Assessments and Accessibility

1. Assessments and Accessibility What State AT Programs Can Do Diane Cordry Golden July 2014

2. CCSS and Assessment Consortia • Common Core State Standards (CCSS) • Assessment Consortia – SBAC & PARCC • High Stakes testing • Teacher evaluations (salary, promotion, contracts) • District accreditation • Grade promotions • Graduation/Diploma • Critical Need for full accessibility

3. Status of CCSS in States Blue - rejected Red - activity to reject Gray - no action

4. State Assessment Participation (hopefully current) PARCC -- AR, AZ, CO, DC, IL, LA, MD, MA, MS, NJ, NM, NY, OH, RI, TN (ND, VI) SBAC – CA, CT, DE, HI, ID, ME, MI, MO, MT, NV, NH, NC, OR, SD, VT, WA, WV, WI (ND, VI, WY) Never Joined Either – VA, TX, NE, MN (AS, GU, MP, PR) Withdrew – AK, AL, FL, GA, IN, KY, KS, OK, PA, SC, UT IA – legislature must approve

5. Federal Activities Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Multiple meetings ED, PARCC and SBAC 1) Limited understanding of software accessibility 2) Misunderstanding of UDL and AT Assumed built-in would address all access needs 3) Conflict with pure content experts/specialists Skills could not be technology supported 4) Neither consortia had internal accessibility expertise or external advisory expertise

6. Missouri Activity Example Task Force - Organizations and State ED Agency Special Education Administrators School Psychologists Specialized Instruction and Related Services Staff Assistive Technology Specialists Higher Education Instruction/Assessment Faculty Developed Guiding Principles for Assessment Accessibility

7. Guiding Principles • Digital assessment applications must conform to an accepted set of accessibility standards. • Students must be allowed to use their own AT. • If students forced to use unfamiliar AT, becomes a test of how quickly and efficiently they can learn new AT. • Without use of AT tools in assessment that are used in everyday learning, the measure of true academic proficiency is questionable.

8. Guiding Principles • Guidelines restricting the use of access features must be patently justified and cannot result in disability-based discrimination or cause invalid proficiency scores for students with disabilities. • Mandating another “individual student plan” to authorize and activate access features for assessments is unnecessary. • Technology supported academic achievement must be valued equally with non-technology supported.

9. Missouri and CCSS Assessments • Missouri is a member of SBAC • SBAC Accommodation/Access Guidelines adopted • SBAC Governing Board adopted resolution allowing states to vary from the SBAC Guidelines to conform to their own laws, regulations, and policies in relation to accessibility for students with disabilities • This “variance” resolution will be used by Missouri. • Missouri awarded state contract to CTB to develop platform and administer CCSS assessments.

10. Assistive Technology SurveyMissouri AT Program • What operating system are your students using? • Mostly Windows • What tablets are your students using? • Mostly iPads • What browsers are your students using? • No clear majority • What kinds of specific AT are your students using? • Significant use of built in OS access features • Set of input and output AT identified

11. Collaborative Efforts with VR in Washington State Alan J. KNue, July 2014

12. WATAP’s Relationship w/ VR Before 2011 • WA Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors (VRCs) occasionally borrowed equipment from us through our Device Lending program for their customers but paying our loan fees was problematic for the VRCs and did not encourage extensive usage. • Purchased evaluation services on rare occasions. • Purchased 0-2 trainings and workshops each year.

13. April-May 2011 • WATAP was approached by one of DVR’s Assistive Technology Assessment Practitioners (ATAPs), who was at the time the official DVR representative on the WATAP Advisory Council, to purchase iPads specifically for their use in demonstrations, assessment, and evaluation purposes. • DVR IT department was not willing to purchase or support any iDevices in their inventory. • WATAP lacked the funding to purchase additional iPads. • The ATAPs discovered DVR had some ARRA funds that needed to be spent by the end of June and facilitated having a portion of that set aside for WATAP to purchase devices that WATAP would manage within its own inventory but would have a priority for DVR customers. WATAP made the case that VRCs needed to have a training on selecting AT as well as the basics of what services WATAP offered.

14. June 2011:ARRA 2-Year Agreement Signed

15. Stated Purpose of the Agreement • Expand access to and awareness of Assistive Technology (AT) for school and work by WATAP through delivery of training, device demonstrations, device lending and AT evaluations for VRCs, customers and other partners.

16. The Agreement provided to WATAP: • $31,443.26 for the purchase of equipment to augment our Device Demonstration and Lending Program with a priority for these devices for VRCs and customers. • WATAP provided to DVR equipment management services that its own IT department was not able to provide: • Maintained AT devices and software including, the housing, insuring and updating (did not include replacing) the equipment; • Updated software products to current versions on DVR purchased laptops; and • Purchased new Apps for mobile devices that meet needs of DVR customers. • $7000- eight half-day workshop style trainings that included • An overview of WATAP programs and services; categories of Assistive Technology/AT as workplace accommodation; • The process for selecting AT for school and work; and demonstration of devices in the DVR collection with the objective of expanding the view of what Assistive Technology encompasses and how it can be used as a school and work accommodation.

17. Other Provisions • WATAP used the trainings as an opportunity to collect data on meeting the demand for ongoing AT training to VRCs, DVR customers, Tribal VR and Community Rehabilitation Programs (CRPs). • WATAP provided to DVR ATAPs mobile devices to hold in person for the purpose of demonstration across the state. • WATAP worked with DVR ATAPs to collect required data for federal reporting on all demonstrations provided. • WATAP waived lending fees for DVR client's for a maximum of 24 months.

18. Outcomes: Device Demonstrations • FY 12 = 104* out of 413 or 25% • FY 13 = 183* out of 477 or 38% *Conservatively estimated numbers

19. Outcomes: Device Loans • FY 12 = 16 out of 272 total loans (5.8%) • FY 13 = 48 out of 287 total loans (16.7%)* • FY 14 = 34 out of 124 total loans (27%) (8 months) * Large increase seen after all trainings were delivered

20. Outcomes: Trainings • 153 VR staff and partners participated. • 89% of the 122 evaluations collected marked above average satisfaction that material would help them improve their skills to identify AT for customers. • Participants identified topics for future trainings

21. Outcomes: Consults and Evals • WATAP AT Specialists are consistently relied upon for more AT consultations and have conducted more evaluations to comprehensively assess and evaluate VR customer’s AT and workplace modification needs to improve their independence at work.

22. Lessons Learned • WATAP needed better inventory tracking and automation in current WATAP Lending check-out system to better serve customers. • WATAP needed more information on the website about the AT categories and options within those categories. • DVR needed to provide funds to cover extension and late fees and for equipment repair and replacement costs. • ATAPs needed to collect more complete and accurate data collection that included some cost savings to DVR that resulted from this collaboration.

23. July 2013-March 2014: Negotiations • It took 9 months to negotiate a new agreement that extended and enhanced many portions of the original agreement. • Again, the ATAP on our Advisory Council was instrumental in making this agreement happen by being able to relay that due to the sequestration cuts, WATAP needed more funds to improve some infrastructure to better serve DVR customers. • While negotiations happened, DVR agreed to provide $500/ quarter to cover our loan fees.

24. April 2014:New 2-Year Agreement Signed

25. Stated Purpose of the Agreement • Expand access to and awareness of Assistive Technology (AT) for school and work by WATAP, through provision of training, assistive technology device demonstrations, and device lending for DVR VRCs and customers. • Provided a total of $84,122.74

26. Lending Library • $5800; $725/ quarter to cover all lending fees including extension and late fees • WATAP will: • Maintain, insure, and ship assistive technology (AT) devices statewide when requested by DVR customers and/or DVR staff; • Provide DVR ATAPs with AT devices to hold in person for the purpose of demonstration across the state; • Coordinate collection and compilation of data and produce an annual report on number of DVR customers served by county, categories of assistive technology devices tried, and cost savings to DVR.

27. Assistive Technology Training • Maximum of $30,000; $1,000 /workshop trainings • WATAP will conduct fifteen (15) trainings over 2 years for up to sixty (60) DVR staff, Tribal VR staff, DVR Contractors, and other DVR partners per event in each of the three DVR Areas across the state. • Topics: • Tablet Comparison and App Selection • Assistive Technology for Learning Disability • Computer access, and Ergonomic Solutions • Assistive Technology for Cognitive Impairments and Mental Health • Assistive Technology for Sensory Impairments

28. Online Library Improvements • $11,880 • WATAP will: • Streamline the checkout and selection process of AT by DVR Client and VRCs • Enhance WATAP inventory tracking to include real-time waiting lists and better automation in reminders and confirmations sent to borrowers • Re-structure categorization of AT to better reflect how users search for needed technologies • Create a tour of AT which provides a general overview of AT categories and examples of technologies within those categories • Facilitate better and more accurate collection of data that incorporates cost savings and a history of device use.

29. Equipment Purchase plus Reserve • $29,782.40 for the purchase of equipment to update and supplement the WATAP inventory to directly support DVR customers • Plus a reserve of $6,660.34 or 25% of the actual cost of equipment purchased for repair(s) or replacement of equipment damaged or lost while in the possession of DVR staff or DVR Customers and not covered by warranty or any insurance coverage.

30. What it took to get where we are today: • Education of our DVR and other agency reps on how federal allocations impacted our annual budget and programs. • Having agency reps advocate for collaboration and coordination of WATAP and agency programs and services. • Continual promotion of the AT Act Program as being the expert on AT so agencies do not need to be experts themselves. • Dovetailing services provided in the agreement with activities authorized under the AT Act or those that can support AT Act activities means staff are working smarter not harder.

31. The Future • Success with the DVR collaboration encourages other State Departments to look at WATAP as a good partner. • Similar arrangements with WA State Department of Services of the Blind and Harborview Medical Center and other regional hospitals have been or are being negotiated. • Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing will be turning over the day-to-day operation of the NDBEDP over to WATAP management in year 3 of the program.