Targeting Accessibility as the Contributing Factor for Positive School Outcomes Among Students with

1
Targeting Accessibility as the Contributing
Factor for Positive School Outcomes Among
Students with Cognitive Disabilities

• Julie A. Armentrout, Ph.D.
• Donna M. Kelsch, Ed.D.
• College of Education
• University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
• First Annual Coleman Institute for Cognitive
  Disabilities Workshop
• October, 2001

2
Introduction

• One of the bedrock principles of special
  education is that all students with disabilities
  have the right to equally access a free,
  appropriate education. With the passage of the
  Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA)
  Amendments of 1997, the standards-based reform
  movement has irrevocably changed the definition
  of the term accessibility of general education
  as it pertains to students with significant
  cognitive disabilities.

3

• An expert panel, under the direction of the U.S.
  Department of Education, Office of Special
  Education (OSEP), has identified access to,
  participation, and progress in the general
  education curriculum as a way to bridge the gaps
  that separate current practice from what is
  needed to achieve better results for children and
  youth with significant cognitive disabilities
  (OSEP Expert Panel, 2001).

4
Our Philosophy A Universal Design Approach to
Accessibility

• Our current and prospective research endeavors
  seek to respond to OSEPs call for targeting
  accessibility as the contributing factor for
  positive school outcomes among students with
  cognitive disabilities. We have defined access
  in terms of the Universal Design concept that
  is, the design and implementation of innovative
  and traditional curricular materials which are
  USER-CENTERED, EASILY ADAPTABLE, and based on
  EQUITABLE UTILIZATION across ALL users.

5

• Our goal is to translate our research into
  practice, in terms of how improvements in
  assistive technology, professional development,
  and standards-based curricula can promote
  successful school, vocational, and
  personal-social experiences across the lifespan
  for individuals with significant cognitive
  disabilities.

6
The Focus of Our Research Our Beliefs, Goals,
and Methodology

• Our Four Beliefs
• First, we believe that ensuring the
  implementation of easily adaptable environments
  requires a Systems-Based Perspective.
  Partnerships with local, district, and state
  school personnel family members of students with
  significant cognitive disabilities students with
  and without disabilities and the general
  community is critical to ensuring adaptable
  environments and accessibility.

7

• Second, we believe that the success of our
  research will depend upon a joining of efforts
  with specialists across multiple disciplines
  (e.g., Engineering, Communication, Psychology,
  General Teacher Education, Business, Marketing)
  within the four University of Colorado campuses
  AND state- and nation-wide government agencies,
  assistive technology specialists, and human
  service providers.

8

• Third, we believe that while Universal Design is
  predominately based on accessible technological
  design, it is applicable to the entire range of
  educational services offered to all children,
  youth, and adults. We will extend the Universal
  Design principles beyond accessible technological
  components to promote Academic, Vocational, and
  Personal-Social development of school-age
  children, their family, and school personnel.

Student
School
Family
9

• Finally, we believe that Universal Design is
• a MINDSET.
• an ATTITUDE.
• a BELIEF SYSTEM.
• Universal Design should be the ultimate,
  motivating force behind supporting ALL children
  and youth, especially those with significant
  cognitive disabilities.

10
Our Goal..

• We look forward to the opportunity to share our
  work with parents, professionals, and, most
  especially, students across the state of Colorado
  and, ultimately, nationwide. Through a mutual
  exchange of experiences, knowledge, and skills,
  we can better promote the quality of life among
  children, youth, and adults with significant
  cognitive disabilities.

11
Our Research Methodology

• Six Guiding Principles..
• We propose 6 methodological strategies to
  accomplish our goal of meeting the needs of
  children with significant cognitive disabilities,
  their family, and school personnel. The
  foundation of each of these 6 principles is based
  on the Universal Design philosophy (Center for
  Universal Design, 2001). We have adopted these
  principles and have provided our interpretation
  of each principles application in serving
  children, families, and school personnel. Our
  primary emphasis is placed on children and youth
  with significant cognitive disabilities
  although we believe that each principle is
  applicable to ALL children.

12
Principle of Equitable Use

• Ensuring that the classroom and school
  environments are usable for all students,
  families, and school personnel, while recognizing
  each persons uniqueness and individuality (e.g.,
  show the use of technology in the classroom as a
  means to facilitate successful, shared activities
  between general and special education students in
  inclusive K-12 classrooms).

13
Principle of Flexibility in Use

• Providing accommodations that recognize diverse
  skills, abilities, experiences, and preferences
  (e.g., utilizing technology that provides the
  teacher with easily adaptable materials in order
  to deliver differentiated instruction and a
  goodness of fit between a students current
  needs and future expectation of progress).

14
Principle of Simple and Intuitive

• Arranging information in an understandable format
  which accentuates skills, abilities, experiences,
  and preferences (e.g., using technology that
  allows for feasible adaptation of the Colorado
  state standards and the Colorado State Assessment
  Program CSAP and CSAP-A).

15
Principle of Perceptible Information

• Communicating information in a manner that is
  consistent with current skills, abilities,
  experiences, and preferences while,
  simultaneously, promoting growth in each of these
  areas (e.g., fully engaging a student in academic
  and social experiences by utilizing their mode of
  communication and sensory needs).

16
Principle of Tolerance of Error

• Creating opportunities for success in academic,
  vocational, and personal-social domains while
  recognizing that re-learning and additional
  opportunities will be needed for skill
  acquisition (e.g., implementing prompting
  hierarchies and time delay procedures as a way to
  gently, yet effectively, shape performance).

17
Principle of Low Physical Effort

• Providing an environment that is comfortable and
  conducive to exploring new skills, abilities,
  experiences, and preferences with minimal
  psychological risk (e.g., maintaining proper
  positioning for students with low physical
  control providing proper placement of materials
  that encourage easy access for students).

18
REFERENCESCenter for Universal Design (2001,
June). Principles of universal design.
Retrieved August 20, 2001, from
http//www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/ Office of
Special Education Programs (2001, April). Record
of the expert strategy panel on students with
disabilities access to, participation in,
and progress in the general education curriculum.
Paper presented at the meeting of the IDEA Part
D National Program Planning Process,
Washington, DC.ADDITIONAL RESOURCESAbility
Hub http//www.abilityhub.com
Center for Applied Special Technology
http//www.cast.orgAdaptive Environments
http//www.adaptenv.org Assistive
Technology Project http//www.ici.umb.edu/AT
Trace Center http//www.trace.wisc.eduBerkow
itz, M., Greene, C. (1989). Disability
expenditures. American Rehabilitation, 15(1),
7-29.Educational Resources Information Center
(1998). What is universal design for curriculum
access? ERIC/OSEP topical brief. Flippo, K,
Inge, K., Barcus, J. (1995). Assistive
technology A resource for school, work, and
community. Paul H. Brookes Publishers
Baltimore, MD.McLeister, D. (1999). An open
door for universal design. Professional Builder,
March, 12-18.Musslewhite, K. King-DeBaum, P.
(1997). Emergent literacy success Merging
technology and whole language for student with
disabilities. Paul H. Brookes Publishers
Baltimore, MD.Vanderheiden, G. C. (1988).
Considerations in the design of computers and
operating systems to increase their accessibility
to persons with disabilities. Trace R D
Center Madison, WI.Vanderheiden, G. C.
(1990). Thirty-something million should they
be exceptions? Human Factors, 32(4), 383-396.
19
We Welcome Your Feedback!

• We welcome your insights regarding our particular
  area of research for helping students with
  significant cognitive disabilities.
• If you would like more information on this
  presentation, or if you would like a copy of our
  detailed research agenda relative to each of the
  six Universal Design principles, please contact
  us!

20
Contact Information.

• Julie A. Armentrout, Ph.D. Donna M. Kelsch,
  Ed.D.
• Assistant Professor Assistant Professor
• University of Colorado at University of
  Colorado at
• Colorado Springs Colorado
  Springs
• College of Education College of Education
• Department of Teacher Education, Department of
  Counseling and
• Special Education, and Curriculum
  Educational Leadership
• Columbine Hall, Room 4053 Columbine Hall, Room
  3019
• PO Box 7150, 1420 Austin Bluffs PKWY PO
  Box 7150, 1420 Austin Bluffs PKWY
• Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150
  Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150
• [phone] (voice) [phone] (voice)
• [phone] (fax) [phone] (fax)
• jarmentr_at_mail.uccs.edu dkelsch_at_mail.uccs.edu