This chapter discusses the recent changes in the state textbook adoption program that shifted from sole reliance on traditional, print-based textbooks to a wide variety of instructional media. These recently available formats include, but are not limited to computer software, compact disks (CD-ROM), videotapes, interactive videodiscs, and instructional materials downloaded from the Internet or the various online services. Historically, copies of the traditional textbooks were produced in braille, large print, or audiotapes to be accessible to students who are blind or visually impaired. However, the new instructional media formats cannot easily be made accessible to students with disabilities.

The most common components of electronic textbooks that should be made accessible to students and teachers who have disabilities are described in the report. The report also summarizes the types of information and delivery modes that must be made accessible and analyzes how these electronic textbooks can be made more accessible to all students in addition to students and teachers with disabilities.

Specific recommendations are included in the report. (1) These encompass design and implementation of demonstration projects to develop accessible electronic textbooks; (2) collaboration with experts in media accessibility research, textbook publishers, software and hardware developers, and educators to develop minimum accessibility standards for new interactive electronic textbooks purchased by the state of Texas.

In 1989, the 71st Texas Legislature amended the textbook adoption process to include electronic media. The expansion of the definition of "textbook" to include product configurations that encompassed new technology led to the submission of a variety of multimedia instructional materials for state adoption. In subsequent years, instructional materials were submitted in configurations that ranged from teacher components only to more traditional student and teacher components, in print or electronic format, or in electronic format with supplemental teacher and student material in print format. Electronic components in many state-adopted programs include computer diskettes, CD-ROM, audio and videocassettes, and laser discs. More recently, access to the Internet and online providers has expanded rapidly as have opportunities to receive educational programming and distance learning via satellite.

The Texas Education Agency has a long history of providing equal access to state-adopted instructional materials for students who are blind or visually impaired. Since 1955, the agency has worked with various organizations to acquire textbooks in braille. With emerging technology, the process of acquiring braille evolved from primarily manual production to electronic production using publisher-provided computer files specifically formatted for more rapid translation into braille textbooks.

In 1991, the 72nd Texas Legislature required publishers of textbooks adopted by the State Board of Education to furnish the agency with computerized textbook files for the production of braille textbooks. The Legislature also mandated formation of a commission to work with textbook publishers on developing processes for converting publisher textbook files into formats needed for speedy braille production. In March 1993, this commission made a series of recommendations for revisions to the process of braille textbook production. Subsequently, the agency expanded the list of content areas for which textbooks could be brailled electronically to include all literary subjects in English and other languages. Currently, music and mathematics are exempt from this list due to technical complications that arise in brailling these subjects. Files supplied by the publishers were standardized and the minimum standards for these file formats were established.

Also in 1991, a videodisc-based program called Windows on Science became the first state-adopted electronic textbook in the nation. It was followed in 1992 by three electronic programs from as many educational publishers in the area of computer literacy, a required, full-year course at grade seven or eight. Each of these three programs included computer diskettes for Apple, Macintosh, or MS-DOS computers, integrated commercial software, laser discs or videotapes, and printed ancillaries. Subsequent electronic programs have been adopted in chemistry, science and world geography, accounting, economics, and other subject areas.

While expanding the range of learning opportunities for students capable of using the visual and audio features, electronic textbooks present new challenges to educators of students with visual impairments or blindness. Articulation of the major challenges and a series of recommendations to address them comprise the body of this chapter.

Accessibility refers to the freedom or ability of an individual to obtain or make full use of a product or environment. A product is accessible to an individual with disabilities only if he or she is able to use it to carry out all of the same functions and to achieve the same results as individuals with similar skills and training who do not have disabilities.

The Texas Education Code defines electronic textbook as "computer software, interactive videodisc, magnetic media, CD-ROM, computer courseware, online services, an electronic medium, or other means of conveying information to the student or otherwise contributing to the learning process through electronic means " [Sec. 31.002 (1)]." This definition defines only the physical delivery media (e.g., computer software, CD-ROM, and online services). The delivery medium is not inherently inaccessible to students with disabilities. The critical features of the electronic textbook are the content and the method of presentation of that content.

The design and presentation content within a textbook, the delivery medium, determines if 10 the information is accessible, 2) all students can learn from the content, and 3) it is usable by all students. Although, information on the Web and on the Internet can be made accessible, the accessibility of many current materials delivered through this media is questionable. This is a critical issue that must be considered as the state investigates the cost and benefits of using computer networks, including the Internet and Web in public schools, and receiving textbook updates via the Internet.

The World Wide Web Consortium is an international industry consortium founded in 1994. Its mission is to promote the evolution and ensure the interoperability of the World Wide Web. Working with the global community the Consortium produces specifications and reference software for free use around the world. The World Wide Web Consortium's commitment to Web accessibility is shown in the following activity statement: "All the protocols and languages we (the W3C) issue as recommendations should meet or exceed established accessibility goals. In addition, we will actively encourage the development of Web software and content that is accessible to people with most disabilities."

To meet this commitment and develop accessibility goals, the World Wide Web Consortium established the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) in 1997. Changing the Web's underlying protocols, applications and, most importantly, the way content is developed can significantly improve access to the Web by people with disabilities. The WAI has working groups developing comprehensive and unified sets of accessibility guidelines for browser accessibility, authoring tool accessibility, and page design (presentation of content).

"The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect," said Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web.

Consider these common classroom uses of technology:

Now, focus on the students who have disabilities in these same classrooms:

Each of these hypothetical scenarios demonstrates the need for accessible electronic textbooks for all students. Obvious benefits are that the students will:

An accessible electronic textbook is one that allows students who have disabilities to use the same textbook and achieve the same intended benefit as students who do not have disabilities. Moreover, they would be able to achieve the benefit with approximately the same amount of effort. At a minimum, that means that the electronic textbooks should be:

Ideally, all electronic instructional materials should be made accessible to all students, including those with disabilities. All students have different functional abilities and learning styles. Each requires a variety of learning experiences to maximize learning. Providing all students instructional materials that present information in an enriched and multimedia environment allow each student to interact with the materials in a manner that best fits the individual’s learning mode. Not all students can read printed material; not all students can hear audio information; and not all students can comprehend complex diagrams. However, in a multimedia environment, the information in print can be provided in audio; audio information can be captioned and displayed in print; and complex information can be displayed as a simplified series of diagrams building to create the complex diagram. Different students learn differently. The same presentation of material that makes sense to one student may be meaningless to another. A multimedia instructional environment would allow students to choose the presentation mode of the material that works best for them.

There is no one tool or medium that provides all students with all the information needed to learn well. If the textbook presentation does not provide information that is meaningful to the student, then classroom teachers, disability specific teachers, and other professionals should provide an equivalent that meets the learning goals and provides equivalent information. Passive relaying of the information is not enough when other students are obtaining the information actively.

An accessible electronic textbook might teach the concept of the piston engine by presenting a visual simulation of a model four-stroke engine. The user can manipulate the components by using a touchscreen, keyboard commands, or a mouse to grab the flywheel and turn it left and right in order to see how the pistons operate. A tone is associated with the position of the piston; as the individual used the arrow keys to rotate the flywheel, a rising tone would indicate the rising visual position of the piston. The student could hear the piston going up until the sound of an explosion was heard at the same time that the visual simulation of the spark is given. The student would then hear the piston tone going back down. In a four-cycle engine, they could hear the valves opening and the piston going up without an explosion, the exhaust valve closing as the intake valve opens. The auditory sounds could be accompanied with a simple narration (accompanied by captions) of the events as they were happening.

Electronic textbooks can be made accessible through changes to the software used to present them. Details of how to make these changes are included in this report. However, some students with disabilities may require a more comprehensive instructional approach which includes non-electronic textbook materials. Using the accessible electronic textbook with the adaptations described above, a student who is blind may not achieve the same benefit as the other students. For him or her, an unintended outcome might be that a flywheel is thought of as a left/right button. The noises may have no meaning unless they were the same as those coming from a real piston engine that the student has directly touched and manipulated. No student could learn the concepts associated with a piston engine only with noises and verbal descriptions. Some students may need additional hands-on interaction with physical models to more fully grasp the concepts. A model would be crucial to the understanding of students with visual impairments and would probably be beneficial for other students as well. Additional instruction might be needed from a teacher trained in the education of students with visual impairments to ensure that the information is absorbed in a non-visual way.

Students with other disabilities or learning styles might benefit from a series of diagrams provided in the electronic textbook that could be printed and reviewed at a later time. The electronic textbook could provide also links to other resources on the Web to ensure that students with a variety of learning styles can connect to the material.

The critical features of the electronic textbook are the content and the method of presentation of that content. The design and development of the content and its presentation within a textbook determines the its usability, the accessibility of information, and the students’ ability to learn from the materials. If the electronic textbooks are not properly designed, the electronic textbook will be partially or completely inaccessible and unusable by students who are blind, have hearing impairments, or other disabilities.

In order to discuss accessible instructional delivery media and systems, it is useful to provide a common frame of reference. Many of the delivery media have common design and formatting elements that must be made accessible. It is important to contrast each element of traditional print textbooks with the elements of electronic textbooks. The print textbook is an information delivery system with which most people are familiar and, therefore, is used as a point of reference in this section.

A print textbook is made up of the following formatting and design elements:

Electronic textbooks are made up of these same formatting and design elements as print textbooks, text formatting, symbolic text, graphics, and a navigation system. These formatting and design elements are enhanced because the information is presented electronically.

Electronic textbooks may also include the following elements, which are not typical of print textbooks:

In discussing access to electronic textbooks, it is useful to use the terminology and approach which has been adopted in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Public Law 104-104. This Act refers to accessibility as the ability of individuals to directly use telecommunication products without requiring special assistive devices (i.e., devices designed to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities). The Act states that telecommunication products and services should be made accessible if this is readily achievable. The Act states that if it is not readily achievable to make products accessible, the telecommunication products and services should be compatible with existing peripheral devices or specialized equipment commonly used by individuals with disabilities to achieve access, if readily achievable. Because there is a close parallel between telecommunications software and electronic textbooks, parallel terminology is used here as follows.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 shows a clear preference for having direct or built-in accessibility for telecommunication products and services. However, each approach has advantages. Electronic textbooks should be directly accessible to the vast majority of students with disabilities and be compatible with assistive technology to meet the specialized needs of some students with disabilities. This will provide the advantages of both approaches.

Where it is impractical on a cost basis to have built-in assistive technology hardware and specialized software, compatibility with standard assistive devices has advantages.

For these reasons it is important that direct accessibility supplemented by compatibility with assistive devices be considered in the design of electronic textbooks.

Accessible electronic textbooks can take many forms. Each has different advantages and poses different accessibility opportunities and issues. There are, however, some general strategies that apply across most electronic textbook formats. The following sections describe some examples of the various formats of electronic textbooks, general accessibility guidelines pertaining to students with disabilities, and issues related to compatibility between common assistive devices and electronic textbooks.

Electronic textbooks may be produced in many different formats. For example, it is possible to deliver a standard movie either as a VHS videocassette, as a videodisc, in digital form on a digital videodisc (DVD), or as a digital file which is downloaded or played live from the Internet. When viewed, the users would have no idea whether they were looking at videotape, a videodisc, or a file from the Internet. Similarly, an interactive textbook might be delivered to the school on a DVD disc, on a CD-ROM, or over the Internet or Internet-like communications link within a single school district (i.e., an Intranet).

Regardless of the format in which an electronic textbook is produced, the basic considerations for making it accessible are the same. Some of the delivery formats lend themselves to including accessibility features more than others.

Implementing these basic accessibility requirements provides students with disabilities access to the content in electronic textbooks. Following these requirements also presents content in a variety of media allowing all students with different learning styles, language and reading abilities, and functional abilities to gain meaning from the textbook. Additionally, the requirements allow a greater flexibility of access for all students, including the ability to operate the textbooks more easily in very noisy environments or in very quiet environments. It is not necessary to limit textbooks and other instructional materials to only a presentation of the text in order to make it accessible. Strategies and tools exist for making even rich multimedia and interactive systems accessible.

The basic accessibility requirements for electronic textbooks are:

An electronic textbook without built-in accessibility should be compatible with common assistive devices and software used by people with disabilities. The effectiveness of assistive technologies providing access to an electronic textbook depends upon the design and compatibility of the electronic textbook. Information that is not available in text form, for example, cannot be displayed using speech or braille. Software that requires an individual to simultaneously monitor two events occurring at opposite edges of a screen would be difficult for someone to operate by using screen magnification.

This section will look more closely at each of the major components of electronic textbooks presented earlier and discuss the implications of making each of these accessible.

There are two ways to provide the text content of an electronic textbook - through the visual interface of the book itself, or in companion files.

Text formatting and hierarchy is important because it provides information about the structure of the information and access additional layers of information such as emphasis and keywords. Text formats identify relationships between one text element and another, highlight key words, identify a sequence of presentation, provide information about the hierarchy of information, and provide other secondary levels of information to the reader. Making information about text formatting and text hierarchy available can be done in several ways, including:

Of these approaches, only the verbal tag approach would work with information that is exported to a dynamic braille display. For spoken output, the other approaches may be less disruptive, but will become more effective as techniques that relate specific auditory cues to specific text formatting features are developed.

As discussed under Text, systems with built-in accessibility have an advantage in that they are sensitive to any special formatting which is built into the text being presented and are able to present this information. Systems that rely on external assistive technologies for providing access to the formatting information must use the standard system tools for formatting text so that they will be compatible with the screen readers. Some types of formatting and text hierarchy, however, may be difficult to present in a fashion that screen readers would be able to use or recognize and convey.

Current symbolic text representation consists of displaying the equations or text as a graphic of the actual equation. Therefore, access to a symbolic (i.e., mathematical, chemical, or economic) equation in electronic media has traditionally been difficult for students who are blind or visually impaired. Some specialized systems for reading mathematical documents have been developed, but no method for reading mathematics in common educational software is available.

The recent approval of Mathematics Mark-up Language (MathML) by the World Wide Web Consortium offers a positive step. MathML was created to meet the needs of people who want to display mathematical expressions on the Web, but who were unable to do so using HTML. It defines a machine-to-machine language for expressing mathematical symbols; that is, people are expected to use authoring tools to create the MathML code and to use a browser of some kind to read it. Reading the code itself does not convey the mathematical symbology to a human.

The MathML code provides a standardized format for encoding mathematical equations that is independent of the final presentation media, be it print, audio, or braille. Rather than using complicated typographic conventions, or even graphic images, to represent equations, MathML retains the semantics of the equation, thereby allowing assistive technology or auditory interfaces to navigate the elements of the equation. This is a major step in accessibility. MathML also provides advantages in terms of visual display and potential synchronization of mathematical equations with other media, such as narration, and brings mathematics to life.

For example, a complicated equation is displayed on the computer screen or a web page. A narrator describes the equation and a highlight or color change follows the narration through each element (or group of elements). As a student points, using a mouse or keyboard, at one of the elements, it is spoken. With an additional mouse click or keystroke the element of the equation is expanded to show additional information about the element, such as how that element was derived, the part of the word problem to which it refers, or the part of a diagram it represents. All of this is accomplished in an accessible manner and interactively.

MathML can be used to create symbolic text documents (i.e., mathematics, science, chemistry, and economics texts will include mathematical equations) that are presentable via the Web or other means. These documents would be accessible to blind and visually impaired students once the tools needed to do so are available. This would include authoring tools for writing equations that are designed to be directly or compatibly accessible so that blind students can write their own mathematical symbols. Also included would be browsing tools that convert the MathML code into something that can be rendered in audio. Because MathML uses a structured way to represent mathematical and other symbolic systems, it should be possible in the near future to provide first-rate interactive access to equations written in MathML. See Appendix C, MathML, for more information.

Graphic information within electronic textbooks falls into three general categories:

The challenges in making electronic textbook graphics accessible are:

There is great value in the redundant presentation (i.e., the repetitive display of the information in multiple formats, such as audio, closed captioning, descriptive video, braille and enlarged type) of information. For individuals who are blind or who have visual impairments as well as for those with cognitive limitations, it is often desirable to have supplemental methods or materials available in addition to any verbal descriptions. This additional information helps in the presentation and interpretation of graphical information. Tactile models, raised line drawings, braille and audio tracks help provide orientation and information that enhance comprehension of graphical images. When a screen magnifier is used to enlarge an image, it may become grainy and unreadable. It would be desirable to supplement informational graphics with student selectable full screen versions of the graphics.

In order to move about effectively within an electronic textbook, students must be able to independently and efficiently operate and navigate the textbook. Electronic textbooks, whether created from existing texts, or crafted as new works specifically for PC or web usage, can incorporate advanced navigational capabilities that benefit all readers.

Understanding that textbooks often have varying structures (e.g., an annotated edition of a novel compared to a science textbook), it is important to provide navigational mechanisms that offer consistency in the user interface while adapting to the specific style of the given book. Students should not have to learn unique navigational commands for each book used.

Multimedia presentations, such as audio, videos and animations, also must be navigable in more than just the time dimension. To be able to search for a word or scene in a video is a major benefit for all students. This concept, already applied to talking books like Daisy, is also part of the upcoming releases of the MPEG format.

The key to an accessible navigation system is twofold:

Electronic textbooks convey the structure of the content by using several methods. These include the use of simple outlines, expanding outlines, tab folders, and image maps. Electronic textbooks also use a variety of methods to help users navigate the contents. These include the use of menus, sub-menus, buttons, tab folders, outlines, scroll bars, icons, graphics, hyperlinks, and search functions.

With hypertext documents that incorporate the concept of non-linear navigation, being able to see the "big picture" is critical. Visual metaphors for structure are useful for sighted students, but they are of no value to the visually impaired. It is important for the student who is blind or visually impaired to understand what is contained within the textbook, how the textbook is organized, and what navigation options are available. Non-visual navigation systems must depend upon the structural elements of the book to create a verbal mapping (e.g., "You are at Lesson 2 of Chapter 5. There are six lessons in this chapter. There are 10 chapters in this book"). With the availability of the structural information, any kind of verbal rendering is possible using braille or speech.

For the student who is unable to use a mouse, the navigation structure must be operable through standard mouse and keyboard controls to ensure compatibility with necessary assistive technology. Though visually oriented students may utilize the mouse to select buttons, menus, or clickable areas on a graphic, it is essential that all possible selections on any given screen have an efficient keyboard selection mechanism. Further, it should be possible to obtain a verbal summary of the number and type of selections possible, whether the selection is explicitly displayed as a button or menu choice, or implied through a clickable image. This can be done directly by the book presentation software, or through an assistive software aid that can programmatically access this information.

It will be possible to adapt a variety of alternative input mechanisms to any electronic textbook. Interfaces like W3C's DOM (Document Object Model) or an Accessibility Application Programming Interface (API) like Microsoft Active Accessibility or Sun's Java Accessibility may be used for this purpose.

The key to efficient and accessible navigation controls includes:

Again, by using the structured version of a book, it is possible to go beyond just the simple "collapsing" of a table of contents. For example, a student could activate a control that says, "Show me (read to me) only the ‘chapter summaries’ for the History Book." It is possible to create any view a student will find useful. Another possibility is that a teacher could create custom views of a book, "collapsing sections" that are not needed at any given time. Rather than using a specific textbook for each mathematics track, use of the same textbook, with different "filters" applied to either show or hide more advanced concepts may be better. Then, educational need, rather than fixed text format drive navigation, structure, and content of the textbook.

There is nothing inherently inaccessible about hyperlinks. The three major problems faced are:

Hyperlinks are generally indicated through text formatting (e.g., the text is a different color or the text is underlined or italicized). If all of the formatting information is available to the user, the existence and location of hyperlinks is generally available as well. A descriptive hyperlink text phrase will help a student determine where the link is going and if they would like to follow it or not. For graphical hyperlinks, associate a text phrase with the image. When an individual has executed a hyperlink jump, some type of a verbal announcement that a jump has taken place is useful as a cue to the individual that the "world around their soda straw view" has changed, so that they look around and reorient themselves to the place to which they have jumped.

In some cases, expand and collapse features may already be accessible. Problems arise, however, depending on how they are implemented in a given system. All expand and collapse features should be executable from the keyboard with speech or electronic text. All non-text visual cues that are provided in conjunction with the expand and collapse features should be available via built-in accessibility or revealed to the screen reader.

A subset of the expand and collapse feature would be a zoom feature. Such a feature allows individuals who are sighted to get a bird's-eye view of the general layout of the document or landscape. They can then zoom in for detail. The equivalent for those who cannot see would be the ability to provide an image that they could feel tactually. In addition, auditory cues could be provided to indicate white space, text and numbers. This would allow them to get a sense for the global layout of the page in the same way as a sighted individual.

In addition to the ability to search for words or phrases, it is also very useful to search for character formatting or for structural items in the document. For example, the ability to search for the next title is very helpful for stepping through a document. If structure information is not available, the ability to search for the next bold or underlined text can be useful.

As with graphics, audio information in an electronic textbook can convey important information or it can be purely supplementary or decorative. For students who are deaf or have hearing impairments any information that is presented auditorially would need to be available in amplified form and as captions. For students who have both visual and hearing impairments, amplification may be helpful, but captions should also be provided in electronic form compatible with assistive technology so that they can be presented via braille. The pace at which the auditory information is presented should be controllable to allow for different levels of comprehension. For example, it should be possible to speed up, slow down, stop, pause, or replay speech and captions. The techniques needed to provide captions for audio are the same as those described in the section on fixed sequence animations and movies.

Electronic textbooks may contain full-motion video in color or black and white, with or without sound. The audio portion of the movies would be accessible to students who have low vision or blindness; however these students may have limited or no information regarding the visual information which is displayed on the screen. Students who are deaf or have hearing impairments, on the other hand, will benefit from the visuals but may not understand any of the sound. In order to make animation and movies accessible, the electronic textbook should provide:

These features can be provided in a number of ways. The same multimedia tools that are used to create the original presentation could be used to add additional audio description and captions to provide these features, and the ability to turn this information on and off could be built as a part of the interface of the product. However, three popular multimedia players now provide the ability to handle audio description and captions within the media format. These formats are:

For some electronic textbooks, it may be helpful to include supplemental materials such as tactile models, raised line drawings, braille or audio materials which can provide orientation and information which would assist students who are blind or visually impaired to understand the graphic information or auditory descriptions.

Information may change for two reasons: (1) In response to an interaction with the student (e.g., the student adds a new substance to a chemistry experiment); (2) The information is "live" and is continually updated (e.g., a weather map is updated to show current conditions).

Combining keyboard or alternative input with audio feedback creates an interface that students can use regardless of whether they can see the screen or they can use a mouse. If the additional audio is found to be a distraction to students who do not need it, the program should offer an option to turn it off.

Compatibility with assistive technologies is a second approach. It is crucial for use by students with some disabilities, such as those who are deaf-blind and use a braille display rather than audio information. For this reason, even directly accessible simulations should be access technology-compatible. However, using educational programs in conjunction with assistive technologies is less appropriate for some students, including younger students.

Technologies are now available that enable developers to design software which is compatible with assistive technologies, providing an important advance in the ability to create accessible software. These technologies are known as Applications Programming Interfaces (APIs). A possible compatibility solution for software built for the Windows platform is Microsoft's Active Accessibility (MSAA), an API for exposing elements of the screen and their state, including exposing the focus of the screen. Using MSAA, software developers can use entirely graphical custom interfaces while still making each element known to a screen reader. This makes it possible to provide access to every control and output of a simulation.

The growing popularity of Java as a programming language for the Internet has led to the development of the Java Accessibility API. With some similarities to MSAA, Java Accessibility allows software developers to expose the location, name, and state of each control while still using the graphical look-and-feel of their choice. For programs being developed in Java, this is an important tool.

Caution must be used when designing modifications of interactive animation and simulations to ensure that the same quality of information is provided to the student who is blind as is provided to other students. In the example of the piston engine, the purpose of the program was to teach a child a specific concept. Even with the adaptations, the student who is blind would not have sufficient access to the information on the screen to learn that concept. Additional hands-on instruction with tactile adaptations, physical models, or other materials necessary for the student to grasp the concept would be provided by a teacher trained in the education of students with visual impairments. Wherever possible, content creators should suggest models that may be constructed from ordinary items. This will help all teachers provide the alternative learning tools that may benefit all students.

Other programs could be modified successfully using only changes to the software. For example, a program might provide an animated story which periodically stops until the child responds to specific directions or answers questions by using the mouse or touchscreen. If there were a verbal (sound or tactual) narration of the story, and the student responses could be provided through the keyboard, then the child who is blind would have adequate accessibility to the content and could achieve the same results as other students.

Simulations often provide students with opportunities they might not have in everyday life - particularly students with disabilities. Handling beakers, flasks, burners, and other equipment in the chemistry laboratory is often not safe for students with visual or cognitive impairments and often not possible for students with physical disabilities. Manipulating the equipment via computer simulations allows students with vision to witness chemical reactions (e.g., color changes, heating, and explosions). Presenting the results of the manipulations through appropriate sound and descriptive narrative allows the student who is blind or has low vision to participate and have information similar to that, which is available in the chemistry lab. Allowing students to manipulate apparatuses via the keyboard includes students with physical disabilities and blindness in the experimentation process.

For some interactive materials, as with fixed sequence materials, it may be helpful to include supplemental materials such as tactile models or raised line drawings.

Collaborative environments allow students with disabilities to interact in communities they might not otherwise have the chance to interact in. They also provide able-bodied students the ability to interact with students with disabilities. An electronic textbook could be designed giving students the ability to collaborate, through the use of collaborative tools (e.g., chat, e-mail, discussion forum, or videoconference) with study peers or a study team to write reports, share research data, or share a "white board" or area of the screen where they can draw, write, calculate, or otherwise work together on the same "piece of paper." Electronic textbooks can provide direct accessibility to collaborative interaction (which is sometimes "live") by choosing accessible tools for videoconferencing, chat, e-mail, and other collaboration tools. If the collaborative tools are developed specifically for the electronic textbook then these tools should be directly accessible or compatible with assistive technology.

For example:

Live collaboration and videoconferencing is inherently no less accessible than face-to-face communication. It is up to the individuals who are communicating to make sure that information is accessible to each other. Basic information on how to communicate in an accessible manner should be provided to a live (human) resource before inclusion in an electronic textbook.

For students who have little voluntary movement, immersive environments can provide valuable alternatives to the experiential learning opportunities they have missed or only passively observed. As long as the environment can be efficiently controlled using keyboard equivalents, these students can control the experience using alternative keyboards or keyboard emulators. A number of strategies can be employed to make navigation and object manipulation easier and more efficient for all students. These include:

For students who cannot use the visual modality, immersive environments in their present state do not add to the learning experience. Providing text or audio labels, descriptions and meta data can provide some access to the information in the three dimensional scene, but the experience remains more frustrating than rewarding. Wayfinding in a virtual world, with few constraints on travel, can be a daunting task even for a student with full vision. This situation may change dramatically with the development and broader availability of haptic interfaces and three-dimensional sound displays. "Haptics" is a term that encompasses both the sensing and action involved in touching and manipulating.

For many students haptics is the preferred mode of exploration. Unlike the visual and auditory modality, by its very nature it is interactive. We manipulate the objects we are sensing in a continuous action-feedback-reaction loop. Thus many people do not feel they have really "seen" an object unless they have handled it and explored it with their haptic sense. With the addition of haptic rendering and haptic display/control devices, three dimensional, immersive curriculums can bring a multitude of objects and environments to the classroom for exploration by all students, including students who are blind. Three dimensional, immersive environments will become more accessible and usable as additional display and control modalities become feasible and widely available. Wherever possible electronic textbooks that include these tools should support multiple display and control modalities and provide information in redundant formats. Virtual reality environments can be divided into two general categories:

In the first case, the virtual reality is simply another way of presenting visual information. Being inherently visual, the student who is blind did not previously have access to the information. However, by making the presentation electronic, it is possible that additional access may be provided through the use of techniques and technologies for image enhancement and edge identification. These could be used in conjunction with tactile printers (e.g., braille printers) and raised-line drawings. In the second case, it is important that visualization tools created to navigate the information space preserve a nonvisual (e.g., verbal/textual) interface for those individuals who cannot use the visualization interface.

Investment in educational technology in the United States is estimated at present at over $5 billion a year. Spending for computer technology in Kindergarten through 12^th grade in the United States is projected to be $9.4 billion in 2000, up from $3.3 billion in 1994-95, $3.9 billion in 1995-96, $4.3 billion on 1996-97 and $5.2 in 1997-98, according to the Data Analysis Group. Of the $4.3 billion spent in 1996-97, between $494 million estimated by the Quality Education Data (QED) Company and $728 million estimated by SIMBA Information, Inc. was spent on instructional software, according to the 1997 Software Publishers Association (SPA) Education Market Report. According to McKinsey & Company, only $300 million out of $3.3 billion was spent in 1994-95 on professional development. Usually, only 5 percent to 8 percent of technology expenditures have been spent on technology training instead of the recommended 15 percent.

Funding for information technologies came mostly from state (47 percent) and local (44.5 percent) sources, according to SIMBA Information, Inc. According to a 1995 McKinsey & Company report, 84 percent of the overall money and 60 percent of funds used for technology in Kindergarten through 12^th grade in public schools comes from state and local governments. Federal funds, which constitute 6 percent of money for education overall, comprise 25 percent of funds spent on technology. Funds provided by businesses, foundations, and fund-raising efforts (10 percent of overall funds) constitute the remaining funding sources for technology.

Although the expenditures on technology are substantial, of the average $5,623 that schools spent per student in 1994-95, just $75 (1.3 percent) was spent on technology. Since then, the amount spent on technology per student has increased. Nationally, the typical public school spent $90.95 per student in 1996-97 for hardware, software, and training, according to QED. This consists of $56.92 for hardware, $10.95 for software, $5.50 for supplies, $5.30 for service, $4.52 for training, $2.62 for online capabilities, and $5.14 for other resources.

According to a 1995 report by McKinsey & Company, the cost of a one-time installation of computers nationwide (including training) may range from $0.08 billion (to install one PC + modem per school connected to the Internet via a district-based file server) to $145 billion (a model that gives each student a PC with full connection to the Internet). Annual operating costs may range from $0.06 billion to $11.28 billion. Hence, getting to a 5:1 ratio of students per computer would require spending $47 billion by 2005 -- 20 percent of it in rewiring and improving air conditioning and $14 billion annually in operations and maintenance. That would amount to about 4 percent of the nation’s total K-12 education budget in 2005; three times the 1.3 percent spent in 1994-95. In 1995, 1.3 percent of the national school budget was spent on instructional technology.

McKinsey & Company estimated that between 1.5 percent and 3.9 percent of the national education budget would be required over the next five to ten years to purchase new equipment, wire schools, and provide access and support, depending on the connectivity model adopted.

Connectivity models range from a minimal configuration to an ideal one with associated variation in complexity and cost as shown below.

Estimating the cost of technology in public education requires a departure from the way school districts have traditionally planned and budgeted for technology. Technology planning in schools has traditionally been guided by a one-time purchase mentality rather than by long range planning considerations. Long range planning must include training, support, and upgrading. Technology planning and technology budgeting in public schools must:

(2) Change the budgeting process to a long range planning process that includes the

Recent technology expenditure data provided by 616 school districts in response to a survey conducted by the Texas Association of School Administrators (TASA) indicate that annual expenditures for technology acquisition and maintenance in 1997-98 ranged widely from less than $50,000 to over $10 million. Over 60 percent of the districts (394) spent $250,000 or less on technology infrastructure and maintenance in 1997-98. Nearly one-quarter of the districts (149) spent between $250,000 and $1 million, and about 12 percent of the districts (73) spent over one million. The Houston ISD, for example, spent $12,700,000 in 1997-98.

(chart represents annual expenditures and percentage of districts)

(chart represents cost of maintenance and acquisition of technology)

Source: TASA Survey, November 23, 1998.

Expenditures associated with technology-related staff development also varied greatly. Nearly 60 percent of the districts (358) spent less than $10,000 in 1997-98 on technology-related staff development, 25 percent (152) spent between $10,000 and $50,000, and 15 percent of the districts (92) spent over $50,000. Houston ISD, for example, spent $400,000 on technology-related staff development in 1997-98.

(chart represents percentage of dollar amount spent on Tecnology)

Source: TASA Survey, November 23, 1998.

Estimating the cost of technology in public education based on current technology use in schools is extremely complex because of:

Estimating the costs of technology during a period of transition renders existing cost models largely irrelevant. Existing cost models focus mainly on the cost elements that are relatively easy to capture; cost of equipment, hardware and software under a few different district, campus and classroom configurations. The estimation of costs associated with the delivery of instructional materials via computer networks—the focus of the Computer Network Study Project—has not previously been addressed nor investigated. The literature did not identify any models or conceptual frameworks that articulate what such models should include. For example, the infrastructure (hardware, equipment, and connectivity) can be compared to the technology superhighway and the delivery of instructional materials via computer networks is the vehicle that rides on this highway. Although the infrastructure is essential to the delivery of instructional materials via computer networks, the costs associated with this delivery are "separate." The extent to which the costs of the delivery of instructional materials via computer networks are interrelated with the costs of the infrastructure may vary depending on the assumptions used and the context in which this technology is implemented.

To estimate the costs associated with the use of computer networks to deliver instructional materials in public schools in Texas, cost data were obtained from districts selected for participation in the study. Two sets of cost data were obtained:

Four districts provided five data sets of costs associated with equipping students (and teachers) with computers: Canyon ISD, Lake Worth ISD, Los Fresnos ISD, and Ysleta ISD. Four of the data sets consisted of cost estimates and one data set included actual costs associated with a current pilot project. The data submitted by the four districts are presented in the following table.

The data demonstrate a high degree of variance in the scope of the projects (ranging from a single campus, to several campuses, to districtwide), in the hardware and software configurations, and in the cost accounting methods. Using the cost elements projected by the districts to calculate a per computer/laptop cost results in an estimated unit cost ranging from $2,175 to $2,810; a 22.3 percent variance. The projected costs per computer/laptop are substantially higher than the actual cost data of the NetSchools Pilot in Ysleta. The lowest projected cost is 35 percent higher than the Ysleta NetSchools Pilot unit cost. Using the projected costs of providing a computer/laptop to each student ($2,175 or $2,810), the costs of providing the 3,535,742 Texas students with laptops can range from $7.69 billion to $9.93 billion. Equipping the 261,427 Texas teachers with computers, assuming that the unit cost for teachers will be the same as for students (although teacher laptops are more costly) will add between $568.6 and $734.6 million. Using the Ysleta NetSchools Pilot cost data as a baseline for statewide projections yields a cost of $5.01 billion for students and $370.7 million for teachers. The estimates do not include amounts for annual costs such as support and maintenance or costs associated with upgrading, replacement, or purchasing computers for new students.

(chart represents costs of providing Technology for Students and Teachers)

* Estimated costs.

** Actual costs. NetSchools Pilot is a turnkey solution; offered at a discount. Computer

costs include hardware, software, training, and support.

Districts selected for participation in this study were asked to provide cost data associated with the delivery of instructional materials via computer networks. To facilitate a consistent framework for providing these data, districts were asked to:

The majority of the districts reported that they deliver some instructional materials through computer networks. The delivery is typically in the computer labs since classrooms do not have enough computers for individual use by students. The districts provided cost data on a large number of instructional programs. Since the assumptions and cost elements used by districts to calculate costs varied considerably, programs on which cost data were provided by multiple districts were selected for analysis. The programs presented in the summary tables are as follows: Accelerated Reader, Jostens Learning Systems (Jostens), Skillsbank, and Invest. Also included are Computer Curriculum Corporation’s (CCC) Successmaker Math as an illustration of a program on which cost data were submitted by a single district, and the Houston ISD Algebra 1 districtwide initiative.

The summary tables are organized by program. The tables identify the district; the name of the program; the number of campuses, classes, teachers, and students that use the program; the year the district started using the program; whether the program is delivered in the computer lab or in the class; and unique usage characteristics. In addition, the table presents data on up-front costs including training, licensing fees, and hardware; and ongoing costs including support, maintenance, training, and materials. The cost per student was calculated in two ways: (1) total up-front cost per student which includes the cost for the first year and (2) ongoing annual costs per student which refer to the annual cost from the second year of the program and thereafter. Please note that total up-front costs or total ongoing costs were not calculated in cases where the districts did not provide sufficient data.

The cost data provided by the districts vary greatly. For example, up-front costs per student for the Accelerated Reader program vary from $4.19 to $42.08. For the Jostens program the up-front cost per student varies from $22.24 to $199.92. For the Skillsbank program the up-front cost per student varies from $4.74 to $77.64. For the Invest program the cost range from $110.76 to $924.90. Annual costs per student also vary widely.

The major reasons for the variance lie in the cost elements included in the calculation of cost and whether "a share of cost" function was utilized. For example, of the five districts that provided cost data for the Accelerated Reader program, two districts did not provide any up-front training costs. One of these districts claimed that no training costs were incurred because teachers who were familiar with the program trained other teachers. Similar variations were observed with regard to the other up-front and ongoing cost elements.

Districts were also inconsistent with regard to the attribution of shared costs. Shared costs are a key component of the cost models involving the delivery of instructional content via computer networks. Shared costs relate to both up-front and ongoing (usage) costs. Up-front costs may be "inflated" in cases where the delivery of the program required building the infrastructure if none existed previously. That is, the up-front costs may be high if the program was the first to be delivered via a computer network and the district or school did not have such a network in place and built it specifically for this program. In cases where the program was installed after such a network has been in place, up-front costs may only include the licensing fees and training specifically associated with the program.

The shared cost concept is also important in calculating ongoing costs. District data varied considerably in this regard. For example, some districts included the entire cost of support although they recognized that the figure included support for all programs delivered via computer networks. Several districts identified the share attributed to the specific program but used different assumptions in deriving that share. Several districts were unable to calculate the share in case of multiple use because of lack of data or indicators or because the share fluctuates as the mix of programs delivered via computer networks changes with the addition or replacement of programs. The share can also fluctuate as the number of students who use the program changes. One of the districts reported that the number of students who use the program has decreased, resulting in higher ongoing costs per student.

Estimating cost of instructional content delivered through computer networks is particularly complicated for multi-component programs like Jostens. The program can be used in different configurations and the configurations can vary by district, within a district, and from year to year. This flexibility inhibits district and cross-district cost analyses. To be valid, cost analyses must address the same components, not just the same program overall.

Other complications revealed from the data provided by the districts include variables such as start-up year and prolonged (multi-year) up-front costs. Districts provided up-front cost data representing the year the district started using the program. Although the annual rate of inflation has been low, it is important to account for up-front costs in constant dollars for inferential and comparison purposes. Up-front costs distributed over multiple years rather than occurring in a single year may also have to be treated in a special way, as may the inclusion of interest payment in up-front cost calculations.

(chart represents cost of costs for teaching Mathematics using Technology)

Obtaining reliable estimates of the cost of delivering instructional content via computer networks will require:

Development of a cost framework for estimating these costs. The cost framework should identify all cost elements, define each element, articulate the underlying assumptions, and have guidelines for addressing potential exceptions.

Establishment of pilot projects that represent different models for delivering instructional content via computer networks. Require each pilot project to use the cost framework and compile detailed cost data.

The Access to Multimedia Technology by People with Sensory Disabilities (1998) report from the National Council on Disability (NCD) estimated that the cost of making a CD-ROM accessible is 2.0-2.5 percent of the total cost of development and production. An unknown is the cost, in terms of time and money, of textbook publishers and their developers learning how to make their products accessible. The same NCD report stated that once developers learn about accessibility issues, they are interested in making their products more accessible. In the past there was limited knowledge and information available on developing accessible products. This is no longer true. Accessibility of products and information has become a worldwide issue. There is no longer a shortage of information, tools, or professionals with expertise in the development of accessible information. Examples of specific media accessibility costs are as follows:

To produce an audio description of 60 minutes of video material would cost $3,300.

Nationwide, current investment in educational technology is estimated to exceed $5 billion a year, increasing to $9.2 billion in 2000. According to a 1995 McKinsey & Company study, achieving a 1:5 computer-student ratio would require tripling the 1.3 percent spent in 1994-95 to about 4 percent of the national education budget for kindergarten through 12^th grade over a five to ten-year period. Equipping each student with an Internet connected computer would cost $145 billion with annual operating costs estimated to range from $0.06 to $11.28 billion.

Expenditures for computer and telecommunications equipment acquisition and maintenance in Texas school districts in 1997-98 varied greatly from less than $24,000 to a high of over $12 million dollars. Nearly one-quarter of the districts spent between $250,000 and $1 million, and 12 percent of the districts spent more than $1 million.

Public schools throughout the United States and in Texas are in a process of transition with regard to technology. The transition process involves moving from primary stand-alone hardware to connectivity; from isolated skills-practice to cross-discipline technology integration, and from inadequate preparation of teachers to support for all teachers in the use and integration of technology in instruction. The transition has been fueled by the recognition that realizing the benefits of technology is dependent on giving teachers and students adequate access to equipment and connectivity, providing appropriate training and technical support to teachers in the use and integration of technology, and using technology effectively.

The pace of transition and technology infusion has accelerated in the past five years and is accelerating annually. In 1984 schools had one computer for 125 students. A decade later, in 1995, nearly all schools had computers and the national ratio of instructional computers to pupils (K-12) was 1:9. The statistical base for measuring computer-student ratio narrowed with the exclusion of all but multimedia computers in the measure. Over the past three years, the ratio of multimedia computers to students has decreased by about 40 percent annually from 1:35 in 1996 to 1:21 in 1997 and to 1:13 in 1998. Moreover, technology has moved down from the library and computer lab into the classroom. Seventy-five percent of the classrooms currently have one or more instructional computers and 44 percent of the classrooms have Internet connections.

Connectivity through LANs and WANs has also become increasingly common. Currently, about 80 percent of the schools have a LAN, as do 53 percent of the classrooms. Similarly, Internet access, available to 35 percent of the schools in 1994, doubled by 1997 to 70 percent and increased to 85 percent in 1998. At the classroom level, Internet connectivity grew from 3 percent in 1994 to 44 percent in 1998. Student access to the Internet increased 40 percent from 54 percent in 1994 to 90 percent in 1998.

Texas has kept pace with the national pace of technology infusion and slightly surpassed it in some areas. In one year, Texas decreased its multimedia computer-student ratio by 40 percent (similar to the national rate) from 1:20 in 1997 to 1:12 in 1998 compared with the current 1:13 U.S. ratio. Texas has a slightly higher computer-student ratio for computers in the classroom (1:18 versus 1:17 for the U.S.). A 1:5 or better computer-student ratio was reported by 31 percent of the districts for elementary schools, by 36 percent of the districts for middle schools, and by 45 percent of the districts for high schools. Furthermore, a larger percentage of the classrooms in Texas schools (78 percent) than nationally (75 percent) have at least one instructional computer. A recent Texas-based survey indicates that in 90 percent of the districts’ classrooms have one or more computers. Over 80 percent of Texas schools and 42 percent of the classrooms have Internet access. In 49 percent of the districts more than 75 percent of the elementary school classrooms have Internet access. In 52 percent of districts more than 75 percent of middle school classrooms have Internet access, and in 65 percent of the districts more than 75 percent of the high school classrooms have Internet access.

In spite of the rapid pace of technology infusion, the level of technology varies greatly from state to state and within states on all technology infusion variables. For example, in 1998, the multimedia computer-student ratio varies from a low of 1:9 in Kansas to a high of 1:21 in Utah. Similarly, the ratio of instructional computers to students in classrooms ranges from 1:9 in Alaska to 1:26 in Maryland. The variance among districts within states is also affected by the composition of the student population. Districts with a high percentage of minority and economically disadvantaged students (24 percent or more) have fewer technology resources.

A high degree of variance in the level of technology in districts, schools, and school levels is also evident in Texas. Overall, the completeness of the technology infrastructure is positively correlated with the school level. That is, the technology infrastructure is more complete at the high school level than at the middle school level and least complete at the elementary school level.

The infusion of technology into schools and classrooms has created a great demand for support. The traditional model of centralized support exclusively provided by district staff has proven inadequate. Nationally and in Texas campus-based support structures are emerging. Nationally, on-campus support is most commonly provided by a technology or computer coordinator. In 1996, 71 percent of the schools reported having a technology coordinator. The technology coordinator position in most schools is a part-time position and is associated with teaching and maintenance responsibilities, leaving fewer than four hours a week for support. Schools with the lowest percentage of poor students were 50 percent more likely than schools with the highest percentage of poor students to have a full-time technology coordinator.

The status of on-campus technology support in Texas schools resembles the national situation. Regardless of the school level, technology support is extremely limited. Elementary schools in nearly one-half of the districts, middle schools in 42 percent of the districts, and high schools in 38 percent of the districts have an on-campus support staff position that is less than .25 full time equivalent (FTE). A .50 FTE support staff was reported by 43 percent of the districts for elementary schools and by over 50 percent of the districts for middle and high schools.

The critical importance of technology support coupled with the dearth of on-campus support resources has resulted in the emergence of a wide range of support structures in Texas at both the district and campus levels. At the district level, more formal and expanded support structures are evolving. At the campus level, schools use a mix of strategies and a mix of personnel to provide support. Overall, three categories of support staff operate on campus: (1) staff whose exclusive responsibility is to provide support, (2) staff who divide their time between teaching and supporting technology, and (3) technology proficient staff who can provide technology support as needed.

The critical importance of technology support to the effective use of technology requires the allocation of more resources both at the district and campus levels to this function. The delivery of technology support can take different forms. Districts and campuses should construct or implement support delivery structures that best fit their needs.

Technology-related professional development, like technology support, is a critical link in using and making effective use of technology. Most teachers begin their professional career with limited or no experience in the use and integration of technology in instruction. Teacher preparation programs have been slow in integrating technology into their curriculum. Furthermore, technology training has been relegated a marginal role until recently. Most training was out of content, not oriented to skill building or to integration in instruction. Contrary to the business sector that spent over $2 billion in 1994 to train employees to use new technology, 80 percent of the districts spend less than 10 percent of their technology budget on training. Consequently, most teachers who use technology are self-taught and 50 percent of the teachers reported that they have little experience with technology.

The infusion of technology into schools and classrooms has energized and drastically changed the technology-related training scenario. Technology-related training has become a priority. Districts and schools have been providing a wide range of technology training to teachers and other staff, although training in more advanced technologies or in how to integrate technology into instruction has been less common. Some school districts and schools even offer incentives to teachers to participate in technology training. Currently, the vast majority of teachers, at all school levels, have had some technology-related training in the instructional use of computers.

In 1997, 15 percent of the teachers had nine or more hours of technology training. On average, teachers were offered 21 hours of technology training in 1998. The volume of technology training offered was associated with schools’ level of technology. Schools with more technology offered more training and teachers associated with such schools had more training hours. Multiple studies have shown that over one-half of the teachers who received technology-related training regard themselves as "comfortable with computers" although nearly as many indicated that they needed more training.

The need for technology-related professional development in Texas is acute. The need is acute because of the large infusion of technology and the considerable variance in the technology competencies of staff. The technology-related training scene in Texas school districts is highly active. Districts offer a wide range of technology-related training, including training in "content focused technology applications" that is offered by 70 percent of the districts. The increase in teachers’ technology competency levels has led to an increase in the number of technology integration training programs. In fact, several technology integration training models have emerged.

Thirty percent of the districts in Texas offer 11 or more training sessions and nearly one-half of the districts offer six or more sessions. Training is offered during the day, in the evenings, on Saturdays, and during the summer. Training is offered in the district’s offices or on campus. On-campus training has been proven to be most efficient and cost-effective. Training is offered by a wide range of providers including regional education service center, district, and campus staff.

Overall, Texas teachers receive more hours of technology-related training than teachers nationally (25 versus 21 hours) do. A larger percentage of Texas elementary school students than elementary school students nationally believe that their Math and Science teachers are "moderately well prepared" to teach using computers. However, two-thirds of the school districts in Texas indicate that the professional development they currently offer is not sufficient to meet the needs of their staff.

The type, method, and content of technology-related training is changing. Districts are moving away from piecemeal, isolated skills training to better organized and more comprehensive training programs that are responsive to staff needs and competency levels. While most districts do not have formal technology training requirements, specific proficiency requirements have emerged most typically in association with special projects such as the distribution of laptop computers to teachers and students. Some districts have conducted needs assessments and developed technology competency assessment tools for their staff, as a step toward the development of a technology-competency accountability system.

The critical importance of technology-related professional development to the effective use of technology requires the allocation of more resources both at the district and campus levels to this function. The delivery of technology-related professional development can take different forms. Districts and campuses should construct or implement professional development delivery structures that best fit their needs.

The use and integration of technology in instruction has faced a range of barriers such as lack of appropriate and sufficient technology in the classroom, limited training and support, technical and logistical problems that teachers cannot solve on their own, and the high costs of acquisition and maintenance. Greater barriers consist of the lack of understanding of the benefits that technology can offer to meet instructional goals; uncertainty whether technology can improve student performance; and lack of knowledge of how to select the most appropriate software, how to integrate it into the curriculum, and how technology can assist teachers in the administrative aspects of their jobs.

As recently as three years ago (1995), technology was primarily used as an add-on apart from the regular curriculum for basic skill exercises at the elementary level or to teach computer applications at the secondary level. Only a small percentage of classes attempted to integrate technology into learning: 19 percent of high school English classes, 6 to 7 percent of Math classes, and 3 percent of Social Studies classes in high school integrated technologies into learning. Fewer than 10 percent of new teachers and about 50 percent of experienced teachers in 1994 felt prepared to use computer applications, multimedia, and communications technologies in their teaching.

The infusion of technology into the school and classroom is dramatically changing the use of technology in instruction. Recent data (1998) have shown that in about one-half of the schools 50 percent or more of the teachers use a computer daily for planning or teaching. In 1996, nearly one-half of the 8^th grade students had teachers who used computers to teach Math and Science. Teachers used computers in 8^th grade Math primarily for drill-and-practice, learning games, and for simulations and applications. In Science, teachers used computers primarily for simulations and applications. The use of computers for simulations and applications has been associated with higher NAEP scores.

Computer use in instruction is more common in Texas schools than nationally. Recent data show that in more schools in Texas than nationally (52% versus 47%) at least one-half of the teachers use computers daily for planning and instruction.

Strategies associated with technology use and integration in Texas school districts range widely and can be divided into district-directed and teacher-directed. The strategies include the use of commercially developed technology integrated programs, use of technology certification programs, partnerships with area businesses for technology support, and incentives programs to encourage technology use and integration.

In one-third of the schools nationwide, 50 percent or more of the teachers use the Internet for instruction. Teachers in moderation use the Internet. The Internet is used for one or two hours a week by nearly one-quarter of the teachers who can access the Internet in their classroom. The Internet is used more often either as a source of information or for conducting research. Teacher Internet use for instruction is slightly lower in Texas than nationally: in 30 percent of the schools in Texas at least one-half of the teachers use the Internet for instruction.

In Texas, regular Internet use as part of classroom instruction by one-half or more of the teachers has been reported by 32 percent (elementary level) to 42 percent (high school level) of the district. Over one-half of the districts’ teachers use the Internet in classroom instruction at least once a week and 6 percent of the districts’ teachers use it daily. Students’ Internet use and frequency of use largely mirrors teachers’ use.

The infusion of technology has also increased the use of distance learning. School districts in Texas are active in building, upgrading, and expanding distance learning structures. Distance learning is used to expand the number and content of courses available to students, provide access to innovative resources that are not typically available to schools, and offer staff development. Districts and schools involved with distance learning partner with institutions of higher learning, regional education service centers, and businesses.

Texas school districts use technology for students with disabilities, ESL students, and at-risk students.

Districts use a wide range of assistive technology for students with disabilities. Some districts have assistive technology teams that assess technology needs, modify and install assistive hardware and software, and train teachers, students, and parents. Special education teachers in some districts enhance their knowledge about adaptive technologies and the latest research by accessing the Internet and participating in chat rooms with peers.

Electronic textbooks and ancillaries are becoming available in a multiplicity of media including interactive media. However, they are also becoming less accessible and usable by students with disabilities. As textbooks move away from a paper delivery medium they become more difficult to produce in braille, large print, and audiotape. Texas is again leading the way in laying the groundwork for ensuring that new electronic textbooks will be usable by all students, including those with disabilities. The Texas Education Agency is investigating the use of networks in schools and pursuing pilot projects to develop accessible textbooks. It is entirely feasible that within the next six years, all new electronic textbooks in Texas classrooms will be accessible and usable by all students.

Districts use similar strategies with ESL students and teachers. Districts use technology also with at-risk populations.