“Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad
description
Transcript of “Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML Cara Laitusis Teresa King Elizabeth Ayad
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
“Accessible Reading Assessment” and HTML
Cara Laitusis
Teresa King
Elizabeth Ayad
Markku Hakkinen
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Materials• 2 test forms (42 items each)• Reading passage followed by multiple
choice options.• Post-test survey
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Population• 49 boys, 44 girls• Grades 7-10• 10 different states
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Test Forms• Form A (Maximum Accessibility)• Form B (Business as Usual)
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Form A (Accessible)• Higher interest passages• Included “context” sentence• Panel of disability experts reviewed items and made
suggested revisions (simplified language)• Additional level of proofing for braille/large print forms• Changes to formatting• Two additional choices of test formats (audio, html)
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Sample by FormTest Form A
Test Form B
TotalBraille Large Print
Braille 18 -- 18
Large Print -- 26 26
Audio (MP3) 11 18 29
HTML 5 1 6
Audio+Braille 10 -- 10
Audio+Large Print -- 4 4
Total 44 49 93
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Mean Scores by Format
Format N Form A Form BMean SD Mean SD
Braille 18 35.22 9.61 34.83 8.08
Large Print 26 35.58 8.82 31.77 9.59
Audio 29 33.28 7.17 26.79 12.22
HTML 6 39.67 3.67 28.67 8.31
Audio+Braille 9 28.11 8.59 26.11 10.54
Audio+Large Print 4 29.50 9.68 22.75 7.50
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Student Comments on HTML• 5 students reported HTML was better
– “because it is easier and faster to navigate (performing the find command made things a lot simpler unlike the braille where I had to keep browsing through many pages and numbered paragraphs)”
– “because both reading the passage and answering the questions was a lot easier than the braille. I did not use the audio.”
– “I could finish more quickly and understand what I was reading.” – “some was read aloud and if there was a word you could not
pronounce it would pronounce it right. It was faster than I could read the braille.
• 1 student reported HTML was worse – “I couldn’t understand it as well”
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
HTML Version • Followed Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) see http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/
Technology Assisted Reading Assessment
Limitations
• Small sample sizes• Confounding of other accessibility
elements with file format