2003 Technology Project Directors' Conference

Connecting Technology Innovators, Developers, and Vendors
November 6-7, 2003
Washington, DC

Conference Proceedings on Thursday, November 6, 2003

Opening Remarks: Lou Danielson, Director, Division of Research to Practice, OSEP

Summary: OSEP is expanding the use of research-based practices in many states, districts, and schools. Lou mentioned three key areas of OSEP funding: research-OSEP has done well in rewarding the grantees who make products relevant to consumers' needs; knowledge transfer initiatives; and systemic change-the State Improvement Grant Program. In addition, accountability, including strategic performance assessment measures, grows ever more important.

Keynote Speech: Bob Regan, Senior Project Manager for Accessibility, Macromedia

Summary: Bob Regan described essential opportunities and essential challenges. Developing partnerships and connecting across expertise help to make the best products.

Opportunities: Accessibility is good business: Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act created government and university markets, and more will come with the reauthorization of IDEA '97.

Challenges: Making good tools requires sustaining partnerships and relationships. The focus on standards needs to be supplemented by the insights of researchers, best practice people, and the special education community. How effective is a tool when a student uses it? Regan says, "just because an application 'works' does not mean it works well." In addition, standards are not static, and upcoming changes in standards, whether by other nations (Japanese standards have just been released) or by Microsoft, could pose real problems for developers and vendors.

Regan also spoke of design challenges. Designers need training to develop accessibility instincts. A tool that is "wide and shallow" is good for someone with a cognitive disability; a tool that is "narrow and deep" suits a person with visual disabilities because there are not a lot of options on the top level. There are designs, however, that work for both.

Partnerships with industry, researchers, and advocacy groups are key. The National Center for Accessibility Media helped Macromedia incorporate its research into a concrete product, thereby moving from theory to practice. We, as a field, have to move the practice of accessibility into policy and product development.

Contact Bob at bregan@macromedia.com.

Breakout Sessions

Designing Accessible Websites , Bob Regan, Macromedia

Summary: Bob's overall principles of website design are accessibility, attractiveness, and thoughtfulness of design (corroborated by others).

Bob provided valuable tips about Dreamweaver. For example, spacer images can be a problem for screen readers, the structure of tables is very important, and Dreamweaver has settings and prompts that help with these issues. "Think of accessibility like spell check and grammar check. Dreamweaver prompts you to remember accessibility as you input information, like the red lines under words in spell check." He also discussed other productivity software produced by Macromedia, Contribute-a web browser with an edit button that allows users to access and edit the templates in a page as they browse-and Flash. Finally, Bob spoke of the need to convince designers that accessibility is important, to win them over as advocates on the issue.

Strategies for Working With Schools , Cheryl Temple and Nancy Icke, Department of Integrated Technology Services, Fairfax County, Virginia Public Schools

Summary: Fairfax County boasts a strong network of IT professionals throughout the school system. Partnerships include companies, researchers, and universities.

Temple and Icke offered practical advice. Developers should allow enough time to thoroughly beta test, have clear expectations of the product, track results, and assess well. Listening to practitioners and students is important-bring developers on site to listen and learn. Be aware of standards in the state, especially standards for learning tests. To encourage participation, support teachers by creating a "live library" of curriculum activities on the Web. Allow price breaks for participating classrooms. Be aware of the pressure to eliminate "extras" because of standards.

Include as many students as possible, those in general education as well as special education, in the beta test. For teachers, face validity is at least as important as the evidence of published research, and the crucial question is often, "Is this something we need ?" Assessment for continuity, however, needs data support. Data also helps make the case during an IEP for providing a tool to a student. Under the law, cost should not be a factor, but in real situations, it often is.

In the school or system, the contact person should remain constant-although it is not so important when the person is in the hierarchy. To be effective, the contact person must be a champion for the cause. Finally, the presenters urged developers to collaborate: to enable AT specialists from different areas to work together, to pair researchers with companies, and to attend national conferences to find new collaborators.

Temple and Icke described problems as well: outdated prototypes, "new" products that were duplicates of existing products, products that were outdated by the time they were released, and products whose testing was continued even though they had proven unsuccessful.

Finally, they mentioned that they have tested good products that later disappear. When developers and vendors don't connect, some valuable products never reach the market.

Update from the Reading Rockets Project, Noel Gunther and Latrice Seals, WETA

Summary: Reading Rockets, a PBS elementary literacy program, combines grassroots activities with a national TV show designed for the broadest audience. The program delivers by linking the TV show both to a multiply interactive website and to high-quality documentaries that tell the stories of people who have found solutions to their real-life struggles with literacy. www.readingrockets.org is updated daily and provides links to a wide range of supports for parents and teachers. The site includes print guides, bilingual resources, curriculum designs, in-depth training and guidance, teleconferences, individualized answers to questions submitted by the public, and a mentoring program, "First Year Teacher." The website and the TV show offer a wide range of assistance, appealing to first-time users as well as offering the depth of understanding that veteran teachers expect. Although the current focus is on young readers, the producers plan to include older readers.

Update from the Tots 'n Tech Research Institute , Pip Campbell, Thomas Jefferson University

Tots 'n Tech, a national research program, is a collaboration of Jefferson University ( Philadelphia ) and Arizona State. Pip Campbell described the research program's design and the most important findings of Tots 'n Tech's Family Pilot Survey, which examined the main barriers to effective AT use at the family, district, and state levels. Awareness and inter-agency collaboration topped the list of the most important factors in the success or failure of the use and dissemination of AT.  

Panel Presentation

Connecting Technology Innovators, Developers, and Vendors, Bob Follansbee, Educational Development Center; Ted Hasselbring, University of Kentucky; Arjan Khalsa, Intellitools, Inc.

Summary: Bob Follansbee started by describing a situation in which a developer has not received enough funding to build something fully. The options are (1) do something simple and stop there; (2) buy outside assistance; or (3) enter a partnership. Bob went on to discuss the pros and cons of partnering from the developer's point of view:

• Advantages: Commercial partners bring additional resources, have expertise and resources in production and marketing, share the risk, and enable you to keep ahead of the development cycle.

• Disadvantages: Your vision may be diluted; your timelines may be different-you may have to wait when you need a quick answer or, at another time, be pushed to deliver sooner than you want to; and your product may compete with the publisher's other products. You may run into trouble unless you carefully negotiate intellectual property issues-get a good lawyer and pay attention to what you sign.

Bob recommended these solutions: Get a memo of understanding or contract early. Know what you will and won't compromise on. Set a publication/distribution date, and agree to a plan if the deadline slips. Get right of approval for the final version.

Ted Hasselbring described the dynamics of a relationship that has two different sets of motives and needs. A project's commercial worth is often the last thing on a researcher's active mind; that is not true for the publisher. However, each side needs the other: Researchers need publishers to reach end users, and publishers need researchers to create effective, marketable work . The relationship has its strains: Publishers may want researchers to promote the product, a role researchers are unused to; in addition, researchers have a hard time handing "their babies" over to the publishers. Ted noted that universities are not good at taking products to market, although some universities have played effective and appropriate intermediary roles. Timing and luck often are critical to the success of any venture.

Arjan Khalsa, the sole vendor on the podium, pushed for better connections. He believes that OSEP should, in appropriate situations, mandate, reward, and support relationships between researchers and vendors. Peer review, he feels, can ensure fairness in situations where OSEP would be supporting for-profit activities. The relationship between the researcher and vendor, when strategically developed and carefully protected (clear expectations, good back and forth) can enable this complex process to work for the benefit of all. Ultimately, both sides have the same concern: helping students learn more effectively by using technology.

Breakout Sessions 

Accessible Textbooks from XML and the National File Format , Chuck Hitchcock, Center for Applied Special Technologies (CAST) 

Summary: Chuck demonstrated an accessible HTML textbook generated from XML and custom XSLT within a talking browser. He talked about the National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC), a research program he directs, funded by OSEP. NCAC will synthesize existing knowledge and evaluate policies affecting access to the general curriculum, bringing together curricula, teaching practices, and policy into an implementation model that bridges theory and practice. Chuck also described a major project, the National File Format (NFF), which was developed under OSEP funding by an expert panel assembled by CAST. NFF is a source file that publishers can implement so that authorized entities can produce and distribute accessible Braille and digital books. The panel delivered its final recommendations on NFF to OSEP in October 2003. For more information about CAST and the progress toward an NFF, see www.cast.org. To go straight to the NFF page, see www.cast.org/ncac/NationalFileFormat3138.cfm .  

Advances in Distance Learning and Collaboration Technologies After 9/11 , Richard Kiefer-O'Donnell, University of Montana Rural Institute 

Summary: After 9/11, people who were reluctant to travel but still wanted "the feeling of a meeting" increased their use of tools for long-distance meetings, learning, and collaboration. For example, long-distance technology enabled Richard to be at conferences in Florida and Anaheim simultaneously. Net meeting includes the following:

• video conferencing;
• electronic whiteboards-message boards on websites that allow all participants to write at the same time, as on a chalkboard;
• application and file sharing-many people can work on a document together and share their work;
• guided Web browsing, and
• streamed media.

Barriers to success include unfamiliarity with the technology; decreased bandwidth caused by high usage; increased costs of video-conferencing servers; increased use of firewalls, filters, blocking software, and pop-up blocking tools, and the fact that any meeting or interaction works better once people develop working relationships.

Some advantages of distance learning include delivering courses online, supervising or advising others at a distance, and enabling those who cannot travel to contribute and engage with a limitless set of new colleagues. In addition, the costs associated with distance learning are relatively low. 

An Examination of the Steppingstones Competition , Cindy Okolo, Michigan State University 

Summary: This discussion of Steppingstones was informative. Major observations included the following:

• Few projects go through all three phases of Steppingstones. This suggests that the program is successful in weeding out ideas that are infeasible or ineffective, but it also underscores the fact that conducting implementation research about technology is difficult. Phase 3 research is not always applicable or feasible on products developed for low-incidence populations.
• Funding levels have remained constant for the past decade while costs (personnel, indirect costs) have continued to rise. The group supported shifting funding to fewer projects at a higher level for a longer duration and OSEP's negotiating or mandating lower indirect rates with universities.
• Phase 1 funds are too low and the funding cycle too brief, given the cost and the length of time required for prototype development. Some members recommended submitting for Phase 1 and Phase 2 simultaneously. Because Phase 3 projects call for review criteria that are unlike those needed for Phases 1 and 2, new, more-specialized criteria should be developed to guide peer review and reviewers found who are experienced with implementation research. The group recommended that Phase 3 funding be variable in duration, with the option of submitting a request for three to five years of funding.
• Because more funding for AT research is unlikely in the near future, the group strongly supported shifting funding to fewer projects at a higher level for a longer duration.
• OSEP's program officers received praise for being responsive but not overbearing. Some noted that OSEP and NSF program officers play different roles and wondered whether the NSF approach might better support innovation and dissemination. Nonetheless, the group had mixed feelings about a suggestion that dissemination and marketing requirements be included in Phase 2 or 3 applications.)
• Some recommended a systematic analysis of projects and impact under Steppingstones. Repeatedly, the group mentioned weaknesses in moving research to marketable product, especially difficult in AT for low-incidence disabilities.

Intellectual Property Issues , Alan Lewine, Attorney 

Summary: Alan Lewine could not attend the conference. He did, however, provide an enlightening article on copyright and trademark issues that (1) warns of legal limitations on the use of electronic items, (2) defines the rights included in copyright, (3) informs developers and researchers of their own intellectual property rights, (4) provides guidance on fair use, (5) explains trademarks, and (6) provides help on permissions issues and digital rights management.

Conference Proceedings on Friday, November 7, 2003

Panel Presentation

Funding Outlook for Technology Innovators , Rayna Aylward, Mitsubishi Electric America Foundation; Robb Doub, New Markets Growth Fund; Tim Meyers, Updata Partners

Summary: A foundation officer and two venture capitalists discussed strategies and potential funding opportunities.

Rayna Aylward cautioned that foundations are more interested in application than pure research and development. She recommended finding a personal connection, through a colleague or an associate, into a foundation. Although foundation grants are simpler to apply for than federal awards, applications include elements unfamiliar to experienced federal grant seekers. Applicants are more likely to succeed if they include a business plan, testimonials and requests for the product, and evidence of the backing of disability groups. She noted that education, employment, and health are all good areas.

Robb Doub noted that venture capitalists are looking for value creation and operations that target a large market. He asked researchers and developers to think of other applications for their technology, citing the military as one example. He cautioned against showing too much of a product to venture capital firms, who might take an idea and move it forward with another partner. In addition, he suggested other avenues of support, especially through special needs networks: Researchers may find funding angels among families and family foundations. Robb also mentioned that Amazon and eBay have resources for entrepreneurs.

Tim Meyers urged developers to consider cross application of technology and use of existing networks, given his perspective from a large venture capital group that looks for effective teams who are ready to take a product to the next level. He urged the audience to consider those within their respective "universes": Who are the accountants and lawyers connected to you who are, in turn, well connected to potential funding sources? They can provide services and attract individual funders. Is there an option of being marketed by a larger organization? "The hardest part is getting your first five customers, then your next 20-by the time you have 100 customers, collaborators will find it much easier and cheaper to sell your product."

Some of the websites mentioned:

www.disabilityfunders.org

www.benetech.org

www.necfoundation.org