Final Thoughts

I did not expect to learn about the existence of so many both high tech and low tech ways to assist in the instruction of special needs children.  I think I expected to only learn about fancy technologies, such as Kurzweil or Livescribe.  When I completed the Boardmaker activity, I realized that technology can be very helpful, but it is not necessarily a replacement for simple, effective activities such as a matching game.

As I move ahead with my career, I will take with me a better understanding of how to design curriculum that is accessible to special needs children.  I hope that by thinking about these issues, exploring technologies, and creating lessons, I’ve internalized a general idea of how curriculum needs to be modified in order to reach more children.

In general, I’m glad this class did not focus simply on theory.  I’m glad that we combined theory with the learning of actual technologies.  Although learning technical information is often a challenge for people with a liberal arts background (which many teachers possess), I think that ignoring this challenge is a mistake made by too many technology-related classes at Teachers College.  Thank you.

Digital Minds

While listening to the presentation about children growing up in a digital age, I was thinking about what students would need to be taught in order to help them succeed in our new world.  Clearly, as technology becomes cheaper and more pervasive, students will have no problem gaining access to powerful, Internet-ready computers (this is true even in poor American neighborhoors--see Generation M2, a 2010 report by the Kaiser Family foundation).

The challenge, therefore, is to help children make the best use of these tools.  Current use of technology by young people focuses mainly on socializing and media-consumption.  Children are mainly using computers to talk to friends, watch YouTube videos, and play games, but they are not typically using technology to create their own unique media.  Although students' prefered use of technology is not all bad, it is arguably the role of teachers and parents to encourage students to use computers in more creative ways.  When students use computers for the purpose of blogging, video creation, podcasting, animation, design, and programming, there is greater chance that they will be developing the information, media, and technology skills required for success in the 21st century.

Special needs students should also be expected, as much as possible, to create their own media in the classroom.  Special needs students, just like their reguarly developing peers, are growing up in a digital world.  They see digital media all around them.  The excitement generated by learning how to contribute to this new world--as opposed to simply observing it--is something that special needs students need to experience.

Issues of Assessment

When listening to the lecture about assessing students, I wondered about how to compare the standardized test scores of disabled children with the test scores of non-disabled children.  Merriam-Webster defines the word "standard" as something set up for "the measure of quantity, weight, extent, value, or quality."  Arguably, as soon as a testing accommodation or modification is put in place, any resulting test score can no longer be measured against the test scores of students who take the non-modified version of the test.

Rather than change the test to meet the needs of disabled children, perhaps it would be better to create a larger number of tests that students could choose to take.  That way scores between students with similar disabilities could be compared.  For instance, a standardized reading test could also exist in a number of alternate forms, such as:

• One with more time
• One with presentation changes (e.g., questions are read)
• One with response changes (e.g., answers are given via an augmentative communication device)
• One with simplified questions

There would probably need to be more options than the four listed above in order to accommodate a wider variety of special needs children.  Furthermore, some students will always need to have unique modifications.  Nevertheless, by having a greater number of standardized tests to choose from, the integrity of scores would be better maintained.

Augmentative Communication

While listening to the augmentative communication lecture, I couldn't help but think of congresswomen Gabrielle Giffords who was injured by a gunshot last year.  I had recently seen her first news interview since the incident.  Diane Sawyer asked her if she planned to run for reelection.  Struggling to find the words to answer, Ms. Giffords simply said the word "better."  When Sawyer indicated that she did not understand, Giffords again repeated the word.  Seeing that she still was not being understood, Giffords turned to her husband who was sitting by her side.  Her husband explain what she meant: "She wants to run for reelection only after she gets better."

The fact Gabrielle Giffords has someone to turn to for help speaking is of huge benefit to her ability to communicate.  Augmentative communication devices, both low-tech and high-tech, are wonderful.  But without assistance from a caring and understanding aide, I wonder how much they're able to help.  I've never worked with children who were unable to speak, but I wonder how much they prefer relying on a device to speak compared to how much they prefer getting help from another person.  Through which means of communication are they better able to express themselves?  And through which means do they feel more independent?

Planning with Technology

I thought the Planning with Technology lecture brought up some good points.  Very interesting was the question, "How do we incorporate technology effectively to overcome barriers, without creating more?"  Although I've seem plenty of ways that technology has enhanced and eased learning, I've also seen how technology can sometimes complicate things.  For instance, at Friends Seminary they having to deal with plenty of technology issues, including students' game playing on iPads, shattered iPad screens, network problems, SMART board problems, software compatibility problems, eBook book registration problems, and file saving problems (files are sometimes saved locally, sometimes saved on the network, and sometimes saved in the cloud).  On top of it all, the technology leaders are often strained for time.  Indeed, sometimes there simply seems to be too much technology to learn.  As a future technology leader myself, I'm starting to believe that the simplest solution is almost always the best one.  For instance, I'm already wondering if school networks are necessary.  Can't students simply always upload their files to a cloud such as Google Docs?

As for students with special needs, the importance of keeping things simple is even more important.  A student such as Jack who has limited working memory and ADHD could easily have his education hurt through poor, disorganized, depersonalized, or redundant integration of technology.

The Power of Assistive Technology

I think it's great that there are so many technologies out there to help people with various disabilities.  I'm also surprised at how many of the solutions for helping the disabled seem to be designed--or at least thought up--by regular people.  For instance, the "Disabled Bodies, Able Minds" article tells the story of how a disabled boy came to play a musical instrument:

A school employee sought out a music-store owner named Robin Amend, who is also a musical-instrument inventor and repairman. Amend, whose grandfather had played a musical instrument despite having only one arm, designed a euphonium with a joystick that electronically instructs the valves of the euphonium to move. Later, an engineer worked with Amend to refine the joystick technology.

It's remarkable that this technology would never have been created had it not been for the minds of a school employee and a music store owner.  Likewise, in the video "Adapting Classrooms for AT Users," many of the assistive technologies are very "low-tech." (for instance, simple solutions involving things such as buttons, spinners, switches, a door opener, and a specialized chair).

Kurzweil

I think Kurzweil is an excellent text-to-speech program to use when an actual recording of a text is not available.  In other words, I think that an actual human recording of a reading—if available—should always be selected before choosing to have Kurzweil convert text to speech.   This is because the intonation, fluency, and expression of a computerized voice are of much lower quality than a human recording.  Perhaps the technology of the future will improve the ability of computers to read aloud, but as of now the technology has its faults.

The ability of Kurweil to help students decode specific words is less problematic.  I can see how the Picture, Definition, Synonym, Pronounce, and Syllables buttons can all prove very helpful to students with disabilities.  Also, the ability to make highlights, make annotations, and extract both to an outline can also help students organize their understanding of a text.

Interactive Whiteboard Use

I’ve read and written a good amount about interactive whiteboards (IWBs).  Basically, the main debate regarding them centers on whether they should primarily be used as for teacher-centered instruction or learner-centered instruction.  Most research has concluded, perhaps unfortunately, that the interactive whiteboards are primarily a teacher-centered instructional tool.  Below is a summary of some of the teacher centered uses of interactive whiteboards:

• Easily compare texts at once by splitting the IWB into three side-by-side screens (Miller and Glover, 2002).
• Quickly annotate, highlight, and flip back and forth between pages of a digital text (Thomas, 2003).
• Reload class- and teacher-created material for review.
• Enhance lessons with sound, video, and images (Levy, 2002).
• Transform, break apart, and rotate fractions, angles, and polygons (Edwards et al., 2002).
• Spend less time managing physical resources (Latham, 2002).
• Save time preparing lessons by more frequently saving, sharing, and reusing lesson material (Lee and Boyle, 2003).
• Regularly model ICT skills on a large screen (Goodison, 2002).

Clearly, interactive whiteboards are capable of truly transforming whole-class (teacher-centered) instruction.  In contrast, IWBs ability to transform learner-centered instruction is debatable.  Essentially, every argument defending the learner-centered benefits of IWBs is confounded by the basic fact that IWBs do not allow more than a few (usually only one) person at a time to control the display of content.  No matter how engaging or interactive, one must question the categorization of IWB lessons as “learner-centered,” which would place them in the same category as lessons built on the principals of group collaboration, student self-direction, and project-based activities.

However, in another paper I have made the case that IWBs are capable of indirectly facilitating and improving learner-centered instruction.  Firstly, time saved using the IWB to explain concepts can provide additional time for collaborative, self-directed, and project-base activities.  Secondly, greater understanding of teacher explanations can lead to more effectual leaner-centered work by students.  And thirdly, student knowledge that group or independent work might be shared with the rest of the class via the whiteboard can cause students to work with increased earnestness.

Since IWBs are nothing more than large, touch-sensitive computer screens, their ability to improve the accessibility of classroom learning anymore than laptops is limited.  However, I can imagine that IWBs could be of benefit to a learner such as Sarah (from the example student profiles).  Sarah has ataxic cerebral palsy and although she very much enjoys working with other students, her disability probably makes it difficult to express herself as much as she would like.  Therefore, the IWB’s ability to allow Sarah to easily present her work to the whole class could be of great benefit.

Also, someone like Emma who struggles with number sense could benefit from a teacher’s improved ability to explain complex mathematical concepts using an IWB.

Universal Design Challenge (Phase 2)

Improving the elevator in my building--and making more universally designed--would require the following:

• Make the elevator larger and the entrance-way wider.
• Make the doors open automatically when they reach a floor. (As is the case on almost all modern elevators.)
• Ensure that the elevator and edge of each floor are perfectly aligned.
• Install an audio system that states the present floor whenever the elevator starts or stops moving. (I don't think I've ever seen an elevator that does this.)
• When the elevator starts moving, the audio system should say what direction it is headed. (I know I've never seen an elevator that does this.)
• The elevator should beep as it passes each floor. (This is common on many elevators, but it would be more useful to a blind person if the above two improvements where also present.)
• Lower the elevator's button panel and include Braille next to each button
• The alarm button should only need to be pushed once, not held down.  When pushed, the alarm should be loud enough to be heard from nearby floors.  It should also automatically notify the building's superintendent.

Recent Web 2.0 Experience

I recently used Google Docs for the first time to work collaboratively with others.  It was for the class "Designing Curriculum and Instruction."  Our group--consisting of seven members--was tasked with writing a 1-2 page outline of our final project (due in December).

I did not have a positive experience working in this manner. As each of us wrote our respective parts of the summary, we were all essentially adding our own pieces to a puzzle.  Unfortunately, our pieces didn't quite fit together right.  Those members who first added to the document ended up making the best contributions.  But as more of us tried to contribute, it became more and more difficult to connect our own ideas to the many ideas already in the document.  Thus, the concluding paragraphs ended up expressing ideas similar to the introductory paragraphs.  We really didn't need to write more than 1 page summarizing our project, yet our summary ended up being a sprawling 2 page document.

I wonder how we could have made our collaboration using Google Docs more effective.  On solution is obvious: have fewer than seven people working together.  But what if reducing the size of the group is not an option?  Perhaps we could have been talking on the phone (or Skype) at the same time that we were collaboratively writing.  Or perhaps we could have started earlier, so that we had time to review the document as a group after each of had all made our individual contribution.  Also, since our executive summary consisted of responses to questions posed by the professor, perhaps Google Docs was the wrong tool to use for the task.  Our writing may have cohered better if we had created key questions or an outline together ourselves.

When I am eventually in the position of recommending that students use Google Docs, I now know that I'll need to guide them as they learn to use it.  Otherwise, this promising technology will not help them write coherent, concise essays.

Universal Design for Learning

I liked this quote from Chapter Four of Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning:

Non-educators often make the mistake of equating access to information with access to learning. In reality, these are two separate goals. In fact, increasing access to information can actually undermine learning, because it sometimes requires reducing or eliminating the challenge or resistance that is essential to learning.

The chapter goes on to explain that teachers should overcome this challenge through proper goal setting.  Instructional technologies and curriculum adaptations can only adequately serve special-needs children if teachers set goals wisely.  As an example of how to accommodate more students, the authors show how the goal "Every student will be able to write an essay in cursive" is perhaps better stated as "Students will write an essay."

The first goal is obviously too specific--cursive writing is only useful to people who can already write normally, but who simply wish to write faster.  A person needing to use a special device for writing does not need to learn cursive.  However, I would also argue that the latter goal is also problematic.  It doesn't challenge a physically disabled child the same way that the first goal challenges a non-physically disable child.  The goal would be better stated as "Students will be able to write a well-organized essay summarizing and analyzing subject content."  This more specific goal maintains a high standard for students of all types.

This goal also accommodates students who prefer to communicate using digital media rather than simply written text.  Although almost all students would probably need to produce some form of "written" work, they could also be encouraged to enhance their project using video, audio, images, etc.

Universal Design

It was interesting to read about universal design and to start thinking about how these principals can improve my instruction.  I'm particularly interested in how the use of multimedia can make curriculum more accessible.  Multimedia in the classroom can be used in two ways: consumption and production.  For example, students can watch a YouTube video in order to learn about a topic (consumption), or they can create a video about a topic and post it on YouTube (production).   For a student who has difficult concentrating, either of these uses of media can be very beneficial.  Similarly, a visually impaired student might like to learn by listening and creating podcasts.  And a deaf person might benefit much from creating their own comic books or animations.  In general, bringing these types of media into the classroom is a great way to make schools more universal.

My Lousy Elevator

I chose to write about the elevator in my building, which was clearly not designed with inclusivity in mind.  For instance, it would probably greatly inconvenience someone in a wheelchair.  Unlike more modern elevators, the door to the elevator does not open automatically.  Instead, it has to be manually opened just like a regular door.  The entrance to the elevator is also not wide.  And when the elevator stops, the floor of the elevator often doesn’t align with the floor of the building, creating a step which one can easily trip over.

The elevator could also better accommodate visually impaired people.  The elevator does not make any sound to indicate that it has reached its destination, which increases the likelihood that a visually impaired person might accidentally get off on the wrong floor.  There is also no Braille on the elevator buttons.

Finally, the elevator’s emergency alarm is inadequate.  One must hold down the button in order for the alarm to continue ringing.  Also, the button doesn’t send any automatic notification to building’s superintendent.

Oh, and might I also mention that the elevator breaks down a lot, sometimes trapping people inside!

About Me, My Work Experience, and My Experiences Learning Technology

Hello! My name is Zach. In 2004 I graduated from Connecticut College with a B.A. in English and a certificate in Elementary Education. After college, I moved to Harlem and began work as a schoolteacher at P.S. 85 in the Bronx. During my first two years I worked as a math "cluster teacher," which meant that I rotated amongst about ten classrooms (grades 3-5) teaching supplemental math. During my second year as a cluster teacher, I designed a unique curriculum that integrated art into my math instruction. More recently, I've self-published my curriculum in a book called Math Art, which I sell through Amazon and promote through my website MathActivities.net.

After two years teaching only math, I spent my third and final year as a teacher in a general fifth grade classroom. Compared to being a cluster teacher, I did not enjoy this experience as much since it required the teaching of all subjects. Wanting to try something new, I left P.S. 85 to work for a couple years in the field of website sales and marketing. Although I liked the company for which I worked, I found the work less rewarding than teaching.

Therefore, I plan to re-enter the teaching field as a Technology Specialist. This is my third semester in the Technology Specialist program at Teachers College. This semester I'll be student teaching at the Friends Seminary lower school (near Union Square). I look forward to possibly applying this course's content to my student teaching and sharing with the class what I've learn while student teaching.

I have much experience teaching myself various technologies (e.g., web design, photography, image and video editing, online self-publishing, online marketing).  My talent at "figuring out" software applications was one of the reasons I entered the Technology Specialist program.  I believe that Martinez's essay about "problem solving" describes my approach to learning technology.  When learning a new technology, I often use an incremental, "trial-and-error" approach.  Since many technologies are extremely complex, it is often impossible to understand all that they are capable of doing.  Nevertheless, by "playing around" with some of the various features of a technology, one can eventually learn to put it to practical use.  For instance, I hardly know everything that Adobe's Photoshop software is capable of doing.  But this is OK since understanding the entirety of Photoshop was never a goal of mine.  Instead, I've set and achieved smaller goals for myself over time, and as a result have learned to use Photoshop to meet almost all of my photo editing needs.

However, though the "trial-and-error" approach to learning technology often suits me well, occasionally I need more assistance and support, especially when I'm first starting out.  For instance, last semester I took my first programming class.  Since I had no prior experience writing code, I had to seek assistance from the professor on multiple occasions.  However, by the end of the course I felt that I had developed a foundation of understanding from which I could continue to learn on my own.  Or, as Martinez would say, I reached a point designing programs using code became "self-sustaining" activity which "[pushed me] along by its momentum."