1 / 12

“Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad

“Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad Markku Hakkinen. Materials. 2 test forms (42 items each) Reading passage followed by multiple choice options. Post-test survey. Population. 49 boys, 44 girls Grades 7-10 10 different states. Test Forms.

astra
Download Presentation

“Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad Markku Hakkinen

  2. Materials • 2 test forms (42 items each) • Reading passage followed by multiple choice options. • Post-test survey

  3. Population • 49 boys, 44 girls • Grades 7-10 • 10 different states

  4. Test Forms • Form A (Maximum Accessibility) • Form B (Business as Usual)

  5. Form A (Accessible) • Higher interest passages • Included “context” sentence • Panel of disability experts reviewed items and made suggested revisions (simplified language) • Additional level of proofing for braille/large print forms • Changes to formatting • Two additional choices of test formats (audio, html)

  6. Sample by Form

  7. Mean Scores by Format

  8. Student Comments on HTML • 5 students reported HTML was better • “because it is easier and faster to navigate (performing the find command made things a lot simpler unlike the braille where I had to keep browsing through many pages and numbered paragraphs)” • “because both reading the passage and answering the questions was a lot easier than the braille. I did not use the audio.” • “I could finish more quickly and understand what I was reading.” • “some was read aloud and if there was a word you could not pronounce it would pronounce it right. It was faster than I could read the braille. • 1 student reported HTML was worse • “I couldn’t understand it as well”

  9. HTML Version • Followed Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) see http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/

  10. Limitations • Small sample sizes • Confounding of other accessibility elements with file format

More Related