[NIFL-LD:4757] RE: Should instruction, and high-stakes assess

From: Christopher Lee (christopherlee@mindspring.com)
Date: Tue May 03 2005 - 06:05:08 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j43A58G23020; Tue, 3 May 2005 06:05:08 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 06:05:08 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <002201c54fc7$4540fba0$a730be44@Christopher>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Christopher Lee" <christopherlee@mindspring.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-LD:4757] RE: Should instruction, and high-stakes assess
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
Status: O
Content-Length: 8655
Lines: 194

Susan -

have you tried the premier (voice our ATT and much better) 
http://www.premier-programming.com/
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Susan Jones" <SUJones@parkland.edu>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov>
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 6:34 PM
Subject: [NIFL-LD:4755] RE: Should instruction, and high-stakes assess


> Students with the right documentaiton here can take the college assessment 
> test with accommodations, and (at least hypothetically) get materials read 
> to them, so for these people, reading has been "redefined" as including 
> hearing it.  I'm not sure it's really being redefined, since the students 
> are getting meaning from written text.
>     Unfortunately, articles like this lead many people to the conclusion 
> that, say, if I have TextHelp! in my computer lab here at the college, 
> that a whole lot more students will be a whole lot more successful. 
> Anybody who's been down the road knows otherwise.  The infrastructure has 
> to be there to support the software.   WHen a whole system has made an 
> investment into the software, they've also made an investment in that 
> infrastructure  * or, at least, I pause to consider cynically, enough 
> investment to have somebody for  a press release.  Could even be that that 
> student brought motivation and language skills to the picture that many 
> students don't have, and that despite the description, many students are 
> laboriously proceeding through a process that has little or no meaning to 
> them (except the part about "you have to do this 'cause it's school, don't 
> expect it to make sense, that's for smart people" * one of my least 
> favorite meanings).
>
> Most of the students who try TextHelp! here are disappointed in the 
> quality of the reading; it's not somebody reading the text aloud.  They 
> would have to (as they would with text) interpret the words and if they're 
> strong auditory learners maybe even have to "translate" the words into 
> another more prosodic voice. For the software to help them, they would 
> need to learn to do this.
>   Then there's that other elusive factor * the perception of the learning 
> as something just a little bit independent of The Assignment... the idea 
> that you learn about something (listen to the book, digest it, think about 
> it) and then use that knowledge to complete the assignment. Most of the 
> folks I see honestly want the most efficient way to Complete The 
> Assignment, and * even if the thing's already scanned in for them, which 
> wouldn't always be possible * hearing the text isn't the most efficient 
> way to do it.
>    I don't know that the law would require consideration of purchase of 
> any specific product; the laws (as should our thoughts and plans) are 
> geared more towards meeting the student needs with reasonable 
> accommodations.  I do know that we've got lots of text-to-speech 
> options... and have for some time, as it's been a need for some time. 
> It's expanding the "need" definition to include those who can see that's 
> the change.
>
>
> Susan Jones
> Academic Development Specialist
> Academic Development Center
> Parkland College
> Champaign, IL  61821
> sujones@parkland.edu
> Webmastress,
> http://www.resourceroom.net
>
>>>> Steve.Noble@ky.gov 5/2/2005 9:33:17 AM >>>
> A "bibliography" of sorts is available at the following website:
> http://kamc.louisville.edu/kyecontent/Documents.htm
> (Scroll down to the list of articles and other studies.)
>
> The state of Kentucky has had a statewide Universal Design for Learning
> (UDL) project in place now for a number of years.  We now have about 95% 
> of
> all K-12 schools in the state using text-to-speech software.  The state
> negotiated a special agreement with TextHelp to obtain school site license
> for TextHelp "Read and Write" software at a much reduced rate.  This
> software includes not only software for reading, but also writing, web
> surfing, etc.  It is also used for the state assessment, as long as it is
> written into the student's IEP or Section 504 plan for a reading
> accommodation.
>
> If you would like more background on the Kentucky UDL project, there is an
> article on the NASDSE website detailing the work of Kentucky, New York,
> California and Ohio in implementing UDL principles.  This article is a bit
> dated now, but gives some good background.  It is at
> http://www.nasdse.org/publications/udl.pdf
>
> Best regards,
> Steve Noble
> Policy Analyst
> Kentucky Assistive Technology Service Network
> 8412 Westport Road
> Louisville, KY 40242
> Voice: (502) 429-4484  x268
> Toll-Free: (800) 327-5287
> Fax: (502) 429-7114
> Steve.Noble@ky.gov
> Board of Directors, Learning Disabilities Association of America (National
> Board)
> Board of Directors, Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic (KY Unit)
> Vice-President, Learning Disabilities Association of Kentucky
> Editor-in-Chief, Information Technology and Disabilities
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janice Komisor [mailto:jkomisor@projecteaston.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:59 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [NIFL-LD:4747] RE: Should instruction, and high-stakes
> assessments offer text to speech software?
>
>
>
> The Annals of Dyslexia has published studies on efficacy - some of them
> can be found at the Kurzweil link below or through the International
> Dyslexia Association. Although there are many text to speech systems I
> believe the Kurzweil system is the oldest and best.  It goes way beyond
> text to speech - providing auditory and visual feedback and a suite of
> study skills tools.
> http://www.kurzweiledu.com/proof_research.asp
>
> Janice Komisor
> Director of Language and Literacy
> ProJeCt of Easton, Inc.
> Easton, PA 18042
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nifl-ld@nifl.gov [mailto:nifl-ld@nifl.gov] On Behalf Of David
> Rosen
> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 1:21 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [NIFL-LD:4745] Should instruction, and high-stakes assessments
> offer text to speech software?
>
> NIFL-LD, NIFL-Technology, NIFL-Assessment and AAACE-NLA Colleagues,
>
> Today's Boston Globe's Education section
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2005/05/01/
> hear_words_see_a_difference/
>
> has an article about how Massachusetts high school students with
> reading disabilities use text (or print)-to-speech [
> http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Text-to-speech ] software to
> help them improve their reading and writing skills, and to take
> high-stakes and other standardized tests.  Massachusetts is not the
> only state that allows this practice.
>
> "Teachers liken the effect to runners who train with faster
> athletes
> to get used to a quicker pace.  Students who used to get bogged down in
>
> chapter one can now read books cover to cover. It's because they can
> focus less on what the words are and more on what they mean."
>
> "A growing body of research indicates these reading programs
> help
> students make significant strides, and under special education law,
> schools are required to consider buying reading programs that might
> help students with disabilities."
>
> I have several questions for you:
>
> 1. What is the "growing body of research" on this?  Can anyone give us
> citations?  (Are any on-line?)
> 2. Do your students with reading disabilities (or reading difficulties)
>
> use text-to-speech? What do you think of this practice?
> 3. Are adult education programs in your state required by law to
> consider buying reading programs like this for students with reading
> disabilities?  If not, should they be?
> 4. Should adult literacy education standardized tests (TABE, CASAS,
> BEST, BEST PLUS and others) be required to have this option? Should
> states be required to make it available?
> 5. Should reading be re-defined to include the use of text-to-speech,
> just as increasingly mathematics now includes/allows the use of a
> pocket calculator? If so, what are the implications for the field of
> adult basic literacy?
>
> I expect there will be a lot of response to these questions, especially
>
> the last one. I have posted this on four e-lists because I think it
> raises issues of concern to readers on all these e-lists (and maybe
> others).  To avoid confusion, and to give everyone a chance to see the
> entire discussion, I propose that we have this discussion on one list,
> NIFL-LD.  If you are not subscribed to this e-list, you can easily and
> quickly subscribe by going to
> http://www.nifl.gov/lincs/discussions/nifl-ld/
> learning_disabilities.html
>
> David J. Rosen
> djrosen@comcast.net
>
>
> 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:49:50 EST