Jumping off the Page: Content Area Curriculum for the Internet Age
Bart Pisha
Peggy Coyne
In the United States, national standards defining mastery in content areas such as science or the
social studies demand literacy skills that include analysis, prediction, comparison, and
interpretation. Despite the promulgation of such standards, 60 percent of the country’s 17-yearolds cannot “find, understand, summarize, and explain complex informational material,” a
situtation that seems to have changed little over the past 30 years (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2000, online document).
Students with identified learning disabilities fare especially poorly. These students’ deficits in
basic skills compromise their ability to extract meaning from text (see, e.g., Ben-Dror, Bentin, &
Frost, 1995; Cook Moats & Lyon, 1993; Deshler & Ellis, 1996; Deshler, Ellis, & Lenz, 1996; Lyon
& Krasnegor, 1996; Scruggs & Wong, 1990; Shaywitz, 1992, 1996; Vaughn & Schumm, 1995;
Wolf, Pfeil, Lotz, & Biddle, 1994). Because instruction in the content areas typically relies heavily
on text, most of these students fail to achieve proficiency. This is a highly significant problem:
there are approximately 5.5 million students with learning disabilities in American schools,
accounting for 12 percent of the total public school population and 46 percent of those receiving
special education services (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000).
What are the causes of this disturbing situation? This article focuses on those that are rooted in
teaching materials and instructional approaches. A review of research in these areas suggests
two factors of particular importance:
1. Textbook designers contribute to the problem by designing “inconsiderate texts” that do
not adequately highlight salient information (Armbruster, 1985; Chambliss, 1994; Jitendra
et al., 2001; Tyree, Fiore, & Cook, 1994), and, as Carnine, Crawford, Harniss, Hollenbeck,
and Miller (1998) note, “rarely include explicit organizational strategies designed to help
students understand and apply content knowledge” (p. 150).
2. Students with special needs spend much time outside of their mainstream classrooms
receiving remedial instruction in decoding, a focus that deprives them of the content
exposure that would help them learn strategies for managing information effectively
(Lipsky & Gartner, 1995; Vaughn & Schumm, 1995; Willis, 1995). In other words, the
provision of remedial support outside of the general education classroom in many cases
results in students falling further behind.
Students with learning disabilities can benefit from adaptation of instructional materials or
creation of alternative materials. However, this approach places a tremendous burden on
teachers, particularly novices (Ellis & Sabornie, 1990; Moon, Callahan & Tomlinson, 1999).
Moreover, while many teachers adapt materials effectively, doing so requires careful attention to
ensure that the adaptations preserve the lesson’s instructional goal and do not change the
learning task. Further, teachers’ efforts sometimes are wasted because students perceive the
adaptations as “different,” feel stigmatized by them, and are therefore reluctant to use them
(Ellis, 1998).
Thus, students with learning disabilities and their teachers require new approaches that better
support their needs. The National Council for the Social Studies (1994) has taken a step in the
right direction with its curriculum standards, which call for a major overhaul of curricula,
methods, and materials to reflect contemporary understanding of social studies subject areas
and the best ways to teach them. An overhaul of this nature provides educators with an
excellent opportunity to design materials and instructional approaches that meet the needs of
diverse students. This article describes a recently completed study focused on the potential of
multimedia, technology-based teaching materials, and instructional approaches to improve
learning for all students, including those with learning disabilities.
Purpose
The purpose of this project was to develop an exemplar of an online content area textbook that
uses contemporary multimedia technology to meet the needs of diverse learners. This resulted
in the refinement of a software tool to read digital text aloud while simultaneously highlighting
the words being read, thus supporting learners whose reading skills are insufficient for the text
at hand.
Three items were developed as a result of 2 years of formative evaluation work with students
and teachers:
1. A digital exemplar, created from
materials in the public domain, that
parallels a section of the popular
high school history text The
American Nation (Boyer, 1998),
enhanced with a range of powerful
built-in supports and customizable
features (a page from it is shown at
right)
2. Assignments and pedagogical
procedures that take advantage of
this flexibility to improve learning
opportunities for all students
(including those with special needs)
in integrated classroom settings
3. High School Students’
Recommendations for Digital
Textbooks: A Formative Evaluation,
a document that details the
recommendations made by students
for the design of digitized versions of
texts
Theoretical Framework
Traditional instructional materials and approaches are based on a one-size-fits-all paradigm that
places an expectation of flexibility squarely on students. This creates barriers to learning for
many, and attempts to overcome such barriers have usually involved implementation of
specialized instructional supports. A new approach to pedagogy called Universal Design for
Learning (UDL), under development at CAST, turns the tables (Meyer, Pisha, Murray, & Rose,
2001; Meyer & Rose, 1998; Pisha & Coyne, 2001; Rose & Meyer, in press). Drawing on recent
work in the neurosciences and on the capacities of new educational media, UDL provides a
framework that guides educators in achieving the kind of curricular flexibility that can meet the
needs of widely diverse learners.
With digital technology, information can be presented in any one of several media, transformed
from one medium to another, electronically formatted, and networked so that teachers and
students can employ many alternatives with relative ease. Brain research provides insight into
three broad learning networks that guide the selection of the alternatives to be presented
(Gazzaniga, Ivry, & Mangun, 1998; Meyer, Pisha, Murray, & Rose, 2001; Meyer & Rose, 1998;
Rose & Meyer, in press):



Recognition networks enable us to identify and understand information, ideas, and
concepts. They are specialized to sense and assign meaning to patterns we see, hear,
taste, touch, and smell.
Strategic networks enable us to plan, execute, and monitor actions. They are specialized
to generate and oversee mental and motor patterns.
Affective networks enable us to engage with learning. They are specialized to evaluate
patterns and impart emotional significance to them.
These three networks align closely with the three conditions for learning proposed by Vygotsky
(1978, 1986):



The learner must recognize patterns in sensory information. Simple perception is
insufficient. For example, the learner must both perceive written letters and recognize
that the order in which they appear is not random.
The learner must have a strategy for processing information. To comprehend complex
information presented in text, students must use high-level strategies (such as locating
main ideas, summarizing, and paraphrasing) and metacognitive skills (such as selfquestioning).
The learner must engage in the task. Some instructional supports and challenges may
overwhelm or bore the student. Successful learning demands sustained focus despite
distractions. Furthermore, the student must believe that he or she can be successful and
appreciate the causal link between this success and the amount of effort expended.
According to Vygotsky (1978, 1986), these three conditions are best met within the student’s
“zone of proximal development” (ZPD)—that is, the point at which the learning task is related to
but just beyond the scope of the student’s existing knowledge in the target area. This happens
when supports and scaffolds, challenge and resistance are balanced in a manner appropriate to
the task at hand. If the task entails too much challenge, the learner cannot recognize its salient
elements, approach it strategically, and maintain engagement with it. On the other hand, if the
supports and scaffolds are too extensive, the task becomes too easy; no effort or learning is
required to achieve it, and students may disengage due to boredom. However, ZPD is not
determined by task alone. Individual differences can arise in any or all of the three learning
networks, leading to a broad spectrum of learning abilities among all individuals. The ZPD is
therefore different for each student.
These insights are the basis for the three principles of curricular flexibility contained in UDL:
1. In order to support diverse recognition networks, instructional materials and approaches
should provide multiple, flexible methods of presentation.
2. To support diverse strategic networks, multiple, flexible methods of expression and
apprenticeship opportunities should be provided.
3. To support diverse affective networks, multiple, flexible options for engagement should be
available.
These principles can inform the development and implementation of curricula that optimize
learning opportunities for the widest possible range of learners.
Research Design
The primary research methodology for this project was formative evaluation (Flagg, 1990),
guided by seven research questions. This methodology differs from summative research in that
its objective is to guide design of a new method, material, or approach, rather than to evaluate
effectiveness empirically.
With the publisher’s blessing, researchers at CAST began by developing a digital prototype that
reproduced on screen the look and feel of the history textbook The American Nation (Boyer,
1998). The prototype featured text-to-speech (TTS) capability, designed to support struggling
readers’ access to written information by reading the text aloud to them. (This feature could be
turned off if desired.) Further, users could elect to have the program highlight words, sentences,
or paragraphs on screen as the text is read aloud, helping them to focus on written text as they
listen. The prototype also included features such as hyperlinked reference tools (dictionary and
encyclopedia), digital highlighters, note-taking tools, and navigational supports.
Qualitative data collected from those who worked with the prototype were used to inform
subsequent modifications and to gain opinions regarding the relative advantages of digital and
print presentation. Researchers also examined the effectiveness of the methods by which the
digital prototype was incorporated into instruction, designing and testing new instructional
materials and assignments to take advantage of the prototype’s scaffolds and supports. Through
formative evaluation, teachers and students contributed to the design process. Consequently,
their needs and preferences are reflected in the materials and instructional assignments.
The first year of the 2-year project was divided into four iterative development cycles (detailed
below) that focused on refinement of the software tool and development of flexible digital
presentation formats for the content of the history text. The second year built on the results of
the first by using similar methods to develop, test, and refine assignments and instructional
procedures using the software tool and digital history text. The data collected were used to
derive preliminary recommendations regarding the design of flexible, digitally based curriculum
materials included in the High School Students’ Recommendations for Digital Textbooks: A
Formative Evaluation. These recommendations will be incorporated into CAST’s UDL guidelines,
which will draw upon information from this study as well as other sources.
Setting and study sample. The study was based at a U.S. suburban public high school with a
population of approximately 1000. Researchers offered students in two Grade 11 integrated
American history classes an opportunity to participate (random sample selection is not a
requirement of formative evaluation). The 70 students who accepted the invitation and gained
parental consent were enrolled in the study. The group included 16 students with identified
learning disabilities and 1 with a significant visual impairment.
Instrumentation. Four techniques were used to gather qualitative data:
 Observation of classrooms and individual students at work
 Interviews of students and teachers
 Student focus groups
 Collection of student work samples
Observations and interviews were guided by written protocols developed in collaboration with
the project’s participating teachers. Focus groups addressed broad questions framed by the
research team.
Procedures. During the first year, four formative evaluation cycles were completed, each
involving four activities (see Figure 1): exploration consisted of approximately 2 weeks’ work
with small groups of students, exploring the use of the software tool or the digitized content;
development typically required several weeks and entailed programming and developing
material based on feedback from the exploration activity; trial entailed a month-long evaluation
by 15 students of the function and utility of recent modifications; and, finally, a one-month
refinement period allowed further fine-tuning of the digital text based on comments collected
during the trial phase.
Figure 1
One Formative Evaluation Cycle
Cycles were executed on an overlapping schedule to maximize their number (see Figure 2).
Figure 2
Four Iterative Development Cycles
The second year focused on developing student assignments and instructional techniques to
capitalize on the novel capacities of the digital text developed in the first year. The formative
evaluation process employed during the first year was modified to guide the development and
testing of four types of student assignments.
Data analysis. Responses to protocol questions collected during the first year were pooled and
then searched for shared student opinions as well as individual suggestions for modifications of
the prototype.
We each independently reviewed the data and prepared a preliminary summary, then reconciled
our summaries through discussion. We prepared a single summary document and presented it to
the full CAST research and development team in order to inform ongoing prototype
development. In the second year, acquisition of a coding and theory-building software program,
NVivo (1999), enabled more efficient and flexible retrieval and coding of participant responses,
but otherwise the Year 1 process was unchanged.
The World Wide Web Consortium’s Access Guidelines
The fundamentals of UDL prompt consideration of the access requirements of the broadest range
of users when designing new educational materials. The basic access needs of individuals with
special needs were met in the prototypes by complying with access guidelines promulgated by
the World Wide Web Consortium (1999, online document). These guidelines served as a
foundation upon which to build new options, features, and supports into the evolving prototypes,
affecting both presentation of the textbook’s content and development of innovative
assignments and activities.
For example, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) guidelines call for a written description of
each image on any Web page, represented visually by an adjacent, underlined d. Although the
descriptions themselves are not visible, screen readers for the blind can be configured to read
them automatically. Other interested users can access the descriptions by clicking on the d. The
presence of these descriptions has minimal effect on users who do not need them, but provides
users who are blind or visually impaired with access to at least some of the information available
to their sighted peers. Inclusion of image descriptions is an excellent example of universal
design: supports for individuals with a special need are built into content presentation, but do
not significantly interfere with the experience of those who do not require them.
Although providing access to information is important, it is not the same as providing access to
learning. As Vygotsky summarized so neatly with his concept of the ZPD, maximal learning
occurs when there is an appropriate balance between challenge-resistance and supportsscaffolds. In some circumstances, efforts to improve access can undermine learning by
eliminating challenge and resistance. For example, text-to-speech capacity can provide a student
with dyslexia access to important content in a digital text. When the goal is to learn about the
subject matter of that text, TTS offers access to the necessary information. However, when the
goal is to learn how to decode, TTS is counterproductive. To ensure a proper balance between
access to information and access to learning, the W3C guidelines were implemented to provide
maximum flexibility in adjusting levels of support and challenge, thereby bringing instructional
tasks into each learner’s ZPD.
Results
Four categories of preliminary recommendations emerged during the formative evaluation
process: content presentation, navigation, reference tools, and gathering salient information.
Rationales for recommendations in each category, with links to the exemplar and screen shots,
follow. Readers are invited to visit and interact with the full American History Exemplar. Readers
who wish to explore the TTS capacity of the text will require a “talking browser” such as CAST
eReader, ReadPlease 2000, or Help Read. Information on how students interacted with digital
materials can be found in High School Students’ Recommendations for Digital Textbooks: A
Formative Evaluation, where selected student comments are reproduced.
Content presentation. The affordance of TTS software proved extremely popular with the
weaker readers in the sample. Further, several students with no identified special needs
reported that they used the highlighting function without the synthetic voice, either to pace
themselves as they read or to help them find where they left off reading when they paused to
answer a homework question. (Click here to see an example of blue-highlighted text from the
exemplar. For this and subsequent examples, use your browser’s “Back” button to return to the
article.) On the other hand, some students chose to shut off the TTS feature.
Students with and without identified special needs articulated their preference for clear, simple
presentation of text. Many commented that they were regularly distracted by graphics on printed
textbook pages. Unexpectedly, almost none of the students -- with or without identified special
needs -- understood the significance of boldfaced text, multicolored headings, and other
elements included by the publisher to help them prioritize, organize, and comprehend major
concepts. Some students also noted that supporting information (such as biographies or sidebar
explanations) in printed textbooks interfered with the flow of the text and their ability to
understand it.
These comments precipitated the design of two alternative views of the full text in the digital
prototype: one with graphics and features embedded as they are in the printed textbook, and
another that replaces the graphics with icons that can be clicked to display images at the user’s
discretion. In addition, to support students’ learning from text and to help them understand the
significance and uses of structural features, an “outline view” of the content was created that
displays only headings, subheadings, and key vocabulary. Clicking on a heading or vocabulary
term brings the student to the corresponding portion of the text.
The formative evaluation yielded the following preliminary suggestions for injecting flexibility
into content presentation in a digital learning environment:










Make TTS available to support reading
Provide sequential on-screen text highlighting, to be used alone or synchronized with TTS
Make available a launch page for each chapter, with options for presentation of text,
images, and other content elements
Make available the option to display digital text in a single column
Provide an option to view the text, images, charts, sidebars, and other elements
simultaneously, as they would appear in a printed textbook (as an example, scroll through
this view of the Farm Life and the Dustbowl section)
Provide the option to select a simplified presentation of textbook material, in which
images, charts, sidebars, and other elements are represented by relatively simple icons
(scroll through this view)
Include both text and graphics in each icon, and keep the location of these links
consistent (example)
Make available an outline of each chapter that readers can use either as an organizer
before reading or as a succinct statement of key points for studying
Embed relevant video clips directly in the chapter, reachable via a linked icon or
embedded image of the video itself (Note: If your browser is Internet Explorer version
5.5 or higher, you will require the QuickTime plug-in to view the video clips in the linked
example)
Make digital and printed content consistent in appearance, to facilitate students’ use of
both the textbook’s and the computer’s presentation (example)
With respect to the last point, page numbering, structure, content of chapters and sections, and
colors used for headings are among the features that can be kept consistent across versions.
While students in this study did not understand the meanings of colored text and other
formatting features found in the printed textbook, they reported that consistency in these
features was helpful when they began a reading assignment in the electronic version but used
the printed version to complete their work later, when a computer was not available.
Navigation. The means by which movement from place to place is possible in a digital text
must be efficient and intuitive for all users. In pursuit of clear navigation design, three
characteristics of the digital text were addressed: number of frames per page, location of the
table of contents, and use of hyperlinks. Formative evaluation yielded the following preliminary
recommendations:

From the launch page, allow users to choose between a single-frame presentation and a
presentation with three frames that can be scrolled and sized independently. The three-


frame selection enables users to view the table of contents, core text, and assignment
directions simultaneously; the single-frame version supports individuals with visual
impairments, who frequently use screen readers that do not readily process multiple
frames.
Present the table of contents in a frame on each page in the three-frame view. This allows
students to move easily from one part of the chapter to another and helps them see at a
glance where they are working within the chapter.
Make available hyperlinks to supplementary information, such as Web sites. Being able to
link to other materials within the electronic environment facilitates access for learners.
Reference tools. In addition to providing navigation to supplementary information, including
links to reference materials is an unparalleled strength of digital text. Integration of Microsoft
Bookshelf (1997) electronic dictionary and reference suite, or similar tools, makes the use of
reference materials easier than in print environments. For example, a student who does not
understand a word in the digital text need only use the mouse to highlight the word and click on
the Bookshelf icon to obtain both a definition and a recorded human voice correctly pronouncing
it. Bookshelf also contains the Encarta electronic encyclopedia. Students with insufficient
background knowledge to understand text on a given topic can access relevant information
simply by clicking, and can then return to the task at hand. Of course, linked encyclopedia also
support student research.
A powerful but often neglected strategy for improving understanding is to look up a concept or
term in the reference materials (e.g., a glossary) within a textbook. Few students in this study
reported using these resources in the printed text: several were unaware of their existence, and
others indicated that the information was difficult to find, largely because it was dispersed (e.g.,
a separate glossary, gazetteer, index, historical documents, and embedded charts and tables).
These observations yielded the following preliminary recommendations:




Present all reference information on a single page (a Unified Resource Page, or URP),
rather than in several locations
Organize each URP to reflect the locations in which information can be found in traditional
textbooks (e.g. the glossary, gazetteer, etc.), to improve students’ understanding of what
these materials are and how they work
Make available links to external reference materials, such as an online dictionary,
encyclopedia, or selected Internet sites
In compliance with the standard computer interface design, if no information is available
from a particular source (such as the gazetteer), “gray out” the title of that source
Gathering salient information. Well-designed electronic environments can effectively support
students in the process of finding, collecting, evaluating, and classifying information. In this
study, students made frequent use of and reported an appreciation for the software tools that
supported them in these processes.
Within the software’s text-to-speech program, users can simultaneously view the table of
contents and place two “text windows” side by side. Students were assisted in setting up one
window with the text under study and the other, smaller window as a “notepad” (example).
Information can be moved from the core text to the notepad in two ways. First, text or images
can be selected using the mouse or arrow keys, and then copied and pasted into the new
notepad document using either commands from the menu bar or their keystroke equivalents.
This is a familiar procedure for students accustomed to using word processors for writing.
Second, students can “drag and drop” material by selecting it with the mouse, depressing the
mouse button while moving the selected material to the notepad, and then releasing the mouse
button. Of course, students can also type directly into the notepad, a feature many used to
answer questions, amplify ideas, and make notes for later study.
Key supports, such as TTS, also work in the notepad file; this document can be read aloud or
printed at any time. Because notepad files are in the rich-text format (RTF) readable by most
word processors, students can save them to floppy disk for loading later on a computer in school
or at home for editing and printing of polished notes or assignments. All students in this study,
regardless of their learning needs, embraced the notepad, and it saw regular use during
classroom-based, teacher-led activities as well as independent work sessions. Students found
the notepad particularly helpful in completing assignments that required locating key terms in
the text and writing definitions for them.
In response to student comments that they wished they could underline or highlight in their
printed textbooks, “highlighter pens” were programmed into the digital exemplar, accessible
through the screen menu bar (example). Students used these pens, available in five colors, to
help make important information stand out: for example, one color might signify who the
passage was about, a second might identify when the event took place, a third might identify
where it took place, and so forth. Some students tended to highlight extensive blocks of text,
illustrating their difficulty in determining what was most important—and making their highlights
less useful. This problem was, of course, not confined to the electronic environment and
reflected the need for strategic help.
Although these supports for strategic approaches to reading are readily available in the digital
version, there are no specific provisions that encourage students to use them. In a separate
study recently completed, embedded supports for strategic thinking while reading were included,
and students were asked to respond to specific embedded strategy prompts (Dalton, Pisha,
Eagleton, Coyne, & Deysher, 2001). It is anticipated that this study will lead to further
recommendations for design features that support strategic learning.
Designing Assignments
Early in the project, members of the CAST research team observed that, at the beginning of
each week, one of the collaborating teachers gave students a list of 12 words reflecting people,
events, or concepts from the section of the textbook under study. They were required to read
the appropriate textbook pages and write definitions of these words as they encountered them.
Close observation of students at work and subsequent interviews of selected students proved
both revealing and unsettling. When questioned privately and in confidence, all students
reported that they seldom, if ever, read assigned textbook chapters from start to finish. On the
contrary, most students without identified special needs skimmed the book to locate each term,
then paraphrased the surrounding text to create a definition. Although none of the 17 students
with special needs employed a skimming strategy (perhaps because their weak reading skills
prohibited it), their approaches are noteworthy: these students either sought support from
teachers or aides in the resource room who typically read the chapter aloud to them, or they
copied someone else’s answers or ignored the assignment altogether.
As students began to work with electronic versions of the textbook, several learned to use the
software’s “find” function to streamline the assignment further by locating the words without
reading the text at all. Once they’d found the words, they used the drag-and-drop feature to
copy them and the surrounding text to the notepad; they then made cursory changes in
wording, and printed out their completed assignment in record time. Of course, these students
completed this task with little or no thought, and probably learned little from it.
Newly designed assignments can use the power of computers to provide a better balance of
supports and scaffolds, challenge and resistance. For example, summarizing passages of
expository text in content area materials is difficult for many students but very useful in both
academic and real-life situations. The researchers chose to develop a series of assignments to
address this skill.
To establish a baseline, students were asked to read several pages of text, either in the printed
textbook or online, and then to summarize their readings in writing. Few students without
special needs and no students with special needs were able to complete this task successfully.
Further, when queried afterward, very few students could articulate a systematic strategy. When
asked how they usually created summaries, the vast majority replied that they first read the
material (if they could) and then wrote down all the information that seemed important, usually
in the order in which it appeared in the reading.
In order to provide students with hands-on opportunities to learn effective summarization
strategies, four sequential assignments were developed. Each of these included built-in scaffolds
and supports, both to facilitate summarization and to help students internalize effective
summarizing strategies for future use. The assignments were created to take advantage of the
software tools, but students were allowed to use the traditional textbook if they wished. Each of
these four assignments addressed the goals of the task in a different way, and each made
available a different mode and degree of support.
In the first assignment, students were asked to use the electronic highlighting pens to draw
attention to five different types of information (view the teacher version and student version of
the assignment). They were encouraged to use their highlighters sparingly, choosing only the
words signifying who, what, when, where, and why, and using a different color for each category
of information. Students were then to draw on their highlighting to support their construction of
one- or two-sentence summaries of each paragraph. The desire for brevity was underscored by
providing small physical spaces—fields capable of displaying only two lines at a time—for student
responses.
The second assignment made use of Inspiration (1994), a commercial computer program
designed to facilitate the development of concept maps (see teacher version, student version).
After instruction on the use of the program, students were asked to develop concept maps
representing selected passages. To support those unable to accomplish the task independently,
students were first provided with partially completed maps. Successful completion required
arrangement of the concept map’s nodes of text from the book into the correct sequence, linking
them, assigning each link a label selected from a list of words describing possible relationships
between ideas, and finally writing a summary for the entire passage. After students had
successfully completed this assignment, they were given a more challenging version intended to
build upon their experience. Here students were required to generate entire concept maps
independently from scratch.
The third assignment was to examine primary source materials presented in the electronic study
environment and identify information that supported or contradicted the key ideas identified in
the concept maps (teacher version, student version). Students chose from a selection of primary
source materials, including both text and other artifacts, such as images and sheet music.
For the fourth assignment (teacher version, student version), groups of three students were
each assigned a section of the textbook, a controversial statement relating to that section, and
instructions to defend or attack the controversial statement. Students were to extract
information from their passages that supported their point of view (using highlighting and
concept mapping, if they wished) and then to present their arguments before a mock congress
comprised of faculty and staff. The congress evaluated each pair of presentations and
recommended legislation based on the persuasiveness of the competing arguments.
Taken together, these four assignments can be seen as a sequence that begins with a relatively
concrete find-and-mark activity and concludes with a relatively abstract and demanding task
requiring the integration of multiple points. This sequence can be repeated several times during
a semester, focusing upon different content each time and giving students multiple opportunities
to develop reading comprehension and study skills in supported environments while also
learning a range of content.
Students reported that three of the four assignments were helpful: the summarizing supports,
the use of primary source documents, and the mock congress. Teachers and researchers noted
that students were more engaged during these activities than during typical class work.
Moreover, teachers reported that student work generated by these assignments was of higher
than usual quality.
The students did not find concept mapping as helpful or engaging as the other three
assignments, and the quality of student maps generated from scratch was not high. When
queried, students reported that they had insufficient experience with the concept mapping
software to use it efficiently. Because Inspiration has been thoroughly studied by others in
similar contexts and found both effective and popular (see, e.g., Anderson-Inman, 1989;
Anderson-Inman & Horney, 1996, 1997; Anderson-Inman & Tenny, 1989), it is likely that the
response would have been more positive had training been more adequate.
Discussion
Digital versus print content. New digital technologies have advantages over print-based
presentations, and this project provided an excellent opportunity to investigate students’
perceptions of them. The majority of the 70 student participants not only recognized the merits
of digital text but also reported that they would use digital content exclusively or in combination
with its print equivalent if given the opportunity; only 2 asserted that they preferred textbooks
and would not use digital content at all. One of these students remarked, “I am used to using
the textbook, I have been using it for a long time.” This comment reflects the effects of 10 years
of in-school experience with printed texts and the high level of comfort this affords. However,
despite the fact that most students had little or no previous experience using electronic
textbooks as they were asked to employ them in this study, the vast majority responded
positively to them.
According to the students, the digital format offers three major advantages:
1. Flexible presentation of content, including the capacity to have the computer read the text
aloud, makes it possible for individuals to structure learning activities to suit their
particular needs.
2. The ease with which one can locate specific information such as dates or terms within
large sections of text greatly facilitates fact finding.
3. The portability offered by a compact disc or Internet version of the content frees students
from the need to carry a bulky textbook.
Students also reported one significant disadvantage of digital material: problems stemming from
technical glitches. Use of a digital textbook requires a school-based technical support system to
troubleshoot problems that may arise with individual computer systems, whereas printed texts
require little or no ongoing maintenance. Of course, students who do not have computers in
their homes are denied the opportunity to use these digital materials outside of school hours,
and this raises a further disadvantaged in the form of a significant equity issue.
Limitations. Because formative research does not require large samples and random
assignment, this study was conducted at a single site with a relatively homogeneous sample and
focused on the single content area of American history. While there appears to be no reason to
conclude that the same results might not be obtained in any urban or suburban school in the
United States, it is possible that the setting, student sample, or the content area were in some
important way idiosyncratic. This question can and should be investigated in subsequent studies.
One characteristic of the sample is noteworthy. The teacher who taught the integrated eleventhgrade American history classes was not a proficient computer user at the beginning of the study.
Further, despite the best efforts of all involved over the 2-year span of the project, this
individual was not able to integrate the use of computers and online materials successfully into
the fabric of day-to-day instruction. The project provided the teacher with all hardware and
software necessary to use the materials created, including a computer for use in the classroom
and the capacity to display the computer’s output on a large television monitor. One-on-one
training was provided at the onset and at intervals during the project, but did not result in the
teacher acquiring the skills and confidence necessary to use the technology effectively with
students.
Project computers located in the resource room and office space next to the history classroom
proved adequately reliable for student use. However, others in a room set aside for study were
generally unusable because they were shared with students not participating in the study and
experienced frequent technical problems.
Finally, participating students were unfamiliar with the Inspiration software used for one of the
prototype assignments, and project staff underestimated the amount of training and practice
required for them to achieve proficiency. Students’ resultant difficulty in completing the relevant
assignment adversely affected the results.
Significant advances: Digital exemplar and assignments. As a result of this project, an
online exemplar of a high school social studies text has been created that illustrates the
preliminary recommendations for designing textbook content in electronic environments. It
includes built-in scaffolds and supports such as TTS that go beyond the capacity of printed
materials to provide for the learning needs of a highly diverse student body. Analysis of
qualitative data suggests that these supports succeeded at least to some extent in increasing
students’ engagement in learning and contributing to better quality student work.
Observations of and interviews with students as they completed the time-honored homework
assignment of locating and paraphrasing definitions of key terms found in the textbook showed
that traditional assignments may be inappropriate in online environments. The process of
designing more thoughtful student assignments that successfully address curriculum goals in
online environments proved very valuable. Insight was gained into promising designs and the
amount and types of training and support that are necessary to enable the transition from printbased instruction to the use of more flexible and powerful digital materials. Further, scaffolds,
such as the use of electronic highlighting pens and partially completed concept maps to help
students learn complex skills such as summarizing, found favor among both students and
teachers. Digital materials, like their print-based counterparts, must be developed within the
context of pedagogically sound instructional approaches.
Preliminary recommendations. A key product of this study is High School Students’
Recommendations for Digital Textbooks: A Formative Evaluation. This document captures what
has been learned about the design of digital texts and presents those insights in the form of
preliminary recommendations for commercial publishers wishing to create digital texts for high
school social studies. The preliminary recommendations provide a basis for further research and
development. The time is right for the development of research-based guidelines for UDL in the
United States, as several statewide textbook-adoption policies require or are contemplating
requiring textbook publishers to provide digital versions of their materials, in addition to printed
versions.
Contributions to UDL. An important element of this project is its aspiration to go beyond the
provision of basic access features, ensuring that instructional approaches scaffold student
weaknesses but do not remove the essential element of challenge. The varied supports were
designed with three broad learning networks in mind (mediating Vygotsky's three conditions for
learning) and scaffold students’ varied recognition, strategic, and affective needs in the following
ways:



Recognition: Individual differences in recognition are supported by the provision of
multiple representations of content. These include both an on-screen layout that features
a rich variety of images, in-text features, and sidebars (similar to those found in many
popular contemporary textbooks), as well as a more spartan layout that provides key
content in a single column of core text and relatively unobtrusive icons, hyperlinked to
supplementary resources. Further, optional TTS with synchronized on-screen highlighting
of text supports a variety of students, including those whose reading skills are inadequate
for typical high school texts.
Strategy: This project explored built-in supports and scaffolds for strategic approaches to
learning. Such tools as an easy-to-use link to an online dictionary make available to
students practical strategies for improving their understanding. Connections to Internet
resources provide structured avenues for obtaining background knowledge. The
assignment prototypes demonstrate the potential of new technologies to allow developers
to embed supports to help students learn strategic skills. Further, providing multiple kinds
of assignments offers students some choice in the manner in which they work with
information.
Engagement: The role of student engagement and investment in the strenuous process
of learning is easily overlooked. This project’s results suggest that giving students
freedom of choice to select representations and strategies appropriate for their own
learning needs contributes significantly to engagement. Perhaps the best examples of this
can be found in students’ reactions to the prototype assignments and in their teachers’
observations that students completing these assignments produced work superior to their
typical efforts.
Implications for Further Research
Because this project was formative by design, rather than summative, the purpose was not to
quantify, document, and describe improvements in student achievement or to make the claim
that materials designed in accordance with the project’s recommendations will bring about
specific improvement. Consequently, in addition to further formative studies that delve deeply
into areas examined here, rigorous experimental or quasi-experimental research will be required
in order to evaluate the full benefits of these materials and approaches for diverse learners.
Further, the novelty of digital prototypes such as those developed in this study may affect their
popularity with students and teachers. Thus, research probing the long-term effects of curricula
designed according to the preliminary recommendations outlined here will be important.
Nonetheless, we are encouraged by the results of this work, and believe that indications of the
potential of UDL to help teachers help all learners warrants further investigation.
In addition, as noted above, this study was limited to one student population in one subject
area. Future work should explore applicability in other student populations, at other grade levels,
and in other content areas.
Finally, by this time, many teachers are fluent with the use of computers for word processing,
basic applications, and locating information on the Internet. However, those who have not
acquired basic computer skills may be resistant to or experience some difficulty in adopting
technology-based materials and approaches. Further research on this teacher population will be
necessary to develop appropriate scaffolds and supports for their learning needs.
Conclusion
Implementation of a UDL approach can help teachers more fully and readily accommodate the
needs of their students, including those with special needs. Curriculum designers and developers
who seek to use multimedia for the benefit of all learners should not fall into the trap of simply
using digital technologies to mirror the methods and approaches of print technologies. If the
promise of digital learning environments is to be realized, new curriculum materials must go
beyond traditional approaches, offering new content presentations, access options, strategic
supports, engagement options, activities, and instructional techniques. With these approaches,
teachers can use the flexibility of electronic multimedia to improve learning opportunities for all
students.
References
Anderson-Inman, L. (1989, June). Electronic studying: Information organizers to help students
study “better,” not “harder” -- Part III. Computing Teacher, 21-53.
Anderson-Inman, L., & Horney, M. (1996). Computer-based concept mapping: Enhancing
literacy with tools for visual thinking. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(4), 302-306.
Anderson-Inman, L., & Horney, M. (1997). Electronic books for secondary students. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(6), 486-491. [Note: A revised version of this article is available
elsewhere at this site.]
Anderson-Inman, L., & Tenny, J. (1989). Electronic studying: Information organizers to help
students study “better, not harder” -- Part 1. Computing Teacher, 16(8), 33-36.
Armbruster, B.B. (1985). Content area textbooks: A research perspective. In P.T.W.J. Osborn &
R. Anderson (Eds.), Reading education: Foundations for a literate America (pp. 47-60).
Lexington, MA: Heath.
Ben-Dror, I., Bentin, S., & Frost, R. (1995). Semantic, phonologic, and morphologic skills in
reading disabled and normal children: Evidence from perception and production of spoken
Hebrew. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 876-893.
Boyer, P. (1998). The American nation. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Carnine, D.W., Crawford, D.B., Harniss, M.K., Hollenbeck, K.L., & Miller, S.K. (1998). Effective
strategies for teaching social studies. In E.J. Kameenui (Ed.), Effective teaching strategies that
accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Chambliss, M.J. (1994). Evaluating the quality of textbooks for diverse learners. Remedial and
Special Education, 15, 348-362.
Cook Moats, L., & Lyon, G.R. (1993). Learning disabilities in the United States: Advocacy,
science, and the future of the field. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(5), 282-294.
Dalton, B., Pisha, B., Eagleton, M., Coyne, P., & Deysher, S. (2001). Engaging the text: Final
report to U.S. Office of Special Education. Peabody, MA: CAST.
Deshler, D., & Ellis, E. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities: Strategies and
methods (2nd ed.). Denver, CO: Love.
Deshler, D.D., Ellis, E.S. & Lenz, K.B. (1996). Adolescents with learning disabilities. Denver, CO:
Love.
Ellis, E.S. (1998). Watering up the curriculum for adolescents with learning disabilities: Part 2 -Goals of the affective dimension. Remedial & Special Education, 19(2), 91-105.
Ellis, E.S., & Sabornie, E.J. (1990). Strategy-based adaptive instruction in content-area classes:
Social validity of six options. Teacher Education and Special Education, 13(2), 133-144.
Flagg, B.N. (1990). Formative evaluation for educational technologies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gazzaniga, M.S., Ivry, R.B., & Mangun, G.R. (1998). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the
mind. New York: Norton.
Inspiration [computer software]. (1994). Portland, OR: Inspiration.
Jitendra, A.K., Nolet, V., Xin, Y., Gomez, O., Renouf, K., Iskold, L., & DaCosta, J. (2001). An
analysis of middle school geography textbooks: Implications for students with learning problems.
Reading and Writing Quarterly, 17(2), 151-173.
Lipsky, D.K., & Gartner, A. (1995). Common questions about inclusion: What does the research
say? Exceptional Parent, 36-39.
Lyon, G.R., & Krasnegor, N.A. (Eds.). (1996). Attention, memory, and executive function.
Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes.
Meyer, A., Pisha, B., Murray, E., & Rose, D. (2001). More than words: Learning to write in the
digital world. In A. Bain, L. Baillet, & L. Moats (Eds.), Written language disorders: Theory into
practice (2nd ed., pp. 137-185). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Meyer, A., & Rose, D.H. (1998). See Chip run: Learning to read in the computer age. In J. Chall
(Series Ed.) & J. Onofrey (Ed.), What research and practice say to the teacher of reading.
Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
Microsoft Bookshelf [computer software]. (1997). Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
Moon, T.R., Callahan, C.M., & Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The effects of mentoring relationships on
preservice teachers’ attitudes toward academically diverse students. Gifted Child Quarterly,
43(2), 56-62.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Digest of educational statistics. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/digest/index.html
National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Ten thematic strands in social studies. Social
Education, 58(6), 356-368.
NVivo [computer software]. (1999). Melbourne, Australia: Sage.
Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start: The Promise of Universal Design for
Learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197-203.
Rose, D.H., & Meyer, A. (in press). Mind, media, and instructional design. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Scruggs, T.E., & Wong, B.Y.L. (1990). Intervention research in learning disabilities. New York:
Springer.
Shaywitz, S. (1992). Attention deficit disorder comes of age: Towards the 21st century. Austin,
TX: PRO-ED.
Shaywitz, S. (1996). Reply to Cliver. Scientific American, 276(3), 10.
Tyree, R.B., Fiore, T.A., & Cook, R.A. (1994). Instructional materials for diverse learners:
Features and considerations for textbook design. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 363-377.
Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J.S. (1995, May). Responsible inclusion for students with learning
disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(5), 264-270.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Willis, S. (1995). Inclusion gains ground. Education Update, 37(9), 1, 6, 8.
Wolf, M., Pfeil, C., Lotz, R., & Biddle, K. (1994). Towards a more universal understanding of the
developmental dyslexias: The contribution of orthographic factors. In V. Berninger (Ed.), The
varieties of orthographic knowledge I: Theoretical and developmental issues (pp. 137-171).
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
World Wide Web Consortium. (1999). Web content accessibility guidelines 1.0. Cambridge, MA,
Rocquencourt, France, & Endo, Japan: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Institut National de
Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique, & Keio Research Institute. Available:
www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=pisha/index.html