Digital Curricula

That recommendation notwithstanding, it is dangerous to view assistive technology as the sole focus of educational technology for students with disabilities. Such an orientation places the emphasis of intervention on the individual rather than the learning environment. Developing powerful technologies to overcome barriers must be balanced by designing environments with fewer barriers. The lesson of the ADA is that small affordances built in everywhere, like curb cuts and ramps, are as critical for access as are assistive technologies like motorized wheelchairs.

The same is true for educational materials and methods. We need to use the new technologies not only to overcome existing learning barriers but also to design learning environments with fewer barriers right from the start.

In the Concord, New Hampshire public schools, teachers and parents are engaged in the painstaking task of digitizing much of their printed curricular materials into the computer. They are working to create "digital versions" of the printed materials used in their schools. Why are they going to all this trouble?

They are doing this work because digital versions of the books are much better for students with disabilities. The difference is not in the content - the digital versions have exactly the same content. The difference is in the way that content is displayed.

In print versions the content is permanently on paper. Its display is fixed, unchangeable, "one size fits all." In digital versions, content is presented dynamically by the computer. As a result, content can be displayed in many different ways, adjusting to many different learners.

Imagine, for example, a digital version of "To Kill a Mockingbird" for a 10^th grade classroom:

Sarah, a student with low vision, can display the text in a very large font so she can see it.

Bill, a student who is blind, can have the computer display the text as spoken words or have the computer print it on a Braille printer.

Jennifer, a student with severe physical disabilities can change the display (e.g. turn the pages) with a single blink of her eye.

Michael, a student with dyslexia, can click on a difficult word to have the computer read it aloud or link it instantly to a context-based definition.

In these ways, digital versions of traditional curricular materials can effectively reduce barriers to learning, thereby reducing the costs associated with expensive adaptations and pull-out programs.

With digital curricula, we can reduce barriers and we can do much more. In a recently completed research study (with technology developed under support from U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs), researchers at CAST digitized books being used to teach reading and embedded research-based strategies for improving reading comprehension into the new, flexible, digital texts. Nearly all of the 109 students in the study had learning disabilities and were performing at least two grade levels below their peers. Because of the digital texts, the level of access and support for reading comprehension could be adjusted closely to each child - providing the foundation for highly efficient learning.

The results were stunning - the students who used the digital texts found them more accessible, enjoyable, and empowering than traditional books, and they learned reading comprehension strategies much more effectively, showing highly significant improvements (achieving a half year's progress after reading only three novels) on later standardized tests of reading comprehension. The control group, comparable learning disabled students who used traditional printed books, showed no significant progress at all. Further, where this approach was used, students exhibited fewer behavioral problems because they were engaged in the learning activity.

Where can schools get these kinds of digital books? Local solutions are far too inefficient. While many schools across the country, like Concord, have begun to digitize their own books, the duplication of effort wastes valuable resources. And it will get worse. As more schools engage in digitizing printed curriculum, more resources will be poured into a redundant, inefficient effort. Schools and national publishers also face a bewildering and contradictory array of local requirements and formats.

A new piece of proposed legislation, the Instructional Materials Accessibility Act of 2001, is critical. This bill provides for the establishment of a single national electronic file format to be used by publishers when creating electronic versions of texts. A consistent standard will greatly facilitate the timely and efficient conversion of textbooks into digital versions that are accessible to students with disabilities: e.g. Braille, large print, digital audio and other specialized formats like those that I have been describing. The proposed bill further calls for a national electronic file repository - a central and efficient solution to replace a hodge-podge of local ones.

OSEP, under part D of IDEA, is supporting efforts that further the development of digital curriculum. For example, OSEP funds the National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum housed at CAST. Research, design, development, dissemination, and training relating to digital curriculum materials urgently needs expanded support.

Recommendations Regarding Digital Curricula

1. Congress should support the points proposed in the Instructional Materials Accessibility Act of 2001, including standardized file formats and a national repository of available digital curricular content.

2. Congress should support dissemination and training for teachers, administrators, and parents.

3. Congress should support ongoing research and development in the design, development, and release of digital curricula infused with the best research-based accommodations and enhancements for individuals with disabilities and their peers.