Targeting Accessibility for Positive School Outcomes Among Students with Cognitive Disabilities

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 progressin 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 OSEP’s 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 ALLusers.

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 ResearchOur 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-Socialdevelopment 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 principle’s 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 person’s 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 student’s 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/ATTrace Center http://www.trace.wisc.eduBerkowitz, 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 (719) 262-4162 (voice) (719) 262-4133 (voice) (719) 262-4110 (fax) (719) 262-4110 (fax) jarmentr@mail.uccs.edudkelsch@mail.uccs.edu