This chapter describes the challenges in implementing science instruction in juvenile corrections settings and present a tablet-based model for meeting the complex challenges. Project RAISE is a Project-based Inquiry Science (PBIS) curriculum designed in the Universal Design for Learning framework. It is developed in a tablet platform, and is designed to meet the unique needs of incarcerated learners. The chapter describes the juvenile justice educational setting, the characteristics of the classrooms, the learners, and the teachers. It provides an overview of one iBook that has been co-designed and tested with incarcerated learners.
There is a dearth of research examining science instruction in juvenile corrections settings. However, the limited evidence of education in these settings reveals substandard instructional practices and low percentage of highly qualified teachers (Krezmien, 2008). In juvenile justice education, even the potential for high-quality science instruction is limited by a general overreliance on independent worksheet completion, the consequential lack of content-specific skill instruction, and the delimited ability of educators working outside their subject area to support student science learning. Furthermore, most juvenile corrections settings are operated from a safety and security perspective that does not allow laboratory opportunities or the use of equipment or materials for classroom experiments. Finally, because the students are confined in a secure placement because of infractions of the law, students cannot leave the facility to do field based experiments that would be particularly powerful in Biological Science classes. In this chapter, we illustrate how tablet-based technology can be utilized to circumvent some of these issues and develop content knowledge, inquiry skills, and increased interest and engagement in science among a group of incarcerated youth.
The work described in this chapter is part of a National Science Foundation (NSF) funded research project (DRL-1418152) titled Reclaiming Access to Inquiry-based Science Education (RAISE) for Incarcerated Students: An Investigation of Project-Based Inquiry Science within a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Framework in Juvenile Corrections Settings. Project RAISE is a design and development project that focuses on developing, implementing and researching a Project-Based Inquiry Science (PBIS) curriculum within a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework. We worked collaboratively with the administrators, teachers, and students in a juvenile justice agency in all stages of the curriculum development, an approach that has been identified as a strategy for creating knowledge that is more relevant to classroom practice than the knowledge generated by research institutes (Enthoven & de Bruijn, 2010). The ongoing feedback from the critical stakeholders in our juvenile justice settings was used to revise all piloted components of the curriculum and thus informed the development of all instructional components.
The Project RAISE curriculum is delivered digitally through a tablet platform that replaces textbooks, workbooks, worksheets, and paper assessments, while at the same time integrating text-based content with multiple media (e.g., pictures, videos, animations, and interactive diagrams). The curriculum is tailored to the full range of learning needs in a diverse population of learners, provides real-time feedback to students and teachers, and enables students to participate in virtual inquiry experiences unavailable in typical juvenile corrections settings. Furthermore, our curriculum engages incarcerated youth in scientific practices that support scientific thinking, which is critical to preparing students with the 21st century skills that enhance their college and career readiness as outlined by the Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills (NRC, 2012). Educators have a duty to prepare students incarcerated in juvenile justice settings to become scientific thinkers. The scientific mindset aligns with the knowledge and skills necessary to integrate thoughtfully back into society and to become active, critical and engaged members of a rapidly transforming world.
In this chapter, we will show science education researchers and policy makers and other professionals how to utilize technology while forming partnerships with stakeholders with the ultimate aim of developing student inquiry skills and an engagement in science, even in a setting as constrained as juvenile corrections. Through a technology-based curriculum, we engaged incarcerated students in interactive instructional experiences that delivered complex science content, all within a UDL framework that addresses the numerous academic and behavioral barriers typical of marginalized incarcerated learners. Furthermore, we outline how we employed a unique co-development model to develop the curriculum in ways that enlisted students as authentic collaborators and sources of expertise, thus giving creative control and voice to this under examined population of learners.
The information we provide in this chapter can support policy makers to reform the educational system in juvenile justice settings to better support and engage difficult to serve learners. Science education researchers can use the model we describe to engage in further research to better understand relationships between digital technology, scientific literacy, and incarcerated students. For educators, engaging incarcerated students in science education that promotes inquiry skills and scientific thinking is critical to preparing these youth with skills necessary for the 21st Century workforce. This is paramount in preparing them to integrate back into society and to contribute to the development of society in general and the enhancement of their community in particular.
To overcome the fundamental problems confronting educators in juvenile justice settings, our NSF grant team developed a project-based inquiry science (PBIS) curriculum based on the principles of universal design for learning (UDL) and utilizing a mobile technology platform. This chapter will provide educators, science teachers, academicians, researchers, school administrations, and technology developers with an understanding of the theoretical and practical aspects of our curriculum. We will include examples of our curriculum and will discuss the anticipated impact that the curriculum will have on incarcerated learners.
This chapter will:
Student Demographics
Incarcerated learners are disproportionately low-income students of color with limited educational opportunities (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010; Krezmien, Leone, & Achilles, 2006). Many of these students also have disabilities that impact their education (Bullock & McArthur, 1994; Krezmien, Mulcahy, Travers, Wilson, & Wells, 2013; Quinn, Rutherford, Leone, Osher, & Poirier, 2005). Incarcerated learners do not typically possess a basic understanding of science and scientific concepts (Anderman, Greisinger, & Westerfield, 1998) and they usually lack the inquiry skills necessary to support scientific thinking (Brigham, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 2011; Therrien, Taylor, Watt, & Kaldenberg, 2013). These factors frequently prevent incarcerated students from passing high-stakes tests in science and obtaining a high school diploma. Consequently, students in juvenile corrections facilities are unable to pursue a post-secondary degree in the STEM fields and are ill-equipped to participate in the 21st Century workforce. The work described in this chapter was conducted in partnership with the juvenile corrections education provider in one state. The youth in the system were from impoverished urban communities. Students ranged from 14 to 18 years old, in the 9th through 12th grades, and almost all were students were students of color. Very few of the youth had passed the State’s Biology examination required to earn a high school diploma.
Learner Characteristics
Most incarcerated learners have a history of trauma and face a host of academic barriers to learning science content. Recorded rates of disability classification amongst students in juvenile corrections are about three to four times that reported in public schools, with the rate of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders being about six times higher (Gagnon & Barber, 2010). Substantial percentages of the students had emotional/behavioral disorders (EBD) and learning disabilities (LD), with high numbers of students identified as having ADHD (Quinn et al., 2005; Gagnon, Barber, Van Loan, & Leone, 2009; Krezmien, Mulcahy, & Leone, 2008). High school students with ED and LD have been found to display academic deficits of comparable magnitude, placing them far below grade level in reading and mathematics (Lane, Carter, Pierson & Glaeser, 2006). Among this group, students with reading disabilities and dyslexia are typical (Krezmien et al., 2013; Krezmien et al., 2008). These learners demonstrate limited phonological awareness (facility discerning and manipulating sounds in oral language and relating them to written language), poor decoding skills, (converting letters into sounds) and deficient orthographic skills (spelling and conventions of written language). These foundational reading competencies are critical for reading fluency, since without accuracy and automaticity, reading is a laborious and slow process, a cognitive load that impedes comprehension of text. Of course, for some students with disabilities, “reading to learn” or engaging in other typical instructional activities across the content areas may be challenging for other reasons. Depending on how tasks are delivered and structured, students with disabilities may encounter barriers to learning that stem from executive functioning issues related to prioritizing and organizing information, or challenges related to attentional management or memory processing. The high rates of special education and associated behavioral health needs create numerous issues for incarcerated learners and their teachers. They often require intensive behavioral and therapeutic supports consistent with those in residential treatment schools.
Many adjudicated students have also not gone to school for several years, and have experienced substantial numbers of disciplinary problems which resulted in removal from class, suspensions from school, or expulsion (Gagnon, Murphy, Steinberg, Gaddis, & Crockett, 2013). Incarcerated youth in both general and special education are often reading several years below their grade level or more than one standard deviation below the normative sample mean as measured by standardized reading assessments (Krezmien et al., 2008; Krezmien et al., 2013; Houchins, Jolivette, Krezmien & Baltodano, 2008; Baltodano, Harris & Rutherford, 2005). They also are substantially behind in mathematics (Mulcahy, Krezmien & Travers, 2015; Gagnon & Barber, 2010; Maccini, Gagnon, Mulcahy, & Leone, 2006). Research indicates that about half of this population of learners can be expected to have co-occurring mental health and behavioral disorders, as well as substance use disorders (Mulcahy & Krezmien, 2009; Gagnon & Barber, 2010). These issues create numerous challenges in science classes. Specifically, students are typically unable to read the complex science texts, lack the necessary vocabulary to comprehend the science content, and lack the basic math skills necessary to participate meaningfully in science classes, especially the with the new Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).
STEM Learning Characteristics
The previously described learning deficits are associated with students who are ill prepared to participate in most science curricula, and cannot typically succeed in a science class that requires the conceptual understanding and procedural skills and abilities required for individuals to address relevant personal, social, and global issues (Bybee, 2010). According to Bybee (2010), STEM literacy involves the integration of STEM disciplines as four interrelated and complementary components. These include:
Achieving these standards is difficult even for knowledgeable and skilled learners. They are often extremely difficult for disadvantaged learners and learners with disabilities -- the students who predominate the juvenile justice settings. These students frequently have limited prior knowledge, are reluctant to pose questions, are less likely to have a plan for solving problems, struggle to implement teacher recommendations, have difficulties with inductive and deductive reasoning, and seldom transfer knowledge to other contexts (Dalton, Morocco, Tivnan, & Mead, 1997). Additionally, incarcerated learners often have fundamental misconceptions about scientific phenomenon, which leads to further struggles during the inquiry process (Jacobson & Archodidou, 2000). Our PBIS-UDL Biology model was designed to address these learning barriers intervention and to provide incarcerated learners with the supports necessary to fully participate in science learning.
Characteristics of Juvenile Justice Facilities
Juvenile corrections education is complex. The types of facilities vary across regions, districts, and states. They differ by purpose. Some facilities are detention programs that hold students awaiting adjudication. Detention facilities are generally short-term placements, although some youth have been in detention settings for as long as a year or more. Other facilities are commitment facilities, which hold youth who have been adjudicated to a locked facility for a determinate or indeterminate amount of time. Some facilities are large, housing several hundred youth. Other facilities are small, serving as few as one student as a time. Some facilities are local, some are regional, and some are statewide. Some facilities run like adult prisons, while other run like residential treatment programs. Finally, some are publically operated, while others are privately operated by providers with and without experience in juvenile justice education.
All students are mandated to participate in a full day educational programs in compliance with state and federal requirements. The education programs vary. Some educational programs have extensive vocational and technical programs, while other have no vocational opportunities. Some programs focus on a high school diploma credit based schools approach, while many focus on alternative education certificate like GED or HiSET. Most facilities place youth into educational programs for criminogenic purposes, so classrooms are typically comprised of students of varying ages, grades, abilities, skills, and course needs. For instance, science class might consist of students from 14 to 18 years of age, from 9th grade to 12th grade, and in classes ranging from 8th grade mathematics to trigonometry. The students may have the reading skills of a 4th or 5th grade student, while others read on grade level. Finally, most classrooms will have a substantial number of students with disabilities.
Researchers have documented concerns about appropriate provision of basic educational materials and practices in secure care for over thirty years. Educational services tend to be limited by issues of physical space, uninterrupted and sufficient instructional time, scheduling conflicts, as well as behavior-related interruptions and the associated punitive responses, which can include the isolation and segregation of youth (Gagnon & Barber, 2010; Mulcahy, Krezmien, Leone, Houchins & Baltodano, 2008). Students in these facilities leave and arrive at different times, and can be very mobile across sites within the system (Leone, Krezmien, Mason & Meisel, 2005). Instruction in these facilities is often worksheet-based (Coffey & Gemignani, 1994, as cited in Leone & Weinberg, 2012; Tannis, 2014). Furthermore, the lack of rigorous applied instructional intervention studies in juvenile corrections facilities and/or with students with EBD limits the quality of educational programming even in systems that attempt to prioritize it (Mulcahy et al., 2015; Krezmien & Mulcahy, 2008). Inadequately completed, lapsed, or missing school records that might have guided the provision of Free and Appropriate Public Education (IDEA, 2004) in correctional facilities is also a common barrier to adequate instruction (Krezmien, et al., 2013; Leone & Weinberg, 2012). Special education in juvenile corrections can potentially provide academic instruction and supports as well as access to behavioral and mental health services, but identification of special needs in these settings can be impeded by student histories of truancy and the aforementioned paperwork problems (Krezmien et al., 2008). Teachers in these facilities are often isolated and have limited access to training and professional development specific to their needs (Gagnon & Barber, 2014; Tannis, 2014). Because facilities are designed with safety and behavior modification as a priority over education, controlling behavior is often a prerequisite to learning that limits the materials teachers can employ in their classes and the research that can be effectively carried out in these facilities (Mulcahy et al., 2008; Houchins, et al., 2008).
Characteristics of Science Classroom Environments
Most science classrooms in juvenile corrections schools are small and lack the materials and equipment typical of a high school science class. Science classes are typically devoid of any equipment that could be used as a weapon, like microscopes, chemistry glassware, burners, and chemical supplies, petri dishes, specimen containers and biological specimens. The classrooms in most facilities are multi-purpose and not specifically dedicated to a single subject, and most are small, with limited space to move around and engage in differentiated activities. Most classrooms have a computer for the teacher only, though many have interactive whiteboards. The partnering classroom for Project RAISE was typical of juvenile corrections settings.
The classrooms in the facilities are generally small. The rooms usually have a small white board, an LCD projector, a few desks for students, an additional chair for the custodial/security staff, and a chair and desk for the teacher. Science class lasted for 45 minutes and usually included 4-5 students. The teacher typically used a textbook and worksheets, and the students were instructed to read the textbook and answer the questions in the worksheets. The teacher responded to student questions and helped them to complete the worksheets as needed. During class, it was a common occurrence for custody staff to call students out of the classroom to attend to various issues.
Characteristics of Teachers
There is limited research on the characteristics and qualities of teachers in juvenile corrections settings. Teachers in juvenile corrections settings are often required to teach in subjects outside of their content area (Gagnon et al., 2009). Teachers are sometimes second career teachers. Sometimes teachers are not licensed teachers, and many are on waivers as they pursue a teaching license. Facilities compete for a generally limited pool of certified science teachers, who are in high demand and can get preferred teaching jobs in public schools. The partner science teacher for Project RAISE was a licensed veteran teacher certified to teach high school mathematics. The teacher was not licensed to teach science. The teacher had 28 years of teaching experience in juvenile detention facilities, and had taught mathematics and science for the last eight years.
Technology in Facilities
Juvenile justice educators typically face three major challenges with respect to technology. First, most juvenile corrections facilities lack the necessary fiscal and structural resources necessary to employ technology in the classroom. For instance, educators typically lack an instructional budget to purchase computers and interactive whiteboards. Additionally, facilities often lack the technological infrastructure to install technology or the technical support to maintain the technology. Second, juvenile justice educators that do have access to technology typically lack the intensive training, support, and ongoing professional development necessary to successfully employ the technology to promote engagement and learning. So, interactive whiteboards are often only used as a typical whiteboard. Interactive software is not adequately utilized because the teachers lack resources to support student use. Third, internet access is typically not available for student use. Because juvenile corrections settings are heavily focused on safety and security, security measures often lock Internet access. In facilities that allow instructional use of the Internet, security breaches typically result in system-wide shutdowns of the Internet on both a temporary and permanent basis. As a result, science teachers in juvenile justice schools typically lack access to the conventional online resources available in public schools or cannot consistently plan lessons around the utilization of online resources even when the facility has internet access. Consequently, teachers often revert to the use of worksheets and independent textbook reading as the primary means of science instruction.
We designed Project RAISE to address the challenges with providing rigorous science education in juvenile corrections settings. Project RAISE addressed the four major challenges of effective science instruction in juvenile corrections settings: (1) the science learning profile of incarcerated students, (2) the dearth of effective inquiry-based science instruction, (3) the limitations of the classroom and facilities environments, and (4) the inconsistency with technology hardware and software consistency and support. The Project RAISE model involved a Project Based Inquiry Science (PBIS) instructional design based upon the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework and delivered through a standalone tablet-based platform. We will describe the components of the model in the following sections, and will provide initial findings about student interest and engagement in science using the model. We will discuss PBIS, UDL, and Technology separately, but we will include examples from one of our tablet-based PBIS-UDL lessons to show how these frameworks function in concert to respond to student needs. The lesson addresses the 10% rule, a critical concept in ecology that is also part of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013). In the 10% Rule iBook, students learn how energy is transferred in an ecosystem, and that in any ecosystem, about 10% of the energy is transferred from one trophic level to the next. Students are required to understand the mathematical model in the context of an oceanic ecosystem, as well as to calculate multistep math problems involving the transfer of energy. The RAISE 10% Rule iBook addresses parts of two NGSS standards:
The 10% Rule lesson incorporates Project Based Inquiry Science and Universal Design for Learning delivered in a tablet-based e-book.
Student Learning Goals
Despite the numerous challenges around science education in juvenile corrections, we adopted the NGSS learning goals for Project RAISE. We did not modify or adapt the learning goals of the NGSS in any way. Rather, we employed the use of PBIS, UDL, and technology to modify the content, delivery, and supports in a manner that would allow incarcerated students to meet the standards set by the NGSS. Incarcerated students can meet rigorous learning goals if the instruction is designed in a manner that supports all learners and engages students in authentic and meaningful ways.
Technology and Usability
Project RAISE adopted tablet-based technology that allowed us to overcome the numerous individual and structural barriers to learning in juvenile corrections settings. Internet access is inconsistent in juvenile corrections settings, so we have developed a curriculum that functions offline, without the use of any online supports. We have adopted the Apple iPad because it provides a single device per student at a relatively low cost, does not require the use of a keyboard, allows for split screens so that students to use multiple tools simultaneously, and accepts a variety of inputs including: a touch screen interface, drag and drop tasks, typed notes and responses, handwritten responses using a finger or a stylus, audio recording, and visual recording through pictures and video. The incarcerated learners involved in our project have responded positively to the use of the iPad tablets. They reported (1) the touch screen is easy to use, (2) the interactive tools are engaging and useful, (3) the opportunity to write, type, speak, or video are helpful, (4) and the ability to access information via video, images, multimedia, and text make information more engaging and accessible.
Project-Based Inquiry Science
The 10% Rule iBook utilizes the principles of Project Based Inquiry Science by giving students opportunities to engage in content organized by active investigations to answer driving questions (Marx, Blumenfeld, Krajcik, & Soloway, 1997) and an extended process of responding to questions, problems, or challenges (Buck Institute for Education, 2013). The process requires students to think critically as they generate questions, generate hypotheses, revise hypotheses, collect data, evaluate findings, communicate, and collaborate with peers. Rather than being the source of instruction, the teacher serves as a facilitator (Barron & Darling-Hammond, 2008) by structuring tasks that build knowledge, promoting utilization of social skills, maximizing engagement of all students, and conducting ongoing assessment of student performance. Consequently, students who engage in Project Based Learning acquire a deep understanding of concepts, develop a lifelong interest in learning, learn to use technology, acquire skills vital to careers and employment, and become increasingly motivated to solve problems of the 21-century (Buck Institute for Education, 2013).
While project-based learning has the potential to enhance students’ use of critical thinking skills as they apply knowledge and skills to real-world problems, there are formidable barriers that must be overcome when exposing incarcerated youth to this type of learning. First, the secure nature of the facilities prevents students from experiencing the natural world and conducting field-based science activities. Second, within the classrooms, security protocols restrict the use of any living organisms, glassware, and microscopes within the classroom, and even prohibit the use of virtual simulations that require the internet. Consequently, students cannot participate in any typical scientific hands-on laboratory experiences. Third, many project-based learning protocols require teachers to be skillful with technology and to understand its use as a tool to enhance learning and thinking (Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, Marx & Soloway, 2000). To overcome these barriers, we developed a final Universal Design for Learning Project-Based Inquiry Science (UDL-PBIS) curriculum that includes virtual learning environments, virtual laboratories, and digital scaffolds and supports that promote scientific learning.
The 10% Rule iBook is built within a PBIS framework in multiple ways. First, the 10% Rule iBook is part of an overarching four-week unit project focused on the human impact on the environment. In that project, students will create Identity Maps—visual representations of their own identity and their place in the ecological world. Over the course of the unit, students revise the Identity Maps by incorporating information learned during the lessons into their Map. The Identity Maps are completed using various apps on the iBooks that allow students to create visual art projects (e.g., self-portraits with symbolic references), multimedia projects (e.g., audio-video presentations), or audio projects such as music or spoken word. The Identity Map unit project addresses multiple aspects of PBIS, including (1) sustained inquiry, (2) student voice and choice, (3) opportunities for reflection on the content and on their individual projects, (4) continuous opportunities to critique and revise their identity molecule projects, and (5) a publicly presented product that allows students to share and explain their project to facility personnel, managerial personnel, members of the community, and parents (Buck Institute for Education, 2013). Additionally, the project is authentic and specific to the unique perspectives of the incarcerated learner, allowing each student to explore the conceptual and content knowledge of the unit within the context of their own experiences and perspectives (Buck Institute for Education, 2013).
Finally, the 10% Rule iBook incorporates aspects of PBIS into the discrete components of the lesson. For instance, the 10% Rule is introduced to the students through a short video that shows a single ocean ecosystem and that describes the energy relationships between algae, krill, mackerel, seal, and a great white shark in an aquatic ecosystem. The video is accompanied by a challenging driving question (Buck Institute for Education, 2013), “Where is most of the energy in an energy pyramid?” The students are engaged in a discussion and independent reporting activity about the video using one of the Visible Thinking routines from Harvard’s Project Zero, known as “See, Think, Wonder.” This routine encourages students to explore the concept of energy and energy transfer in a single ecosystem by listing observations (in this case, from the video), using their observations as justifications for thoughts, and extending these insights into questions. The students then move on to an exploration of a model of the energy pyramid, with embedded video-based supports that teach students how the energy pyramid model explains the transfer of energy they observed in the video. Then the students engage with an interactive energy pyramid tool (See Figure 1) that allows the students to explore the 10% rule through manipulation of the organisms and energy in the ocean ecosystem from the video.
| Figure 1. Interactive energy pyramid |
|---|
|
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
The energy pyramid tool in Figure 1 allows students to add or subtract energy to trophic level 1 of the pyramid by clicking on the buttons at the bottom. As they add energy, images of the representative organisms (algae, krill, mackerel, seal, shark) appear in the respective trophic level, and the energy needed at that trophic level appears in the text boxes next to the images in each respective level. The energy pyramid tool is accompanied by a series of multiple choice and open-response questions. The multiple choice questions provide instantaneous feedback to students. For instance, if a student chose the incorrect choice “C”, the tool will provide them with feedback specific to the errors in choice “C”, will give them some feedback to help them rethink the answer, and give them another opportunity to respond to the question. The students can answer using by a whiteboard tool to do longhand computations, using a calculator, and/or using the interactive pyramid tool, all within the lesson’s interface. After the students complete the questions, the students are asked to revisit the answer they developed for the driving question, “Where is most of the energy in an energy pyramid?” The question appears in the iBook and their original response is shown in the integrated whiteboard tool. Students discuss what they learned through the interactive tool, and make changes to their response to the driving question or add to it by reflecting on what they have learned. The interactive aspects of the activities, the utilization of video representations of ecosystems that the students cannot visit, and the responsive multiple-choice questions which provide instantaneous feedback allow the students to participate in a rich and meaningful experience despite the restrictions of the environment. The students then have the opportunity to watch part of a video about human impact on the environment, and to incorporate what they have learned in this lesson into their identity molecule. These PBIS activities allow the students to develop a personal connection to the content, which can typically feel abstract or esoteric.
Universal Design for Learning
Because the students face substantial and complex issues that impede learning, we designed all Project RAISE lessons within the Universal Design for Learning framework (UDL). UDL is an educational design framework for the development of curriculum and instruction that expects and accounts for learner variability (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014). UDL views human variability as a natural phenomenon and considers differences to be the norm. The significance of this view lies in its implications for the initial design of learning experiences: curricula can be developed with flexible options and supports that anticipate variations in how learners will perceive, act on, and internalize information in the environment. UDL has three guiding principles, corresponding to three neural networks, that promote options in learning: (1) multiple means of representation (corresponding to the recognition network, or the “what” of learning); (2) multiple means of student action and expression (corresponding to the strategic network, or the “how” of learning); and (3) multiple means of student engagement (corresponding to the affective network, or the “why” of learning) (Rose & Meyer, 2002). UDL further posits that the use of digital technology can help facilitate the development of flexible curricula by creating dynamic learning opportunities for students and teachers (Meyer & Rose, 2005). The 10% Rule lesson has numerous examples that show how options for perception (representation), action and expression, and engagement were established or enhanced through the integration of the three guiding principles into the curricular design.
UDL Principle I: Multiple Means of Representation
There are multiple ways that Project RAISE has incorporated multiple means of representation and thus options for comprehension into the lesson. First, we aligned the textbook text with the NGSS, and eliminated any text that was not directly related to the standards. This resulted in a reduction of about 80% of the text, thereby reducing the number of words and sentences. Additionally, we re-authored the text so that non-essential (not directly linked to science knowledge or concepts) complex multisyllabic words were eliminated and sentences were written as short declarative sentences. Finally, we limited the amount of text per page of the e-book to reduce the perceptual load, and added audio and audiovisual versions of the text as alternative representations of the same information. For example, our final ocean ecosystem video is accompanied by a standards-aligned oral narration, and has the option for subtitles. The changes to the text and the associated media dramatically increased accessibility for students with below grade level reading skills, and substantially decreased the literacy barriers for students with learning disabilities and dyslexia. Instead of dedicating substantial time and effort trying to decode and understand complex text, students spend time engaged in a multimedia experience that delivers the content in multiple ways and in a straightforward design.
| Figure 2. UDL representations of the energy pyramid |
|---|
 |
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
Figure 2 also shows multiple ways that multiple means of representation are integrated into a single interactive tool. Second, each level is differentiated by text-based titles, color, shading patterns, space between each level, and images of the organisms in each level drawn from the original video. Additionally, the images of the organisms are interactive: students can touch an image to replay the section of the video that is related just to that organism in the video. Finally, when a student taps on a specific level, the level is highlighted as shown separately in the right hand pyramid in Figure 2. These features guide information processing through multiple means, and also allow students to experience multiple representations of the same concepts in a single interactive tool. As with the multiple representations of the text, the broadened representations of the energy pyramid provide more entry-points into the content. The options to customize the display of information help individualize the content to the learner, and thus decrease the amount of time and effort that might be spent trying to understand a single fixed model, while increasing the amount of time on learning.
UDL Principle II: Multiple Means of Expression
The 10% Rule iBook also provides multiple means of expression, which allows students to convey their knowledge, ideas, and understanding in multiple ways. For example, the 10% Rule iBook has multiple types of questions and multiple types of response systems. Figure 3 displays two different interactive types of questions. The right side shows a drag and drop tool that allows students to demonstrate their knowledge about the energy chain by dragging images into the chain itself. The images are the same images used in the video and in the energy pyramid diagram, and the chain is color coded to match the pyramid, to maximize transfer and generalization throughout the iBook. Additionally, students can use the “check answer” feature to self-monitor their understanding. The 10% iBook also utilizes an app-based tool that allows students to answer open-ended questions by typing, writing with their fingers or a stylus, or drawing. The tool also includes images and figures from the iBook, such as the energy pyramid in Figure 2, which allows the students to make notes or annotations next to or over the figures that they encounter in the iBook. Additionally, students can use the tool to record audio or video of themselves explaining answers to questions. These various methods of response provide students with multiple ways to communicate their knowledge. Immediate feedback supports their expressive strategy development. Data storage systems, built-in to the iBook, prevent work from being lost or not turned in, a behavior typical of students with LD or ADHD. These options for action and expression also allow students to convey their thoughts, knowledge, and ideas in more individualized ways. These tools increase the amount of time and effort students can dedicate to higher-order thinking tasks like answering questions, and allows the teachers to have multiple data sources by which to evaluate student achievement.
| Figure 3. Drag and drop tool and multiple choice tool |
|---|
 |
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
Additionally, the 10% Rule iBook includes tools and supports that help students to answer conceptual and mathematical questions even if they have limited or no computational skills, which is typical of many of the students in juvenile corrections settings. The supports for expression and executive functioning are clear in the math questions related to the 10% rule. First, the iBook has an embedded video that provides students with on-demand support for how to calculate 10% of a number, and the video contextualizes this instruction by using organisms from the lesson. Second, the iBook contains a calculator app that students can use if they struggle with hand and/or mental calculations. Third, Figure 4 shows how the energy in the 10% model can be represented in multiple ways that can help a student to better express their understanding of the 10% rule. Figure 4 shows the kilocalories available at each level of the energy pyramid in a graphic representation. The graphic representation of kilocalories as boxes (like math manipulative blocks) helps students to understand the magnitude of the energy at each level. Furthermore, the arrangement of the energy boxes in the pyramid orientation with the same color coding and images of the representative organisms from each trophic level maintains a pattern of representation that can serve as a scaffold for students to understand where most of the energy is found in an energy pyramid, the driving question of the lesson. The students can use their understanding of the graphic representation to explain their understanding of the 10% rule, and can use the figure to answer multiple choice and open-ended questions about the 10% rule.
| Figure 4. Graphic Representation of kilocalories in an energy pyramid |
|---|
 |
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
Figure 5. shows an example of one of the whiteboard features used to answer the driving question, “Where is most of the energy in an energy pyramid.” The student whose work is shown in Figure 5. used the typing tool to write, revisit, and revise his response to the driving question. In comparison to Figure 1, Figure 5 shows how the student’s understanding of the energy pyramid developed over the course of the lesson, and also shows that the student was able refine his understanding by reading some of the material available in the 10% Rule iBook. Figure 5 also shows how the tool allows the student to reply in multiple ways, through typing, writing, drawing tools, or recording tools (located in the bottom bar).
| Figure 5. Whiteboard tool with an example of a student response to the driving question |
|---|
 |
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
Finally, Figure 1 shows the interactive energy pyramid that allows students to explore how the 10% rule functions. However, this interactive model can also be used as a calculation tool, allowing students to change the numbers of representative organisms in the first trophic level, observe the changes in the representative organisms in higher levels, and use the energy totals in the number boxes at the top to determine how much energy is at each level. By adding or subtracting algae in the model, students can determine how much energy is used at each subsequent trophic level. So, if a student struggles with computation and even struggles with the use of a calculator, the student can use the interactive energy pyramid tool to answer math questions.
UDL Principle III: Multiple Means of Engagement
The entire Project RAISE curriculum is designed with attention to providing multiple means of engagement throughout all activities. The UDL framework considers self-regulation, effort and persistence, and interest as broad components of engagement. Project RAISE lessons are designed to address these aspects of engagement. For example, Project RAISE iBooks recruit interest by utilize various sorts of videos that show students examples of living organisms in authentic environments as well as tutorial videos that have been aligned with the lesson content. The videos are presented in ways that activate or supply background knowledge, which in turn optimizes the relevance of and minimizes aversive responses to the instructional materials. The iBooks support self-regulation and persistence by allowing students to access videos at any time. This option supports their self-assessment and develops their coping skills and learning strategies because it encourages students to question their understanding and utilize resources in the environment to support their learning. This option also helps sustain their efforts to answer questions, because it facilitates students’ drawing on evidence from the lesson. Also, the iBook pages have been designed with the other two UDL principles in mind, and as such they reduce the cognitive load normally required during the reading of textually and visually complex science textbooks. This makes the relevant text more accessible and subsequently more likely to be engaged with by incarcerated learners. By making complex content more accessible, we are recruiting student interest and thus increase the likelihood that learners will feel motivated to participate in difficult assessments that they typically skip in a textbook and worksheet driven model of instruction.
Project RAISE also incorporates numerous interactive features, like the interactive energy pyramid (See Figure 1), which increase the choices students have over how they acquire and engage with concepts. All of these features are incorporated within a single student driven Identity Map project that optimizes the relevance, value and authenticity of the learning experience as students relate the content to their individual lives and experiences.
Curricular Co-Design and the Project RAISE Prototyping Process
In curriculum design, the UDL framework helps educators and instructional designers consider and develop as many options for learning as appropriate, given the instructional goal, to insure the engagement of the widest range of learners possible. In digital design (e.g., the development of web sites and mobile applications), User Experience (UX) techniques emphasize iterative cycles of prototype development and user testing to insure the best product experience possible. There are emerging efforts to enlist older students as co-creators of curricula (Bovill, Cook-Sather, & Felten, 2011), but Project RAISE has been unique in that it combined UDL and UX approaches into a co-design model, and engaged juvenile corrections students and teachers as authentic collaborators throughout the curricular development stages.
In addition to bridging the gap between pedagogical practices and methods of technology development, the RAISE co-design model rests on established theories in the learning sciences. It represents the fruition of Donald Campbell’s (1969) position that, to solve complex problems, scholars should bridge their disciplinary knowledge with others in related but distinct fields – rather than just pursue continued, siloed expertise solely in their discipline. Expanding on Campbell’s idea, Gerard Fischer endorsed a theory of distributed intelligence, which contends that collaboration with other people and technology extends the power of the unaided human mind (Fischer, 2006). More recently, scholars at the intersection of education and technology have described the potential of “knowledge communities,” or “socially-oriented” learning environments, enabled by contemporary advances in technology, in which “the production and aggregation of content emerges from the collective contributions of all members of the community, rather than from a single authoritative source” (Tissenbaum, Lui, & Slotta, 2012, p. 328). By including marginalized students and teachers as experts alongside traditional education “experts” in our curriculum development process, we are drawing on a more comprehensive pool human intelligence to more comprehensively address the multifaceted challenges associated with science education in the juvenile justice system. In conjunction with what can be described as the “artificial” intelligence available through mobile technologies, the RAISE team is then able to innovate and creatively re-define what constitutes a UDL-PBIS digital curriculum, as well as what is possible in juvenile justice education.
We piloted the co-design model by testing the 10% Rule iBook prototype with students in two juvenile corrections facilities. A RAISE team researcher with over a decade of science teaching experience introduced the lesson by projecting the cover and first page of the iBook for the whole class to see. The researcher engaged the students in some discussion about what they might already know about the topic, and then stated the objectives of the lesson. After discussing the driving question, the students proceeded through the lesson individually, with the researcher and classroom teacher providing individual support to students as needed. A second researcher observed and recorded behaviors and comments. Finally, we posed questions in a focus-group format at the conclusion of the lesson to collect feedback from both students and the teacher. Figure 6 displays the records from one 20-minute observation. The Student behavior columns show that the students were engaged in task related behaviors for the entire 20-minute session. Student comments were directly related to the instructional content, and demonstrate some capacity to understand the potential ethical issues associated with the film, which is critical to the ability to relate to the content in an authentic and meaningful manner.
| Figure 6. Example of direct observation of prototype session |
|---|
 |
| Source: RAISE 10% Rule iBook |
Researchers evaluated student responses by collecting both feedback as well as artifacts of student navigation and engagement captured by the technology in the iBooks. Students generally commented positively on the 10% rule iBook, but they also provided substantial informative and critical feedback. Students appreciated the videos and the interactive and responsive quizzes. However, they found that some of the video narrations were difficult to understand. As a response, the team revised the narration that accompanied the videos. The students responded positively to the look and feel of the interactive pyramid, and they used the embedded instructional videos associated with the calculation of the 10% rule. The students were critical of the use of a separate whiteboard apps. Specifically, they reported problems with opening and closing the iBook in order to access the whiteboard tools. Based on student suggestions, the development team redesigned all of the iBooks and accompanying apps to function via split screen, so that the iBook can always be open and used as a resource in associated activities. However, the students also indicated that the tools were difficult to control using fingers and suggested styli. As a result, the development team procured styli as an option for all tablet activities. The RAISE researchers and instructional designers also analyzed evidence of student use of features in the iBook (e.g., which videos were played? How often were calculator and/or white board tools used?) and student responses to questions to evaluate not just what students said about the iBook, but what they did when it was in front of them during class. We recommend capturing both kinds of information as our data resonates with established social-science understandings of human behavior: people often say one thing, and do another. We took into account student’s articulated reactions to the curriculum in tandem with the work they produced within the curriculum, compared this with the insights of teachers and science education experts, and used this multi-layered feedback to redesign lessons and re-test the revisions. We suggest that this iterative and inclusive approach, when bounded by deadlines and time tables, yields better quality learning experiences and produces improved learner outcomes in science.
The process for the development of the 10% Rule lesson, described in this chapter, was repeatedly applied to each of the lessons in this four-week curriculum to develop a final version for piloting in juvenile corrections classrooms. Following the analysis of results, we anticipate expanding our co-development method to create semester and year-long curricula, with the intention of capturing more long-term outcomes. In the age of ephemeral digital media, it is especially important for educators to track what students learn and how; otherwise, future technology development efforts might miss opportunities for innovatively supporting the widest possible range of learners. One interesting example might lie in considering how dosage compares to quality of experience: how might short and long-term student learning outcomes compare between, say, a multi-level complex game or simulation, or a set of lessons in an e-book, to a single short engaging video clip, or a high-definition three-dimensional image? It will also be interesting to try to disentangle the elements that constitute engagement: are students interacting with educational mobile technologies because they are novel, or because their curiosity in the academic content is peaked? Does distinguishing these kinds of engagement even matter? And are digital platforms presenting students with opportunities to engage with content in unique and dynamic ways, or are they merely reproducing conventional didactic instruction in a shiny new package? As the possibilities for learning expand with the development of mobile technologies, research along these lines will need to use nuanced methods to better approximate the outcomes and implications of what technology enables marginalized learners to do.
Mobile tablet-based technology has dramatically enhanced the ability to provide engaging and enriching science instruction and associated experiences for incarcerated learners. The developmental phase of Project RAISE has led to innovations in the ability to provide meaningful project based inquiry science opportunities to our most vulnerable and disengaged learners. The tablet technology fully supports a plethora of UDL features that can decrease or eliminate barriers to learning for a population of learners characterized by disability, gaps in factual and conceptual knowledge, and major deficiencies in reading and mathematics skills. The Project RAISE PBIS-UDL curriculum built on the tablet platform has also provided us with the ability to provide engaging and meaningful virtual experiences despite the facility strictures that prevent laboratory opportunities, the use of equipment or materials for classroom experiments, and limit access to typical Internet based resources available in public schools. Project RAISE utilizes tablet-based technology to develop content knowledge, inquiry skills, and increased interest and engagement in science among a group of incarcerated youth. The PBIS-UDL Biology curriculum will provide incarcerated learners with the supports necessary to fully participate in science learning. It has the capacity to promote increased interest and engagement in science and other STEM fields and the potential for postsecondary STEM education or STEM careers.
This research was previously published in Optimizing STEM Education With Advanced ICTs and Simulations edited by Ilya Levin and Dina Tsybulsky, pages 267-295, copyright year 2017 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).
Anderman, E. M., Griesinger, T., & Westerfield, G. (1998). Motivation and cheating during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology , 90(1), 84–93. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.84
Baltodano, H. M., Harris, P. J., & Rutherford, R. B. (2005). Academic achievement in juvenile corrections: Examining the impact of age, ethnicity and disability. Education & Treatment of Children , 28(4), 361–379.
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning. Book Excerpt . George Lucas Educational Foundation.
Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist , 35(3), 149–164. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3503_2
Bovill, C.-S., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co‐creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. The International Journal for Academic Development , 16(2), 133–145. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
Brigham, F. J., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2011). Science education and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice , 26(4), 223–232. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00343.x
Buck Institute for Education. (2013). Project-based learning for the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.bie.org
Bullock, L. M., & McArthur, P. (1994). Correctional special education: Disability prevalence estimates and teacher preparation programs. Education & Treatment of Children , 17(3), 347–355.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM Education: A 2020 Vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher , 70(1), 30–35.
Campbell, D. T. (1969). Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish-scale model of omniscience. Interdisciplinary Relationships in the Social Sciences, 328, 348.
Dalton, B., Morocco, C. C., Tivnan, T., & Mead, P. L. R. (1997). Supported Inquiry Science Teaching for Conceptual Change in Urban and Suburban Science Classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 30(6), 670–684. doi:10.1177/002221949703000611
David, J. (2008). What research says about project-based learning. Educational Leadership , 65, 80–82.
Enthoven, M., & de Bruijn, E. (2010). Beyond locality: The creation of public practice‐based knowledge through practitioner research in professional learning communities and communities of practice. A review of three books on practitioner research and professional communities. Educational Action Research , 8(2), 289–298. doi:10.1080/09650791003741822
FischerG. (2006, May). Distributed intelligence: extending the power of the unaided, individual human mind. In Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces (pp. 7-14). ACM. 10.1145/1133265.1133268
Gagnon, J. C., & Barber, B. R. (2010). Characteristics of and services provided to youth in secure care facilities. Behavioral Disorders , 36(1), 7–19.
Gagnon, J. C., & Barber, B. R. (2014). Instructional practice guide for teaching reading and mathematics in juvenile correctional schools. Journal of Correctional Education , 65(3), 5–23.
Gagnon, J. C., Barber, B. R., Van Loan, C., & Leone, P. E. (2009). Juvenile correctional schools: Characteristics and approaches to curriculum. Education & Treatment of Children , 32(4), 673–696. doi:10.1353/etc.0.0068
Gregory, A., Skiba, R. J., & Noguera, P. A. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap two sides of the same coin? Educational Researcher , 39(1), 59–68. doi:10.3102/0013189X09357621
Houchins, D. E., Jolivette, K., Krezmien, M. P., & Baltodano, H. A. (2008). A Multi-State study examining the impact of explicit reading instruction with incarcerated students. Journal of Correctional Education , 59(1), 65–85.
Jacobson, M. J., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. Journal of the Learning Sciences , 9(2), 145–199. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0902_2
Krezmien, M. P. (2008, January). National perspectives of youth with disabilities and their interaction with the juvenile system: A statement of the issues and need. Presentation at the 1st conference of the Ohio Juvenile Justice Project, Columbus, OH.
Krezmien, M. P., Leone, P. E., & Achilles, G. M. (2006). Suspension, race, and disability: Analysis of statewide practices and reporting. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders , 14(4), 217–226. doi:10.1177/10634266060140040501
Krezmien, M. P., & Mulcahy, C. A. (2008). Literacy and Delinquency: Current status of reading interventions with detained and incarcerated youth. Reading & Writing Quarterly , 24(2), 219–238. doi:10.1080/10573560701808601
Krezmien, M. P., Mulcahy, C. A., & Leone, P. E. (2008). Detained and Committed Youth: Examining Differences in Achievement, Mental Health Needs, and Special Education Status. Education & Treatment of Children , 31(4), 1–20.
Krezmien, M. P., Mulcahy, C. A., Travers, J., Wilson, M., & Wells, C. (2013). Reading performance of incarcerated youth: Understanding and responding to a unique population of readers. Journal of Special Education Leadership , 26(2), 71–81.
Lane, K. L., Carter, E. W., Pierson, M. R., & Glaeser, B. C. (2006). Academic, social, and behavioral characteristics of high school students with emotional disturbances or learning disabilities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders , 14(2), 108–117. doi:10.1177/10634266060140020101
Leone, P. E., Krezmien, M., Mason, L., & Meisel, S. M. (2005). Organizing and delivering empirically based literacy instruction to incarcerated youth. Exceptionality , 13(2), 89–102. doi:10.1207/s15327035ex1302_3
Leone, P. E., & Weinberg, L. A. (2012). Addressing the unmet educational needs of children and youth in the juvenile justice and child welfare systems, 2012 Edition . Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Center for Juvenile Justice Reform.
Maccini, P., Gagnon, J. C., Mulcahy, C. A., & Leone, P. E. (2006). Math instruction for committed youth within juvenile correctional schools. Journal of Correctional Education, 57(3), 210-229. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23282753
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. The Elementary School Journal , 97(4), 341–358. doi:10.1086/461870
Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2005). The future is in the margins: The role of technology and disability in educational reform . In Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., & Hitchcock, C. (Eds.), The universally designed classroom: Accessible curriculum and digital technologies (pp. 13–35). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning . Theory into Practice .
Mulcahy, C. A., & Krezmien, M. P. (2009). Effects of a contextualized instructional package on the mathematics performance of secondary students with EBD. Behavioral Disorders , 34(3), 136–150.
Mulcahy, C. A., Krezmien, M. P., Leone, P. E., Houchins, D. E., & Baltodano, H. (2008). Lessons learned: Barriers and solutions for conducting reading investigations in juvenile corrections settings. Reading & Writing Quarterly , 24(2), 239–252. doi:10.1080/10573560701808635
Mulcahy, C. A., Krezmien, P. K., & Travers, J. (2015). Improving mathematics performance among secondary students with EBD: A methodological review. Remedial and Special Education , 37(2), 113–128. doi:10.1177/0741932515579275
National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.7226/13398
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States by States. Author.
Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E., Osher, D. M., & Poirier, J. M. (2005). Youth with disabilities in juvenile corrections: A national survey. Exceptional Children , 71(3), 339–345. doi:10.1177/001440290507100308
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tannis, L. 2014. Educating incarcerated youth: Exploring the impact of relationships, expectations, resources and accountability. Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/9781137451026
Therrien, W. J., Taylor, J. C., Watt, S., & Kaldenberg, E. R. (2013). Science instruction for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education , 35(1), 15–27. doi:10.1177/0741932513503557
Tissenbaum, M., Lui, M., & Slotta, J. D. (2012). Co-Designing Collaborative Smart Classroom Curriculum for Secondary School Science. Journal of Universal Computer Science , 18(3), 327–352.
Co-Design: A process based in generative design research methods that seeks to collect the explicit as well as tacit knowledge of users, as well as entrust users as colleagues and collaborators in the development of new experiences and technologies.
Human Variability: The normally occurring vast range of differences between and within individuals that result from the varying conditions surrounding human development.
Project-Based Learning: A method of instruction in which students learn content by working for an extended period of time to investigate and respond to complex, real-world issues.
Prototyping: The creation and testing, with users, of preliminary models that elicit insights about improvements and lead to iterative development of a final product.
Scientific Inquiry: The process by which scientists study and explain phenomena; the activities students undertake, such as formulating questions, designing investigations, conducting observations, analyzing data, drawing conclusions, and communicating results.
Special Education: Instruction designed to meet the unique needs of a student with a disability, at no cost to the child’s primary caregiver(s).
Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A framework for designing learning environments and materials that addresses human variability by providing multiple options for perception, action and expression, and engagement.