[Greater-baltimore] Annapolis Fact Sheet 2

Mon Jan 14 14:50:43 UTC 2013

Hello All:

Here is the second and last fact sheet for Annapolis. Please be ready on
Thursday.

Thanks again,

Sharon

Subject:           Nonvisual Accessibility for Online Learning in K-12
Education

Date:               January 17, 2013

________________________________________________________________________

THE PROBLEM

Education in Maryland is changing in order to take advantage of digital
online learning. Elementary and secondary schools are beginning to offer
online courses in addition to other forms of digital learning. Blind and
other print disabled students are being left out of these new opportunities
because accessibility laws are not enforced.

PROPOSED ACTION

The Maryland General Assembly should amend the Education article, Section
7-1002 Virtual Learning Opportunities, Annotated Code of Maryland, to
authorize the Maryland State Board of Education and county Boards of
Education to include accessibility review, remediation, and denial or
approval when setting reasonable fees for the costs incurred by the Maryland
State Department of Education (MSDE) or local education agencies (LEAs) for
the review and approval of online courses and services. Because the MSDE and
LEAs have little expertise in accessibility, they should be able to contract
for such services and charge vendors accordingly.

BACKGROUND

The National Federation of the Blind of Maryland, the voice of Maryland’s
blind, has been advocating for equal nonvisual access for decades. As a
result, the Maryland General Assembly has a proud history of enacting
legislation requiring nonvisual access to public information and services,
but these laws are poorly enforced. Discrimination against the blind by the
MSDE is particularly disturbing. For instance, in 2012, HB 1219 and SB 674
were enacted into law, and read in part:

SECTION 2. AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED, That the State Department of Education
shall:

(1)   ensure that online courses and services developed or reviewed and
approved include specifications that allow for access by students with
disabilities, including blindness, in accordance with the technical
standards for electronic and information technology issued under subsection
(A)(2) of Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.
794(A)(2) or any other appropriate accessibility standard; and

(2)   establish a means for ensuring that online courses and services that
fail to meet the requirements of paragraph (1) of this section are
prohibited from use.

While the MSDE claims to enforce the accessibility requirements, there is
little evidence to support this claim. The Department recently developed
regulations to implement this law (see the appendix, page 4). These
regulations, entitled 13A.04.15 Digital Learning, which the Maryland State
Board of Education is scheduled to adopt on January 22, 2013, make no
mention of accessibility.

When the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland commented on these
regulations, the MSDE informed us of its procedures and accessibility
standards that are already in effect. Unfortunately, the standards do not
adequately address the accessibility issues. There is no direct requirement
in the document entitled “Process and Procedures for Offering Student Online
Courses in Maryland Public Schools,” effective date June 26, 2012, that the
online courses must be accessible in order to be approved. While the MSDE
tool, Standards for Reviewing High School Online Courses (available at
<http://mdk12online.org/docs/StandardsforReviewingOnlineStudentCourses.pdf>
http://mdk12online.org/docs/StandardsforReviewingOnlineStudentCourses.pdf),
addresses accessibility, these standards call for judgments about
accessibility rather than objective criteria about accessibility that are to
be furnished by evaluators. In short, these standards are too vague and weak
to be effective.

The adoption of 13A.04.15 Digital Learning demonstrates the need for
stricter and more objective accessibility criteria.

The 2012 legislation recognized that the MSDE and LEAs do not have the
expertise and funds to adequately examine online courses and services to
ensure that they are appropriate for use in Maryland. To solve this problem,
the 2012 legislation also authorized the MSDE and LEAs to charge a fee to
the vendors when the vendors seek approval of online courses or services.
This funding mechanism will increase the use of online learning without
raising the cost to taxpayers.

The 2012 legislation, HB 1219 and SB 674, must be amended to require the
inclusion of accessibility review and remediation in these vendor fees.

BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION

*	Because all students have different learning styles, incorporating
accessibility features into online courses will not only benefit students
with disabilities, but also will enhance learning opportunities for all
students.
*	Section 508 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act demonstrates that, if
we are to achieve equal access in education and rehabilitation, it is
cost-effective to require such access in the procurement and design of these
products and services. This successful strategy should be thoroughly
incorporated into state and local education procedures.
*	Accessibility will be overlooked unless specific funds are
designated for its implementation. Because it is the vendors’ responsibility
to provide an accessible online course, it is only fair that accessibility
be incorporated into the fees charged by the MSDE or LEAs.
*	The MSDE and LEAs should not be expected to have expertise in
accessibility. By contracting the accessibility review and remediation to an
expert, errors and oversights may be avoided.

CONCLUSION

Students who are blind or who have other print disabilities should have the
same right to online learning as their nondisabled peers. Accessibility
features in online courses are technically achievable if vendors are
required to include such features in their online courses and products. The
state of Maryland must not only enact legislation to require access, but
must vigorously enforce this legislation. Providing funding through vendor
fees as suggested by the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland is a
reasonable method to achieve this goal. Because Maryland is just beginning
to move toward greater use of online learning, it is crucial to address
accessibility now and to enact the suggested legislation.

APPENDIX

Title 13A
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

Subtitle 04 SPECIFIC SUBJECTS

13A.04.15 Digital Learning

Authority: Education Article, §§2-205 and 7-1002, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Proposed Action

[12-326-P]

The Maryland State Board of Education proposes to adopt new Regulations
.01—.05 under a new chapter, COMAR 13A.04.15 Digital Learning. These
regulations replace the emergency regulations 13A.03.02.02 and .05 published
on August 24, 2012. 

This action was considered at the September 25, 2012, meeting of the
Maryland State Board of Education. 

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this action is to provide additional course opportunities for
students.

Comparison to Federal Standards

There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.

Estimate of Economic Impact

I. Summary of Economic Impact. The proposed regulation will have a fiscal
impact on MSDE’s ability to hire content expert educators and trained
reviewers to evaluate student online courses. It will also impact MSDE’s
ability to provide professional development for district educators as it
relates to the review and evaluation of online courses. 

Revenue (R+/R-)

II. Types of Economic Impact.

Expenditure (E+/E-)

Magnitude

  _____  

A. On issuing agency:

(E+)

$14,000

B. On other State agencies:

NONE

C. On local governments:

NONE

Benefit (+)
Cost (-)

Magnitude

  _____  

D. On regulated industries or trade groups:

NONE

E. On other industries or trade groups:

NONE

F. Direct and indirect effects on public:

NONE

III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.)

A. S.B. 674, Acts of 2012, states that the State Board may set reasonable
fees for reviewing and processing approvals for online courses and services.
Each course review requires several content expert educators and a trained
reviewer. It is anticipated that a minimum of ten courses will be reviewed
each year. The Department may delegate the authority to review and approve
online courses to a County board. Professional development provided by MSDE
that is related to the review process is required to expand each district’s
capacity to review and approve courses.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses

The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.

Impact on Individuals with Disabilities

The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.

Opportunity for Public Comment

Comments may be sent to Valerie Emrich, Director of Instructional
Technology, Maryland State Department of Education, 200 West Baltimore
Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, or call 410-767-0382 (TTY 410-333-6442),
or email to  <mailto:vemrich at msde.state.md.us> vemrich at msde.state.md.us, or
fax to 410-333-2128. Comments will be accepted through January 2, 2013. A
public hearing has not been scheduled.

Open Meeting

Final action on the proposal will be considered by the Maryland State Board
of Education during a public meeting to be held on January 22, 2013, at 9
a.m., at 200 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201. 

.01 Purpose. 

Digital learning encompasses a wide spectrum of tools and practices that
support teaching and learning for students and educators. This chapter
defines online and blended courses and establishes requirements for such
courses to be offered to students for credit. Processes for the approval of
online credit bearing student courses and professional development courses
are addressed. These processes include the setting of a vendor fee structure
for reviewing and approving courses.

.02 Definitions. 

A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meaning indicated. 

B. Terms Defined.

(1) “Blended course” means one in which less than 20 percent of the
instruction is conducted online. Such a course is also referred to as a
“hybrid course.”

(2) “Digital learning” means any instructional practice that effectively
uses Internet-related technology to strengthen the student and/or educator
learning experience. 

(3) “Online course” means an Internet-based course in which 80 percent or
more of the instruction is conducted online, the teacher and student are
separated by distance or time or both, and two-way communication is required
between teacher and student.

(4) “Review” means an analysis of a student or professional development
online course by a panel of experts designated by the Department to
determine whether the course shall be recommended for approval. 

(5) “Vendor” means a person or organization that markets online courses or
contracted online student seats in such courses. 

.03 Approval Requirements.

A. Credit-bearing online courses provided to students by a local education
agency (LEA) are subject to Department approval.

B. Noncredit-bearing courses and blended courses provided to students by a
local education agency do not require Department approval. 

C. All online professional development courses offered by vendors to local
education agencies are subject to Department approval.

.04 Review and Approval Procedures. 

A. There are three options for obtaining review and approval of
credit-bearing online courses and professional development courses.

B. Options for Obtaining Review and Approval.

(1) Departmental Review and Approval.

(a) A vendor may request a Department review of an online credit-bearing
course or professional development course.

(b) Department review shall be conducted by a panel of at least three
content experts, one of whom shall be a reviewer trained to conduct such
reviews.

(c) A vendor seeking Department approval of an online or professional
development course shall pay a nonrefundable fixed fee of $1,400 to the
Department to cover the cost of a review.

(d) The Department reserves the right to review previously approved courses
every 3 years.

(e) The Department reserves the right to determine which courses will be
reviewed based on student and local education agency need.

(2) Local Education Agency Review and Approval Process.

(a) A vendor may request an LEA review of an online credit-bearing course or
professional development course.

(b) The LEA review shall be conducted by a panel of at least three content
experts, one of whom must be a reviewer trained to conduct such reviews as
designated by the Department.

(c) An LEA may establish a reasonable fee to cover the cost of a review.

(d) After conducting the review, the LEA shall submit its review and
recommendation for approval to the Department for final approval.

(e) To cover the cost of the final review, the LEA shall submit to the
Department 15 percent of the fee it collected from the vendor.

(f) The LEA reserves the right to determine which courses will be reviewed
based on student need.

(3) MSDE-Approved Reviewing Program.

(a) A vendor may request an MSDE-Approved Reviewing Program review of an
online credit-bearing course or a professional development course.

(b) After the review is completed, the MSDE-Approved Reviewing Program shall
submit the review documentation to MSDE.

(c) The vendor shall pay a fee of $360 to the Department to cover the cost
of the final review. 

.05 Fee Increase.

Upon review and approval by the State Board, in FY 2016 and any subsequent
year thereafter, the Department may increase the vendor fees set forth in
this Regulation by no more than 20 percent per annum. If the Department
increases the fee, it shall publish such increase on its website at
<http://marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE>
http://marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE. 