Students with Disabilities Learning Online

1. Students with Disabilities Learning Online Vulnerable Students in a Rapidly Evolving and Unstable Environment David Rose, CAST April 23, 2015, 3:00-4:00 PM ET www.CTDInstitute.org

2. Founding Partners of the Center • Center for Research on Learning, University of Kansas (KU-CRL) • Don Deshler, Jamie Basham, Daryl Mellard, Sean Smith • Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) • David Rose, Michael Connelly, Tracey Hall, Sam Johnston, Wendy Johnson, Skip Stahl • National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) • Bill East, Paula Burdette

3. Evolution, variability, and the origin of everything.

4. The Top Ten Observations • and their variance

5. 1. Large Variance; Small Central Tendency • Other than the inclusion of some kind of online content delivery, no consistent or uniform procedures constitute the practice of online learning.

6. 1. Large Variance, Small Central Tendency in: • Proportions and populations of students with disabilities enrolled • Roles played by teachers and parents • Quality of instructional design (e.g., in the adoption of evidence-based practices) • Basic accessibility and universal design features, or lack thereof

7. 1. Large Variance, Small Central Tendency in: • Capacity for peer-to-peer or student-to-teacher interaction • Resources and training provided for teachers and administrators • Means for monitoring progress • Feedback provided to students, parents, and teachers • Requirements for “offline” contextual support, and many more

8. 2. Data Rich; Information Poor

9. 2. Data Rich; Information Poor • Potential: • Much data for trackingstudent progress and learning pathways already exists • Reality: • Lack of communication and interoperability across systems currently makes this tracking nearly impossible

10. NE1 Information Systems

11. 2. Data Rich, Information Poor • Vendors: Lots of big data but too little information from schools about individual SWD’s - their strengths or weaknesses, their IEP goals - to help them adapt or customize instruction • Schools: Too little information from vendors that is timely or informative enough to evaluate or modify ongoing plans and practices. • Parents and students: Toolittle information is available or helpful in making choices about the focus of instruction, alternative paths, access features or supports, etc.

12. 3. Old Methods, New Packaging • The majority of online instructional offerings are traditional offline materials delivered online. • Benefits include: • Scalability • Timeliness/relevance • Accessibility (when compliant) • SEA/LEA customization • Multiple media

13. 3. Old Methods, New Packaging • Less common are curricular offerings that take advantage of the unique affordances of online learning to: • Foster student collaboration • Support student capacity for self-regulation • Differentiate instruction and learning pathways • Support mastery demonstrations in multiple ways • Encourage student-centered learning

14. 3. Content Mastery; Process Mastery • Most online platforms concentrate on content mastery whereas SWD’s need support and direct instruction in process mastery: • Self-regulation • Learning strategies • Time management • Executive function • Socialization • Help seeking • Etc.

15. Data + Analytics = Personalization • Monitoring Student’s academic “health” http://www.seneye.com/

16. 4. Design Matters • Enormous variation exists – both between and within vendors – in meeting the core needs of SWDs for basic accessibility.

17. 4. Design Matters • Enormous variation exists – both between and within vendors – in following basic guidelines for Universal Design for Learning (UDL): • Provide students with Information presented in multiple ways & multiple media • Allow students to demonstrate achievement in multiple ways • Provide varying support for student engagement & persistence

18. Khan Academy

20. 5. Context Matters: Variance in Implementation • Virtually every online program is a “blended” program in its implementation, but the “blends” differ considerably in what is offered “online” • Natively Offline: • Read a textbook, Watch a video • Natively Offline delivered online: • Read a textbook on a Kindle/iPad/Mobile device, • Watch an online video • Natively Online: • Read or watch interactive “textbook” that continually updates and modifies itself based on student usage patterns, progress, etc..

21. 5. Context Matters: Variance in Implementation • Huge variation exists in the ways any particular program is implemented: • Teacher : Student ratios – 1 to 25, 50, 200? • Separate “placements” for SWD? • Number of contacts per week, month? • Who is responsible for the IEP? • Is there an IEP? • Who is primary teacher?

22. 5. Context Matters: Variance in implementation • Whatever the design of the online learning component, research shows that the context in which that program is implemented has strong effects on outcomes.

23. 6. Context Matters: Teacher Preparation • Virtually all stakeholders report that teaching SWDs online requires significantly different knowledge, skills, and motivations than teaching SWDs in F2F settings. • Different goals and goal-setting processes • Different methods of instruction • Different materials for instruction • Different roles and responsibilities • Different means of communication with parents • Different social-emotional demands • Different tools for measuring progress Kennedy & Archambault, 2014 • None of the existing standards (NEA, iNACOL, etc.) have been formally validated. • Existing certification requirements based on F2F instruction may limit the pool of effective online teachers. Natale, 2011 • Greer, Rowland, & Smith, 2014

24. 6. Context Matters: Teacher Preparation • Few teachers are being prepared professionally for the changed demands of online teaching: • Very few teacher preparation programs provide any guidance or experience in online instruction. • In-service supervision from schools and/or vendors in how to teach or adapt for SWDs is highly variable • Currie-Rubin & Smith, 2014

25. 6. Teacher Preparation & Development • National survey data shows that less than 2% of teacher preparation programs offer field experience in online learning. Kennedy & Archambault, 2014 • None of the existing standards (NEA, iNACOL, etc.) have been formally validated. • Existing certification requirements based on F2F instruction may limit the pool of effective online teachers. Natale, 2011

26. 7. Context Matters: Parent Preparation • Parent roles in different online learning platforms varied widely. In some cases, parents are less involved than in F2F classrooms. In others, parents are expected to be the primary teachers. • Many parents reported that they were unprepared for the new demands imposed by their roles in online learning. • Continuing support for parents varied significantly across different schools and programs. • Currie-Rubin & Smith, 2014

27. 8. Context Matters: Local and National Policies • Virtually every stakeholder- from parent to school to vendor – reported that the wildly inconsistent and anachronistic policy landscape created among the most significant barriers to successful outcomes for SWDs.

28. 8. Context Matters: Policy Example • Supporting Data Privacy • Review third-party contracts carefully to identify how student data will be kept secure and what happens to student data when the contract ends. • Educate teachers so they understand how to keep sensitive data secure and within the State privacy legislation and the federal FERPA & COPPA laws.

29. 8. Context Matters: Policy Example • CA SB-1177 • …prohibits an operator of an Internet Web site, online service, online application, or mobile application from knowingly engaging in targeted advertising to students or their parents or legal guardians, using covered information to amass a profile about a K–12 student, selling a student’s information, or disclosing covered information, as provided.

30. State Policies Tablehttp://centerononlinelearning.org/resources/state-policy-guide/

31. Categories of Policy • Placement and Enrollment • Allowable Providers of Services • Accommodations and Assessments • Access and Accessibility • Funding for Services • Administrative Duties • Graduation or Exiting • Teacher Preparedness • Definitions

32. Policies in 2013 vs 2014 2013 2014 37 states had policies Most around Placement and Enrollment issues Still no true student ‘engagement’ policy Policy nearly doubled between 2013 and 2014 Teacher Preparedness (certification, training) found in 5 states Definitions for online program, blended learning, eligible students, appropriate online course (5 states) • 27 states had policies • Most around Placement and Enrollment issues • No true student ‘engagement’ • Little policy until 2012 • Teacher qualification non-existent • Online learning not defined

33. How knowledgeable are you about the numbers and types of students with disabilities who are now enrolled in online learning? 2013 2014

34. How comfortable are you with existingstate policiesabout online learning for students with disabilities? 2013 2014

35. 7. Persistence, Completion & Outcomes • The primary barrier to research on the effectiveness of online learning: • access to critical data that is often not publicly available or even viewed as proprietary Barbour, 2010 • Instruction combining online and face-to-face elements had a larger advantage relative to purely face-to-face instruction than did purely online instruction. Means, et al, 2010

36. How confident are you that your teachers and administrators know how to deliver effective 'specially designed instruction' in online environments? 2013 2014

37. 9. Students Matter: Recruitment & Enrollment • Who Chooses? • Participation rates of SWD = 3% to 35%

38. 10. Students Matter: Persistence, Completion & Outcomes • While most vendors believe differential rates of persistence, completion, and outcomes for different groups of SWDs occur, access to that data is often not available to researchers for various reasons: • Schools have not provided adequate data on individual students (often for privacy reasons) so that vendors can conduct such analyses • Vendors believe that such data is proprietary or is unavailable to them because of other policies and constraints.

39. 10. Persistence, Completion & Outcomes • The primary barrier to research on the key variables of persistence, completion, and outcomes of online learning: • access to critical data that is often not publicly available or even viewed as proprietary Barbour, 2010

40. Reconceptualizing our research in this evolving online ecosystem:

41. Critical connections in the online ecosystem

42. Disconnection Syndromes

43. Critical disconnections in the online ecosystem

44. Based on the Center’s investigations of the first 2 ½ years, two key findings emerge that inform our research plans: • Research conducted in only one or more of these sectors in isolation is empirically unproductive, lacks ecological validity, and is likely to have no impact. • Research conducted across the sectors is is so hobbled by disconnections and barriers that it is grossly inefficient and is powerless to take advantage of the unique research capabilities of online technologies.

45. These disconnections produce two kinds of disabilities: Internally: A system that is unable to adequately monitor its progress or to support evidence-based decision-making. Externally: A system that is unable to support effective research, especially the kinds of research that modern online technologies would require and allow.

46. An Example: Audio-Supported Reading (ASR) What we already know: Most SWD’s face barriers with text-based information Text is heavily used for information in most online programs Usage of ASR varies widely across different vendors, schools, students. What we don’t know: What are the (long and short-term) effects of using ASR? For whom (what types of SWDs) is use of ASR effective? How can ASR be used most effectively (training, strategies, etc.)? When (under what conditions, goals) should ASR be used, when should it not be used?

47. Research within the Online Research to Practice Network: ASR research as an example. First, recognizing the disconnection problem: The Center is working with a provider that can track (and record) every use of ASR for every student in their network.

48. Recognizing the disconnection problem: The Center is working with a provider that can track (and record) every use of ASR for every student in their network. But they do not have access to the data on who the individual students are: their disabilities, their IEPs, their demographics etc.

49. Recognizing the disconnection problem The Center is working with a provider that can track (and record) every use of ASR for every student in their network. And they do not have access to data about context: the instructional practices and policies of the LEA or classroom that affect the use of ASR. But they do not have access to the data on who the individual students are: their disabilities, their IEPs, their demographics etc. This is what a disconnection syndrome looks like.

50. Re-imagining research in a functional ecosystem: The Online Research to Practice Network: Reducing the barriers. The provider could track (and record) every use of ASR for every student and use that information, along with information from other SWDs and their schools, to optimize adjustments and accommodations in their design and delivery. Schools and teachers could examine the effects of changes in local policies and practices – e.g. do usage patterns (and outcomes) change after strategy instruction in effective use of ASR. Each individual student and their parents would be able to track their usage of ASR and its effects on their overall progress, their reading development, their motivation, etc. What if the “disconnections” were remediated?