2 authors: Gina Biancarosa University of Oregon 49

Policy Recommendations
Despite the limited evidence base for the effectiveness of e-reading technology, it is nevertheless possible to suggest specific policies to help schools use the technology to support improved literacy outcomes for all students. The following policy recommenda- tions are informed not only by the research base, but also by discussion with authors and editors of this issue of the Future of Children and with a panel convened by the Carnegie Corporation of New York that included representatives of educator advocacy groups, reading researchers, educational publishers, and e-reading technology developers. We thus make the following four recommen- dations based on collaborative, grounded
discussions on how to capitalize on the prom- ise of e-reading technology as well as on the research to date.

Our first recommendation is that school systems should insist on e-reading technol- ogy that incorporates Universal Design for Learning. Only technology that supports UDL is flexible enough to fulfill one of

e-reading technology’s core promises: helping teachers support diverse learners. Although several e-reading technology applications already incorporate many UDL features, those features are not yet universally avail- able and often are limited to text-to-speech. And while text-to-speech has by far the most research supporting its efficacy, it cannot by itself meet the full range of learner needs.
Policy makers should require that funds devoted to e-reading technology be used only for devices and programs that support UDL and have the capacity to individualize support features. Specific criteria and procedures for complying with UDL are available from the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard and the National Center on Universal Design for Learning.⁷⁶

Our second recommendation for schools is to choose evidence-based tools. Because e-reading technology is proliferating and diversifying so rapidly, research evidence

will necessarily lag behind innovations. Thus, choices of e-reading technology tools must be guided by research both on the technology itself and on effective instructional practices. The research on e-reading technology that we have reviewed relies heavily on practices with an extant pretechnology research base—
for example, explicit instruction, model- ing, and guided and independent practice opportunities. For small investments in
e-reading technology, an evidence base that is not rooted in the technological application

may be sufficient. But for large investments, school systems should require independent scientific evidence of effectiveness or, when that is not possible, arrange for researchers or third-party evaluators to study the tech- nology’s effectiveness as soon as it first is implemented. Policy makers should be very cautious when considering investments in innovative practices, such as virtual learning environments, that were not possible before e-reading technology. Meanwhile, federal and private grant makers should encourage precisely such innovation, always incorporat- ing research on effectiveness.

Our third recommendation is that schools provide systemic supports. To use e-reading technology tools effectively, teachers need adequate and consistent systemic support, such as formal school-based information- technology teams. These teams should be familiar not only with the technology, but also with how it should be used within the curriculum and how to support teachers and others who use it. Technical support should include regularly scheduled updates and servicing to ensure security and prevent problems; it should also give teachers rapid response to troubleshooting requests. Policy makers and administrators should consult organizations such as the Consortium of School Networking and State Educational Technology Directors Association for up-to- date advice and estimates on infrastructure and costs associated with supporting band- width and other needs raised by e-reading technology.⁷⁷

The needed systemic supports also include professional development for teachers, spe- cialists, librarians, and other school faculty and staff. Because teacher training begins in college teacher preparation programs, these programs must move to incorporate regular

use of e-reading technology. Teacher candi- dates should use this technology not only as learners, but also as instructors; that is, they should be given opportunities to use it both to learn and to teach. Given the breakneck speed of technological advance, no teacher preparation program will ever be able to keep teachers fully up-to-date in the shift- ing technological landscape. Schools must thus invest in professional development that helps teachers to use adopted technology to its utmost. As with any effective professional development, these opportunities need to be ongoing and responsive to local problems of practice.

Our fourth recommendation for schools is to capitalize on data. One of the clearest strengths of e-reading technology is in gathering and reporting student data.

Teachers require timely data at their finger- tips to inform their instruction and interven- tion decisions. This requirement is made all the more pressing by the current widespread investments by states in Response to Intervention models wherein schools use screening and progress-monitoring assess- ments to make ongoing decisions about the nature and intensity of supports provided to struggling students. As school systems modernize their data systems, it has become feasible for teachers serving students from pre-kindergarten through postsecondary levels to access the data they need to ensure more seamless transitions between grades and schools—for example, the transition from pre-kindergarten to kindergarten or from middle school to high school. Similarly, monitoring agencies, such as districts and states, will have increasingly timely access to evaluation and other outcome data. And not least, these data streams open up a world of possibilities for research by enabling analysts to take into account students’ educational

histories in investigating how and why various practices and interventions work differently for different students.

The increasing wealth of data available through e-reading technology can be per- ceived either as a burden or as an opportunity to discover how to serve the learning needs

of varied populations both locally and for the field more generally. In particular, this wealth of data affords opportunities to investigate how effects of e-reading technology are influ- enced by key variables that have been largely overlooked, such as teacher experience with technology, consonance of technology tools with the curriculum, and facilitators and bar- riers to optimal intended use of technology. Policy makers and federal and private funders should provide incentives to school districts and universities to collaborate not only with each other in capitalizing on data, but also with educational publishers and e-reading technology developers, so that information about the design of such innovations can flow in both directions.