Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, many educational institutions offered some form of distance learning. The need for distancing and time away from school buildings normalized the practices of online education. As online education options increases, researchers continue to explore whether there is true accessibility for all learners. The existing literature shows a world of possibility for inclusion in distance learning that has not come to fruition. Research studies from the early 2000s espoused the future of online education as an avenue for learning differences; however, many designers and developers have incorporated the same face-to-face practices that limit accessibility, namely presentation and assessment in a one-size-fits-all format. Mary Rice and Michael Dunn (November 2022) reviewed international findings and identified gaps in practices that support inclusiveness in distance learning. Patrick Lowenthal et al. (January 2020) published their findings before the COVID protocols required almost all learners to move to online schooling. They found that online inclusivity seems to stop at compliance, think audio captions for images or extended time on testing, rather than practices to all true accessibility. The research completed by Gibson, Clarkson, and Scott (2022) supports previous findings.
The research completed by Gibson, Clarkson, and Scott (2024) was a meta-analysis of existing literature to identify essential practices in online assessments that should include all learners. The research question was broad but valid. Essentially, it asks how educators can ensure all students demonstrate their understanding in a distance learning format. The researchers used qualitative meta-analysis to integrate current findings and create a list of applicable suggestions. The methodology is the most helpful for current educators, focusing on practices, not theory. The limitation of meta-analysis is the lack of new concepts to be added to the overall understanding of effective inclusive assessments in distance learning.
This article summarizes the next steps for inclusive distance testing into three tangible steps. The first is offering assessments with choice for students, enabling them to demonstrate their level of understanding. The second is to create opportunities for formative assessments with peer learning, allowing for collaboration and feedback within the assessment loop. The third is inclusive feedback that students with various needs can access. The main takeaway is that choice is critical for inclusively assessing student mastery within a distance learning format. The authors' ideas are concise and easy to understand; however, there is no clear best option for all educators. The choices made with distance assessment must depend on the individual student's needs. The aim to reach personalization is a conundrum in education, as tailoring education for each student is a worthwhile goal but often unattainable based on class size.