient access and collaborative use.

Today, Mr. Gunderson's class will begin a new unit of study, addressing the War of 1812. The weekly assignment sheet that Mr. Gunderson passes out this Monday differs from those they have received in the past. This raises a quiet buzz of discussion as the class sits down. Most notable on the sheet is the frequent and unprecedented appearance of the phrase choose from. The notion of choice of activities and materials is still radical in this environment, and students barely digest this aspect of the plan when they realize that among the listed choices are "work independently or form a group of up to four students for this week's classes." When Andy drifts in 5 minutes late, even he immediately notices that all is not as usual. One of his friends signals him to join a group seated near a computer, and he does so.

Mr. Gunderson begins by briefly explaining that he is experimenting with a new way of approaching teaching and learning, and that he would welcome comments on this new model after class. Several students roll their eyes-they have heard it all before-but most youngsters seem guardedly optimistic.

The unit begins with an essenti\al question. This question reflects the "big picture" of what Gunderson expects the class to learn this week and is explicitly linked to the state history standards, which will certainly appear on the high-stakes test. This immediately heightens Ellen's attention. She is all about passing that test! Andy, scowls, unconvinced, but the other boys in his little cluster do not notice. Their curiosity is aroused, and any change from the same old, same old could only be an improvement. One of them even hazards a response to a question Mr. Gunderson addresses to the class. For several others in the class, beginning the class with a question, rather than a fact or an assertion of the topic's importance, has engaged them and stimulated their curiosity.

Rather than revealing the answer to the essential question, as the class expects, Mr. Gunderson instead directs their attention to the week's plan and distributes a single photocopied sheet to students. On it is a factually accurate yet fictional account of the War of 1812 culled from Whispers of War: The War of 1812 Diary of Susanna Merritt, told from the perspective of a 12-year-old girl.

In addition to this worksheet, a related Internet resource is provided, and students are asked to study its contents in one of three ways over the next 10 min: They may read the sheet to themselves and discuss it with another student or the members of their small group, they may listen while a member of their group reads it aloud, or they may access the URL on one of the class's computers, with the option of having the text read aloud to them by the computer.

They also notice that their reading choices are quite different from their usual mandated readings. Most salient to the class is the option of reading the assignment in the traditional manner or reading it on a computer. Computers in the classroom, the school library, and in their study halls have been loaded with the required text and a program that can both read the text aloud to them and facilitate their access to the information. These digital versions offer a convenient glossary, ancillary readings containing background knowledge that students may find helpful, and text-to- speech capabilities that can help those who need decoding support read the text. Further, by speaking with Mr. Gunderson, students can obtain a CD containing both the texts and the supporting software for use on their home computers, or an MP3 audio version of the required reading that can be read aloud by any computer or downloaded to a portable MP3 player. Even Andy suspects that this may be an interesting week.

As the class files out, Ellen finds herself with Eric, as both of them have chosen to ask Mr. Gunderson for a copy of the CD, for use on home computers. Both studiously ignore each other, for different reasons, and neither plans to announce to their friends that they asked for the CD. Nonetheless, each does take a copy home and installs it immediately after supper. Ellen finished reading her history assignment in 30 min, and although her mother sat beside her, their home computer pronounced the words that Ellen could not decode independently. Ellen's mother's role shifted from reader to co-discussant. The focus was on the ideas in the passages, not on the struggle to read the words. Ellen suggested that on the next evening her mother join her a little later, after she ha read the text, for the discussion. Mrs. Jones is flabber-gasted. She has read her daughter's textbooks to her for the last 7 years and has worried that her daughter's LD would seriously limit her prospects as an adult. As she prepares for bed, she shares her observations with her husband

Eric has also used the CD version that evening. While its range of options for text access and additional background information were initially distracting, his natural inquisitivencss propelled him to discover a new way to increase his attention to the task. By setting the software's sequential text highlighting feature to "read" sentencc-by-sentence in conjunction with the computer's high- quality synthetic speech, he discovers that he is able to maintain his focus. His eyes seem drawn to the highlighted words. He also discovers that he is able to use the computer's "find" function to help him answer the questions that appear at the end of the chapter in a way that he was never able to accomplish with the print version.

Although Andy was unwilling to voice his interest in class, he chose to work with Whispers of War because he was the same age as the character. He was interested to discover that even though the book itself was fictional, the events it depicted matched those described in the textbook. Further, even though the heroine was a girl, the fact that she was the same age meant that she was dealing with some similar issues, and he was able to immediately relate to her interactions with her friends and her family and to the threat of war.

On Tuesday Mr. Gunderson informs the class that, from this point forward, all readings assigned from the class textbook will also be available on CD for home use, as well as on computers around the school. He received three telephone calls from parents who wanted to know more about the changes in his class the night before, and each parent expressed support for the changes he instituted. Typically, Mr. Gunderson dreaded evening parent calls; invariably, the callers were upset or even angry. Three supportive calls from parents in a single evening was completely unprecedented.

This morning, Mr. Gunderson noticed that some of the bounce had returned to his step as he entered the school building. The vague sense of impending doom with which he had come to unlock his classroom door in recent years seemed less oppressive.

Moving the Promise Forward

For the first time in the history of federal special education legislation, the appropriateness of core instructional textbooks to meet the needs of students with disabilities is being addressed. As a result of unprecedented agreement among disability advocates, curriculum publishers, and educators, the immediate and distinct needs of students who evidence a print disability as the result of a sensory or physical impairment will be met. This initiative creates the foundation for expanding these alternatives to every other student with a disability, and even to those students who might simply prefer to work with more flexible and supportive materials. This expansion of opportunity will help teachers like Mr. Gunderson align the richness of his curriculum to both the learning needs of his students and the achievement requirements of his school district and state. For Ellen, Andy, and Eric, it promises to increase their inclusion in general education, heighten their engagement with learning, and, ultimately, raise their academic achievement beyond the limits of their disabilities.

If students with print-related disabilities are not provided with accessible and appropriate instructional materials at the same time as their nondisabled classmates, the potential that these students will meet standards-based achievement expectations is slim.

REFERENCES

Edybum, D. L. (2004, Winter). Measuring assistive technology outcomes in reading. Journal of Special Education Technology, 19(1), 47-49.

Ellis, E. (1997). Watering up the curriculum for adolescents with learning disabilities: Goals of the knowledge dimension. Remedial and Special Education, 18(6) 326-324.

Ellis, E. S., & Sabornie, E. J. (1990). Strategy-based adaptive instruction in content-area classes: Social validity of six options. Teacher Education and Special Education, 13, 133-144.

Elmore, R. F., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1995). Opportunity-to-learn standards and the state role in education. Teachers College Record, 96(3), 433-458.

Guiton, G., & Oakes, J. (1995). Opportunity to learn and conceptions of educational equality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 323-336.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004) (amending 20 U.S.C. 1400etseq.)

Levine, P., & Wagner, M. (2003). Secondary School Students' Experiences in Secondary Education Classrooms, National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI. Retrieved April 30, 2004, from http://www.idts2.Org/scarch/tables/7/NPR1D3afrm.html

Moon, T. R., Callahan, C. M., & Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The effects of mentoring relationships on preservice teachers' attitudes toward academically diverse students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(2), 56-62.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Children 3 to 21 years old served in federally supported programs for the disabled, by type of disability: Selected years, 1976-77 to 2001- 02. Retrieved May 5, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/ d03/tables/dt052.asp

Pisha, B. (2003). Assistive technologies: Making a difference. IDA Perspectives, 29(4), 1, 4.

Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start: The promise of Universal Design for Learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197-203.

Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Snyder, T. D., & Huffman, C. M. (2002). Digest of educational statistics. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.

Stahl, S., & Aronica, M. (2002). Digital text in the classroom. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(2), 57-59.

Note. This article is from The Promise of New Learning Environments for Students with Disabilities, by B. Pisha and S. Stahl, 2005, Wakefield, MA: CAST. Copyright 2005 by CAST. Adapted with permission.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Bart Pisha, EdD, is director of research at the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST), where he oversees research design, data collection and analysis, and interpretation of findings. He has served as principal investigator for several federally funded \research projects. His current work focuses on designing and implementing professional development for teachers that leads to better instruction and sustained improvement in student achievement. He holds a doctorate from the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Skip Stahl, MS, is a founder of CAST and its director of technical assistance. Skip chaired the National File Format Technical Panel for the U.S. Department of Education and led the consensus-building to identify the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard (NIMAS). He is presently project director for the NIMAS Development Center. He is the author of dozens of articles, including a regular technology column to Counterpoint, a publication of the National Association of Directors of Special Education. Address: Bart Pisha, CAST, 40 Harvard Mills Square, Suite 3, Wakefield, MA 01880-3233.

Copyright PRO-ED Journals Nov 2005

Source: Intervention in School and Clinic

More News in this Category