Transcript Effective Technologies that Support Inclusive Science

Effective Technologies that Support
Inclusive Science Instruction
Dr. Matthew T. Marino
Washington State University
Spring 2008
[email protected]
http://www.wsu.edu/~matthewmarino/index.html
Universal Design: A Theoretical Framework
for Improving Access to Learning Materials
• Developed from architecture in the early
1970’s at North Carolina State University
• Based on the idea that all products should be
usable to the greatest extent possible by
everyone, regardless of their age, ability, or
status in life.
• Examples of Universal Design include curb
cuts, TV captioning, & pictorial representation
on restroom doors.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
• An educational application of the original
architecture-based UD construct
• Developed at the Center for Applied Special
Technology (CAST) for K-12 students
• UDL is designed to improve access,
participation, and progress in the general
education curriculum
• UDL challenges teachers to anticipate, reduce,
and/or eliminate barriers by creating flexible
curricula
Premise for UDL
• Barriers occur as diverse learners interact
with curriculum (e.g., nonreaders working
with text)
• The curriculum and instruction are the
problem, NOT the students
• Curricula should consider student differences
at the outset… as opposed to retrofitting
existing instructional plans (Meyer & Rose, 2005)
Barriers to Student Learning
•
•
•
•
•
•
Prior knowledge about the concept
Seeing, decoding, or fluently reading text
Filtering extraneous sensory information
Keeping track of information (e.g., organization)
Lack of interest with the topic
Ability to maintain focus for an appropriate
period of time
Struggling Readers Face Significant Barriers
• 12.4 million students will experience significant
difficulties learning to read (NCES, 2003)
• Students with reading difficulties (RD) possess
unique neural systems that affect metacognition
(Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2004; Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 2004)
• Poor readers have difficulty with: knowledge of print
conventions, print awareness, attention, planning,
concentration, and organization abilities (Fletcher et al., 1994;
Stanovich and Siegel, 1994; Velutino, Scanlon, & Lyon, 2000)
• Students with LD in reading and poor readers
possess virtually indistinguishable reading growth
curves in grades 1 through 12 (Lyon et al., 2001)
Struggling Readers & Expository Texts
• Often lack prior knowledge (Gersten et al., 2001)
• Are unaware of the text structures they are reading
(Meyer, Brandt, & Bluth, 1980)
• Retrieve information randomly (Wilson & Rupley, 1997)
• Have difficulty determining essential information (Engert &
Thomas, 1987)
• Do not utilize text cues (Gersten et al, 2001)
• Fail to recognize when they are not comprehending
new information (Gersten et al., 2001)
This leads to…
• Low levels of reading comprehension
(Gersten et at., 2001)
• An inability to formulate questions and hypotheses
(Wilson & Rupley, 1997)
• Failure to make abstract connections
(Engert & Thomas,
1987)
• Frustration, lower motivation, expected failure
(McKinney, Osborne, & Schulte, 1993)
How can we help these students?
Technology Can Provide
• Representational illustrations of concepts
(Mastropieri et al., 1996)
• Spatial / graphic organizers (Mastropieri et al, 2003)
• Access to background information on
demand (McKenna, Reinking, Labbo, & Kieffer, 1999)
• Translational resources (e.g., text-to-speech)
(Horney & Anderson-Inman, 1999)
• Supplemental resources (e.g., screen
reading, note taking, reference tools) (Pucket, 2004)
• Embedded assessments (Liu & Bera, 2005)
UDL +Technology + Instruction = Learning
• Students need systematic, explicit, scaffolded instruction
to utilize cognitive tools (Gersten & Baker, 1998)
• Opportunities for students to reflect on and have
immediate feedback regarding tool use (Swanson & Hoskyn, 1998)
• Inclusion of tools that support cognitive overload and outof-reach activities (Land, 2000; Liu, 2004; Marino, 2006, Williams & Peterson, 2004)
• Additional technology and content area training for
teachers (Sharpe & Hawes, 2003)
• Increased collaboration between special education and
regular education teachers (Moore & Keefe, 2001)
• Improved instructional strategies (Washburn-Moses, 2005)
Teachers’ Technology Challenges
• There has been a flood of e-learning (online,
multimedia, and software) material to the
market
• Purchasing decisions are based on marketing
rather than unbiased assessment
• Where can you go for reliable peer reviewed
data about technology-based learning
materials?
http://www.wsu.edu/~matthewmarino/
Purchase Technology That…
• Includes an electronic pre/posttest design and/or
curriculum-based measures (CBM) that allows teachers
to monitor student learning
• Meets the teachers’ levels of technological proficiency
• Acts as assistive technology by including tools that
support students with reading difficulties (e.g., text-tospeech)
• Provides instructional strategies for effectively teaching
students to use the technology
• Offers customer support services and free training
Washington State University
Technology Resource Database
The goal of the Washington State University Technology
Resource Database is to develop an internet-based elearning resource for K-12 teachers, administrators, and
researchers that will provide unbiased, peer-reviewed
information about the types of e-learning products that are
most efficacious for student learning.
The database is composed of three linked interfaces: 1) an
online e-learning assessment survey that teachers
complete after using e-learning products with their
students, 2) a database comprised of the results of the
survey responses, and 3) a search engine that allows
teachers and researchers to access pertinent information
in the database quickly and efficiently.
E-learning Survey Domains
•
•
•
•
Content
Design
Instruction
Accessibility
•
•
•
•
Assessment
Student Information
Technical Aspects
Manufacturer information