Technology Enhanced Learning for People with Disabilities: Approaches and Applications (Premier Reference Source)

Technology Enhanced Learning for People with Disabilities: Approaches and Applications Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos University of Oviedo, Spain Jingyuan Zhao Harbin Institute of Technology, China Robert Tennyson University of Minnesota, USA

Information science reference Hershey • New York

Director of Editorial Content: Director of Book Publications: Acquisitions Editor: Development Editor: Publishing Assistant: Typesetter: Production Editor: Cover Design:

Kristin Klinger Julia Mosemann Lindsay Johnston David DeRicco Milan Vracarich Deanna Jo Zombro Jamie Snavely Lisa Tosheff

Published in the United States of America by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2011 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities : approaches and applications / Patricia Ordonez de Pablos, Jingyuan Zhao, and Robert Tennyson, editors. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: "This book brings together academics, policy-makers and practitioners, with the goal of delivering a reference edition for all those interested in approaches and applications of technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities"-Provided by publisher. ISBN 978-1-61520-923-1 (hardcover) -- ISBN 978-1-61520-924-8 (ebook) 1. Students with disabilities--Computer-assisted instruction. 2. Computers and people with disabilities. 3. Educational technology. I. Pablos, Patricia Ordonez de. II. Zhao, Jingyuan, 1968- III. Tennyson, Robert D. LC4024.T43 2010 371.9'04334--dc22 2010018196 British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.

List of Reviewers Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos, University of Oviedo, Spain Robert D. Tennyson, University of Minnesota, USA Robert L. Jorczak, University of Minnesota, USA Jingyuan Zhao, Harbin Institute of Technologies, China Miltiadis. D. Lytras, University of Patras, Greece Adolfo J. Cangas, University of Almería, Spain Anastasios Ntanos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Ángel García-Crespo, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid António Moreira, University of Aveiro, Portugal Athanasios Drigas, Net Media Lab, Institute of Informatics & Telecommunications, Greece Belén Ruiz, Parque Científico Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Dimitris Kouremenos, Net Media Lab, Institute of Informatics & Telecommunications, Greece Diogo Casanova, University of Aveiro, Portugal Fernanda Nogueira, University of Aveiro, Portugal Fernando Paniagua-Martín, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Irene Samanta, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Israel González Carrasco, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Javier Jiménez, Parque Científico Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain John Vrettaros, Net Media Lab, Institute of Informatics & Telecommunications, Greece José A. Carmona, University of Almería, Spain Jose Emilio Labra Gayo, University of Oviedo, Spain José Luis López-Cuadrado, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid José M. Sánchez, Parque Científico Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Juan Miguel Gómez-Berbís, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Kelly Ligon, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Luis Iribarne, University of Almería, Spain Margarida Almeida, University of Aveiro, Portugal Michela Ott, Istituto Tecnologie Didattiche- ITD, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche –CNR, Italy Moisés Espínola, University of Almería, Spain Mona Pruett, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Pablo Revuelta, Parque Científico Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Panagiotis Kyriazopoulos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Rania Christou, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece

Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Saif alZahir, University of N. British Columbia, Canada Sharon Jones, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Susanne Croasdaile, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Tariq M Khan, Brunel University West London, UK

Table of Contents

Preface.................................................................................................................................................. xiv Chapter 1 Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities..................................................................................... 1 Robert D. Tennyson, University of Minnesota, USA Robert L. Jorczak, University of Minnesota, USA Chapter 2 Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities: Review of Research and Practice.................. 10 Robert D. Tennyson, University of Minnesota, USA Chapter 3 China Special Education: The Perspective of Information Technologies . ........................................... 34 Jingyuan Zhao, Harbin Institute of Technologies, China Chapter 4 Learning Applications for Disabled People........................................................................................... 44 Athanasios Drigas, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece Dimitris Kouremenous, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece John Vrettaros, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece Chapter 5 A Paradigm in Transition: From a Teaching Focused Education to a Learning One—The ICT Contribution to the Acquisition of Social and Individual Skills in High Education.............................. 58 Pablo Murta Baião Albino, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain Fernando González Gatica, Universidad Diego Portales, Chile José Enrique Armendáriz-Iñigo, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain

Chapter 6 Personal Learning Environments: Meeting the Special Needs of Gifted Students............................... 67 Jaime Ribeiro, University of Aveiro, Portugal Diogo Casanova, University of Aveiro, Portugal Fernanda Nogueira, University of Aveiro, Portugal António Moreira, University of Aveiro, Portugal Margarida Almeida, University of Aveiro, Portugal Chapter 7 Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students........................................ 89 Pablo Revuelta, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Javier Jiménez, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José M. Sánchez, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Belén Ruiz, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Chapter 8 School of the Future: E-Tools and New Pedagogies to Build Up and Inclusive Learning Community.......................................................................................................................................... 105 Michela Otta, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Italy Chapter 9 Public Information Services for People with Disabilities: An Accessible Multimedia Platform for the Diffusion of the Digital Signature............................................................................. 121 Ángel García-Crespo, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Fernando Paniagua-Martín, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José Luis López-Cuadrado, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Israel González Carrasco, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Juan Miguel Gómez-Berbís, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Chapter 10 Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age............................................................................ 137 Panagiotis Kyriazopoulos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Irene Samanta, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Rania Christou, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Anastasios Ntanos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Chapter 11 Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools.................................... 154 Susanne Croasdaile, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Sharon Jones, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Kelly Ligon, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Linda Oggel, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Mona Pruett, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

Chapter 12 Theory of Mind in Autistic Children: Multimedia Based Support...................................................... 167 Tariq M. Khan, Brunel University of West London, UK Chapter 13 M-Learning: Accessibility and Limitations for People with Disabilities............................................ 180 Saif alZahir, University of Northern British Columbia, Canada Chapter 14 Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems in Educational Settings........................................................................................................ 194 José A. Carmona, University of Almería, Spain Adolfo J. Cangas, University of Almería, Spain Luis Iribarne, University of Almería, Spain Moisés Espínola, University of Almería, Spain Compilation of References................................................................................................................ 203 About the Contributors..................................................................................................................... 225 Index.................................................................................................................................................... 233

Detailed Table of Contents

Preface.................................................................................................................................................. xiv Chapter 1 Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities..................................................................................... 1 Robert D. Tennyson, University of Minnesota, USA Robert L. Jorczak, University of Minnesota, USA Perhaps contrary to expectations, computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), particularly asynchronous text discussion, has characteristics that may be beneficial to learners with disabilities. CSCL seeks to bring the benefits of classroom-based collaborative and cooperative learning to the online environment. Collaborative and cooperative learning, and particularly its online form, CSCL, is a learning methodology with characteristics that may mask or compensate for specific disabilities. For example, in addition to the generally improved access offered by online learning, the slowed pace and anonymity of asynchronous text discussion has shown to improve social interaction for learners with communication and learning disabilities. This chapter suggests how learners with specific disabilities may benefit from CSCL discussion in postsecondary courses. Chapter 2 Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities: Review of Research and Practice.................. 10 Robert D. Tennyson, University of Minnesota, USA This chapter presents an argument for the employment of computers in education and the possible improvements especially for students with disabilities. Early in the chapter questions concerning technological change are discussed in reference to research and practice. The view in disability education is moving towards lifelong learning and the need to apply advances in both technology and research to accomplish this goal. Employment of cognitive theories coupled with emerging technologies is hypothesized to improve the paradigm shift in education from classroom-centered instruction to distributed learning environments. Proposed is that research in cognitive psychology, especially with findings for constructive theories can be successfully applied to disability education. Chapter 3 China Special Education: The Perspective of Information Technologies . ........................................... 34 Jingyuan Zhao, Harbin Institute of Technologies, China

The development of information technologies should be able to benefit to every educated person. The use of information technologies in special education is a little studied by Chinese scholars. This study focuses on China’s special education from the perspective of information technologies, discusses the causes and impact factors why the information technologies applications in special education in China is a blind area, presents the two principles for information technology applications in special education, and put forwards to three implementation models of special education applications in special education. Chapter 4 Learning Applications for Disabled People........................................................................................... 44 Athanasios Drigas, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece Dimitris Kouremenous, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece John Vrettaros, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece The chapter presents e-learning practices and applications, which target people with visual and hearing disabilities. The first part discusses an e-learning application, which targets visually impaired people while the second part presents an e-learning application for the teaching of the English language to deaf and hearing impaired people. The final part presents a study about the relationship of the deaf and hearing impaired with new technologies in Greece. The chapter stresses the importance of the thorough exploitation of ICTs together with e-learning technologies towards the effective improvement of educative methods for this target group. The goals are to support the distance and lifelong education and training of the target group, to guarantee their equal access to information, knowledge, education and employment and finally, to minimize the digital divide through the use of assistive technologies and contemporary, easily navigable and user-friendly e-learning environments. Chapter 5 A Paradigm in Transition: From a Teaching Focused Education to a Learning One—The ICT Contribution to the Acquisition of Social and Individual Skills in High Education.............................. 58 Pablo Murta Baião Albino, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain Fernando González Gatica, Universidad Diego Portales, Chile José Enrique Armendáriz-Iñigo, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain The traditional teaching process at higher education levels has changed in the European Union since the arrival of the “Bologna Process.” Under this new paradigm, professors are no longer the knowledge transmitters but also guides that must encourage students to generate knowledge. Hence, it is crucial to generate certain skills that will let them learn throughout all their lives, especially in the ability to search information that solves a certain problem. At this point is where it comes in hand the acquisition of ICT skills; since the learning process can surpass the physical barriers of the classroom and is an effective tool for solving problems. In this chapter, the authors address this new change in the educational paradigm focused on the European Union and taking into account the leading role of ICT in this learning process.

Chapter 6 Personal Learning Environments: Meeting the Special Needs of Gifted Students............................... 67 Jaime Ribeiro, University of Aveiro, Portugal Diogo Casanova, University of Aveiro, Portugal Fernanda Nogueira, University of Aveiro, Portugal António Moreira, University of Aveiro, Portugal Margarida Almeida, University of Aveiro, Portugal Gifted Students, in spite of their very well known characteristics, have specific education needs in order to achieve their potential. Although they do not present a special educational need in the common meaning, they have very particular learning needs that, if overlooked, may lead to adverse feelings towards school and learning that can result in academic failure. Authors in the field agree that giftedness can and must be developed and providing challenging and facilitative learning environments is the first building block. The PLE, held up by WEB 2.0, for its openness and possibilities it offers to learn autonomously, resorting to exploration, discovery, networking with like-minded peers and experts fits the style and pace of learning of its user and shows to be a tool to fully suite the particular traits of these students. In this chapter a 5 dimension PLE is conceptualized that accommodates the cognitive, emotional and education needs of gifted students. Chapter 7 Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students........................................ 89 Pablo Revuelta, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Javier Jiménez, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José M. Sánchez, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Belén Ruiz, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain This chapter introduces the potential of Automatic Speech Recognition Technology (ASR) in the challenge of inclusive education. ASR technology combined with Information and Communication Technology (ICT) enhances the learning of disabled people both in and outside the classroom. In the classroom, deaf and hearing-impaired students can benefit from a real-time transcription of what the teacher is saying. Also, a real-time transcription facilitates note taking for students with visual or physical disabilities. Outside the classroom, transcription and other media files (audio, slides, video, etc.) are powerful educational resources for all students, disabled or able-bodied. Some of most relevant projects and systems around the world are described and compared in this chapter to provide updated information about ASR technology performance and its application to enhancing the learning of disabled students. Chapter 8 School of the Future: E-Tools and New Pedagogies to Build Up and Inclusive Learning Community.......................................................................................................................................... 105 Michela Otta, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Italy This chapter tackles the issue of e-inclusion in the field of school education. A picture of the new millennium learning panorama is outlined where new learners, new teachers, new tools and new pedagogies are around. Some experience –based reflections are also proposed on how, from this panorama,

new learning opportunities may arise for “all” learners, irrespective of their individual differences and specific characteristics. The overall purpose of the chapter is to give an idea that the building up of a genuinely inclusive classroom is an achievable goal, provided that strong efforts are devoted not only in the direction of producing/using fully accessible e-tools but also (perhaps mainly) in the direction of making the most of them in order to suit the “different” needs of the “different” students. Chapter 9 Public Information Services for People with Disabilities: An Accessible Multimedia Platform for the Diffusion of the Digital Signature............................................................................. 121 Ángel García-Crespo, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Fernando Paniagua-Martín, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José Luis López-Cuadrado, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Israel González Carrasco, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Juan Miguel Gómez-Berbís, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain The current chapter introduces an accessible multimedia platform applied to the diffusion of the digital signature. The project presented in this chapter is a multimedia initiative to promote the use of information technology (IT), specifically, the digital signature. Through the modeling of typical daily situations, the platform provides simple responses to any uncertainties or concerns a user may hold about the digital signature, and the advantages which its use entails. The multimedia system has been designed to support subtitling and audio description facilities, with the objective of enabling access to the diffusion of e-government to persons with an auditory or visual disability. The results of the evaluation of the platform by test users of the system are positive, and have initiated the continuation of developments which encourage e-inclusion. Chapter 10 Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age............................................................................ 137 Panagiotis Kyriazopoulos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Irene Samanta, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Rania Christou, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Anastasios Ntanos, Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece The purpose of this research is to explore behaviour regarding the use of the internet by elderly people with movement disabilities. The study illustrates the ways, and the frequency, that they make use of the internet; while identifying the attitudes of non-users towards the internet. Quantitative research was carried out from a sample of 180 questionnaires divided into dyads (ninety users of the internet and ninety non-users) in order to explore and evaluate the attitudes and views of the elderly. The findings identify the factors that motivate older individuals with disabilities to move towards making use of the internet, and allow an understanding of the reasons why some of them are still distrustful towards the internet.

Chapter 11 Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools.................................... 154 Susanne Croasdaile, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Sharon Jones, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Kelly Ligon, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Linda Oggel, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Mona Pruett, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA This chapter examines practitioners’ perceptions of the factors impacting the implementation of assistive technology (AT) for students with disabilities in five public school divisions. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams to consider the need for assistive technology (AT) for every student with a disability. In order for AT consideration to be effective, IEP team members need to be informed about AT and able to make appropriate decisions for their students. Interview data indicated that barriers to the implementation of AT include lack of stakeholder buy-in, especially in the area of administrative support. Important supports include the development and maintenance of relationships with instructional staff and technology coordinators. The ongoing need to build stakeholder awareness of and skill in implementing assistive technology was a common theme. Participants perceived that, if empowered to do so, an AT facilitation team can overcome existing barriers to implementation. Chapter 12 Theory of Mind in Autistic Children: Multimedia Based Support...................................................... 167 Tariq M. Khan, Brunel University of West London, UK The chapter examines how multimedia learning systems and analogical reasoning could be used to help autistic children cope with the demands of reasoning abstractly and to develop their Theory of Mind. Learners with autism have problems reasoning about other’s mental states and beliefs, which has been coined Theory of Mind. The specially developed systems proved beneficial for the autistic children, which highlights the potential benefits that a multimedia system can have as a learning tool for Theory of Mind. However, there is some doubt over the usefulness of interactivity for learning beyond its enhancement of enjoyment and sense of participation. It is intended that the results will stimulate a reassessment of current multimedia theories as they relate to non-typically developing learners, and provide new directions for research in the area of support for children with ASD. Chapter 13 M-Learning: Accessibility and Limitations for People with Disabilities............................................ 180 Saif alZahir, University of Northern British Columbia, Canada This chapter presents technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities. At first, the author scans the phases of learning progression and propose a learning model to represent their interrelationships. Then the author explains the various types of disabilities within the learning reference of context and map available technologies to their corresponding learning disabilities. A special emphasis will be exerted on mobile-learning software, hardware, and systems that meet the requirements for learners with disabilities. In this research, the author finds that although m-learning has several limitations and

shortcomings to deliver to users, it is a promising learning technology for people with disabilities and its technological constraint and limitations are likely to be addressed and mostly eliminated in the near future. Chapter 14 Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems in Educational Settings........................................................................................................ 194 José A. Carmona, University of Almería, Spain Adolfo J. Cangas, University of Almería, Spain Luis Iribarne, University of Almería, Spain Moisés Espínola, University of Almería, Spain In recent years, thanks in part to advances in computer technology, there has been a renewed interest in using Virtual Reality (VR) to improve the traditional intervention procedures used in educational and clinical settings. A growing number of researcher teams, and three-dimensional (3D) simulations, are oriented toward the detection and treatment of school-related problems such as violence in the classroom, hyperactivity, eating disorders, and drug abuse. The chapter highlights the major advantages of using VR in clinical assessment and intervention programs. Compilation of References................................................................................................................ 203 About the Contributors..................................................................................................................... 225 Index.................................................................................................................................................... 233

xiv

Preface

One of the most meaningful application domains of technology enhanced learning (TEL) is related to the adoption of information technologies (IT) and designs for people with disabilities. Much research and development effort has been directed towards technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities, assistive learning technologies, and public information services in terms of learning activities, learning resources, and learning supports. Technology enhanced learning in special education projects is developing websites, instructional modules, and resources that are accessible to teachers, parents, and consumers. The emerging assistive learning technologies and innovations for people with disabilities are attracting significant coverage from society. This book brings together policy makers, government officers, academics, and practitioners to deliver a reference edition for all those interested in approaches and applications of technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities. Our goal is to foster conditions conducive to promoting the development of technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities.

Objective of the Book This book provides relevant theoretical frameworks and contemporary empirical research findings in the area of TEL applications for people with disabilities. It is written for professionals who want to improve their understanding of the strategic role of trust at different levels of the information and knowledge society; that is, trust at the level of the global economy, of networks and organizations, of teams and work groups, of information systems and, finally, trust at the level of individuals as actors in the networked environments. The book has a clear editing strategy: • • •

To be a reference for all those interested in the strategic role of TEL in helping people with disabilities: The main emphasis is on practical aspects. To be a reference for all those (policy makers, government officers, academics, and practitioners) interested in understanding how TEL can help people with disabilities. To become a reference edition for people thirsty for knowledge on theoretical and practical applications of Information Technology to improve the life and work of people with disabilities.

The book aims to be the leading source of information for all those interested in understanding how TEL can help because it promotes scientific discussion of the needs of people with disabilities and how IT enhanced activities and programs can help disabled people in their daily activities. Furthermore, this book demonstrates the capacity of information technology and management for the mutual understanding, prosperity and well being of people.

xv

Target Audience • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Politicians Professors in academia Policymakers Government officers Students Corporate heads of firms Senior general managers Managing directors Board directors Academics and researchers in the field both in universities and business schools Information technology directors and managers Quality managers and directors Human resource directors Libraries and information centres serving the needs of the above.

Patricia Ordoñez de Pablos Robert D. Tennyson Jingyuan Zhao March 2010

1

Chapter 1

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities Robert D. Tennyson University of Minnesota, USA Robert L. Jorczak University of Minnesota, USA

ABsTRACT Perhaps contrary to expectations, computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), particularly asynchronous text discussion, has characteristics that may be beneficial to learners with disabilities. CSCL seeks to bring the benefits of classroom-based collaborative and cooperative learning to the online environment. Collaborative and cooperative learning, and particularly its online form, CSCL, is a learning methodology with characteristics that may mask or compensate for specific disabilities. For example, in addition to the generally improved access offered by online learning, the slowed pace and anonymity of asynchronous text discussion has shown to improve social interaction for learners with communication and learning disabilities. This chapter suggests how learners with specific disabilities may benefit from CSCL discussion in postsecondary courses.

INTRODUCTION Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is the use of networked computers to deliver collaborative learning activities. Collaborative learning methods involve increased student participation and exploration in learning activities, including reliance on peer-to-peer interaction for learning. CSCL seeks to bring the benefits of classroom-based collaborative and DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch001

cooperative learning to the online environment. CSCL is frequently employed in online training and postsecondary education, but the techniques of CSCL may be increasingly applied to other educational levels in the future. Collaborative and cooperative learning results from a theoretical learning perspective asserting that students sharing their understanding provide opportunities for individual students to increase their knowledge and also that conflict among students’ ideas and knowledge provide a stimulus for increased knowledge. A body of research shows

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

that collaborative learning activities can foster shared understanding and retention of learned material (Johnson & Johnson, 1994; Johnson, Maruyama, Johnson, Nelson, & Skon, 1981; Slavin, 1987, 1992; Yeager, Johnson & Johnson, 1985). Other research asserts that collaborative learning methods can promote higher-order learning such as critical thinking (e.g., Anderson, Howe, Soden, Halliday & Lowe, 2001; Gokhale, 1995; Meyer, 2003; Webb, 1989). CSCL often uses online peer-to-peer discussion to support achievement of higher-order learning objectives. Hammond (2005) surveyed online discussion studies and found several that cite evidence of higher-order knowledge construction and learning advantages of group discussion. Supporters of online learning generally assert that online learning provides increased access to postsecondary education for students with disabilities, but there is minimal research on if and how online learning environments affect postsecondary students (Kinash, Crichton & Kim-Rupnow, 2004). Schenker and Scadden (2002) suggest that the research on educational technology and the disabled tends to focus on accessibility, but that pedagogy and instructional design may also affect disabled students. Schenker and Scadden (2002) further suggest that assessing the effects of instructional approaches is more difficult and therefore has been the subject of less research. Collaborative and cooperative learning, and particularly its online form, CSCL, is a learning methodology with characteristics that in some ways mask or compensate for specific disabilities. Confirming research of these characteristics, however, is not yet available, so at this time we speak mainly of potential benefits of CSCL characteristics. CSCL provides opportunities for students to interact with other students so they can practice and improve their social skills and experience group dynamics (Tennyson, 2005). This characteristic may be particularly useful to students with disabilities that limit access to social interaction. While collaboration is beneficial to all students,

2

the characteristics of online environments may present better learning opportunities for learners with specific disabilities than traditional classroom collaboration. Online collaborative environments may also present some unique problems for learners with specific disabilities. Cook and Gladhart (2002) posit that learning via the Internet has analogues of most instructional methods used in higher education classrooms. Online instruction thus has few or no pedagogic limitations compared to classroom instruction, except that the instructor or facilitator is not physically present. The physical absence of an instructor places an additional burden on online instruction to provide clear class procedures to students. Cook and Gladhart (2002) assert that such additional guidance is especially important for students with learning disabilities, who then have more difficulty generalizing information than other students.

ADAPTIVE AND AssIsTIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR COMPUTER UsE The first factor to be considered in examining CSCL for learners with disabilities is their ability to use computers access to the World Wide Web of the Internet. For some learners with disabilities, adaptive technology is required to enable Internet use. For example, learners with visual disabilities may require “screen reader” software that uses synthetic speech to read text on computer screens. (See Cook and Gladhart [2002] for a list of examples of such assistive hardware and software.) This discussion will not address the various technologies that provide Internet access to learners with disabilities, but rather will focus on how CSCL can benefit such learners once they have Internet access and can use a computer to participate in typical CSCL learning activities. In general, technology is available that enables learners with disabilities to take postsecondary classes online

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

that they could otherwise take only with great effort (for example, see this Internet article: http:// www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/0522ecollege.mspx). While discussion of technology intended to ease computer use by learners with disabilities is beyond the scope of this chapter, this problem should not be overlooked. Online courses have some characteristics that can inhibit use by students with specific disabilities (see for example, the Carnevale, 2005 article: http://chronicle.com/ free/v51/i49/49a03301.htm).

IMPROVED ACCEss TO LEARNING ENVIRONMENTs Online learning in general provides easy access to various learning environments, and often provides much improved access for learners will physical disabilities. Transportation to a classroom, support for various physical disabilities, and issues of technology support of communication often are non-issues once the learner is able to use a computer to access online learning on the Internet and to communicate with the instructor and fellow students. For courses that are offered totally on the Internet, learners typically interact only through their computer display and keyboard and, if discussion is asynchronous (not real time), students communicate at the time (and speed) of their own choosing. (For detailed descriptions of asynchronous discussion, see Lapadat, 2002.) For adult students with severe physical disabilities, online distributed learning may be the only practical or economical means for students to access a wide variety of higher education and postsecondary courses and may also be the only feasible means to access courses employing collaborative learning. Improved access (provided the learner has the requisite access technology) is a feature of all online learning, not just collaborative learning. Collaborative learning, however, is in particular made much more accessible to learners with some disabilities by being offered online. Collaborative

learning in a classroom often involves communicating verbally with members of a small group in real time. Collaborative learning is highly interactive and relies on student learning from fellow students. The classroom environment for collaboration places additional burdens on students who have difficulty moving about the classroom, getting situated for small group discussion, and communicating via speech. Online discussion, in contrast to classroom collaborative learning, can be done from students’ own households or from any location that provides Internet access and supports asynchronous written communication.

EQUITY IN PARTICIPATION Equity in online collaborative learning activities means the potential for students to equally contribute to and benefit from activities such as discussion. Equitable discussions are balanced in terms of contributions from group members, and students’ contributions are treated with impartiality. Such discussions provide students with both the ability to fully express themselves and the ability to be fully heard. Also, equitable discussion would be impartial in judging the merits of presented information, ideas, and opinions. Most CSCL environments use asynchronous text-only discussion, which improve discussion equity for all students. Unlike face-to-face oral discussion, no learner can dominate an asynchronous conversation by taking up a disproportionate amount of the time allotted for discussion. With asynchronous discussion, all learners can say as much as they want, and lengthy comments do not lessen the time for other learners to participate. Learners’ speaking and social skills have less effect on the discussion. Because most online discussion for learning is exclusively by text, learners who are disadvantaged in their ability to speak or to hear and comprehend oral communication are less disadvantaged when communicating via text in CSCL activities.

3

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

Physical disabilities can affect learners’ ability to fully participate in face-to-face discussions, as learners with such disabilities may have difficulty speaking quickly or intelligibly, or to use various nonverbal communication cues. These issues are not present when asynchronous discussion is used to support collaboration, so students with such disabilities can fully contribute their ideas to the discussion. Asynchronous, text-only small group discussion clearly has the potential to mitigate problems experienced by students with certain communication disorders. Students with hearing and speaking disabilities, for example, are not disadvantaged in asynchronous text-only discussion because communication is not aural and occurs at a pace comfortable to all participants. CSCL allows learners to engage in discussion “without a voice and without a face” (Schenker & Scadden, 2002, p. 3) which provides increased anonymity that may allow learners to express themselves more openly (Schenker & Scadden, 2002). With online text-only discussion, the probability of feeling stigmatized is lessened as students often never see each other and may be unaware of a student’s disability unless that student mentions their disability. In typical CSCL discussions, students with disabilities are less likely to be discomforted or frustrated by their disability; other students are often not aware of such disabilities because students do not hear or see their peers and written contributions are indistinguishable. When other group members are aware of an individual student’s disability, they may react by lessening or limiting their interaction for fear of inadvertently offending the individual. They may also unconsciously lower their expectations of students with observable disabilities. The online collaborative environment provides more control and choice to students with disabilities. In most CSCL environments, the student can choose if and when to reveal a disability, likely reducing their anxiety of interacting with classmates. If other group members are unaware of those disabilities,

4

they will be less likely to be inhibited in reacting to students with disabilities and less likely to adjust their expectations of those students. When collaborative activities rely on written communication, physical and perceptual disabilities that affect typing can put learners at a disadvantage in synchronous (real time) discussion (i.e., “chat”). With synchronous text-only communication, a learner must be able to type quickly to equally contribute to the fast-moving discussion. Synchronous discussion among several learners can be confusing to learners without disabilities, as learners struggle to conduct multiple conversations at the same time. Real time discussion can be an even greater problem for learners with physical or communication disabilities, or learners who are easily distracted (Cook & Gladhard, 2002). When discussion is asynchronous, learners have as much time as they need to read and process messages from other learners. Learners with typing handicaps are not disadvantaged in terms of their ability to fully contribute to the discussion because they have ample time to produce their messages. When discussion is asynchronous, even learners who type more slowly can equally participate in the discussion. Collaborative learning small group discussions can increase apprehension of learners with disabilities because they may have encountered difficulty with social interaction in the past; particularly if learners have an obvious learning disability or if their disability involves difficulty with communication or social interaction. Such apprehension can cause these learners to minimize their participation in discussion, preventing full participation. In face-to-face discussion, group members may feel inhibited from fully responding to learners with physical disabilities or obvious communication or learning disabilities. Thus, the learner with the disability is deprived a fully developed discussion (which may involve conflict of ideas and perspective) that is required for the interaction to support peer-to-peer learning.

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

In general, CSCL asynchronous discussion has the potential to provide more equitable peer-topeer discussions for learning. For students with physical, communication, and other disabilities, asynchronous text-only communication provides increased anonymity, which works against stereotyping and assumptions about other students. This increased impartiality of online discussion may be particularly true for students with observable disabilities.

IssUEs AND POTENTIAL BENEFITs OF CsCL FOR sTUDENTs WITH LEARNING DIsABILITIEs A learning disability hinders a person’s ability to interpret what they sense or to integrate information activating various parts of their brain (Neuwirth, 1993). Students with learning disabilities may have difficulty using spoken or written language. Learning disorders may also affect a student’s ability to focus attention. Difficulties with spoken and written language are of particular concern because of the reliance of collaborative learning on communication, especially peer-topeer communication. Difficulties with speaking, listening, reading or writing are likely to diminish the effectiveness of collaborative learning. CSCL, being an online learning environment that relies heavily on text communication, is therefore most sensitive to difficulties with written language. While many learning disabilities are developmental, some continue into adulthood. For example, hyperactivity associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) generally subsides in adolescence, but problems with maintaining attention can continue into adulthood (NIMH, 1993). Adults with ADHD tend to have difficulty in organizing and completing tasks (NIMH, 1993). Many people with ADHD, Asperger syndrome, and dyslexia are highly intelligent, but the difficulties they experience when trying to process information cause frustration and

in some cases shame and embarrassment. Such feelings are likely to hinder both communication and the resultant learning when participating in collaborative learning. Asynchronous CSCL discussion tends to slow the pace of communication, providing more time for students to think about and react to ideas and information (Meyer, 2003; Garrison et al., 2000), thereby lessening the pressure for students to perform in discussion. The reflective time of slower written communication along with the more conscious and careful organization of written online communication may ease the need for continuous and deep attention, and may also remove the social pressure of face-to-face synchronous discussion. The slower pace of asynchronous written discussion provides students with more time to cognitively process new information present in the discussion (Andriessen et al., 2003; Lapadat, 2002). This extra time available to process information when responding to asynchronous written messages deepens the level of students’ processing and students’ potential to extract meaning using online dialog (Lapadat, 2002). Students with attention problems will likely feel less frustration with the discussion because discussions progress at a slower and user-determined rate. Learners with problems involving attention or organization are also less likely to adversely affect other learners in an online environment because the learner with disability any frustration with communication is less likely to be observed. While learners with speaking disorders and ADD may benefit from the slower, written discussion pace of CSCL environments, learners with dyslexia—a difficulty with written language, particularly with reading and spelling (Moody, 2000)—are disadvantaged in CSCL text-only discussion environments, particularly synchronous text discussion in which written responses must be quickly processed and generated. Dyslexic learners must be given additional support to ensure that they benefit from online written discussion, but effective ways of supporting learners with

5

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

dyslexia are not clear. Further research is required to identify means of addressing the problem of dyslexic CSCL learners, but additional help (from the instructor and other members of the group) is very likely to be required for these students. The use of graphical representations and additional discussion scripting (detailed instructions and models guiding discussion) may also prove helpful.

sOCIO-EMOTIONAL MEDIATION Despite the ability of text-only CSCL discussion to support cognitive processes required for deep learning, some theorists assert that text-only computer-mediated discussion is lacking in socioemotional content and that content is necessary for optimal learning. For example, Kreijns et al. (2003) state that “…research on group learning shows that asynchronous distributed learning groups utilizing computer supported collaborative learning environments often lack the social interaction needed for these dialogs” (p. 335). Classroom collaborative-dialog learning activities use face-to-face oral communication, a medium rich in non-verbal cues that carry much of the social and emotional content of the discussion (Garrison et al, 2003; Kreijns et al, 2003). Such communication is carried visually (e.g., through facial expression and body language), audibly (e.g., with voice inflection), or via other senses. Because text-only computer-based communication does not include these sensory modes, much of the social and emotional content of face-to-face discussion is either lost or must be communicated via text (e.g., with emoticons). Mallen et al. (2003) found that participants in face-to-face dialog reported greater satisfaction and levels of “closeness” than those in online text-only dialogs. The loss of much of the socio-emotional content of discussion in computer-mediated communication (CMC) might result in less social presence (Garrison et al, 2003; Kreijns et al., 2003, Mallen, et al., 2003) a feeling that one is communicating

6

with other, emotionally involved people. Increased social presence may be reassuring to some students and enable them to better understand and interact with other students. The difficulty of computer-mediated communication in establishing the level and quality of social and emotional interaction present in face-to-face collaborative learning environments raises questions about how text-only discussion might affect learners with social interaction disabilities, such as social anxiety disorders or Asperger syndrome. Some learners may require the full spectrum of social communication cues found in face-toface discussion to communicate effectively in a collaborative learning environment discussion. These learners would be at a disadvantage in CSCL text-only discussions. Learners who have difficulty processing and interpreting social and emotional cues of oral conversation, or who find social interactions intimidating or threatening, however, may prefer the mediated communication of text-only asynchronous environments in which such cues are not present and their interpretation is not required to fully understand what a group member is saying. Learners with Asperger syndrome tend to have difficulty reading nonverbal cues and may be annoyed by stimuli that do not bother other students and is therefore the behavior of the student with Asperger’s syndrome misinterpreted by other students (Kirby, 2005). The communication mediation of text-only discussion is therefore a benefit for smooth and productive integration of students with Asperger syndrome into group discussions. Learners with social anxiety disorder have a chronic fear of being judged by others and of being embarrassed by their actions. Students with this type of disability may also benefit from the relative anonymity of online discussion. The additional time to compose messages of asynchronous discussion also may work to lessen students’ anxiety. Agoraphobia, for example, is an anxiety disorder in which a person feels extreme fear when there is no easy means of exit or escape and

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

tends to avoid pubic or unfamiliar places. Students with this disorder may only be able to take part in collaborative learning via online offerings. In general, students who are uncomfortable with social interaction of traditional classrooms may prefer an online environment and perform better in one (Cook, 2002).

sUMMARY AND CONCLUsION Because of the more controlled and thoughtful socio-emotional communication of asynchronous CSCL text discussion, all students may feel more secure and consequently reveal more of themselves than in face-to-face discussion. Such comfort and self-disclosure may be an essential aspect of peer-to-peer discussion for learning (Rourke et al. (1999). Optimal learning via online discussion requires that discussion include diverse ideas and opinions (e.g., Jorczak, 2008). In addition, the preexisting ideas and opinions of learners must be challenged enough so that students experience conceptual conflict (Johnson & Johnson, 1979; Lowery & Johnson, 1981). It is more likely that such conflict will occur and be accepted as positive if students feel secure, trust their group members and do not overreact to criticism or contrary opinions. Overreaction is less likely to occur if students have time to consider their discussion contributions and those of their classmates. Overreaction is also less likely to occur if socio-emotional messages are reduced in number, less spontaneous, and not delivered via non-verbal cues. Students with physical, communication, and learning disabilities may need the more mediated and considered discussion that is possible with asynchronous text-only discussion because they have greater insecurities associated with social interaction, particularly in public settings and with strangers. Andriessen, Baker, and Suthers (2003) suggest that students learn from argumentation in collaborative discussion by having more coherent

discourse about a topic, a changing attitudes and beliefs, and co-construction of new knowledge when they achieve a compromise of divergent views. When disabilities are known to other students, they may initially be reluctant to engage in conceptual conflict and argumentation with those students with disabilities. Thus, students who already may have additional problems in taking part in collaborative learning may also be deprived of aspects of collaborative interaction that are necessary to obtain the full benefits of collaborative learning. Aspects of CSCL, and particularly of asynchronous online discussion, are beneficial to students with several types of disabilities. The slowed pace of discussion and the lessening of socioemotional content in CSCL discussions seems to have benefits for students with several types of disabilities, while having potential problems for students who find it difficult to communicate through writing. Empirical research is required to understand exactly which disabilities are lessened or exacerbated by characteristics of CSCL environments, but there are several good reasons to expect that the online collaborative learning environment is superior to traditional classroom environments for students with specific disabilities.

REFERENCEs Anderson, T., Howe, C., Soden, R., Halliday, J., & Low, J. (2006). Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students. Instructional Science, 29, 1–32. doi:10.1023/A:1026471702353 Andriessen, J. (2006). Collaboration in computer conferencing . In O’Donnell, A. M., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Erkens, G. (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 197–232). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

7

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

Andriessen, J., Baker, M. J., & Suthers, D. (2003). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions . In Andriessen, J., Baker, M. J., & Suthers, D. (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 1–25). Amsterdam: Kluwer. Cook, R. A., & Gladhard, M. A. (2002). A survey of online instructional issues and strategies for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Information Technology and Disabilities, 8(1). Retrieved on August 1, 2009 from http://people. rit.edu/easi/itd/itdv08n1/gladhart.htm Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 1–19. Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1). Hammond, M. (2005). A review of recent papers on online discussion in teaching and learning in higher education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3).

Jorczak, R. L. (2008). The effects of task characteristics on higher-order learning in online collaborative learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Kinash, S., Crichton, S., & Kim-Rupnow, W. S. (2004). A review of 2000-2003 literature at the intersection of online learning and disability. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 5–19. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1801_2 King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar. H. Mandl & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 13-38). New York: Springer. Kirby, B. L. (2005). What is Asperger syndrome? Online Asperger syndrome information and support site. Retrieved on December 12, 2008 from http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/aswhatisit. html. Lapadat, J. C. (2002). Written interaction: A key component in online learning. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(4).

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49(1), 51–69.

Lowery, N., & Johnson, D. W. (1981). Effects of controversy on epistemic curiosity, achievement, and attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 115(1), 31–43.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). An overview of cooperative learning. In J. Thousand, A. Villa & A. Nevin (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning. Baltimore: Brookes Press. Retrieved January 27, 2008, from http://www. co-operation.org/pages/overviewpaper.html

Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3). Retrieved January 22, 2009, from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/pdf/ v7n3_meyer.pdf

Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individual goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.47

Moody, S. (2000). Dyslexia—a psychotherapist’s guide. The Dyslexia Online Journal. Retrieved December 12, 2008, from http://www.dyslexiaadults.com/therapy.html

8

Benefits of CSCL for Learners with Disabilities

Neuwirth, S. (1993). Learning disabilities. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content/learningdis.html NIMH. (1996). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. National Institute of Mental Health. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www. himh.nih.gov/health/publications/adhd/nimhadhdpub.pdf Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51–70. Schenker, K. T., & Scadden, L. A. (2002). The design of accessible distance education environments that use collaborative learning. Information Technology and Disabilities, 8(1). Slavin, R. E. (1987). Developmental and motivation perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161–1167. doi:10.2307/1130612

Slavin, R. E. (1992). When and why does cooperative learning increase achievement? Theoretical and empirical perspectives . In Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Miller, N. (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups (pp. 145–173). New York: Cambridge University Press. Tennyson, R. D. (2005). Using glass box simulations to accelerate and extend knowledge transfer. System Dynamics Review, 21, 243–267. Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–39. doi:10.1016/08830355(89)90014-1 Yeager, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 60–66. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.77.1.60

9

10

Chapter 2

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities: Review of Research and Practice Robert D. Tennyson University of Minnesota, USA

ABsTRACT This chapter presents an argument for the employment of computers in education and the possible improvements especially for students with disabilities. Early in the chapter questions concerning technological change are discussed in reference to research and practice. The view in disability education is moving towards lifelong learning and the need to apply advances in both technology and research to accomplish this goal. Employment of cognitive theories coupled with emerging technologies is hypothesized to improve the paradigm shift in education from classroom centered instruction to distributed learning environments. Proposed is that research in cognitive psychology, especially with findings for constructive theories can be successfully applied to disability education.

INTRODUCTION Visualize, if you will, two tenth grade students with learning disabilities that are actively involved in the study of toxins in the St. Louis River of Minnesota (USA). They have spent a week in the library using the computerized catalog and the CD ROM periodicals index with full text to locate information from which to propose a hypothesis for their investigation, “The Cause of Water Pollution of The St. Louis River.” They DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch002

obtain an Excel database of River Watch monitoring results from the MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency). From that data they decide to focus on the topic “Acid Rain.” Their data are the raised pH levels collected at all sites over a four year period. They obtain computerized details on Acid Rain from the MPCA and then search the Internet for other schools with similar interests. The home page of a southern Minnesota school involved with deformed frog research has some links to information sources. They also find more Acid Rain background material on the Green Net, the River Net, and GLIN (Great Lakes Information

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

Net). From these sources, they download pictures and text, and proceed to construct a storyboard multimedia presentation, using PowerPoint. This presentation will be the final summary (qualitative and quantitative) of their processes and efforts. As part of their learning activities, they will also analyze the actual water quality by taking samplings at the Indian Point site on the St. Louis River of Minnesota, and will compare those findings with the established criteria from the MPCA on river based toxins. The most interesting thing about this whole scenario is that these students are in a special education science class at the high school level.

TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE (Is TECHNOLOGY OUTPACING EDUCATIONAL CHANGE?) The above scenario is typical of one technologically mature approach to using computers on a daily basis in one class at the Duluth Central High School in Duluth, Minnesota. Computers have been used for instruction in schools for over 35 years in Minnesota, with some real successes and some definite concerns that we will explore in detail in this chapter. Miniaturization of computer chips in the 1970’s has provided education with a powerful technological tool--the microcomputer. But, the concern is that the educational microcomputer does not come with directions as to its appropriate use! Educational theory and the resulting research will be explored as a possible diviner of instructions for how computers should be used to support instructional interventions for school children with disabilities. The 1990’s and 2000’s paradigm shifts in research from scientific reductionism to holistic social constructivism (Lytras & Tennyson, 2008) and in practice from 20th Century industrialism to today’s post-industrial information society, will be used to explain the complex and interrelated issues of using computers for instructional interventions in special education.

The existing knowledge base related to computers in the state of Minnesota will be explored thoroughly in the next pages, as Minnesota has been in the forefront of the adoption of computers in education: Starting with mainframe access across Minnesota in the 1970’s, followed by local MECC (Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium) site coordinators and microcomputer efforts in the 1980’s, and recently consummating with the legislative funded technology site testing and the Internet explorations of the 2000’s. Technological change is driving both the computer industry and education at a frenetic pace, while at the same time; schools worldwide are striving to find the most educationally sound applications for the newly emerging computer technologies. We will also explore the driving mechanisms of computer use in educational institutions of many kinds (public, private, and distributed) by looking at how miniaturization, networking, artificial intelligence, and business initiatives are driving the change process. At the close of this chapter, we to describe some of the emerging knowledge base issues supporting computer interventions with children.

REsEARCH AND PRACTICE (CAN REsEARCH IMPROVE EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE?) Schools around the world have married the computer for better or worse, with wedding expenses in the multiple billion dollar range. Meta-research indicates that computers can improve instruction, so the investment has not gone to waste (O’Neil & Perez, 2008). Properly designed computer instruction is equal to or more effective that traditional large group or small group instruction (Tennyson & Breuer, 2003). The research results build an incomplete picture but they suggest that certain hardware and software employed with particular populations under competent teachers

11

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

can meet instructional objectives. Students who use a computer improve their spelling, sentence memory, listening comprehension, vocabulary, and reading comprehension (literacy) skills more than those who do not (Breuer, Molkenthin, & Tennyson, 2008). A critical question still persists, though, because of the large amount of school computer hardware and software presently in use: Is the software and hardware used in education based on successful research that can lead to improvement in school practice or are teachers just going through another educational fad--driven by the media hype of the “information revolution?” Schools cannot stop the worldwide computer revolution and ongoing technological change but they can willfully build computers into education in ways that are most efficient and effective based on sound research linked to educational theory (Tennyson, 2005b).

NATIONAL CENTER FOR IMPROVEMENT OF PRACTICE In 2004, the National Center for the Improvement of Practice (NCIP), collected testimony on the problems associated with operationalizing computer theory and research into educational practice. On one side of the table sat the university professors with a clear research agenda based on solid theory, and on the other side sat the practitioners who were the college, high school, or primary school educators. This was one of the few times that these two groups had come together to focus on the holistic issue--how to move from theory based research to the practical classroom implementation of computer based instruction. Most practitioners and researchers present recognized that there was a significant problem in moving from closely structured theory based research to the complexity of the real classroom Many NCIP conference sessions and discussions were held because the problem of moving research into practice appeared to be real and

12

significant to all. Examples were given of the few research projects that had resulted in commercial successes such as the reading program, Reader Rabbit, and the problem solving experiences, Jasper Woodbury, but most did not. NCIP participant discussions came to be directed at the large amount of research that was funded and completed that was not possible to put into practice. Much of computer research is focused on a narrow segment of education (e. g., eighth grade small group computer instruction) that would be difficult to replicate at another site or that is so theoretical in nature (e.g., the artificial intelligence visual recognition research) that it is not possible to convert it to a practical educational end product. Researchers defended their specific research agenda’s that were tightly linked to theory, which have suffered from shortages of research dollars in recent years. Practitioners positioned themselves as overworked and underfunded but with a clear need to utilize the power of technology and the microcomputer to improve educational interventions with children. The NCIP has since 2004, provided a valued service to both researchers and practitioners by (a) selecting specific research projects that can most easily be operationalized into practice through their funding and development programs, (b) developing video vignettes of viable computer practices, and (c) providing an Internet site to continue the dialog on the issues surrounding the conversion of research to practice. The NCIP has brought our attention to the need for careful analysis of computer based interventions with children and the need for sound research that can be put into practice. The important question is: “How can theory and research lead to improved educational practice in a time of decreasing budget and ever increasing speed of technological change?” The researcher and the practitioner may have to seek a common ground where the student can benefit or the future of computer based education may default to the software sales people interested in monetary returns instead of educational results.

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

COMPLEXITY (CAN EDUCATION DEAL WITH THE LARGE NUMBER OF VARIABLEs?) The educational classroom application of computer interventions for children with disabilities is a very complex task. Cognitive factor research has isolated a large number of abilities that have been studied related to schools and education (i.e., verbal, spatial, perceptual speed, and visual memory). The number of educational research variables that have been investigated individually is well over thousands and includes variables such as: Abstract reasoning, achievement, aptitude, attitude, behavior, calculations, cognitive style, cooperative learning, deductive reasoning, difficulty, discovery, educability, encoding, experience, failure, feedback, forgetting, general intelligence, genotype, goal-directed, grouping, growth, health, heredity, imagery, individual difference, interest, instructor, instruction, judgment, knowledge base, language, latency, listening, memory, mental age, metacognition, motor, observation, organization, parenting, past performance, personality, problem solving, recognition, reflection, rehearsal, selfregulation, sex differences, social class, spatial, strategy, teaching style, test anxiety, time-on-task, trainability, transfer, underachievement, values, verbal, whole brain, working memory, zone of proximal development, etc. The complexity of implementing an instructional program is obvious to those instructional designers attempting to utilize computers for educational improvement, and is one of the major roadblocks to the operationalization of research into classroom practice. There is a need to rigorously match the relevant research findings to student’s individual needs. We need to plan for computer intervention, by linking cognitive theory and research to specific appropriate pre-

scriptions (Tennyson, 2005a). The complexity of the computer-human interface is an added complication to the myriad of variables in the instructional setting, which all combine to form a complex environment.

REsERACH (WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT REsEARCH ON COMPUTER BAsED INsTRUCTION?) Researchers have seen fit to study most of these 100+ variables in basically a laboratory environment in order to control for intervening and confounding effects during the investigations. Based on the NCIP meetings, the very control of independent variables that leads to quality research does not seem to allow for easy replication in the real world of multicultural schools with their myriad of social problems, diversity of students, and multiplicity of extraneous variables. Schools each have their own unique mix of variables that make implementation in actual school environments so difficult. Meta-Analysis. Research that looks at a number of studies, meta-analysis, can give us a broader view of the impact of educational research completed in the last several decades. The 2006 meta-analysis of 254 computer based instruction (CBI) studies since the 1980’s (Tennyson, 2006) came to the conclusion that CBI usually produces positive instructional effects on students. Tennyson found that CBI raised the average final exam scores from the 50th to the 62nd percentile (.30 standard deviations) in the typical study. This seems to match a previous study (Suppes, 1979) that found a .31 standard deviation increase and also matches other studies that show CBI at least as effective as live teaching and it may also result in savings of instructional time. The detailed metaanalysis findings give us some insight as to what may be relevant to computer implementation, these include the following:

13

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

Effectiveness: CBI used in a four week or less time period improved performance by .42 standard deviations over traditional instruction taught in a traditional classroom. Teaching: Instructors had a significant effect on instructional outcomes, which addresses the issue of the human interface and social interaction. Good instructors are necessary. Software: Microcomputers are more effective because of the growing sophistication of the available software. Efficiency: CBI took only 2/3 the time of conventional instruction, but taught as well. Attitudes: CBI improves students’ attitudes towards instruction, the content, and towards the instructor of the class.

PRACTICE: (WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT IMPLEMENTING COMPUTER INsTRUCTION?) At the NCIP meetings, college, high school, and primary school teachers bemoaned the low quality of available software and the lack of solid research and evaluation support for these interventions. Only since the late 1990s has the computer hardware/software industry provided the multimedia products that are making data access via computer such a powerful tool for educators. Yet, many titles are nothing more than computerized books such as encyclopedias, with no research to support their use. Some of the findings from the long term effects of using computers in the classroom are as follows: 1.

14

Performance: Scores on both mathematics and English were higher than control groups. Keyboard skills averaged 39 WPM compared to the control groups of 18 WPM. Test scores indicated that students were performing well and some were clearly performing better. Students wrote more effectively, with

2.

3.

greater fluidity, and classes finished whole units of study far more quickly than in past years. Collaboration: Researchers found that instead of isolating students, access to technology actually encouraged them to collaborate more than traditional classrooms. Instead of technology becoming boring with use, technology was even more interesting. Competencies: Students wrote more and better when they had access to computers. Students in computer supported classrooms did almost twice as much writing as students in other classes. Students explored and represented information dynamically and in many forms, became socially aware and more confident, communicated effectively about complex processes, used technology routinely and appropriately, became independent learners and self starters, knew their areas of expertise and shared that expertise spontaneously, worked well collaboratively, and developed a positive orientation to the future.

sUMMARY At this point I can unequivocally say that research and practice on computer instruction shows positive results. The microcomputer is effective in delivering classroom instruction, does improve student attitudes about instruction, and is efficient in delivering instruction in a third less time. Contemporary microcomputer software is an improvement over the past, and the instructional skills of the teacher are a significant factor in the success or failure of any use of computers for instructional interventions for children. Students seem to do better academically than in the traditional classroom, and feel good about the use of technology in education.

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

PARADIGM sHIFTs IN EDUCATIONAL REsEARCH AND PRACTICE Educational paradigms are the theories and models that underlay the research and practice of computer based instruction. In educational theory there have been a number of paradigm shifts over the years, from the behaviorist to the cognitive to the constructivist. Educational systems should and usually do reflect the underlying cultural beliefs, values, and ethics of a given society (Banathy, 1987). Yet, education has been severely criticized in the last 25 years because of its inability to change and meet the needs of the changing multicultural society of the world. Businesses and industries that count on the schools to provide them with young minds have been increasingly critical of public education. The ongoing criticisms of education suggest that classroom educational experiences that are grounded in the industrial age of the last century are outmoded and do not meet the needs of an information based society (Lytras, Tennyson, & Ordonez de Pablos, 2009). Business corporations have had to undergo large restructuring to keep up with the information driven demands. Business expects that schools also have to change from the industrial paradigm of large groups and mass production, to a customized education utilizing technology. Education needs to focus on learning and diversity to be realistic in the multicultural world, in place of the conformity of large class instruction and sorting of individuals. Moving the educational paradigm to a learning focus requires a shift from the teacher focus of the past. Some of the recommendations are to focus on construction in place of instruction so that learners can build their own knowledge as opposed to being fed information by the subject matter expert. This new type of educational paradigm requires a shift of instruction to active

learning, authentic tasks, and allowing the learner flexible time in order to achieve success. This is quite a change from the existing paradigm where the learner is expected to sit down, be quiet, and do what they are told by the authoritarian teacher (Tennyson, 2005b). The rate of change in our post-industrial society is increasing and many feel that technology is leaving education behind. Scientific knowledge is doubling at an increasing rate, while schools have generally not changed at anywhere near the rate required to disseminate that knowledge. We can see this trend most clearly in the sciences where the amount of new knowledge is doubling yearly. Many schools are still teaching science in the same laboratory manner that we all grew up with, even though the capabilities exist for the school laboratory to move out into the real world. For example, with a lap-top computer and the proper probes placed in real rivers, science labs can analyze water acidity directly. Schools can move from the older analysis of laboratory experiments to the construction of answers to real problems; problems that have social and cultural relevance to students, their lives, and their future.

COMPUTERs, REsERACH, AND THE PARADIGM sHIFT The use of the computer is compatible with the paradigm shift that is taking place today in psychology and education. Educators are moving from schools based on a 19th century industrial model to a more post-industrial information based approach to lifelong learning. Researchers appear to be moving from the old reductionist view of the study of small pieces of instruction in isolation, to a more holistic view of dealing with the complexities of the educational experience. Past educational research has used a reductionist paradigm that studied computer education by breaking down the

15

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

computer relevant psychological phenomena into their discrete parts for study. This has allowed for well controlled studies of specific phenomena, but has the ecological limitation of not representing the real educational experience in an authentic way. Once the phenomena has been broken down to the constituent parts such as the graphics and text components, these parts no longer resemble accurately the real-life instructional phenomena of interest. This lack of ecological realism due to research reductionism, could explain the difficulty in taking the significant results of a research effort and operationalizing them in the classroom. The positive aspect of this new paradigm is that there is a significant research movement underway to change from studying decontextualized processes, to the study of computer based interventions in the context of the real classroom (O’Neil & Perez, 2008). There is a move in research to eliminate the reductionist nature of educational research and to move to the positioning of the research in the broader social and environmental context that impacts the practice of computer based education. The psychological theory that supports this research appears to be moving to a more holistic and social view of the learning experience. It is starting to consider the whole ecology of instruction when designing a research study. The concern is for ecological validity by looking to wholes, the processes, and networks. The shift in computer based instructional research is away from looking at what behavioral effects are present to what both internal mental states and external environment variables affect the computer human interface. Since the paradigm shift to the convergence of the cognitive viewpoint, the Piagetian constructivist viewpoint, and the social constructionist viewpoint—educational research and practice have started to look at the realistic ecologically of computer based instruction during lifelong learning.

16

Is THE EXIsTINTG REsEARCH FLAWED? (Is TYPE I ERROR PREsENT?) Part of the motivation for a paradigm shift is likely caused by the media researchers that have been highly critical of the past media research. They hold the position that there are no unique effects from media like television, the computer, and CD Rom because of type I error--the research error of finding significance where none exists. An example of type I error is where the research shows that the ADAM CD Rom significantly improves medical instruction when the improved efficiency of instruction may be totally due to better teachers, better planning, or the increased content of the CD Rom. Many media studies have that have shown educational gains have utilized a regular classroom group for comparison purposes. These comparison groups have been taught by regular teachers who taught the usual load of classes and had minimal time for course preparation (Clark, 1994). When taking the average time to prepare one hour of CD instruction at about 228 hours (Barron & Orwig, 1995), it is likely that the argument of type I error with respect to the preparation time is realistic. The CD project usually hires the best teacher they can find to do the presentation, with that teacher assigned to just the CD project until it is completed--which is not at all comparable to the regular classroom setting. Yes, type I error can surely be present! Type I error may be a blessing in disguise, to the overworked regular classroom teacher. The traditional teacher receives the benefit of the improved teacher, increased preparation time, and other benefits of the media effort for the price of a single CD Rom. Having the CD Rom deliver more content than the traditional teacher may be type I error to the researcher, but to the traditional teacher and student they are benefits of

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

the media. It means more learning! The selection of the best teacher for the CD Rom may also be a type I error, but to the computer using teacher it means improving a portion of their course. The ADAM CD is a good example of a type I error, and also an example of how the effects of media can make a difference in the medical curriculum. That is, students are learning better and learning more (Barron & Orwig, 1995).

EXIsTING KNOWLEDGE BAsE: EDUCATIONAL COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY The knowledge base that a person has about computer technology is all important in the understanding of that technology. The knowledge base is the scaffolding that supports all future learning. What we presently know in terms of declarative, procedural, and contextual knowledge about computers in education is a foundation from which can be built better instructional designs. Declarative knowledge is the stable facts that represent “what” is to be known about computers in education. Procedural knowledge is the processes and sequential knowledge that is the “how” of computer use. Contextual knowledge is the ecology and context in which the computer is used.

BEHAVIORAL PARDIGM (DO ANIMALs AND HUMANs LEARN THE sAME WAY?) Experimental research by Russian physiologists provided much of the foundations for behavioral psychology. Sechenov (1829-1905), known as the father of Russian physiology, suggested that experimental approaches used in physiology were also applicable to psychology. He is also noted for his work in showing the role that reflexes and learning play in behavior. Bechterev (1857-1927) credited for developing reflexology, advanced the

position that external behavior is the only valid consideration in scientific experimental inquiry. Following in these traditions, the more known of the Russian physiologist, Pavlov (1849-1936) tested the hypothesis that certain reflexes could be conditioned. Of interest in the development of behavioral psychology is that in his work in glandular secretions and motor movement, Pavlov initially included reference to mental states in his research with animals but in his later writings excluded such references, resulting in a purely objective stance. Most influential to American behaviorism was his research resulting in classical or Pavlovian conditioning, the process in which an initially neutral stimulus, called the conditioned stimulus, is repeatedly paired with a reinforcer or unconditioned stimulus, replacing the initial response, referred to as the unconditioned response with a conditioned response. Applying these concepts in America, Watson (1878-1958) purposely intended to establish a new school of psychology in America, one that was to apply a purely objective and experimental approach to the study of behavior, both animal and human. Rejecting the teachings of the American functionalist school which included concepts of introspection, Watson suggested that the goal of psychology was to predict and control behavior, thus discarding all reference to consciousness. Watson was particularly influenced by the work of Thorndike (1874-1949), whose work advanced the development of comparative (animals as subjects) psychology that culminated in his theories of trial and error learning. Reflecting on these advances, Watson applied the method of observation to comparative psychology in his work on fear responses using children and animals. Although pragmatic in practice, Watson’s behaviorism was foundational to the work of neo-behaviorists who further advanced behaviorism to its position of dominance in American psychology. Beginning in the 1930s and progressing into the 1960s was a second phase of behaviorism known as neo-behaviorism. Proponents advocated

17

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

explanatory systems and encouraged increased precision through common methods and terminology. Applying postulates from both molarism and Gestalt theory, Tolman (1866-1959) introduced the concept of purposive behaviorism that utilized a systematic treatment of the data in his research in learning and cognitive complexity based on studies done with animals and mazes. Utilizing a more theoretical than empirical approach, Guthrie (1886-1959) established contiguous conditioning based on an instrumental conditioning model that suggested that learning occurs through the pairing of a stimulus and a response, with reinforcement not necessary for learning to occur. Hull (1884-1952) applied concepts of mathematics to learning resulting in his mathematico-deductive theory of learning based on classical conditioning emphasizing habit strength and drive. Hull’s theory was quite complex and usually stated in mathematical formulations. The most famous of the neo-behaviorists was Skinner (1904-1990), developer of operant conditioning and its schedules of reinforcement. Skinner proposed that if the occurrence of an operant or emitted response is followed by a reinforcing stimulus, the rate of responding will increase. Skinner’s theory of operant conditioning has been of vital influence to instructional development, particularly in the areas of learning, cognition, and artificial intelligence. The application of the behavioral paradigm in education was promoted by the use of teaching machines in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Behaviorist’s treated the computer experience as a black box, where input and output functions were the observable behavioral responses of the student. The computer managed teaching machine was a black box, where an individual student could press a button to indicate which answer was correct-and then receive immediate reinforcement. An example of teaching machines during this era was a closed loop filmstrip that the computer would stop so that an answer could be selected from the choices given. With the management control provided by a mainframe computer and later with

18

the increasingly powerful microcomputer, these teaching machines became quite sophisticated tools for industrial and military instruction by the late 1970s. However, they never caught on in the K-12 schools because of initial high costs and because they dealt with only the lowest level of declarative knowledge. Behavioral Software. Much of the initial software that was developed for mainframe computers and later converted to microcomputers was based on the behavioral paradigm (Enkenberg, 1995). For example, the software developed for the Apple IIe was primarily of a drill and practice nature; like Math Drill, that gave the student a math problem and had the student select the correct answer in a multiple choice format. Reinforcement was in the form of a word reward like “correct;” sound and animation were added later as the rewards for correct responses. However, students found the short games that were part of these first math drills, such as the first Number Munchers, to be more captivating than the drill software. This is the same time period that Packman became a best selling game, and which can still be found on most small computer systems today. The Muncher programs in the Apple system have since become a standard instructional strategy for many subjects. The goal of the muncher is to only eat the correct answers, thus providing a reward. Additional software for Apple based applications have been developed by teachers using the computer programming language BASIC (Beginners All purpose System of Instructions of Computers?). BASIC allowed easy construction of text and number based drill and practice programs. BASIC is an interpreted language that does not run as fast as a compiled language (e.g., Cobal or FORTRAN), but it was available for use with most microcomputers by the 1980’s. Weaknesses of Behavioral Paradigm in CBI. The weakness of the behavioral position for CBI design was the structured approach of the small, incremental steps followed by randomly presented rewards. Humans are capable of going

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

beyond the simple behavioral strategy of learning by reinforcement; they can learn by modifying their actions through the cognitive process of mental reflection--a processes largely ignored by the behaviorist. There are some powerful examples of drill and practice software like the SAT Preparation materials and the latest versions of Math Munchers, but these employ the stimulusresponse-reinforcement instructional design strategy. They all have the common attributes of restricting the user to a low level of declarative knowledge learning.

sPECIAL EDUCATION The field of special education has benefited by the ongoing use of the behavioral paradigm because there is a real need for drill and practice and lowlevel software where reduced mental capability is individually diagnosed. These software programs that were developed in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s serve a valuable function for students that are grades below their age-appropriate developmental level and for those students that need to have a large number of repetitions. Similar programs have been developed to assist in tasks like teaching the street signs and their meanings to the low functioning students. The microcomputer has also been useful in special education for monitoring actual behavior in the classroom through data recording methods and in providing school psychologists with tools for test administration and analysis. An example of the former is the Mpls. Record that allows the observer to record actual student behaviors as they happen on a portable microcomputer. An example of the latter is the Behavior Evaluation Scale program that allows immediate access to behavior assessment data and results.

COGNITIVE PARADIGM (CAN WE UNDERsTAND WHAT GOEs ON IN THE MIND?) Contemporary cognitive theories of learning are having a similar effect on current instructional design for computer applications in education as the behavioral theories had on the earlier applications (Tennyson, 2005a). The concern of cognitive theories with knowledge structures, metacognitive strategies for problem-solving, and integration of new and existing knowledge structures by the learner is leading to a number of instructional design changes, including: development of a new theoretical basis for design of learning environments intended to facilitate exploration and reinforce context (e.g., computer “microworlds” and hypertext); significant expansion of the role of learner control coupled with an enriched dialog between the learner and the learning environment in order to support individual learner differences, facilitate integration and enhance motivation (e.g., the “coach” technique in intelligent tutorial systems); and a redefinition of the structural requirements for simulations and games. In outlining the history of cognitive psychology, Tennyson and Elmore (1997) write that cognitive psychology grew out of a history of behaviorism (e.g., Skinner) and psychoanalysis (e.g., Freud). These two approaches focused on the individual; additionally, the measurement tools developed in cognitive psychology have also been focused on the learner. To the extent that special education teachers and school psychologist understand the learner, they can develop more effective instruction, but cognitive psychology has not been primarily concerned with that. Effective instruction is an implementation of the research findings. That is, experimental psychologists conducting basic research in human learning have not traditionally been responsible for diffusion and dissemination of their findings into the fields of education.

19

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

That this attitude is changing somewhat, is the ideal exemplified by Ausubel, Novak, and Hanesian (1978), where they emphasize a stronger relationship between theories of learning and theories of teaching, suggesting they are interdependent and not mutually exclusive. An adequate theory of learning is essential to a theory of teaching because it is unproductive to experiment with varying teaching methods without some basis in learning theory (Tennyson, 1990). Discovering the most effective teaching methods is dependent on knowing the status of the learner and the variables that affect learning. Computers have enabled cognitive science theorists to analyze the learning process in new ways, and much of the work in cognitive theory has been done by those familiar with computers (O’Neil & Perez, 2008). Computer programs and system flowcharting have made it possible to simulate cognitive procedures and mental models such as student problem solving methods. Breuer et al. (2008) point out that while mental models which children use have been identified, they are rarely taught. Children invent them; because all mental models may be different, children may be giving the same answers but using entirely different methods, some more or less effective and efficient than others, to arrive at their conclusions. Rather than focusing on the answers provided by students (basically the methodology paradigm of behaviorism), cognitive methodology focuses on the mental procedure being used (the cognitive model); the outcome is information that may allow transforming a learning theory into an instructional theory. A primary application of computer techniques in describing learning has been the development of information processing (IP) models. The basic components of the IP model of learning include the following components: sensory receptors, perception, short-term (working) memory, and long-term memory. Contemporary IP models, unlike the behavioral models, have two primary sources of knowledge acquisition: external and

20

internal. External information enters the cognitive system through the standard sensory mechanisms while internal information is constructed as a result of the output/input relationship between the three system components. External behavior is exhibited through the output of the sensory receptors component. Sensory Receptors Component. External information enters and behavior exits the cognitive system through the sensory receptors. Basically, these sensory receptors are the learner’s ears (auditory) and eyes (visual). The information in this register decays rapidly and is easily interrupted. External stimuli include those aspects of instructional design referred to as delivery systems; such as, text materials, visuals, audio sources, graphics, illustrations, drawings, etc.). Perception Component. Information coming from the external receptors or from internal knowledge sources passes through the perception component which performs the functions of being aware of and evaluating the potential value and worth of that information and knowledge respectively. The perception component can be viewed as a filtering device for the cognitive system. Overtime, the perception component performs this filtering task in an autonomous or subconscious matter; all within a short time period 0.5 – 2.0 seconds. Short-Term (Working) Memory Component. There is considerable debate as to the divisions or architecture of memory, but in a broad sense, the exact details are not important to the instructional implications of the various theories. In general, there is agreement that memory comes in two forms, a store for previously learned information and a store for information which are currently being processed. This latter form, short-term (working) memory, is defined with these salient aspects: (a) it is limited in storage capacity and time (approximately 20 seconds); (b) items in working memory are subject to manipulations such as rehearsal, comparison, or matching and reordering by the processes that operate in

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

short-term memory; and, (c) items are selected for inclusion in short-term memory either by some consciously active process or by automatic action of well developed processes in such activities as reading, processing of verbal discourse, imagery evoking processes, etc. Long-Term Memory Component. The acquisition of knowledge and the means to employ knowledge occur within the storage and retrieval subsystems of the long-term memory component. Within the storage subsystem information is encoded into the knowledge base according to various representations (i.e., declarative and procedural knowledge), while the retrieval subsystem uses cognitive abilities to employ knowledge (i.e., differentiation and integration). The storage subsystem is where coded knowledge is assimilated into a learner’s existing knowledge base. A knowledge base can be described as an associative network of concepts (or schemas) which varies per individual according to amount, organization, and accessibility of its knowledge. Amount refers to the actual volume of knowledge coded in memory, while organization implies the structural connections and associations of that knowledge, and accessibility referring to the processes used in servicing the knowledge base. The latter two forms of knowledge are those that separate an expert from the novice. That is, a large amount of knowledge is not the key to expert performance, but rather the ability to both find and employ knowledge appropriately. Artificial Intelligence. The mind can be viewed as similar to a computer (e.g., the IP model), and vice versa—the computer can be modeled after our developing understanding of the human mind. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a field in computer science that has been working on efforts to model mental processes since the middle 1960’s, and has some reasonable success. AI is based on computer logic where the computer is taught a number of rules that it adheres to, in order to make decisions at each step in the analy-

sis/synthesis process. Recent AI based models of neural functions allow the computer to see edge detail in modeling vision systems, and to pick up an egg with a sensitive feedback system similar to the human neurological system. The 1996 well publicized chess match between Big Blue (a mainframe chess software program developed by IBM and associates) and a worldclass chess master is an excellent example of AI. It was a close contest, till the human adapted his playing style to take advantage of the rigid rules that the computer was using in its game. The human still won the chess match, but by the narrowest margin ever. This may foreshadow the future progress possible in mental modeling by computer software design. Intelligent Tutor Systems. The need for individual diagnoses and prescription has been present for years in American schools and has been given added impetus through the individualizing capabilities of the microcomputer. Intelligent tutor systems (ITS) software design methodology provides a level of intelligence adequate to measure student achievement level, and to prescribe the appropriate remediation to facilitate the student’s mastery of instructional content. For those students that lack the self-regulation capability to make accurate instructional decisions, an ITS can be designed to provide a depth of instruction to match student needs and performance level. An example of a basic ITS tutor for mathematics is the BUGGY program that was built using the detailed analysis of mathematical mistakes made by students and how to correct them. More than 232 bugs (mistakes) in the subtraction of two and three digit numbers can be remediated by the computer-based tutor. The tutor is designed to respond intelligently to the bugs, or mistakes, that are made and to remediate specific problems. Another ITS is the MAIS system that can respond accurately to a student’s past performance and offer at the moment adaptive instruction. The main decision making process for the MAIS is

21

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

provided through the use of Bayesian statistics (Tennyson, 1994). Bayesian statistic utilizes the probability of prior success combined with the probability of present success, to predict when the student has had enough instruction on a particular topic to achieve the learning goal desired. This type of intelligent tutor overcomes the limitations of the novice in making accurate judgments about when to go on to the next section, based on successfully learning the present material. Instructional Learning Systems. The cognitive approach to learning research has resulted in a number of attempts to develop comprehensive instructional learning systems (ILS); for example, the WICAT system. WICAT, as implemented in Minnesota K - 8 programs, is a large program to deliver the major curricular content of a school. It has a track record of success in providing instruction at a level equal to or better than conventional instruction, with a rather substantial initial investment that is recovered over the years of its use. While WICAT lacks much in individual flexibility and creativity, it does deliver English, Mathematics, and other curricular subjects to a reasonable level of quality, in place of or in cooperation with the traditional teacher. Weaknesses of Cognitive Paradigm. The weaknesses of the cognitive paradigm include the assumption that the computer and human mind are similar--when in fact they may be two totally unrelated systems serving similar functions, and that what goes on in the mind of the learner is of highest importance to instruction--when in reality the lack of a breakfast may be a much more important environmental concern than any cognitive memory function. The ability of research to deal with the multiple variables that are involved with education goes far beyond the limitations of the cognitive paradigm. The investigations of situated cognition that emphasize the contextual aspects of the cognitive experience are a recent attempt to consider the ecology of education along with the cognitive and behavioral aspects.

22

CONsTRUCTIVIsM PARADIGM (Is THE LOCUs OF LEARNING PRIMARILY IN THE MIND?) The constructivism paradigm appears to be moving to a dominant position in educational technology research today. In direct contrast to the behavioral paradigm, constructivism holds that the learner uses their existing mental structures to form or construct a new idea or problem and knowledge. For example, the Piagetian model states that this understanding is accomplished through a process of fitting the new information into the existing knowledge structure (assimilation) and/or by revising the existing knowledge structure (accommodation). Restructuring of existing knowledge structures is the central focus of the constructivist thinking, with the educational process changed to match this model. The constructivist emphasis since 1930s has held that the child from the youngest age is a seeker after the goal of making sense of the world around them through the process of constructing better and always more complicated mental models of what they perceive as reality. Once the neurological growth is well along in the womb, the unborn child begins to hear the sounds of the mother and the world around them. Touch also is active in the unborn infant as they have already started to explore the limits of their world by pushing, moving, and touching the limits of their environment. Furthermore, constructivists emphasize the role of social interactions (e.g., student to student, teacher to student, student to media) as influencing what students’ learner. Educational constructivists differ in the degree to which they ascribe knowledge construction to the student. On one hand, certain constructivists view mental models as reflective of external realities, whereas, on the other hand, some constructivists see no independent reality external to the mental model of the individual. However, for educational purposes, most constructivists agree on the following attributes

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

of instructional design for a learning environment: (a) that students are active in constructing their own knowledge and (b) that social interactions are important to knowledge construction. The Logo computer language is a good example of both the positive and negative aspects of the constructivism paradigm as it is applied to education. Researchers at MIT developed logo in the early 1970’s, as a way that young children could construct mathematical meaning by creating drawings on a computer (Papert, 1980, 1990). Logo has the student write a program to direct an imaginary or actual turtle to draw pictures. Typing the words that were their titles, and could also be combined into larger pictures by combining the Logo words in different ways would run these pictures. Logo allows the young child to construct pictures for words and then to creatively combine those pictures to draw even more complex pictures. Research testing the basic constructs of Logo has shown some gains in specific cognitive skills such as mathematical problem solving but not in general transferable skills. Logo is, and remains a good example of the constructivism paradigm in action. The multimedia tools such as Linkway Live for PCs and HyperStudio for Apple computers, allow the student to construct meaning during the multimedia writing experience. HyperStudio allows the integration of text, still pictures, sound, video, and animation on a page. The student plans a presentation using a storyboard to show graphics in miniature and a script next to each graphic. Then, the final graphics are constructed on a card (page) using the integrated paint program. Pictures can be imported directly as paint files and placed on the background, or they can be imported as graphic objects on any level in the foreground. The use of multiple levels like in a computer aided drafting (CAD) program, allow graphic objects to overlay each other, and also to be animated where they pass in-front-of and behind other objects. The student has to construct information by planning a pre-

sentation, collecting the information from diverse sources, and matching still pictures or live video to the text content. The final multimedia product can become part of a student’s portfolio, and is a unique example of the constructivism process. The student has to reorganize new information and integrate it into their thinking process through the use of technology. Weaknesses of the Constructivism Paradigm. The weakness of the constructivism position is that it deals with only one aspect of computer instructional interaction—those interactions that are going on from the viewpoint of the individual constructing meaning from the exchange of information. The teacher is considered to be a resource to the instruction, but in many cases the teacher has to become the major information source—not just a guide. From a social perspective, the teacher is pictured as a required mediator of knowledge, when in fact there may be a number of mentor situations to consider. From the social constructivist viewpoint, the teacher is needed to mediate the knowledge and to serve as a mentor and scaffolding assistant to the developing learner, but in reality these functions may be accomplished by other means (programmed instruction, help screens, intelligent tutors, etc.). The expectation that the novice learner can make accurate judgments on their learning may also have its limitations.

CsI sYsTEM DEsIGN (WHERE DO WE GO NOW WITH TECHNOLOGY?) The use of computer technology in all areas of education has expanded immensely since the 1960s. Compared to other educational media, computer technology offers several advantages within an educational environment for students with disabilities. The interactive capabilities of computer supported instruction (CSI) are attractive to learners as it allows the individual to become an active partner in the learning process resulting in

23

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

increased interest and motivation. Furthermore, instruction and testing can be individualized to meet the needs of the individual learner and students can self-pace and manage themselves according to their specific rate of learning. The flexibility offered by CSI makes it an invaluable tool for delivering instruction and administering tests. The first uses of computers in education began in the late 1950s and early 1960s. As Stolurow (1962) described in, “What is Computer-Assisted Instruction”, the early applications of CSI involved mainly drill-and-practice lessons with large computers linked to teletype machines and electric typewriters. One such application in schools was an elementary mathematics program developed in 1964 by Patrick Suppes and Richard Atkinson of Stanford University’s Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences (IMSSS). This program provided daily arithmetic drill-and-practice lessons in the classroom on a teletype machine connected by phone lines to the main computer located at IMSSS (Suppes & Macken, 1978). Another well-financed CSI project of the 1960s was the (PLATO) system, a joint effort of the National Science Foundation and Control Data Corporation managed at the University of Illinois under the direction of Donald Bitzer. The use of student terminals with display graphics and symbol capabilities provided a major improvement over earlier CSI systems (Suppes, 1979). The PLATO courseware system is still in use today for applications ranging from library use to role-playing games (Foshay, 1995). In 1972, with funding from The National Science Foundation, Victor Bunderson at Brigham Young University began work on Time-shared, Interactive Computer-Controlled Information Television (TICCIT). This system was designed to use minicomputers and modified televisions to deliver CAI lessons in English and Mathematics to community college students; further developments in CAI in the 1970’s brought continued improvements in student terminals. Minicomputers helped reduce the high costs of CAI, but problems with

24

communication lines, “down-time” and batchoriented processing often failed to meet the needs of students in a timely manner (Suppes, 1979). In the later 1970s the development of microcomputers had a major impact on the CSI movement. By using a microcomputer to deliver instruction, many of the problems associated with CAI on larger computer systems such as the downtime dilemma were eliminated. In addition, the devices were much less expensive than previously available computers making CSI accessible to more students. This growth became evident in the 1980’s with the increased presence of microcomputers in the schools. During the 1980s, advances in technology continued to create increasingly powerful and efficient computers available at reduced costs. There was also a tremendous growth in the area of educational software. According to Barron and Orwig (1995), more than 10,000 packages were produced by 700 educational software publishers, providing drill-and-practice programs, tutorials, simulations, and games. Unfortunately, not all of the software available was high quality. Often manufacturers and purchasers were more concerned with the attractiveness and availability of the software than the educational effectiveness, suggesting a clear need for improvements in the process of evaluation of such programs (Roblyer, Edwards, & Havriluk, 1997). Advantages of the more advanced and emerging computer capabilities of the 2000s include increased flexibility, greater potential for interactivity, and improved individualization of instruction. In addition, significant advances have occurred in development of alternative ways to access the computer. Innovations in this area include touch screens, light pens, bar codes, and voice activation as well as more commonly used joy sticks and mouse technology. In addition to making computer use more efficient and flexible, these adaptations allow persons otherwise unable to use a computer keyboard manually to have computer access via alternative input modes. Adapted switches and

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

keyboards have also made computers accessible to almost anyone regardless of disability. Just as the audiovisual arena identified a void in empirical foundation in the 1960s, so too, in the 2000s, educational computer developers identified the need for supporting the technology with research. Specifically addressed was the need to bring contributions from the fields of cognitive psychology and educational research into the design of computer-supported instruction. Debate over the educational effectiveness of instructional media and the ability to meaningfully research it continues in the literature (Clark, 1994; Ross, Sullivan, & Tennyson, 1992; Tennyson & Jorczak, in press). According to O’Neil and Perez (2008), the presence of modern technology in schools does not guarantee it will be used wisely. However, they go on to say that we have the capability to solve the increasing problems in education if we utilize past experience to plan for the future. As advances in technology continue to shape and promote educational media and methods of delivering instruction, the educational experience will become rapidly more flexible, more interactive, and more individualized. Further exposing these tools to academic scrutiny will more clearly define the extent of meaningful application and use. Needless to say, and contrary to the opinion of earlier critics of audiovisual media, technology has not replaced teachers. There is no evidence, empirical or otherwise, to support that the future will be any different. Instead, advanced technology has provided teachers and special education specialist with new methods for delivering effective and efficient instruction and testing to address the unique needs of the individual student.

EMERGING KNOWLEDGE BAsE: INTERACTIVE INsTRUCTION Imagine students who are not only capable of regulating their own learning, but who are so

enthusiastic about it that they voluntarily explore new bodies of knowledge. (Jonassen, 1995, p. 5) The above quote describes one of the dreams of special education teachers: To have students so taken with the educational experience, that they freely explore new learning situations without prompting. The last two days of the 2007-2008 school year were like that in Duluth, Minnesota, when two special education students came in to explore music on the Internet. This was very unusual because those two days were teacher-only work days and after school was officially closed for the year. The two students who were working so diligently were experiencing education in one of the best ways--through personal involvement with interactive Internet based learning. The key component activating these students excitement for learning was the interactive instruction provided by the Internet. It is most important to look at the requirements of interactive instruction that instill such deep student involvement in students-the same ones that will not sit still to learn from a lecturing teacher giving what students call a boring lesson.

INTERACTIVE INsTRUCTION (VARIABLEs LINKING REsEARCH AND PRACTICE) Key constructs of interactive Internet based instruction are learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation. Once defined in measurable form as variables, they give some important insights into interactive instruction: •

Learner control is the active manipulation of the situation, experience, or effort while under the control of the involved learner. It is based on the premise that each learner will know what is best for him or her. In the case of the Internet example, the stu-

25

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

•

•

dents could select the content from a large resource base of music on the Internet. Self-regulation is the learner actively receiving and selecting of information. It is based on the premise that the more effective that the individual feels they are in managing their own instruction, the better they will do. Continuing motivation is the self involvement of the individual in the activity so that the involvement itself is found to be pleasant and rewarding. The activity itself is the equivalent to the behaviorist’s positive reinforcement, and is recognized cognitively as being an activity that is enjoyable to continue. The Internet example was individually satisfying for the two students, because finding the music made their personal internal reward system complete.

Interactive Niches (Internet).Niche is a term from biology that describes the relevant physical, social, emotional, and other characteristics of the ecology that supports a living organism. The interactive niche for the two students in my example is a portion of a very potent educational ecology. They are involved in a learner controlled process of finding new sounds and their creators (musicians, bands, etc.) on this hypermedia form of telecommunication (i.e., Internet niche). Hypermedia allows the linking of one idea (picture or text) to another so that a person can click on one and go immediately to the next idea. The Internet niche allowed the students to self regulate their experiences through their decisions that are made as part of the Internet niche. The combination of learner control and self regulation are the motivators that allow the students natural interest and creativity to lead them to be part of a cycle of continuing motivation. The computer affords these students a unique learning environment (Internet niche) that has never existed prior to the two students turning the computer on during that Thursday and Friday in June. This World Wide

26

Web Internet niche is a good example of the combined behaviorist, cognitive, and constructivist experiences that will motivate future learners: The students were in control of the learning experience, but were using the search techniques that the teacher had provided them via prior instruction. The teacher served as a mediator and a resource to the students, but the students determined the direction and content of instruction. They were in control of their learning, and were intrinsically motivated to explore new knowledge on the Web. Students sensed their effectiveness in exploring the Internet environment and this provided them with continuing motivation to explore further; and the students interpreted their findings and captured the sounds based on their interest or use to either of the two students. They could also regulate the speed and direction that the net searches took, and the choices of topics at each new Web page. The Internet niche is a learning environment that is very responsive to the learners’ choices and makes very attractive choices available to the learner. Learner control can assist the student in developing the self regulation necessary to make decisions on the music choices available on the Internet.

FUTURE THEORY, REsEARCH, AND PRACTICE WITH COMPUTERs Fifteen students are scattered about the room in-groups of threes and fours; a dozen of their classmates are doing scientific fieldwork at a nearby state forest, scanning plant samples for a multimedia presentation with a hand held digital camera. The rest of the kids are logged on to school from home or elsewhere. In the classroom, one group of students is exploring a simulated excavation site of an ancient Greek City, while a few others join a group of students from England on a virtual-reality bike expedition to study local flora in the Yucatan in Mexico. The teacher is a guide on their journeys, not just a lecturer.

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

Although the above scene represents a technology based future for education described in the early 2000s, such a possibility is readily available in some schools today. Schools like those in Eagan and Edina, Minnesota have all the technology in place to enact the above scene today. Yet, other schools a few miles down the road have only the teacher lap-tops and some out-dated Apple computers for drill-and-practice because of financial limitations. We have pieces of the future present in our society as schools like those in Eagan and Edina that are well funded by a combination of public and private sources. What have we seen in these future schools in the way of teaching, learning, and materials that would be valuable to be aware of when planning and implementing learning niches today?

TEACHING BEYOND 2000 (TEACHERs ROLE IN INTELLIGENT MEDIATION) We already have the teachers’ role in the 2010’s redefined as a mediator within the constructivist learning process, but the future will not be that simple. With the development of information infrastructures across the globe, teachers will mediate a learning niche without barriers of time and distance (Salomon, Perkins, & Globerson, 1996). With the wide range of students social, emotional, and intellectual development, the teacher needs to be more intelligent and utilize artificial intelligence in providing a full range of learning choices as part of curricular planning. Learners with mature capabilities can benefit from the teacher that provides nurturing and cognitive guidance, while the immature learner needs a teacher that provides more in the way of direct instructional guidance and direct instruction. Intelligent computer diagnostic tools and tutor programs will allow the teacher to focus on creativity and adaptations of curriculum.

DIsTRIBUTED LEARNING (LEARNING FROM A VARIETY OF LOCATIONs AND sOURCEs) Distance learning will be transformed into distributed learning through the ongoing development of global communications and high-performance computing (Salomon et al., 1991). Distributed learning takes place in the new instructional niches that are afforded learners through new forms of expression such as knowledge webs, virtual communities, synthetic environments, and sensory immersion. Knowledge webs use telecommunication to provide distributed access to experts, archival resources, authentic environments, and shared investigations. Virtual communities supplement face-to-face interactions with support from people who share common “joys and trials” and provide future learners with access to new people, new experiences, shared ideas, humor, and fellowship. Synthetic environments are learning niches that do not yet exist, but are shared synthetic environments that extend our experiences beyond what we can encounter in the real world. Sensory immersion is an extension of the learning niche created by the computer development of artificial realities, and allows the learner to see the patterns and relationships in large amounts of information gathered from diverse sources. Distributed learning via technology will be an accepted instructional method because of the increasing economics of schooling, and the need for one teacher to handle an increasing student load to meet efficiencies of scale. Student-teacher ratios of 50 to 1 will be common, but will be compensated for by intelligent tools like computer based personal assistants that are designed to match each students needs. As computers decrease in cost in the future and the simple networked computer for each learner becomes a reality, individualized instruction may become possible in future education. Until that time, we will deal with the small group and large group capabilities of the microcomputer, as we presently know it.

27

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

CLAssEs AND sCHOOLs (WHAT DO sCHOOLs AND CLAssEs AFFORD sTUDENTs?) A physical school building will still exist beyond 2000, but “it won’t be necessary” (Winn, 1990). With computer technology that is cheap and invisible in the future, the classroom can be where it can have the most impact on the learner. With distance learning the norm, the only limit in the learning experience will be the creativity of the instructor and student. “. . . classroom walls will become more permeable, boundaries between community and school reduced” (Winn, 1990, p. 39). In the Ojibwe sense, the whole community will be part of the education of every developing child. The experiential learning of the 1990’s will mature into community based cooperative learning where students will, for example, assist the city government in researching development options such as the GLEAM (Great Lakes Environmental Action Mentors) team of students from Anoka High School. Teaching could be by a University of Minnesota professor one day, a computer tutor the next, and the city zoning commissioner the next—with students providing valuable services at all levels.

READING, WRITING, AND MATHEMATICs (HOOKs, ZINEs, PINEs, AND VINEs) Reading, writing, and mathematical skills will become even more important in the time beyond 2000 when intellectual production will exceed manufacturing production in America. The book will take on new hypermedia forms (hooks) that are adaptable to student choices in selection of plot, characters, settings, and actions—not unlike the game of Dungeons-and -Dragons. Magazines (zines) designed for networks are just starting to take on an Internet form of their own, and will

28

mature to integrate learner control of sound, text, and graphics. Newspapers (pines) will be delivered and printed in the home, with learner control over subjects, story type, and extent of coverage--but allow hyperlinking to all relevant supportive information through intelligent agents in software form. These agents will be available to provide research and retrieval functions to support any direction of investigation that is motivating to a particular student due to their individual differences. A fully accessible video interface (vine) at each computer will allow access to any and all media forms on demand, with the teachers role one of providing the level of mediation required for development of the individuals intellect and their discipline. Mathematics will be integrated into all activities, as it is in real life--with the emphasis on ever increasing levels of applied mathematics in business, industry, and sports. Computer video interface (vines) will become three dimensional through technology, where students can project their presence into any experience, and through visual, tactile, and olfactory feedback can experience such things as the whales pod type of family structure by becoming a whale for a learning experience.

Is THE MEDIUM THE MEssAGE? (INsTRUCTIONAL DEsIGN IN THE FUTURE) The start of the media revolution and the criticism of scientific reductionism can be dated back to 1966, when Marshal McLuhan declared, “In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operation and practical fact, the medium is the message” (McLuhan, 1966, p. 23). The use of the computer in education has allowed a true McLuhan type extension of ourselves, as we come to better use this new and developing

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

digital technology. It has restructured our work and our play, and will continue to restructure our schools. We cannot believe that the message brought to us by the computer is the ecological change that this powerful mental tool evokes. McLuhan made us aware of the changes wrought by technology of his time, but could not have predicted the effects that were triggered by miniaturization of the silicone chip. Instructional Design. The instructional design industry is also changing, with the movement from the behavior paradigm of the past to the cognitive paradigm of the 1980’s and the constructivist paradigm of the 1990’s (Salomon, 1993). The more complex understanding of mental processes resulting from the cognitive paradigm has led to sophisticated software that can be run on microcomputers. The adoption of constructivist models will make software more user controlled and allow for more creative individual use of software tools.

sYsTEMIC APPROACH (THEORY/ PARADIGM CONsIDERATIONs) A new systemic approach to research and practice is required, one that considers the educational experience in all of its complexity and keeps intact all of the variables that are involved at each level that they occur. We can no longer just look at the behavior that the students exhibit their internal mental state, what they construct, or the computer environment that they are functioning in. We must consider the Gestalt of all of the factors that affect the ecology of learning. The term Niche has been introduced to help us to understand the new systemic approach to the educational paradigms more clearly. The educational ecology is composed of a number of niches (activity spaces), which contain the behavioral, cognitive, biological, and constructivism attributes that are relevant to the computer based

instruction. Learning experiences are filed with niches in niche spaces, in which the dynamic interactions using computers takes place. This new systemic approach will unify the behavioral, cognitive, constructivism, and social viewpoints through the use of multiple, integrated variables that represent more of the realistic educational situation in Niche space.

TECHNOLOGY TOOLs (COsT Is NO LONGER A LIMITATION) The future of technology use in education appears to be unlimited, with the microcomputer technology providing a wonderful tool for individual students. The student will be able to utilize the distributed knowledge of the Internet with the touch of a keyboard, a pen, or voice access in the future. For example, the price of the calculator has been reduced from the 1965 high of $799, to the 1975 Texas Instrument for $29, to the 2005 Scientific for $9. This economy of scale has provided the financial incentive to drive the computer revolution of the 1980’s and 1990’s. By 1978 the cost of the microcomputer was low enough to support efforts by Apple Computer Corporation to market the Apple II to the schools in quantity. We will see similar major cost reductions in educational computing. The 200 MHz computer that is capable of running full frame video will drop to prices that allow their use as a standard teaching computer by the year 2010 and beyond. Each classroom will be able to afford a computer for the teacher, and at least one matching for every four students--in addition to having access to computer labs and digital media centers. The cost of wiring the schools of America seems high now, but in just a few years the network power will pay for itself in better quality education and in improved national output from our schools.

29

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

COGNITIVE REsCRIPTIONs: PRACTICAL Vs. THEORETICAL REsEARCH America is a recognized leader in technology and the creative research that supports that technological success. But, the Japanese have far surpassed us in the art of taking an existing idea, whether it is education of the flat screen display, and developing it into a successful application through applied research. The previous successes that were mentioned such as Reader Rabbit and Jasper Woodbury were accomplished under a conscientious effort to apply research to the application of the computer in the classroom. We may see resurgence in the applied research effort in America, as the manufacturers see the value of the financial return for the research dollars, as it becomes obvious that education can be improved through the use of technology that is carefully researched for specific applications. Schools cannot stop the information revolution that is changing the face of America. They can though, willfully build computers into education in ways that are most efficient and effective based on sound research linked to educational theory (Tennyson, 1988, 1990). Each educational application in the classroom has to be studied in its own right, in place of the computer laboratory mentality of the past. In place of throwing money at the problems of education by administrators and purchasing another computer laboratory, schools need to utilize the past research to move from theory to practice. We need to move from theory to prescriptions that work in the niche of the individual student. Schools of the future will be improved through the utilization of technology to facilitate the construction of new knowledge. Minnesota is a leader in using WANs (Wide area networks) to connect the state’s schools, and has hosted many conferences and studies of networking. The state has access to the TIES system through its networking from the major universities. Web66 is designed to be communication oriented,

30

so that students and teachers can use the network interactively. Schools that are members of the system can post a project that they have under way or can participate in any of the ongoing projects that are now running. The legislative and human investment in computers in education will pay off in Minnesota in a few short years, with creative increases in intellectual property.

CONCLUsION One of the common visions for computer based instruction is to use the computer to individually prescribe and deliver instruction to meet individual student differences. While schools have purchased a large number of computers in the decade of the 1980’s, financial constraints have kept the numbers at an average of one computer for every 10 students. Reality of computer use in America is that we will likely have enough machines to facilitate small group instruction for all students, but only be able to individualize in part of the school day where students have access to a computer lab. Small groups of students working together on one machine will be the norm of school computer use, except for those portions of the day when individual use can be facilitated by the availability of the computer lab with 30+ machines for a whole class. The finding of a 2002 conference on libraries in Australia is that the library is becoming the true learning center of the campus or school. With the move from print media to digital media and from physical research to online research, the library is becoming the digital online source for students from diverse regional, cultural, and educational backgrounds. While there is no consensus on the direction that libraries need to move, there is consensus that the digital revolution is taking place leading to Internet access and CD data base library services so that they may stay competitive. The separation between our libraries and our communication networks are becoming fuzzy as

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

the digital revolution continues. These fuzzy edges change our concept of education to a process of constructing knowledge through use of library accessible information. The libraries new role is to serve a worldwide user group by becoming a fluid and dynamic source of information through networks and the Internet. Greater freedom of access with electronic networks and cooperative sharing of resources can be shown to have great promise, such as the Fargo/Moorhead library system of Minnesota. The Minnesota and North Dakota high schools, colleges, and universities have a combined library structure to make access easier. A common catalog allows access from multiple locations, and makes both paper and digital information access a present reality. School administrators need to change to meet the demands of the new technologies that are revolutionizing the ways students learn. If administrators are going to survive into the next decade, they are going to have to recognize the irrelevance of smokestack (Industrial) education, and move forward using information age approaches. Some of the suggestions are to (a) use Channel 1 to teach visual literacy, (b) use hyper-navigation to learn critical-thinking, and (c) to design environments for student-centered learning and shared decision making (Roblyer et al., 1997). The Minnesota OBL efforts should go far to move most Minnesota schools in the direction of student-centered learning by giving them choices of topics beyond the basics. Shared decision making has support by the Minnesota legislature in the form of putting inservice financing into teachers’ hands, but further efforts will take cooperation on the part of school boards, teachers, and their groups. Finally, teachers have been educated from five to twenty years in the past, when the behaviorist paradigm was in place. Schools may have to utilize staff development funds and time to facilitate the transition of staff from the reductionist, behavioral paradigm to the constructivism paradigm.

Meeting in small groups to discuss and rethink the nature of the educational enterprise seems to facilitate the transition process. The Minnesota state legislature has passed laws that designate a portion of state funds specifically for Inservice education. These funds are totally administrated by the teachers, and are going towards updating the staff on the digital revolution, however slow it may precede in education. To help present my topic in this chapter on computers in education, I have deliberately used the state of Minnesota as our example base. My goal was an attempt to blend theory with application. Computer technology is a rapidly changing field that makes certain concrete hardware and software techniques and methods obsolete in a short period of time. Thus, I feel that the application of computers into education should be from the foundation of learning theory rather than hardware/software. For example, good writing is possible with any tool that records words. A computer may improve efficiency of writing but not the quality. That is true as also for educational uses of computers. The computer is a tool which can enhance existing practice and perhaps even introduce new practices. I am therefore arguing for both theory foundation and experience to help us move ahead in improving education.

REFERENCEs Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Banathy, B. H. (1987). Instructional systems design . In Gagné, R., & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Instructional technology: Foundations (pp. 85–112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Barron, A. E., & Orwig, G. W. (1995). Multimedia technologies for training. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

31

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

Breuer, K., Molkenthin, R., & Tennyson, R. D. (2006). Role of simulations in Web-based learning . In O’Neil, H., & Perez, R. (Eds.), Web-based learning (pp. 307–326). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Clark, R. E. (1989). Current progress and future directions for research in instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 57–66. doi:10.1007/BF02299046 Clark, R. E. (1994). Media and method. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 21–31. doi:10.1007/BF02299088 Enkenberg, J. (1995). Complex technology-based learning environment . In Tennyson, R. D., & Barron, A. E. (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Computer-based development and delivery tools (pp. 245–264). Berlin: Springer.

Ross, S. M., Sullivan, H., & Tennyson, R. D. (1992). Educational technology: Four decades of research and theory. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(2), 5–8. doi:10.1007/ BF02297045 Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals’ cognition . In Salomon, G. (Ed.), Distributed cognition’s (pp. 111–138). New York: Cambridge University Press. Salomon, G., Perkins, P. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2–9. Stolurow, L. M. (1962). Implications of current research and future trends. The Journal of Educational Research, 55, 519–527.

Foshay, W. R. (1995 April). The problem with ISD models. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Society for Performance and Instruction, Chicago.

Suppes, P. (1979). Current trends in computerassisted instruction . In Yovits, M. C. (Ed.), Advances in computers (Vol. 18, pp. 173–229). New York: Academic Press.

Jonassen, D. H. (1995). Mindtools for schools. New York: Macmillan.

Tennyson, R. D. (1988). An instructional strategy planning model to improve learning and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 35–45. doi:10.1016/0747-5632(88)90028-3

Lytras, M., Tennyson, R. D., & Ordonez de Pablos, P. (2009). Knowledge networks: The social software perspective. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. McLuhan, M. (1966). Media is the message. New York: New Books. O’Neil, H., & Perez, R. (Eds.). (2008). Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Books. Papert, S. (1990). Introduction by Seymour Papert . In Harel, I. (Ed.), Constructionist learning (pp. 1–8). Boston: MIT Media Laboratory. Roblyer, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

32

Tennyson, R. D. (1990). Cognitive learning theory linked to instructional theory. Journal of Structural Learning, 10, 249–258. Tennyson, R. D. (1994). Knowledge base for automated instructional system development . In Tennyson, R. D. (Ed.), Automating instructional design, development, and delivery (pp. 29–60). Berlin: Springer. Tennyson, R. D. (1995). The impact of the cognitive science movement on instructional design fundamentals . In Seels, B. (Ed.), Instructional design fundamentals: A reconsideration (pp. 113–136). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

Computer Interventions for Children with Disabilities

Tennyson, R. D. (2005a). Learning theories and instructional design: An historical perspective tof the linking model . In Spector, J. M., Ohrazda, C., & Van Schaak, A. (Eds.), Innovations in instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill (pp. 219–235). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Tennyson, R. D., & Elmore, R. (1997). Learning theory foundations for instructional design. In R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives, Vol. I: Theory and research (pp. 177-182). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Tennyson, R. D. (2005b). Linking learning theory with instruction . In Schott, F., & Hillebrandt, D. (Eds.), Outside behavior – Inside cognition? (pp. 62–94). Berlin: Springer.

Tennyson, R. D., & Jorczak, R. L. (in press). Benefits of CSCL for learners with disabilities . In Ordóñez de Pablos, P. (Ed.), Technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities: Approaches and applications. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Tennyson, R. D. (2006). Advancements in the integration of technology into higher education: Situated technology-enhanced learning support systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54, 129–131.

Winn, W. (1990). Some implications of cognitive theory for instructional design. Instructional Science, 19, 53–69. doi:10.1007/BF00377985

Tennyson, R. D., & Breuer, K. (2003). Computerbased training: Advancements from cognitive science . In Piskurich, G. M. (Ed.), The ASTD handbook of instructional technology (pp. 24.1– 24.12). New York: McGraw-Hill.

33

34

Chapter 3

China Special Education: The Perspective of Information Technologies Jingyuan Zhao Harbin Institute of Technologies, China

ABsTRACT The development of information technologies should be able to benefit to every educated person. The use of information technologies in special education is a little studied by Chinese scholars. This study focuses on China’s special education from the perspective of information technologies, discusses the causes and impact factors why the information technologies applications in special education in China is a blind area, presents the two principles for information technology applications in special education, and put forwards to three implementation models of special education applications in special education.

1 INTRODUCTION In 2002 the United Nations adopted the “Biwako Millennium Framework for Action” in the activities of the Second Asia-Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons “towards an Inclusive, Barrier-free and Rights-based Society for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and the Pacific”. The outline claims that the construction of information barrier-free should be promoted as a priority to solve the difficulties of people with disabilities fully through using modern information and communication technologies. The theme of World Telecommunication Day 2008 DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch003

is “Connecting Persons with Disabilities: ICT Opportunities for All”, its purpose is to urge the countries to pay special attention to vulnerable groups of persons with disabilities in the national strategy of informationization, encourage the design, production and provision of information and communication technologies, equipment and services required by persons with disabilities, establish the capacity of information communication technologies for the use of all people including persons with disabilities to promote equal access to information communication technologies by people from all sectors of society in order to improve the sharing of development results of information and communication technologies.

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

China Special Education

As early as 1998, President Bill Clinton signed the “Americans with Disabilities Rehabilitation Act”, and the Section 508 stipulates that when the U.S. federal government purchases IT products and services, including software, websites, telecommunications, audio and video, PC and notebook computers, copiers, printers, kiosks, etc., the supplier must take the initiative to prove that their products meet standards of information accessibility established by the Barrier-Free Committee of United States. As a result, the legislative precedent of global information accessibility is created. Spain and Sweden issued “Computer Accessibility Regulations” and “Computer Accessibility Guide” in 1998. The United Kingdom, Germany and Ireland respectively issued the relevant regulations, acts and guidelines in 2002. Netherlands developed “Network Accessibility and Regulations” in 2003. Swiss formulated “Government and Ministry of Utilities Accessibility Regulations” in 2004. In the same year, the EU issued “Procurement Procedures”. In the Asia Pacific region, Japan made relevant regulations in 2004 and introduced “Japan Industry Association Standards” developed cooperatively by the government and industry. It should be noted that China is already lagging behind in the establishment of information system and the development of barrier-free. From 2004 on, the Ministry of Information Industry established the annual session of “China Information Accessibility Forum” associating with the China Disabled Persons Federation, the China Internet Association, the China Disabled People’s Welfare Fund aimed at narrowing the digital divide and sharing the information civilization to enhance scientific and technological innovation capacity and construct information barrier-free environment, so that the application of information accessibility is promoted. Ministry of Information Industry formulated the development program of “the Eleventh Five-Year Plan” for the information

industry undertakings for the disabled, and the information accessibility became an important task in the planning. In the meantime, Ministry of Information Industry actively supports the Internet Society of China to develop standards of information accessibility, and actively promote R&D and applications of products and services in terms of information accessibility. “CPC Central Committee and State Council Views on Career Development for Persons with Disabilities” was issued in March 28, 2008, and proposed to improve the accessibility of information and exchange for persons with disabilities through some measures as following, public institutions provide voice and text tips, Braille, sign language and other barrier-free services, television and movies and programs have subtitles, networking, electronic information and communications products are convenient for people with disabilities etc. China’s system is in constantly improving along with the information society development not only concerning about the basic livelihood of persons with disabilities but also concerning about the information access of persons with disabilities. Meanwhile, the Government gives full attention on information technologies applications in special education. The priorities of special education in “Eleventh Five-Year Plan” are information technologies and modern distance education of special schools. The international scholars have done a great deal of research on special education, such as Gibb and Dychesm (2000), Heward (2000), Lorenz (1998), Taylor (2000), Vahid (1998), Harwood and Brown (2000). China’s special education study is developed over the past 20 years, the well-known scholars, such as Yunying Chen, Jiacheng Xu, Ningsheng Zhang, Youngxin Piao, Junming Fang etc have done exploratory research on special education. China’s current information technologies research on special education is in

35

China Special Education

early stage. Special education informationization is a process to use information technologies in all aspects of education for students with special needs to improve recovery levels, and accelerate the pace of integrating into mainstream society, and ultimately the modernization of special education is achieved. It has been found from the educational technologies application and research that special education has been neglected and people with disabilities have been marginalized groups in the field of educational technologies applications. There are only a few articles focusing on information technologies of special education in a variety of educational technologies journals, and less scholars in China mainland study on information technologies of special education. Searching in Chinese Academic Journals Database and Thesis Database from 2001 to now, there are about 35 relevant papers, and two Master’s thesis “Virtual reality technologies application in the distance education of persons with disabilities” and “Special education information technologies survey of Jilin province and development strategy”, it can be seen that educational technologies applications and research has a blind area in the field of special education. The development of information technologies should be able to benefit to every educated person. With regard to information technologies use in ordinary schools, many experts and scholars have done a great deal of discussion, while the use of information technologies in special education is a little studied, and monograph is even rare. Today, information technologies represented by the computer is in rapid development, information technologies should also be available for further assistance for people with disabilities (Xiao, 2007). This study is themed by China’s special education, and discusses special education status and development in China from the perspective of information technologies.

36

2 EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIEs Is A BLIND AREA OF CHINA sPECIAL EDUCATION 2.1 Present situation “Some observations on the development of special education” issued by State Education Commission in 1989 claimed that the education of children with disabilities should be into the orbit of universal compulsory education, and is planned, managed and inspected in a unified way with local implementation of the compulsory education by education departments at all levels, and the implementation situation of education development planning for children with disabilities is one of the elements of universal primary education. “Protection of Disabled Persons Act” promulgated in 1990, and “Persons with Disabilities Education Ordinance” enacted in 1994 are a reflection of Government’s increasing emphasis on education for the disabled. However, China’s special education still has problems, especially the application of information technologies has a great gap compared with developed countries. China mainland has 375 special education schools with 40 thousand students in 1985, there are 886 special education schools with nearly 85 thousand students in 1991, there are 1605 special education schools with 362.9 thousand school children with disabilities in 2006. The status quo of China’s education for the disabled is as following, (1) a large base: 20 million school-age children need special education assistance, of which 2.46 million are disabled; (2) a high percentage for rural areas: 70% of children with disabilities are located in rural areas; (3) the rate of school-age children with disabilities receive special education services is less than 15%; (4) the rate of receiving special education services for children with special requirement is less than 2%; (5) special education schools are in low level of information technologies.

China Special Education

Taking Hebei Province as a case, the Center for Educational Technologies and Equipment Management of Hebei made a questionnaire survey in 2008 in terms of three types of special education schools and teaching and rehabilitation equipment, the survey is involved in 117 special education schools of three types in 172 counties or districts of Hebei Province, accounting for 87% of 134 special education schools, covering a population of 64.82 million people with 7715 disabled student, including 4737 deaf-mute students accounting for 61%; 277 blind students accounting for 3.5%; 2707 mental retardation students accounting for 35%. These students with disabilities are in nineyear compulsory education stage except of 143 high school students. Principals who filled out questionnaires are 23 years of school age and 9 years serving as principal on average. The number of students with disabilities in special education schools of three types in Hebei Province is 57 average per school while students with disabilities on national average are 255 per school, the number of teachers in special education schools of Hebei Province is 24 average per school while teachers on national average are 21 per school, teacher-student ratio is about 1:3 in special education schools of Hebei Province while teacherstudent ratio is about 1:11 in national schools, the province has 1.8 students with disabilities in school per million population while there are 3 students with disabilities in school per million people on national average. Regarding general classroom equipment, the survey shows that 52% of classrooms have color TV, 23%of classrooms have video booth. Regarding the equipment in resource centers, 65% of resource centers have computers, 59% of resource centers have printers, 44% of resource centers have cameras, 19% of resource centers have copiers.

2.2 Impact Factors This study finds the following impact factors result in a blind area of information technologies application in special education.

2.2.1 Application Context Constraints of Educational Technologies In the continuous development of special education in China, the number of students with disabilities is increasing. According to statistics, up to 2002, special education schools are 1624 developed from 570 in 1987, special education classes in the ordinary schools are increased to 3322 from 600 in 1987. There are nearly 57 million students with disabilities, there are 27 high schools for students with disabilities, and 215 secondary vocational education institutions for students with disabilities. The vocational education and training institutions for people with disabilities organized by Disabled Federation at all levels are1162, the technical colleges of higher education are 10. So many people with disabilities learning in a variety of educational system have corresponding special needs for a variety of educational technologies application environments. According to the differences of environmental reality and virtuality, educational technologies application environment can be divided into school education technologies application environment and network educational environment. People with disabilities in the field of special education have a different special needs for these two types of environment compared with ordinary learners, however, these special needs have not attracted much attention from designers and developers of educational technologies application environment (Zhang, Zhu, & Cheng, 2006), which is shown mainly in the following two aspects. First, school education technologies application environment such as computer rooms, network classrooms, multimedia classrooms

37

China Special Education

etc. are designed in standardization lacking personalization and user-friendly design for a small number of students with disabilities. The building of educational technologies application environment is mostly based on the popular hardware and software, less investment is in dedicated hardware for the group of persons with disabilities such as Braille typewriters, special keyboards and other equipment etc. and software such as screen reader software, screen enlarging software, voice input software etc., or even zero investment, so that disabled learners in regular classes and in special education school have a greater difficulty when learning in school educational technologies environment. Second, the accessibility of virtual learning environment in Web-based education is poor. Online education is a focus of current educational technologies research and practice, network education has a feature of Five Any, namely any person in any place at any time can start to learn anything from any section of content (Zhang et. al, 2003). Berners-Lee (2003) claimed that Web accessibility is to put the internet and its services at the disposal of all individuals, whatever their hardware or software requirements, their network infrastructure, their native language, their cultural background, their geographic location, or their physical or mental aptitudes. Thinking ahead within a framework of design for all is about anticipating a variety of usages, locations, and types of users, without making any exclusive a priori decisions about them. The Web Accessibility determines the effectiveness and efficiency of study via network for people with disabilities. Education Web site theoretically allow any person including people with disabilities to learn in the virtual environment, but in practice, the majority of online education platform cannot be accessed by learners with disabilities, mainly attributed to the poor accessibility of Web site or network teaching platform, thus closing door for the disabled learners to learn in the virtual environment.

38

2.2.2 Learners with Disabilities are overall in Low Level of Information Literacy Information Literacy is the basic survival skills in the information age (Zhu, 2002). The level of information literacy is the decisive factor for a learner to participate in information-based environment to learn. For learners with disabilities, the limitations of sensory organ and motor function enable them to obtain certain information skills and participate in learning far more complexly, difficultly than common learner, at the same time, it is also difficult for educational technologies workers to use educational technologies to the learning of people with disabilities. From the whole, the level of information literacy of people with disabilities is much lower than that of general people.

2.2.3 The Development and Application of Scientific and Technological Supporting Means is Lacking Learners with disabilities often have to study science and technologies by means of a supplementary means such as screen-reading software, screen enlarging software, voice input software. However, China has a great gap in terms of the development and application promotion of supporting science and technologies means compared to developed countries. Many companies abroad would like to develop related products for persons with disabilities. IBM’s Homepage reading software, Freedom Scientific’s JAWS, Microsoft’s operating system and office software series etc. provide help for people who a variety of sensory organ and motor function is limited. China has similar products, such as Yongde screen-reading software developed by a blind man, however the level of product development, application, and promotion is asymmetric compared to the huge group of people with disabilities.

China Special Education

2.2.4 Protection Measures Related to the Right of People with Disabilities are not Being Properly Implemented The legislation on disability rights and interests of China is mainly “Law on the Protection of Disabled People”, “Individuals with Disabilities Education Ordinance”, and so on, these legislations provide strong protection for people with disabilities in terms of related rights and interests. But most of these bills are positioned in the barrier-free construction of public goods and services, particularly construction products, while the special needs of information access of people with disabilities in the information society have not been concretely embodied, specific requirements on the accessibility of information resources, especially electronics information resources have not been taken into account in above laws and regulations. In addition, some laws and regulations are formulated in 1980, and some of the content has been outdated.

3 APPLICATION PRINCIPLEs OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIEs IN sPECIAL EDUCATION The application of information technologies in special education must be based on certain principles (Qiao, Li & Peng, 2005; Hu & Ren, 2008). Using general principles of basic education information technologies and special education rules for reference, the implementation of special education information technologies should follow the following principles.

3.1 Using the Compensatory Theory to Play up strengths and Avoid Weaknesses

aspects. For example, hearing impaired learners loss language and listening skills due to congenital or acquired reasons, they will be strengthened in vision. The hearing and touch of blind children without visual capacity will be strengthened. Thus, the characteristics should be paid attention in instructional design of special teaching to play up strengths and avoid weaknesses. Teaching deaf children should make more use of video files and lively, slightly exaggerated animation and colorful pictures to vividly highlight the focus and difficulty of teaching. Teaching blind children should pay attention to the use of their developed hearing, the scene that is difficult to communicated via language description can be expressed through other auxiliary medium such as playing music to stimulate the imagination of students. Correct use of compensatory principles would enable the modern educational technologies to apply more fully and reasonably in special education.

3.2 Combining Intuitiveness and Abstractiveness Traditional special education teaching is characterized by visual images, but the sensible and intuitive teaching can only produce presentations, the knowledge must be summarized and abstracted from a large number of visual materials, and then to rational knowledge. Compensatory theory claims that the sense of hearing should be highlighted for learners with visual disabilities, the teaching principles of colors and images should be especially given prominence for hearing-impaired learners, intuitive pictures and vivid music are intended to grasp the nature of knowledge. Therefore, the learning technologies pays attention to close integration of intuitiveness and abstractiveness to better grasp the core of knowledge.

Compensatory theory for the shortcomings claims that anyone who has deficiency in one aspect will be compensated in another aspect or a few

39

China Special Education

4 IMPLEMENTATION MODELs OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIEs IN sPECIAL EDUCATION Qiao, Li and Peng (2005), Hang and Ren (2008) claimed that special education teaching activities mainly includes three types of classroom teaching, life skills training, vocational skills training. Therefore, the implementation models by which information technologies is applied to special education have the following three types.

4.1 Implementation Model of Information Technologies in Classroom Teaching The implementation of information technologies application in special education is mainly in the classroom. In specific instructional design, the most appropriate services or mode should be provided to students based on the greatest need or problem through the most effective treatment or strategy. In this process, students’ visual, tactile, motion perception and other sensory organs should be paid attention. The information symbols consisting with its characteristics should be extracted to express the intrinsic link between knowledge and laws based on age and personality of special learners from the perspective of Knowledge Project, and technical means should be made full use to transfer abstract knowledge into intuitive, visual, vivid knowledge, allowing students a thorough understanding, such as the development

and application of brainpower whiteboard system, which is able to promote this effect. For the special learners with physical defects, direct service model can be used, and instructional design should follow the principle of compensatory, the media acts as demonstration role, enhancement role and learning guide role. For the special learners with psychological problems, a combination of direct and indirect ways can be used, as shown in Figure 1. For example, for learners with a relatively low cognitive ability, teaching programs can be taken to solve problems in small steps to go from the easy to the difficult, the students are given positive feedback for each step triggering students to maintain a high mood. The key that information technologies plays a role lies in flexible control ability of teachers and related practitioners on the diversification of information technologies.

4.2 Implementation Model of Information Technologies in Life skills Training The ultimate goal of special education is to enable special learners to return to social life, and work and live like normal people. Due to physiological and psychological problems, they could not spontaneously seek information technologies, especially for young special learners, it is difficult to understand the importance of information technologies through persuasion and education. The only way is to make full use of the objec-

Figure 1. Strategies on solving problems of special learners via information technologies

40

China Special Education

tive environment to stimulate the initiative and the actual demand of learners to solve real-life problems by information technologies. Everyday life in schools is the best environment. Therefore, schools should carefully organize the lives of learners, and create conditions to guide them using of information technologies in life as far as possible. For example, students regularly use the Blog, message board or other tools to describe everyday life and learning problems, and video and audio materials can help students correct the lip, pronunciation and so on. At the same time, the study technologies creates social computing environment, which promotes learners’ interaction through using language, improve social communication skills of learners, and develop learners’ societal emotion and the ability of coordination and collaboration to demonstrate to other learners. For stimulating the initiative and the actual demand of learners to use technologies in solving real-life problems, everyday life in schools is the best environment.

4.3 Implementation Model of Information Technologies in Vocational skills Training Special education should increase vocational and technical education and enhance labor skills development, create some skills training courses for students such as art, sculpture, sewing, embroidery etc. according to the situation so that students with disabilities are able to be self-reliant and become useful persons for society after graduation. The information technologies of virtual reality is involved in skills training, and will make skills training easier for students to accept. For example, when learning sculpture, a large screen can demonstrate each step of carving work for students as well as the details of each action and so on. Meanwhile, the multimedia device can repeatedly play, until students fully understand.

5 CONCLUsION AND sUGGEsTIONs This study has the following conclusions. •

•

•

The information technologies applications in special education in China becomes a blind area mainly due to the constraints of educational technologies application environment, the low information literacy of learners with disabilities, the lack of development and application of supporting technological means, and the improper implementation of rights and interests guarantee means related with people with disabilities. The information technologies applications in special education must be based on certain principles. Using information technologies principles of general basic education for reference, the information technologies of special education should be implemented to follow following principles: correct application of compensatory theory to play up strengths and avoid weaknesses, and combination of intuitiveness and abstractiveness. Special education teaching activities mainly includes classroom teaching, life skills training and vocational skills training, therefore information technologies applied to the implementation of special education is in three models: the implementation model of information technologies in classroom teaching, the implementation model of information technologies in lifeskills training, the implementation model of information technologies in vocational skills training.

Education information technologies has become an important basis for the development of modern education, it should be done to seize the opportunity to comprehensively advance in educational information construction based computer and

41

China Special Education

network communications to improve information technologies level of education tools and educational resources so that China education for people with the disabilities keeps pace with international development process. In order to achieve special education informationization, four aspects of work should be done, including information infrastructure, special equipment development and construction, information resources establishment, and universal education of information technologies education. •

•

•

•

42

Information infrastructure is the assurance of informationization including not only the campus network construction but also multi-media classrooms, computer classrooms, electronic reading, digital libraries, teaching management systems, remote communication network construction and so on. Special equipment development and construction is a characteristic of special education informationization. Children with disabilities use different rehabilitation facilities depending on different extent and different conditions of barriers, the full utilization of special equipment can truly reflect the difference of information technologies in special education from general education. Information resources establishment is the key to carry out informationization. The hardware cannot fully play a role without digital teaching resources available. Universal education of information technologies is the core of special education informationization. What is the ultimate goal of information technologies education? It is to train all children with disabilities to have necessary information literacy to adapt to modern society, and integrate into mainstream society.

To sum up, current information technologies of China special education still has a larger gap including hardware, software and training of personnel, and still need the attention of nation and the huge capital investments in order to fill these gaps, thereby speeding up information technologies of China special education.

REFERENCEs Gibb, G. S., & Dychesm, T. T. (2000). Guide to Writing Quality Individualized Education Programs: What’s Best for Students with Disabilities?Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Heward, W. L. (2000). Exceptional Children – an Introduction to Special Education (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hu, H., & Ren, Y. (2008). New developments in learning technologies and significance for education research. China Educational Technologies, 4, 1–6. Lorenz, S. (1998). Effective in-class Support: the Management of Support Staff in Mainstream and Special Schools. London: David Fulton Publishers. Qiao, G., Li, N., & Peng, W. (2005). Probe on information technologies application in special education. Modern Distance Education Research, 6, 23–25. Taylor, R. L. (2000). Assessment of Exceptional Students: Educational and Psychological Procedures. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Vahid, B., Harwood, S., & Brown, S. (1998). 500 Tips for Working with Children with Special Needs. London: Kogan Page. Berners-Lee, T. (2004). The definition of Accessibility. Retrieved December 29, 2004, from http://www.ocawa.com/ Accessibility_8_en/Definition_30.htm

China Special Education

Xiao, L. (2007). The using of information technologies methods in special education. Journal of Henan Institute of Education General ( . Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 26(12), 81–83.

Zhang, J., Zhu, X., & Cheng, J. (2006). Blind area of application and research of educational technologies-Education of Disabilities, Modern . Educational Technology, 16(4), 13–15.

Zhang, J. (2003). Modern Education Technologies - Theory and Applications. Beijing: Higher Education Press.

Zhu, Z. (2002). Information Education Outlook. Shanghai, China: East China Normal University Press.

43

44

Chapter 4

Learning Applications for Disabled People Athanasios Drigas N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece Dimitris Kouremenos N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece John Vrettaros N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Greece

ABsTRACT This chapter presents e-learning practices and applications, which target people with visual and hearing disabilities. The first part discusses an e-learning application, which targets visually impaired people while the second part presents an e-learning application for the teaching of the English language to deaf and hearing impaired people. The final part presents a study about the relationship of the deaf and hearing impaired with new technologies in Greece. The chapter stresses the importance of the thorough exploitation of ICTs together with e-learning technologies towards the effective improvement of educative methods for this target group. The objectives of this chapter are to support the distance and lifelong education and training of the target group, to guarantee their equal access to information, knowledge, education and employment and finally, to minimize the digital divide through the use of assistive technologies and contemporary, easily navigable and user-friendly e-learning environments.

E-LEARNING PRACTICEs FOR VIsUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE Promoting equality of access to e-content for disabled individuals is a primary goal of web designers nowadays. Keeping in mind that access to information and education is the most undeniable right of all people, it becomes clear that DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch004

the adjustment of ICT services and the Internet content to the needs of disabled people and special target groups in general, especially in education issues is essential (Drigas, Vrettaros, Stavrou & Kouremenos, 2004; Twining, 2007). Very thorough international activity has been taking place, concerning the adjustment of the Internet to the special needs of the disabled people, through the use of special technological applications in the already existing communica-

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Learning Applications for Disabled People

tion mediums, with very important results. A large number of organizations and companies have been active in the area of preserving the rights of disabled people and have come up with gadgets that adjust the existing technological mediums to their needs. E-content can be available to all users and information can be found faster regardless of the user agent that is being used and regardless of their disability (Colace, DeSanto & Vento, 2003; Graf & List, 2005; King, 2003). A significant number of methods contribute to the improvement of e-content accessibility by various target groups of people such as people who have reading difficulties, people with cognitive and learning disabilities as well as hearing impaired people and people with mobility problems. Some of these methods include icons and videos depicting a person translating the text into the Sign language, enhancing internet access, multi web internet browsers, media access generators, sensus internet browsers, ΤΤΥ-text phones, hearing aids, image phones for the deaf, special keyboards, joysticks, mouthsticks and sensors for those with mobility disabilities. All the aforementioned supportive technological equipment (assistive technology) stems from the continuous effort to familiarize the disabled in general, with the ICTs in order for them to become equal members of the information society (Angehrn & Balakrishnan, 2004; Phipps, Sutherland & Seale, 2002; Pilling, Barrett & Floyd, 2004). In visually impaired individuals’ cases, there are numerous ways to tackle their disability. The most important ones are the auditory description of visual-multimedia information, which benefits the blind individuals, whereas for those individuals with sight disabilities there is the solution of the graphics enlargement with the use of special software. This section presents an e-learning environment that was developed and designed for the informing and education of blind and visually impaired individuals and their trainers (Geoffrey,

Aimeur & Gillet, 2002; Humar, Pusticek & Bester, 2003). This e-learning environment provides the following possibilities to the people that it targets. Firstly, it incorporates technologies that cover the communicative needs and handicaps of the visually impaired. Moreover, it provides the opportunity to the users to make use of their alternative sensory routes such as hearing and touch for easier navigation and finally, it provides them with the opportunity to access e-content that will initially inform them and in the long run ensure their equal access to information, knowledge, education and employment. The lifelong training-education of the trainer was considered a very crucial part of the project as it indirectly upgrades the education quality of the visually impaired. Such supportive environments are mainly based on the principle of the knowledge and understanding of the handicaps of the visually impaired from a psychological point of view. It is essential to take this information into account in order to be able not only to smooth these handicaps, but also to enhance their other skills and finally, cover in full both their special personal as well as their communicative needs (Drigas & Koukianakis, 2004; Drigas, Koukianakis & Papagerasimou, 2006).

system Units Presentation In psychology studies it is stated that individuals with visual impairments have their other senses (such as touch and hearing) upgraded, which in a way replace and fill in for the lack of or low eyesight. Unfortunately though, the use of one of the aforementioned senses alone is not adequate enough. It is essential that the visually impaired use a combination of their alternative sensory routes for better results. Hence, it becomes obvious that the e-learning environment must provide such possibilities to the user. There were three main system units that were taken into account when designing this informative and educational

45

Learning Applications for Disabled People

e-system. The e-learning environment interface, the database structure and finally, the special tools that needed to be embedded in the system in order to achieve the main aim: the equality of access and the easy navigation of the visually impaired to e-content. The discussed e-learning environment interface, contains technological and general information regarding the blind and the visually impaired and it is based on the multiple access interfaces, fulfilling the basic principles of “design for all” and “universal access”. Particular emphasis was given to the special access interfaces, which include audio navigation and the possibility of enlarging the text, in order to make the e-learning environment user friendly and easily navigable. The main aim was to ease the integration of the visually impaired to the ICTs and hence, to information, knowledge, education and employment. In addition, another important factor that was taken into account was the distance education of the disabilities specialists-trainers, as the upgrade of the specialists’ knowledge has indirect effect on the upgrade of the training and education of the visually impaired. Moreover, a database was created to be used by the trainers of the visually impaired, aiming at the scientific evaluation of the quality of the services that are provided to these people. This database constitutes a source of information as well as a database for the trainers of a disability centre, to which they can refer for the history and the progress of the special education of the visually impaired. More particularly, all the information that regards visually impaired people is inserted into the database. In addition, the therapeutic and educational work of the employees of the centre is inserted into the database together with the corresponding profile of the served population. The aim of this database was to upgrade the trainers’ work in favour of the visually impaired. Furthermore, special tools (assistive technology) were embedded in the system to support and assist the Internet access and navigation the visu-

46

ally impaired. Since visual access interfaces are of no use to blind people and are problematic for those with visual impairments, the need to create other special access interfaces arose, which would support the information flow through alternative sensory routes such as hearing and touch. Regarding visually impaired people, common software-based assistive technology includes screen readers, which is a software program that reads the content of the screen aloud to a blind user. Screen readers can usually only read text that is printed, not painted, to the screen. Moreover, screen magnifiers are used, which is a software program that magnifies a portion of the screen, so that it can be more easily viewed by individuals with low vision and finally, speech synthesizers and voice/audio input software that operate in conjunction with graphical desktop browsers. Hardware assistive technology includes alternative keyboards, pointing devices and finally, Braille displays, which achieve the display of a large percentage of what is displayed on the screen. In particular, Real Audio was used for the generation of audio messages, while for the incorporation of these messages within a web page, a special Real Player plug-in was used. In addition, the Macromedia Flash 5 Player is responsible for the enlargement of the graphics, while finally, JavaScript was used for the activation of certain keys on the keyboard that support and ease the navigation of the visually impaired user.

Navigation Techniques Presentation In this section the e-learning environment is presented as well as its special access interfaces and its various navigation techniques and services. The e-learning environments’ entrance page guides the user as to the special tools that the user will need in order to use the environments’ services. These are the Macromedia Flash Player and the Real Player. After this, the user enters the main interface of the environment.

Learning Applications for Disabled People

Once the user has entered the main interface, an audio message can be heard and a moving image can be seen. This confirms the correct installation of the essential Macromedia Flash Player and Real Player tools. The main interface includes the e-learning environments’ four navigation techniques. By choosing one of the four navigation techniques, namely, Audio based Navigation, Graphics based Navigation, Braille Terminal or Screen Reader Navigation and Common Citizens Navigation the corresponding interface will appear. For the visually impaired individual there is an audio message that welcomes and instigates the user to press one of the 1,2,3,4 keys in order to be navigated to one of the four aforementioned interfaces.

Audio Based Navigation The visually impaired are navigated through audio messages (Real Audio) to audio information only. This means that the installation of the Real Player tool is essential for the navigation of the visually impaired user. The navigation through the pages is realized by pressing the keys according to the instigation of the corresponding audio message. The keys that are used are “enter” to return to the main interface, “space” for returning to previous pages and the numerical ones “1-9” for the navigation through the pages. Once the interface is loaded, an audio welcome and navigation message is heard. The activation of the keys was realized with JavaScript, while the audio navigation was realized with the generation of real audio messages and their incorporation in a page through the special Real Player plug-in. The thematic units are exactly the same as the ones in the common citizens interface, except for the multimedia ones (video, video on demand and video conference) for the obvious reason that they cannot be used by the visually impaired. The only multimedia unit that is present here is the audio books.

Graphics Based Navigation The structure of this interface is exactly the same as in the common interface, except that through the installation of a special Flash Player plug-in, the user may enlarge both the graphics and the text. The enlargement process, which is given sonically by navigating the user to the corresponding interface, is realized by right clicking the mouse and choosing zoom in. This interface’s possibility is due to the special design of the web pages using the Macromedia Flash 5 tool.

Braille Terminal or Screen Reader The information that the user finds in this interface is the same as the information provided in the Common and Graphic Enlargement Interfaces, the difference lying in the fact that it is presented in plain text format with a large font in order to be able to easily use either a Braille Keyboard or a Screen Reader. This is because the graphics impede the use of the aforementioned tools and hence, it is essential to have a simple environment. In addition, this interface contains all the information of the Common Interface and has been designed in such a way, in order to collaborate with a Hellenic Screen Reader and a Braille Terminal, which serve the educational needs of the visually impaired by accessing the network environment.

Common Citizens Navigation In this interface, the non-disabled interested users may navigate through the information of the e-learning environment through columns of links as happens in a normal web portal. In particular, this interface is mainly addressed to the trainers as well as the family members of the visually impaired users. This page consists of four units namely, Technology, Information, Organizations and Multimedia. The unit “Technology” contains information

47

Learning Applications for Disabled People

about technological supportive tools for people with visual and mobility impairments such as Braille terminals, and screen readers. The unit “Information” contains useful information such as books about disabled people according to the disability, magazines and links to Hellenic libraries where these magazines can be found, hyperlinks of the most important Hellenic and foreign web sites that engage in disabilities issues and finally, information about causes of child eyesight loss. The unit “Organizations” contains information about all the institutions and organizations related with disabilities in Greece. Finally, the unit “Multimedia” contains educational and recreational material for both the disabled people as well as their trainers such as digital videos of educational activities taking place at disability centers according to the thematic of the activity as well as links to these videos, excerpts from Audio books that are available in Real Audio and Greek and foreign links to radio stations on the Internet and also to music web sites. Finally, this interface provides two very useful services. The first is Video on demand using the IPTV Viewer 3.0 and also audio and video conference services.

ENGLIsH E-LEARNING PRACTICEs FOR DEAF PEOPLE Despite the vast and rapid evolution of information and communication services and products, only a small percentage of these are used within the linguistic training circle and even a smaller percentage are used to support the linguistic training of impaired people and especially of deaf and hearing impaired people. The general idea is that the majority of the Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and services target the common user, and exclude handicapped people and other sensitive community groups. This fact provokes and creates a phenomenon more commonly known as ‘digital divide’, or in other

48

words, the exact opposite of e-inclusion, which is supported internationally by several policies and organized actions (Molla, & Al-Jaghoub, 2007). This section presents an e-learning environment that aims at the promotion of the English language as a second language for deaf and hearing impaired people whose mother tongue is the sign language. Towards this aim, a special pedagogic methodology of distant linguistic training was designed and used together with innovative educational e-content, suitably adapted to the needs of the deaf and hearing impaired. The whole process includes audits and evaluation of the linguistic skills of the e-students. The educational e-content was designed to be divided into different levels according to the knowledge level of the students. The system has been designed to evaluate the student and set the pedagogic material at the corresponding level using an intelligent taxonomy system. Particular emphasis was given to the quality and innovation of the educational material where new animation and digital video technologies were extensively used (Tavangarian, Leypold, Nölting, Röser, & Voigt, 2004; Rosenberg, 2000; Drigas, & Koukianakis, 2006). An important element of the task was the promotion of equality of the deaf and hearing impaired people through their participation in the European Community. Nowadays, the English Language as a second language constitutes an important asset in the professional field, for all individuals. The Greek sign language (GSL) is a natural visual language used by the members of the Greek Deaf Community, which counts several thousands of native and non-native signers (Antzakas and Woll, 2002; Lampropoulou, 1992). There is also a large number of hearing non-native signers of GSL, mainly students of GSL and families of deaf people (Lampropoulou, 1992; Bellugi & Fischer, 1972). The recent increase of mainstreamed deaf students in education, as well as the population of deaf students scattered in other institutions, minor town units for the deaf and private tuition may well double the total number of secondary and

Learning Applications for Disabled People

potential Sign language users (Kyle & Woll, 1985; Efthimiou & Katsoyannou, 2001; Wilcox, 2003).

final improvements of the central and the subsidiary design and developments.

Project steps

The E-Learning Application

The projects’ basic objective is to support the equality of access and the real participation in professional training for deaf people (Phipps, Sutherland & Seale, 2002). Moreover, the main aim is the promotion of the English language as a second language for the deaf and hearing impaired through distant linguistic training using innovative educational material (e-content) suitably adapted to their needs. The steps that were followed for the realization of the project were as follows:

The e-learning application has been designed using both asynchronous services for the delivery of the educational material as well as asynchronous services of communication and collaboration, in an effort to surpass the barriers that are related with the time and the place of training but also to satisfy the needs of deaf and hearing impaired students with a variety of possibilities of equipment and communication. Moreover, the model of the visual classroom has been designed using video conference services through images, with the possibility of realization of cooperative real-time activities (whiteboard, application sharing, file sharing). Apart from the designed visual classroom model, the model of supported self-paced learning is also in use. In addition, the educated person is simultaneously able to use the course and to intervene in the flow and its structure. In this designed model the strategy is learner centered. The designed services that are provided by the e-learning environment are categorized into the following axes:

•

•

•

•

Design and development of an e-learning environment for the deaf and hearing impaired, adapted to their special needs through the use of sign language. Design and development of electronic informative and adaptive material (e-content) for the deaf and hearing impaired people on the Web. This informative material includes text and sign language videos (multimedia) and aims at the teaching of the English language. Design and use of innovative e-learning methods for linguistic training with selfpaced learning. Processes of synchronous learning and collaborative methods of asynchronous self-paced learning were used (Moore, 1989; Moore and Kearsley, 1995; Naeve, Lytras, Nejdl, Harding and Balacheff, 2006; Lytras, 2007; Lytras and Sicilia, 2005). Design and operation of an application for lifelong and distance learning of the English language. In this application, all the aforementioned actions and developments were designed and coordinated so that the desired training outcome is available to the deaf community for implementation and evaluation that will lead to the

•

•

•

•

Visual order: line of courses in real time with the possibility of interaction through the Internet. Self-instruction: access (search and recovery) to training and informative material for various cognitive and more general subjects that interest teachers. Collaborative learning: communication and attendance in thematic circles of discussions and development of collaborative activities; Files: the instructor can upload files to the server. Students do not have access to these files unless the instructor links them

49

Learning Applications for Disabled People

•

•

•

•

•

•

to another part of the site. A file can be text documents, sound files, spreadsheets etc. Grades: there is the capability of grading tests, quizzes and projects that students have undertaken. Questionnaire: the questionnaire module allows users to complete online feedback style forms using a variety of user input methods. Scorm/AICC: the Scorm activity allows the inclusion of a Scorm lesson within the e-learning environment. Scorm is a common system for putting together online learning experiences, and there are many packages that can export activities in Scorm format. Survey: instructors can add pre-built surveys to the class. These are typically used for online, distance learning courses. Wiki: instructors can add a Wiki to their class. A wiki is similar to a blog, the difference being that everyone can contribute, edit and comment so the content can be built very quickly. RSS Feeds: the e-learning platform supports outgoing RSS feeds. This option needs to be enabled by the administrator. Once enabled, RSS is available in the forum and glossary modules. RSS is a technology where visitors to a web site can choose to have the web site send new postings to an RSS aggregator. RSS allows a user to build a custom news service. When users subscribe to a RSS-enabled page, they will get new postings from forums and/or new entries in glossaries without having to visit the e-learning site every day.

The E-Content The purpose of the discussed e-learning environment could be summarized as teaching - tutoring deaf students in order to meet the ESOL level 1 and level 2 standards (developed by the Depart-

50

ment for Education and Skills (DfES) and the Basic Skills Agency (BSA)). Each of these two levels consists of the same five sections. Their semantic differential is located on the language skills acquisition each level defines as necessary - appropriate. An abstract e-learning schema of the final system is the following: The learning process consists of three stages. Each individual deaf student must successfully complete each stage in order to proceed to the next. Also, a fundamental assumption is that there exists a logical/obvious priority list containing all sections in a certain ascending order. The section priority list begins with the letter recognition and alphabetical order, then follows the spelling and vocabulary, before the grammar and sentence structure. The section priority list ends with the reading and finally, with the writing. The e-learning process is presented in length next together with the analysis of some key issues. The e-learning process begins with the acquisition of the necessary language skills for each individual section. Per section questions or questionnaires are interchanged with corresponding instruction/lesson sessions. This process ends only after the deaf student completes all sections successfully. If an accurate assessment (according to statistical thresholds) of the student’s language level cannot be reached, more questions are employed. The e-learning process continues with the acquisition of language skills relevant to each section and to the section(s) lying above it. The deaf student is provided with questions relevant to a certain section and simultaneously relevant to all the corresponding prerequisite sections (of the section under consideration). Two issues are of vital importance; answers could be simultaneously right according to some sections and wrong according to others and also the part of an answer relating to a specific section could be partially right. Moreover, the question itself exhibits a different degree of relevance/weight

Learning Applications for Disabled People

with respect to each individual section. Finally, the e-learning process concludes with the overall verification - evaluation of the student’s exact language level. Questions at this stage are more complex, combining various arbitrary sections, which are chosen randomly instead of being selected in some formal way.

E-LEARNING PRACTICEs FOR ICT’s AND DEAF PEOPLE Individuals with hearing disabilities are exposed either as persons, or as organized communities in communicational problems, which can be reduced or enhanced due to the brainstorming of information (Kersting, 1997). Due to their impairment the deaf cannot manage the communication mediums in their whole, resulting to their social relegation, because knowledge and access to information is very important nowadays for the social-economical status of each person (Akach & Woodford, 2000). The Internet and its services reduce substantially the differences between hearing people and hard of hearing people, because in this case, information is primarily offered visually and less sonically. A hard of hearing person can have access to information of the same depth and plurality as a hearing person. (Sanger, 2006). The kind of information offered through the Internet, spreads from text, to image, to audio documents and complex video. The information offered is available in different media presentation forms, as a result of the technological convergence between the content of older communicational mediums (text, image, audio, and video). For the people with hearing impairment that is the step for complete access to the Information Society (Bozinis & Iakovou, 2005; Caldow, 2004). Numerous websites have appeared lately, which are managed by people with hearing impairment. These websites concern deaf people and their environment, and their content varies, including

discussions, press reports, links, social services, communication capabilities, instructions for TV shows with subtitles, researches and scientific papers. One of the most important features of the Internet is interactivity. In addition to the classic communication mediums, the user can participate in the information offering, its updating and its handling, so that the user emerges as a producer and as an information dealer. The deaf constitute the primary target user group who need e-learning tools and educational material for the e-services and new technologies sector (Riley & Riley, 2003; Drigas, Vrettaros, Kouremenos & Stavrou, 2004; Lytras, 2007; Lytras & Sicilia, 2005). Till very recently e-learning systems were unavailable to students with hearing impairment. However, the user-friendly multimedia-based, communication and information services of the Internet can be used as a standard electronic platform to support primarily the main procedures of distance, lifelong and continuous training for the deaf (Drigas, Vrettaros & Kouremenos, 2004; Bose, 2004). The communication and information services are adjusted to their special needs through the use of Sign language, and this is a certain method towards the general improvement of the educational and training services provided for the deaf people (Hughes, Hudgins & MacDougall, 2004; Henderson, Grinter & Starner, 2005). The main objective is to support the equal rights of deaf people for their access and real participation in the professional training (Drigas, Vrettaros, Kouremenos & Stavrou, 2004). The final aim is the creation of a passage for these individuals into the new professional fields via their training with specialized knowledge and skills in the use of the continuously developing e-services. Specifically, this knowledge and experience will constitute a supply for their lifelong training and education. An important blossoming in the work market has been observed in e-services and new places of work are continuously created.

51

Learning Applications for Disabled People

The main research question that was aimed to be clarified though the present research, based on an empirical approach, was how people with deaf impairment can or are willing to manage concepts and capabilities through the Internet, such as elearning, e-commerce and e-government (Lytras, 2007). Additionally, the relationship between deaf people and the computer is explored, as well as the motives and the character of this relationship.

Assumptions and Research Questions The assumptions that are examined refer to centric theoretic concepts, such as integration, information, Internet use and its extensions (communication). Hence, the following assumptions were structured accompanied by their reasoning, which were set under examination through the use of a questionnaire. 1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

8.

52

Deaf people have sufficiently gained skills for the use of the computer and the Internet. Deaf people don’t have the lingual skills for using the capabilities offered through the Internet. Deaf people can be informed through the Internet about various subjects. Deaf people with access to the Internet mostly use it as an information source. Sign Language consists the most suitable way for facilitating deaf people with the use of the Internet Deaf people have minimum knowledge of the capabilities and applications of e-learning, e-commerce and e-government Deaf people show special interest in future training on the applications of e-learning, e-commerce and e-government Deaf people believe that the use of new technologies is highly important for their professional integration and improvement.

Methodological Approach The online questionnaire was filled in by a representative sample of 53 deaf people anonymously, who are members of two of the largest deaf organizations in Athens as well as Internet users. It was highlighted that the questions concern only deaf people and not hard of hearing people, in order to define the respondent group from the beginning. For the examination of the assumptions and the research questions, the written questionnaire method was designated, which is considered more appropriate for the recording of attitudes and opinions of people. The questionnaire is a well structured tool of empirical social research, which consists of close and open ended questions. The questionnaire was presented and filled in at an Internet website and could alternatively be sent by email. The method of the online questionnaire was chosen based on the purposes of the research approach, which is related with the use of the Internet and therefore was directly referred to the target group (deaf users of the Internet). The advantages of the online survey have to do on the one hand, with the low cost and on the other, with the capability of directly processing the research data. A disadvantage is the fact that the deaf people consist only a minor percentage of the Greek population, from which comparably only a small part has access to Internet services. From a database comprising fifty questions, fourteen simple questions, which were considered appropriate, were chosen in collaboration with a group of experts as far as their lingual structure and their notional content were concerned. In two successive pilot applications on deaf people with similar psychometric elements with the population we are concerned with, improvements were made on certain questions depending on their difficulty and understanding level. An online panel site tool was developed, which consists of a simple series of modules in the application for online research for the conduction

Learning Applications for Disabled People

of the online survey. The data processing was simplified through the aforementioned online tool, because it comprised the largest part of this process. Moreover, with the help of the online tool, the initial data where enhanced in the SPSS statistic analysis program for further processing. The younger deaf people of the sample (16-25 years old) took part in the online survey. This fact enforces the position, that the age is a variable of great importance regarding the relationship of the deaf people with the Internet. 56% of the sample has attended only a school for the deaf, but a large percentage of the sample has education of a higher level. The ascertainment that the largest percentage of the deaf people that took part in the survey are unemployed, is explained, partly due to their young age, but is also a clear indication of the difficulties that the deaf people confront in order to gain access to employment.

Assumptions Analysis and Results

4.

5.

6.

The assumptions and research questions must sufficiently satisfy the problematical of the present research, which is the educational needs of the deaf people regarding the Internet and its applications. 1.

2.

3.

Deaf people have sufficiently gained the skills for the use of the computer and the Internet, but in the case of extended and productive use of the Internet, they present medium to low ability. Deaf people don’t have the lingual skills to use the offered Internet capabilities. A large percentage of the sample (34%) doesn’t speak foreign languages, a fact which is an obstacle for their relationship with the new technologies. Deaf people can be informed through the Internet about various subjects. From the online survey it was deduced that deaf people use the Internet services typically. The observation that the Internet is chosen as a means for entertainment, probably means

7.

8.

that the Internet is considered as more attractive compared with television or the written press, where there is no capability of subject presentation neither in the sign language nor with the use of multimedia. Deaf people with access to the Internet mostly use it as an information source. The results from the survey enhance this assumption. Over 80% of the deaf people of the sample believe that they are more efficiently informed and that they communicate easier and faster with the use of the Internet. Sign Language consists the most suitable way for facilitating deaf people with the use of the Internet. The results from the survey confirm that the combination of Sign Language and multimedia is a very important factor and one that will probably contribute to a more massive use of the Internet by deaf people. Deaf people have minimum knowledge of the capabilities and the applications of elearning, e-commerce and e-government. From the conducted survey, one can confirm that the difficulties that the people have accessing and using the Internet, are the main factors why deaf people can’t understand and therefore participate in e-learning, ecommerce, or e-government activities. Deaf people show special interest in future training on the applications of e-learning, e-commerce and e-government. Despite the fact that deaf people don’t have the knowledge or haven’t be trained in order to participate in e-learning, e-commerce or e-government activities, they are willing to be trained in the use of these technological capabilities and their applications in common economical, social and professional aspects. Deaf people believe that the use of new technologies is highly important for their professional integration and improvement. Regarding the professional evolution of the deaf people that use the Internet, 70% of the

53

Learning Applications for Disabled People

sample believes that these technologies will help them efficiently. The presented survey aimed to make clear the deaf people’s place in society regarding the use of the Internet and the new technologies and whether these new technologies can comprise a means for their integration in the social, economical and professional life. Undoubtedly, the informing and communication of the deaf people has improved significantly with the use of the Internet. Better communication means greater participation in social life, because through the communication with other people, one can participate in social changes more easily. On the other hand, better informing means understanding and awareness of the surrounding air, ideas, values and the orientation of the society. The extensions and the applications of the Internet, which offer an open communicational frame of interaction, allow the deaf people’s clean contact with all the possible receivers, whether they are deaf or not, putting a definitive end to deaf people’s social exclusion.

CONCLUsION The focus of this chapter was the visually and hearing impaired people with respect to education issues through e-learning applications and the relationship of deaf people with the Internet and the new technologies in Greece. Throughout the chapter, emphasis was given to the major importance that the Internet and ICTs play towards the e-inclusion of disabled people and their equal access to information, knowledge, education and employment. Of course, it must be mentioned that the whole approach towards the aforementioned applications was based on the fact that the ICTs constitute a very powerful tool towards the decrease of the problems that the disabled people face and that under no circumstances do they conceal them.

54

The first part of this chapter dealt with an e-learning environment for people with sight disabilities, which incorporated special assistive technology, adapted to their needs, in order to make navigation feasible for the visually impaired. The basic objective of this environment was to include and support the participation of the visually impaired in e-learning activities, which will contribute to their lifelong education and training and render them equal members of the so-called information society. The second part of this chapter presented an e-learning environment for the teaching of the English language to deaf and hearing impaired people whose mother tongue is the Sign Language. Special pedagogical methods for distant lingual training were embedded in the e-environment together with high quality e-content in video format (sign language videos) for the deaf and hearing impaired. Lastly, assessment and evaluation methods and tests were used within the elearning environment in order for the instructors to be able to monitor the skills of the hearing impaired students. Finally, the third part of this chapter dealt with a study about the relationship of the deaf and hearing impaired with new technologies in Greece. The study was based on an online questionnaire, which was filled in by deaf people. The aim of this study was to fully understand the needs of the hearing impaired with respect to new technologies and how these can contribute to their e-inclusion and their lifelong training. The results of the study indicate that the Internet offers a lot of potential regarding the deaf and the hearing impaired and that deaf and hearing impaired people use and are willing to exploit the Internet further. This can be achieved provided that special environments covering their informative and communicative needs are developed with the use of multimedia tools (digital video) and their mother tongue (sign language). Through the Internet disabled people can interact with other people, they can access useful information, they can learn and most im-

Learning Applications for Disabled People

portantly, they can feel active members not only of the Internet world but of the society in general.

REFERENCEs Akach, P., & Woodford, D. (2000). Deafness: A Guide for Parents, Teachers and Community Workers. UNESCO. Angehrn, N. T., & Balakrishnan, R. (2004). Integrating Context in E-learning Systems Design. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 355-359). Antzakas, K., & Woll, B. (2002). Head Movements and Negation in Greek Sign Language. In Gesture and Sign Language in Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 2298, pp. 193-196). Bellugi, U., & Fischer, S. (1972). A Comparison of Sign Language and Spoken Language. Cognition, 1, 173–200. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(72)90018-2 Bose, R. (2004). Information Technologies for Education and Training in E-government. In . Proceedings of International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing, 2, 203–207. Bozinis, A. I., & Iakovou, E. (2005). Electronic Democratic Governance: Problems, Challenges, and Best Practices. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 5(2), 73–80. Caldow, J. (2004). E-democracy: Putting Down Global Roots. Institute for Electronic Government. IBM. Colace, F., DeSanto, M., & Vento, M. (2003). Evaluating Online Learning Platforms: A Case Study. In Proceedings of 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Washington, DC: IEEE Press.

Drigas, A. S., & Koukianakis, L. G. (2004). A Modular Environment for E-learning and Epsychology Applications. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Application, 6(3), 2062–2067. Drigas, A. S., & Koukianakis, L. G. (2006). An Open Distance Learning E-System to Support SMEs E-Enterprising. In Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering and Databases (pp. 297-302). Drigas, A. S., Koukianakis, L. G., & Papagerasimou, Y. P. (2006). A Web Based E-Learning and E-Psychology Modular Environment. In International Conference on Next Generation Web Services Practices (pp. 168-174). Drigas, A. S., Vrettaros, J., & Kouremenos, D. (2004). Teleeducation and E-learning Services for Teaching English as a Second Language to Deaf People, whose First Language is the Sign Language. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 1(3), 834–842. Drigas, A. S., Vrettaros, J., Kouremenos, D., & Stavrou, L. (2004). E-learning Environment for Deaf People in the E-commerce and New Technologies Sector. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 1(5), 1189–1196. Efthimiou, E., & Katsoyannou, M. (2001). Research Issues on GSL: A Study of Vocabulary and Lexicon Creation. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 2, 42–50. Geoffroy, F., Aimeur, E., & Gillet, D. (2002). A Virtual Assistant for Web-based Training in Engineering Education. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems (LNCS 2363, pp. 9-24). Graf, S., & List, B. (2005). An Evaluation of Open Source E-learning Platforms Stressing Adaptation Issues. In Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 163-165).

55

Learning Applications for Disabled People

Henderson, V., Grinter, R. E., & Starner, T. (2005). Electronic Communication by Deaf Teenagers. Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology. Hughes, G., Hudgins, B., & MacDougall, J. (2004). Remote Sign Language Interpretation Using the Internet. In Proceedings of Second Annual Conference on Communication Networks and Services Research (pp. 345-350). Humar, I., Pustisek, M., & Bester, J. (2003). Developing Dynamic Educational Material with Integrated Mathematical Notation for Web-based E-learning System. In 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (Vol. 1, pp. T3F-19 T3F-24). Kersting, S. (1997). Balancing Between Deaf and Hearing Worlds: Reflections of Mainstreamed College Students on Relationships and Social Interaction. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2(4), 252–263. King, N. J. (2003). Website Access for Customers with Disabilities: Can We Get There From Here? UCLA Journal of Law and Technology, 6. Kyle, J. G., & Woll, B. (1985). Sign Language: The Study of Deaf People and Their Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lampropoulou, V. (1992). Meeting the Needs of Deaf Children in Greece. A Systematic Approach. Journal of the British Association of the Teachers of the Deaf, 16(2), 33–34. Lampropoulou, V. (1992). The Socioeconomic Status of Deaf People in Greece. Journal of the British Association of the Teachers of the Deaf, 16(4), 90–96. Lytras, M. D. (2007). Teaching in the Knowledge Society: An Art of Passion. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 1(1/2), 1–9. doi:10.1504/IJTCS.2007.014205

56

Lytras, M. D. (2007). The Semantic Electronic Government: Knowledge Management for Citizen Relationship and New Assessment Scenarios. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 3(1), 5-17. Lytras, M. D., & Sicilia, M. A. (2005). The Knowledge Society: A Manifesto for Knowledge and Learning. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning., 1(1/2), 1–11. doi:10.1504/ IJKL.2005.006259 Molla, A., & Al-Jaghoub, S. (2007). Evaluating Digital Inclusion Projects: A Livelihood Approach. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(6), 592–611. doi:10.1504/IJKL.2007.016835 Moore, M. G. (1989). Three Types of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6. doi:10.1080/08923648909526659 Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1995). Distance Education: A Systems View. London: Wadsworth Publishing. Naeve, A., Lytras, M., Nejdl, W., Harding, J., & Balacheff, N. (2006). Advances of Semantic Web for E-learning: Expanding learning frontiers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(3), 321–330. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00608.x Phipps, L., Sutherland, A., & Seale, J. (2002). Access All Areas: Disability, Technologies and Learning. York, UK: JISC. Pilling, D., Barrett, P., & Floyd, M. (2004). Disabled People and the Internet Experiences, Barriers and Opportunities. York, UK: The Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Riley, T. B., & Riley, C. G. (2003). E-governance to E-democracy: Examining the Evolution. International Tracking Survey Report, No. 5. Rosenberg, M. J. (2000). E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Learning Applications for Disabled People

Sanger, L. M. (2006). The Future of Free Information. Digital Universe Journal, 2006(1). Tavangarian, D., Leypold, M., Nölting, K., Röser, M., & Voigt, D. (2004). Is E-Learning the Solution for Individual Learning? Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 2(2), 273–280.

Twining, P. (2007). Discussing ICT, Aspirations and Targets for Education: International Perspectives. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(2/3), 154–170. doi:10.1504/ IJKL.2007.015549 Wilcox, S. (2003). The Multimedia Dictionary of American Sign Language. Learning Lessons about Language, Technology, and Business. Sign Language Studies, 3(4), 379–392. doi:10.1353/ sls.2003.0019

57

58

Chapter 5

A Paradigm in Transition:

From a Teaching Focused Education to a Learning One—The ICT Contribution to the Acquisition of Social and Individual Skills in High Education1 Pablo Murta Baião Albino Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain Fernando González Gatica Universidad Diego Portales, Chile José Enrique Armendáriz-Iñigo Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain

ABsTRACT The traditional teaching process at higher education levels has changed in the European Union since the arrival of the “Bologna Process”. Under this new paradigm, professors are no longer the knowledge transmitters but also guides that must encourage students to generate knowledge. Hence, it is crucial to generate certain skills that will let them learn throughout all their lives, especially in the ability to search information that solves a certain problem. At this point is where it comes in hand the acquisition of ICT skills; since the learning process can surpass the physical barriers of the classroom and is an effective tool for solving problems. In this chapter, the authors address this new change in the educational paradigm focused on the European Union and taking into account the leading role of ICT in this learning process. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch005

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

A Paradigm in Transition

1. INTRODUCTION. DYNAMIsM ON EDUCATION: A MODEL THAT CHANGEs The evolution of new technologies, centered in connecting people, has the power to potentially broadcast knowledge at a worldwide scale though it has not been fully applied in the education process at all levels. According to Gadotti (2000), education is still based on a writing language in spite of being our culture predominantly digital. Hence, education systems have not yet appropriately weighted the impact of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT). The usage of ICT in education requires some significant changes in the learning process. It needs to strength those skills that are specifics of human beings; that is, their capacity to think, reason and not only to develop its memory and storage capacity (even though this last one plays the main role in the thinking process). The necessity of a school that teaches how to think requires knowing new methods and languages as well as a real believe in this education technique. That is the point where ICT comes in hand just to create new spaces and ways of knowledge and learning; this adds and complements to the ones already present in school, at home or social institutions, the tow latter ones also are agents of education. The commitment of all European ministers of Education to improve the competitiveness of university education which was formalized as the European High Education Area (EHEA, and more commonly known as the “Bologna Process” back in 1999). The Bologna Process is especially aimed to cross develop in all syllabuses the nest set of skills: cognitive, affective and social. These skills must let students face the challenges of a globalized and competitive job market. The EHEA plan tries to unify the plethora of different educational programs into a single University degree in the whole European Union. In this sense, each degree is divided into several

courses distributed through all the years of the degree are measured in terms European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) units. The main difference is that the student will switch from a model relying on the reception of knowledge from the professor to a new one based on the development of skills (Pablos et al., 2005). This change carries out an innovation in the teaching process, in terms of: contents and didactic methodology; learning and its associated processes; and, skills and the strategies that comes into play. Professor will no longer be the exclusive knowledge holder and the students will not act as merely receivers of that knowledge. This new education paradigm implies that students must take the leading role in the learning process; they are the ones who must state questions, generate new information and contribute to a general consensus in the activities to be accomplished so that they are oriented to their learning process itself. Students’ mobility (and, to some extent, professionals in general) inside and outside the European Union calls for new learning and communication tools between the professor and the students in order to continue activities outside the context of the classroom. Faced with the challenge proposed by the Bologna Process, the use of ICT has obtained a significant role too as tools involved also in the learning process (Caeiro, 2004). They satisfy all educational necessities of users as they provide an effective, accessible and attractive learning. The challenge is not focused on the access to information; rather, it is in the way a student learns how to take advantage of it. In this chapter, our aim is to contribute with some discussion and to think about the changes already done and those to come in the teaching and learning processes, bearing in mind the social current context, the Bologna Process and the use of ICT in these processes. The rest of the chapter is organized as follows: Section 2 is devoted to explain the change in the traditional teaching process; from acquiring

59

A Paradigm in Transition

and storing knowledge to acquire and develop a certain set of skills. This acquisition of skills is presented in Section 3. Section 4 introduces the relationship between ICT and the development of individual and social skills. Finally, conclusions end the chapter.

2. A CHANGE: THE EDUCATIONAL APPROACH IN TRANsITION In our humble opinion, a legitimate assumption that all agents involved in the education and different government policies have during the last decades is to reach higher and better quality and equity standards in the teaching process of all educational systems. This necessary aspiration, it is hardly assumed and dealt with effective and operational proposals. The concept of quality in education derives from several connotations that usually come along with a public debate about it. Despite this broad conceptual and multidimensional nature of the term, there are some agreements that have been established as a result of that discussion and compromise directly to the entire educational system, including Higher Education. These agreements set a system to be deployed whose main educational goal goes beyond the acquisition of some knowledge and a set of theoretical and practical tools. Its goal will consist in the promotion and training of skills that are considered as basic in the development of a person, regarding to his role as individual, social and professional. Twelve years have passed since the World Conference on Higher Education of UNESCO (1998) and its declaration is still valid nowadays: “On the eve of a new century, there is an unprecedented demand for and a great diversification in higher education, as well as an increased awareness of its vital importance for sociocultural and economic development, and for building the future, for which the younger generations will need to be equipped with new skills, knowledge and ideals. Higher education

60

includes ‘all types of studies, training or training for research at the post-secondary level, provided by universities or other educational establishments that are approved as institutions of higher education by the competent State authorities’.” Among others, this Declaration points out in Article 9(a): “In a world undergoing rapid changes, there is a perceived need for a new vision and paradigm of higher education, which should be student-oriented, calling in most countries for in-depth reforms and an open access policy so as to cater for ever more diversified categories of people, and of its contents, methods, practices and means of delivery, based on new types of links and partnerships with the community and with the broadest sectors of society”. Besides, in Article 9(b), it claims that higher education institutions should “educate students to become well informed and deeply motivated citizens, who can think critically, analyse problems of society, look for solutions to the problems of society, apply them and accept social responsibilities” According to these aims, the educational paradigm cannot pretend to continue in the same principles that characterize the teaching styles at universities. Instead, it must pursue a gradual transformation that shifts the teaching and learning process of institutions from lectures of professor where students must show a cognitive mastery of this knowledge based on those lectures to a system that pays special attention to ensure “the acquisition of skills, competences and abilities for communication, creative and critical analysis, independent thinking and team work in multicultural contexts, where creativity also involves combining traditional or local knowledge and know-how with advanced science and technology.”. The traditional leading role of the University professor should be balanced towards the student. Nowadays, it is expected that professors will be able to have and develop a set of methodological learning strategies so students can learn to learn and take some initiatives rather than a deposit of knowledge. These agreements are also reflected in

A Paradigm in Transition

the strategic option defined by European Union at Lisbon Strategy in 2000, in the sense of becoming by 2010, into a ‘knowledge economy’, a more competitive and dynamic economy (European Council, 2000). These commitments must be translated into specific aims and strategies suited to students. They must acquire some key skills that will be necessary to learn for the rest of their lives; these skills must be understood as the capacity to address certain complex tasks and to carry them out successfully. These skills assume a “combination of practical work, knowledge, motivation, ethics, attitude, emotions and other social components that must be mixed together to accomplish a certain work” (Ayuso 2007). The European Parliament and the European Council set up eight key skills for a permanent learning (European Parliament, 2006): i. ii. iii.

Mother tongue communication skills. Foreign language communication skills. Mathematical skills and some basic skills in science and technology. iv. Digital skills. v. Learn to learn skills. vi. Interpersonal, intercultural, social and civic skills. vii. Entrepreneurship skills. viii. Cultural Expression skills. These can be also summed up in the four major four major objectives of the new educational paradigm, as stated by Delors (UNESCO, 1997): i. ii. iii.

iv.

Learn to know, to promote that anyone can construct knowledge Learn to do, to have the chance of practicing what one has already learnt Learn to live together, by favoring the existence of equal-opportunity community spaces. Learn to be, by encouraging the development of the individual power.

These four nuclear skills present qualifications that aim to train persons so that they become more autonomous, flexible and adaptive. The person is susceptible to adequate to changing contexts, can integrate knowledge, procedures and attitudes. In other words, he can relate the learning coming from different topics, use them in an effective way and apply them to a variety of situations and contexts (Jensen, 2004).

3. A CHANGE: THE MEANING OF A PROCEss FOCUsED ON LEARNING The learning process is indeed considered as an important phenomenon that leads us to modify ourselves, adapt to the environment and, if everything goes fine, acquire new skills; furthermore, it will change throughout all the years. Up to know, this process was considered as one-way; the professor, denoted as “master” is responsible for transferring the knowledge and the information while students play the passive role merely consisting in memorizing/learning. This mode of learning has been put into consideration. The changes in the traditional teaching and learning process, influenced by the need of acquiring new skills, is changing this one-way communication into a two-way one where students can also provide knowledge and information. Meanwhile, the professor is not the exclusive knowledge holder and its role also includes acting as a mediator or a students’ guide in the search of learning. Hence, this change of paradigm requires of new ways to motivate to learn. Students must realize that it is not only a matter of passing the course but the real challenge relies on acquiring new skills for their future job, labor and personal life. The requirements of this new learning process are: effective, flexible, accessible and attractive. Besides, it must ease the development of professors’ tasks with new technologies (Caeiro et al., 2004). As noted by Setzinger (2006), this learning

61

A Paradigm in Transition

process must be based on a constructivist pedagogy in which collaborative learning plays an important role. The characteristics of this pedagogy are (Caeiro et al, 2004; Setzinger, 2006): i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

Active and controllable: it involves the students, so they are who interact and explore themselves; gives them the opportunity to be aware of the output of their own learning process; Constructive and reflective: it allows students to gain new knowledge and accommodate to previous ones, which leads to think about their own learning; Intentional: it lets the student to propose goals and to monitor his achievements until the proposed goals; Authentic, challenging and contextualized: it helps the students to set their learning in real situations, which prepares them for future challenges; Cooperative, collaborative and conversational interaction: it encourages students to discuss different issues, clarify doubts and share ideas in order to solve problems.

The advantages of this perspective of teaching and learning process, is its adaptiveness to modern society, which changes continuously. It transforms the traditional concept of education based on the acquisition of knowledge towards a more modern one based on the ability to solve problems that may appear throughout your lifetime. Thus, it is intended to develop individuals that can efficiently afford, with the proper skills, the evolution of the society by solving both, social and labor, problems. This proposal considers that every single human being has a great potential, susceptible of being developed when he shows interest to learn. It emphasizes in the development of constructive, knowledge skills and attitudes that allow students to be inserted appropriately in the labor structure and to adapt to the changes required by the society (Marin, 2003). Under this

62

assumption, the student learns by his own interaction with the information; assumes a critical, creative and reflexive attitude that will permit him to apply what he already learnt in daily problems. On the other hand, the professor is responsible for creating the learning environment that encourage open attitudes, leading the interaction towards the development of his/her potential and the use of hidden skills (Haywood et al, 1986). Special attention deserves the technological and “learning to learn” process skills. The first one includes the development of skills to search, derive, process and communicate the information and, afterwards, it will be transformed into knowledge (Kozulin, 1998). The second one deals with starting the learning process up and being also able to continue it independently. It will also consider the management of uncertainties just by trying to find answers that satisfy the logic of rational knowledge. Observing both skills demands a double challenge to professors. On the one hand, to acquire methodological knowledge and tools that promote the development of the learning potential; apart from the cognitive process and skills underneath this learning process. In regard to this issue, it is needed to address the question whether students develop these skills before reaching the higher education level or there are sensitive holes in this area that provoke a lack of maturity to carry out this process. On the other hand, to keep in touch with all educational tools provided by new technologies; as a rough outline, it is worth noting that students use them more intuitively than professors. In the past two decades, there has been a great emphasis on cognitive strategies. A lot has been said and written about “learning to learn”, but this concept has not been successfully understood at all educational levels (Sternberg and Grigorenko, 2003). Roughly speaking, and following the approach given in Gagne (1976), we noted that cognitive skills are those handling skills that the human being acquires and develops throughout his lifetime to manage his own learning, attention and

A Paradigm in Transition

reasoning process. This concept is closely related to the knowledge, experience and metacognitive control. They are joined together in some educational strategies (Feuerstein, 2003) that easily, with knowledge and practice, can be incorporated into the teaching process that encourages critical and reflective thinking. They can be summarized as follows (Feuerstein, 1980): i. ii.

To ask for reasons of the answers; To discuss how a correct response has been obtained; iii. To compare how one has faced similar tasks in previous occasions; iv. To discuss different and systematic manners of facing a problem; v. To analyze the error sources; vi. To distinguish among correct and erroneous aspects in the same response; vii. To reflect the face of emotional or motivational factors involved in a particular performance. The challenges raised by new technologies and its potential turn out to be evident. The intrinsic faster changes of ICT have modified the way to acquire, develop and transmit knowledge. This transformation does not necessarily mean that professors are no longer necessary; however, their role has been changed in the learning process. Universities can be considered as a good example in terms of the benefits and potential of ICT ensuring their quality. In Article 12 of the World Conference on Higher Education of UNESCO (1998) points out some means that can be adopted to enforce the implementation of technology resources in higher education. This includes, among others, setting up networks, technology transfer and new teaching environments that range from distance education to virtual systems of higher education.

4. THE RELATIONsHIP BETWEEN ICT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL AND sOCIAL sKILLs In accordance with (Salinas, 2004), the so called process of educational innovation based on ICT merely consists in review current works and boost innovative ITC experiences in the teaching and learning process in higher education institutions. They emphasize the use of ITC in teaching, the features of the systems as a communication and distribution channel of the learning materials. This author also states that an error in which we must never incur is emphasizing the availability and the potential of ICT without developing flexible projects based on global and institutional educational goals in order to get all agents involved in the teaching process. On the other hand, it is mentioned in (Carnoy, 2004) that professors are, in general, unwilling to change to any technology that does not ease the goals imposed by the education system. Hence, it is clear that ICT usage must be one of the key points in the education system. Although, most of the students go to University just to pass the exams and, hence, learning becomes a secondary goal. Professors go to class and present a given content and at midterm or at the end of the semester, they must prepare an exam where students must obtain a certain mark to pass the subject. This presents a scenario with low motivation for the introduction of innovative techniques in the teaching and learning process. In order to overcome this situation, in (OECD, 2001) is proposed a change in the working habits, merely due to the introduction of ICT, of faculty staff with special training programs so that they can become comfortable with the new technologies and adapt their courses to the use of ICT within them in the teaching and learning process. Another interesting learning tool, with an increasing popularity is the Collaborative ProjectBased Learning (CPBL) methodology. CPBL tries to solve a problem or tries to give answer to a com-

63

A Paradigm in Transition

plex question by the collaborative work of a group of students. They have to propose an action plan, launch this plan which involves some decisions during its lifetime and solving the problems that may appear as a consequence of these decisions. If this methodology (Badia, 2006) is adequately worked, it permits to acquire and develop higherlevel cognitive skills apart from other skills that can be easily ported to environments outside the classroom. Actually CBPL is a complex methodology that demands certain features: i. ii. iii. iv.

The professor needs a lot of educational help; It needs to be planned in real scenarios to accomplish real tasks; It needs to be developed in open learning and teaching contexts; Students must work autonomously during certain long periods of time

In spite of the increasing usage of ICT for educational purposes (Caeiro et al, 2004) due to the popularity of images and informatics (specially the Internet), the cornerstone of teaching is still the writing language. People for the use of ICT in education argue that it is need a deep change in the educational methodology, to let the brain reason instead of solely developing its memorizing skills (Gadotti, 2000). According to (Ayuso, 2007), there will be no effective adoption of ICT in education until some requirements are fulfilled like the cost reduction of hardware and professor training. This will only occur when a new generation of teachers, those educated in the context of ICT, enters into all range of educational institutions. If there are no well trained teachers then the usage of ICT will not be effective in the teaching and learning technology; specially, if we are talking about the University education. ICT only works as a technological support when users realize its value for themselves. Thus, we are facing two challenges: (i) to add a sustain-

64

able value to users; and, (ii) to encourage their contribution in terms of knowledge, experience and thoughts (Angehrn et al. 2009). Many methodological changes fail due to the fact that they do not take into account emotional or psychological aspects of individuals along with their social needs. In the aforementioned CPBL methodology there are six types of tools that give support to them (Badia, 2006): i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v. vi.

An environment that helps the professor. It gives the professor information regarding to several questions related to the design and development of the activity; Educational interaction professor-student. It gives useful educational help that are store in a given virtual classroom; Educational interaction among students. It eases the work of students in two ways: it favors his individual work; and stimulates the collaboration with the rest of the members of his team; An environment that helps the student. It helps the student to keep in touch with the activity to be studied; ICT and the activity. It gives the chance to provide resources and contents; ICT and the relationship between the professor and the activity. It is a matter of the professor to make resources and contents available in order to make the activity feasible.

By proceeding this way, we are obtaining a modern knowledge exchange environment along with an interactive learning environment that collects the latest trends on the Internet. Besides, the way they connect each other with these activities will make ach team member valuable, encouraging him to interact with the rest of members while they are witnesses of the active knowledge they are acquiring. Under this environment, it is very important that all agents are kept integrated in a system that will encourage and let them:

A Paradigm in Transition

i. ii. iii. iv. v.

Share and discuss their experiences; Explore, develop or present ideas; Work collaboratively in a project; Improve his efficiency and professional competence; Contribute actively to the innovation and its dissemination.

Finally, education is the key to ensure the development. It is not only needed to update it but also to deeply transform it (Gadotti, 2000). Hence, the logics inside the knowledge construction must be changed as the learning process will last for the rest of our lives.

5. CONCLUsION The traditional teaching process has passed away; this is especially true in Europe with the advent of the Bologna Process. This is an attempt to unify the higher education in all universities across UE. We have to change from a teaching process where professors are the knowledge transmitters to a new one. Under this new scenario, professors must also act as guiders to students, which in turn make students more active since they have to collaborate among them, search for information and transmit knowledge. Students can carry on this task of knowledge transmitters if they acquire the proper skills. These skills have to be wide enough to make the learning process durable (throughout all their lives) and also being able to solve their labor problems. Besides, students need to be mature enough to take full advantage of this learning process and, in the same way, professor must change the way their lectures are organized. Finally, this change comes in hand with one of the biggest revolution of our era which is ICT; our students must also be familiar with ICT since it is another way to teach and an effective way for search information and solve problems. Hence, this new teaching and learning process has

to take full advantage of the enormous potential that ICT brings.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work has been partially supported by the Spanish Government under research grant TIN2009-14460-C03-02.

7. REFERENCEs Ayuso, J. A. (2006). El reto de enseñar por competencias. Tavira: Revista de ciencias de la educación, 22, 257-264. Badia, A., & García, C. (2006). Incorporación de las TIC en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje basados en la elaboración colaborativa de proyectos. Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 2(3), 42–54. Bologna Declaration. (1999). Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education: The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. Retrieved from http://www.eees.es/pdf/Declaracion_Bolonia.pdf Caeiro, M., Llamas, M., & Anido, L. (2004). Hacia el soporte de actividades de aprendizaje heterogéneas. Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial, 8(24), 77–86. Carnoy, M. (2005). Possibilities and Challenges . In Inaugural Lecture of the 2004 – 2005 Academic Year (pp. 1–20). Barcelona: ICT in Education. European Council. (2000). Lisbon European Council: Summit 23 and 24. Retrieved from http:// www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm European Council. (2006, July 31). European Parliament and Council Education Recommendations on Key Skills. No. 230-231 / 2007. Feuerstein, R., & Feuerstein, R. A. S. (2003). Feuerstein instrumental enrichment basic: Instruments. Jerusalem: ICELP.

65

A Paradigm in Transition

Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. (1974). Mediated learning experience: An outline of proximal etiology for differential development of cognitive functions. Journal of International Council of Psychology, 9, 7–37. Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. Hoffman, M., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Gadotti, M. (2000). Perspectivas Atuais da Educação. São Paulo em Perspectiva, 14(2). Gagné, R. (1976). Gagné. Revista de Tecnología Educativa, 5(1). Haywood, C., Brooks, P., & Burns, M. S. (1986). Stimulating cognitive development at developmental level . In Schwebel, M., & Maher, C. A. (Eds.), Facilitating cognitive development: Principles, practices, and programs (pp. 127–147). New York: Haworth Press. Jensen, E. (2004). Cerebro y Aprendizaje. Competencias e Implicaciones Educativas. Madrid: Narcea Ediciones. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

66

OECD. (2001). Organisation for Economic CoOperation and Development. Learning to Change: ICT in Schools. Pablos, J. P., & Villaciervos, P. M. (2005). El Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior y las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación. Percepciones y Demandas del Profesorado. Revista de Educación, 337, 99–124. Stenberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. (2003). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511615801 UNESCO. (1998). World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. Retrieved from.http://www.unesco. org/education/educprog/wche/declaration_eng. htm

ENDNOTE 1

This work has been partially supported by the Spanish Government under research grant TIN2009-14460-C03-02.

67

Chapter 6

Personal Learning Enviroments: Meeting the Special Needs of Gifted Students Jaime Ribeiro University of Aveiro, Portugal Diogo Casanova University of Aveiro, Portugal Fernanda Nogueira University of Aveiro, Portugal António Moreir University of Aveiro, Portugal Margarida Almeida University of Aveiro, Portugal

ABsTRACT Gifted Students, in spite of their very well known characteristics, have specific education needs in order to achieve their potential. Although they do not present a special educational need in the common meaning, they have very particular learning needs that, if overlooked, may lead to adverse feelings towards school and learning that can result in academic failure. Authors in the field agree that giftedness can and must be developed and providing challenging and facilitative learning environments is the first building block. The PLE, held up by WEB 2.0, for its openness and possibilities it offers to learn autonomously, resorting to exploration, discovery, networking with like-minded peers and experts fits the style and pace of learning of its user and shows to be a tool to fully suite the particular traits of these students. In this chapter a 5 dimension ple is conceptualized that accommodates the cognitive, emotional and education needs of gifted students. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch006

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Personal Learning Enviroments

INTRODUCTION Giftedness, the potential for exceptional achievement, is normally characterized by high intelligence and creativity. Frequently it is associated with high Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores, which is a highly limiting approach and excludes a broader and complex dimension that involves other facets of gifted people. Gifted individuals exhibit a complex of cognitive, perceptual, emotional, motivational and social traits. The issue of giftedness has attracted attention and interest over time, creating myths that contributed towards misconceptions about gifted individuals. Usually, when one refers to gifted students we think of someone with outstanding intellectual abilities, with high levels of cognitive interests, fast learning and, therefore, that easily overcome obstacles and do not experience any difficulties in academic life. Seen in this way, there would be no reason to take particular care for the education of these students. It would seem that these students always learn, whatever the circumstances, good or bad, that make up their study environment. In fact, gifted students do have special needs that may cause several problems that can lead even to school dropout. Gifted students underachieve for many reasons and in many different circumstances that range from obstructing disabilities to lack of motivation and interest in school activities. Several authors agree that we must regard giftedness as something that can and must be developed, stressing the importance of learning environments (Gagné, 1999; Heylighen, 2007; Endepohls-Ulpe, 2009). As Endepohls-Ulpe (2009) correctly states, students with a rapid learning pace, highly effective information processing capacities and memory skills, often associated with high learning motivation and a growing need for knowledge, will suffer from boredom and under-stimulation if their special needs are not met. Lack of challenging experiences and lack of a sense of achievement will, in the long run, decrease or destroy their motivation and affect

68

their intellectual development (Endepohls-Ulpe, 2009). Therefore, their capabilities risk not being developed due to environmental issues or even due to avoidance related with the lack of adjusted responses that may lead to disinterest in school and consequent failure. As many education professional acknowledge these students experience several difficulties during their education, despite the relevance of their particular qualities (Senos & Diniz, 1998). Steps have been made in order to actively respond to these students’ particular needs, however there is still a major lack of educational strategies to support gifted students education. They require services and activities not ordinaryly provided by school in order to fully develop their capabilities (Johnsen, 2004; Renzulli, 2002; Brown, Renzulli, Gubbins, Siegle, & Zhang, 2005). Gifted students demand flexible and differentiated learning strategies that comply to their special educational needs in order to develop their potential. Otherwise we risk not being able to provide meaningful and enjoyable learning experiences that take advantage of what these students can potentially offer. However, even the more willing teacher who strives to be proactive in this respect is faced with constraints to implement individualized teaching and learning that often reveals itself to be hard work in today’s classroom that still suffers from the “syndrome” of teaching for the masses. The implications that computers and the Internet have in providing new and meaningful experiences in education is unavoidable. The use of technology to enhance education is well documented, it being clear the associated motivational load that it triggers in all students, eager to explore it and play and learn with it. It has been observed that technologies and web experience are advantageous in general and special education, acting as innovative learning tools and promoting access and participation for all students (Ribeiro, Moreira & Almeida, 2009). The Web 2.0, the new concept of the Internet, is now a two way process, where users can easily interact, create and share

Personal Learning Enviroments

information, open up new doors that open up new possibilities of knowledge construction. We can now consume and produce contents, trough webware applications that allow to gather and mash-up information, interact and communicate. Web 2.0 based Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) constitute a multidimensional space where it is possible to assemble and tailor different software and webware applications that suite the users learning needs in terms of content consumption and information exchange. PLEs paired with strategies that encourage the pursuit of knowledge through more autonomous learning based on search, discovery, exploration and social interchange present themselves as a component of the open instructional format that seems to be more advantageous for older or more intelligent students (Heller, 2004). Therefore, they seem to be adequate for the particular needs of gifted students that require open and comprehensive learning environments. Educators of gifted students endeavour to provide curricula with complexity and depth, which includes organizing, analyzing, synthesizing, and communicating large amounts of information. Technology can be used effectively in this process (Siegle, 2004a). Such tasks define the nature of a PLE that can be characterized in a simplistic manner as an online space that resourts to WEB 2.0 tools to manage all of them. Not being the all-in-one-solution to the learning of gifted students, PLEs could be an answer to the differentiated learning that these students require. In this chapter we introduce and explore the potential that PLEs have to offer to support the learning needs of gifted students. It is our belief that PLEs fully fit the particular characteristics of gifted students and thus portray themselves as a tool for individualizing learning at the service of these students. A PLE can be used with almost any age group. But given the constraints that involve the use of the Internet, supervision is advised and its use should preferably be aimed at young people with an added integrated sense of responsibility

and Internet safety. Cautionary measures can be taken with the use of tools similar to those of parental control.

THE GIFTED sTUDENT There is no clear universally agreed definition of gifted students. Overall, the literature consistently reports positive qualities of interpersonal effectiveness, independence, and self-assurance for academically gifted students (Murray, 2008). Although it is not clear, the concept behind Special Educational Needs also comprises the education of students with giftedness traits, an area with several and controversial discussions due to erroneous conceptions, which include those that state that gifted students are equipped with skills that empower them to succeed with no help. However, the gifted individual is not necessarily a brilliant student. It is often found that gifted students may have social and learning issues (Serra, 2004; Senos & Diniz, 1998). Gifted individuals with learning disabilities or other learning problems are a common exception; they often may have extreme ability in one or more areas and need remediation in others (Rimm, 2009; Johnsen, 2004). However, it has been found that it is very rare that a gifted student excels in all areas; rather, they usually have great competences in very restricted areas (Serra, 2004; Senos & Diniz, 1998). Rather than presenting an extensive list of definitions and discussion on giftedness we would like to expose a brief but comprehensive description of giftedness that may allow the reader to understand the traits that influence the academic path of gifted students. The concept of giftedness goes beyond high IQ scores, which is a very restrictive definition and many scholars and practitioners argue that it disregards numerous students whose potential for superior performance simply does not show up on intelligence tests (Renzulli, 2002). As Heylighen (2007) correctly states, giftedness is characterized

69

Personal Learning Enviroments

by a complex of traits extending far beyond aptitude for IQ tests. One of the most cited authors, with whose perspective we agree, is Renzulli, who assembled the works of experts in the area and came up with the following definition (Brown, Renzulli, Gubbins, Siegle, & Zhang, 2005, pp. 69): “Giftedness consists of an interaction among three basic clusters of human traits these clusters being above-average general abilities, high levels of task commitment, and high levels of creativity. Gifted and talented children are those possessing or capable of developing this composite set of traits and applying them to any potentially valuable area of human performance. Children who manifest or are capable of developing an interaction among the three clusters require a wide variety of educational opportunities and services that are not ordinarily provided through regular instructional programs (p. 261)”. This definition captures the essence of giftedness and highlights the need for proper educational responses. Moreover, we concur with Clark (2002 cited inManning, 2006) that the growth of intelligence has a strong dependability on environmental experiences that the individual encounters to develop his/her abilities. Therefore, opportunities must be provided so that a gifted student can raise his/her potential. In a simple and non comprising way, we can say giftedness is the potential for exceptional achievement, high cognitive abilities and creativity. Gifted individuals exhibit a complex of cognitive, perceptual, emotional, motivational and social traits (Heylighen, 2007). Based on the work of different authors (Gowan & Torrance, 1971; Renzulli, 1978-2007; Tannenbaum, 1983; Tuttle & Becker, 1983; Alencar, 1986; Freeman, 1991; Lombardo, 1997), cit in Oliveira (2007); (Silverman, 2000; Winebrenner, 2001; Clark 2002), cit inManning (2006); (ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children, 1985; Sisk, 1987; Chuska 1989; Landau,

70

1994; Serra, 2004; Bainbridge, 2010) we can sum up the traits that characterize gifted youngsters (Figure 1). From some of the traits listed above we can see that gifted individuals have a high learning potential if their cognitive, motivational and creative needs are met. Anticipating the description of some of the most common educational strategies used with gifted students and the introduction of Personal Learning Environments in this chapter, we would like to draw the reader’s attention to the intellectual, motivational and work discipline traits that stand up to show the willingness to pursue knowledge in flexible, autonomous, self-regulated and innovative ways. Their abilities and thinking processes indicate that intellectuality gifted students need advanced content and choice in learning activities (Manning, 2006). Cognitive abilities and motivation need to be worked with these students in order to fulfill their needs and not holding back their enormous potential.

Underachievement as a Result of Maladjusted school Environments Possessing such high intellectual abilities it is easy to conceive that these students encounter no difficulties in their school path. However, the reality can be very harsh and it is reasonably common to find students who show great academic potential not working up to their abilities in school. In fact, educators agree that underachievement among highly capable students is a common phenomenon (Reis & McCoach, 2002; Rimm, 2009). Underachievement might be defined as a discrepancy between potential (what a student ought to be able to do) and actual performance (what a student is demonstrating). A variety of factors can contribute to the underachievement of gifted students. Whitmore (1989), cit in Smutney (2004), identified three broad causes for underachievement in gifted children:

Personal Learning Enviroments

Figure 1. General characteristics of gifted youngsters

71

Personal Learning Enviroments

i. ii.

iii.

Lack of motivation to apply themselves in school; Environments that do not nurture their gifts and that may even discourage high achievement; Disabilities or other learning deficits that mask their giftedness.

A research review by Reis and McCoach (2002) also points out basic reasons for underachievement related with physical, cognitive and socialemotional reasons, and with a mismatch between student and his or her school environment. As can be observed, the causes of underachievement are due to intrinsic problems that originate from (i) some type of disability or social-emotional issues, or from (ii) environmental issues related to non-motivating, maladjusted and unchallenging learning environments. The identification of the cause of underachievement is of crucial importance as interventions that do not address the special needs of these students could do more harm than good (Reis & McCoach, 2002). As the reverse of underachievement due intrinsic problems requires a specific intervention such as counselling, the addressing of maladjustment in educational contexts demans for an adequate instructional approach (Schultz, 2005; Reis & McCoach, 2002). The inadequacy of educational conditions is probably the most referred issue related to the underachievement of gifted students, often associated with lack of motivation to undertake school activities that do not fulfill the potential of the gifted individual. Monotony, routine, wasting time with irrelevant subjects may contribute to underperform, diluting any interest once held. Inappropriate curriculum, that reveals itself uninteresting, undifferentiated and therefore unengaging often leads to underachievement (Rimm, 2009). The disenchantment and adverse feelings towards school may lead to further reluctance to pursue academic success and even opposing behaviours.

72

Understanding achievement motivation is relevant to giftedness because it plays an essential role in enabling intellectually gifted students to fulfill the promise of their exceptional abilities and in preventing their underachievement (Rea, 2009). In this matter, motivation, diversity and opportunities to explore and choose different knowledge paths play an important role. A study made by Emerick (1992) with gifted underachievers concluded that the participants were most presumably building up achievement-oriented behaviours when stimulated and given the opportunity to pursue topics of interest to them. As shown ahead, educational strategies that blend with the style and pace of learning of gifted students have a strong motivational impact that brings back the student to the learning process and promotes better feelings towards school.

Learning strategies for Gifted students For centuries the maxim of “equal education for all” was defended, connected to democracy and equality ideals. Meanwhile, the recognition of human diversity and its various biological rhythms and different cognitive and psychological characteristics increased learning activities focused on the idiosyncrasies of each individual. Therefore, we reinforce the need of being aware of gifted abilities, styles (instructional, reasoning, expressive) and interests, in order to provide them with the required environment for the development and expression of their potential, thus preventing possible episodes of underachievement. General giftedness traits unveil the need of pedagogical intervention proposals that require flexibility and adaptation of curricula and effective differentiation of educational methods and strategies. Multiple conceptions and definitions of giftedness have led, over time, to the development of different educational approaches. Although not mutual exclusive, we can identified three major

Personal Learning Enviroments

giftedness models of intervention in the literature (Senos & Diniz, 1998; Kirk, 2002): a.

b.

c.

acceleration procedures which include early admission to certain levels of schooling, grade skipping and condensation of academic years; creation of homogeneous gifted student groups, through gifted resource rooms with itinerant teachers, special classes and even special schools; development of enrichment programs in order to create stimulating and attractive procedures for the gifted integrated into the regular education system.

Our aim is not to persist on detailed explanations about each of these models. We will only focus on potential strategies for enrichment, as we believe there is a strong benefit in developing such programs with and trough technology. Renzulli’s Enrichment Triad Model (1977) is one of the most popular learning theories based on enrichment and is structured around three levels: a.

b.

c.

General Exploratory Activities (Type I) - it offers introductory or general exploratory activities to expose students to new topics and ideas; Group Training Activities (Type II) - students are encouraged to develop higher-level thinking and advanced research skills related to a specific area of their interest; Individual and small group investigations of real problems (Type III) - activities that trigger opportunities for students to apply their skills and become ‘experts’ in a field or topic, engaging in real world activities.

This intervention model is based on special gifted traits and the demand for a shift from a traditional, passive and teacher-centred paradigm, to a more independent, personal and engaging learning one. Some years later Renzulli and his

colleagues proclaimed the importance of enrichment programs for all the students and involving the whole school and community. Through the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) (Renzulli & Reis, 1985), all students should be encouraged with challenging environments but Type III activities were particularly suitable to the gifted. Renzulli’s learning approach considered that each student is unique and therefore Type III activities should be developed taking into account the students’ interests and learning styles as well as their individual abilities; another important assumption, taking into account the relevance of motivation for effective learning, is that activities should be developed and evaluated considering both pleasure and goals of cognitive growth. Influenced by Discovery Learning methods (John Dewey, 1909), enrichment Type III activities emphasize learning based on the real world, meeting students interests (personalization) and encouraging the use of authentic research methods; finally, this approach gives special emphasis to the individuals’ creativity and sharing knowledge with other experts. Other authors have also addressed strategies suited to gifted. According to Nielsen (2002), curricular interventions are vital to enhance giftedness and some strategies need to be considered: (a) design a curriculum that recognizes and enhances different or multiple intelligences and learning styles; (b) emphasize critical and creative thinking; (c) allow students to self-select projects; (d) allow students opportunities to conduct indepth exploration within interest areas; (e) modify assignments and products so that students’ gifts and abilities can be demonstrated. Along with curricular adaptation, “excellence” in the gifted is also dependent on the learning environment. In this manner, a study by Emerick (1992) found that a class that (i) provides opportunities for intellectual challenge and advanced studies, (ii) supplies independent study in areas of interests, (iii) promotes students discussion, (iv) offers “real” contexts and challenges and

73

Personal Learning Enviroments

(v) empowers feedback, have positive influence on the academic achievement of gifted students. Having identified the benefits of enrichment strategies for approaching the performance of students within their actual abilities, we will now focus on the potential of emerging technologies for the implementation and dissemination of those enrichment strategies that can enhance the education of these students with particular traits.

WEB 2.0: AN OPEN DOOR TO KNOWLEDGE AND INTERACTION Technology is changing daily and with it Education. The last decade gave us mobile phones, social media, laptops and the access to online applications where and when we want. As Renzulli (2005) accurately states, virtually all of the world’s knowledge is accessible to any student that can use a computer with an Internet connection. Learners are seeing new and attractive ways of getting information without constrains of any kind. It is easy to create and generate information, it is easy to upload it online; it is easy to have an opinion and broadcast it worldwide. Technological development brought us the Internet, the largest knowledge store currently available. It is also a communication highway that demolishes distances and time. Via its features everyone can stay in touch trough synchronous and asynchronous communication. Finding information sources and experts has become increasingly easier. Communicating with science specialists can be just a click away. The World Wide Web provides an environment in which the gathering, analysis, and sharing of information are prominent. Learning is currently based on knowledge construction by collecting information, processing it in meaningfull ways, and presenting it to others (Siegle, 2005a). The evolution of web 2.0 trends, usually related with web applications that promote users’ easy content production and information sharing,

74

interoperability and user-centred design applications, facilitates the democratisation of online content production, therefore promoting a different web, more focused on socialization and equality. These new trends are giving everyone the power of being someone (Casanova, Huet & Holmes, 2009). This new paradigm brings with it a big change in terms of constructing, producing and managing knowledge. Kress and Pachler (2007) point out that we are experiencing a transition from a stable, settled world of knowledge produced by authority/authors, to a reality where knowledge is changing and produced by individuals everywhere. As far as education is concerned, the Web 2.0 gives learners new opportunities, allowing them to form learning networks and communities, giving them the faculty of freely producing content and jump outside classroom walls. Social networks as Facebook, Twitter, NING, Blogging and Wikis are giving learners new opportunities to communicate, produce, share and assimilate knowledge in new places, using new formats and new environments. Students are used to work with these tools to communicate and socialize and feel comfortable interacting with each other, sharing information, resources and opinions. Teachers, however, still experience some difficulties in taking full advantage of these students’ new habits and using them for enhancing learning. While social networks have altered much of society, in teaching and learning the change has been minimal (Siemens, 2008). Different authors (Oliver, 2006; Riley, 2007) emphasise the lack of teaching strategies aligned with these new trends and changes, mainly as to curriculum design, monitoring students’ improvements, absence of feedback in students’ work and new forms of assessment. Attwell (2008) sustains that either education embraces technology “enabling learning and knowledge for all” or, if it does not, technology and the Internet will minimize education with potentially disastrous results. It seems crucial to respond to the generation gap that we are facing, allowing students the opportunity to

Personal Learning Enviroments

produce information and the task of participating in the production of knowledge. Theories like Constructivism, Communal Constructivism (Holmes, Tangney, FitzGibbon, Savage, & Mehan, 2001) and Connectivism (Siemens, 2005) give context to the shift that we are facing nowadays from the instructor- or institution-controlled teaching to a greater learner-controlled teaching. Educators should not limit students’ hunger for information and knowledge; they have to adapt their teaching processes and habits in a way that allows students to feel they are part of the process of building knowledge and embrace them as members of a community (Holmes et al, 2001). From the teacher’s point of view, these new trends emerging in schools and in education in general do not limit his/her performance as instructor and responsible for knowledge management, nor does it give him/her less power in the process of facilitating knowledge. These new teaching strategies, if well used, can take full advantage of ICT and Internet capabilities and induce new learning experiences, motivation and willingness to seek new knowledge. It can also promote personal learning environments and the sense of ownership, a greater sense of independence and the possibility of promoting the emergence of individual learning paths. Information flow as grown at the same velocity as the users’ willingness to produce content. We are living in a context where users have the opportunity of producing content everywhere, anytime and for everyone, originating a large amount of information that is made available to all users. This growing amount of information brings with it difficulties to all opinion makers and to those who have the responsibility to select learning materials, information and content from all the repositories available online. This reality allows these agents to promote new strategies decentralizing the process of browsing information and using learners to seek knowledge. Tee Web 2.0 is an open and fast pathway for information and knowledge exchange. It provides

several educational opportunities that are even at hand if you know how to take advantage of its high potential. These opportunities are extremely important for gifted students given their thirst for knowledge that is not included in the regular curriculum. The Web 2.0 is still evolving, but as it is, it adequately fits the needs of more autonomous learners and knowledge seekers as gifted students can be. We might say that gifted students are definitely a population that can capitalize on the features that the Web 2.0 makes available. The establishment of knowledge networks allows them to group up with learners with similar interests and traits and to contact with experts outside school, letting them overcome the boundaries imposed by the school budget, bureaucracies and physical distance. The diversity of gifted students interests and skills demands the availability of advance training that is frequently beyond the confines of their schools and communities (Siegle, 2005a). We conclusively agree with Ng and Nicholas (2007) that in an era where technology is advancing at an accelerated pace, and where information is effortlessly accessible on the Internet, educators should be capitalizing on these resources for gifted students. Online resources and technologies promote the exploration of new concepts and sharing of new learning with a group of motivated and “like-minded” peers. Learning trough Web 2.0 resources presents itself as an opportunity to enhance student autonomy and to create a self-paced, expert-directed, time/place independent environment for learning (Skyba, 2009). The Web 2.0 generates an immense amount of resources and information exchange, rendering its management as what could be described as Herculean. A vast amount of information and resources can be found at institutional applications, such as schools’ Learning Management System (LMS) or independent applications such as Blogs, Wikis, Social Networks, Online Newspapers and other information resources. In these

75

Personal Learning Enviroments

information resources there are new contents and learning materials that are uploaded daily, which makes it difficult for educational agents to follow all the information flow. There is, therefore, the need to have applications that comfortably and conveniently assemble all the relevant information and that aggregate different resources in just one place, allowing customization and personalization of the environment.

PERsONAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTs: CUsTOMIZED LEARNING Customizable and editable web-based systems have been promoted as support for the future of teaching and learning (Atwell, 2007) because it they allow customisation of educational environments and promote autonomous learning. Related to these concepts there emerges the Personal Learning Environments (PLE) that stand for a new approach of information and communication technologies, influenced by web 2.0, that gives students and teachers control of their learning environment by allowing them to choose and customize their learning materials from centralised repositories. Van Harmelen (2006) refers to PLE as being essentially a multidimensional space where the user can manage the content and applications that will facilitate the interaction between all the participants (teachers, students and other educational agents) in the process of building knowledge. Siemens (2007) refers the importance of promoting autonomous learning but he also mentions the importance for these environments to be open and their ability to interact with other environments and users, allowing the producing and sharing of knowledge. Atwell (2008) highlights the importance of PLEs as individual environments in which users can communicate and interact with the main objective of learning and contributing for collaborative knowledge construction.

76

As mentioned before, PLE characteristics allow learners to take control of their learning processes and adapt learning to their needs and rhythms. The learners can plan the way to achieve their learning outcomes taking therefore the responsibility for achieving their learning goals. In this new reality, the role of the teacher is far removed from the traditional style of transmitting knowledge. PLEs can also change the nature of assessment. These tools should have features that allow teachers to monitor students’ participation in group communications (synchronously and asynchronously), in the production of quality content, in sharing this content with other learners, and in interactions with each other.

How to Technically support a PLE Tools that support PLEs should allow users to foster their creativity giving them the opportunity to customize their own learning environments with new information modules, resources and specific layout. With these purposes in mind this tools have to allow: i. ii.

iii.

iv.

the production of content (blog posts, forum threads, posts on Facebook or on Twitter) the aggregation of different sources of information using web syndication (web syndication allows to receive all the fresh content from different types of Web resources) the linking-up of new personal or customized widgets and modules (widgets are visual blocks which combine in one application different kinds of data from one or more websites, mashing-up information and content while respecting content authority and copyright; this can be made using software like Widgetize, Widgetbox, Econetvibes or Wahoo Pipes) the availability of synchronous communication tools such as messenger or skype (that allow teachers and students to communicate synchronously, even outside the classroom)

Personal Learning Enviroments

v.

the possibility of formatting/customizing their own layout, choosing their own images, colors and layouts.

What is needed is a desktop that operates on the Web and that has the ability to communicate with other desktops and websites. This web desktop or webtop uses web applications, web services and application servers often using Ajax technology due to its flexibility. Examples of webtops can be found in iGoogle, Netvibes or Pageflakes.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE UsE OF PLEs TO sUPPORT GIFTED sTUDENTs’ LEARNING NEEDs When it comes to the education of gifted students, the mismatch between the learning materials and learning contexts and the specific learning characteristics of each specific student is often highlighted. The inadequacy of educational environments will certainly result in lack of motivation and indifference to learning outcomes which can induce school underachievement. Gifted students need environments that foster creativity, interest and motivation that lead to the personalization of the learning process but that also concede the possibility of sharing and interacting with other gifted students in learning communities. At this stage we must note that special education programs for gifted students are not often available and geography can pose an important problem. Online learning trough the use of a PLE based on the above mentioned Web 2.0 toolsd and principles, becomes a reliable alternative to underserved students. Gifted learners like to take command of their own learning, master more things in shorter periods of time, and do not rely on being taught but rarther like to take the initiative. From this perspective, such advantages of online instruction as flexibility of time and place of learning, more learner control, exposure to innovations and optimization of learning rate make

web based learning appealing to gifted learners (Skyba, 2009). PLEs by their inherent web properties aggregate these requirements and constitute a viable option for gifted students that appreciate interaction with web technologies to complement their education. Thus it is important to promote learning with the interaction of other dimensions that motivate the student. We idealize this PLE (Figure 2) based on 5 dimensions that we take as crucial in the conception of a PLE for gifted students: i.

ii.

Learning: The first dimension of this PLE is the one that relates to its primary function, to learn and to produce new information and knowledge, seek new information from different online resources and transform it in meaningful information; Sharing: After the production of meaningful information, share this information with other gifted students, the community of teachers and other users such as friends and family;

Figure 2. Dimensions integrated on a PLE to support the education of gifted students

77

Personal Learning Enviroments

iii.

iv.

v.

Connecting: Connect with others, communicating, interacting and socializing. Collaborate on the production of knowledge, sharing input and accepting suggestions; Leisure: Even though this is a learning environment it should also have an important dimension for leisure and recreation. Virtual games, music and television can promote new learning stimulus even if they are not directly connected to school curriculum content; Evaluation and monitoring: Formal evaluation is very important. Like with ordinary students, the gifted students learning process also has to be monitored and guided. The PLE has to have the feature of allowing the tutor to monitor his/her students and if needed to guide them onto the right path.

These dimensions represent the way learners’ should interact with the teacher and with each other, promoting contexts for formal and informal learning experiences that complement and augment multidimensional knowledge construction. As mentioned earlier gifted students can be a very heterogeneous population. However, there are traits that stand out: the will to explore and learn beyond what schools can usually provide; a need to pursue topics of study in greater depth and breadth (Eckstein, 2008; Siegle, 2005b) and to persist independently; and, at least in part, to generate new understandings independently (Ng and Nicholas, 2007). Learning with rich full online tools, covering the above dimensions, that are condensed on a customized space, constructed by learner with little or no help, seems to be in line with the particular interests of these special learners.

FUNCTIONs FOR THE PLE Each PLE is unique. The primary characteristic of a PLE is precisely the fact that it is an envi-

78

ronment with features that allow ideosyncratic customisation. Therefore, the features available in each PLE should be consonant and coherent with the interests of each owner. However, it is possible to highlight some functions (Figure 3) that we think are relevant for giftedness education. We conceive our PLE concept for gifted students in five fundamental pillars: (i) communication, (ii) content production, (iii) tasks and goals setting. (iv) information gathering and, (v) using free time (leisure).

(i) Communication One of the most important functions in the PLE is the communication feature. Due to their independent learning nature it may not seem that gifted students really need to communicate. Face-to-face communication is sometimes hard for these students owing to their interests not being alike those of their peer. They need support in their affective and growth needs, they need to socialize with other like-minded students, and share and discuss topics of their interest. Online communication in its many features can cover a wide range of communication needs, including the possibility to exchange information with other gifted students and go directly to the source of information, asking experts to clarify their doubts. It is possible to communicate synchronously and asynchronously using freeware web based tools, from VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) to social networking. Online communication has different characteristics from communication in class. First of all this communication can be synchronous and asynchronous, which means that, depending on the context, teacher and student can wait to give a specific answer to a question, promote a more reasoned discussion and take part of multiple virtual communities of interests and be actively present in all of them. On the other hand, if communication is synchronous all the most urgent doubts and questions can be answered by the teacher in seconds, using text,

Personal Learning Enviroments

Figure 3. An example of functions available on a PLE to support the learning of gifted students

sound or even video. Besides the temporal issue, online communication eradicates geographical constrains allowing students to interact with the teacher while in different places, therefore making virtual and informal learning easier. Finally, and because we are addressing gifted education, virtual communication allows gifted students to integrate better in communities without being misadjusted vis-à-vis other students. In social networks users that participate in communities producing high quality content play a key role in those communities and are followed by other users.

•

Asynchronous communication: •

Social Networks: generally built upon users with the same interests. They are important resources for finding answers, sharing and confronting findings or to meet people with the same interests. Opinion makers emerge according to the impact and quality

•

of produced content. There are online social networks for almost all existing topics so it is easy to find one to suite learner needs. Some examples of social networking tools are Ning, Facebook, Twitter, Google Buzz and LinkedIn. Academic-based online social networking provides an avenue to connect gifted students with intellectual peers and learn the skills of social networking in a safe environment (Ecstein, 2009). E-mail: one of the most used means of communication. It can be used for question-answer issues but it is also important for the development of digital identity which is crucial for online learning because the majority of the web applications require a digital identity. Some examples of e-mail providers are Gmail, yahoo and live. Brainstorming tools: these tools allow several users to interact and discuss ideas

79

Personal Learning Enviroments

with text (synchronous and asynchronous), diagrams, images or even video. Teachers can create a brainstorming session with their students and with their colleagues trying to promote collaborative thinking. Some examples of brainstorming applications are Mindomo, Writeboard and Mindmeister.

Synchrous Communication •

•

•

80

Instant messaging: it is a form of realtime direct text-based communication between two or more people. It is a process similar to chat but it has a feature of lists of contacts/group contacts, which allows teacher and students to communicate with each other in a private environment or even crate a shared channel for communication between classes. Live Messenger is the most famous IM application but there are others like Yahoo! Messenger, Google Talk, Google Wave or Skype. VoIP: it is a voice based real-time way of communication that allows conversation between two or more users. It also has a contact list feature for all users and it works, for each user, as a telephone inside the computer. Skype is the most famous VoIP application because it comprises VoIP, videoconferencing and IM. However, there are other VoIP applications such as Google Talk and Yahoo! Messenger. Whiteboard: as the name suggests a whiteboard web based application is an application that simulates a teaching board on a computer. Because it is computerbased and online it comprises an on-screen shared notebook, a place to chat, draw and upload files like videos, sound and multimedia applications. There are interesting applications for whitebording such as WiZiQ, Twiddla and Scriblink.

Research by Michelle Eckstein (2008) refers that academically gifted students learn better with their intellectual peers who also have unique social and emotional needs. Internet communication provides opportunities to address their particular needs in new and diverse ways.

(ii) Content Production Content production relates to all the input that a student places in his/her PLE. Due to its learningbased conception, a PLE has to allow content production. Learners produce content when they communicate, when they comment a blog post, when they interact with other learners or when they write text, draw and/or upload files. The most relevant characteristic of Web 2.0 is the ability of harnessing the power of the people, giving the user the power of putting content online where, when and how s/he wants. Nowadays each user, each student, has the power of being heard and this can create new challenging opportunities because s/ he can be heard by a larger audience. Comments will be read, videos will be seen, speeches will be listened to, feedback and comments will be more active, which means each voice will be heard more often. This can induce more motivation in the student given the fact that s/he knows that feedback of his/her work will be richer and more constant. Collaborative documents enable students to interact and work together without being physically present. •

Writing texts: it is very easy to post an idea or a message in a blogging application. For educational purposes a Blog can be used as a portfolio, for a classroom assignment or for a group work report. It is also possible to comment other blogs and interact with other users in the blogosphere. Wordpress, Blogspot and Livejournal are three of the vast Blog providers available on the web. For assign-

Personal Learning Enviroments

•

•

ments it is also possible to use wikis and upload the work on this kind of webpage or even write articles on Wikipedia. Wikis foster creativity and collaboration and are commonly used for group work (wikispaces, PBworks, Wetpaint). Other good tools for collaborative work are documentsharing applications such as Google Docs, Zoho or Etherpad. All of these tools allow exporting in most common formats after the collaborative writing process finishes. File upload and sharing: there are also applications that allow the upload of different types of files and sharing these files with the web community receiving feedback and comments about them. These files can be based on images (Flickr, Picasa and DevianART), videos (Youtube, Vimeo and Teachertube) or slides and books (Slideshare, Scribd). Note-taking: even though this is a content production resource it is also an important tool for browsing the web and associating content to this PLE. Unlike the other two features, taking notes does not promote sharing. It is a very important working tool to collect, sort, tag and annotate notes and resources selected from the web.

(iii) Management of Personal Goals and Tasks Gifted students, even more as regular students, feel the urge of having a feature for setting their own goals and tasks on their own learning environment. They need to know where they are going and see the steps to be taken to attain their objectives. As Ng and Nicholas (2007) mention it is essential to structure gifted students learning based on goals to help them direct towards what they want to achieve. Therefore, managing objectives and tasks is essential to keep on track. Despite their abilities of self-motivation, self-centred learning and eagerness for knowledge, it is easy to get

dispersed in the immense sea of information. Moreover, no student, even the most gifted one, can accomplish his/her own relevant learning without the supervision of teachers or of older gifted peers as they risk to stray way from what is really necessary for the scaffolding of learning. Therefore, it is important that the teacher monitors closely the student’s progress. We assume in this PLE that it is possible for students and teacher to share the list of personal learning tasks and goals. Sharing this list allows the teacher to define what the learning outcome required for each student is, and also to endow each student with the self-determination of defining their personal goals and tasks, thus fostering the personal need for informal learning that resides outside his/her teaching duties. Assessing the process and stage of learning is possible trough a PLE based partnership between teacher and student. Google calendar and Google notebook allow synchronizing a calendar and a to-do-list and sharing this list or one of its items with other users such as students and the teacher. For personal goals and tasks each student can use a goal-setting community, such as “43 things” (www.43things. com), in order to help choose informal learning goals. Such tools help find other users’ experiences in achieving a specific goal.

(iv) Gathering Information No matter the field, there is such an amount of new information being published that it is a full time job just to keep up with subject matter. The web adds more and more content and Google reported that there is more than 1 trillion (1,000,000,000,000) unique URLs on the web. It is impossible to select the best information available because it is disperse in too many resources to make it possible to keep up with. Syndication facilitates this task because it allows the updating of further resources and webpages. Users can add to their blogrolls all the blogs they want to follow, podcast providers with the categories that

81

Personal Learning Enviroments

interest them and feeds for all bookmarks with the tags they want to receive. Everything is uploaded automatically in their PLEs without any manual work. They just have to set what they consider to be important and wait for the information to appear on their learning environments. •

•

•

82

Blogroll: these are important resources. Several proeminent thinkers in each scientific area interact with the web community using their own blogs and it is possible to retrieve important information and fresh content when we follow these people. On the other hand blogs are also massively used in education, for group work and assignments. To follow blog users one can use feed readers (Google Reader, Bloglines, Wasabi), e-mail clients (Thunderbird) or Web browsers (Firefox or Flock). To search for relevant blogs each student can search on Technorati or Edublogs which are realtime search providers for blogs. Libraries: Libraries are always important resources for finding information. Besides the physical library almost every school has, there are some schools with online libraries or document repositories in their own Learning Management Systems (LMS). Outside schools there are also some online libraries such as The Free Library, Project Guttenberg, Read Print and Google Books. Social Bookmarking: As already mentioned it is very difficult to keep up with all the interesting information produced online. Following some key players’ bookmarks or some bookmarks tagged with relevant words can be a good method for retrieving quality content. Social bookmarking tools such as Delicious, Diigo or Stumbleupon can be very important resources in order to filter/suggest new content and resources. In the case of Diigo and Trailfire it is possible to establish a

•

•

•

path of relevant websites, record, comment and share them among a community of learners. Personalised search engine: Google offers an important feature (Google Custom Search) of customising a search engine. Basically the student just has to add the webpages that s/he wants Google to search (for instance the blogs, wikis and social networks s/he follows) and Google will just search information pertinent to these resources. Other metasearch engines can be customized by areas of interest. Wikis and Dictionaries: Wikis are important resources for finding information. Even though they are still regarded by the education community with some wary they can be a starting point for the student. It is possible, however, to find well-documented Wikis signed by experts and key actors. Besides Wikipedia, good examples can be found in Student Room, Wikimedia Commons and Wiktionary. It is also important to have a dictionary and thesaurus feature associated to the PLE to help write text in the mother language but also in foreign languages. Reference.com and The Free Dictionary services have a Dictionary, Thesaurus and a Translator all in one. For the Encyclopedia feature both Britannica and Encyclopedia are also great resources. Podcast library: these are specific libraries that give access to audio and video files allowing users to download them to their computers, MP3 players or smart phones. This would allow each student to listen/ see audio/video classes and other resources while jogging or commuting. Podcast Alley, iTunes and Podomatic are some available podcast libraries. The majority of online Radio and TV channels have their own podcasts available as well as national and community libraries and University libraries.

Personal Learning Enviroments

•

File storage providers: teachers can share e-books, articles and presentations using storage providers and sharing them with their students and colleagues. From his/her PLE each student will have access to all the class information that the teacher uploads to the storage provider, and also do the reverse. Box and Dropbox are two good examples for storing and sharing files.

(v) Using Free Time Recreation, leisure and free time activities are important for a PLE because they help students recreate and use spare time also promoting informal learning activities. Listen to music, watching television, playing online games can also promote new competences and knowledge even when these do not have a formal pedagogical intention. Virtual reality, for instance, can help students get acquainted with historical places like Ancient Rome or Ancient Athens and, at the same time, visit the Frank Lloyd Wright Virtual Museum, going to a theater to see a play or listen to a classic concert and one minute later accompany a heart surgery procedure at the Postgraduate Medical School in the Imperial College of London. All of this can be done in Second Life or in Active Worlds. In the PLE it is also possible to play educational games that are available depending on the students’ age and interest. Gifted students suffer with the high expectations of people surrounding them; they also don’t identify with the most of their age-group peers creating stress. They find relief contacting with older peers, other gifted students and adults. Different Social networks can provide possibilities to freely socialize, share, learn and teach with other individuals that have similar views and perspectives.

CONCLUsION One of the main objectives of educational systems is to promote excellence and maximum development of human potential. According to the definition of giftedness put forward by Renzulli et al (2005), there are three important clusters that distinguish gifted from regular students: (i) above-average general abilities, (ii) high levels of task commitment, and (iii) high levels of creativity. Therefore, gifted students’ education requires a set of guiding principles in order to support those above-average general abilities and promote exceptional achievement, not only to ensure individuals exponential development, but also to avoid problems of maladjustment and subsequently prevent underachievement. First of all, it is crucial to identify gifted students’ learning styles, characteristics and interests, not as an attempt to create labels but aiming to plan and conceive an atmosphere suitable to their needs. Curricular flexibility and adaptation as well as challenging and supportive environments, both well stocked with enrichment strategies, are important issues to considerer when educators face students with traits such as those mentioned in this chapter. Although many factors contribute for the underachievement of high ability students, several research findings (Reis & McCoach, 2002; Murray, 2008; Endepohls-Ulpe, 2009) unveil that one of the reasons for the discrepancy between gifted students’ potential and real performance is linked with the lack of challenging opportunities and the prevalence of environments that do not nurture their gifts. According to Emerick’s research conclusions (1992), when appropriate educational opportunities are present, gifted underachievers can respond positively. A closer look at gifted traits and benefits of technology enhanced learning led to our consideration of web 2.0 trends, namely Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) as a viable “tool” to address enrichment strategies and activities, as well as af-

83

Personal Learning Enviroments

fective support for this special educational needs population. The Internet and technological tools are generally seen as precious assets for students whose needs are not met in a regular classroom, but who are highly motivated to meet their educational goals (Skyba, 2009). The benefits of the web 2.0 for gifted students has already been highlighted in Eckstein’s Enrichement 2.0 project (Eckstein, 2009a), which is an adaptation of Renzulli’s Enrichment Clusters model using web technologies (Renzulli, 1977). However, our intention is to demonstrate the potential role of PLEs for the gifted students’ learning process, since their features and functions can give more freedom and control to the student over the learning environment, empowering personalization, connectivity, self-publication and creativity. Literature on effective practices towards gifted students (Renzulli, 1977; Emerick, 1992; Nielsen, 2002) shows that it is extremely important to respect student’s learning rhythms given the speed of assimilation that characterize them. The potential of technology in special education is recognized specifically by facilitating different rates of learning, enabling the exploitation of resources and content according to the speed of each student and their own interests, at the same time avoiding excessive repetitions on familiar topics. PLEs, by creating a space where gifted students can gather and manage contents, resources and communication seem to fit the learning needs and rhythms of these students, empowering autonomy, individuality and control over their own learning processes. Self-oriented learning focuses on the interests of youngsters, becoming a pillar for motivation and increased levels of task commitment for these students. Therefore, by allowing them to build and manage their own PLE according to their interests, giving opportunity for high quality research and autonomous learning with online resources suitable for advanced levels of thinking, educators are indeed supporting gifted individuality and satisfying their need from mental engagement.

84

Task management by teachers and learners is of crucial importance to ensure the achievement of relevant learning. Therefore, the role of the teachers doesn’t fade into nothing; rather, it evolves from transmission of knowledge to facilitating its construction, requiring a shared space where task management can occur in order to monitor progress and assess strengths and areas where extra work is required. Such space can easily be created on a PLE through Web 2.0 tools for production, collaboration, and time and task management . PLEs, on the other hand, by connecting online learning communities, provide these students with the opportunity to increase their knowledge, through the sharing of information and exchange of ideas with experts or members of network communities who share their personal interests. The opportunity to interact online breaks physical and bureaucratic barriers, simultaneously bringing about benefits in terms of speed and quality of feedback, i.e., online interaction with experts in a particular subject of interest allows gifted students to get answers more quickly and with higher quality than when s/he is limited to the school walls or to the teacher, a non-specialist in some specific topics. Through on-line communication it is also possible to create supportive network communities for the gifted to share their feelings with peers with similar abilities. Hard to reach gifted individuals (in rural areas, for example) are also a click away from all this vast array of knowledge and challenging contributions. The numerous Web 2.0 tools available also allow youngsters to develop presentation skills, drawing on a range of techniques, encouraging both innovation and creativity. Because PLEs are also a publishing platform, sharing their own productions, texts and points of view through blogging, wikis or by uploading other media resources (photos, videos, podcast), is of major relevance as they enjoy and feel motivated when their work is recognized. Furthermore, while this sort of “talent” dissemination does not usually occur in face-to-face classroom contexts, it can act

Personal Learning Enviroments

as a source of stimulation and encouragement for those gifted students that normally conceal their opinions or ideas in front of their “not-gifted” colleagues, for fear of peer retaliation or social exclusion – the so-called deliberate underachievement phenomenon (Murray, 2008). Although this may look ambiguous, teachers must heighten their awareness of issues related to gifted students, namely their skill and will to pursue knowledge both autonomously and cooperatively, extending the span of interests and establishing their own learning pace, connecting to knowledge through specially oriented social networks where information exchange can occur with peers. It is also very important to be aware of safety and ethics when dealing with Internet browsing. Individuals must be critical consumers and virtuous citizens. Even though the majority of gifted students possess a sense of responsibility and critical judgement of him/herself and of others, in a world where media inputs became clearly superior to our capacity to assimilate information, it is important to alert them for the need of questioning available information by measuring levels of authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency and coverage of webpages (Johnson, 2008). It is common sense that learning can happen in many contexts (formal, informal and non-formal), therefore a leisure dimension cannot be overlooked in a PLE as it may eradicate opportunities to further enhance their knowledge. It is our belief that PLEs are not the panacea for gifted education issues but rather an innovative strategy, especially because they allow for the establishment of a “least restrictive environment” that enables the development of gifted individuals’ abilities through formal and informal learning. We must keep in mind that online learning is not suited to every gifted student; individuals with self-regulation problems and poor time management skills will find it difficult to cope with (Siegle, 2004b). Therefore, in such cases the teacher’s role is even more determining, filtering which student’s profile is more adequate to the type of learning strategies illustrated here.

In the meantime, the concept presented depends on field implementation with practitioners that are fully aware of the potential of PLEs and able to put in practice this innovative tool to ascertain its value as a sound strategy that integrates and interconnects the most well known traits of gifted students. We would like to add, as a matter of curiosity, that the preparation of this chapter was optimized through the use of available collaboration and communication Web 2.0 tools that were worked upon resorting to the authors’ own Personal Learning Environments.

REFERENCEs Atwell, G. (2007). Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers, 2(1). Atwell, G. (2008). Integrating personal learning and working environments. In Pontydysgu (2008). Retrieved, November 18, 2008, from http://www. pontydysgu.org/2008/11/integrating-personallearning-and-working-environments/ Bainbridge, C. (2010). Characteristics of Gifted Children. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://giftedkids.about.com/od/gifted101/a/giftedtraits.htm Brown, S., Renzulli, J., Gubbins, E., Siegle, D., Zhang, W., & Chen, C.-H. (2005). Assumptions Underlying the Identification of Gifted and Talented Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(1), 68–79. doi:10.1177/001698620504900107 Casanova, D., Holmes, B., & Huet, I. (2009). Aiding Academics to move from knowledge management to knowledge creation: Conceptualization of a Personal Academic Environment (PAE) . In Méndez-Vilas, A., Martín, A., González, J. A., & González, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of m-ICTE 2009 - Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education (Vol. 1, pp. 481–486). Badajoz, Spain: Formatex. 85

Personal Learning Enviroments

Dewey, J. (1975). Moral Principles of Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Eckstein, M. (2008). Using Social Networks to Create Gifted Education Programs. Tempo –TXGifted, 27(3), 22-27. Eckstein, M. (2009a). Enrichment 2.0: Gifted and Talented Education for the 21st Century. Gifted Child Today, 32(1), 59–63. Eckstein, M. (2009b). The gifted Kids Network: 2008 Pilot. Gifted Child Today, 32(2), 20–28. Emerick, L. (1992). Academic Underachievement Among the Gifted: Students’ Perceptions of Factors that Reverse the Pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(3), 140–146. doi:10.1177/001698629203600304 Endepohls-Ulpe, M. (2009). Teaching Gifted and Talented Children . In Saha, L., & Dworkin, A. (Eds.), International Handbook of Research on Teachers and Teaching (Vol. 21, pp. 881–894). New York: Springer International Handbooks of Education. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73317-3_57 ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children. (1985). Gagné, F. (1999). My convictions about the nature of abilities, gifts and talents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22(2), 109–136. Harmelen, V. (2006). Personal Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’06) (pp. 816-818). Retrieved July 15, 2009, from http://doi.ieeecomputersociety. org/10.1109/ICALT.2006.263 Heller, K. (2004). Identification of Gifted and Talented Students. Psychological Science, 46(3), 302–323.

86

Heylighen, F. (2007). Characteristics and Problems of the Gifted: neural propagation depth and flow motivation as a model of intelligence and creativity. Retrieved February 26, 2010, from http:// pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Giftednessmodel.pdf Holmes, B., Tangney, B., FitzGibbon, A., Savage, T., & Meehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. In J. Personal author, compiler, or editor name(s); click on any author to run a new search on that name.Price, A. Willis, N. Davis & J. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE - Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3315-3320). Norfolk, VA.: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Johnsen, S. (2004). Identifying Gifted Students: A Practical Guide. Austin: Prufrock Press Inc. Johnson, A. (2008). Internet Strategies for Gifted Students. Gifted Child Today, 31(2), 58–64. Kirk, S., & Gallagher, J. (2002). Educação da Criança Excepcional (3rd ed.). São Paulo, Brazil: Martins Fonte. Kress, G., & Pachler, N. (2007). Thinking about the ‘m-’ in m-learning . In Pachler, N. (Ed.), Mobile learning towards a research agenda. London: WLE Centre. Manning, S. (2006). The name assigned to the document by the author. This field may also contain sub-titles, series names, and report numbers. Recognizing Gifted Students: A Practical Guide for Teachers. The entity from which ERIC acquires the content, including journal, organization, and conference names, or by means of online submission from the author.Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(2), 64-68. Retrieved February 28, 2010, from http:// www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/ content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1d/c9/13.pdf

Personal Learning Enviroments

Murray, B. (2008). Underachievers. In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Retrieved February 21, 2010 from http://www. encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045302831.html

Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Emerging Conceptions of Giftedness: Building a Bridge to the New Century. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 67–75.

Ng, W., & Nicholas, H. (2007). Technology and independent learning. Roeper Review, 29(3), 190–196. doi:10.1080/02783190709554408

Ribeiro, J., Moreira, A., & Almeida, A. (2009a). An approach to Inclusion through Information and Communication Technology. In I. Gomes & R. Maia (Eds.), Proceedings of 1st International Congress on Family, School and Society – Special Education (pp. 1089-1102). Porto, Portugal: Educare.

Nielsen, M. (2002). Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: Recommendations for Identification and Programming. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 93–111. Oliveira, E. (2007). Alunos sobredotados: a aceleração escolar como resposta educativa. Unpublished PhD Thesis presented to Minho University, Portugal. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/ handle/1822/7081?locale=en Oliver, M. (2006). Editorial: New pedagogies for e-learning? ALT-J, 14(2), 133–134. doi:10.1080/09687760600668453 Rea, D. (2009). Motivating Gifted Students . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 591–594). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. (2002). Underachievement in Gifted and Talented Students With Special Needs. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 113–125. Renzulli, J. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Re-examining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–181. Renzulli, J., & Fleith, D. (2003). O Modelo de Enriquecimento Escolar. Sobredotação, 3(2), 7–40. Renzulli, J., & Reis, S. (2007). ATechnology Based Program That Matches Enrichment Resources With Student Strengths. International Journal Of Emerging Technologies In Learning (IJET), 2(3). Retrieved March 7, 2010, from http://onlinejournals.org/i-jet/article/view/126/78.

Riley, D. (2007). Educational Technology and Practice: Types and Timescales of Change. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 85–93. Rimm, S. (2009). Underachievement . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 911–914). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Senos, J., & Dinis, T. (1998). Crianças e Jovens Sobredotados: Intervenção Educativa. Departamento de Educação Básica: Ministério da Educação. Retrieve January 1, 2008, from www. dgidc.min edu.pt/fichdown/ensinoespecial/criancas_jovens_sobredotados.pdf Serra, H. (2004). O aluno sobredotado: compreender para apoiar - Um guia para educadores e professores. Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal: Gailivro. Siegle, D. (2004a). The merging of literacy and technology in the 21st century: A bonus for gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 27(2), 32–35. Siegle, D. (2004b). Learning Online: A Viable Alternative for Gifted and Talented Students. Technology Matters, 4(4). Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://www.dukegiftedletter.com/ articles/vol4_no4_tm.html Siegle, D. (2005a). Six uses of the Internet to develop students’ gifts and talents. Gifted Child Today, 28(2), 30–36.

87

Personal Learning Enviroments

Siegle, D. (2005b). The Internet as an Aide to Teaching the Gifted. Understanding Our Gifted, 17(4), 6–8. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. Siemens, G. (2007). PLEs - I Acronym, Therefore I Exist. Elearnspace. Retrieved November 16, 2008 from http://www.elearnspace.org/ blog/2007/04/15/ples-i-acronym-therefore-i-exist Siemens, G. (2008). New structures and spaces of learning: The systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning. In A. Carvalho (Ed.), Actas do Encontro sobre Web 2.0 (pp. 7-23). Braga, Portugal: CIEd–Universidade do Minho.

88

Silva, M. (1992). Sobredotados - suas necessidades educativas específicas. Porto: Porto Editora. Skyba, O. (2009). Online Gifted Education . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 653–657). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Smutney, J. (2004). Meeting the needs of gifted underachievers – individually! Davidson Institute. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://www. davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10442.

89

Chapter 7

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students Pablo Revuelta Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Javier Jiménez Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José M. Sánchez Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Belén Ruiz Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain

ABsTRACT This chapter introduces the potential of Automatic Speech Recognition Technology (ASR) in the challenge of inclusive education. ASR technology combined with Information and Communication Technology (ICT) enhances the learning of disabled people both in and outside the classroom. In the classroom, deaf and hearing-impaired students can benefit from a real-time transcription of what the teacher is saying. Also, a real-time transcription facilitates note taking for students with visual or physical disabilities. Outside the classroom, transcription and other media files (audio, slides, video, etc.) are powerful educational resources for all students, disabled or able-bodied. Some of most relevant projects and systems around the world are described and compared in this chapter to provide updated information about ASR technology performance and its application to enhancing the learning of disabled students.

INTRODUCTION Traditionally, Special Education was the only choice for people with disabilities or special needs. Fortunately, there have been strong movements DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch007

in favor of integrating disabled students (Arnáiz, 2003). As a consequence of these movements, new concepts like ‘education for all’, ‘integrative education’ or ‘inclusive education’ are replacing the traditional idea of special education. According to Echeita (Echeita, 2006), real and complete

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

inclusive education must be a process that constantly strives for improvement. It must identify and remove barriers inside the classroom (and eventually outside). It must aim for equal opportunity in the participation of and achievement by all students disabled or not, and place particular emphasis on groups of students who are at risk of marginalization, exclusion or failure. To meet the challenge of inclusive education, a multidisciplinary effort from governments, educators, psychologists, educators, social workers, parents, students, researchers and, in general, of the whole society is required. Regarding barriers that hinder equal access to education, there are many which are not completely removed yet. For example, in the classroom, listening to what the teacher is saying becomes difficult or even impossible for deaf or hearingimpaired students. Seeing what the teacher is showing with slides or on the board is a problem for visually impaired or blind students, and note taking can be a challenge for physically disabled and aurally or visually impaired students. Outside the classroom, access to educational resources such as multimedia files (videos, slides or audio files) can also be difficult for students with some disability. Researchers around the world are working on removing these barriers through Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) technology. The common idea is that, inside the classroom, ASR technology provides a transcription of what the teacher is saying in real time. This transcription is showed to disabled students to assist them in note taking. Information and communication technology (ICT) can easily provide synchronized multimedia resources (e.g., recorded audio and/ or video, slides, etc.) outside the classroom. The transcription and these educational resources can be accessible for all students, disabled or not. Not only students with disabilities (aural, visual, physical, dyslexic, etc.) benefit from enhanced learning but also able-bodied students and students who don’t speak the teacher’s language.

90

This chapter provides a review of some of the most relevant projects and systems based on ASR technology and ICT aiming for the inclusive education. These projects demonstrate that ASR can really help disabled students when accuracy is good enough. Regarding (Park, Hazen, & Glass, 2005) and (Thong et al., 2002), a Word Error Rate (WER) between 30% and 50% is a highly erroneous transcription and the text is difficult or impossible to understand. However, other authors fix the level of comprehension at a WER of less than 15% (Wald et al., 2004). According to the accuracy achieved, some authors reported in English 77% accuracy (Glass J., Hazen et al., 2004) and others reported a particular case of 90% accuracy (Leitch & MacMillan, 2003). Other projects in Spanish reported an accuracy of 83% (Revuelta et al., 2009). However, there are other languages such as Portuguese with worse results, a Word Error Rate (WER) of 43% (Trancoso et al., 2008). These results were expected since the technology is more developed in English. The languages supported depend on the commercial ASR systems used. The projects listed in this chapter are based on different commercial ASR systems such as Dragon NaturallySpeaking, ViaVoice, Microsoft Speech Engine, etc. Apart from benefits for disabled students, ASR technology and ICT have other important advantages. It provides a cost-effective solution for accessibility in education. Otherwise, it would be necessary to hire dedicated staff such as Sing Language Interpreters, personal note takers, etc. to support disabled students. Besides reducing costs, it encourages independence of students with disabilities. Another advantage of using ASR technology is that it provides automatically educational resources useful for more effective and higher quality e-learning. Synchronized editable multimedia resources can be easily created for this purpose (Bain et al., 2007). At the end of chapter, it shows the comparison and discussion of the projects submitted. This

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

discussion is intended to give an overview of the complexities and peculiarities of such applications, as well as the main differences between the existing systems. This chapter serves as a starting point for those people or professionals who are interested in using this type of applications or developing their own design.

TRANsCRIPTION sYsTEMs Viascribe: Liberated Learning Liberated Learning is the oldest and biggest ASR technology-based enhanced learning project in the world. At present, Liberated Learning is a Consortium1 based on the ‘Liberated Learning Concept’ which is founded on two interrelated applications: using speech recognition technology to automatically transcribe spoken language and display it as readable text; and using speech recognition to produce accessible multimedia notes. Mike Wald ([email protected]) and Keith Bain ([email protected]) are some of the researchers who have participated in Liberated Learning. Liberated Learning began in 1998 as a pilot project at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. In 1999, the Liberated Learning Project (Bain et al., 2002) started for three years. After that, the Liberated Learning Project created and managed numerous inter-university partnerships and collaborative corporate agreements. The original project transitioned into the Liberated Learning Initiative and finally, the Liberated Learning Consortium was created with universities and industry partners. The Liberated Learning Consortium is a group of international university and industry partners working to improve information accessibility through speech recognition technology. The Liberated Learning concept undergoes continuous development and refinement by members of the Liberated Learning Consortium. It is structured around a renewable

Joint Study Agreement (JSA) between Saint Mary’s University (SMU) and IBM Research. The JSA allows SMU to engage other like-minded institutions to support the Consortium’s overall goals and objectives. From 2001 to 2008, the Liberated Learning Consortium published about 46 publications which can be consulted in http://www.liberatedlearning. com/resources/index.shtml. What started as proof of a concept has led to many publications as a result of the extensive research carried out. At the same time, the Liberated Learning Consortium jointly with IBM has developed some important products like ViaScribe (Liberated Learning, 2003) and Captioning Editing System (CES) (Miyamoto et al., 2007). Another tool developed by the consortium is the Note Finder (Bain et al., 2007), which allows users a quick search of multimedia resources. ViaScribe is based on IBM’s NetScribe, developed in 2001 (Basson et al., 2003). It provides real-time transcription in the classroom and the transcription is synchronized with slides, audio files, etc. to enhance the learning of disabled students outside the classroom. ViaScribe has evolved during these years. For example, in the beginning, the transcription was shown on a large screen visible to all students (Bain et al., 2002) and in the latest versions, students may use personal displays like laptops, PDAs, etc. (Wald & Bain, 2007). Another improvement was to allow real-time edition (Wald & Bain, 2007) to correct errors produced by the ASR program. Also, there is a new version of ViaScribe which allows the transcription of multiple speakers at the same time (Wald & Bain, 2008). ViaScribe is based on IBM’s ViaVoice2 and currently supports English, Japanese, Chinese, French, Italian, and Portuguese (Liberated Learning, 2007). The latest version is ViaVoice release 10. Currently, ViaScribe can be used with Dragon NaturallySpeaking by using the Captioning Editing System (Miyamoto et al., 2007). CES further enhances the editing capabilities of ViaScribe.

91

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Training ViaVoice is necessary in order to create a personal voice model of the teacher. This task can be done with the basic training which consists on reading predefined texts and updating the vocabulary database. However, the LLP has proposed a new method for training called ‘Batch Enrolment’. It is based on training the voice profile without reading a set of predefined texts. Voice models are created and adapted by using transcribed audio recorded during a lecture transparently to the professor (Kanevsky et al., 2006). ViaScribe has two modes of working: the ‘stand alone’ model and the network model (Liberated Learning, 2003). In the ‘stand alone’ model, the professor’s voice profile is loaded in a laptop which is used by the professor in the lecture. At the end of the lecture, the data are given manually to an editor who corrects errors before the professor uploads data files to a server. Students may download files from this server. This model has several disadvantages. The professor’s personal voice model is not centralized and the professor needs to load his data manually or a dedicated laptop for each professor is needed. Also, data are exchanged between the professor and the editor manually and they could be lost or damaged. For these reasons, the network model (Figure 1) is a more complete solution. In this model, the professor’s personal voice model and multimedia files are stored in a central server. When lecture begins, the professor has to log into a session which is synchronized with his/her voice model. At the end of the session, multimedia files are automatically stored in the central server, where an editor can access these data. The network model is the most interesting one because it really enhances the e-learning concept by taking advantage of ICT. The newest version of ViaScribe allows the possibility of multiple speakers at the same time. To do that, it is necessary to combine and synchronize the separate audio recordings of individual speakers. Wald and Bain proposed two different approaches (Wald & Bain, 2007): using one computer and one instance of ViaScribe over

92

a network for each speaker (networked approach), and using a single computer with multiple instances of ViaScribe and multiple USB microphones (single computer approach). During Liberated Learning’s life, the consortium has carried out different studies and some of the results are shown below. In 2003 they reported the first results of an exhaustive investigation with 44 universities (Leitch & MacMillan, 2003) and 30 professors. Table 1 shows the accuracy scores achieved by 17 professors for a sample of 1200 words. Results are different depending on experience and ability. Ninety-one percent is the maximum score achieved and about forty percent of professors achieved more than 85%. In general, all scores are not very high and, because of that, the investigation was focused on improving accuracy and readability by means of real-time text edition (Leitch & MacMillan, 2003). The same research report also demonstrated that, despite these accuracy scores and other problems, both students and professors generally liked the idea, and felt it improved the learning and teaching process, moreover when reasonable accuracy was achieved (more than 85%).

Figure 1. Network model

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Table 1. Accuracy for 17 professors in a 1200-word sample. Accuracy Score Professor 1

91%

Accuracy Score Professor 10

72%

Professor 2

89%

Professor 11

71%

Professor 3

86%

Professor 12

51%

Professor 4

85%

Professor 13

84%

Professor 5

79%

Professor 14

81%

Professor 6

73%

Professor 15

79%

Professor 7

72%

Professor 16

71%

Professor 8

72%

Professor 17

Professor 9

72%

Mean: 77%

With respect to the training process, another study (Kanevsky et al., 2006) reported that the batch enrollment method is a more efficient method to create training models. The batch enrollment method allows training the system and creating voice models using the audio of recorded lectures and accurate transcripts of them. Therefore, with this method, the professor does not have to spend time training the ASR engine.

APEINTA: Inclusive Education in and Outside the Classroom The APEINTA project3 was developed by the Computer Science Department and the Spanish Center of Captioning and Audio Description (CESyA) in 2008 at the Universidad Carlos III, Madrid, Spain. It was founded by the Spanish Minister of Education and Science (EA2008-0312) (Revuelta

84% Std. Dev. 9.58%

et al., 2009) and the research group was directed by Ana Mª Iglesias ([email protected]). APEINTA proposes the use of Speech Technology and ICT to enhance disabled students’ learning, particularly deaf and hearing-impaired students (see Figure 2). In the classroom, ASR and text to speech (TTS) technologies are able to eliminate the communication barrier for deaf students. ASR provides a real-time transcription of the class while TTS allows students with speaking problems to communicate with the teacher and classmates. Realtime transcription is very useful for taking notes, not only for deaf and hearing-impaired students but also for students with visual or physical disabilities. Outside the classroom, ICT is used to develop an accessible Web Learning Platform (Moreno et al., 2008) where one can download the multimedia resources created inside the class-

Figure 2. Multi-device system architecture

93

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

room (video, audio files, slides, etc). The Web Learning Platform is accessible with a double-A conformance level according to the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (W3C, 1998) and it has been designed following inclusive design, with the focus on the user (student)4. APEINTA has been developed to be compatible with any ASR or TTS system. The first prototypes were implemented with Dragon Naturally Speaking (Revuelta et al., 2008) but the latest version was tested with both DNS and ViaVoice (Revuelta et al., 2009). The transcription is showed to students on a large screen or on personal displays connected to a server via Bluetooth. Personal displays can be a PDA, a laptop or a head-mounted display (Jiménez et al., 2008). Students can choose between two presentation modes: ‘Plain text mode’, transcription separated in paragraphs; and ‘Captioning mode’, according to Spanish TV regulations (AENOR, 2003). The transcription is stored in an XML file and the captioning in an STR file. The teacher’s voice is also recorded in an audio file. These files and other multimedia resources like slides and videos are synchronized and uploaded in the Web Learning Platform. The APEINTA project has been tested with real students in two environments. The first experiment was carried out in the ‘Tres Olivos’ Inclusive School in Madrid with 6 hearing-impaired and 10 hearing students ranging in age from 10 to 14 years old (Revuelta, Jiménez, Sánchez, & Ruiz, Multidevice System for Educational Accessibility of Hearing-Impaired Students, 2008). This experiment was performed with a 30-minute basic training session of Dragon Naturally Speaking software, only consisting of reading texts (no training of specific vocabulary). After a class of 60 minutes, questionnaires were given to students. It was found that the hearing-impaired students appreciated the ASR and TTS systems, especially one girl with serious speaking problems. However, delay and accuracy were found to be the biggest problems (Jiménez et al., 2008). 94

A more complete experiment was carried out at the Universidad Carlos III. In this experiment, both DNS and VV were tested by 11 users and 35 hearing students (non-users) in their 3rdyear of Computer Science (Revuelta et al., 2009) during three 90-minute lectures (objective analysis). Also, several questionnaires were given to users and non-user students in order to evaluate (subjective analysis) the views and satisfaction with ASR technologies, usability of devices, and general satisfaction (Revuelta et al., 2009). Objective analysis is not complete yet but, the first results reported for DNS are the following: 82.85% correct words, 16.28% incorrect words, 1% added words and 0.5% omitted words in a discourse of 9423 words (Revuelta et al., 2009). Subjective analyses are explained in depth in (Revuelta et al., 2009). Some of these results are shown in Figure 3. In Figure 3a, ‘VV read’ means ViaVoice transcription readable evaluation and ‘DNS read’ Dragon NaturallySpeaking transcription readable evaluation. The X-axis represents the tabulated responses (‘1’: completely disagree, ‘5’: completely agree). Percentages represent proportional satisfaction in each response. In Figure 3b ‘General’ refers to general technical satisfaction. ‘Writing’ concerns usability of the writing interface (TTS system). ‘Plain text’ and ‘Teletext’ refer to usability of both presentation modes. As can be seen in Figure 3a there is no significant difference between ViaVoice and Dragon transcriptions and none of them completely satisfy students since most of the answers are between 2 and 4. However, there is quite high general satisfaction with respect to device’ usability, as seen in Figure 3b. Other important information is the preference of students to use the ‘teletext’ mode instead of the ‘plain text’ transcription mode (Figure 3b). In the same study, it is reported that the rest of the students, 68.57%, were not distracted at all, and they didn’t find the system useful for hearing students (65.71% manifested that they were not interested).

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Figure 3. (a) Satisfaction regarding ASR. (b) Satisfaction regarding the devices’ usability.

VUsT: Villanova University speech Transcription The VUST system was developed in the Applied Computing Technology Laboratory of the Computing Sciences Department at Villanova University, Pennsylvania, USA, by Dr. Tomas Way, director of the Applied Computing Technology Laboratory ([email protected]) and Richard Kheir, software engineer with Hughes Network Systems ([email protected]). VUST is a portable, cost-effective, laptopbased ASR system designed to augment note taking by deaf and hearing impaired students in the college classroom. The ASR is based on the Microsoft Speech Recognition Engine (MSRE) and works with two additional blocks, a training engine and a Dictionary Building Software tool (DiBS) (Kheir & Way, 2007). The VUST system has a client-server architecture which works as follows. A wireless microphone sends the speech to the Wireless Receiver, which forwards it to the Speech Recognition Engine. The transcription from the Speech Recognition Engine is given to the VUST Server, where students can connect to and download the transcription to their personal computers (clients). The training period takes around 30 minutes. It is possible to insert new words not contained in the basic vocabulary dictionary. With this

basic procedure, the accuracy can reach from 75% correct words (untrained system) to 94% (McCoey, 2007). The experiment data set was built with a 90-minute lecture of 9,783 words. The results of these experiments are shown in Table 2, where the maximum accuracy of 94% was achieved for moderated training, customized dictionary and customized pronunciations (Way et al., 2008). Furthermore, Way et al. classified sections of the transcription based on their speech content in order to extract more information about the speech recognition process. The classification was: rollcall (list of names or otherwise discontinuous speech), planning (assignments, dates, and genTable 2. Comparison of recognition accuracy, range of accuracy, and accessibility Description

Accuracy

Range

Accessibility

Untrained

75%

64-83%

Poor to fair

Minimal training (default script, 10 minutes total)

88%

78-93%

Sufficient

Moderate training (3 additional scripts, 30 minutes total)

90%

81-96%

Good

Moderate training, customized dictionary

91%

83-96%

Good

Moderate training, customized dictionary, customized pronunciations

94%

86-98%

Very good

95

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

eral classroom business), discussion (interaction including student discussion) and lecture (continuous instructor speech) (Way et al., 2008). The low recognition accuracy (61%) of rollcall speech is because some names are not in the vocabulary and because discontinuous speech is not well supported by most ASR (Way et al., 2008). In Table 3, it is demonstrated that accuracy strongly depends on speaking behaviour (Kheir & Way, 2007). Students said that having the transcription in a computer was easy to refer to, convenient to use, and not distracting. In general, students got the meaning of the transcription and considered it to be pretty good and helpful for taking notes. However, some reported some weird errors and felt that the formatting was hard to read. The deaf student participant, who had not used assistive technology or sign interpreters before, considered the experience of real-time transcription to be usable and very helpful. This student found himself fully engaged in a lecture for the first time (Way et al., 2008).

The LECTRA Corpus: Classroom Lecture Transcriptions in European Portuguese The LECTRA5 system was developed by the INESC-ID, Spoken Language System Lab of Lisbon, and by the Centro de Linguística da Universidade of Lisbon by Isabel Trancoso, Rui

Table 3. Comparison of VUST accuracy of four classifications of speech content Classification

Words Correct

Planning

635

Lecture

6329

Roll-call

Overall Accuracy

Accuracy range

758

84%

79-88%

6925

91%

85-96%

155

254

61%

58-63%

Discussion

1592

1846

86%

82-90%

TOTAL

8269

9783

89%

58-96%

96

Total Words

Martins, Helena Moniz, Ana Isabel Mata and M. Céu Viana and others (Trancoso et al., 2008). The aim of this system is to provide both digital resources and hearing-impaired people technical aid, divided in 5 main tasks (Trancoso et al., 2008): (1) Collection of the training and test material, recordings of the audio-video signals, text material and the manual annotation of a subset of the recorded data. (2) Adaptation of the acoustic, lexical and language models and production of a first transcription of the lecture contents; Construction of interpolated language models and exploring unsupervised learning approaches for acoustic model adaptation. (3) ‘Enrichment’ of this first transcription with metadata that would render it more intelligible. (4) Integrating the recorded audio-video and corresponding transcription with the other multimedia contents. (5) User evaluation. They decided to conduct an on-line recognition experiment. An initial limitation concerning accessibility is the fact that this system works on recorded media, like videos or audio files. In this sense, it would be difficult to use this system for a real-time transcription and, hence, facilitate accessibility for hearing-impaired students. This system was tested over 5 lectures totaling 74.7 hours during one semester in the Technical University of Lisbon. Some of these courses have representative jargon in English (2.1%), although they are in European Portuguese. One of them was transcribed on-line (with the lack of higher latency) (Trancoso et al., 2008). A manual transcription of a portion of subjects was made with the Transcriber tool6 in order to have some reference data to be compared with the automatic transcription. In Table 4, the results for these 5 subjects are shown with the baseline vocabulary, the WordError-Rate (WER) and the Out-of-Vocabulary (OOV) word rate (Trancoso et al., 2008). As can be seen in the previous table, results are not very satisfactory when using ASR systems in European Portuguese. The same study shows

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Table 4. Results of LECTRA with baseline training for 5 different subjects Course

WER(%)

OOV(%)

PCM

63.6

3.4

ETI

56.4

1.6

LA

67.0

5.2

IICT

43.2

4.2

OOP

79.6

3.1

how some relative reductions can be achieved after lexical and language adaptation and after acoustic model supervision from 3.7% to 29.6% (Trancoso et al., 2008).

iCAMPUs: MIT spoken Lecture Processing Another interesting project is the Spoken Lecture Processing Project developed within iCampus7, a partnership between MIT and Microsoft Research. The Lecture Processing Project (Glass et al., 2005) started in 2003 and is directed by James Glass ([email protected]). Although this solution is initially designed for video indexing, an automatic transcription is proposed so a posteriori processing and indexing is made when a class is recorded. The system is prepared for non-usual vocabulary introduction and training to decrease the error rate. In this sense, researchers are conscientious of the advantage of this kind of technology for hearing-impaired students, even though the WER is, also in this case, quite high. In this project the significance of transcribed lessons is discussed, since errors in common words are not critical for video indexing, but more relevant when it is supposed to help people with special needs. But the iCampus project has higher goals, such as allowing students to upload audio content for an automatic transcription and indexing, accepting supplemental text files that will help to adapt the language model and vocabulary of the system (ICAMPUS, 2003).

The WER achieved with this system is between 36.3% and 17% in the best case (Glass et al., 2007). Since iCampus is not a real-time transcription system, no further analysis will be offered in this chapter.

CHIL: Automatic speech Transcription The CHIL Project8 is an Integrated Project (IP 506909) developed under the European Commission’s Sixth Framework Program. A whole solution for human interaction helped by computers for tracking, translation, presentation and, what is relevant for this summary, transcription is proposed in this project. Automatic Speech Transcription9 is implemented by the French partner LIMSI/CNRS of the TLP Group, who divided the process into two parts: Audio partitioner and Word recognizer. This institution has a Broadcast News Transcription system (Gauvain, 2002) whose core is used in this implementation (Lamel et al., 2006). As seen in previous studies, the system has a server-client architecture and connected wireless and uses head-mounted displays as personal devices. Another way of receiving and presenting transcriptions is the ‘CHIL Phone’, a PDA with specific software prepared for all CHIL Project functions (Waibel, 2005). The basic vocabulary was built with 58000 words and compound words and acronyms (CHIL, 2005). With this baseline, a WER of 37% was achieved for close talking, while 65% of words were wrongly transcribed when the scenario was far-field (Waibel, 2005).

COMPARIsON In this chapter, six ASR-based systems were presented for enhancing disabled students’ learning. This section summarizes and compares the main characteristics of each of them, discussing functional aspects as well as the given results (if any) of

97

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

each study. These characteristics are Architecture, ASR technology, Communication system, End user devices, Presentation and Results.

Architecture Most of the solutions have a server-client architecture. This is a natural approach since the communication model in educational environments has this structure. However, it can be implemented in another way, such as a common screen available for all students. This is a cheaper solution, proposed for situations where it is not possible to offer each student a laptop or a PDA to read transcriptions. This constraint is not very relevant, since any of these systems can implement a client and run it in a computer connected to a public screen. This solution should be taken into account in any project of this area. There is another issue that must be mentioned. Not every solution presented can provide a real-time transcription. Some of them like the LECTRA or iCampus are only prepared for a posteriori analysis. This is a significant constraint for some applications, and accessibility for hearingimpaired students is not achieved. On the other hand, a non-real-time transcription theoretically allows lower error rates since time is no longer a critical parameter for the system design.

AsR Technology The ASR system has become the most critical part of all proposed solutions for educational accessibility and resources generation or video and audio automatic indexing. Some of the analyzed systems have developed their own ASR, as ViaScribe or iCampus did. The other solutions use previously developed software, as summarized in Table 5. The decision of which ASR software is proposed is important in economic and strategic terms. The results of these decisions will be shown in the following pages.

98

It is also important to remark that not every language is compatible with these systems. The ASR needs a language, grammar, phonetics and a prosodic model to give an accurate transcription. Moreover, minority languages have smaller institutions backing them, so less investigation is made in these languages. It shouldn’t surprise, then, that English ASRs get better results and Portuguese higher WER. Concretely, ViaScribe works in English, Japanese, Chinese, French, Italian and Portuguese. The current version of APEINTA woks in Spanish, but as it is ASR independent, only character set limitations would potentially be a constraint. VUST and iCampus work in English and, finally, LECTRA in European Portuguese.

Communication system As seen, the server must be connected, as seen, to user devices. This connection will yield to different technological and telematic solutions. Not every study specifies which technology is used to connect the server and clients. ViaScribe uses PDAs and PCs for client devices, as is proposed in the APEINTA system. It provides a wireless communication such as BlueTooth or Wifi, both of them with a high enough bandwidth. The VUST system offers a telematic approach to this problem, talking about a chat webpage connection between computers, but this connection is not specified. The CHIL system can be, as explained, implemented on head-mounted displays and PDAs, so a wireless connection must be created. Table 5. ASR software Solution

ASR software

ViaScribe

IBM ViaVoice

APEINTA

Any

VUST

Microsoft MSRE

LECTRA

Own

iCampus

Own

CHIL

Own

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Finally, since iCampus and LECTRA are a posteriori processors, they will be not analyzed from this point of view.

End User Devices The CHIL solution is presented as the only one that has developed its own user device, with a head-mounted display connected to a radio transceptor. This allows a closed-captioning system, which does not bother at all the rest of people present at all. The main problems of this solution are related to distribution and mass production of a quite complex circuit and elements. The other projects propose the use of commercial devices already in use in our daily life, such as computers or PDAs. That is a cheaper option, since only software must be distributed, and most of the population has a mobile phone, or a computer. It is better for font size setting, speed of presentation and many other parameters that ease reading and understandability.

Presentation As a consequence of the previous point, it can be said here that the head-mounted display option is a closed solution concerning the presentation, because there is no option to change the way in which information is shown to the user. Nevertheless, other proposals allow users to configure some parameters according to individual needs. For example, APEINTA offers different ways of showing the transcription: Captions or Plain text. In most countries, people are used to seeing captions as film subtitles, that is, centered justification, two lines, bottom of the screen, etc. Some northern countries use left justification and some more lines. The other option is to present sentences as soon as they arrive at the synchronization process in the server and append them at the end of the previously transcribed text. The final result of this method is something like a written page. It is useful for going backward in the teacher’s

speech, to read back the lecture, and, in some cases, easier to read. The APEINTA project tried to manifest this difference when comparing these two presentation modes, but no statistical difference was found (Revuelta et al., 2009). However, a logical conclusion can be extracted from these options: when using a word-by-word ASR, it would be easier to read a plain text transcription. When using a sentence-by-sentence ASR, both systems should work in a similar way. That is because if a word-by-word ASR is used, the delay between the teacher’s speech and captions (that must be complete to be built) is higher than in the other option, showing words as soon as they arrive. That doesn’t happen when the ASR works sentence-by-sentence, because no appreciable delay is added if the caption must be built or if it is sent directly.

Results Talking about results means talking about training since they are completely correlated. This relationship has been shown in every system. It was seen how every ASR has procedures to add specific vocabulary. Sometimes they were trained with a baseline of Broadcast News (VUST), sometimes with default vocabulary (APEINTA) but all of them used that procedure to decrease the Word-Error-Rate. This process is usually done using texts, articles, e-mails or other media with personal or technical vocabulary. Time spent on training seems to be similar in all presented projects, around 30 minutes for basic training. Two groups of data have been presented according to their nature: Quantitative and Qualitative. These two approaches to system evaluation are complementary and provide important information for improving the system, but these studies are not available for every project, so a complete comparison will not be possible. Regarding the quantitative evaluation, the studies presented give the WER as the most

99

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Table 6. Minimum WER Project

WER (%)

ViaScribe

9

APEINTA

17.15

VUST

6

LECTRA

43

iCampus

17

CHIL

37

representative measure of quantitative system performance. Table 6 shows the best results achieved by each of them. From these results, we can obtain the confirmation to the hypothesis proposed in this section that predicts better results in English transcription (between 6% and 17%) than in Portuguese (43%). These data agree with the ViaScribe results, with an average WER of 12%. This level is a bit higher than other systems, because of the internal functioning of the ViaVoice ASR. As mentioned, this ASR system processes word by word, so its delay is smaller with the counterpart of its WER. It must be noted that, nevertheless, its minimum WER is 9%, so ViaScribe’s transcriptions are readable. A qualitative analysis is helpful to evaluate how people interact with the proposed system. This fact is important for interface design and improvement, redefining some parameters (translation speed, font size, etc.) or even as a measure of real functionality. The APEINTA results show general satisfaction with both Dragon NaturallySpeaking and ViaVoice transcriptions as seen in Figure 3a, but a better acceptance of ‘Teletext’ mode (captions) instead of plain text (Figure 3b). A general appreciation of the system was found in APEINTA, as well as in the VUST qualitative analysis. In this latter case, there were some complains concerning some weird error and problems of reading with formatting.

100

Unfortunately, no similar information was found about the LECTRA, iCampus or CHIL systems.

CONCLUsION In this chapter it was presented a widespread technology for educational purposes. This constraint allows us to give a short summary of commercial and experimental projects already in use in some countries to give an introductory idea of the state of the art. Because of this, only 6 implementations were analyzed according to their similarities and differences to extract some information for further articles/research. In this line, the tendency to mix real-time and a posteriori use of digital resources for enhanced education and accessibility must be noticed. This is especially clear in the APEINTA and ViaScribe systems, where the system itself is a web server and a real-time transcriber at the time. This mixed architecture is also visible in the VUST system (with clients and server implemented in Java and managed by means of a JAVA applet and a network connection). It has been underlined the importance of allowing a low-cost operation of the system in order not to exclude many schools without many resources. In this way, it is important to avoid electronic or specific hardware implementations to make distributions and fabrication costs much lower. This is an important constraint for the CHIL project, in which head-mounted displays are used as end-user devices and, thus, the final price is increased. As seen when the ASR system was analyzed, it is a crucial part of the system and must be taken into account. This attention call affects prosody of the teacher, speech speed, the microphone, computational requirements, background noise and the training period. All these parameters have to be carefully studied and referred to when a new experiment or commercial implantation set up is planned.

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Another important aspect that should be taken into account in further research is the high dependency of the WER and the ‘economic power’ behind each language. This effect is represented in the found results for English, Spanish and Portuguese. This is important to consider, since it helps the digital divide to grow. There is still a problem with punctuation marks. Even if some of them are objective (such as periods and question marks), it is a field in which many resources still have to be invested. To increase transcription accuracy, some studies try to identify the emotional status of the speaker in order to adjust the model to this situation. In the same field, there are many researchers working in multi-user or even user-independent ASR systems, with results still not good enough. A more accurate database of typical errors would help to implement macros (automatic or semiautomatic routines) to correct this type of mismatch when possible decreasing the error rate. An important problem of these solutions is the difficulty for students with hearing problems to read the screen continuously with the transcription and, at the same time, look at the teacher’s explanation and other relevant information sources in the classroom. The attention problem could be dodged by means of a head-mounted display, as proposed in the CHIL project, with the drawback of the price. Even if the CHIL project proposes an automatic translation, this field was not reviewed in depth. Authors found the accessibility systems more interesting because of the critical situation of exclusion of thousands of students all over the world because of hearing problems. However, all these systems seem to be useful for people with special needs, and great progress towards their inclusion. In any case, this reason is supposed to be the real motor of this type of research and project. Because of this, there would be a special license fee for applications in accessibility in order not to make huge business with people’s needs.

Many other applications were found for ASR and ICT technology (as the initial goal of the iCampus, allowing automatic indexing of video and audio media). And also, these technologies are found embedded in bigger systems with other functionalities (as in the CHIL). Because of all these questions, this is a completely open field in which it is important to keep walking.

REFERENCEs W3C. (1998). Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Recuperado el June de 2009, de http://www. w3.org/WAI / AENOR. (2003). UNE 153010: Captioning for deaf and hearing impaired people – Teletext captioning. Retrieved June 2009, from http:// www.aenor.es Arnáiz, P. (2003). Educación inclusiva: una escuela para todos. Málaga, Spain: Aljibe. Bain, K., Amici, I., Serra, A., Tibaldi, D., Violi, A. M., & Wald, M. (2007). How Speech Recognition Technology Can Enable the Full Potential of e-learning. Committee on Culture, Science and Education Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe. Bain, K., Basson, S., & Wald, M. (2002). Speech Recognition in University Classrooms: Liberated Learning Project. In Proceedings of 5th Annual International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies (pp. 192-196). New York: ACM. Bain, K., Hines, J., Lingras, P., & Yumei, Q. (2007). Using Speech Recognition and Intelligent Search Tools to Enhance Information Accessibility. In Proceedings of HCI International 2007 (LNCS 4556, pp. 214-223). Berlin: Springer.

101

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Basson, S., Faisman, A., & Kanevsky, D. (2003). Speech Recognition - New Accessibility Impacts. Liberated Learning. Retrieved June 2009, from http://www.liberatedlearning.com/resources/pdf/ RC_2003_IBM_SR_Paper.pdf

Kanevsky, D., Basson, S., Chen, S., Faisman, A., & Zlatsin, A. (2006). Speech Transcription Services. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Speech and Computer (SPECOM 2006), St. Petersburg (pp. 25-29).

CHIL. (2005). CHIL - Technology Catalogue. LIMSI. Retrieved June de 2009, from http://chil. server.de/servlet/is/13736/

Kheir, R., & Way, T. (2007). Inclusion of deaf students in computer sciences classes using realtime speech transcription. In Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (ITiCSE’07) (pp. 261 - 265). New York: ACM.

Echeita, G. (2006). Educación para la inclusión o educación sin exclusiones. Madrid: Narcea. Gauvain, L. L. (2002). The LIMSI Broadcast News Transcription System. Speech Communication, 37(1-2), 89–108. doi:10.1016/S01676393(01)00061-9 Glass, J., Hazen, T. J., Cyphers, S., Malioutov, I., Huynh, D., & Barzilay, R. (2007). Recent Progress in the MIT Spoken Lecture Processing Project. In Proceedings of INTERSPEECH Conference (pp. 2553-2556). Glass, J., Hazen, T. J., Hetherington, L., & Wang, C. (2004). Analysis and processing of lecture audio data: Preliminary investigations. In Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL (pp. 9-12). New York: Association for Computational Linguistics. Glass, J. R., Hazen, T. J., Cyphers, D. S., Schutte, K., & Park, A. (2005). THE MIT spoken lecture processing project. In Proceedings of HLT/EMNLP on Interactive Demonstrations (pp. 28-29). ICAMPUS. (2003). ICAMPUS Projects. Spoken Lecture Processing. Retrieved June 2009, from http://icampus.mit.edu/projects/SpokenLecture. shtml Jiménez, J., Revuelta, P., Ruiz, B., & Sánchez, J. M. (2008). Online Captioning System for Educational Resources Accessibility of Hard-of-Hearing people. In Proceedings Young Researcher. 11th Internacional Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2008) (pp. 22-31). Retrieved from http://www.icchp.org/ files/YR_Proceedings.pdf

102

Lamel, L., Bilinski, E., Adda, G., Gauvain, J.-L., & Schwenk, H. (2006). The LIMSI RT06s Lecture Transcription System . In Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction (pp. 457–468). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/11965152_40 Leitch, D., & MacMillan, T. (2003). Innovative Technology and Inclusion: Current Issues and Future Directions for Liberated Learning Research. Saint Mary’s University. Liberated Learning. (2003). Taking Liberated Learning to New Realms: Network Via Scribe Project. Saint Mary’s University. Liberated Learning. (2007). Liberated Learning. IBM ViaScribe Voice Recognition Software Technology. Retrieved June 2009, from http://www. liberatedlearning.com/technology/index.shtml McCoey, J. (2007). Methods for Improving Readability of Speech Recognition Transcripts. In Proceedings of the 1st Villanova University undergraduate Computer Science Research Simposium (pp. 43-55). Villanova, PA: Villanova University. Miyamoto, K., Arakawa, K., & Takizawa, M. (2007). Integration of Caption Editing System with Presentation Software. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 4554, pp. 761-770). Beijing: Springer.

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

Moreno, L., Iglesias, A., Castro, E., & Martínez, P. (2008). Using accessible digital resources forteaching database design: Towards an inclusive distance learning proposal. In Proceedings of the 3th Annual Conference on Innovation and Techonology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE 2008) (pp. 32-36). Madrid: ACM.

Trancoso, I., Martins, R., Moniz, H., Mata, A. I., & Viana, M. C. (2008). The LECTRA Corpus – Classroom Lecture Transcriptions in European Portuguese. Proceedings of the Sixth International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’08). Marrakech: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).

Park, A., Hazen, T. J., & Glass, J. R. (2005). Automatic processing of audio lectures for information retrieval: Vocabulary selection and language modeling. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP’05) (pp. 497- 500). Washington, DC: IEEE.

Waibel, A. (2005). CHIL keynote at LEARNTEC 2005 on CHIL. CHIL – Computers in the Human Interaction Loop. Retrieved June 2009, from http:// chil.server.de/servlet/is/2510/

Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Iglesias, A., & Moreno, L. (2009). APEINTA: A Spanish Educational Project Aiming for Inclusive Education in and out the classroom. In 14th Annual SIGSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Paris. Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Sánchez, J. M., & Ruiz, B. (2008). Closed Captioning for Accessibility of Hard of Hearing People in Educational Environment. Procesamiento del lenguaje Natural, 41, 305-306. Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Sánchez, J. M., & Ruiz, B. (2008). Multidevice System for Educational Accessibility of Hearing-Impaired Students. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology in Education (CATE 2008) (pp. 20-25). Crete: Acta Press. Thong, J.-M. V., Moreno, P. J., Logan, B., Fidler, B., Maffey, K., & Moores, M. (2002). SpeechBot: An experimental speech-based search engine for multimedia content on the web. IEEE Trans. Multimedia, 88–96.

Wald, M. (2004). Using Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Education for All Students: Turning a Vision into Reality. In 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, session S3G (pp. 22-25). Wald, M., & Bain, K. (2007). Enhancing the Usability of Real-Time Speech Recognition Captioning through Personalised Displays and RealTime Multiple Speaker Editing and Annotation. In Proceedings of HCI International 2007: 12th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 4556, pp. 446-452). Beijing: Springer. Wald, M., & Bain, K. (2008). Using Speech Recognition for Real-Time Captioning of Multiple Speakers. Multimedia, IEEE, 56-57. Way, T., Kheir, R., & Bevilacqua, L. (2008). Achieving Acceptable Accuracy in a Low-Cost, Assistive Note-Taking, Speech Transcription System. In Proceedings of Telehealth and Assistive Technologies (TeleHealth/AT 2008). Baltimore, MD: Acta Press.

ENDNOTEs 1 2 3

http://www.liberatedlearning.com/ http://www.nuance.com/viavoice/ http://www.cesya.es/es/investigacion/trabajos/proyecto01

103

Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Learning for Disabled Students

4

5

104

The platform is available in Spanish at http:// pid_basesdatos.uc3m.es/dadbd08/login.php (2008) https://www.l2f.inesc-id.pt/wiki/index.php/ LECTRA

6 7 8 9

http://trans.sourceforge.net/ http://icampus.mit.edu/icampus/index.shtml http://chil.server.de/ http://chil.server.de/servlet/is/13736/

105

Chapter 8

School of the Future:

E-Tools and New Pedagogies to Build Up an Inclusive Learning Community Michela Ott Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Italy

ABsTRACT This chapter tackles the issue of e-inclusion in the field of school education. A picture of the new millennium learning panorama is outlined where new learners, new teachers, new tools and new pedagogies are around. Some experience –based reflections are also proposed on how, from this panorama, new learning opportunities may arise for “all” learners, irrespective of their individual differences and specific characteristics. The overall purpose of the chapter is to give an idea that the building up of a genuinely inclusive classroom is an achievable goal, provided that strong efforts are devoted not only in the direction of producing/using fully accessible e-tools but also (perhaps mainly) in the direction of making the most of them in order to suit the “different” needs of the “different” students.

sETTING THE sCENE Nowadays the term “school of the future” is widely used1. It expresses a common feeling that school is changing and evolving so that in the future it will be able to offer a variety of new and augmented learning opportunities. But in which direction is the new school moving exactly, what are the achievable targets and the suitable milestones along the hard road? Above all, what exactly will this “school of the future” be like? In the following DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch008

we tackle these issues by taking the viewpoint of those students who are less fortunate, those who in the “school of the past” were often forced to live at the margins of mainstream school systems.

The Challenge: No student Left Behind The recent UNESCO Education for All - Global Monitoring Report 2009 reminds us that “the right to education is a basic human right” and that “like any human right, it should be protected and extended as an end in itself”.

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

School of the Future

In this direction: “Accelerating progress towards education for all is one of the defining development challenges of the early twenty-first century” also because: “progress towards the equalization of opportunity in education is one of the most important conditions for overcoming social injustice and reducing social disparities in any country. It is also a condition for strengthening economic growth and efficiency” (UNESCO, 2009). The emerging concept of Universal Access to Education 2 entails the ability of all students to have equal opportunity in education, regardless of their social class, ethnicity, background or physical disabilities3; it is directly linked to the principle of “non–discrimination” clearly stated in the charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000) according to which: “Any discrimination such as sex, race, color, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited”. As a matter of fact, instead, many young people of school age are currently still unable to fully access mainstream education or are de facto excluded from active participation in school systems. This may happen for a variety of reasons and mainly regards those students: • • • • •

•

106

with physical and/or sensorial impairments; with cognitive disabilities; with specific and non-specific learning difficulties; with communication disorders who have a cultural/linguistic heritage that is different from the one of the majority of their classmates (e.g. immigrants); who are hard to reach because of specific personal, family or social situations (school drop outs, illness, social exclusion, nomadic habits,…)

Most of these students are unable to fully access standard education systems and are, therefore, at risk of being marginalized: as a matter of fact, for some of them regular attendance at school is highly problematic while others show significant problems in accessing and /or using mainstream educational tools. Despite the specificity and the seriousness of their problems, they have, instead, the right to expect the same standard of education as their schoolmates (Dymond et al, 2008) and also to be considered and act as being an integral part of the learning community.

From Integration to Inclusion The recognition of the right of all students to “belong to the mainstream” has given rise to the concept of school inclusion, which has gradually substituted that of school integration. The difference between the two terms instantiates a change in perspective rather than simply a change in terminology. According to what Northway (1977) underlines, the idea of integration implies that people with special needs (which are “different”) are integrated into an existing “normal/standard” society; the concept of inclusion, instead, implies looking at the overall society as a whole which contains and encompasses a variety of individuals, each one with his own peculiarities and specificities. While the concept of integration focuses on the enactment of suitable “support actions” for people with special needs (who are considered different from those defined as “normal”), inclusion entails a society where all the persons, despite individual differences, have the same rights, play their own active roles and are all actors and co-stars in the same theatre. The new concept of inclusion refers to almost all aspects of social life, including education, where, as mentioned above, it actually refers to the idea that all students are ensured equal opportunities, irrespective of their varying skills, abilities, possibilities, problems, difficulties.

School of the Future

Figure 1 gives an idea of the difference between the two concepts of integration and inclusion in the field of school education. The “Integrating classroom” is represented (left side) as an environment containing a number of “normal” students (white circles) and a number of students with special needs (black circles) who are, nevertheless, “admitted” to attend the same lessons. The “Inclusive classroom” (right side) is, instead, outlined as composed by a number of individual students, all appearing as different characters (different shapes). The concept of school inclusion, if compared to that of school integration, appears to be much stronger: it entails that all students should be enabled to participate in mainstream educational contexts to the best of their abilities, whatever their needs may be. Inclusive education - according to UNESCO (2001) - means that the school should provide all pupils, irrespective of their varying abilities, with a good education and that all children should be treated with respect and ensured equal opportunities to learn together. As further underlined in the Ofsted report (2001), “An educationally inclusive school is one in which the teaching and learning, achievements, attitudes and well-being of every young person matter. The most effective schools do not take educational inclusion for granted. They

constantly monitor and evaluate the progress all pupils make.” School inclusion can, then, be regarded as an ongoing process of addressing and responding to the diversity of needs of all learners without distinction; it is a long-lasting process which requires time, efforts and strong conviction by teachers and by all those involved in students’ education. It also requires that suitable and effective educational tools/means are employed From this perspective, ICT tools are regarded by students, parents and teachers as having a high potential, and most educational researchers show a strong commitment to making the most of these tools in order to provide all learners with equal opportunities. On the basis of research results, there are grounds for maintaining that ICT tools may help a variety of students overcome barriers to learning, increasing both achievement and self esteem (Ofsted, 2004). From a number of pilot field experiments strong evidence has also emerged that “ICT is both a medium and a powerful tool in supporting inclusive practice. It provides wide-ranging support for communication, assisting many learners to engage with learning, including those who are hard to reach, and helps to break down some of the barriers that lead to under-achievement and educational exclusion” (Becta, 2007). This confidence in the high potential of ICT tools to support, foster and trigger school inclu-

Figure 1. From the concept of school Integration to the concept of school Inclusion

107

School of the Future

sion has given birth to the concept of e-inclusion, which actually seems to open interesting new perspectives.

The Emerging Trust: E-Inclusion The concept of e-inclusion is strictly linked to the idea of the “Information Society” which actually concerns “the central position information technology has for production, economy, and society at large”. As a matter of fact, the Information Society4 has highly influenced the present economic, educational and social life; in this scenario, the concept of e-inclusion refers to the goal of guaranteeing access to “information-society based products and services” to all people, including those with special needs or at risk of exclusion (such as the elderly, people with disabilities, those with little formal education, the unemployed, ethnic minorities and people living in isolated rural areas…). It deals with the idea of ensuring that “everyone is included in and gains from developments enabled by ICT” (Meyer et al., 2006), in the hope that full access to ICT may contribute to overcoming social and economic disadvantages and exclusion, thus also enabling and facilitating the full integration of “all people” in today’s society. In this perspective, as summarized in the Declaration on e-inclusion by the Ministers of the European Union (EU) Member States in June 2006, “e-Inclusion means both inclusive ICT and the use of ICT to achieve wider inclusion objectives” 5 Coming to the field of school education, we see that also here the term e-inclusion assumes the above mentioned double-edged meaning and refers both to: •

108

the idea that all students (with no distinction) have the right to benefit from ICT tools to the same extent, irrespective of their disabilities/difficulties; this implies all of them having the right to access, and the actual possibility of doing so, and use

•

mainstream educational tools, including those that are ICT-based. the idea that the school should “address and respond to the diversity of needs of all learners through increasing participation in learning, cultures and communities, and reducing exclusion within and from education, also by means of ICT tools” (UNESCO, 2005).

In the former perspective, the tools are the key point and thus full access to all educational e-tools (software products both stand-alone and net-based, hardware components and ICT-based services) should be guaranteed to all students; in the latter perspective, the educational method is at the core: the school should ensure, also by relying on the enlarged possibilities offered by e-tools, that all students are considered and enabled to act as being an integral part of the learning community to the best of their possibilities.

sCHOOL INCLUsION IN THE KNOWLEDGE sOCIETY The concept of school e-inclusion, as underlined above, emerged in the framework of the Information society and, originally, mainly focused on the adoption of the new digital tools, their accessibility, usability and availability (Ott & Pozzi, 2009b). With the advent of the concept of Knowledge Society (Lytras & Sicilia, 2005) “which includes a dimension of social, cultural, economical, political and institutional transformation, and a more pluralistic and developmental perspective” (Waheed Khan, 2003) an overall new and enlarged vision of the concept of e-inclusion appears to be required. In this direction, attention should be devoted not to digital tools per se (although they can be considered key “building blocks” of the learning process) but mainly to the underpinning new pedagogical approaches and to the new role that both students and teachers (the main actors

School of the Future

of the learning process) assume in this renewed educational framework. Learners, actually the “new millennium learners”6, are “digital native” (Prensky, 2001), they make large use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in their everyday life for both leisure and communication/social interaction purposes and this highly affects their choices and attitudes as well as their expectations and needs (Punie & Carneiro, 2009). Ideally, they are located at the centre of the learning process (O’Neill & McMahon, 2005) and, thanks to the interaction among the “new teachers”, the “new tools” and the “new pedagogies”, they may have at their disposal a variety of new, augmented learning opportunities (Ott & Pozzi, 2009a). As sketched in Figure 2, the “new teachers” (actually those teachers who have a new role and who, therefore, need new skills) together with the “new tools” and the “new pedagogical approaches” should be regarded as the gears that trigger the whole engine of the new learning processes. In the following, we briefly consider some functional aspects of the new digital tools that can be considered serviceable to foster school inclusion and we also propose some reflections on the new role of teachers and on the new pedagogical approaches that may serve the scope of widening and making the learning opportunities of all students as even as possible. Figure 2. Three gears to trigger new inclusive learning processes

In the final paragraph we glance at the new learning panorama as it emerges if we make efforts to re-think the whole learning process in the light of the main novelties that are around and, above all, in the light of the emerging new mental attitudes, feelings and interests.

Looking at E-Tools from the Point of View of school Inclusion The number of different e-tools that are nowadays available (and de facto used) for educational purposes is huge. As to the digital tools that play a significant role in today’s educational systems, together with the traditional ones such as educational software and content rich educational applications, a number of communication tools and internet services should necessarily be considered: blogs, Wikis, podcasts, instant messaging, VOIP systems, RSS, social networks, online references and repositories… As a matter of fact, in the Knowledge Society, communication becomes the basis for collaboration, and learning is no longer considered a process that students should perform in isolation. In addition, in the new learning panorama, one of the most disruptive novelties (which is particularly valuable for students with special needs) appears the adoption of distance learning services and tools. Both asynchronous (such as email and discussion forums) and synchronous services (such as chat rooms and instant messaging environments) provide students with the possibility to communicate and exchange ideas and actual material such as texts, worksheets, tests etc. The importance of cooperative and collaborative study is widely recognized (Alderman, 2006; Panitz, 2007) and Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) is universally considered a valuable field for advanced educational research (Dillenbourg, 1999). Besides the above mentioned ICT tools (synchronous and asynchronous) that allow and foster cooperation among students, a number of specific environments where students

109

School of the Future

can interact and produce texts or other material in a collaborative way are now available; word processors, for instance, that were previously available almost exclusively as standalone applications are now moving online, with specific features designed to enhance and support collaboration, even in real time. As a further example, Wikis permit collaborative production of online documents by multiple users by means of a standard web browser and are therefore considered by most educationalists as ideal tools to support and increase collaborative work done even at a distance (Augar, et al., 2004). This is not enough…: access to learning material and collaboration among learners can also be fostered thanks to the use of “m-learning” devices, namely those mobile devices that allow carrying out ICT-based learning activities in a whole variety of places, not just in settings where learning traditionally occurs, like the classroom, lab or home. The logic of school inclusion, as briefly outlined above, implies that all students, irrespective of their particular needs, are enabled to take part equally in mainstream learning activities (those carried out inside and outside the physical class-

room, synchronously and asynchronously) and to engage in collaborative activities. In this perspective, it is important that e-tools are “accessible” to all students but, unfortunately, this is not always the case. “While these technologies are beneficial and have been shown to help with educational tasks, their design and usability are an issue” (Anderson, 2006). In other words, the use of e-tools, in principle, can be both highly beneficial and, at the same time, also very challenging for some categories of students and as a result, accessibility is a concrete issue to be tackled. As an example, Figure 3 shows the main menu of an educational platform used in the field of the education7; of hospitalized children. This platform cannot be used by low vision students because it is fully based on visual presentation, an overall vision of the content is needed and no screen reading facility is available.

Accessibility Tools In order to solve accessibility-related problems (such as those presented by the educational platform shown in Figure 3) an important role is played by those that are commonly referred to as “accessibility tools” namely those e-tools (both

Figure 3. Screenshot of the main menu of an educational platform

110

School of the Future

specific hardware devices and software programs) that may allow (or favor/ make easier) the access to standard digital tools. Figure 4 presents the same platform menu as it can be viewed thanks to the help and mediation of specific accessibility tools: a magnifier (right side) that allows the vision of students with low visual acuity and a customization facility (left side) that allows the grouping of objects in specific parts of the screen, thus meeting the needs of students with tunnel vision or reduced visual span. As shown in the example, “accessibility tools” can be both external and internal, that is they can be used in combination with the software at hand, or they may even represent one of its a built in features.

Remedial, Enabling, Compensatory and Control/Support Tools Besides those that we have called “accessibility tools”, (those tools that may enable students with disabilities to use standard digital products) there are a number of other software tools that can be profitably used to enhance learning possibilities and to contribute to offer equal learning possibilities to all learners. Among these, it seems important

to mention remedial, enabling, compensatory and control/support tools. When dealing with students with specific learning disabilities (such as dyslexia and dyscalculia), often the school is also in charge of carrying out, if and where possible, suitable remedial interventions. This can be done both by means of digital remedial tools (i.e. tools explicitly conceived with the aim of supporting the remediation of the difficulty) and of standard educational tools employed and customized so as to respond to the different specific needs of the students with disability (e.g. digital reading and writing exercises, if carefully chosen and/or conveniently customized, can be fruitfully used with dyslexic and dysgraphic students). Enabling tools actually “enable” users to perform specific functions and/or carry out specific activities that will otherwise be difficult/ prohibited. When a specific function, fundamental to carry out learning tasks, is precluded (as an example handwriting in case of serious motor disabilities), enabling digital tools can be used to allow the student to perform the required task (writing in the above example) differently. Word Processors (possibly used in connection with specific input devices) open up the possibility of

Figure 4. Different visions of the same screenshot obtained by using different accessibility tools

111

School of the Future

writing to a significant number of students for whom handwriting represents a big issue, and, from this specific perspective, can therefore be considered enabling tools. Compensatory tools are an interesting and valuable subset of the enabling tools. Certain students with disabilities, indeed, may have such severe learning problems that both remedial strategies and support tools are not able to be effective enough to let them perform the required tasks. In these cases, specific strategies and tools need to be employed in order to compensate for the difficulty, namely to help students to perform the same activity in an alternative way (e.g. obtaining written texts by means of audio dictation, making calculations by using electronic calculators...) Another type of digital tool has widely proved to be highly effective in education: control/support tools. Following the previous example related to writing, it is the case of the spelling checkers that can be used to control the correctness of one’s own writing production, and it is also the case of also of speech synthesizers, that can be employed to “echo” the writing production, thus providing the possibility of controlling its correctness. All the above mentioned categories of digital tools can be considered a valuable patrimony; they can be used to improve the learning of all students significantly (irrespective of their own peculiarities), to help and support students with special needs and, finally, to allow all students to perform the same learning activities, thus also contributing to create a more inclusive learning community. Nevertheless, there is evidence from research (Moseley et al, 1999) that in almost all formal educational contexts e-tools do not make the difference per se, simply by being used: rather, what is likely to produce effective and significant changes on the whole educational process is the pedagogical idea underpinning the learning activities to be enacted: this is certainly true in the field of special education and inclusion. According to a Becta report in this area (2007), the provision

112

of technology alone will never fully capitalize on the opportunity ICT offers to inclusion without the understanding and skill of teachers in planning its implementation: “there is a need for a clear understanding of the pedagogy of ICT and inclusive education by all those supporting children’s welfare and education”. The process of inclusion, then, can be fostered by the use of new technological tools but it also requires changes and modifications in educational contents, approaches, structures and strategies and, above all, it also calls for a deep involvement of teachers and educators in re-thinking pedagogical choices/actions.

Looking at the New Pedagogical Approaches in an Inclusive Perspective Teachers need to adapt to a changing technological society where managing technology may occupy a great deal of time and intellectual energy. However, the demands go deeper than this: changes and novelties that are around call for an overall re-examination of the teachers’ role and of the teaching methodology which has also strong link with other relevant changes involving, for instance the places where learning takes place. As a matter of fact, the inclusive classroom can no longer simply be regarded as the physical place where lessons take place; the integrated use of new tools enlarges the perspective and leads us to consider the classroom more as a group of people who interact for learning purposes. As a result, the classroom itself is no longer considered exclusively related to the physical place where lessons take place but assumes the connotation of virtual place where learners learn together; in this light, the real possibility emerges for the learning event to become “ubiquitous” (Liu & Hwang, 2009) or even genuinely “time and space independent” (Roschelle & Pea, 2002), better suited to the essentially “mobile” nature of “learning” (Vavoula & Sharples, 2002).

School of the Future

The actual physical classroom exists, but is not the only place where learners and teachers meet and interact. In this scenario, the inclusive classroom can be considered an open classroom where the two educational environments (physical and virtual) are possibly integrated, where the new virtual aspects of distance learning activities are valued, without necessarily underestimating the relevance of those learning activities that are carried out in presence, in the physical classroom.

The New Teacher’s Role In the new inclusive classroom (namely a classroom which highly relies on the new digital tools with the aim of including and valuing the presence of all students with no exception) what basically changes is the teacher’s role. Teachers can no longer be considered “information givers” but rather become facilitators and guides; this role also incorporates mediation, modeling, and coaching, and requires a high degree of adaptivity to new learning/teaching schemes. As a facilitator, the teacher is required to become personally engaged in public and private dialogue with students in order to assist them (face-to-face and online) throughout the whole learning process. S/he should also think of how to promote and orchestrate collaborative study and often needs to become a co-learner and co-investigator together with the students.

The New Approaches In the new panorama, together with the teacher’s role, the traditional techniques of classroom instruction and scheduling are also brought into question: the type of activities to be done may change, multiple activities may occur simultaneously, changing the ways in which the teacher might/must facilitate learning, and also changing the ways in which learners tackle educational tasks. What’s more, the learner-centered approach becomes an emerging educational trend (Downes,

2005) and specific emphasis is placed on active learning, creativity and communication, thus focusing on the social dimension of learning. In this direction, community links become stronger and are not limited to school time, interpersonal relations are fostered, students are encouraged to communicate and cooperate with each other, seeking help and advice if and when needed. If, on the one hand, the active participation of all students in school life and events and the collaboration among all the actors in the educational process is fostered, on the other, a high degree of personalization of educational activities is allowed by the availability of the new tools so that there is greater possibility for adaptation to the individual needs of all learners. In this direction, the need for considering the peculiarities and the characteristics of each single student (learner centered approach) together with the consciousness of the need to provide adequate educational opportunities for all learners calls for a renewed attention to the planning of educational activities/interventions (Kurtts et al., 2009). Such planning, which appears to be key to facing the challenge of any kind of educational innovation is a long consolidated element of teaching practice and it continues to play a key role in contemporary ICT based education (Koper et al., 2004). Researchers are increasingly looking at how to make the best possible use of the new opportunities offered by ICT to enhance the construction of suitable and effective pedagogical plans and their actual enactment (van Es and Koper, 2005; McAndrew, et al., 2008; Conole, and Oliver, (2002). As a specific example of research efforts going in the direction of making the most of net technologies to facilitate pedagogical planning the AEsseDI8 web-based environment can be cited. It has a specific focus on inclusive education and is specifically aimed at supporting educators in designing fully inclusive pedagogical plans, thus contributing to avoid exclusion and discrimination, in a student-centric perspective (Benigno et al., 2006).

113

School of the Future

The AEsseDI platform was designed and implemented in compliance with the basic principles of “Universal Design” (Hitchcock & Stahl, 2003): it can, then, be regarded both as a concrete example of a fully accessible web-based educational application and as a means aimed at shedding light on the use of ICT to foster educational inclusive practices. One of the most innovative environments available through the AEsseDI system is the “Pedagogical Planner”, a web based authoring system which allows both the building up and the retrieving of pedagogical plans. It supports teachers/authors in giving a suitable, clear structure to their pedagogical ideas and it correspondingly provides teachers/readers with concrete examples and practical clues on how to carry out concrete educational activities; the plans designed by some teachers/authors can actually be considered Open Educational Resources and therefore can can be viewed, adapted if necessary and fully re-used (including contents-learning objects) by other teachers, in different educational settings (Sicilia and García 2003). In AesseDi the pedagogical plans are organized around a well defined tree-like structure and encompass a high number of descriptors which focus on how to use ICT to foster educational

inclusive practices by providing as many details as possible about: • • • • •

the overall idea of inclusion underpinning the whole plan; the learner/s’ specific needs to be met; the accessibility features of ICT tools in play; the use of ICT tools as a means for inclusion; the inclusive practices to be adopted.

In Figure 5 examples are provided of the structure (activity-line) of two different existing pedagogical plans. Pedagogical planning appears to be a key step towards the building up of genuinely inclusive classrooms. These days where inclusive educational practices are not yet widespread and cannot yet be considered a consolidated patrimony of the present teaching/learning society pedagogical planning is key to the building up and the spreading of specific knowledge in the field. As a matter fact, on the one hand, it is widely recognized that pedagogical planners (in particular those ICT based), have a “maieutic function” in that their use, besides helping to logically organize and structure (Watanabe & Kato, 2008) the educa-

Figure 5. Example of a pedagogical plan and of the related activity line in AEsseDI

114

School of the Future

tional activities, implies turning implicit knowledge into explicit knowledge and enhances the author’s awareness of the educational process/ mechanisms being described. On the other hand, they also have a high potential to contribute to the spreading of ideas, information and acquired know how among educators. In a few words, they can be viewed as tools that foster both educators’ reflections on educational practices and the educational exchange and “reuse” of existing and validated educational material and best practices. The AesseDi environment, which is specifically oriented to foster school inclusion, on the one hand, can be considered a “communication oriented object” (Bottino et al. 2009) that may contribute to strengthen the links among educators and, on the other hand, should be regarded as a valuable tool in the direction of creating a new inclusive teaching community.

sUMMING UP As discussed above, in the “school of the future”, which will serve the main scope of preparing “all” students -with no distinction- to be an active part of the knowledge society, new actors new presences and new means are around; this situation deeply influences the aspect of the whole learning panorama, which is briefly sketched hereunder

by starting from the tentative picture of the new inclusive learning community.

A Glance at the Prospective New Inclusive Learning Community The whole educational panorama which is actually considered and defined as “new” by most researchers (Ala-Mutka et al., 2008; Punie & Carneiro, 2009) has been (and still is) deeply influenced by the availability of the new ICT tools. Indeed, these tools play a major role: they create an immersive educational worlds (de Freitas & Neumann, 2009) where students, who are of course in a central position, can be more deeply and actively involved in the learning process; more importantly they also suggest and trigger the use of new pedagogical approaches and contribute to changing the role of teachers who actually become facilitators, supporters, assistants and helpers. Figure 6 recalls the traditional (obsolete?) situation, while Figure 7 depicts a new (current, future?) model, hopefully underpinning the inclusive classroom. In the former situation (Figure 6) teachers mainly act as the information providers and students the recipients where it is “poured” (the main arrows show the prevailing direction of the interactions between the two groups). The two groups are represented as separated and all the members of each group (teachers /learners) are depicted as

Figure 6. Traditional relationship learners-teachers

115

School of the Future

Figure 7. The new learning community

similar /identical to each other (teachers-squares; students-circles) since in this vision their own specificities are not considered as very important. Only some students (black circles: those with specific learning needs) are located at the margins or even outside the main picture so that learning interventions (that are actually directed to the very

Figure 8. Grasping the new learning opportunities

116

center of the big circle representing the students’ community) cannot fully reach them. Figure 7 represents, instead, the new learning situation where the learners, who are represented by different shapes thus instantiating the value of their individual differences, assume the central position and are linked (work together, cooperate, network) with pairs and have reciprocal, frequent

School of the Future

interactions with teachers who also work in a team and not in isolation (and are therefore represented as multiples individualities). In this view, teachers and learners who actively interact and work together form a new learning community where no student is hopefully left outside or at the margins of the learning process. The above sketched inclusive new learning community is surrounded by a number of varying new learning opportunities that can be available for them thanks to the use of the new available tools and pedagogies. Figure 8 aims at representing this emerging new situation by emphasizing how, thanks to the educational use of different e-tools and to the adoption of the related more suitable educational methods/approaches, each specific individual student can be allowed to “grasp” one of the offered new learning opportunities; it also shows that the same learning opportunity can be reached by following different routes, thus allowing each student to make the most of the available tools and of the suitable educational methods. In the above picture (Figure 8) a number of different new learning opportunities are depicted in the external circle surrounding the learning community, formed by teachers and learners and located at the very centre of the picture (i.e. of the learning process); the two internal circles contain, instead, the new tools and the educational approaches at hand. The arrows show that different educational interventions for different students can be planned and enacted: in the example, different activities are planned for students A, B, and C, with the aim of letting them all grasp the same learning opportunity; while for student B and C the same educational tool is used but two different approaches (pedagogies) are employed, student A is lead to reach the target learning opportunity by following a completely different path: a different tool is used together with a different kind of educational approach. Looking at the above picture in the perspective of e-inclusion, as a final consideration we

acknowledge that inclusion is a target that can/ should be pursued in a variety of ways. The primary option, of course, that of giving all students the possibility of using the same tools and the same educational approaches in order to benefit from the same learning opportunities (hence the relevance of all the aspects related to the accessibility of the educational tools). In case this is not possible for a variety of reasons (including scarce suitability of each specific tool to the physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioral characteristics of a specific student) the goal of providing students with the same learning opportunities can be reached by personalizing and customizing individual learning itineraries (this is what is shown in Figure 8 as far as Student A, B and C are concerned). The concept of “personalization of the learning activities” emerges here as an important key factor to foster inclusion and the provision of equal opportunities to all learners. Of course it should not be interpreted as the option of setting different educational objectives for each single learner but should be mainly regarded as the possibility of helping all students to reach the same goals by making the most of those educational means that better suit their individual needs, abilities and expectations.

REFERENCEs Ala-Mutka, K., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2008). ICT for Learning, Innovation and Creativity. FJRC Technical notes-European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Retrieved October 2009, from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC48707.TN.pdf Alderman, B. (2006). Get Real! Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Online article. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.griffith. edu.au /school/art/text/april00/alderman.htm

117

School of the Future

Anderson, P. (2006) The Future of Human-Computer Interaction. In Emerging Technologies for Learning. Retrieved October 2009, from http:// partners.becta.org.uk /upload-dir/downloads/ page_documents /research/emerging_technologies.pdf Augar, N., Raitman, R., & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. Paper presented at the ASCILITE Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education 2004 Conference. Becta. (2007). Inclusive learning: an essential guide. Retrieved October 2009, from http://publications.becta.org.uk/ Benigno, V., Candiani, V., Caruso, G., & Tavella, M. (2006). AEsseDi: a tool for supporting the design of accessible learning plans. In A. Mendez-Vilas et al. (Eds.), Proc. IV Int. Conf. on Multimedia and Information & Communication Technologies in Education (m-ICTE2006), Current Developments in technology-Assisted Education, FORMATEX, Badajoz, Spain (Vol. 3, pp. 2115-2119). Conole, G., & Oliver, M. (2002). Embedding theory into learning technology practice with toolkits. Journal of Interactive Educational media, 8. de Freitas, S., & Neumann, T. (2009). The use of ‘exploratory learning’ for supporting immersive learning in virtual environments. Computers & Education, 52(2), 343–352. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2008.09.010 Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.). (1999). Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Elsevier. Downes, S. (2005, October 17). E-learning 2.0. eLearn magazine, 17. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?s ection=articles&article=29-1

118

Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. J. (2008). Inclusive high school service learning programs: Methods for and barriers to including students with disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(1), 20–36. Hitchcock, C., & Stahl, S. (2003). Assistive Technology, Universal Design, Universal Design for Learning: Improved Learning Opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(4). Koper, R., & Manderveld, J. (2004). Educational modelling language: modelling reusable, interoperable, rich personalised units of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 537–551. doi:10.1111/j.0007-1013.2004.00412.x Kurtts, S. A., Matthews, C. E., & Smallwood, T. (2009). (Dis)Solving the Differences A Physical Science Lesson Using Universal Design. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(3), 151–159. doi:10.1177/1053451208326051 Liu, G.-Z., & Hwang, G.-J. (2009). A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards context-aware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. Lytras, M. D., & Sicilia, M. A. (2005). The Knowledge Society: a manifesto for knowledge and learning. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 1(1/2), 1–11. doi:10.1504/ IJKL.2005.006259 Mc Andrew, P., Goodyear, P., & Dalziel, J. (2008). Patterns, designs and activities: unifying descriptions of learning structures. Retrieved September 2009, from http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/getfile. cfm?documentfileid=6000 Meyer, I., Müller, S., & Kubitschke, L. (2006). eInclusion – Towards a Coherent European Policy Response to Social Inequalities in the Information Society. Paper presented at eChallenges Conference.

School of the Future

Moseley, D., Higgins, S., Bramald, R., Hardman, F., Miller, J., Mroz, M., et al. (1999). Ways forward with ICT: Effective Pedagogy using Information and Communications Technology for Literacy and Numeracy in Primary Schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001369.htm Northway, R. (1997). Integration and Inclusion: Illusion or Progress in Services for Disabled People? Social Policy and Administration, 3, 157–172. doi:10.1111/1467-9515.00046 O’Neill, G., & McMahon, T. (2005). Studentcentered learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers? In G. O’Neill, S. Moore & B. McMullin (Eds.), Emerging issues in the practice of University Learning and Teaching, AISHE, Dublin. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.aishe.org/readings /2005-1/oneillmcmahon-Tues_19th_Oct_SCL.html Ofsted. (2004). ICT Special educational needs and disability: towards inclusive schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.ofsted. gov.uk/publications /index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs. summary&id=3737 Ott, M., & Pozzi, F. (2009a). Exploring the new learning landscape: which added values for the new learners? In L. Gómez Chova, D. Martí Belenguer, I. Candel Torres (Eds.), EDULEARN09 Proceedings, International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies – IATED. Ott, M., & Pozzi, F. (2009b). Inclusive Education and ICT: Reflecting on Tools and Methods Paper presented at the AAATE2009 Conference, Florence 1 September 2009. Panitz, T. (2007). Collaborative versus cooperative learning – a comparison of the two concept which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning. Online article. Retrieved October 2009, from http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopdefinition.htm

Petrides, Ll., Nguyen, L., Jimes, C., & Karaglani, A. (2008). Open educational resources: inquiring into author use and reuse. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1/2). doi:10.1504/IJTEL.2008.020233 Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.marcprensky.com /writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives, %20 Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf Punie, Y., & Carneiro, R. (2009). The New Learning Generation. Editorial eLearning Papers 15. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=volume Report, O. (2001). Evaluating Educational Inclusion - Guidance for Inspectors and Schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.ofsted. gov.uk/assets/459.pdf Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handhelds may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognitive Technology, 1(1), 145–168. doi:10.1075/ijct.1.1.09ros Sicilia, M. A., & García, E. (2003). On the concepts of usability and reusability of learning objects. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). UNESCO. (2001). Understanding and Responding to Children’s Needs in Inclusive Classrooms. Retrieved October 2009, from http://unesdoc. unesco.org/images/0012/001243/124394e.pdf UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Retrieved October 2009, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0014/001402/140224e.pdf

119

School of the Future

UNESCO. (2009). Education for all: human right and catalyst for development. In Education for All - Global Monitoring Report 2009. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.unesco.org/en/ efareport/reports/2009-governance/ van Es, R., & Koper, R. (2005). Testing the pedagogical expressiveness of IMS LD. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 229–249. Vavoula, G. N., & Sharples, M. & KLeOS (2002). A personal, mobile, knowledge and learning organization system. In M. Milrad, U. Hoppe, & Kinshuk (Eds.), Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Mobile and Wireless Technologies in Education (WMTE2002) Aug. 29-30, Vaxjo, Sweden (pp. 152-156). Waheed, K. A. (2003). Interview. A World of Science. Retrieved October 2009, from http://portal. unesco.org /ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=11958&URL _DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html Watanabe, T., & Kato, K. (2008). ComputerSupported Interaction for Preparing Logically Organized Documents. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 19, 428–434. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-87783-7_54

ENDNOTEs 1

2

120

As an example explicit reference is made to the “classroom of the future” in the EC -FP7 Call for proposal. Technology Enhanced Learning -Challenge 4-Objective 4.2 The concept of Universal Access to Education dates back to the 1990s when it emerged in the framework of the World Conference on Education for All-Meeting

3

4

5

6

7

8

Basic Learning Needs Jomtien, Thailand 5-9 March 1990 (http://unesdoc.unesco. org/images/0009/000975/097552e.pdf); it was then reaffirmed during the World Education Forum (26-28 April 2000, Dakar) which adopted the decision mentioned in the document “Dakar Framework for Action, Education for All: Meeting our Collective Commitments” (http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0012/001211/121147e.pdf) and it was recently recalled in 2009 at the General Assembly of the United Nations, by Mr. JeanPierre Lacroix Representative of France to the United Nations (http://www.franceonu. org/spip.php?article3727). Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Universal_access_to_education Definition from Wikipedia, accessed May 2009 at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_society Ministerial Declaration on an “inclusive information society”, Riga, June 2006 accessed October, 2009 at http:// ec.europa.eu/ information_society /events/ict_riga_2006 / doc/declaration_riga.pdf OECD definition October, 2009 available at http:// www.oecd.org/ document/ 10/0,3343, en_2649_35845581_ 38358154_1_1_1_1,00 .html The educational platform was used in the framework of athree years research project dealing with the education of hospitalized children http://www.itd.cnr.it/Progetti_ Rispo1.php?PROGETTO=52 http://asd.itd.cnr.it

121

Chapter 9

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities:

An Accessible Multimedia Platform for the Diffusion of the Digital Signature Ángel García-Crespo Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Fernando Paniagua-Martín Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain José Luis López-Cuadrado Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Israel González Carrasco Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Ricardo Colomo-Palacios Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain Juan Miguel Gómez-Berbís Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain

ABsTRACT The current chapter introduces an accessible multimedia platform applied to the diffusion of the digital signature. The project presented in this chapter is a multimedia initiative to promote the use of information technology (IT), specifically, the digital signature. Through the modeling of typical daily situations, the platform provides simple responses to any uncertainties or concerns a user may hold about the digital signature, and the advantages which its use entails. The multimedia system has been designed to support subtitling and audio description facilities, with the objective of enabling access to the diffusion of E-government to persons with an auditory or visual disability. The results of the evaluation of the platform by test users of the system are positive, and have initiated the continuation of developments which encourage E-inclusion. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch009

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

INTRODUCTION Skelcher (1992) pointed out that since the mid1980s, the public sector has undergone a service revolution as a result of the application of IT. As a consequence of this new approach, since the mid-1990s, governmental agencies had high expectations about the take up and increasing usage of electronic service channels (Ebbers, Pieterson & Noordman, 2008). According to Gil-García and Pardo (2005), technology provides two main opportunities for government: increased operational efficiency by reducing costs and increasing productivity, and better quality of services provided by government agencies. In this scenario, Electronic government (E-government) refers to governments’ use of technology, particularly Webbased Internet applications to enhance the access to and delivery of government information and service to citizens, business partners, employees, other agencies, and government entities (Layne & Lee, 2001). Nearly every country in the world — from the poorest to the richest — has developed some form of it, and an extensive literature on the subject continues to grow (Ruth & Doh, 2007). Diverse studies have reported the benefits of the application of E-government. These include improved citizen involvement and contribution to government-related issues (Barnes & Vidgen, 2003), more transparent relationships (González, Gasco & Llopis, 2007), improved operations (Brunschwig, 2006), better government-citizen communication (Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), lower overall costs (Fahnbulleh, 2005) and the improvement of citizens’ perception of the public sector (Tolbert & Mossberger, 2006), among numerous other advantages. On the other hand, researchers have identified many open issues which are hindering the adoption of E-government in many countries. See Sarikas and Weerakkody (2007) for a comprehensive review. Within the pending issues identified by research, one particular issue emerged which is a crucial topic for the current work. This topic concerns guaranteeing the

122

access to E-services from the perspective of accessibility. This requirement has been pointed out in a number of distinct studies, such as Fang (2002), Jaeger and Thompson (2003), Jaeger (2004), Al-Omari and Al-Omari (2006), Shy (2007) and Jaeger (2008). The importance of accessibility to E-government services is considered one of the criteria for the quality of the services offered. In fact, accessibility has become a fundamental characteristic which is included as a criterion for evaluation of the services offered by government bodies (see Bertot & Jaeger, 2006; Esteves & Joseph, 2008). Particularly, initiatives coordinated by the EU (European Union) are being carried out to guarantee E-inclusion to people with disabilities. A broad report of the EU efforts can be found in Timmers (2008), or detailed separately for each member country of the EU in Strejcek and Strejcek (2002). Nowadays, it is a fundamental challenge for government administrations to develop a diffusion strategy such that services can be communicated and available to all citizens. Unless citizens know what is available from the E-government, they will not likely seek to use its services, defeating the purpose of the development of E-government information and services (Jaeger & Thompson, 2003). According to Roger (2002), “diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. It is a special type of communication, in which the messages are about a new idea”. Thus, in the context of citizens with disabilities, communication channels should be equally accessible, in particular those based on innovative media such as E-services. This chapter proposes an initiative for the diffusion of E-government, using accessible media for people with disabilities. The remainder of the article has been structured as follows. Initially, the state of the art of the technologies is outlined. The subsequent section sketches how the project fits in the picture, explaining objectives, phasing and project evaluation.

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

Lastly, the principal conclusions of the paper are presented, and some suggestions for resolving the problems encountered are outlined, as well as proposals for future research.

sTATE OF THE ART There are numerous studies dedicated to determining the digital gap in E-government which focus on the requirements of people with disabilities (for example, Pieterson, Ebbers & van Dijk, 2006; Dobransky & Hargatti, 2006; Choudrie, Brinkman & Pathania, 2007). Examining a study by Jaeger and Thompson (2003), the implementation of E-government services should be based on the correct diffusion and communication of the services. In this environment, in the same way as it is necessary to be able to rely on accessible E-government services, it is also fundamental that the communication channels are accessible. In an attempt to realize this objective, the following sections will focus on the most important aspects of accessibility, in particular, subtitling and audio description as tools for accessibility to multimedia content, as has been analyzed in the literature since the 1980s (O’Conner, 1985).

subtitling and Audio Description Pereira and Burnett (2003) point out the importance of the user experience and not the terminal in multimedia communications. An improved user experience does not only imply the adaptation of the contents to the different technologies which are utilized to diffuse the content, it also involves taking into consideration the possible handicaps a user may have which limits his/her access to the contents. Hence, subtitles and audio description become essential elements to make the multimedia contents accessible to all users. In a Web environment, accessibility does not only entail making the Web page accessible. Recent W3C Web Content Accessibility Guide-

lines (WCAG) establish concrete guidelines for time-based media (audio and video) on the Web (Caldwell, Cooper, Reid & Vanderheiden, 2008). To comply with these guidelines, captions and audio descriptions or alternative contents must be provided in order to achieve Web accessibility. Also, the National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) recommended a set of practices for accessible electronic, multimedia and Web applications (Feed and Rothberg, 2006). Both W3C and NCAM recommendations emphasize the necessity of captions and audio descriptions for multimedia contents on the Web. This requirement could be achieved by means of alternative contents, or specific multimedia formats and viewers. Distinct formats exist which could be used to achieve this objective, the most widely-known being SMIL and SAMI. Microsoft Synchronized Accessible Media Interchange (SAMI) (Microsoft Corporation, 2003) is a format defined by Microsoft to provide closed captions to multimedia products by means of Microsoft Windows technology. The Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL) (Bulterman et al., 2008), developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), is an XML-based language for writing interactive presentations by means of the association of hyperlinks with media objects. SMIL allows the definition of the screen layout for the presentation, and the representation of timing and synchronization between the media objects. Different visualization platforms exist which interpret SMIL and SAMI through visual representation, both commercial and free distribution. Such technologies enable the publication of accessible multimedia content which is subtitled and has associated audio descriptions. Audio description involves adding audio files which describe visual information for the blind. Diverse studies have linguistically analyzed audio descriptions, focusing on the verbal language used to describe visual elements. Piety (2004) performed a study on the language used for audio description, with the aim of developing a base

123

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

for future research efforts to establish a common language. Salway (2007) analyzes a corpus of words which constitute a common language (or terminology) for audio description, which can be used for the application of the technologies which support audio description. The definitions with SMIL permit the inclusion of audio elements which contain the audio description of the multimedia content. For the subtitling of audio visual content, a distinction may be made between two options: “open captions”, where the subtitles are displayed inseparably and simultaneously with the video, and “closed captions“ where the displaying of subtitles is optional, according to user preferences. The use of closed captions requires the use of specific technical elements which permit the decodification of subtitles in a determined format and the choice of the user to display or not display subtitles (In Spain, the directive UNE153010:2003 is applicable for subtitling in teletext, and the industry standard EIA-708-B, “Digital Television (DTV) Closed Captioning”, is adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in the US). Even though these standards may be applied to subtitled material for its publication online, there are no specific regulations in place which enforce compliance with the standards for subtitled material in various countries. Two of the leading video publication sites, Google video (http://video.google.com) and YouTube (http://www.youtube.com), allow users to include subtitles using the Subviewer (http:// dado.be/media/p/16.aspx) and Subrip (http:// zuggy.wz.cz/) formats. It is hoped that in future versions, Google video will admit other formats, such as DFXP, SAMI, QuickText (http://www. apple.com/quicktime/tutorials/texttracks.html), among others. For the inclusion of subtitling within multimedia content, the TTAF – DFXP (Adams, 2006) specification enables the definition of captions which can be directly used by a video’s visual platform included in a Web page, or by means of the definition of multimedia content

124

using SMIL. The syntax used in DFXP is very similar to HTML. The basic structure of a document in DFXP format is composed of: •

•

•

Definition of the different styles which can be applied for the subtitles. These styles include the font type, size, color and attributes of the text (bold, italics or underlined). Definition of the different regions where the subtitles can appear. For example, a region can be defined in the upper right hand side of the screen in which the content is visualized in order to visualize the content which refers to sound effects. Definition of the subtitles in distinct blocks according to language. In this way, the multimedia players can provide the option to select the language in which the subtitles will be visualized.

For the generation of subtitles in different formats, various authoring tools are available, both licensed and freely available. Among those which are freely available, besides the previously mentioned Subrip and Subviewer, the authoring tool MAGpie distributed by NCAM should be mentioned (available at http://ncam.wgbh.org/ Webaccess/magpie/index.html), which allows the generation of multimedia contents based on SMIL for QuickTime or Real Player, SAMI for Windows Media Player or the TTAF – DFXP format.

Accessibility Accessibility from the perspective of the Web has its origin in the phrase coined by the inventor of the WWW, Tim Berners-Lee (2006): “The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.” Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can use the Web. More specifically, Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can perceive, understand, navigate, and

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

interact with the Web, and that they can contribute to the Web. Web accessibility also benefits others, including older people with changing abilities due to aging (WAI/W3C, 2005).Web accessibility encompasses a variety of concerns ranging from societal, political, and economic, to individual, physical, and intellectual through to the purely technical. Thus, there are many perspectives from which Web accessibility can be understood and evaluated (Boldyreff, 2002). Throughout the years, different authors have construed multiple definitions to determine the concept of accessibility. The work of Brajnik (2008) contributes a detailed list of the most extensive definitions of accessibility. Some of them focus on user performance indicators that can be experimentally measured (for example, effectiveness, usability), one definition sets appropriate relative levels (e.g. same effectiveness), other definitions focus on properties that are more difficult to define and measure (for example, navigability, understandability, exploitation); sometimes even properties unrelated to user performance properties are considered (for example, robustness, degradation). In this sense, Brajnik (2006) pointed out that there are at least three definitions of accessibility: some refer to usability, some to effectiveness, and some to other principles such as perceivability, understandability and operability. The problem is that depending on the definition, different methods have to be used to perform effective research. Running a user test does not generate appropriate results if the objective of the researcher is to determine conformance to guidelines, and conversely conformance testing cannot be used to determine usability of the Web site with respect to disabled users. In the last number of years, the issue of Web accessibility has increased in relevance all over the world (Benavídez et al., 2006). In the European Union, for instance, most member states have developed legislation to ensure the accessibility of public administration Web sites at all levels (central, regional, local…) in conformance with

the World Wide Web Consortium’s (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG). In this context, the evaluation of the accessibility of a Web site is of utmost importance. This evaluation cannot be completely automated, as many of the checkpoints require human judgment to assess a Web page’s conformance level and compliance with standards and guidelines. Thus, the evaluation of Web accessibility is a complex task requiring human expertise and tool support.

Guidelines for Web Accessibility The analysis of Web site accessibility by means of guidelines, similarly to other inspection methods used in usability/accessibility assessment, requires observing, analyzing and interpreting the Web site characteristics themselves (Abascal et al., 2004). Nowadays, the most relevant sets of guidelines are those recently developed by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the World Wide Web Consortium. W3C-WAI has established three sets of W3C recommendations to improve the accessibility of the Web (WAI/W3C, 2008): •

WCAG 1.0 (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), released in May 1999, which concern how to make Web sites sufficiently accessible so that people with disabilities are able to use them alongside today’s existing technologies. (http://www. w3.org/TR/WCAG/). The current practice of evaluating Web accessibility uses a dichotomous method based on absolute compliance with WCAG (Parmanto et al., 2005). A Web site is judged as being accessible or inaccessible by evaluating the Web site according to the accessibility checkpoints provided by the WCAG. The WCAG contains 14 broadly phrased guidelines which are further sub-defined into 91 specific checkpoints, explaining how the guidelines should be applied to specific content development scenarios.

125

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

•

126

These checkpoints are organized into three levels of priority: Priority 1 contains 29 checkpoints that must be satisfied; Priority 2 contains 40 checkpoints that should be satisfied; and Priority 3 contains 22 checkpoints that are required to be satisfied. The Web Accessibility Initiative has introduced the WCAG Conformance Logos to further promote accessibility on the Web. Content providers can use these logos on their sites to indicate a claim of conformance to the specific level of the WCAG. The Web Accessibility Initiative expects that use of these logos on conformant sites will help raise awareness of accessibility issues. The definitions of different conformance levels are: ◦ Conformance level A: All Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied. ◦ Conformance level AA: All Priority 1 and 2 checkpoints are satisfied. ◦ Conformance level AAA: All Priority 1, 2, and 3 checkpoints are satisfied. WCAG 2.0, last release in December 2008: W3C/WAI received extensive feedback on WCAG 1.0 due to its adoption by an audience broader than most other W3C specifications. WCAG 1.0 represented the first time there was an international standard for Web accessibility, developed and supported by consensus among representatives of industry, the disability community, accessibility researchers and government. This feedback indicated the need to update WCAG 1.0 to reflect more advanced Web technologies; the need for WCAG to be more understandable to different audiences; easier to implement; and more precisely, testable. As a consequence, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group is exploring ways of layering the document to ensure that non-technical audiences as well as technical audiences can find the information that they require.

•

•

They are also developing a test suite which will include precise testing criteria and test files. An additional goal of WCAG 2.0 is to be backwards compatible to the extent possible with WCAG 1.0, so that conformance to WCAG 2.0 will only require minor changes in Web sites that already conform to WCAG 1.0. ATAG (Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines), released in February 2000, which provide guidance for software developers in designing authoring tools that produce accessible Web content and in creating accessible authoring interfaces (http://www.w3.org/ TR/ATAG/). UAAG (User Agent Accessibility Guidelines), released in December 2002, which are concerned with how to make Web browsers and multimedia players more accessible, as well as being compatible with some of the assistive technology that people with disabilities use (http:// www.w3.org/TR/UAAG/).

Together these three guidelines provide complementary solutions resulting in comprehensive accessibility. Guidelines for accessible Web sites have been developed with the participation of representatives from many organizations around the world, and adopted by many governments around the world; implementation is gradual. Guidelines for browsers and authoring tools are seeing incremental implementation by application developers, but not yet at a pace that has made a significant impact on accessibility of the Web for people with disabilities (Brewer, 2003). The strengths of WAI guidelines are both their universal acceptance and the way they are produced (Abascal et al., 2004). However, these broadly accepted and used guidelines are far from being definitively established. As Web technology is rapidly evolving, the production of guidelines is a continuous process that periodically offers new

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

versions. This has an important effect on tools for automatic accessibility evaluation. Other important guidelines and standards which focus on specific aspects of accessibility are the U.S. Access Board’s Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards, known as the Section 508 Guidelines, (U.S Department of Justice, 2001) and the UK (UK Government, 2005), Italian (Italian Government, 2005) and Spanish (Spanish Government, 2007) regulations for Web accessibility, which specify a number of technical requirements similar to WCAG 1.0 and Section 508 points. There are many automatic and semi-automatic evaluation tools that can be used to analyze a Web page and generate an assessment of its accessibility level based on these guidelines. However, no tool alone can determine if a site meets accessibility guidelines, so that knowledgeable human evaluation is required to determine if a site is accessible. See Benavídez (2006) for a detailed review of free online tools. However, at the present time, testing the accessibility of a Web site is still an art. The lack of an appropriate definition of accessibility, combined with the complexity of the methods of evaluation and use of evaluation tools, which requires human supervision, are some of the reasons why Web accessibility is difficult to achieve. As a result of the work of some authors, such as Parmanto et al. (2005) and Vigo et al. (2007), new methodologies and metrics for the evaluation of accessibility have been defined as part of recent attempts to address the deficiencies in Web accessibility.

The Project The current project is included in the plan governed by the Spanish Ministry for Industry, Tourism and Business, “Plan Avanza”, whose objective is the development of the Information Society, as can be consulted in the section entitled “Acknowledgements”. The Spanish “Plan Avanza” is an initiative within the European plan “i2010:

A European Information Society for growth and employment” (EU, 2005), presented by the European Commission in June 2005, one of whose objectives is “to support inclusion, better public services and quality of life through the use of ICT”. One of the first tasks to be addressed upon initiation of the project was to define which knowledge should be included in the contents to be communicated. The fundamental objective was to disseminate the use of the digital signature, but it was required to determine from which perspective this should be communicated. Through collaboration with the council of Leganés (Madrid), by means of their program “Leganés Digital City” (Leganés Ciudad Digital), and with the CESYA, Spanish Centre for Subtitling and Audio Description (Centro Español de Subtitulado y Audiodescripción), data were obtained which reflected the current situation of bodies and associations of people with disabilities and the elderly (The CESYA is a centre run by the Spanish Royal Board on Disability, governed by the Spanish Ministry for Employment and Social Affairs, a multidisciplinary project for accessibility in the field of audiovisual media, through the use of subtitling and audio description facilities). Initially, a study was performed to determine the essential contents which should be provided, based on the requirements of the users to which the contents are destined. An analysis of previous knowledge and user difficulties gave rise to the division of the contents into two distinct blocks: • •

Broadcasting contents. Educational contents.

The broadcasting contents (Figure 1) refer to general introductory knowledge related to the digital certificate and the digital signature which should be broadcasted. It emerged from the preliminary study that the users demonstrated knowledge of the existence of the digital certificate and the digital signature, but not its usefulness. Likewise, users aware of the possibilities of the

127

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

digital signature and certificate displayed some suspicion, as a direct result of the lack of information regarding issues which address the level of security this technology provides. The block of broadcasting contents explains to citizens in a simple way what the digital signature and digital certificate are, and all related information, placing strong emphasis on the security their use provides. This block is deliberately lacking in technical information, as the objective is to exclusively provide basic information, which is easily processed by the user. The second functional block (Figure 2) contains what has been termed “educational content”. It offers specific technical information detailing how to use the digital certificate and signature. The content includes demonstrations of how to complete the most common online and offline operations, such as requesting the certificate, the importation or exportation of the certificate from some of the most widely-used browsers (Internet Explorer and Firefox), email signatures, the verification of the certificate of an email received, among other actions.

Once the contents to be communicated and their organization had been determined, it had to be decided specifically how to communicate these contents, in terms of support media and format. Frequently, the guides and manuals which explain such technical information adopt a technical language style and are extremely tedious, resulting inaccessible for people with a low level of knowledge or skills in the use of ICT. This results in the outcome that users prematurely abandon their search for information, and this was a significant consideration to be taken into account at the moment of establishing the communication media. It was decided to adopt a novel form of communication in this field, which is close to the users and at the same time permits the inclusion of elements which makes the information accessible. Video was the medium selected to perform this task; it enables the use of subtitles for people with auditory disabilities, and the addition of audio descriptions for people with visual disabilities. The use of video is not new, however, the novel feature is demonstrated by the content: it is communicated through a comedy show. This

Figure 1. Low resolution reproduction of broadcasting contents

128

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

Figure 2. Subtitled educational content

format, familiar and close to users, has enabled the creation of an entertaining demonstration which captures the users’ attention in order to explain the principal features of the digital signature in easy steps. During the scenes, actors introduce the fundamental concepts of the digital signature step by step through the simulation of daily situations, including a light touch of humor. The “broadcasting contents” are presented in a natural progression through subtitled and audio described dramatizations. The “educational content” is presented in a more direct form, given that the content relates directly to the concrete use of the digital signature and the digital certificate within the computer. For the communication of these contents, the principal comedy actor directs himself to the viewer, indicating which steps to follow to carry out daily actions, such as how to import or export a digital certificate in the most common browsers, digitally

sign a document or obtain the digital certificate, as previously mentioned. Subsequent to defining the information to be communicated and how it should be communicated, the project researchers completed the remaining tasks required, which included the drafting of the script, the shooting and editing of the scenes, and the design and construction of the Web site to host the video scenes. Implementing the elements described above, the project has thus resulted in the realization of a multimedia Web system for the diffusion of the use of the digital signature which complies with the accessibility regulations (AENOR, 2003) and (AENOR, 2005) and follows the “Design for All” principles. The work has been published on the currently accessible Web site (AENOR, 2004) www.pasmao.tv, where the contents of the videos are accessible free of charge. The said contents

129

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

have also been published in subtitled and audio described versions, and the tutorial explaining how to use the digital signature has been made available to the users, with subtitles. The Web site includes essential information regarding the development of the project, indicating of what it consists and which organizations have participated in its financing or have collaborated in its development. The Web site specifically created to diffuse the videos across the internet is presently accessible, and enables viewing of the contents in a “contrast” mode to facilitate reading and access for people with visual disabilities (the “contrast” mode allows the user to view the textual content of the website in white font with a black background). It is possible to access the videos in distinct formats, providing customized “low resolution” or “high resolution” to facilitate access contingent upon the bandwidth which users who access the site have available to them. Subsequent to the videos being fully completed and being made available to users, a survey was realized concerning the perceptions of the efficiency, format and accessibility of the video scenes. Twenty-three questions related to the efficiency of the videos were formulated, and satisfactory results were obtained for the responses to all of the questions, the questions regarding audio description, subtitling and audio described navigation generating particularly satisfactory results. The sample was composed of 84 subjects, of which 46 were women (55%), and 38 men (45%). The average age of the sample was 35.8 years. The survey was completed during the months of March and April 2008, by a set of 8 interviewers. The sample was made up of people linked to the CESYA (refer to the information in the section entitled “The Project), with distinct disabilities which require access to accessible audiovisual content, and professionals dedicated to accessibility. The figure displayed in the section which follows demonstrates the responses to the 23 questions. The questions posed to the sample were the following:

130

1. 2. 3.

4.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

12. 13.

14.

15.

16. 17. 18. 19.

Do you consider the video scenes clear and understandable? Do you consider the video scenes entertaining? Has watching the video scenes improved your general level of knowledge regarding the digital certificate? Has watching the video scenes improved your general level of knowledge regarding the digital signature? Do you now know how to obtain the digital certificate? Do you now know how to use the digital certificate? Do you now know how to use the digital signature? Do you consider using the digital certificate sufficiently simple? Do you consider using the digital signature sufficiently simple? Do you consider the use of the digital certificate and digital signature adequately secure? Has your level of confidence regarding these types of technologies increased subsequent to listening to the explanations in the videos? Do you believe that you will use the digital certificate in the future? Do you consider it necessary to provide more videos which explain the use of the technologies? Have you understood the differences between the digital certificate and the digital signature? Do you consider it correct to use comedy as a format for general explanations, and the use of direct presentation for technical explanations? In the case of having used audio description, did you consider it correct? In the case of having used subtitling, did you consider it correct? In the case of having used audio navigation, did you consider it correct? Do you consider it useful that these types of scenes are performed following the “Design

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

20. 21. 22. 23.

for All” principles, compared with specific acting scenes for the various audiences to which the scenes are directed? Have you clearly understood the concept of “Authentication”? Have you clearly understood the concept of “Integrity”? Have you clearly understood the concept of “Confidentiality”? Have you clearly understood the concept of “Non repudiation”?

Only responses with closed “Yes” or “No” values were permitted in response to the questions above. The percentages of the different responses are summarized in the Figure 3. According to the results obtained in the evaluation, the initiative is considered highly significant, based on the level of acceptance by the sample. A large portion of the results indicate total acceptance of the proposals, the negative responses always remaining under 15%. An additional element which should be considered in the evaluation, besides the quantitative analysis of the surveys, are the qualitative results expressed by the people who had access

to the videos in face to face presentations. Both people with disabilities as well as professionals dedicated to accessibility showed their satisfaction with what they considered an original and useful development. The sample of people with auditory or visual disabilities communicated that access to contents is not only possible but also easy, thanks to the regulations regarding the design of accessible Web sites which the project complies with, as well as the subtitling and audio description of the content published. Additionally, people without disabilities have appreciated the communication format, being much more user friendly and simple than the formats usually employed for the diffusion of these types of technologies. Assuring the fair access to electronic media, apart from being a human right according to legislation and regulation in force, is an opportunity to equip people with disabilities who do not possess sufficient autonomy to access information or manage it to perform such actions. These are presently fundamental daily actions, and providing them ensures that people with disabilities can exercise their rights as any other citizen. Thanks to technology this can now be made possible. It is viable to provide information in accessible

Figure 3. Evaluation results

131

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

multimedia formats, manage information online through accessible Web sites, among other actions. The electronic signature is a clear example of this.

CONCLUsION AND FUTURE WORK The realization of the project described in this work had an associated considerable risk due to the novelty of the proposal. The use of a medium as orthodox as the use of comedy to diffuse ICTs presented itself as a handicap from the beginning. However, the results have been more than satisfactory. All of the documentation published regarding the work has demonstrated a level of acceptance by users concerning the user-friendly publication of content which normally results in being too dense and boring, as being more than satisfactory. From the technical perspective, the results fulfilled all of the objectives initially specified: on the one hand, the diffusion of the digital signature, and on the other hand creating an accessible service. With reference to the later, it should be mentioned that both the Web site as well as its contents are completely accessible: the Web site by means of the compliance with reference standards for this type of support, and the videos which have optional subtitles and audio descriptions available which enable people with disabilities with equal access to the information. With reference to economic aspects, it was verified that the financial burdens resulting from the use of actors were not significant. The drafting of the “conventional” script already contained almost all of the information necessary to create subtitling and audio description. To carry out the subtitling, the script could simply be used, with minor modifications where necessary. Regarding the audio description, taking this into account during the writing of the script had the result that this was not an excessive task. The phrasing of the audio descriptions was uniquely considered as an additional task, however as this was realized during

132

the shooting of the scenes, thereby reducing cost and effort considerably. Lastly, the editing of the scenes with the inclusion of subtitles and audio description did not involve much more additional work than if they were not to be included, obtaining in exchange much more significant benefits. The work carried out shows that it is possible to realize accessible dramatizations of the use of ICT, both with respect to the formal regulatory aspects, as well the less technical features concerning the style of language and communication used, which overcome some of the barriers to equality among all citizens. With respect to future research lines, more initiatives are necessary to make programs and courses with digital themes accessible to people with disabilities. Additionally, these educational actions will have benefits in other fields to diffuse information about new technologies by means of the Internet. At a technical level, currently the audio described versions of the videos are available as separate videos. It is possible to use multimedia which allow the inclusion of audio descriptions as a separate sound file, which empowers the user to activate audio description or not according to his/her preferences. It is aimed to incorporate this functionality in future research work.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The project: Multimedia System for the Diffusion of Electronic Administration in Specialized Groups (Sistema Multimedia de Difusión de la Administración Electrónica en Colectivos Especiales) has been realized with the support provided by the General Management of the Development of the Information Society of the Spanish Secretary of State of Telecommunications, and with the support of the Information Society of the Spanish Ministry for Industry, Tourism and Commerce, with reference number: PDM-2006-106.

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

REFERENCEs Abascal, J., Arrue, M., Fajardo, I., Garay, N., & Tomás, J. (2004). The use of guidelines to automatically verify Web accessibility. Universal Access in the Information Society, 3(1), 71–79. doi:10.1007/s10209-003-0069-3 Adams, G. (Ed.). (2006). Timed Text (TT) Authoring Format 1.0 – Distribution Format Exchange Profile (DFXP). W3C Candidate Recommendation. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http:// www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/ AENOR. (2003). [Subtitulado para personas sordas y personas con discapacidad auditiva. Subtitulado a través de teletexto. AENOR. Madrid: AENOR.]. Norma UNE, 153010, 2003. AENOR. (2004). [Aplicaciones informáticas para personas con discapacidad. Requisitos de accesibilidad para contenidos en la Web. Madrid: AENOR.]. Norma UNE, 139803, 2004. AENOR. (2005). Norma UNE 153020. Audiodescripción para personas con discapacidad visual: requisitos para la audiodescripción y elaboración de audioguías. Madrid: AENOR. Al-Omari, A., & Al-Omari, H. (2006). E-Government Readiness Assessment Model. Journal of Computer Science, 2(11), 841–845. doi:10.3844/ jcssp.2006.841.845 Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003). Measuring Web site quality improvements: a case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 103(5), 297–309. doi:10.1108/02635570310477352 Benavídez, C., Fuertes, J., Gutiérrez, E., & Martínez, L. (2006). Semi-automatic Evaluation of Web Accessibility with HERA 2.0 . In Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 199–206). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/11788713_30

Berners-Lee, T. (2006, 2008/12/17). Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/WAI/ Bertot, J. C., & Jaeger, P. T. (2006). User-centered E-government: Challenges and benefits for government Web sites. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 163–168. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2006.02.001 Boldyreff, C. (2002). Determination and Evaluation of Web Accessibility. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure For Collaborative Enterprises, June 10-12, 2002 (pp. 35-42). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. Brajnik, G. (2006). Web Accessibility Testing: When the Method Is the Culprit. In K. Miesenberger et al. (Eds.), Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2006), Linz, Austria, July 12-14, 2006 (LNCS 4061, pp. 156-163). Berlin: Springer. Brajnik, G. (2008). Beyond conformance: the role of accessibility evaluation methods. In 2nd International Workshop on Web Usability and Accessibility IWWUA08, Auckland, New Zealand, Sept. 2008. Keynote speech. Brewer, J. (2003). Web accessibility highlights and trends. ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the Physically Handicapped, 76, 15–16. doi:10.1145/1036401.1036408 Brunschwig, C. R. (2006). Visualising legal information: mind maps and E-government. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 3(4), 386-403. Bulterman, D., Jansen, J., Cesar, P., Mullender, S., Hyche, E., DeMeglio, M., et al. (Eds.). (2008). Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL 3.0). W3C Recommendation 01 December 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http:// www.w3.org/TR/SMIL3/

133

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Reid, L. G., & Vanderheiden, G. (Eds.). (2008). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. W3C Recommendation. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www. w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 187–216. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2005.02.001

Choudrie, J., Brinkman, W. P., & Pathania, R. (2007). Using diffusion theory to determine the digital divide in E-services: two UK local-area perspectives. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 4(3), 345-359.

González, R., Gasco, J., & Llopis, J. (2007). E-government success: some principles from a Spanish case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(6), 845–861. doi:10.1108/02635570710758752

Dobransky, K., & Hargatti, E. (2006). The disability divide in internet access and use. Information Communication and Society, 9(3), 313–334. doi:10.1080/13691180600751298

Italian Government. (2005). Requisiti tecnici e i diversi livelli per l’accessibilità agli strumenti informatici. Decreto Ministeriale 8 luglio 2005. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www. pubbliaccesso.it/normative/DM080705.htm

Ebbers, W. E., Pieterson, W. J., & Noordman, H. N. (2008). Electronic government: Rethinking channel management strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 181–201. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2006.11.003 Esteves, J., & Joseph, R. C. (2008). A comprehensive framework for the assessment of eGovernment projects. Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 118–132. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2007.04.009 EU. (2005). A European Information Society for growth and employment. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/index_en.htm Fahnbulleh, N. (2005). The future of electronic government. Futurics, 29(1/2), 7–12. Fang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: concept, practice and development. International Journal of the Computer . The Internet and Information, 10(2), 1–22. Feed, G., & Rothberg, M. (2006). Accessible Digital Media. Design Guidelines for Electronic Publications, Multimedia and the Web. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://ncam.wgbh.org/ publications/adm/

134

Jaeger, P. T. (2004). The social impact of an accessible E-democracy. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15(1), 19–26. doi:10.1177/1044207304 0150010401 Jaeger, P. T. (2008). User-Centered Policy Evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24–33. doi:10.1177/1044207308315274 Jaeger, P. T., & Thompson, K. M. (2003). Egovernment around the world: lessons, challenges, and future directions. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 389–394. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2003.08.001 Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136. doi:10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00066-1 Microsoft Corporation. (2003). Understanding SAMI 1.0. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ ms971327.aspx

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

O’Conner, B. (1985). Access to moving image documents: Background concepts and proposals for surrogates for film and video works. The Journal of Documentation, 41(4), 209–220. doi:10.1108/eb026781 Parmanto, B., & Zeng, X. (2005). Metric for Web accessibility evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(13), 1394–1404. doi:10.1002/asi.20233 Pereira, F., & Burnett, I. (2003). Universal Multimedia Experiences for Tomorrow. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 20(2), 63–73. doi:10.1109/ MSP.2003.1184340 Pieterson, W., Ebbers, W., & van Dijka, J. (2006). Personalization in the public sector: An inventory of organizational and user obstacles towards personalization of electronic services in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 24(1), 148–164. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.12.001 Piety, P. (2004). The Language System of Audio Description: an Investigation as a Discursive Process. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 98(8), 453–460. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. Ruth, S., & Doh, S. (2007). Is E-Government Ready for Prime Time? IEEE Computing, 11(2), 80–82. Salway, A. (2007). A Corpus-based Analysis of Audio Description . In Garin, E., Díaz-Cintas, J., Orero, P., & Remael, A. (Eds.), Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description and Sign Language (pp. 151–174). Amsterdam: Rodopi. Sarikas, O. D., & Weerakkody, V. (2007). Realising integrated E-government services: a UK local government perspective. Transforming Government: People . Process and Policy, 1(2), 153–173.

Shi, Y. (2007). The accessibility of Chinese local government Web sites: An exploratory study. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 377–403. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2006.05.004 Skelcher, C. (1992). Managing for Service Quality. Harlow, UK: Longman. Spanish Government. (2007). Reglamento sobre las condiciones básicas para el acceso de las personas con discapacidad a las tecnologías, productos y servicios relacionados con la sociedad de la información y medios de comunicación social. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http:// www.boe.es/g/es/bases_datos/doc.php?coleccion =iberlex&id=2007/19968 Strejcek, G., & Theil, M. (2002). Technology push, legislation pull? E-government in the European Union. Decision Support Systems, 34(3), 305–313. doi:10.1016/S0167-9236(02)00123-9 Timmers, P. (2008). EU E-inclusion policy in context. Info, the journal of policy, regulation and strategy for telecommunications, information and media, 10(5/6), 12-19. Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of E-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 354–369. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00594.x U.K. Government. (2005). UK Disability Discrimination Act. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/ DG_4001068 U.S. Department of Justice. (2001). Guide to the Section 508 Standards for Electronic and Information Technology. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/ guide/1194.22.htm

135

Public Information Services for People with Disabilities

Vigo, M., Arrue, M., Brajnik, G., Lomuscio, R., & Abascal, J. (2007). Quantitative metrics for measuring Web accessibility. In W4A ‘07: Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A).

136

WAI/W3C. (2005). Introduction to Web Accessibility. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http:// www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php WAI/W3C. (2008). WAI Guidelines and Techniques. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/WAI/ guid-tech.html

137

Chapter 10

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age Panagiotis Kyriazopoulos Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Irene Samanta Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Rania Christou Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece Anastasios Ntanos Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus, Greece

ABsTRACT The purpose of this research is to explore behaviour regarding the use of the internet by elderly people with movement disabilities. The study illustrates the ways, and the frequency, that they make use of the internet; while identifying the attitudes of non-users towards the internet. Quantitative research was carried out from a sample of 180 questionnaires divided into dyads (ninety users of the internet and ninety non-users) in order to explore and evaluate the attitudes and views of the elderly. The findings identify the factors that motivate older individuals with disabilities to move towards making use of the internet, and allow an understanding of the reasons why some of them are still distrustful towards the internet.

INTRODUCTION Nowadays the internet is an essential part of daily life (Olson & Olson, 2003) allowing people to communicate and be connected with social, political, personal, business and recreational activities (Namazi & McClintic, 2003). Thus, one of the most remarkable points is that technology in many circumstances acts as social work to the

elderly, as it provides them with the opportunity to keep in touch “with the times” (Thorne, 1996). However, senior individuals, in order to be familiar with internet technology and adopt it, should take advantage of it. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2000) the elderly are getting familiar with internet technology very quickly, although they feel uncomfortable with such developments. According to Zeithmaml and Gilly (1987, p. 66),

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch010

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

the elderly adopt technologies when an advantage is presented and communicated. Furthermore, a few years later Menchin (1989, p. 131) supported this by arguing that the acceptance of innovations by the elderly is strongly related to the benefits that they will gain by adopting them. Several models have been developed in order to examine the variables that influence elderly people to use or not use a technology; most of these models have approached the issue from a psychological point of view. The diffusion model of Rogers (1962), the technology acceptance model (TAM) (Davis et al., 1993) and the technology readiness index of Parasuraman (2000) are some models that have been developed to identify the use of the internet by consumers. A limited number of research studies examine the use of the internet by the elderly with disability. The number of elderly people are now defined as aging due to increasing of their longevity as the standards of living have been improved. Firms take into consideration for their marketing plans the emerging new segment of the elderly, the “able elderly”. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to illustrate the use of internet by elderly with disabilities.

CHANGEs IN THE “GREY MARKET” According to Juznic et al. (2006), the internet can be characterised both as a communication tool and an information source which opened up interesting opportunities for marketers Shwu-Ing Wu (2002). Moreover, the internet is also a significant source of consumer information because it is more economical, and at the same time more accessible and user-friendly (Bonn et al., 1999). However, the degree of “user involvement” in an “internet marketing” activity will illustrate the success of internet marketing, as it plays an essential role regarding consumer behaviour (Lassar et al., 2005). At this point it is vital to

138

highlight some of the variables that influence an individual’s internet behaviour. According to Lassar et al. (2005) the perceived usefulness, the ease of use of the internet, online experiences, and many special characteristics play an important role regarding consumers’ internet behaviour. However, according to Haisken-De New et al. (2001), interest in the internet is strongly related to age, and it is true that internet users are usually the youngest of the population. Nowadays things have changed and the “grey market” is a growing and increasingly profitable market, according to Pickton and Broderick, 2005. They argue that the “grey market” can be considered as a general term for anyone aged 55 or over. Furthermore, in industrialised countries the “grey market” already accounts for 25% of the population compared to 15% in 1950, and is anticipated to double by 2020. As Moschis (2003) states, the elderly have special needs which are caused by two main factors: the elderly have social differences due to their life circumstances. There is little knowledge about the attitudes, characteristics, values, behaviour, motivations and concerns of older users and non-users of the internet, especially in Greece. This is a consequence of the fact that, until now, elderly individuals were largely a neglected segment of the population with low economic resources and importance (Moschis, 2003). The elderly had never learned about the internet from their education and, furthermore, it was not necessary in their working environments. When the internet became obligatory, almost the majority of them were already retired (Juznic et al., 2006).

DIFFERENCEs BETWEEN UsERs AND NON-UsERs OF THE INTERNET The present study approaches and analyses the differences between users and non-users of internet defined by Trocchia and Janda (2000). There are different themes: reference group affiliation,

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

technology schemata, resistance to change (Trocchia & Janda, 2000, p. 607).

Reference Group Affiliation The reference group affiliation of a person influences that individual’s attitude, values, beliefs, motivations and behaviour (Trocchia & Janda, 2000; Jobber, 2004). However, an individual could be part of more than one reference group. Research has shown that the groups, in which individuals consider themselves as members, are playing an important role in enhancing attitudes towards the internet. Groups with a direct influence on individuals are called membership groups (Kotler et al., 1999). There are primary groups, with whom there is regular but informal interaction, and also secondary groups, with whom there is less regular but more formal interaction (Kotler et al., 1999). Furthermore, there is also a kind of psychicogical reward or punishment from the reference groups towards technology (Trocchia and Janda, 2000).

Technology schema Technology schema relates to how an individual comprehends the technology. According to Bettman (1979) it is a well-structured set of expectations, attitudes and beliefs that one individual has about technology. Many research studies have shown that technology schema can influence individuals’ behaviour towards the internet (Robertson & Kassarjian, 1991; Trocchia & Janda, 2000).

Resistance to Change Individuals’ behaviour can be characterised by their general position towards change. There are individuals open to changes in their everyday life and others who prefer their normal and routine life without any innovations which might “destroy” their harmony. Individuals resist changes for many different reasons. Many of them are uncertain about the usefulness of the change and others just

do not trust the change. According to Mick and Fournier (1998) the reason that individuals do not follow changes is because everything is changing so fast, and new technologies and innovations become outmoded very quickly. Trocchia and Janda (2000) reported that those who are more comfortable with change are more likely to use the internet.

Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) The technology acceptance model (TAM) is completely modified to the acceptance and diffusion of computer-based technologies (O’Cass & Fenech, 2003) and has been used in several settings which involved different kinds of technological adoption (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). According to this model, the behavioural intention to use technology is developed from the apparent usefulness and ease of use (Davis, 1993; Gerrard et al., 2006). In other words, the behavioural intention is determined by the belief that the technology will improve one’s job performance and that using the technology is easy. TAM has helped to value and explain technology adoption in the marketing environment, including “internet-based” consumer behaviour (O’Cass & Fenech, 2003). The TAM uses the theory of reasoned action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) in order to explain computer usage behaviour. Thus, if a consumer does not make use of the internet, he perceives that the service is difficult to use and not useful enough.

Technology Readiness Index (TRI) According to the technology readiness index, optimism and innovativeness drive an individual towards technological readiness, while discomfort and insecurity can work as obstacles (Gerrard et al., 2006, p. 161). More precisely, Gerrard et al. (2006) argue that the quality of optimism shows the degree to which individuals with a positive view of technology believe it offers increased efficiency in their lives. They show that innovative-

139

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

ness is the degree to which individuals are technological pioneers that want to try new products and services first. Furthermore, discomfort and insecurity are almost the opposites of optimism and innovativeness. Discomfort is the degree to which individuals feel a lack of control over technology, and, finally, insecurity is the degree to which individuals distrust technology and are not certain of its capability to work correctly (Gerrard et al., 2006).

Culture: social Class According to Kotler et al. (1999), cultural factors have the deepest influence on consumer behaviour. Therefore, marketers should understand and carefully examine the role played by the individuals’ culture, sub-culture and social class (Kotler et al., 1999). According to Jobber (2004, p. 87) culture refers to traditions, values, taboos, beliefs, decision rules and the basic attitudes of the whole society within which an individual lives and develops. Therefore, individuals’ behaviour is not random but is developed from these social factors. In consequence, individuals’ behaviour is not only a part but also a reflection of the society in which they develop (Baligh, 1994). However, in a society, culture is shared between its members (Malhotra & Birks, 2000) and at the same time is a learned phenomenon. According to Hofstede & Bond (1988) individuals begin to acquire their cultural inheritance from the day they are born in a social process that continues throughout their lifetime in a particular society (Gong et al., 2007, p. 60). Thus, cultural factors can strongly influence consumer behaviour; therefore, companies should consider them when designing their marketing strategies (Kotler et al., 1999).

HYPOTHEsEs Older individuals represent a large market segment that cannot be easily ignored by marketers because

140

it is increasing tremendously. The following hypotheses will be tested through data analysis: H1: Environment influences senior individuals with disabilities to use the internet H2: High technology schema works positively towards the use of the internet H3: Senior internet users accept changes in their everyday life H4: Senior internet users believe that the internet facilitates their lives H5: Web advertisements (web-ads) push senior individuals to use the internet H6: Internet users find it easier to access the internet to do their shopping, as they are not able to go out for their shopping H7: Individuals with low behavioural intention to use the internet perceive a low usefulness of the internet

REsEARCH METHODOLOGY For the purposes of this research the quantitative method is used. Before the distribution of the questionnaires a pilot test was used in order to refine the questionnaires. The group selected for the pilot test included twelve senior people. In order to check the reliability and suitability of the questions and, moreover, to take into consideration the respondents’ opinions, ideas and suggestions for the final structure of the questionnaire.

sample selection The research took place in Athens, the capital of Greece. The first intention was to geographically cover the whole country but the collected data were not suitable for the needs of the research. Therefore, the research was carried out within the narrow limits of Athens. A pilot test was carried out and ten day period was needed in order to make the necessary corrections. Finally, the research was carried out from 1st September

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

2008 to 30th November 2008. The participants had to be senior citizens over 65 years old. For the purpose of the current study, 180 questionnaires were distributed and 100 interviews were finally conducted. The response rate was 55.5%. Due to the limited percentage of senior citizens who use the internet (almost 9%) the researchers chose the sample with the main priority of being representative of the population. According to the National Statistic Service, the number of senior individuals in Athens is “around 916,000”, which means that 180 questionnaires covered 0.02% of the population. Therefore, ninety questionnaires were distributed to internet users, and ninety questionnaires to non-users.

sampling Techniques and Methods The sample was statistically chosen at random. The cluster method of probability sampling was used in order to select the cases (Saunders et al., 2003). The study used a self-administered type of questionnaire, and, due to the sensitive state of health of the target group, the researcher decided to help all the respondents to fill out the questionnaires. Some of the participants could not easily read and were tired by it. The structure of the questionnaire was divided into four main parts: personality, internet skills and use, general opinions of the internet and personal information.

Ethical Issues There are a number of ethical issues that should be taken into consideration in this research. The questionnaires were accompanied by a covering letter which explained not only the purpose of this research but also gave information about ethical issues related to the study. This letter was read loudly and clearly by the researchers to the respondents, who were encouraged to ask questions. Moreover, the covering letter explained why the recipients’ response was important and how long

it would take them to complete the questionnaire, and informed them about the confidentiality and anonymity of the interview. Finally, the covering letter concluded with thanks for their contribution to the research.

Data Analysis: sample Characteristics The analysis came from 50 users and 50 nonusers of the internet (rate of response: 55.5%). The sample does not represent the current situation in the Greek market, as only 9% of the total population over 65 years old and over is using the internet (National Statistic Service, 2007). The reason for selection of the answers of 50% users and 50% non-users was that, in this way, the researchers could have an overall view about the opinions and behaviours of the two groups. From 100 respondents, 62 were male and 38 were female. The age range was 65 and over. 82% of the respondents were married and 81% had children. In order to exam the respondents’ income was used cross-tabulation with the level of education in order to give more interesting results. The education of the majority of the respondents with low income (€20,000 or less) was to high school level. At the highest levels of income the majority were well educated.

Personality This part of questionnaire referred to the respondents’ attitude towards new products or services. The results illustrated that 30% of the senior individuals that were not using the internet reported that they do not like to try new products or services, while only 2% from the group of users reported the same thing. According to Trocchia and Janda (2000), technology schema can influence individuals’ behaviour towards the internet. Therefore, it is expected that individuals who are non-users of the internet would not like trying new products or services. Furthermore, individuals’ behaviour

141

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

can be characterised from their general position towards change. According to Trocchia and Janda (2000), those who are uncomfortable with change hesitate to use the internet, which is also shown in the result of the analysis. Furthermore, in the last part of this section the researcher tried to identify respondents’ general opinions about themes of technology and innovation. The researcher applied the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test in order to compare the opinions of senior users and non-users of the internet and to illustrate their significant differences in five categories: technology schema, reference group affiliation, usefulness, resistance to change and social relations.

1. Technology Schema The majority of the respondents, both users and non-users, felt familiar with the technology (mean 3.45) (Table 1). Moreover, the researcher applied the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test in order to distinguish the exact differences between the two groups. According to the Mann-Whitney U test the senior individuals that use the internet are more familiar with technology, while non-users are less familiar with technology (U=506.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The Mann-Whitney U test found that users of the internet follow the development of technology more than non-users, who do not follow the development of technology at the same level (U=849.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00).

The Mann-Whitney U test found that non-users of the internet do not follow the development of technology at the same level as users because it changes very fast (U=796.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The test found that users of the internet are more willing to learn new technologies than non-users (U=811.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). According to the data analysis the hypothesis H2 was confirmed and supported. It was proved that older individuals with high technology schema have a more positive attitude towards the use of internet. Finally, the test found that non-users of the internet believe that their friends usually consider that they are against technology, while users believe that their friends do not consider that they are against the technology (U=609.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). From this analysis of the statistics it is shown how senior users and non-users comprehend technology. It is true that technology schema can influence individuals’ behaviour towards the internet (Trocchia & Janda, 2000). Therefore, users feel more familiar and follow technology, as well as never stopping being willing to learn new technologies. Furthermore, non-users avoid new technologies as they believe that there is no use in learning about them as they change very fast.

2. Reference Group Affiliation The majority of respondents claimed that they were afraid to be excluded from goings-on if they

Table 1. Technology schema Mean

142

Standard Deviation

I feel familiar with the technology

3.45

1.27

I follow development of technology

2.93

1.08

I don’t follow the technology because it changes very fast

2.57

1.13

I am unwilling to learn new technologies

2.42

1.39

Friends usually believe that I’m against the technology

2.14

1.35

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Table 2. Reference group affiliation Reference group affiliation

Mean

Std. Deviation

My environment influenced me to use the internet

2.39

1.40

Everybody in my environment uses the internet

2.98

1.32

I am afraid that I will be excluded from goings-on if I do not use the internet

3.24

1.51

did not use the internet (Table 2). Moreover, the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was applied in order to distinguish the exact differences between the two groups regarding reference group affiliation. The Mann-Whitney U test found that users of the internet consider that the internet is obligatory in their life, while non-users do not consider it as obligatory (U=438.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The test showed that users of the internet are afraid that they will be excluded from goings-on if they do not use the internet, while non-users are not afraid that they will be excluded from goingson (U=579.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Furthermore, the test found that users of the internet consider that knowledge of the use of internet functions is positive in their opinion, while non-users do not consider it at the same level (U=625.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The responses to the statement that the environment influences the elderly to make use of the internet showed no significant difference between users and non-users. Both groups had the same opinion towards the statements. 60% believed that the environment influences individuals to use the internet, while 40% believed that the majority of individuals from their environment use it. Therefore, through analysis the hypothesis H1 was supported as both senior users and non-users believed that the environment influences senior individuals to use the internet. From this analysis it is evident that a group of people can influence an individual’s attitude, values, beliefs, motivations and behaviour (Trocchia & Janda, 2000; Jobber, 2004). The majority

of the respondents believe that they were mainly influenced by their environment towards making use of the internet, and that almost any of them make use of it. Moreover, the majority of users were afraid to be excluded from goings-on if they did not use the internet, while, by using the internet, they felt more accepted by their reference group. Moreover, the majority of users claimed that it is obligatory to use the internet and it is very difficult to refuse to use it because they will be excluded.

3. Usefulness The Mann-Whitney U test found that users of the internet believe that the internet facilitates communication, while non-users believe the opposite (U=566.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Moreover, the test found that non-users of the internet doubt the long term usefulness of the internet, while users do not doubt it (U=457.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). After the data analysis, hypothesis H7 was confirmed as it was proved that the elderly with low behavioural intention to use the internet anticipate low usefulness from it. There are many individuals who doubt the usefulness of the internet. The majority of nonusers doubt the long term usefulness of the internet, while at the same time the majority of users believe that the internet is not only useful but also facilitates everyday communication.

4. Resistance to Change Most elderly users and non-users of the internet accept changes that facilitate their everyday

143

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Table 3. Resistance to change Mean

Standard Deviation

I accept changes in my everyday life

3.64

1.05

I accept innovations that facilitate my life

3.97

1.01

I don’t trust the innovations that influence my everyday life

2.65

1.25

I avoid the products/services that are difficult for me to understand how they work

3.08

1.27

life (mean 3.97) (Table 3). Moreover, the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test was applied in order to distinguish the exact differences between the two groups towards the changes. The Mann-Whitney U test found that users of the internet accept that innovations facilitate their life in comparison with non-users (U=854.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Moreover, the test found that non-users of the internet do not trust the innovations that influence their everyday life, while users do trust them (U=612.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). However, individuals rarely accept products or services for which it is difficult for them to understand how they work, showed no significant difference between users and non-users. Both groups had the same opinion towards the statements. 62% agreed that they accept changes in their everyday life, while 44% stated that they avoid product or services for which it is difficult for them to understand how they work. According to the results, hypothesis H3 was supported and confirmed as both elderly users and non-users of the internet accept changes in their everyday life. As mentioned before, there are two types of individuals: those who are open to changes in their everyday life and those who prefer their normal and routine life without any innovations which might “spoil” their harmony. According to the findings, many of the non-users, without giving any reason, do not trust changes and innovations which could possibly influence their everyday life. Those that are more comfortable with change are more likely in the future to use the internet.

144

5. Social Relations The Mann-Whitney U test found that non-users of the internet believe that if they were well informed about the benefits they could gain by using it, they would possibly use it. From the other side, the internet users indicated that they do not need to be well informed in order to use it (U=793.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The test also found that users of the internet feel greater autonomy and freedom compared with those who do not use it (U=568.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Finally, 65%, which is the majority of both the users and non-users, answered negatively to the statement that they feel less lonely with the internet. According to Kotler et al. (1999), cultural factors have the deepest influence on consumer behaviour. Culture refers to traditions, values, taboos, beliefs, decision rules and basic attitudes of the whole society within which an individual lives and develops (Jobber, 2004, p. 87). Therefore, when a senior user of the internet feels more autonomy and freedom than a non-user, it is as a result of the values and beliefs of the micro society in which he or she lives (Table 4).

Internet skills and Use Senior Non-Users The most remarkable result among the fifty nonusers is that 26% only knew what the internet is, 16% did not know what it is and 8% had never

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Table 4. Mann-Whitney U test among elderly users and non-users of the internet with disabilities handle

Grouping Variable: hadle Computer N1:50, N2:50

MannWhitney U

Wilcoxon W

Z

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

NO

YES

I feel familiar with the technology

506.5

1731.5

5.18

0

35.34

64.3

I follow development of technology

849.5

2124.5

-2.88

0

42.49

58.5

I don’t follow the technology because it changes very fast

796

2.071

-3.24

0

59.58

41.4

I am unwilling to learn new technologies

811.5

2086.5

-3.13

0

59.27

41.7

Friends usually believe that I’m against the technology

609

1.884

-4.75

0

63.32

37.6

In my work it is obligatory to use internet

438

1.713

-5.88

0

34.26

66.7

I am afraid that I will be excluded from the goings-on if I do not use the internet

579.5

1854.5

-4.74

0

37.09

63.9

Knowledge of use of internet functions is positive in my opinion

625

1.900

-4.40

0

38

63

The internet facilitates communication

566

1.841

-5.36

0

36.82

64.1

I doubt for long term usefulness of internet

457

1.732

-5.98

0

66.36

34.6

I accept innovations that facilitate my life

854

2.129

-2.92

0

42.58

58.4

I don’t trust innovations that influence my everyday life

612

1.887

-4.56

0

63.26

37.7

If I was well informed about benefits of using the internet I would use it

793.5

2068.5

-3.24

0

59.63

41.3

With the internet I feel greater autonomy and freedom from those who do not use it

568.5

1843.5

-4.82

0

36.87

64.1

heard of it. We can identify the reasons why the 26% of the total sample that knew what the internet was had never used it. The results showed that 35% of the respondents answered that they were just afraid of not being able to learn how to use it. According to the technology readiness index, discomfort can work as an obstacle to technology readiness (Gerrard et al., 2006, p. 161). They felt discomfort and a lack of control over technology (Gerrard et al., 2006). Furthermore, the perceived ease of use was low, which is something that it is completely tailored to the acceptance and diffusion of the internet according to the TAM (O’Cass & Fenech, 2003). Moreover, it has been proved that an inappropriate technology schema negatively influences the individuals’ behaviour towards the internet (Robertson & Kassarjian, 1991; Trocchia & Janda, 2000). Finally, those individuals who think that the innovation is not easy to use consider the use of Internet complicated. However, the other 35% avoided the use of the internet

Mean Rank

because they believed that they did not need it and that it was useless to them. According to the TAM the behavioural intention to use a technology is developed from the perceived usefulness that would be received (Davis, 1993; Gerrard et al., 2006). Moreover, it is interesting that exactly half of the individuals that knew about the internet and had never used it were willing to start using it in the next two years, while the other half refused to make any use of it.

Senior Users Regarding the frequency with which senior individuals make use of internet, the majority of the respondents (90%) answered that they use it every day or almost every day, while only 6% declared that they use it three to four times a week. Furthermore, 92% of the senior users declared that they access the internet at work and the remainder (8%) from their homes.

145

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Moreover, the researcher asked about how much time individuals usually spent using the internet during the week. It is worth mentioning that more than half (54%) use the internet for more than four hours per week; 15% use the internet for about four hours; while 20% use the internet for from one to three hours. Regarding the main reasons that made a senior internet user wish to make use of the internet, the majority of respondents answered that they had used the internet at least once in order to send an email; 84% answered that they had used the internet at least once in order to be informed about the news; 74% declared that they had used it at least once in order to surf on the World Wide Web; 54% had used it at least once for online shopping; 48% had used it at least once in order to download programmes; another 48% had used it at least once for medical reasons; 38% answered that they used the internet for e-banking; 24% had used the internet at least once for telephone use; and finally 20% used it for hobbies.

Moreover, according to the test, senior users of the internet found it easier to learn how to use it than non-users (U=428.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). However, regarding the statement that there should be free internet training seminars, both senior users and non-users of the internet had the same positive opinion. At this point it is essential to underline the positive attitude of non-users towards the statement that they believed that there should be many free internet training seminars. Furthermore, as was expected, senior internet users find it easier to use or to learn how to use the internet, while non-users are afraid that they can’t use it. According to the TAM, the behavioural intention to use a technology is developed from the perceived usefulness and the perceived ease of use (Davis, 1993; Gerrard et al., 2006). Therefore, individuals who consider that the use of the internet is quite easy are possibly already users, while non-users indicated that the internet is a very difficult thing to learn.

General Opinions of the Internet

Usefulness

The objective of the third part of the questionnaire was to identify the specific opinions, attitudes and behaviours of senior respondents towards the internet. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was applied in order to compare the opinions of senior users and non-users of the internet, and to illustrate their significant differences.

The majority of elderly users and non-users reported that they find a lot of useful information through the internet (mean 3.49). The researcher applied the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test in order to distinguish the exact differences between the two groups towards their position regarding the usefulness of the internet. The test found that for users it is easier to find what they search for on the internet than for non-users (U=495.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). According to the test, users find much more useful information on the internet than non-users (U=540.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The users believe that the internet facilitates their daily life more that the non-users (U=515.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). After completing the analysis of the results, hypothesis H4 was confirmed which states that those elderly users

Ease of Use The majority of elderly users and non-users find free internet seminars to be very important. The Mann-Whitney U test found that users of the internet find it more easy to use the internet than non-users (U=365.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Furthermore, the test found that users find it easier to browse on web sites than non-users (U=466.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00).

146

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

with disabilities believe that the internet facilitates their daily life. The test found that senior users of the internet found it easier to compare prices on the internet for various products or services than the non-users (U=772.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). As mentioned before, the TAM suggests that the behavioural intention to use a technology is developed from the perceived usefulness and the perceived ease of use (Davis, 1993; Gerrard et al., 2006). Therefore, it is obvious that senior users’ perceived usefulness is high in comparison with the low perceived usefulness of non-users.

Web-Ads The majority of elderly users and non-users were against the web-ad, and the Mann-Whitney U test identified that non-users believe that web-ads help them more with searching for products or services than the users (U=940.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The test found that, for non-users, web-ads are more useful than for the users (U=893.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). The test identified that users believe that the internet informs them about the characteristics of products or services more that the non-users (U=842.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). Moreover, according to the test more users were against the web-ads that non-users (U=756.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). However, regarding the statement that web-ads push them to buy new products or services, both senior users and non-users of the internet had the same negative opinion, that the web-ads do not push them to make any purchase. Therefore, after the above result, the hypothesis H5 is not valid and could not be confirmed as both elderly users and non-users reported that web-ads do not push them to use the internet. The most unexpected result of this research was that users not only did not find the web-ads particularly useful but also that they were against

them. This is a statement that marketers should consider.

Trust The internet users trust more the information that they find through the internet than non-users (U=701.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). This part of the analysis shows that senior users may trust the information that they find on the internet, but that they do not trust Greek sites and do not trust making purchases through the internet. According to the technology readiness index, insecurity can work as an obstacle against the technology (Gerrard et al., 2006, p. 161). Insecurity is the degree to which individuals distrust technology and are not certain of its capability to work correctly (Gerrard et al., 2006).

Social Relations Elderly users report that people today are forced to use the internet more than non-users (U=613.50, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). According to the test, the non-users report that the internet is for young people, in comparison with users who do not report this so much (U=511.00, N1=50, N2=50, (2-tailed) p=0.00). It is evident that a group of people can influence an individual’s attitude, values, beliefs, motivations and behaviour (Trocchia & Janda, 2000; Jobber, 2004). The majority of users believed that they were forced to use the internet as a result of their environment. Moreover, non-users believed that the internet is not for their age as they feel incapable of using it.

Correlation Analysis of all Variables The correlation analysis results showed that there was a significant positive correlation between the variables of the study. A positive correlation (where r varies from 0 to +1.00) describes two variables that change in the same direction.

147

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

As is shown in Table 5, there is a significant positive correlation between technology schema and usefulness (r = 0.70, p = 0.00). This means that senior individuals with positive technology schema also tend to find the internet more useful. There is a significant positive correlation between technology schema and ease of use (r = 0.70, p = 0.00). This means that senior individuals with positive technology schema also tend to find the internet easier to use. There is a significant positive correlation between reference group affiliation and usefulness (r = 0.70, p = 0.00). This means that senior individuals that are influenced by their environment to use the internet also tend to find the internet more useful. There is a significant positive correlation between usefulness and ease of use (r = 0.70, p = 0.00). This means that senior individuals that find the internet useful in their lives also tend to find it easier to use.

Finally, there is a significant positive correlation between usefulness and trust (r = 0.70, p = 0.00). This means that senior individuals that find the internet useful also tend to trust it more.

Factor Analysis to all Variables A factor analysis was used in order to decide whether there are factors that influence the use of the internet by senior individuals. According to the results of the factor analysis the value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling (KMO) is 0.876 (close to 1) (Table 6, 7). The results extracted from the above factor analysis (Table 6) are that there are five factors that influence senior individuals to use the internet. The five factors mentioned above explained 70.23% of the variance. More analytically, the first factor, “use of internet”, explained 38.89% of the variance; the second factor, “reference groups”, explained 12.94%; the third, “web-ads”, explained 7.02% of the variance; the fourth, “in-

Table 5. Correlation analysis Technology Schema

Correlations Technology schema

Correlation

Reference Group Affiliation

Usefulness

Resistance to change/ insecurity

Easy of use

Optism (trust)

Social Relations

1

Sig. (2-tailed) Reference group affiliation Usefulness Resistance to change/ insecurity

Correlation

0.51

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.00

Correlation

0.70

0.57

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.00

0.00

1

Correlation

0.44

0.26

0.34

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.00

0.01

0.00

Easy of use

Correlation

0.70

0.52

0.65

0.34

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Optism (trust)

Correlation

0.49

0.40

0.67

0.42

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Correlation

0.26

0.24

0.25

0.47

Sig. (2-tailed)

0.01

0.02

0.01

0.00

Social relations

148

1 1 1

1

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Table 6. KMO and Bartlett’s test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy

0.876

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square

1.582.528

df

0.276

Sig.

0.000

Table 7. Factor analysis Rotated Component Matrix Component Use of technology I feel familiar with the technology

0.76

I follow the development of technology

0.58

Reference groups

In my work it is obligatory to use the internet

0.71

I am afraid that I will be excluded from the goings-on if I do not use the internet

0.78

Knowledge of the use of internet functions is positive in my opinion

0.80

Webads

Innovation

I accept changes in my everyday life

0.85

I accept innovations that facilitate my life

0.77

If I was well informed about the benefits of using the internet I would use it

0.74

With the internet I feel greater autonomy and freedom compared to those who do not use it

0.65

With the use of the internet I feel less lonely

0.60

It is easy to use the internet

0.82

I easily find what I search for on the internet

0.82

The internet facilitates my daily life

0.69

It is easy to browse web sites

0.83

Web-ads help me on searching for products/services

0.82

Web-ads are particularly useful

0.86

Web-ads push me to buy new products/services

0.82

I find a lot of useful information on the internet

0.73

It is easier to compare prices in the internet for various products/services

0.63

I can find good offers via the internet

0.57

It is easy to learn how to use the internet

0.78

People are forced today to use the internet

0.47

It is safe to use the internet (e-banking, e-shopping) I find cheaper products through the Internet

Information insurance

0.65 0.58

149

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

novation”, explained 6.23% of the variance; and, finally, the fifth factor, “information insurance”, explained 5.15% of the variance.

CONCLUsION: MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONs The results of this research could provide valuable help to those scientists that would like to attract and address older individuals with disabilities through the internet. Over half of the respondents (62%) answered that they prefer to gather as much information as possible about products or services that might be useful in the future, could be worth consideration by the scientists that work with the internet, or those who are willing to promote their services through it. It is generally accepted that the internet can provide a wide source of information. Scientists should consider which part of this information is useful to elderly individuals and which ways would bring this target group closer to it. A remarkable fact was that 26% of the nonusers only knew what the internet was, 16% did not know what it was and 8% had never heard of it before, a result that is very important. Scientists should develop the necessary knowledge base in order for the majority of the non-users of the internet to be at least informed about what is it, as well to find out the benefits to be gained by using the internet. However, the fact that over half of non-users had a positive view towards the possibility of future usage of the internet was very encouraging. Furthermore, the majority of respondents answered that they would use the internet if they were well informed about the benefits of using it. This was also a very important statement that marketers should take into consideration. The results of this research showed that the majority of the elderly were open to innovation and were willing to learn about the internet. The only thing they needed was knowledge and help on how to use it, which explains why the answer to the ques-

150

tion regarding the need for free internet seminars was positive. Moreover, scientists should consider the fact that users not only did not find web-ads useful but were also against them. This statement suggests that marketers should strongly consider whether either to decide on a different method of communication through the internet, or to try to develop better and more efficient web-ads. Furthermore, elderly individuals could be informed about the internet through television and newspapers. Companies should promote the benefits that individuals gain by using the internet in highly popular television series. Greek users, because of their ignorance, reported that it is not so important to use the internet for health and medical information. Therefore, for those Greek marketers that deal with pharmaceutical issues, there is an opportunity to develop a relationship based on trust with senior individuals. In other words, they have to develop the necessary conditions in order for Greek senior individuals to be encouraged to visit suitable sites in order to find information about health issues. The results of this research were also supported by other studies such as Menchin (1989) and the most recent study of Vuori and HolmlundRytkonen (2005). In the current study, the majority of the elderly admitted that they would use the internet if they were well informed about the benefits they could gain by using it. There are also some differences between the findings of this study and those of some previous international studies such as Gervey and Lin (2000) and Szmigin and Carrigan (2000). The current study identified that older individuals prefer surfing online to buying online (e-shopping). The same result was found in the study of Vuori and Holmlund-Rytkonen (2005). However, the studies of Gervey and Lin (2000) and Szmigin and Carrigan (2000) reported that older individuals prefer to use the internet for purchasing rather than surfing online. Furthermore, the findings regarding the general opinions of Greek elder individuals were supported

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

by the research of Vuori and Holmlund-Rytkonen (2005). In the same way as Finnish elder individuals, those Greeks who did not make use of the internet did so because they felt that they did not need it, that there was nothing interesting on it, or just they had no access to it. Moreover, the result that almost 50% of non-users had a positive attitude towards the internet and thought that they might become users in future was also supported by the study of Vuori and Holmlund-Rytkonen (2005). This study also supported the current study regarding the fact that a high percentage of elder respondents declared that there is a need for free internet training seminars that would motivate them to make use of the internet. For the current research, one hundred interviews were made. It was very difficult for the researcher to find senior internet users due to the limited percentage of senior internet users.

REFERENCEs Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2000). Use of the internet by householders. Canberra: Australian Government. Baligh, H. H. (1994). Components of culture: Nature, interconnections, and relevance to the decisions on the organization structure. Management Science, 40(1), 14–27. doi:10.1287/mnsc.40.1.14 Bettman, J. (1979). An information processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Bonn, M. A., Furr, H. L., & Susskind, A. M. (1999). Predicting a behavioural profile for pleasure travellers on the basis of internet use segmentation. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 333–340. doi:10.1177/004728759903700403

Davis, F. D. (1993). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral Dissertation, Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(6), 982–1003. doi:10.1287/ mnsc.35.8.982 Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gerrard, P., Cunningham, J. B., & Devlin, J. F. (2006). Why consumers are not using internet banking: A qualitative study. Journal of Services Marketing, 20(3), 160–168. doi:10.1108/08876040610665616 Gervey, B., & Lin, J. (2000). The age factor: How internet use varies from teens to seniors. Advertising Age, 71(16). Gong, W., Li, Z. G., & Stump, R. L. (2007). Global internet use and access: Cultural considerations. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 19(1), 57–74. doi:10.1108/13555850710720902 Haisken-De New, J., Pischner, R., & Gert, G. (2001). Private internet use. Economic Bulletin, 38(12), 409–412. doi:10.1007/s10160-001-01203 Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. R. (1988). The Confucian connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 5–21. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(88)90009-5 Jobber, D. (2004). Principles and Practice of Marketing (4th ed.). London: McGraw-Hill International.

151

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Juznic, P., Blazic, M., Mercun, T., & Plestenjak, B. (2006). Who says that old dogs cannot learn new tricks? New Library World, 107(1226/1227), 332–345. doi:10.1108/03074800610677308 Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J., & Wong, V. (1999). Principles of marketing (2nd European Ed.). London: Prentice-Hall Europe. Lassar, W. M., Manolis, C., & Lassar, S. S. (2005). The relationship between consumer innovativeness, personal characteristics, and online banking adoption. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23(2), 176–199. doi:10.1108/02652320510584403

Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2003). Humancomputer interaction: Psychological aspects of the human use of computing. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 491–516. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.54.101601.145044 Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology readiness index (TRI), A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. doi:10.1177/109467050024001 Pickton, D., & Broderick, A. (2005). Integrated marketing communications (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2000). Marketing research: An applied approach (European Ed.). New York: Pearson Education Limited.

Robertson, T. S., & Kassarjian, H. H. (1991). Handbook of consumer behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Menchin, R. (1989). The mature market: A strategic marketing guide to America’s fastest growing population segment. Chicago, IL: Probus Publishing Company.

Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.

Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions and coping strategies. The Journal of Consumer Research, 123–143. doi:10.1086/209531 Moschis, G. P. (2003). Marketing to older adults: An updated overview of present knowledge and practice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(6), 516–525. doi:10.1108/07363760310499093 Namazi, K., & McClintic, M. (2003). Computer use among elderly persons in long-term care facilities. Educational Gerontology, 29, 535–550. doi:10.1080/713844391 O’Cass, A., & Fenech, T. (2003). Webretailing adoption: Exploring the nature of internet users’ webretailing behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10, 81–94. doi:10.1016/ S0969-6989(02)00004-8

152

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students (3rd ed.). Essex, UK: Prentice-Hall. Szmigin, I., & Carrigan, M. (2000). The older consumer as innovator: Does cognitive age hold the key? Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 505–527. doi:10.1362/026725700785046038 Thorne, D. T. (1996). Activities, events and services for and about seniors. Retrieved from http:// www.infi.net Trocchia, P. J., & Janda, S. (2000). A phenomenological investigation of internet usage among older individuals. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(7), 605–616. doi:10.1108/07363760010357804 Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. doi:10.1287/ mnsc.46.2.186.11926

Elderly People with Disabilities in the Internet Age

Vuori, S., & Holmlund-Rytkonen, M. (2005). 55+ people as internet users. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 23(1), 58–76. doi:10.1108/02634500510577474 Wu, S.-I. (2002). Internet marketing involvement and consumer behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 14(4), 36–53. doi:10.1108/13555850210764945

Zeithmaml, V. A., & Gilly, M. C. (1987). Characteristics affecting the acceptance of retailing technologies: A comparison of elderly and non-elderly consumers. Journal of Retailing, 63(Spring), 49–68.

153

154

Chapter 11

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools Susanne Croasdaile Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Sharon Jones Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Kelly Ligon Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Linda Oggel Virginia Commonwealth University, USA Mona Pruett Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

ABsTRACT This study examines practitioners’ perceptions of the factors impacting the implementation of assistive technology (AT) for students with disabilities in five public school divisions. Participants were five members of division-wide AT facilitation teams. Interview data indicated barriers including lack of stakeholder buy-in with a focus on administrative support. Important supports included the development and maintenance of relationships with instructional staff and technology coordinators. The ongoing need to build stakeholder awareness of and skill in implementing assistive technology was a common theme. Participants perceived that, if empowered to do so, an AT facilitation team can overcome existing barriers to implementation. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch011

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

INTRODUCTION The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (1997) defined assistive technology devices and services for students in K-12 public education settings and required that AT be considered for every student with a disability. That consideration is focused on AT service provision in an educational environment. The broad definition includes a wide variety of items that might be considered assistive technology devices and may be categorized into the following areas of need: writing, spelling, reading, math, study/organizational skills, listening/seeing, communication, computer access, electronic and other aids to daily living, recreation, leisure, positioning, seating and mobility. Given the wide variety of AT tools and services available for students with disabilities, a significant challenge facing school personnel is how to coordinate assessment, training, integration, and ongoing service provision related to AT. Currently, many school divisions have no coherent procedures for assessing the need for and implementing the use of AT. The range of personnel involved in the processes, from administration to related service providers, is so great that “on the fly” coordination is ineffective. Providing AT for one individual may in fact be done by one or two staff members, but for school divisions with dozens or hundreds of students requiring the types of services described above, clearly-defined systems are required.

PURPOsE OF THE sTUDY The purpose of this study is to determine the barriers to and supports for implementing AT in public schools. Knowledge of these will indicate the areas on which to focus when developing effective systems change related to AT. To determine what was already known on the subject, we searched the MetaLib online catalog including the InfoTrac One File, ERIC Index to Educational Materials,

Academic OneFile, PowerSearch, LexisNexis Academic, and Dissertation Abstracts electronic databases in April 2008. While searching the databases, we found no relevant matches for the subjects “assistive technology” and “systems” although there is a single study of “Using participatory action research to examine outcomes and effect systems change in assistive technology financing” (Hammel, Finlayson, & Lastowski, 2003). As financing is not our primary focus, but rather implementation, we determined that exploratory research is lacking and needs to be conducted. Results from this study can be used to inform the development of technical assistance supports for all schools working to adhere to the legal requirements related to AT assessment and service provision as well as to inform future research.

sAMPLE AND DATA COLLECTION In this grounded theory study, we collected interview data from five practitioners. The participants interviewed were theoretically sampled: each of five researchers contacted one public school employee with whom she is currently working on an initiative related to assistive technology. We selected only those persons who we have seen to be knowledgeable of assistive technology and its implementation in the public school environment. Although grounded theory research usually involves a greater number of interviews, we felt that we collected enough information on this subject from only five interviews to both saturate the categories we create and provide meaningful data to inform our work.

ANALYsIs We analyzed our interview data as we collected it, transcribing and analyzing each one as it was completed. We used the constant comparative

155

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

method of data analysis to take information from each interview and compare it to our emerging categories. Categories were created related to events, happenings, and instances; those categories were saturated with information from the interviews (Creswell, 1998). Through the use of open coding, we made preliminary categories related to barriers to and supports for the acquisition and implementation of assistive technology in schools. As categories emerged, we expanded or collapsed the category to best reflect the information collected. We examined each category to determine what, if any, subcategories should be identified and expanded upon with additional information. These categories are addressed in the remainder of the chapter.

FINDINGs AND DIsCUssION We share our findings as suggestions for improvement in the area of AT systems change in preK12 public schools. In this, we follow Hirsh and Killion’s (2009) principle that we obtain more from exploring principles or themes on which to base our systems change than we would from describing specific practices. Whereas practices are often not transferable, principles and themes can be considered and applied across situations. This increases our opportunity to make a meaningful and lasting impact. Five major themes emerged in our analysis. Participants felt that there was a need to address the following areas: getting the right stakeholders to the table, communicating the vision, developing relationships, building knowledge, and having a plan for spending money. Noticeable by their absence are the issues of money and time; although the identified areas did relate to the two popular themes, they did not emerge as matters of prime importance in AT systems change.

156

Involve the Appropriate stakeholders Have the right team membership. All of our participants are or have been involved in a team to plan and/or coordinate AT services for a school or division. The team model for AT coordination, assessment and planning has been identified as an efficient and effective way to ensure that students with disabilities receive AT services in schools (Copley & Ziviani, 2004). Participants described a variety of teams, but generally indicated that knowledge of AT and team stability are important components. I don’t think that it really matters the type of team; I think that as long as the team is knowledgeable about how to educate others about assistive technology and then making sure that it’s implemented. From experience, it’s important that you have stable committed members of an assistive technology team. A strong team. To have that follow-through. To continue that education; to continually guide [others] through the process. Team members encompassed a variety of players, including instructional, administrative and related services personnel. Several participants noted the benefit of involving instructional technology personnel—who are typically seen as a general education rather than a special education resources. I think it needs to be a diversity and I think that’s one of the barriers we that have struggled with. I think we’re beginning to make some headway with it. Typically it starts with it being somebody’s baby rather than it being the system’s; and then it gradually grows. I think that what I have found in this system is that clinicians, therapists…it takes diversity. It can’t be just a clinician. Of course special ed teachers – because they are mostly directly line on it – but I think all teachers in general. We teach students with all different needs. I think it’s important that we

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

all are educated about assistive technology, for ourselves and for our students. A regular educator. And that kind of needs to be a person that’s kind of a leader in the school – that’s important because no matter how much we deny it, we as adults look to other people, and we take their lead…so I think that person has to be in. And the special ed director, of course, needs to be there…policies and procedures. And an administrator …an administrator is your leader in your school and usually what they say is what everybody follows, so having them on board would be helpful. We…have an instructional technology specialist that in the past couple of years has learned a lot about assistive technology; she already has a great background in technology and is very knowledgeable with technology in general and I think she’s just going through the motions of figuring out how to adapt for our children with special needs-those technologies to make it, you know, an assistive technology. Our participants’ responses correspond to the limited recent literature on AT teams. To meet federal requirements related to AT, school personnel require support. Qualified AT specialists are in short supply (Lahm, 2003). In an ideal world, each school would have an AT team with membership as described in our interviews (Zascavage & Winterman, 2009). Such leadership teams have been proven to effective in determining what to do and how to do it as well as actually implementing a systems change plan (Hinckley, 2009). Define “stakeholders” for the implementation of AT. In addition to noting who should be on an assistive technology planning team, participants identified a number of stakeholders who should be involved in the acquisition and implementation of assistive technology and specified the reason for inclusion of each. The importance of administrative awareness and involvement was noted by all participants. Often overlooked when we talk about assistive technology, our participants felt that those in

leadership positions have a crucial role in whether AT efforts are successful. From top-down, I mean I think from superintendent to student. I think it’s making sure that everybody sees, has the same goal, I guess. And has the same information. And that levels the playing field, and everybody’s in the same page. I think that’s a big factor and I think everything else kind of stems off of that. If an administrator or a teacher doesn’t know what assistive technology is [and] they don’t have any training on it, then obviously you know they’re not going to be going out there trying to acquire it. The lack of leadership could be another [barrier], because if you don’t have somebody bringing it up or reminding you that this is an option or have you tried this, I think it is easy to get caught up in what’s not right instead of trying to figure out what can be right. Instructional technology and its close relationship to assistive technology was another area noted by participants. This is in part due to the parallel struggles faced by those attempting to infuse instructional and assistive technology into classroom instruction. Having some knowledge of what [technology] is, where it is, how to use it, how is it most going to benefit the student. I think making sure that all your stakeholders are educated about the purpose…Forming an AT team, you know, handing out brochures, and educating teachers, following through with them to make sure that they’re using it, going into the classroom, perhaps using it, with students. I think AT and IT go hand-in-hand. There’s not a big difference between the two. Paraprofessionals, often left out of training opportunities due to contract hours or other obligations, were noted as important stakeholders as well. We have a lot of students that use voice output devices and when we do inclusion, we’re split up, so I might not be with my students-there may be a paraprofessional with my preschool students in the regular education classroom with a regular education preschool teacher. And even though

157

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

everything is discussed and planned out for that paraprofessional to support that voice output device, and for that regular education teacher to know what it is, and kind of help to support-even though that’s put in place, it doesn’t a lot of times happen successfully. They might do a little bit, but not consistently-or successfully. I think they just need more time with it, more exposure; I think there needs to be some buy-in as well. Maybe they haven’t had an opportunity to see the assistive technology really truly work for a child. We really empower the teaching assistants in using the technology and that’s been really beneficial. But if they don’t have it around, and they don’t, these classrooms that need it don’t really have it available. Technology should be something that’s built into their classrooms that they can use. Participants also noted that parents and students were important stakeholders and that “everybody” needs to know something about AT for it to spread throughout a system. Maybe educating parents to know how to ask for assistive technology or to even know that it’s available. So I guess it’s an education of everybody - even the kids…I mean once you get to high school those kids are making their own decisions. It takes numerous individuals understanding AT, and the need for it, and then spreading that out to other folks. As noted earlier, participants indicated that it was critical for the school building and divisionlevel administration to understand the requirements for AT and its importance in supporting student success. With administrators…if they don’t understand the technology or how it is to be implemented, that’s a whole other issue right there…good modeling by administrators and school leaders is important. [There was] some hindrance on the part of administrators…Not necessarily their unwillingness, but I think, it’s just it’s that they just had no idea what it was or how it was going to help. Administrators are so focused on passing that test

158

that sometimes they get so caught up in that vision that they forget that we’re educating children…I know that was one of the real challenges that we had in acquiring as well as implementing [AT]. Probably more so in implementing it was the administration. It wasn’t that they were negative about it; it was I just don’t think that they knew what it was enough...It’s just like everyone else; they kind of chunked it as special ed and thought OK, that’s something special ed teachers take care of. It’s not necessarily something we all need to take care of. So I think they saw it as more of a special ed issue and brushed it [away]. I think administration….looks at it as another mandate and not as an educational tool. If those that were responsible for the gen ed curriculum at the administrative level…bought into it, I think we would be clicking right along at light speed. I think principals are the ones that are more prone to lack the experience or have the knowledge of what assistive technology is and what we need to support our students. I think it has something to do with the fact that principals are involved in so much as far as [standardized]testing and are [test]-driven and they obviously should be and there is so much on their plates but they don’t always know a lot about what’s going on in the special education classroom with those particular students. If the principals knew more about assistive technology and were able to support it a little bit better I think that would make a difference in implementing it, too. Because they could say, “I know such-and-such student, they’re supposed to be using this. Have you used it yet? Can I help you?” That type of thing-that extra support from administration as far as the principals in each school. The perceived need for administrators to increase their awareness and knowledge leads us to the next area that participants identified as crucial to successful AT implementation in schools: communication of a school vision that

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

includes the use of assistive technology to help students be successful.

Communicate the Right Vision Clearly communicate administrative support for AT acquisition and implementation. The importance of having a shared vision in public schools when attempting educational reform is clearly documented in recent literature (Easton, 2008; Lambert, 2003; Macneill, Cavanagh, & Silcox, 2003; Park & Ertmer, 2008; Rivero, 2005). Lack of a clear, shared vision for AT implementation in their school divisions was reported as a barrier by our participants. Our participants saw leaders as responsible for communicating the vision and ensuring that stakeholders have the necessary knowledge, skills, support, and opportunities to learn (Hirsh & Killion, 2009). I would think that we have good leadership with a good vision - I think that’s a start to make sure that all the things that are required are in place for assistive technology. Some of the main factors that we found that helped us acquire the assistive technologies were first of all administrative support—the acknowledgment that it was important and that they supported us and supported me in making sure that we could get more staff. As the lead for the OT/PT Department, we were doing a lot of adapting, accommodating, and using a lot of technology in what we did. When the buzz word became so important, the AT part of the law became so important, that actually [the Sped Director] came to me and said “I’d like for you to start our AT program.” It was kind of what we were doing, but it was untitled in a sense. Once he acknowledged that it was needed, it was at that point that we got the official go ahead to spend some money, allot some time to purchase materials, and allot some time officially for AT. To officially grow, it was harder to fight that battle unrecognized.

When that vision was not in place, or was not communicated to all staff, participants felt that AT fell by the wayside. They often indicated that training related to special education initiatives is of low priority, and since AT appears in this category, it does not receive the attention it needs to be successfully implemented. I think that the teachers are required to do so much other training that there is little or no time left for special education training or training on assistive technology. I think that’s why the assistive technology team is trying to incorporate it into the training that is already mandatory for all the teachers, because that just makes sense. It’s a small district and there’s not that many special education teachers, but still it would be nice to be able to pull them as well as some regular education teachers and have specific assistive technology training. Integrate AT acquisition and implementation into the overall vision for student success. Participants saw a need to stop considering AT as a stand-alone initiative, and instead integrate the concept of AT supports and access methods into the larger arena of teaching and learning. Technology is a huge part of assistive technology. I mean the hardware, the software, and seeing it’s kind of the same sell for that of instructional technology…you have to see it’s not an add-on, it’s just part of. And that’s one of the hindrances I think for teachers..they think it’s just something else to do something else to fill out...seeing that it’s part of the lesson and not an addition to the lesson. I think that’s both with assistive technology and instructional technology. And that’s not just with teachers, but with administrators too. The county now has a committee that is comprised of several administrators like the second in command to our superintendent as well as two administrators that are responsible for the gen ed curriculum. And then I know that there is a building administrator who is also on the AT committee and…someone from ITRT... My understanding is they are trying to come up with some way that

159

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

this county can have a plan of where technology is going to go that will encompass gen ed and special ed and direct and guide us. Which will be nice because I think that we are very splintered right now. This related to their desire for a vision that included AT, but continued more deeply into the issue of technology integration and the end of “sending students away for magic solutions.” We really do have a lot of situations when people want to refer a student for an AT evaluation or send that student for a consult or to “God or whomever” to provide an answer just to take the issue off their plate. They indicated that teachers needed to work together to determine how best to integrate AT into teaching and learning. Participants were concerned that supports need to be in place for this integration to occur. [Teachers] may not know, “How do I incorporate this into my teaching, how do I incorporate this into a student’s learning process.” Another piece we need to get to is the networking. So that each 9th grade special ed teacher isn’t inventing a tool specific to the group of kids they are teaching. But if it’s science and it has to do with cell division it’s more networked and shared. Even to use some of the programs that already exist… Hold staff accountable for implementing AT. Participants felt that this demand for accountability should come from administrators rather than an AT team or AT coordinator. This call for “pedagogic leadership” also occurs in the literature on systems change and education reform (Macneill, Cavanagh, &Silcox, 2003). The holding them accountable part of it really is going to ultimately come from administration; I don’t think it’s going to happen today, but it needs to be part of their review. Using technology to teach, even the universal design part of it, not just assistive technology, but technology to teach. If the technology took off the AT would lend right to that.

160

The lack of leadership…because if you don’t have somebody bringing it up or reminding you that this is an option or have you tried this, I think it is easy to get caught up in what’s not right instead of trying to figure out what can be right. Policies and procedures addressing the delivery of AT services; staff development and technical assistance; and purchasing, using, and managing equipment have been recognized as important in developing a sustainable system of AT implementation (Kroth & Edge, 2007). Research has demonstrated that few schools have these policies and procedures in place (Bausch & Hasselbring, 2004). Our participants considered these policies and procedures necessary, and again felt that they should be espoused by administration. It should come from administration because when I do it as the AT coordinator then I feel like I’m over stepping my level of authority. So I really do think it needs to come from administration. I mean it’s a piece of policy in that you must follow the IEP and it is a component of the IEP that has to get done; but the step-by-step how-to sorts of stuff, the procedural sorts of thing, not just the policy of it needs to come from an administrator, from some who will hold you accountable for it. I don’t know where or how changes in legislation are communicated to all teachers. I know that there times that there are quote “procedures” and not so much as with IDEA but within our system that I don’t know about until, well months later. There was no formal, “This is a new procedure a change in the system, the way we do it.”

Develop and Maintain the Right Relationships Build and maintain relationships. With the insufficient number of AT leadership personnel an acknowledged fact (Edyburn, 2004; Lahm, 2003), members of AT facilitation teams must rely on building their skills as well as those of the school staff around them. Our participants noted the need to build relationships that serve

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

to share tasks, to complete tasks, and to convince others to engage in the implementation of AT. Some termed the development of relationships as “public relations” or PR: We’ve continually talked about the benefits of AT in department meetings, principals’ meetings and other special ed. meetings. Sometimes it was me or someone from OT being in places when it didn’t always feel like it was the best use of our time, but because we were there when topics were brought up we could introduce people to AT. When we could introduce people to AT, those situations did turn out to be more worth our while than we thought it was at the moment. So it was beneficial just to have time for PR. It’s been a long time to get to this. Probably I guess 4 years and there are still some schools who don’t acknowledge that they even know what AT is. It’s so exciting to have some people coming to us to say we want to know what you have, instead of us always going to them asking them to find some time to fit us in because we’d really like to tell you about this. Developing those relationships were big. [A project such as using handheld technology in the classroom is] more efficient and one of the reasons it’s more efficient [is] because you’re in a classroom working with 12 students even if you’re individualizing things for those 12 students, you’re not in 12 different classrooms and then while you’re there the teacher might say if you’re working on a particular project- the teacher might also say, “You know what? Such and such also isn’t working.” It has nothing to do with the project you’re working on, but you’re already in the classroom, you’ve already established a rapport, and “oh!” now I have an in to talk about such and such and then they’re up on whatever tool it is and then hopefully they can share the wealth with another teacher…the projects are certainly fun and can be a good PR opportunity. We have just recently had some schools, the administrators themselves, asking [us] to come and “teach my team this and provide some training on this specific item because I’m am going to give

them $3000 to buy things for this classroom.” So that’s been a huge help in actually implementing AT in those classrooms. All of the participants noted at least one case in which persistence led to the development of a relationship that paid off. This particular case manager, it’s her second year I have worked her and with a NEO with two different students, so that may have been part of it. The longevity of the relationship may have had an impact. We do have some teachers who we’ve persevered and worked with and really hand-held. Over and over we’ve created things for them, trying to facilitate them being the creator of the activities or the tools that they were using and we’ve finally now succeeded. We have one teacher that after three years is someone we never thought would really find AT valuable. Now he is excited and wanted to show us some of the things he had made over the summer to use with his class. Relationships between instructional and assistive technology also were mentioned as important. Installation of software for use in classrooms, in particular, was noted to be an issue. This is consistent with literature on barriers to AT use by students (Edyburn, 2004). Relative to implementation a big part was our relationships--all of our relationships within the schools. In my school division, the OTs and PTs take a very active part in assistive technology implementation. We found when the therapists have good relationships with staff, it was much easier for them to go in and show how to implement the AT in the classroom and get them to follow through. The other thing that helps us in implementing the AT is having good relationships within the IT department. Because of issues with installation of the programs, sometimes they’re blocked, so we need to have good relationships within the IT department. That’s been a little bit of a struggle off and on. Then the other thing in implementing the technology was being able to spread the word and educate the teachers and show

161

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

them what AT is out there, share success stories, and get them to buy into it. The big one that comes first to mind is IT—installation of the software for the devices. Because a lot of times we’ve had some things installed and there are some kind of security measures that have been put into place where all of a sudden overnight something gets updated and the ports are blocked and then we can’t plug in a device. That’s been a big thing, so we just have to continue to work on that relationship with IT to make it stronger. That again has been a really long, hard road but we are getting to a point where it feels like it’s more workable. Find creative ways to overcome staff resistance. Peter Senge (1990) posited that resistance to change is due to balancing (or stabilizing) feedback. He indicated that the resistance reflects a (possibly hidden) system goal. and all efforts to change matters will be thwarted until the goal is changed or its influence is weakened. This connection to the true vision and shared goals appeared in our participants’ responses as well as in recent literature on using AT with children (Copley & Ziviani, 2004). Overcoming resistance to change requires systematic communication and collaboration between those charged with professional development and those who supervise (Hinckley, 2009; Noell & Gansle, 2005). I don’t know where this resistance comes from…I think maybe some of these people who’ve not had access to technology and don’t have access to as much technology in their home, so when they come to work it’s a little frightening to them. One of the things we’ve tried hard to do is to offer people the opportunity to work with us. We’ve offered basic information….training with computers to show how to type a document and where to save it. And to some people that seems like something you don’t need to take the time to show, but it really is. It’s something a lot of people are afraid to do so taking some of those basic steps to help people get over this. I think the motivation has to do with a fear sometimes. You

162

see people who, not to age people, but who are older and they just want to do it the way they’ve done all along. You know we sometimes hear comments that “I’m retiring in two years and I’m not making pictures symbols for everything in my classroom.” So we definitely do hear things like that and sometimes you just wait for those people to retire in two years. It goes back to you know that willingness to change and sometimes teachers think, “it’s these kids, these kids, these kids...” but sometimes it’s us as teachers that need to change, not the kids. I think especially the older teachers, they are the harder ones. Newer teachers are usually easier to convince. Because most of them are digital natives, and they understand. The very independence that we are trying to encourage through the use of assistive technology may be a factor contributing to teacher resistance. I think in a way…teachers want control. I mean, you go in-that’s your classroom. Those four walls are yours. I think some of it is going from teacherdirected instruction to student-directed instruction and I think that’s hard; especially for those folks who’ve been in education for a while-it’s very difficult to make that change and to give up that power as an adult to a child. I think it’s more so that than it is anything else. A common thread across participants was the feeling that teachers had to be “convinced” to implement AT. Research supports the idea that professionals must determine for themselves that something is important or worthwhile before they will be willing to attempt or engage in it (Easton, 2008; Lambert, 2003; Parsons, Daniels, Porter, & Robertson, 2008). Exciting them about it. Because I think that once people realize it works, they are going to use it. It’s just getting them to try it and to implement it to begin with. Teacher buy-in from other teachers-that’s another factor-is having another teacher be successful with a particular piece of technology and then sharing that knowledge with someone else

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

because I think that goes further than someone from central office making that same statement because it’s all based on time and the perception of, “Oh, I don’t have enough time to do that” but this teacher who is in the classroom next to me is also a teacher and she made the time to do it, so I can too…

Find a Way to Build and Maintain the Right Knowledge Have a structure in place to build awareness and capacity in others. Most school personnel have had little or no training in assistive technology. They may have a single three-credit course in educational technology, but there is no assurance that AT is addressed in that course. Special education programs often offer classes in assistive technology as an elective (Bausch & Hasselbring, 2004; Edyburn, 2004). Teachers often lack the knowledge and skills to integrate even assistive or even instructional technology into the classroom and other environments (Judge, 2000; Park & Ertmer, 2008). Assistive technology abandonment has been ascribed in part to lack of meaningful training on how to use AT devices and provide ongoing support (Judge, 2000). We know that “when people engaged in reform efforts have the necessary knowledge, skills, and practices associated with the reform, the reform has greater potential for success” (Hirsh & Killion, 2009). The lack of knowledge related to AT, therefore, is a significant hurdle for AT systems change. Our participants recognized this and indicated that it was of great importance. I think the answer…is education. Having some knowledge of what it is, where it is, how to use it, how is it most going to benefit the student. I think making sure that all your stakeholders are educated about the purpose…One small step at a time! Forming an AT team, you know, handing out brochures, and educating teachers, following through with them to make sure that they’re using it, going into the classroom, perhaps using it, with

students…even being educated about where to go to get the information. It’s just a small painstaking process at times, especially when you don’t have everybody on board. You’ve got to have the training, but then you also have to have the manpower available to support what you have trained and the people that you have trained. I think that it is real crucial if you hand someone a tool, or a device or a program. You know the educators don’t have time to sit around and play with it by themselves and figure it out, how it will work and how it will benefit them; they almost need someone to help take them through it, figure it out. Obviously knowledge and training are going to be an issue. Because if a teacher has a device and they don’t know how to use it, they’re not going to use it. Even if support is in place-yes that makes it better-but unless there’s someone right there saying, “Come on! Let’s try this!” then, you know, it’s a little less likely to happen. Participants clearly saw themselves as members of a leadership team. The research on effective leadership teams indicates that by broadening the school leadership base, empowering those teacher leaders, and focusing on the development of a professional learning community centered on student learning a school can obtain positive outcomes (Hirsh & Killion, 2009, Lambert, 2003). Know where to go to obtain knowledge. Participants regarded themselves as knowledge-seekers, showing the way to others. This included locating knowledge that they did not currently possess. You know, there’s a lot of free stuff out there now. So I guess having a team and having that team knowledgeable about where to find other resources is a key part. Bless [our school-university partnership]!… Knowing that that’s where I can come, I’ve learned that I can come when I need to know-okay, I’ve got this kid who has this issue, where do we go? Or there’s this certain factor going on in our school, what we do about it or what are our options...being educated about where to go to get the information.

163

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

Another thing that was really helpful to us in getting AT was utilizing our resources. Knowing what our resources were and being able to utilize those whether it was through [our schooluniversity partnership], teachers or therapists who already had a good base of knowledge in AT, vendors who could loan items to us so we could try some items out before we purchased things, and the other local AT teams were a huge resource to us…knowing things that they had tried before that worked and didn’t work. Then once we decided to order some AT, it was a better argument for which things were more tried and true. Working with a partnership or having a kind of resource to always bounce things off of and to help guide you.

Have the Right Funding Plan Have money to purchase materials. We expected a significant focus on money when we planned these interviews, and were surprised at the direction in which the interviews progressed. Money did in fact arise in conversation, however when we asked participants to explain what they meant by money, responses often veered off into issues related to vision and knowledge. Money certainly is a factor- but I would say that is secondary… I guess it’s just acquiring those resources; it’s not really the implementation, I guess. But, it does help. Making sure you have what you need. The word “acquire” …requires funds and those are limited. And then I think another piece, from our experience here, has been it takes numerous individuals understanding AT, and the need for it, and then spreading that out to other folks. There are computers in the school but not in the classroom and I think teachers sometime run into barriers…The next problem is going to be is where is the hardware that supports [free text-to-speech software] and then that goes back to the money. Have spending policies that make certain funds are appropriately spent. Participants identified the

164

need for additional policies and procedures that focus on how money is allocated for purchasing, maintaining, and supporting AT in the school division. Making sure that those resources that are available are appropriately spent – and that goes back to leadership. …There has been a lot of money spent. We’ve held off conservatively purchasing a lot of additional AT until we could figure out what we had, what still works, and then where do we want to go so it’s not just money being spent. It’s the money. The other part that is so frustrating about technology is there is so much available so how do you as a system figure out are we better off purchasing a bulk amount of laptops and putting the software on them or do we purchase a bulk, NEO mobile lab, and then what do we do for read out loud, what do we get…the separate little reader. And so because there is so much available, it is challenging to figure out where you want to put your money. Then the other thing is, because technology changes so quickly, that when you finally get the funds and you finally figure out what you want to purchase and by the time it hits the loading dock it’s out dated and so that’s challenging. The biggest factor I have to say has to be money. That is, we’ve never really been denied when we needed to purchase something for a student, but being able to just go out and buy AT items for ourselves to have to try has always been more painful. We couldn’t just go out and buy different things to try. It’s kind of been on an as-needed basis. That’s how we’ve been adding things to our inventory. I would say money is the main thing.

DIsCUssION Our participants’ responses for the most part match Johnson’s (2005) list of skills that promote connected learning communities. Three of his identified skill areas are “setting up for success

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

(planning)” “working together,” and “moving to action.” In terms of planning, our participants identified their struggles and successes with identifying and convening stakeholders, designing and managing a process for acquiring and implementing AT, and locating resources. They work collaboratively to build the initiative and increase the knowledge and skills of school personnel. Each of our participants independently identified relationships necessary to make AT implementation successful in their school division. Participants described how they act by reaching out to engage those who are resistant and make connections between the more skilled and those who are less skilled to keep staff members in a learning mode. We feel that it is accurate to characterize our participants as members of connected learning communities who perceive that, if empowered to do so, their AT facilitation team can overcome existing barriers to implementation. As for the barriers, leadership concerns in the area of school vision stand out prominently, as do awareness and accountability on the part of other staff members. To appropriately provide AT to dozens or hundreds of students, clearly-defined systems that address these issues will be required.

REFERENCEs Bausch, M., & Hasselbring, T. (2004). Assistive technology: Are the necessary skills and knowledge being developed at the preservice and inservice levels? Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(2), 97–104. doi:10.1177/088840640402700202 Copley, J., & Ziviani, J. (2004). Barriers to the use of assistive technology for children with multiple disabilities. Occupational Therapy International, 11(4), 229–243. doi:10.1002/oti.213

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Easton, L. (2008). From professional development to professional learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(10), 755–761. Edyburn, D. L. (2004). Rethinking assistive technology. Special Education Technology Practice, 5(4), 16–23. Hammel, J., Finlayson, M., & Lastowski, S. (2003). Using participatory action research to examine outcomes and effect systems change in assistive technology financing. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 14, 98–109. doi:10.1177/ 10442073030140020801 Hinckley, P. (2009). Making change work. The American School Board Journal, 196(3), 27–28. Hirsh, S., & Killion, J. (2009). When educators learn, students learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 464–469. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. (2004). 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. Johnson, D. (2005). Sustaining change in schools: How to overcome differences and focus on quality. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. Judge, S. (2000). Accessing and funding assistive technology for young children with disabilities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(2), 125–131. doi:10.1023/A:1009507722653 Kroth, R., & Edge, D. (2007). Assistive technology and devices. Counseling and Human Development, 39(9), 1–8. Lahm, E. (2003). Assistive technology specialists: Bringing knowledge of assistive technology to school districts. Remedial and Special Education, 24(3), 141–152. doi:10.1177/0741932503 0240030301

165

Supports for and Barriers to Implementing Assistive Technology in Schools

Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. Macneill, N., Cavanagh, R., & Silcox, S. (2003). Pedagogic principal leadership. Management in Education, 17(14), 14–17. doi:10.1177/0892020 6030170040401 Noell, G., & Gansle, K. (2009). Moving from good ideas in educational systems change to sustainable program implementation: Coming to terms with some of the realities. Psychology in the Schools, 46(1), 79–89. doi:10.1002/pits.20355 Park, S., & Ertmer, P. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problem-based learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 631–643. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00858.x

166

Parsons, S., Daniels, H., Porter, J., & Robertson, C. (2008). Resources, staff beliefs and organizational culture: Factors in the use of information and communication technology for adults with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 21(1), 19–33. Rivero, V. (2005). Moving it forward. The American School Board Journal, 192(9), 32–34. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: Mastering the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Zascavage, V., & Winterman, K. (2009). Middle school educators should know about assistive technology and universal design for learning. Middle School Journal, 40(4), 46–52.

167

Chapter 12

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children:

Multimedia Based Support Tariq M. Khan Brunel University West London, UK

ABsTRACT The authors discuss how multimedia learning systems and analogical reasoning could be used to help autistic children cope with the demands of reasoning abstractly and to develop their Theory of Mind. Learners with autism have problems reasoning about other’s mental states and beliefs, which has been coined Theory of Mind. The specially developed systems proved beneficial for the autistic children, which highlights the potential benefits that a multimedia system can have as a learning tool for Theory of Mind. However, there is some doubt over the usefulness of interactivity for learning beyond its enhancement of enjoyment and sense of participation. It is intended that the results will stimulate a reassessment of current multimedia theories as they relate to non-typically developing learners, and provide new directions for research in the area of support for children with ASD.

INTRODUCTION Theory of mind refers to the ability to appreciate another’s perspective on a situation. Of particular interest in this chapter will be the issue of whether or not children with Autism (ASD) can develop a Theory of Mind through the use of multimedia learning tools. Typically developing learners have a wide range of software to assist with their education. In contrast children with learning difficulties DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch012

or special education needs have not benefited from software focusing on their learning needs. As a result children with special needs tend to be taught without specialist software tools. In the interest of inclusiveness it is desirable that all children, including those with special needs, have the opportunity to benefit from the latest technological advances. There has been insufficient investigation into the efficacy of multimedia learning tools for supporting learners with ASD, and particularly, there is scarcely any attention given to the issue of Theory of Mind. The work of Baron-Cohen

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

is one important exception, which has laid the ground for recognizing the difficulties that learners with ASD experience when trying to understand the thoughts of others. It is the objective of our research to examine a basic question: “Could children with ASD successfully develop a Theory of Mind from using multimedia learning tools?” Our approach to studying this question was to build two multimedia learning systems aimed specifically at learners with autism, and to test whether there was evidence of significant learning from each group of learners. The systems were designed from educational technology principles, best practice and observations of actual teaching scenarios, so that it would be transparent how it sought to support particular learning needs. The chapter will begin with a review of current understanding of autism (ASD) and how it impairs learning in children. The prominent work of BaronCohen on Theory of Mind will be reviewed and used as the defining theory, and the target subject of learning. Alternative interventions previously developed to help ASD sufferers overcome their difficulties and actually develop a theory of mind will be described, particularly Gray’s work on Social Stories. The chapter will then proceed to discuss theories of how technology enhanced learning systems should/could be developed with special consideration given to Mayer’s work on multimedia learning. The discussion will consider the suitability of Mayer’s theories to special needs learners. Supporting theories, such as Sweller and Chandler’s Cognitive Load Theory will be covered also since cognitive loading is central to the difficulties that children with ASD experience. The theme here is that interventions to ameliorate an ASD learner’s difficulties in learning should focus on managing cognitive load primarily. Best practice derived from literature and from observations will be discussed, and lessons learned from the reported experiment will be presented. Future directions that stem from the research conclusions will be discussed.

168

AUTIsM Autism is a biological and neurological disorder that affects many children and adults worldwide. It affects people to different degrees, so it is often referred to as Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Sufferers will be affected in many ways, for instance, children like routine and may become distressed when routines are interrupted. Another significant impairment is the inability to communicate fluently. Some children will learn to communicate slowly throughout their lives, while on the other extreme of the spectrum sufferers may never be able to talk. A further characteristic of Autism is the lack of emotionally based contact with others (Rieffe et al, 2000). It has also been proposed that autistic children are socially impaired because they lack a theory of mind (Muris et al, 1999). Difficulty in understanding other minds is a core cognitive feature of autism (Baron-Cohen & Howlin, 1998). The cognitive and social impairments of autistic children include difficulties in the expression and understanding of emotion, as well as problems in discerning facial affect (Dennis et al, 2000). It has been found that autistic children find immediate social environments to be un-predictable, so they often treat people and objects alike (Baron-Cohen et al, 1985). By not understanding that other people think differently from one another and from themselves, many autistic individuals have problems relating socially and communicating with other people. The characteristics of an Autistic child are typically represented in the form of a triangle known as the triad of impairment (Figure 1).

Theory of Mind Theory of mind is the ability to represent one’s own or other’s mental states such as beliefs, intentions, desires and knowledge (Baron-Cohen et al, 1985). First order belief describes what people think about real events, whereas second order beliefs relate to what children think about other people’s thoughts

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

(Baron-Cohen & Howlin, 1998). The ability to infer what other people are thinking and feeling is one of the most fundamental aspects of human social interaction. In well-abled children this ability is acquired around the age of 4 and develops into the age of 16. The thought process is mainly used to socialise with others. Social intelligence such as the ability to detect another person’s goal and/or course of action is formed as part of the Theory of Mind knowledge. Within well-abled individuals specific cognitive mechanisms have evolved that allow them to mind read, that is, to make sense of actions and to interpret views thoughts and intentions as meaningful. This is unfortunately not true of autistic children and thus requires conscious effort by these children to grasp other’s beliefs and thoughts. Theory of Mind has been extensively studied in both normal and abnormal development. An early study (Baron-Cohen et al. 1985) tested theory of mind on 61 autistic and typically developing preschool children. Results strongly supported the hypothesis that autistic children fail to employ a theory of mind. The study found evidence that autistic children lack the ability to appreciate that other people’s beliefs might differ from their own. It was further argued that a theory of mind deficit might be at the core of autism. This lack of theory of mind makes it likely that an inability to attribute mental states would lead to limited social relationships. Autistic children lack not only social insight; they

also lack normal communication skills, and have problems with playful imagination (Frith, 2000). Promisingly, though, a study conducted by Rieffe (Rieffe et al., 2000) assessed understanding of atypical emotions in autistic children and found that children from the autistic spectrum do have the capacity to mind read, with respect to both desires and beliefs. Behavioural intervention has proven to be highly beneficial for autistic children. The earlier this occurs the better the chance of the child understanding that others have separate beliefs, desires and thoughts. Teaching proper reasoning about mental states is one of the essential components of behavioural intervention in accordance to theory of mind. In conclusion, learners with autism have an impaired ability to develop a Theory of Mind, but with carefully managed development such an ability can emerge.

Education Programs and Theories A considerable amount of research has been conducted in ASD to offer suitable interventions, such as education, to help people lead normal lives. The Delaware Autistic Program in the USA first used an approach called Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) to help children and adults initiate communication skills by using objects and picture symbols. Another program that was introduced in the USA in the 1960s is the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Re-

Figure 1. The triad of impairment

169

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

lated communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH), which is a structured teaching program that can help arrange the child’s environment, by providing clear, concrete and meaningful visual information. The aim of this program is to prepare people with ASD to function independently in their home, at schools and in the community. Both programs are based on the fact that most Autistic people are visual learners. For example rather than asking the child directly what s/he wants for breakfast, pictures of the different kinds of things they could have can be shown. The child can point to the picture rather than have to say what they would like for breakfast. The vital question within Theory of Mind lies in finding a method to teach individuals with ASD to understand and acknowledge the thoughts and feelings of others. One of the methods used to teach this concept is an intervention developed by Gray (1994, 2005) called social stories. These short stories describe different scenarios that allow autistic individuals to understand themselves and others better. Social stories are unique in that they can identify a concern and develop a story that supports a desired outcome, also allowing differing perspectives to be addressed. The flexibility of the story allows the child to either learn directions for appropriate behaviour or make his/ her own choices. These stories may motivate them to start asking questions about other people and at least recognize that different individuals think in unique ways. Social Stories attempt to address the Theory of Mind impairment by giving individuals some perspective on the thoughts, emotions, and behaviours of others. Furthermore, these stories give individuals direct contact with social information through pictures and text as opposed to speech or observation, which are notable areas of weakness for autistic children. Finally, Social Stories allow the child a chance to practice the skills often and on their own terms. Many teaching strategies have been used to teach children how to mind read (Baron-Cohen & Howlin, 1998). These strategies may be applied

170

during play, with pictures, computers, and games. Corcoran (2001) has suggested that theory of mind judgments can be arrived at using analogical reasoning skills and has proposed that this is the route that people with conditions such as autism and schizophrenia take when they make inferences about other’s mental states. Autistic children find it difficult to reason abstractly, which prevents them from reasoning analogically. However, autistic children are able to develop the concept of patterns within learning using teaching methods such as repetition, which could allow them to reason analogically. Recent work has demonstrated a strong relationship between mental state inference and autobiographical memory. It has been theorised (Breuning, 2003) that autistic individuals have a specific cognitive deficit related to learning and memory. Although these ideas are still at early stages and need significant testing, they do offer interesting new directions for researching into supporting autistic learners.

Multimedia Learning Computers can be useful environments for promoting communication, creativity, and playfulness for learners even at the extreme of the autistic spectrum to address the triad of impairments. Murray (2005) has noted that many people with autism seem to have “monotropic interest systems” where their attention tends to be fixed on isolated objects. Computers are an ideal resource to break this pattern of fixation because they allow for “cotropical interaction”, by allowing others to join the individual’s attention tunnel. External events can be more easily ignored when focusing on a computer screen as the area of concentration is limited to the bounds of the screen. Richard Mayer defines multimedia learning as learning from words and pictures (Mayer, 2001). He stated that “multimedia messages that are designed in light of how the human mind works are more likely to lead to meaningful learning than those that are not” (p.41). Dual-channel, Limited

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

capacity and Active processing are Mayer’s assumptions of a cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Our research project is mainly concerned with the dual-channel assumption, which is based on people having two separate information processing channels: one for visual represented materials and the other for auditory represented materials. The Dual-channel assumption provides for two separate information processing channels: auditory/verbal channel and the visual/pictorial channel. When presenting instructional materials to the learner it is better to take advantage of both channels, auditory and visual as opposed to a single channel. This principle is particularly important for learners with auditory impairment and a greater reliance on their visual processing channel. It is worth noting that Mayer’s model was developed for typically developing children and does not try to account for children with special needs. As such, these ideas need to be tested for their suitability to children with special education needs such as autism where there is a greater need to reduce processing in the auditory channel. The triad of impairments can be aided through use of multimedia applications. One of the main problems autistic people face is the inability to acquire social skills naturally. Simulation is one of the main features that multimedia can assist in improving their social skills and to teach them different social rules (Hetzroni & Tannous, 2004). The second aspect of the triad of impairments relates to impoverished communication skills. It is shown that multimedia enhanced the acquirement of communication skills by students with autism, and it led to a decrease in the use of echolalia. The last impairment that constructs the triad is rigidity of thought. Several key elements of using multimedia in relation to this issue are “simulations, interactivity, and animation of multimedia”. Multimedia can enhance the comprehension of a series of events taking place one after the other by presenting several pictures organized in a simple sequence (Tréhin, 2004), such as a storyboard.

Cognitive Load Theory Cognitive load is the total amount of mental activity imposed on working our memory at an instance in time (Sweller & Chandler, 1991). Sweller and Chandler’s theory of cognitive load suggests that effective instructional material facilitates learning by directing cognitive resources toward activities that are relevant to learning rather than toward preliminaries to learning (Paas et al, 2003). Therefore, when ineffective designs of instructional materials are presented to the learner this can cause unnecessary cognitive load on their working memory that can prevent learning. Controlling cognitive load is highly significant when dealing with children with autism since they tend to have different visual and auditory balance compared to typically developing children. When designing multimedia messages for special needs children, complicated or irrelevant information has to be reduced even further and more so than for typically developing learners.

THE MULTIMEDIA sYsTEMs Our investigation into the Theory of Mind development centred on using two specially developed multimedia learning systems. These were used to test the possibility that children with ASD could improve their appreciation of other people’s viewpoints. The two systems differed in the amount of opportunity afforded for children to interact, e.g. to control progress, or to repeat pages. Interaction, therefore, was a control variable because it is seen to be a particularly beneficial component of technology enhanced learning tools aimed at typically developing learners, so it would be interesting to test its effectiveness for children with ASD. It was important that we understood how these children were taught in a normal classroom environment in order to take the best methods and adapt them to a computer environment. We

171

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

identified from the observation and interviews that the children require visual methods to support their learning. There are mainly two teaching strategies that the children are most familiar with and which were used in the systems: pictures with words, and Makaton symbols, which is a sign language developed originally from British Sign Language. Another important method is Social stories, which specifically addresses the problems of Theory of Mind in autistic people. Developed by Gray (1994, 2005), this has proven to be a successful strategy in allowing learners to “read” and understand social situations. Therefore the strategy was incorporated in the systems by using fables (fictional stories based on animals or fantasy creatures as main characters with human characteristics) alongside problem scenarios which bring the social story element to the system. Note that the individual frames of the storyboard (each separate picture and caption) are displayed with a time lag so that one frame follows another after eight seconds to allow time for learners to focus on one frame. Mayer’s assumptions on dual channels were that people use two processing channels, visual and auditory. Therefore, representing information through both of these channels would enhance learning by avoiding overloading a single sensory channel. Thus, materials were presented visually and verbally to the children. Interactivity was used in one of the systems to enable the child to

engage with the system. Interactive features such as selecting images to bring up information and rolling over images to bring up text were incorporated into the design. See Figure 2 for an example of the use of interactivity in which animation and user initiated system responses are used together.

Learning Content The content is in the form of two Fables: (1) Ant and the Grasshopper and (2) The North Wind and the Sun. These fables are illustrated in a storyboard format relying on visuals and limited written narration (see Figure 1). Each fable represents a fantasy situation that is coupled to an analogous real life scenario that the child may encounter. The objective of the session is to have the child understand that the real life scenario could have many alternative perspectives, and not just the one that they themselves arrive at. The child’s own belief is represented through the selection from among alternative perspectives s/he makes and the alternative belief is given by a fictional character who selects a different view. There is a help feature associated with the story that prompts the child into considering why the character had the alternative view. This is achieved through a frame that illustrates the two opposing views of the characters/animals in the fable to provide a hint to the child that in the fable two different beliefs were possible, thus, more than one belief

Figure 2. Screen shot showing the interactive social story

172

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

in the analogous real life scenario also might be possible (Figure 1). The screen in Figure 2 is structured as a split screen to make the connection between the fable and the real life scenario. The light-bulbs are animated and are programmed to flash twice in a two second time interval to capture the user’s attention. Once the user scrolls over it, narrative text appears as shown. During the questioning phase, the learner must choose a response but an alternative is also presented to suggest that other perspectives are possible, i.e. theory of mind.

METHODOLOGY Null Hypotheses Ho¹: There is no development in theory of mind in children with Autism who use a multimedia learning tool based on analogical reasoning. Ho²: There is no difference in the development of theory of mind between the groups using interactive and non-interactive multimedia systems.

Procedure It was imperative to test the level of theory of mind developed from using the systems. The testing involved a set of questions at the end of the session. The procedure was as follows: The pupils worked through the system to exercise their theory of mind. At the end they were given a test, which had three questions. During this time the investigator observed how well the children were performing. The research was conducted over a period of two weeks at a moderate learning difficulty (MLD) school in the UK. The chosen participants were children between the ages of 10 and 12, who had been diagnosed to be comparatively high functioning. These subjects displayed mild autistic ability under each impairment within the triad. A discussion with the Headmaster confirmed that

the subjects had limited but adequate communication ability, and were capable of reading simple sentence structures. The subjects were able to control motor mannerisms and did not have severe behavioural problems (e.g. tantrums, shouting and disruptive behaviour). Since the participants in this case have communication difficulties, direct interaction with them was not appropriate. Instead, requirements for the system were taken from observations of them, interviews with their classroom teachers, the headmaster and from the literature. These observations were recorded using a written account since taped recordings were not permitted due to regulatory constraints. Interviews were conducted with the headmaster and three experienced teachers to ascertain their opinions on the design of the multimedia learning tool. All teachers were qualified to teach and support children with learning difficulties, and in particular, they were experienced with autism for typically 10 years. Two groups of children (eight children in each group) were formed from equal ability classes across the school. Although no formal pre-testing or profiling was conducted for this research project, the school had previously assessed these children using the Diagnostic Criteria for Autistic Disorder from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and designated them to be at equivalent levels of ability without prior teaching in the target domain.

Experiment Design Two groups of randomly assigned subjects, aged 10-12, of equal ability and condition were composed. Each group was exposed to a different multimedia learning tool that differed only in its amount of interactivity. Treatment 1 (system 1) contained multimedia components according to the principles outlined before, however, it had limited user interaction and was relatively passive. Treatment 2 (system 2) consisted of the same content but presented with more interactivity. Both treatment groups were given a pre-test and

173

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

a post-test. Both tests consisted of three openended questions, which were designed with the help of a teacher to ensure that they would be easily understood by the subjects. Open-ended questions were chosen as they are a useful way to prompt an un-biased response (Gray, 1994, 2005). A time limit was not imposed upon the subjects in answering the questions due to the subject’s impairments. In both the pre-test and post-test a scenario was shown to the test subjects through a series of visuals. The scenario shown was designed similarly to the scenarios in the system. The test subject was then asked three questions to determine whether they had an understanding or any development in their Theory of Mind. The three questions asked by the Investigator were: (1) Can you see the difference between your choice and Joe’s choice? (2) How is Joe’s choice different to your choice? (3) Can you see that Joe has a different view to your view? Any difficulties / problems experienced by the children were noted. The observation involved inferring the level of Theory of Mind through a qualitative judgment of the test subject’s mannerisms, behaviour and emotions. These observations noted use of mannerisms, emotions and interest in the material shown on the screen by each child. Lindblad (1996) suggests in “Language and Communication Programming and Intervention for Children with Autism” the significance of mannerisms. Lindblad argues that where autistic children struggle to communicate their understanding of the learned material, their learning patterns and thought processes can be indicated through behavioural actions and mannerisms. Thus, as the children used the system their comments and behavioural reactions in frames were also noted.

Results Pre-test Vs Post-test: Matched sample t-tests with n=8 were conducted on both groups to determine whether or not the children showed significant signs that their Theory of Mind had developed.

174

For system 1 (non-interactive) t obtained = 2.78 (t-critical = 2.365) α=0.05, hence Ho¹ can be rejected for system 1. For system 2 (interactive) t obtained = 4.34 (t-critical = 2.365) α=0.05, hence Ho¹ can be rejected for system 2 also. Pre-test System 1 Vs Pre-test System 2: An independent samples t-test was conducted to determine whether the two test groups were initially equated. In fact, the pre-test means of both groups were identical X1 = 2.24 and X2 = 2.24. Thus, the groups were equated with respect to their initial Theory of Mind. Post-test System 1 Vs Post-test System 2: An independent samples t-test was conducted to determine whether the two test groups achieved different levels of development in Theory of Mind. The t-obtained = 1.29(t-critical = 2.145) α=0.05, hence Ho2 cannot be rejected. Usage of Help feature: Correlation analysis was performed on the relationship between the usage of the help feature and subsequent development of Theory of Mind. For system 1 r=0.56, and for system 2 r=0.83. Thus, we can conclude that there is a moderate positive relationship. Usage of Repetition feature: Correlation analysis was performed on the relationship between the usage of the repetition feature and subsequent development of Theory of Mind. For system 1 r=0.86, and for system 2 r=0.76. Thus, we can conclude that there is a moderate positive relationship. The results are based on qualitative judgments, and although the observers were qualified and experienced, it must be noted that there is an element of imprecision when attempting quantitative analysis on such data. Consequently, the statistical findings, which point to the apparent success of both systems to aid in the development of Theory of Mind, through the use of analogical reasoning, social stories, and multimedia principles, are insufficient so it is useful to refer to qualitative data collected in the observations to inform these initial conclusions.

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

Observations During the pre-tests, sessions and post-tests on both systems the teachers were noting the behaviour and mannerisms displayed by the participants. This was necessary because the children often found it difficult to effectively communicate their intentions. Without the ability to express verbally their thoughts, it falls on interpretation of subtle cues to inform the observer’s judgments. Furthermore, these judgements were catalogued in parallel with a record of whether or not a particular subject utilised the help and repetition features. Interesting examples of comments from observers are worth noting. For instance, one subject who fully utilised both features received the following comments: “The child understood that two beliefs existed in the scenarios and when prompted to explain, they did so confidently and convincingly using mannerisms to reiterate their understanding.” Another, who did not use either of the features received “The child struggled to communicate any understanding of other’s views. However an attempt was made by the child through mannerisms such as pointing and gesturing.” Another comment for a different child who failed to utilize the additional feature was “The child tried to actively convey through mannerisms that other’s views could exist however it was not convincing. The child’s facial expressions indicated a sense of confusion and frustration.” For a child who used the repetition feature only comments were “The child displayed understanding predominantly through mannerisms by pointing and gesturing appropriately to make their answers understood, However, the child struggled to communicate or show any signs of a clear understanding.” None of the subjects used the help feature without also using the repetition feature. From treatment group 1, in the question associated with the Ant and the Grasshopper fable, the majority of the children were able to demonstrate an understanding of two alternative views through

verbal means and/or through mannerisms and displayed emotions. A few of the children stated they understood that alternative views existed, however when prompted further on their answer, they failed to convince that they had developed a theory of mind. In the North Wind and the Sun fable, the majority of the children stated that they understood that two views existed, however, they could not build on this understanding when prompted. It appears that many of the children were able to develop superficial understanding of Theory of Mind but failed to reach solid levels that would have convinced the observers that substantial development had taken place. From treatment group 2, in the question associated with the Ant and the Grasshopper fable, children stated that they understood that alternative views existed, however when prompted further on their answer they failed to convince that they had a deeper understanding. Through mannerisms the observers were able to conclude that these children had some understanding. In the North Wind and the Sun fable, a few of the children were able to demonstrate a theory of mind through the understanding that two different views existed in the scenario. The majority of children stated that they understood that two views existed however could not build on this understanding when prompted. As with system 1, it appears that the level of understanding was superficial, and that deeper learning of Theory of Mind had not taken place. In both systems, though, some allowance must be made for the inability of the children to directly express their understanding.

satisfaction survey A short survey was conducted after completion of the experiment to ascertain the opinions of the participants on their general views about the systems they used. Of course, some of the participants struggled to clearly express their views so their efforts were interpreted by their teachers.

175

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

Did you like using the system? In treatment group 1, six of the children stated that they liked the system whilst two children stated that they didn’t. In treatment group 2, all eight children stated that they liked the system. Do you think it’s easy to use? In treatment group 1, seven children stated that they found the system easy to use whilst one child remained unresponsive, but they did indicate by shaking their head that they didn’t. In treatment group 2, all eight children stated that they found it easy to use. Would you like to use the system again? In treatment group 1, four children said that they would use the system again however the remaining four were un-decided and stated that they were not sure. In treatment group 2, seven children said that they would like to use it again, whilst one child stated “maybe”. Treatment group 1 did not appear to enjoy the system as they remained fairly quiet when using it. Their concentration wavered and they became restless in their seats. Treatment group 2 seemed to enjoy using the interactive features as they became enthusiastic when proceeding through the system. They seemed far more involved in the content and appeared to concentrate on each screen by fixating their eyes on the frame and awaiting further instruction from the system. However, this additional interest and enjoyment did not clearly translate in to greater development of Theory of Mind. Nonetheless, enjoyment is an important benefit of learning and should be appreciated as being a catalyst for learning. To summarise, based on the qualitative observations it can be concluded that interactivity enabled the children in treatment group 2 to communicate and/or display clearer signs and/ or development of theory of mind to the observers due to their higher motivation and interest in the system, which appeared to be greater than in treatment group 1. Additional learning, however, was not corroborated by the quantitative results.

176

DIsCUssION These findings are similar to that of Corcoran (Corcoran, 2001) who discovered that autistic children are able to make inferences about others mental states by reasoning using analogy. Through analysis of treatment group 1, it can be noted that the help feature in the system may have been beneficial to those that used it over those that didn’t. All the children who did access the help frame either demonstrated theory of mind or showed clear aptitude by conveying to the observers an ability to recognise other views aside from their own exist. The majority of the children who did not access the help feature did not show as much aptitude in developing an understanding of others views and on whole provided little and/or no responses in the post-test. The common behaviour observed suggests that the repetition feature helped the test subjects to develop a better understanding of others views then those that did not utilise the feature. The children who did take advantage of this feature at the Review frame in the system were able to either demonstrate theory of mind or show clear aptitude and/or ability to understand two alternative views were possible and existed alongside each other. Overall, the children who did not use repetition were unable to clearly demonstrate to the observers that they had developed a theory of mind. From analysis of treatment group 2, it can be seen that the help feature had a small positive effect in assisting the children in developing a theory of mind. There appears to be a distinct advantage to those who used it as they all seemed to develop at least an understanding of two alternative views whilst those who didn’t seem to have struggled in contrast. The majority of the children used the repetition feature. The repetition seemed to help the children in demonstrating and/or convincing the observers that they had grasped the understanding of different belief systems. From this, it can be inferred that overall, use of the repetition

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

feature did provide a distinct advantage to those that used it. To summarise, findings suggest that both treatment groups benefited from using the help feature as it had a positive effect on them being able to convey an understanding of alternative views. This finding is supported by (Hardy, 2000) on the benefits of using a help button to enable individuals with Autistic Spectrum Disorder to work in a non-threatening environment where virtual support is available to promote learning. Overall, findings from both treatment groups suggest that the repetition feature was useful in helping the children to rationalise beliefs and show an understanding of others beliefs to the observers. This finding is supported by research done by (Baron-Cohen & Howlin, 1998) which suggests that repetition is a useful tool in reinforcing an instructional message. Based on the qualitative data and personal observations, the children were largely motivated in treatment group 2 due to their fascination and involvement with the content presented which enabled them to concentrate fully on the system. The motivation from the interactive system enabled treatment group 2 to perform better overall in their skills and knowledge of alternative belief systems, judged qualitatively. This finding is backed up by research in (Galitsky, 2002) which suggests that interactivity provides an element of great interest to autistic individuals and can lead to increased motivation to complete a task. Observations showed that the children were far more comfortable and at ease using the interactive system and found the material more riveting. This may have been due to the active involvement that interactivity requires from its users as suggested by (Norman & Draper, 1986). Despite the attempts to support the children with interactivity, it had no apparent affect on their performance measured quantitatively. This result suggests that engaging autistic learners with the system offers benefits that are limited to enjoyment but that does not easily translate in to greater learning. The essen-

tial element discussed in the learning experience is interactivity, which supports the observations made that treatment group 2 had a more fulfilling learning experience. Based on the qualitative results, the system was successful in helping to develop a theory of mind. In (Baron-Cohen et al, 1997) Baron-Cohen suggests that autistic children need to develop “mind reading skills” to develop theory of mind. Factors mentioned which could suggest development of theory of mind include, “pointing/showing and identification of patterns of behaviour” These indicators were noted through observations conducted with both groups. Baron-Cohen suggests that learning full theory of mind is an on-going, gradual process, one which can take up to several months to develop. It is an individual process where some will grasp other’s beliefs and views eventually whilst others will tend to struggle. Based on the results obtained it is fair to say that the children show an aptitude for developing a theory of mind hence with increased use of the system, they may find that they are able to improve their social and communication skills. The literature and the background research suggested using visual methods to support their learning. Thus, the system did use a variety of pictures, symbols and animated images to support the children. And moreover, the principles of cognitive load theory to take in to account that the working memory is extremely limited (Sweller & Chandler, 1991), were adopted to help autistic learners successfully cope with the demands of the lesson.

CONCLUsION To conclude, the results evidently show that the multimedia systems did successfully lead to improvements in Theory of Mind for both groups of children. There is evidence to suggest that use of the help feature and repetition in the systems are correlated to improved Theory of Mind. However,

177

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

there was no apparent benefit from the additional use of interaction in system 2, although system 2 seemed to be better appreciated by the children since they expressed more positive views. Both groups of children found the systems beneficial due to the visual-oriented design and added support for cognitive loading, but System 2 seemed more enjoyable and interesting due to the greater need for subjects to participate and be involved with the system. The literature would suggest that strategies such as social stories and analogical reasoning can be used to aid Theory of Mind, and our research would suggest that these approaches are indeed beneficial in practice when embedded within multimedia systems. Children with Autism have problems with abstract reasoning, but they are able to apprehend analogies and have shown evidence of superficial analogical reasoning from fantasies to real life social scenarios. The research suggest that multimedia systems benefit autistic children even with development of abstract thinking, but conventional thoughts about the benefits of interactivity may not be applicable so readily.

Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the Autistic Child have a Theory of Mind? Cognition, 21, 37–46. doi:10.1016/00100277(85)90022-8

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Frith, U. (2003). Autism: Explaining the Enigma (2nd ed.). New York: Blackwell.

This research was conducted in collaboration with Ms. Nida Islam, graduate of the Brunel Business School.

REFERENCEs Baron-Cohen, S., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1997). Mindblindness: Essays on Autism and the Theory of Mind (Learning, Development & Conceptual Change). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Baron-Cohen, S., & Howlin, P. (1998). Teaching Children with Autism to Mind-read. London: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

178

Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Cohen, D. (1999). Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Breuning, M. (2003). The Role of Analogies and Abstract Reasoning in Decision-Making: Evidence from the Debate over Truman’s Proposal for Development Assistance. International Studies Quarterly, 47(2), 229–245. doi:10.1111/14682478.4702004 Corcoran, R. (2001). Theory of Mind in Schizophrenia & Disorders. Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, 30, 149–174. doi:10.1037/10407-005 Dennis, M., Lockyer, L., & Lazenby, A. L. (2000). How high-functioning children with autism understand real and deceptive emotion. Autism, 4, 370–381. doi:10.1177/1362361300004004003 Elsom-Cook, M. (2001). Principles of Interactive Multimedia. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Galitsky, B. (2002). Extending the BDI model to accelerate the mental development of autistic patients. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL 02). Gray, C. (1994). Social Stories. New York: Future Horizons Inc. Gray, C. (2005). Revealing the Hidden Social Code: Social Stories for People with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Hardy, C. (2000). ICT for All. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Theory of Mind in Autistic Children

Hetzroni, O. E., & Tannous, J. (2004). Effects of a Computer-Based Interaction Program on the Communicative Functions of Children with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 95–113. doi:10.1023/ B:JADD.0000022602.40506.bf Lindblad, T. (1996). Language and Communication Programming and Intervention for Children with Autism and Other Related Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 20, 111–120. Mayer, R. (2005). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6 Muris, P., Steerneman, P., Meesters, C., Merckelbach, H., Horselenberg, R., van den Hogen, T., & Van Dongen, L. (1999). The TOM Test: A new Instrument for Assessing Theory of Mind in Normal Children and Children with Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 67–80. doi:10.1023/A:1025922717020

Murray, D., Lesser, M., & Lawson, W. (2005). Attention, Monotropism and the Diagnostic Criteria for Autism. Autism, 9(2). doi:10.1177/1362361305051398 Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on HumanComputer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: CRC Press. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1 Rieffe, C., Terwogt, M., & Stockmann, L. (2000). Understanding Atypical Emotions Among Children with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 195–203. doi:10.1023/A:1005540417877 Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4). Tréhin, P. (2004). Computer Use for People with Learning Difficulties: Basic Needs. Berlin: Miesenberger Publishing.

179

180

Chapter 13

M-Learning:

Accessibility and Limitations for People with Disabilities Saif alZahir University of Northern British Columbia, Canada

ABsTRACT Learning aims at interconnecting social classes, reducing poverty, and accepting diversity of all forms. This chapter presents technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities. At first, the author scans the phases of learning progression and proposes a learning model to represent their interrelationships. Then he explains the various types of disabilities within the learning reference of context and map available technologies to their corresponding learning disabilities. A special emphasis will be exerted on mobile-learning software, hardware, and systems that meet the requirements for learners with disabilities. In this research, the author find that although m-learning has several limitations and shortcomings to deliver to users, it is a promising learning technology for people with disabilities and its technological constraint and limitations are likely to be addressed and mostly eliminated in the near future.

INTRODUCTION Education and training are the processes by which knowledge, wisdom and skills of one generation are passed on to the next (Keegan, 2005). Learning started with chalk and talk or what is later called classroom learning, c-learning. In this method, the learner is engaged in the learning process through interaction with the instructor. Although this method of learning is still common and adDOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch013

vantageous, it has many drawbacks. One major drawback is that it does not cope with today’s busy world with a significant segment of learners have jobs and cannot make it to class on certain times. C-learning could not adapt with the rapidly changing societal needs including the needs of people with disabilities and hence the call for a new learning method became imperative. Distance learning, or d-learning, was the answer then. In d-learning students work at home, on the train, or in a coffee shop, and communicate with their instructors via mail, email, phone, voice over the

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

M-Learning

Internet (VoIP), or any other available form of communication. D-learning has gone through three main phases. In the first phase, course material was made available in printed form, on audio tapes, videos, CDs and DVDs, etc., and mailed to students via postal services or the network. Students study, solve their homework and tests, and return their assignments and tests to their institutions for grading. One example on this method is the Open University in the UK at Milton Keynes. The second phase exploited the information technology leap and the introduction of the Internet to advance this method using email technology and software-based learning. The third phase employs major learning software such as Web Course Tools (WebCT), Blackboard, and most recently Moodle. D-learning instructors use Blackboard, for example, to add their course material and tools such as discussions and live chat to help create online course content. Recently, d-learning developed to a new type of learning that is called electronic learning, or e-learning. E-learning includes most of d-learning technologies plus that the content is made available to learners as a dynamic content via the Internet, broadcasting, and interactive media. Also, a significant portion of e-learning is made up of real time content. What distinguishes this type is that the content can be delivered to learners who are geographically separated and enables them to participate in discussions in a synchronous manner. For example, Elluminate Live! Academic Edition 7.0 is a real-time e-learning and web collaboration environment that contains live interaction to asynchronous d-learning, and promotes active learning (e-learning solutions, elluminate.com, 2010). Duke University chose Elluminate Live! software to enhance the online experience of its remote students, provide cross platform support, participants control of classroom and meetings management, offer universal accessibility, and ensure higher security among other reasons. Finally, the fourth method of learning is mobile leaning or m-learning. M-learning is the newest method of learning in which mobile

devices, wireless technology, and protocols such as Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) are used. M-learning devices come in various sizes, and they differ in their abilities of running different applications. These devices offer many services including but not limited to voice conversations, messaging (Short Message Service, SMS, and Multimedia Messaging Service, MMS), browsing the Internet, emailing and opening attachments. The main devices used in this method of learning are: handheld devices such as cell phones, smart phones, and PDAs; tablet PCs; and laptops. According to GSMA - industry association (Mobile World Congress in Barcelona), the number of connections on mobile phone networks has crossed the 4 billion mark worldwide, and forecasting further growth to nearly 6.0 billion connections by the year 2013. Such phenomenal growth makes this technology a promising one and that it is here to stay for some time. To complement and deal with the advancements in the hardware and protocols, software industry has successful introduced and implemented a large number of software packages aimed at m-learning. For example, Hot Lava Software, Inc. (hotlavasoftware.com) is a leading provider of mobile authoring, publishing, delivering and tracking solutions. Hot Lava Software’s Learning Mobile Author (LMA) is a mobile content authoring and publishing tool that allows the speedy design, editing and publishing of trackable mobile learning content. LMA modules are delivered and the results are tracked by cell phones, any internet enabled phone, or smartphones such as BlackBerry’s, Motorola Q’s, Treo’s and PDAs such as Palm-OS (Oliva, 2005). M-learning major hurdle is to convert content in such a way to fit mobile devices small and low resolution screen. This challenge has been achieved to a great success via chunking content into small and meaningful units that can fit small screens. Figure 1 shows an approximate model that represents the four learning methods and their

181

M-Learning

relationships. This model displays m-learning as central to the learning sphere as it is becoming the focal point for current and future learning. The other learning methods (c-learning and elearning) are being reduced and will be phased out as technologies de passé. Some of the newly introduced G4 and G3+, and new wireless WiFi, fast and reliable technologies such as the E – readers such the Kindle 2 of Amazon.com (2009), Apple iPad (2010), the new Web search engines Google goggles (2010), and the new smartphone for google, Gphone, (2010) are examples to support this model.

Handheld Devices

M-LERNING DEVICEs As APPLIED TO DIsABILITY

Cell phones provides a range of services that start from simple standard services such as SMS and voice calls to a sophisticated and high traffic services such as Internet access, video calls, and streaming video. There are lots of companies manufacturing these devices such as Nokia, Samsung, Alcatel, Motorola, and Sony to name a few. The new kids on the block these days are are the iPhone of Apple Co. and the recently released GPhone of Google (announced in January 2010). These devices are widely spread among people as well as university students. The prices of these equipments are continuously decreasing which make them affordable by learners. It is estimated that every student and instructor has one cell phone on average. This wide spread service made it indispensible for m-learning.

During the last two decades, numerous mobile devices have been introduced to the market. These devices have evolved drastically by adding new features to include voice, text, images, video, and graphics. These devices can be classified into three main classes based on their services: (i) handheld devices which include smartphones, cell phones, and the personal digital assistant better known as PDAs; (ii) tablet PCs; and (iii) laptops. Figure 2 shows the categorization of these devices and their relationship.

Handhelds are mobile devices that can fit in one hand or in a pocket. These devices have smart features and are Internet-enabled to make them practical for teaching and learning. Academic and training institutions have used a large array of sophisticated mobile devices which the young regard as essential tools for carrying out a wide range of tasks in learning. Handheld devices can be classified into 3 types: cell phones, PDAs, and smartphones.

Cell Phones

Figure 1. Learning methods model Figure 2. Classification of mobile devices

182

M-Learning

PDAs

Tablet PCs

PDAs are scaled down versions of computers that are originally designed to become organizers. Although new features such as accessing the Internet, opening e-books, and video calls were added to many of these devices, their popularity remained limited due to their high prices. The most popular types of PDAs are: Palm, Pocket PC and BlackBerry. Palm has its own operating system (webOS) and it is accredited for efficient use of memory CPU and memory power (overview of webOS, 2010). Pocket PC uses Microsoft operating system. Some of the advantages of the Pocket PC are: (i) compatibility with Windows, (ii) wireless connectivity, and (iii) fast and powerful CPU for multimedia tasks. Toshiba and HP make PDA devices that use the Pocket PC software. BlackBerry, on the other hand, uses a pager like system called the RIM network, emailing is instantaneous and always on. BlackBerry is best suited in situations where connectivity and low cost solutions are required to stay in touch via cell phone and email. The BlackBerry’s deficit is that it doesn’t support the Acrobat PDF format via the web browser. The PDF files can only be opened through an email attachment or by subscribing to an online service like DocHawk (Cao et-al, 2006). Newer versions of Blackberry 9700 can open and view pdf files.

Tablet PC was launched in late 2002 by Microsoft and other hardware manufactures. There are two main types of Tablet PCs, (i) slate; and (ii) controvertible. In a slate Tablet PC, there is an attached keyboard and a pen is used for the input. The convertible Tablet PC looks like a normal laptop except that the screen can be rotated all the way around and laid down flat across the keyboard. A Tablet PC a device that is capable of running standard PC applications. Tablet PCs are pre-installed with Windows XP/Vista/Window 7 Tablet PC edition. So, besides offering all the functions of Windows, it also supports handwriting recognition and pen-based input and control. Thus, all applications that can run on Windows can run on Tablet PC. Tablet PCs are fully networkable devices, with the most including wired and wireless network connectivity as standard. Tablet PCs also have some laptops features such as USB ports and expansion slots. The latest Tablet PC is the iPad of Apple that is released in January, 2010. Like other ultraportables, Tablet PCs generally have smaller screens, slower processors and are more expensive than conventional laptops. While Tablet PCs are optimized for mobile use and newer models provide a degree of improvement in battery life over previous versions, they are a long way from being able to last for a whole working day, particularly when their wireless capabilities are heavily used. The durability of screens and the need to buy replacement pens if one is lost are still the main impediment for the limited spread of this device. Evidence from case studies shows several benefits of Tablet PCs in education. They have been found to be useful as both a learner device and for teachers to deliver learning/organize their work. Tablet PCs mobility, ease of use and pen input has been seen to encourage their use and better integrate Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). There are indications that Tablet PCs can motivate students and adapt

Smartphones Smartphones are handheld devices that have the features of cell phone and PDA combined. A most important feature of a smartphone is its ability to make mobile voice calls over one of the cellular mobile networks that use the GSM900 or GSM1800 frequency standards for voice and data calls. All new smartphones support both types known as dual-banding and progressively offering support for GSM1900 in North American markets.

183

M-Learning

to individual learning styles more easily than notebook PCs. Younger students in particular find the pen interface more natural than traditional keyboards and mice and it may help to improve handwriting skills. Tablet PCs allow handwriting, drawings, equations and diagrams to be integrated into documents, manipulated and electronically stored. Teachers have found the ability to annotate documents useful for marking and returning work electronically. Wirelessly linking a Tablet to a projector provides an alternative to an interactive whiteboard and the device can be passed around the classroom (Tablet PC, 2004) (becta.org.uk). Many universities are using the Tablet PC extensively including Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Purdue University, Bently College, and University of Ontario Institute of Technology (Genovese, 2006) (butler.edu).

Laptops Laptops are characterized by high memory capacity so that students can use it to store large amounts of content. Recently, reasonably priced hard disks come in the order of hundreds of gigabytes and possibly in terabytes. In addition, laptops are networkable devices and they are more powerful than handhelds in sense that students can use them to install and run large software applications. The use of laptops in education can help students gain benefit from using software packages such as simulators and online materials including e-books, quizzes, and interactive videos. For example, the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) is Ontario’s only laptop university and among the few universities in the world where every seat in the classrooms and laboratories is connected to the Internet and the faculty are required to appropriately integrate the use of technology into teaching-learning enterprise (Grami et al, 2005). Table 1 shows some of the capabilities of handheld devices. A group of three PDAs (Palm TX, BlackBerry Bold 9700, and HP iPAQ Glis-

184

ten), two cell phones (K610im I-mode and Nokia E72), and three smartphones (iPhone 3G, Samsung BlackJack, and Nokia N97) features are presented. This table shows mobile devices support SMS, MMS, email, and open attachments. This Table indicates that although such devices are small but they enjoy remarkable capabilities and are able to deliver many services for mobile learners in general and for learners with disabilities in specific.

TAXONOMY OF LEARNING DIsABILITIEs In the previous sections learning methods and m-learning devices were introduced. In this section we present the taxonomy of learning disabilities and match that to the corresponding features in m-learning devices. The World Health Organization (WHO.int, 2010) defines learning disabilities as follows: “Disabilities is an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Impairment is a problem in body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in involvement in life situations. Thus disability is a complex phenomenon, reflecting an interaction between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which he or she lives”. Generally, a person with learning disabilities experience difficulties in one or more of the following: studying skills, reading or writing skills, oral skills, logical or mathematical skills, or social skills. The declared segment of population with such disabilities is growing as many people are coming forward and declaring their disabilities to their employers or to their academic intuitions. Assistive technology for people with learning disabilities is defined as any software, hardware, or system that facilitates bypass, work around or compensate for an individual’s specific learning defects (schwablearning.org, 2006). Disabilities

M-Learning

Table 1. Comparison between different handhelds (from related web sites) PDAs Services SMS

Cell phones

Smartphones

HP iPAQ Glisten

Palm TX

Blackberry Bold 9700

Nokia E72

K610im I-mode

Samsung BlackJack

iPhone 3G

Nokia N97

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

MMS

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

E-mail

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

View PDF

✓

✓

✗

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

Camera

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

QWERTY keyboard

✓

✗

✓

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

Organizer

✓

✓

✓

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

Capture video

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

Media player

✓

View MS Word, Excel and PPT

✓

WAP

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

✓

✗

✗

✗

✗

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

Java

✗

✗

✗

✓

✗

✓

✓

✓

Touch screen

✓

✓

✗

✗

✗

✗

✓

✓

Processor Weight Bluetooth

624 MHz

312 MHz

312 MHz

~

~

220 MHz

624 MHz

434 MHz

132g

148.8g

122g

128g

89g

99.22g

133g

150g

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

Synchronization

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

Text recognition

✗

✓

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

256 MB

128 MB

256 MB

11 MB

16 MB

64 MB

128 MB

128 MB

✓

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

✗

Memory Voice recognition Battery talk time

~

~

6 hrs

12.5 hrs

~

5.5 hrs

4.9 hrs

9.5 hrs

Conference call

✓

✗

✗

✓

✗

~

~

✓

Expandable memory

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

✗

✓

can fall into one of four types: (i) physical; (ii) mental; (iii) learning; and (iv) developmental. Figure 3 shows a schematic chart for the major types of learning disabilities. In this section, we present each type of these learning disability in relation to the capabilities and limitations of most advanced and available mobile devices and software.

Physical Disability Physical disabilities include, but not limited to, mobility impairments, vision impairments, and hearing impairments. In this section we provide examples of how m-learning can deliver content to learners with these disabilities.

185

M-Learning

Figure 3. General cataloguing of disabilities

Mobility Impairment

Vision Impairment

Mobility impairment disabilities come in different forms and stages. To explain some of these forms and what m-learning can provide for people with such disability, consider for instant a learner with arm movement problems. M-learning can provide solutions to learners with this disability via offering voice recognition software in which learners could use speech as input without using their hands or arms. Dragon NaturallySpeaking 10, for example, allows hands-free use of the PC, tablet PC, and handhelds devices. The learner can also attend lectures and participate in discussions from his/her home via video calls. Another example is the “Remote Commander” which allows PDAs to be used as if they were the PC’s cursor and keyboard. From the handheld, “Remote Commander” transmits to the PC the movements and taps of the stylus and characters entered into the PDA. This allows the PDA to mimic everything that can be performed with a mouse or keyboard. (Myers et al 2004) proposed that “Remote Commander” is useful for people with motor impairments such as muscular dystrophy or cerebral palsy, who often retain their fine motor control even after losing gross motor skills and consequently although they might not be able to operate a regular keyboard or mouse they can still use a handheld’s tiny onscreen keyboard and mouse control as their PC interface.

In this category, three types of disability can be identified: (i) Blind: m-learning provide people with this impairment with alternative technologies that is based on sound signals such as media player which is built in most mobile phones to listen to the content. In addition, Optical Character Recognition technology (OCR) can be very effective for learners with this type of disability. For example, the “Reading Pen” scans, defines, and pronounces words from any printed material (readingpen.com, 2006). It can help students also to have good pronunciation of the written text. (ii) Low vision: people with this kind of impairment may increase the available options on font size in order to be able to read the text, in additions buttons of larger sizes are also available (techdis. ac.uk, 2006). Increasing the size of the screen of a PDA is not an option hence, the PDA or the cell phone cannot solve the problem for users with low vision and the solution for this group is to use laptops, tablet PCs or attach larger screens to their cell phones or PDA. Speech recognition can also be used as an alternative solution in this case. (iii) Colour blind: when designing course material, it is important not to rely on colour alone, and to ensure that text and graphics are understandable when viewed without colour. This is the only solution for this group of users.

186

M-Learning

Hearing Impairment This category includes deaf and low hearing learners. Deaf learners dependent on lip-reading which in turn may impede them from writing notes. Even in the case that somebody else’s takes notes to them, the learner might not be able to understand the notes taken by somebody else during a lecture. In that case m-learning offers a solution to this problem by saving the lectures as video materials so that the deaf students can view them at anytime any number of times he or she requires. These videos can be designed to contain captions of text that the deaf person can see in order to compensate for his hearing loss. In addition, such materials can be presented using sign language (also known as: finger-spelling) if needed. For learners with low hearing problems, new mobile phones are designed to overcome such problems by equipping them with speakerphones and learners can increase the volume as they desire.

Mental Disability Mental disability refers to any mental illness, mental impairment, mental retardation, or mental deficiency, which lessens the capacity of a person to use his customary self-control, judgment and discretion in the conduct of his or her affairs and social relations. There are many types of mental learning disabilities among which are depression and anxiety disorder. Learners who have one or more of these types of disabilities are offered hardware that can save a large content to store all related material that can be viewed and studied when the impact of the mental impairment subsides.

Learning Disability Learning Disabilities refer to a number of disorders which may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or

nonverbal information. These disorders affect learning in individuals who otherwise demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and/or reasoning. This definition is adopted by the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada on January 30, 2002. Learning disabilities result from impairments in one or more processes related to perceiving, thinking, remembering or learning. M-learning devices such as handhelds are equipped with word processors that allow viewing, editing and modifying documents which solves the problem for those who have writing problems. Furthermore, for learners who have reading problems, speech to text software can compensate for this impairment. Assistive tools that assist with reading can be classified as follows: (i) Audio books and publications; (ii) optical character recognition; (iii) Speech synthesizers/ screen readers; and (iv) variable speed tape recorders. While each type of these technologies works a little differently, all of them present text as speech and help facilitate decoding, reading fluency, and comprehension. As for students with retention problems, SMS is very useful. Most of the new mobile devices are equipped with organizers in which the learner can record information about the homework assignments, appointments and so on. In addition, these mobile devices have reminders that help the learner remember the tasks that he or she has to do.

Developmental Disability Developmental disability is defined as a severe, chronic impairment which creates substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life activity: self care, language, learning, mobility, and self-direction. Autism is an example of developmental disability. Table 2, identifies major disabilities and their corresponding appropriate assistive m-learning technologies.

187

M-Learning

Table 2. Major learning disabilities and their corresponding assistive technological Disability

available M-Learning Assistive Technology

Blind

Speech recognition, Media players, OCR,

Low vision

Speech recognition, Font size (laptops, tablet PCs),

Color blind

Not relying on color only when presenting the material

Deaf

Video materials with captions of text or sign language

Low hearing

Speakerphones, video materials

Reading problem

Text to speech

Writing problem

Word processor

Learning Disability

Word processor, speech to text, SMS

Autism

Video, CBI, touch screens

Mobility impairment

Voice recorder, remote commander, video material, video call, etc.

TECHNOLOGY CAPABILITIEs AND LIMITATIONs As mentioned earlier, assistive technology can be either software, hardware, or a system that helps compensate for an individual’s specific learning defects. Nowadays, new handheld devices in the market come with integrated services, text, voice, images, video, and graphics that can offset for such deficit. Some of these mobile technologies are the following.

Voice Communications Voice communication permits learners to talk with follow learners and with their instructors in order to solve problems that cannot be solved by email or text messaging. This service is available by means of VoIP via Skype, Yahoo and MSN Messengers. These software applications can be

188

installed on desktop computers and PC Tablets as well as with some handheld devices. In addition they provide services at minimal or no cost. Some of the advantages of the software are: (i) there is really no need for distance learners and educators to pay commercial license fees to obtain the different features of sophisticated conference software; (ii) With little creativity, the entertainment features of the Yahoo Messenger and MSN Messenger Freeware tools can be tailored for efficient and effective teaching and learning uses.

Short and Multimedia Message Services (SMS and MMS) SMS and MMS services allow professors to send messages to their students in discrete times to keep them on the right track. These messages can be updates or notification about new exams and/or assignments. (Trifonova, 2003) reviewed some experiments using SMS in education and based on the conclusions, SMS proved to be useful and positive results were obtained. In addition, (Thronton & Houser, 2004) conducted an experiment of giving some lessons to a group via SMS and by comparing with the lessons delivered via paper, SMS had much improvement.

Handwriting Recognition Students can use some mobile devices to take notes in class and store these notes in PDF or MS Word document format. Taking notes by hand is sometimes more convenient than typing them, especially if they contain figures or graphs. For students who use this feature, Tablet PC is their best choice, as it comes with a relatively large screen compared to that of the handheld device.

Voice Recognition Speech recognition can be used as another user interface, especially that device screens are small and it is cumbersome to input data. In order to

M-Learning

assist users in managing mobile devices, user interface designers are starting to combine the traditional keyboard or pen input with “hands free” speech input (Kondratova & Goldfarb, 2006) and (Wilson, 2006), adding other modes of interaction such as speech based interfaces that are capable of interpreting voice commands (Kondratova & Goldfarb, 2006) and (Sawhney, 2000). In addition, voice input combined with the traditional keyboard-based or pen-based input models permits multimodal interaction in which the user has more than one means of accessing data in his device (Kondratova & Goldfarb, 2006).

Touch Screen Touch screen feature takes the advantage of the mobile device screen, instead of providing extra keys to the keyboard, which makes the size of the device larger. In addition, touch screen can assist those who have problems using the keyboard or the keypad of the mobile devices, as they find it an alternative.

Open Attachments Emails come with different types of attachments such as PDF, MS Word, Excel and PPT. Some mobile devices have the ability to view and edit these attachments. The usefulness of this feature comes from the ability to read and modify a material from a device that can fit in a pocket instead of carrying paper material. Furthermore, the ematerial can be exchanged with students by email.

Synchronization with PC PDAs were initially designed to be satellites to a desktop PC system. Many users continue to have a desktop PC machine and a mobile device, and use the latter when traveling about to act as a Personal Information manager (PIM) and document carrier which they synchronize with the desktop machine later on. This is typically done through a serial

or USB port on the PDA, although some PDAs also have a cradle that they sit in while hooked up to the PC. Given the mobile nature of PDAs and the potential for loss of data when batteries run down, most users also regularly back-up all their data with a desktop system.

CHALLENGEs FACING MOBILE LEARNING Although mobile learning can be a method to change the way education is provided, it still faces some challenges. Among the problems facing mobile learning are the following.

screen size and Low Resolutions Research shows that the most important constraining factors for wide spread mobile learning adoption, a long with battery life, are the screen size and user interface (Kondratova & Goldfarb, 2006). Mobile screens can tire eyes, especially if the user uses the device for a long time. However, reading from a book or a paper can be more convenient sometimes, as the reader can add lines and notes and it is more comfortable to the human eyes as well. However, this might not be true for all cases in which mobile learning is applied. (Thronton & Houser, 2004) identified four educational studies using mobile phones: accessing distance learning materials on web phones, using mobile phone email, web and voice to study Spanish, emailing English vocabulary to mobile phones, and reviewing training materials on mobile phones outside of face to face training sessions, and in all of the studies participants highly rated the convenience of learning with mobile phones and all reported that text size was not a problem, but the different organization of material was required. Another problem is the input limitations, as in some mobile phones you have to hit the key more than once to find the correct letter. Although it might not be convenient to have a mobile with a

189

M-Learning

large keyboard, speech can be used as an alternative user interface, where user interface designers are starting to combine the traditional keyboard or pen with “hands free” speech input adding other modes of interaction such as speech-based interfaces that are capable of interrupting voice commands (Rutagemwa & Shen, 2003). Some companies such as Nokia introduced the onscreen QWERTY keyboard like in Nokia 6708 and Nokia N97 smartphones. Screen resolution is another problem, as it harmful for the human eye to spend time reading and working on the mobile device. Not only that, but limited screen resolutions have a great impact on the type of content that can be used on a mobile device, as websites designed for desktops are not displayed effectively when viewed on mobile devices. Input limitations and screens are to be taken into consideration when designing a course material. (Trifonova, 2003) concluded that the nature of mobile devices with small screens and poor input capabilities led to the assumption that they could not replace the standard desktop computers or laptops, but the same properties could make them efficient in learning domain, if certain constrains were kept: (i) short not more than 5-10 minutes long modules; (ii) simple and funny with added value functionality; and (iii) area and domain specific content delivered in time.

Internet Access It is difficult to access an ordinary webpage from a mobile phone and these pages are distorted when viewed on mobile screens. Internet standards such as HTML, HTTP, TLS and TCP require large amounts of mainly text based data to be sent which is a big problem in bandwidth constrained systems such as mobile systems (Shudong et al, 2006). This bandwidth consideration was taken into consideration when designing WAP, so that pages of website are designed using HDML, XHTML, and CHTML can be viewed on mobile devices.

190

There is also another problem related to browsing materials. Very few mobile phone browsers can really view the content in more than two languages, which are usually English and the user’s mother language and the same thing happens with emails which can really create problems for foreign language learners (Shudong et al, 2006) Not only that, but mobile devices cannot be online all the time, and even when they are online the transfer rate is low. There is no coverage everywhere for the wireless network, and it is expensive to be online all the time. This puts limitations on the place as mobile learning is to be used everywhere. In addition, sometimes disconnections happen, and thus loss of data occurs. Therefore, the concepts of offline operations are of important in disconnected scenarios (Aveberg et al, 2006)

Lack of standardization One of the problems is that although there is a wide range of mobile devices, there is a lack of standardization in software, platform and communication capabilities, which complicates the task of providing user modeling services to distributed ubiquitous applications (Paredes et al, 2005). For example, although most phones come standard with WAP in US and Europe, NTT-Decomo in Japan is still using i-mode (Shudong & Higgins, 2005). In addition, there are other different networks besides WAP and disconnections often occur when these mobiles move from one network to another. (Aveberg et al, 2006) introduced a new transparent middle layer service called Mobile Delivery Server (MDS) between the mobile device and a Learning Management System (LMS), and this service is responsible for all additional mechanisms needed to make LMS’ content suitable for different mobile devices.

M-Learning

security Issues Mobile devices, PDAs, mobile phones, laptops and smartphones, can expose organizational data if not properly secure (Halpert, 2004). Mobile devices have become a target for individuals and groups involved in government espionage, hacking and device theft, and not only that, but also employee forgetfulness and oversight must be addressed (Halpert, 2004). Among the general protection strategies to protect sensitive data on mobile devices are encrypting the device transmissions, installing third party software protection mechanisms and utilizing a mobile firewall if the mobile device has wired or wireless network access capabilities (Halpert, 2004). In spite of high complexity software to protect content on mobile devices, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has reported on December 29, 2009 on its website that “a German computer scientist has published details of the secret code used to protect the conversations of more than 4bn mobile phone users”. Such breach of security threatens confidentiality of content, grades, and research output. In fairness security issues is not specific to mobile technology but rather it is a characteristic of all networks regards of its type (wired or wireless) or generation. Another important topic is the security of the device itself. There are many challenging factors in the design of mobile appliances. According to (Raghunathan, at al, 2003) the various challenges in supporting security on mobile devices are: flexibility, computational requirements of security processing, battery life, and tamper-resistance. For example, regarding battery life, it is shown that the increasing complexity of functions that a mobile device supports, seem to be outpacing the much slower evolution of battery technologies (Raghunathan et al, 2003). In that case it can be concluded that the battery life can be considered as a limiting factor to the spread of these devices. (McGreal et al., 2005) addressed the crucial research question: What are the limitations and

difficulties in delivering course materials to mobile devices? They described further developments involving the delivery of files in MP3 format and using podcasting as well as open access to online Athabasca University library system using AirPac specially designed for compatibility with mobile devices. They concluded that such system is a success.

DIsCUssION AND CONCLUsION M-learning is a new type of learning in which students can learn while they are moving using mobile devices. The rapidly increasing number of the reasonably priced mobile devices and services bring greater emphasis on their use in education. Such move results in providing low cost education for people worldwide. In addition to its role as the method that provides equal opportunity of education for both the poor and the rich, it also provides many solutions to people with disabilities. Due to the limitations imposed by available technology today, a number of important issues are still unsolved for learners with disabilities. For example, speech recognition, text to speech, browsing the Internet by eye, and video and image storage volume are still issues that need to be further investigated and researched. In addition, certain disciplines’ contents such as an advanced mathematics using mobile devices may not be as effective as a linguistics class. This is due to the fact that some courses depend on understanding and practicing the materials by hand using a pen and a paper. In that case, mobile learning can be used as a means of communication between the students themselves and students and their professors such as voice conversations, SMS, MMS, and browsing web materials related to the course. We find that due to its varied characteristics, mobile learning can be very valuable in ubiquitous learning. This type is a new trend of information and communication technologies, in which a huge number of tiny computers is embedded into an

191

M-Learning

invisible part of the fabric everyday. Using these cooperative tiny computers, ubiquitous computing provides computing for all: access to anything, by anyone, at anytime and anywhere. Finally, mobile learning can be useful when it is used as a supporting method for teaching elementary school courses as it can present the content in small segments and also as it interests the pupils who find something new besides the traditional classroom learning.

REFERENCEs Apple. (2010). The Apple iPhone 3G/3GS. Retrieved January 29, 2010 from: http://www.apple. com/ca/iphone/iphone-3gs/ Aveberg, D., Boppert, J., Holzweibig, K., Loke, T., Riemann, T., & Magenheim, J. (2006). Mobile Delivery Server (MDS) – A Solution for Resolving Problems and Limitations in Mobile E-Learning Scenarios. In International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies. Blackberry. (2010). Blackberry Bold 9700. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http:// na.blackberry.com/eng/devices/blackberrybold9700/bold_specifications.jsp Cao, Y., Tin, T., McGreal, R., Ally, M., & Coffey, S. (2006). The Athabasca University Mobile Library Project: Increasing the Boundaries of Anytime and Anywhere Learning for Students. In Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Communications and mobile computing (pp. 1289 – 1294). E-learning Solution. (2010). Retrieved January 29, 2010, from: http://www.elluminate.com

192

Genovese, M. (2006). Tablet PC Research Project. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from http:// www.butler.edu/ir/cmsExternalDocuments/ tabletResearchProject.pdf Grami, A., Rao, G. S., & Rosen, M. A. (2005). Use of Laptops in Internet-Enabled Learning Spaces: Enhancing Electrical Engineering Education. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from http://www.cden. ca/2005/2ndCDEN-conference/data/10045.pdf Halpert, B. (2004). Mobile Devices Security. In Proceedings of the 1st annual conference on Information security curriculum development (pp. 99-101). HP. (2010). HP iPAQ Glisten. Retrieved January 29, 2010 from: http://www.hp.com/sbso/ special/ computing/ipaq-glisten.html?jumpid=ex_r295_ go/glisten/1Q10ipaq-glisten/kimsmb/112409 Keegan, D. (2005). Mobile Learning: The Next Generation of Learning. Retrieved from http:// learning.ericsson.net/mlearning2/files/workpackage5/book.doc Kondratova, I., & Goldfarb, I. (2006). M-learning: Overcoming the Usability Challenges of Mobile Devices. In International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies (ICNICONSMCL’06). McGreal, R., Cheung, B., Tin, T., & Schafer, S. (2005). Implementing Mobile Environments using Learning Objects: The Athabasca University Digital Reading Room. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (pp. 136-140). Nokia. (2010). Nokia E72. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://europe.nokia.com/findproducts/devices/nokia-e72/specifications

M-Learning

Nokia. (2010). Nokia N97. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://www.nokia.ca/find-products/ phones/nokia-n97#/main/landing Paredes, R. G. J., Ogata, H., Yano, Y., & Martin, G. A. S. (2005). A Multi-Model Approach for Supporting the Personalization of Ubiquitous Learning Applications. In IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’05). Raghunathan, A., Ravi, S., Hattangady, S., & Quisquater, J. J. (2003). Securing Mobile Appliances: New Challenges for the System Designer. In Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition (DATE’03). Retrieved from: http://www.uoit.ca Rutagemwa, H., & Shen, X. (2003). Modeling and Analysis of WAP performance over Wireless Links. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2(3), 221–232. doi:10.1109/TMC.2003.1233528 Sawhney, N., & Schmandt, C. (2000). Nomadic Radio: Speech and Audio Interaction for Contextual Messaging in Nomadic Environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(3), 353–383. doi:10.1145/355324.355327

Shudong, W., & Higgins, M. (2005). Limitations of Mobile Phone Learning. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’05) (pp. 179-181). Tablet, P. C. (2004). Becta technical Paper. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from www.becta. org.uk/subsections/foi/documents/technology_ and_education_research/tablet_pc.do Thornton, P., & Houser, C. (2004). Using Mobile Phones in Education. In 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’04). Trifonova, A. (2003). Mobile Learning – Review of the Literature. Technical Report DIT-03-009, Informatica e Telecomunicazioni, University of Trento. Wilson, L. (2006). Look Ma Bell, No Hands! – VoiceXML, X+V, and the Mobile Device. XML Journal. Retrieved October 12, 2006 from: http://xml.sys-con.com/read/45792. htm?CFID=35964&CFTOKEN=D160E34CDC59-7D3B-3DA79BF1ACFC6B42

193

194

Chapter 14

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems in Educational Settings José A. Carmona University of Almería, Spain Adolfo J. Cangas University of Almería, Spain Luis Iribarne University of Almería, Spain Moisés Espínola University of Almería, Spain

1. ABsTRACT In recent years, thanks in part to advances in computer technology, there has been a renewed interest in using Virtual Reality (VR) to improve the traditional intervention procedures used in educational and clinical settings. A growing number of researcher teams, and three-dimensional (3D) simulations, are oriented toward the detection and treatment of school-related problems such as violence in the classroom, hyperactivity, eating disorders, and drug abuse. In this chapter, the authors highlight the major advantages of using VR in clinical assessment and intervention programs. They also discuss some of the virtual tools that have been developed, as well as the results obtained with these tools. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-923-1.ch014

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

2. UsEFULNEss OF 3D sIMULATION IN EDUCATIONAL/CLINICAL sETTINGs The use of 3D computer simulation or virtual reality has multiplied in recent years. The reasons for this increase include reduced costs and improved technology, and the tremendous popularity of videogames among today’s youth. As pointed out by Kim, Pack and Baek (in press), the popularity of 3D technology has made its applied use very attractive and contributed to its wide acceptance, especially among adolescents. Moreover, as is clear from studies that have evaluated VR and its clinical applications, this technology boasts a number of features that make it highly valuable for use in educational/ clinical settings (Adams, Finn, Moes, Flannery & Rizzo, 2009; Perpiñá, Botella & Baños, 2003; Schultheis, Himelstein & Rizzo, 2002; Botella, García-Palacios, Baños & Quero, 2007): VR simulates real life quite accurately. With the latest advances in graphic design, modern computer systems can simulate reality considerably well. This characteristic permits, for the purpose of clinical assessment or intervention, immersing the client in an environment similar to what the client might encounter in his or her own life. Using VR in an intervention program thus increases the program’s ecological validity, overcoming one of the biggest limitations of traditional paper-and-pencil tools. Control over the stimulus presentation. Another important advantage of VR is that it gives the designer full control over the type, quantity, and intensity of stimuli that are presented to a client. This has several possible benefits. For instance, with VR, a therapist can manipulate the features of threatening or aversive stimuli, or ensure that certain stimuli are (or are not) presented. This capacity, in turn, may make patients more motivated to undergo therapy and become actively involved in the treatment. From an assessment standpoint, VR permits collecting data in a more

objective and uniform manner, since they may be collected automatically while the therapist controls the stimulus presentation. In short, VR makes it possible to carry out clinical assessment and treatment that is more flexible than what traditional procedures allow, treatment that can be adapted to the characteristics of each client. The virtual world is safe. Situations presented in virtual reality are not physically dangerous or threatening to users. Hence, users can freely interact in the virtual environment without any of the risks that abound in normal life. With VR, patients may view therapy as a protective environment, a safe setting that allows them to experience and react to situations without directly suffering negative consequences. This fact makes VR very helpful for therapists treating patients unwilling to experience certain stimuli or events in real life. For such individuals, VR may provide an intermediate step between behaviors learned in therapy and their generalization to the outside world. With regards to assessment, again, VR has the advantage over traditional methods in that VR allows the patient to experience a potentially harmful situation (e.g., being offered drugs) without any real risk, allowing the therapist to observe the patient’s response and gain valuable information for use in treatment. How we react in a virtual world. Numerous studies have revealed similarities in the way people react (behaviorally, cognitively, and emotionally) to virtual and real situations. Findings suggest VR makes its users feel as if they were truly experiencing the simulated events, allowing them to feel, think, and respond to any virtual situation as they would in real life. Essentially, the way people respond to situations presented virtually appears to be a valid indicator of how they would respond to the corresponding real situations. Presenting situations at any moment. Therapists often struggle with the fact that they cannot control what the patient experiences outside of therapy. Using VR as a supplement to existing therapy, however, helps to overcome this limita-

195

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

tion, as it permits the therapist to present to the client, at any moment during the therapeutic process, key situations or stimuli as often as needed.

3. APPLICATIONs OF VIRTUAL REALITY IN PsYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION A number of studies have examined the usefulness of VR as a tool to improve the outcome of therapy. Here, we will discuss the most important of these psychological uses of VR, particularly with the adolescent population and in educational settings. Some of these applications were not specifically designed for adolescents, but we mention them nevertheless because they have every potential to be applied to this population (e.g., tools that have been developed for assessing adult drug use).

3.1. Uses of VR in Educational settings To date, although VR has seen more applications in the area of adult mental disorders than in the area of education, an increasing number of researchers have applied it to school-related problems in youth.

3.1.1. VR for Assessing Hyperactivity in the Classroom In school settings, and specifically in classrooms, one of the most common problems and disrupters of class flow is the behavior of students diagnosed with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The main contribution of VR to this area has been to improve computerized assessment tools such as the Continuous Performance Task (CPT). Rizzo and colleagues created a “virtual” CPT for the assessment of ADHD in schoolchildren (Rizzo et al., 2001). Specifically, they designed a virtual classroom that simulates the basic features of a

196

regular classroom, including the teacher, students, chalkboard, etc., and even a window with a view, included to increase the level of realism. Like in a traditional sustained attention task, participants had to respond to visual and auditory stimuli. The therapist could introduce various sounds and objects, or any combination thereof, as distractors. The potential for experimental control over the distractor stimuli is important, as it allows the researcher/therapist to perfect the assessment tool and increase its ecological validity. In the time since the tool was created, several other researchers have utilized it, with minor modifications, to assess ADHD, and also to evaluate the tool’s psychometric qualities and validity. Promising results have been found. The virtual CPT appears to be a sensitive indicator of ADHD, and moreover, the technology offers greater ecological validity than other assessment tools (Gutiérrez-Maldonado, Alsina-Jurnet, CarvalloBecíu, Letosa-Porta & Magallón-Neri, 2007; Adams, Finn, Moes, Flannery & Rizzo, 2009).

3.1.2. VR and School-Related Phobias Recently, a research team developed a VR application for the assessment and treatment of adult anxiety disorders, with a special focus on phobias. The treatment of phobias in school settings, therefore, is a natural extension of this work. Indeed, the team of Gutiérrez-Maldonado and colleagues, of the University of Barcelona (Spain), has developed VR therapy for school phobia and test anxiety (Gutiérrez-Maldonado, Alsina-Jurnet, Carvallo-Becíu, Letosa-Porta & Magallón-Neri, 2007). For school phobia, this group created two threedimensional school environments, one consisting of an outdoor patio and schoolyard, the other a classroom having students and a teacher. The user’s task is simply to explore these areas. In so doing, the user finds the opportunity to interact with other students (avatars) in a number of conflict situations, such as when someone threatens

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

to bully the participant after school, or when the participant finds himself in the classroom, standing at the board, attempting to solve a problem while others observe and tease him. With regards to test anxiety, these researchers designed a virtual environment simulating the specific contexts in which this disorder often occurs. The simulations present a realistic sequence of events, beginning with the participant’s home and its various rooms, followed by a commute to the university, then a walk through a building hallway, and finally, the classroom where the exam will take place. The virtual classroom contains stimuli known to be significant in this disorder, such as the sight of the professor holding exams in his hand before passing them out to the students. Gutiérrez-Maldonado et al. (2007) found that, both for school phobia and test anxiety, the virtual simulation elicited emotions similar to those that occur in the corresponding real-life situations. The authors concluded that VR therapy combined with a standard phobia treatment had the same overall effectiveness as imaginary exposure combined with standard treatment. However, VR demonstrated certain long-term advantages over imaginary exposure, such as the fact that participants who underwent VR therapy were less likely to avoid fearful stimuli.

3.2. Other Applications of VR to Educational settings In addition to the aforementioned applications, a host of other applications have been developed. Some of these were designed for adults, or for problem behaviors not specifically related to school settings, but they nevertheless could be adapted for use with school-age children and for school-related problems. Here, we describe some of the most pertinent studies applying VR to children and adolescents with behavioral problems.

3.2.1. VR Solutions for Autism and Other Neuropsychological Disorders Cognitive neuropsychologists studying cognitive functioning and rehabilitation have become increasingly interested in VR. The possible use of VR that has generated the most interest among these researchers may be skills training for individuals with autism-spectrum disorder. A number of virtual tools exist in this regard, the first one created by Strickland, Marcus, Mesibov and Hogan (1996). These authors created a virtual street with moving cars, designed to train children with autism to cross the street safely. More recently, studies have examined the potential usefulness of VR for social skills training in children with autism-spectrum disorder. Several simulations have been created for this purpose. For instance, a simulation of two people talking to each other at a bar, to assess whether the participant walks in between the people or around them (the latter being the socially appropriate response). Other examples are a simulation of a park with flowers and plants, to test whether or not the participant steps on these, and a simulation of a typical social situation at a cafe. These tools have shown promising results and, overall, it appears VR is indeed a useful method to study and improve social skills in people with autism-spectrum disorders (Mitchell, Parsons & Leonard, 2007; Parsons, Mitchell & Leonard, 2004; Parsons, Mitchell & Leonard, 2005).

3.2.2. VR and Eating Disorders Several research groups have used VR in studying and treating patients with eating disorders, particularly those having the symptom of distorted body image. Here, we will summarize the work of two research teams that have contributed significant findings in this area. The group of Riva and colleagues, in Italy, has developed a treatment program that combines several intervention techniques (Riva et al, 2000). This

197

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

treatment, called Experiential Cognitive Therapy, combines traditional cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with VR. The VR component is used to counter the distorted body image often found in people with eating disorders. In the VR component, patients find themselves in a house with several rooms, where they encounter stimuli such as a scale, food, and beverages. These sessions are intended to be therapeutic and also function as an assessment tool, providing the therapist with valuable information to incorporate into therapy. Riva et al. (2000) found that patients who underwent the CBT-VR combined therapy reported higher body satisfaction, higher self-efficacy, and more motivation to change than those treated with CBT alone. The group of Botella and colleagues, in Spain, also has used VR to study and treat body image distortions in patients with eating disorders. One technology they designed presents a virtual environment intended to change the way patients value and view their body in a variety of contexts (Botella, García-Palacios, Baños & Quero, 2007). As with the program developed by Riva et al. (2000), the therapist can use the information gained from the VR sessions to design an appropriate intervention. We should also mention the study of LetosaPorta, Ferrer-García and Gutiérrez-Maldonado (2005). These authors sought to overcome certain technical limitations of previous virtual tools with their development of a new tool called The Body Image Assemssment Software (BIAS). Unlike the previous technology, BIAS permits greater control over the bodily proportions of the avatar so that the proportions closely resemble those of the client. BIAS also allows modification of the avatar’s body parts while the whole avatar is in view. Moreover, unlike most other tools, BIAS does not require any special equipment other than a personal computer (Ferrer-García & GutiérrezMaldonado, 2008).

198

3.2.3. VR and Drug Use In the field of addiction, much research has centered on the contextual and social cues involved in addictive behavior, and in the craving response. In a typical assessment procedure, the client is presented with stimuli associated with the substance—the drug itself, related objects or paraphernalia, users, or locations where the drug has been used—for the purpose of assessing the resulting craving responses. The information gained from this procedure is later used in therapy, with the goal of reducing the craving response to each stimulus through extinction, cognitive restructuring, or other techniques known to be useful. Our present interest is that VR may also be used to this end, and VR offers an advantage over the aforementioned techniques in that multiple stimuli can be presented simultaneously, permitting the development of tests that more closely resemble natural drug contexts. To date, VR has been used to assess cannabis, tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, and gambling addiction. These programs expose clients, in virtual form, to many types of stimuli: places of leisure where substances are used, specific drugs, a casino with slot machines, people who use drugs in social situations linked to use (e.g., a party), paraphernalia, and more (Woodruff, Conway, Edwards, Elliot & Crittenden, 2007; Bordnick et al. 2008; Bordnick et al. 2004; Bordnick et al, 2009; Saladin, Brady, Graap & Rothbaum 2006). The possibility of presenting three-dimensional virtual scenes involving drug use, drug users, and odors associated with use (as well as other stimuli) allows these tools to duplicate the real-life contexts where drug use occurs with greater accuracy than other methods.

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

4. FEARNOT! AND MI sCHOOL: TWO NEW 3D APPLICATIONs FOR sTUDYING PROBLEM BEHAVIORs IN YOUTHs Bullying and drug abuse are two of the most significant and worrisome problems facing children and teenagers. However, to date, not many VR tools have been developed to study, assess, or treat these problems. Recently, though, a few researchers have brought their attention to this area. Here, we will describe the two existing 3D tools, one designed to detect drug use and violence in schools, and the other designed to treat bullying.

in which the avatar, in another encounter with the bully, does what the participant suggested and experiences the corresponding consequences. Thus, the participant receives feedback on the success of his advice. The authors of the program state that the purpose of exposing students to this type of interaction is to produce feelings of empathy—for them to understand the victim’s perspective, and feel the victim’s thoughts and emotions. The authors hypothesize that interventions fostering empathy toward the victims of violence may reduce the likelihood that people will act violently.

4.1. FearNot!: 3D Technology to Combat Bullying

4.2. Mii school: A 3D Program for Detecting Drug Use and Violence in Adolescents

The European project known as ECircus (Education through Characters with emotional-Intelligence and Role-playing Capabilities that Understand Social interaction) is a multidisciplinary team of researchers coming from several countries, and one of the most important contributors to the mission of reducing bullying with its development of FearNot! (Fun with Empathic Agents to Reach Novels Outcomes in Teaching). Intended for use with children in primary education, FearNot! presents users with a virtual school where a variety of characters (students) interact amongst themselves and with the user. FearNot! contains school-violence scenes that follow a sequence of events representative of what could occur in real life. At the start of the simulation, the participant witnesses (from a distance) a student bully another student at school. Then the bullied student approaches the participant to ask for advice on how to manage situations in which he is bullied. The participant must respond by selecting from a list of responses provided by the program. Upon responding, the participant sees the bullied avatar’s reaction to the advice, which varies depending on the advice given (Zoll, Enz, Schaub, Aylett & Paiva, 2006). Finally, a simulation is played out

The research team of Dr. Adolfo J. Cangas and colleagues, in Spain, has developed a virtual tool for detecting various problem behaviors in school settings. Specifically, they have developed Mii School (MS), which uses 3D simulation technology to detect drug use, bullying, and interpersonal/ family conflicts in adolescents. MS contains 17 scenes through which a therapist may assess the participant’s responses to particular situations. The scenes take place in a schoolyard, a classroom, a park, and the participant’s home, and present common situations of conflict or risk that are likely to occur to young people in these settings. In the various scenes, the character corresponding to the participant is immersed (like in modern video games) in these conflict situations, and is asked to indicate what his or her usual response to these situations would be or, if the participant has never experienced a particular situation before, how he or she would react. Several scenes in the program are intended to detect tendencies of violence and bullying. In some of these scenes, peers (one or several at a time) insult and threaten the participant. In other scenes, the participant’s character threatens a

199

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

peer, thus allowing the participant to experience the perspective of the bully. In another scene, the participant observes two students fighting in the schoolyard, and must indicate how to respond. Finally, another scene addresses indirect or relational bullying, simulating two classmates who do not allow the participant into their clique. MS also presents scenes geared toward detecting specific types of substance users. Separate scenes address the use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, and ecstasy (MDMA). The sequence of events in each one is similar: first, the participant observes one or several peers using a substance, and then the peers ask the participant to try the substance with them. The scenes involving tobacco, marijuana, and ecstasy take place in a secluded park where a group of friends offer the drug to the participant. The alcohol scene takes place inside a house, where the participant’s friend offers him a drink while they eat pizza. In the cocaine scene, the participant is at a friend’s house. The program also contains scenes intended to assess the participant’s family dynamics. In these, the user must indicate how his or her parents would react to situations in which he or she disobeyed a rule, or in which the participant is experiencing emotional problems. Finally, others scenes assess factors related to the participant’s personality and beliefs. Currently, although Mii School is still being evaluated as an assessment tool, over 500 Spanish high school students have used the program. Generally speaking, the initial results suggest the various scenes in MS are indeed useful for detecting substance users and people tending toward violence, as these individuals have been found to show characteristic patterns of responding to the program (Carmona, Espínola, Cangas & Iribarne, in press). Finally, it is important to mention that Mii School has the advantage of being easy to apply, since it requires only a personal computer running Windows XP or a similar operating system, rather than the specialized virtual reality equip-

200

ment required by most other systems. Mii School therefore is easy to distribute and apply broadly.

5. DIsCUssION We have described the most important applications of virtual reality (VR) for the study, assessment, and treatment of numerous clinical problems appearing in educational settings. In the last decade or so, this area of research has grown in popularity, and numerous researchers have developed VR techniques aimed at preventing and reducing behavioral problems in educational settings, beneficial for the patient experiencing the problem, the people who coexist with the patient, and the school as a whole. As we have highlighted, the use of VR is justified by the important advantages it offers over other procedures. Moreover, numerous studies have confirmed the feasibility and effectiveness of these tools as a supplement to traditional assessment and therapeutic techniques. We should mention that some of the procedures using VR, in their current state, may still be limited in that they require sophisticated and often costly equipment. For this reason, we believe it would be worthwhile for future research to develop VR technology that is more accessible both to researchers studying the technology and to professionals interested in using the technology in their clinical or educational practice.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was financed with a research project from the Spanish Ministry of Health and Consumption (National Plan on Drugs, ref. 2007/063) awarded to the second author.

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

REFERENCEs Adams, R., Finn, P., Moes, E., Flannery, K., & Rizzo, A. S. (2009). Distractibility in Attention/ Deficit/Hiperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the Virtual Reality classroom. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 120–135. doi:10.1080/09297040802169077 Bordnick, P. S., Copp, H. L., Traylor, A., Graap, K. M., Carter, B. L., & Walton, A. (2009). Reactivity to cannabis cues in Virtual Reality environments. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 41, 105–112. Bordnick, P. S., Graap, K. M., Copp, H., Brooks, J., Ferrer, M., & Logue, B. (2004). Utilizing virtual reality to standardize nicotine craving research: A pilot study. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 1889–1894. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.06.008

Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (in press). Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers & Education. Letosa-Porta, A., Ferrer-García, M., & GuitiérrezMaldonado, J. (2005). A program for assessing body image disturbance using adjustable partial image distortion. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 37, 638–643. Mitchell, P., Parsons, S., & Leonard, A. (2007). Using Virtual Environments for Teaching Social Understanding to 6 Adolescents with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 589–600. doi:10.1007/ s10803-006-0189-8

Bordnick, P. S., Traylor, A., Copp, H. L., Graap, K. M., Carter, B., & Ferrer, M. (2008). Assessing reactivity to virtual reality alcohol based cues. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 743–756. doi:10.1016/j. addbeh.2007.12.010

Parsons, S., Mitchell, P., & Leonard, A. (2004). The Use and Understanding of Virtual Environments by Adolescents with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 449–466. doi:10.1023/ B:JADD.0000037421.98517.8d

Botella, C., García-Palacios, A., Baños, R. M., & Quero, S. (2007). Realidad Virtual y Tratamientos Psicológicos. Cuadernos de medicina psicosomática y psiquiatría de enlace, 82, 17-31.

Parsons, S., Mitchell, P., & Leonard, A. (2005). Do adolescents with autistic spectrum disorders adhere to social conventions in virtual environments? Autism, 9, 95–117. doi:10.1177/1362361305049032

Carmona, J. A., Espínola, M., Cangas, A. J., & Iribarne, L. (in press). Mii-School: A 3D videogame for the early detection of abuse of substances, bullying and mental disorders in adolescents. European Journal of Education and Psychology.

Perpiñá, C., Botella, C., & Baños, R. M. (2003). Virtual Reality in Eating Disorders. European Eating Disorders Review, 11, 261–278. doi:10.1002/ erv.520

Ferrer-García, M., & Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J. (2008). Body Image Assessment Software: Psychometric data. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 394–407. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.2.394 Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Alsina-Jurnet, I., Carvallo-Becíu, C., Letosa-Porta, A., & Magallón-Neri, E. (2007). Aplicaciones clínicas de la realidad virtual en el ámbito escolar. Cuadernos de medicina psicosomática y psiquiatría de enlace, 82, 32-51.

Riva, G., Bacchetta, M., Baruffi, M., Rinaldi, S., Vincelli, F., & Molinari, E. (2000). Virtual Reality-Based Experiential Cognitive Treatment of Obesity and Binge-Eating Disorders. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 7, 209–219. doi:10.1002/1099-0879(200007)7:3<209::AIDCPP232>3.0.CO;2-V

201

Applying Virtual Reality (VR) to the Detection and Treatment of Clinical Problems

Rizzo, A. A., Buckwalter, J. G., Bowerly, T., Humphrey, L. A., Neumann, U., Rooyen, A., & Kim, L. (2001). The virtual classroom: a virtual reality environment for the assessment and rehabilitation of attention deficits. Revista Española de Neuropsicología, 3, 11–37.

Strickland, D., Marcus, L. M., Mesibov, G. B., & Hogan, K. (1996). Brief report: two case studies using Virtual Reality as a Learning Tool for Autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 651–659. doi:10.1007/ BF02172354

Saladin, M. E., Brady, K. T., Graap, K., & Rothbaum, B. O. (2006). A preliminary report on the use of virtual reality technology to elicit craving and cue reactivity in cocaine dependent individuals. Addictive Behaviors, 31, 1881–1894. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.01.004

Woodruff, S. I., Conway, T. L., Edwards, C. C., Elliot, S. P., & Crittenden, J. (2007). Evaluation of an Internet virtual world chat room for adolescent smoking cessation. Addictive Behaviors, 32, 1769–1786. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.12.008

Schultheis, M. T., Himelstein, J., & Rizzo, A. A. (2002). Virtual Reality and Neuropsychology: Upgrading the Current Tools. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 17, 378–394. doi:10.1097/00001199-200210000-00002

202

Zoll, C., Enz, S., Schaub, H., Aylett, R., & Paiva, A. (2006). Fighting bullying with the help of autonomous agents in a virtual school environment. Dissertation, Trieste, Italy.

203

Compilation of References

Abascal, J., Arrue, M., Fajardo, I., Garay, N., & Tomás, J. (2004). The use of guidelines to automatically verify Web accessibility. Universal Access in the Information Society, 3(1), 71–79. doi:10.1007/s10209-003-0069-3 Adams, R., Finn, P., Moes, E., Flannery, K., & Rizzo, A. S. (2009). Distractibility in Attention/Deficit/ Hiperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the Virtual Reality classroom. Child Neuropsychology, 15, 120–135. doi:10.1080/09297040802169077 Adams, G. (Ed.). (2006). Timed Text (TT) Authoring Format 1.0 – Distribution Format Exchange Profile (DFXP). W3C Candidate Recommendation. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/ttaf1-dfxp/

Ala-Mutka, K., Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2008). ICT for Learning, Innovation and Creativity. FJRC Technical notes-European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Retrieved October 2009, from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC48707. TN.pdf Alderman, B. (2006). Get Real! Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Online article. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.griffith.edu.au /school/art/text/ april00/alderman.htm Al-Omari, A., & Al-Omari, H. (2006). E-Government Readiness Assessment Model. Journal of Computer Science, 2(11), 841–845. doi:10.3844/jcssp.2006.841.845

AENOR. (2004). [Aplicaciones informáticas para personas con discapacidad. Requisitos de accesibilidad para contenidos en la Web. Madrid: AENOR.]. Norma UNE, 139803, 2004.

Anderson, T., Howe, C., Soden, R., Halliday, J., & Low, J. (2006). Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students. Instructional Science, 29, 1–32. doi:10.1023/A:1026471702353

AENOR. (2005). Norma UNE 153020. Audiodescripción para personas con discapacidad visual: requisitos para la audiodescripción y elaboración de audioguías. Madrid: AENOR.

Anderson, P. (2006) The Future of Human-Computer Interaction. In Emerging Technologies for Learning. Retrieved October 2009, from http://partners.becta.org. uk /upload-dir/downloads/page_documents /research/ emerging_technologies.pdf

AENOR. (2003). UNE 153010: Captioning for deaf and hearing impaired people – Teletext captioning. Retrieved June 2009, from http://www.aenor.es Akach, P., & Woodford, D. (2000). Deafness: A Guide for Parents, Teachers and Community Workers. UNESCO.

Andriessen, J., Baker, M. J., & Suthers, D. (2003). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions . In Andriessen, J., Baker, M. J., & Suthers, D. (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 1–25). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Compilation of References

Andriessen, J. (2006). Collaboration in computer conferencing . In O’Donnell, A. M., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Erkens, G. (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 197–232). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Angehrn, N. T., & Balakrishnan, R. (2004). Integrating Context in E-learning Systems Design. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 355-359). Antzakas, K., & Woll, B. (2002). Head Movements and Negation in Greek Sign Language. In Gesture and Sign Language in Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 2298, pp. 193-196). Apple. (2010). The Apple iPhone 3G/3GS. Retrieved January 29, 2010 from: http://www.apple.com/ca/iphone/ iphone-3gs/ Arnáiz, P. (2003). Educación inclusiva: una escuela para todos. Málaga, Spain: Aljibe. Atwell, G. (2007). Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers, 2(1). Atwell, G. (2008). Integrating personal learning and working environments. In Pontydysgu (2008). Retrieved, November 18, 2008, from http://www.pontydysgu. org/2008/11/integrating-personal-learning-and-workingenvironments/ Augar, N., Raitman, R., & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. Paper presented at the ASCILITE Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education 2004 Conference. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2000). Use of the internet by householders. Canberra: Australian Government. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Aveberg, D., Boppert, J., Holzweibig, K., Loke, T., Riemann, T., & Magenheim, J. (2006). Mobile Delivery Server (MDS) – A Solution for Resolving Problems and Limitations in Mobile E-Learning Scenarios. In International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies. Ayuso, J. A. (2006). El reto de enseñar por competencias. Tavira: Revista de ciencias de la educación, 22, 257-264. Badia, A., & García, C. (2006). Incorporación de las TIC en la enseñanza y el aprendizaje basados en la elaboración colaborativa de proyectos. Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 2(3), 42–54. Bain, K., Amici, I., Serra, A., Tibaldi, D., Violi, A. M., & Wald, M. (2007). How Speech Recognition Technology Can Enable the Full Potential of e-learning. Committee on Culture, Science and Education Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe. Bain, K., Basson, S., & Wald, M. (2002). Speech Recognition in University Classrooms: Liberated Learning Project. In Proceedings of 5th Annual International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies (pp. 192-196). New York: ACM. Bain, K., Hines, J., Lingras, P., & Yumei, Q. (2007). Using Speech Recognition and Intelligent Search Tools to Enhance Information Accessibility. In Proceedings of HCI International 2007 (LNCS 4556, pp. 214-223). Berlin: Springer. Bainbridge, C. (2010). Characteristics of Gifted Children. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://giftedkids.about. com/od/gifted101/a/giftedtraits.htm Baligh, H. H. (1994). Components of culture: Nature, interconnections, and relevance to the decisions on the organization structure. Management Science, 40(1), 14–27. doi:10.1287/mnsc.40.1.14 Banathy, B. H. (1987). Instructional systems design . In Gagné, R., & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Instructional technology: Foundations (pp. 85–112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

204

Compilation of References

Barnes, S. J., & Vidgen, R. (2003). Measuring Web site quality improvements: a case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 103(5), 297–309. doi:10.1108/02635570310477352

Benavídez, C., Fuertes, J., Gutiérrez, E., & Martínez, L. (2006). Semi-automatic Evaluation of Web Accessibility with HERA 2.0 . In Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 199–206). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/11788713_30

Baron-Cohen, S., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1997). Mindblindness: Essays on Autism and the Theory of Mind (Learning, Development & Conceptual Change). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Benigno, V., Candiani, V., Caruso, G., & Tavella, M. (2006). AEsseDi: a tool for supporting the design of accessible learning plans. In A. Mendez-Vilas et al. (Eds.), Proc. IV Int. Conf. on Multimedia and Information & Communication Technologies in Education (m-ICTE2006), Current Developments in technology-Assisted Education, FORMATEX, Badajoz, Spain (Vol. 3, pp. 2115-2119).

Baron-Cohen, S., & Howlin, P. (1998). Teaching Children with Autism to Mind-read. London: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the Autistic Child have a Theory of Mind? Cognition, 21, 37–46. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8 Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Cohen, D. (1999). Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Barron, A. E., & Orwig, G. W. (1995). Multimedia technologies for training. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Basson, S., Faisman, A., & Kanevsky, D. (2003). Speech Recognition - New Accessibility Impacts. Liberated Learning. Retrieved June 2009, from http://www.liberatedlearning.com/resources/pdf/RC_2003_IBM_SR_Paper.pdf Bausch, M., & Hasselbring, T. (2004). Assistive technology: Are the necessary skills and knowledge being developed at the preservice and inservice levels? Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(2), 97–104. doi:10.1177/088840640402700202 Becta. (2007). Inclusive learning: an essential guide. Retrieved October 2009, from http://publications.becta. org.uk/ Bellugi, U., & Fischer, S. (1972). A Comparison of Sign Language and Spoken Language. Cognition, 1, 173–200. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(72)90018-2

Berners-Lee, T. (2006, 2008/12/17). Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/WAI/ Bertot, J. C., & Jaeger, P. T. (2006). User-centered Egovernment: Challenges and benefits for government Web sites. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 163–168. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2006.02.001 Bettman, J. (1979). An information processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Blackberry. (2010). Blackberry Bold 9700. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://na.blackberry.com/eng/ devices/blackberrybold9700/bold_specifications.jsp Boldyreff, C. (2002). Determination and Evaluation of Web Accessibility. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure For Collaborative Enterprises, June 10-12, 2002 (pp. 35-42). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. Bologna Declaration. (1999). Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education: The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. Retrieved from http://www.eees.es/ pdf/Declaracion_Bolonia.pdf Bonn, M. A., Furr, H. L., & Susskind, A. M. (1999). Predicting a behavioural profile for pleasure travellers on the basis of internet use segmentation. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 333–340. doi:10.1177/004728759903700403

205

Compilation of References

Bordnick, P. S., Copp, H. L., Traylor, A., Graap, K. M., Carter, B. L., & Walton, A. (2009). Reactivity to cannabis cues in Virtual Reality environments. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 41, 105–112. Bordnick, P. S., Graap, K. M., Copp, H., Brooks, J., Ferrer, M., & Logue, B. (2004). Utilizing virtual reality to standardize nicotine craving research: A pilot study. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 1889–1894. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.06.008 Bordnick, P. S., Traylor, A., Copp, H. L., Graap, K. M., Carter, B., & Ferrer, M. (2008). Assessing reactivity to virtual reality alcohol based cues. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 743–756. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.12.010 Bose, R. (2004). Information Technologies for Education and Training in E-government. In . Proceedings of International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing, 2, 203–207. Botella, C., García-Palacios, A., Baños, R. M., & Quero, S. (2007). Realidad Virtual y Tratamientos Psicológicos. Cuadernos de medicina psicosomática y psiquiatría de enlace, 82, 17-31. Bozinis, A. I., & Iakovou, E. (2005). Electronic Democratic Governance: Problems, Challenges, and Best Practices. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 5(2), 73–80. Brajnik, G. (2006). Web Accessibility Testing: When the Method Is the Culprit. In K. Miesenberger et al. (Eds.), Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2006), Linz, Austria, July 12-14, 2006 (LNCS 4061, pp. 156-163). Berlin: Springer. Brajnik, G. (2008). Beyond conformance: the role of accessibility evaluation methods. In 2nd International Workshop on Web Usability and Accessibility IWWUA08, Auckland, New Zealand, Sept. 2008. Keynote speech. Breuer, K., Molkenthin, R., & Tennyson, R. D. (2006). Role of simulations in Web-based learning . In O’Neil, H., & Perez, R. (Eds.), Web-based learning (pp. 307–326). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

206

Breuning, M. (2003). The Role of Analogies and Abstract Reasoning in Decision-Making: Evidence from the Debate over Truman’s Proposal for Development Assistance. International Studies Quarterly, 47(2), 229–245. doi:10.1111/1468-2478.4702004 Brewer, J. (2003). Web accessibility highlights and trends. ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the Physically Handicapped, 76, 15–16. doi:10.1145/1036401.1036408 Brown, S., Renzulli, J., Gubbins, E., Siegle, D., Zhang, W., & Chen, C.-H. (2005). Assumptions Underlying the Identification of Gifted and Talented Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(1), 68–79. doi:10.1177/001698620504900107 Brunschwig, C. R. (2006). Visualising legal information: mind maps and E-government. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 3(4), 386-403. Bulterman, D., Jansen, J., Cesar, P., Mullender, S., Hyche, E., DeMeglio, M., et al. (Eds.). (2008). Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL 3.0). W3C Recommendation 01 December 2008. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/SMIL3/ Caeiro, M., Llamas, M., & Anido, L. (2004). Hacia el soporte de actividades de aprendizaje heterogéneas. Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial, 8(24), 77–86. Caldow, J. (2004). E-democracy: Putting Down Global Roots. Institute for Electronic Government. IBM. Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Reid, L. G., & Vanderheiden, G. (Eds.). (2008). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. W3C Recommendation. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ Cao, Y., Tin, T., McGreal, R., Ally, M., & Coffey, S. (2006). The Athabasca University Mobile Library Project: Increasing the Boundaries of Anytime and Anywhere Learning for Students. In Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on Communications and mobile computing (pp. 1289 – 1294).

Compilation of References

Carmona, J. A., Espínola, M., Cangas, A. J., & Iribarne, L. (in press). Mii-School: A 3D videogame for the early detection of abuse of substances, bullying and mental disorders in adolescents. European Journal of Education and Psychology.

Cook, R. A., & Gladhard, M. A. (2002). A survey of online instructional issues and strategies for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Information Technology and Disabilities, 8(1). Retrieved on August 1, 2009 from http://people.rit.edu/easi/itd/itdv08n1/gladhart.htm

Carnoy, M. (2005). Possibilities and Challenges . In Inaugural Lecture of the 2004 – 2005 Academic Year (pp. 1–20). Barcelona: ICT in Education.

Copley, J., & Ziviani, J. (2004). Barriers to the use of assistive technology for children with multiple disabilities. Occupational Therapy International, 11(4), 229–243. doi:10.1002/oti.213

Casanova, D., Holmes, B., & Huet, I. (2009). Aiding Academics to move from knowledge management to knowledge creation: Conceptualization of a Personal Academic Environment (PAE) . In Méndez-Vilas, A., Martín, A., González, J. A., & González, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of m-ICTE 2009 - Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education (Vol. 1, pp. 481–486). Badajoz, Spain: Formatex. CHIL. (2005). CHIL - Technology Catalogue. LIMSI. Retrieved June de 2009, from http://chil.server.de/servlet/ is/13736/ Choudrie, J., Brinkman, W. P., & Pathania, R. (2007). Using diffusion theory to determine the digital divide in E-services: two UK local-area perspectives. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 4(3), 345-359. Clark, R. E. (1989). Current progress and future directions for research in instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37, 57–66. doi:10.1007/BF02299046 Clark, R. E. (1994). Media and method. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 21–31. doi:10.1007/BF02299088 Colace, F., DeSanto, M., & Vento, M. (2003). Evaluating Online Learning Platforms: A Case Study. In Proceedings of 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Washington, DC: IEEE Press. Conole, G., & Oliver, M. (2002). Embedding theory into learning technology practice with toolkits. Journal of Interactive Educational media, 8.

Corcoran, R. (2001). Theory of Mind in Schizophrenia & Disorders. Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, 30, 149–174. doi:10.1037/10407-005 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(6), 982–1003. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 Davis, F. D. (1993). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral Dissertation, Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA. de Freitas, S., & Neumann, T. (2009). The use of ‘exploratory learning’ for supporting immersive learning in virtual environments. Computers & Education, 52(2), 343–352. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.010 Dennis, M., Lockyer, L., & Lazenby, A. L. (2000). How high-functioning children with autism understand real and deceptive emotion. Autism, 4, 370–381. doi:10.1177/1362361300004004003 Dewey, J. (1975). Moral Principles of Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.). (1999). Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Elsevier.

207

Compilation of References

Dobransky, K., & Hargatti, E. (2006). The disability divide in internet access and use. Information Communication and Society, 9(3), 313–334. doi:10.1080/13691180600751298 Downes, S. (2005, October 17). E-learning 2.0. eLearn magazine, 17. Retrieved October 2009, from http:// www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&ar ticle=29-1 Drigas, A. S., & Koukianakis, L. G. (2004). A Modular Environment for E-learning and E-psychology Applications. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Application, 6(3), 2062–2067. Drigas, A. S., Vrettaros, J., & Kouremenos, D. (2004). Teleeducation and E-learning Services for Teaching English as a Second Language to Deaf People, whose First Language is the Sign Language. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 1(3), 834–842. Drigas, A. S., Vrettaros, J., Kouremenos, D., & Stavrou, L. (2004). E-learning Environment for Deaf People in the E-commerce and New Technologies Sector. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 1(5), 1189–1196. Drigas, A. S., & Koukianakis, L. G. (2006). An Open Distance Learning E-System to Support SMEs E-Enterprising. In Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering and Databases (pp. 297-302). Drigas, A. S., Koukianakis, L. G., & Papagerasimou, Y. P. (2006). A Web Based E-Learning and E-Psychology Modular Environment. In International Conference on Next Generation Web Services Practices (pp. 168-174). Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., & Chun, E. J. (2008). Inclusive high school service learning programs: Methods for and barriers to including students with disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(1), 20–36. Easton, L. (2008). From professional development to professional learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(10), 755–761.

208

Ebbers, W. E., Pieterson, W. J., & Noordman, H. N. (2008). Electronic government: Rethinking channel management strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 181–201. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2006.11.003 Echeita, G. (2006). Educación para la inclusión o educación sin exclusiones. Madrid: Narcea. Eckstein, M. (2009a). Enrichment 2.0: Gifted and Talented Education for the 21st Century. Gifted Child Today, 32(1), 59–63. Eckstein, M. (2009b). The gifted Kids Network: 2008 Pilot. Gifted Child Today, 32(2), 20–28. Eckstein, M. (2008). Using Social Networks to Create Gifted Education Programs. Tempo –TXGifted, 27(3), 22-27. Edyburn, D. L. (2004). Rethinking assistive technology. Special Education Technology Practice, 5(4), 16–23. Efthimiou, E., & Katsoyannou, M. (2001). Research Issues on GSL: A Study of Vocabulary and Lexicon Creation. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 2, 42–50. Elsom-Cook, M. (2001). Principles of Interactive Multimedia. New York: McGraw-Hill Education. Emerick, L. (1992). Academic Underachievement Among the Gifted: Students’ Perceptions of Factors that Reverse the Pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(3), 140–146. doi:10.1177/001698629203600304 Endepohls-Ulpe, M. (2009). Teaching Gifted and Talented Children . In Saha, L., & Dworkin, A. (Eds.), International Handbook of Research on Teachers and Teaching (Vol. 21, pp. 881–894). New York: Springer International Handbooks of Education. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73317-3_57 Enkenberg, J. (1995). Complex technology-based learning environment . In Tennyson, R. D., & Barron, A. E. (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Computer-based development and delivery tools (pp. 245–264). Berlin: Springer. Esteves, J., & Joseph, R. C. (2008). A comprehensive framework for the assessment of eGovernment projects. Government Information Quarterly, 25(1), 118–132. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2007.04.009

Compilation of References

EU. (2005). A European Information Society for growth and employment. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/ index_en.htm European Council. (2000). Lisbon European Council: Summit 23 and 24. Retrieved from http://www.europarl. europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm European Council. (2006, July 31). European Parliament and Council Education Recommendations on Key Skills. No. 230-231 / 2007. Fahnbulleh, N. (2005). The future of electronic government. Futurics, 29(1/2), 7–12. Fang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: concept, practice and development. International Journal of the Computer . The Internet and Information, 10(2), 1–22. Feed, G., & Rothberg, M. (2006). Accessible Digital Media. Design Guidelines for Electronic Publications, Multimedia and the Web. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://ncam.wgbh.org/publications/adm/ Ferrer-García, M., & Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J. (2008). Body Image Assessment Software: Psychometric data. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 394–407. doi:10.3758/ BRM.40.2.394 Feuerstein, R., & Feuerstein, R. A. S. (2003). Feuerstein instrumental enrichment basic: Instruments. Jerusalem: ICELP. Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. (1974). Mediated learning experience: An outline of proximal etiology for differential development of cognitive functions. Journal of International Council of Psychology, 9, 7–37. Feuerstein, R., & Rand, Y. Hoffman, M., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Foshay, W. R. (1995 April). The problem with ISD models. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Society for Performance and Instruction, Chicago. Frith, U. (2003). Autism: Explaining the Enigma (2nd ed.). New York: Blackwell. Gadotti, M. (2000). Perspectivas Atuais da Educação. São Paulo em Perspectiva, 14(2). Gagné, F. (1999). My convictions about the nature of abilities, gifts and talents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22(2), 109–136. Galitsky, B. (2002). Extending the BDI model to accelerate the mental development of autistic patients. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL 02). Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 1–19. Gauvain, L. L. (2002). The LIMSI Broadcast News Transcription System. Speech Communication, 37(1-2), 89–108. doi:10.1016/S0167-6393(01)00061-9 Genovese, M. (2006). Tablet PC Research Project. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from http://www.butler.edu/ir/ cmsExternalDocuments/tabletResearchProject.pdf Geoffroy, F., Aimeur, E., & Gillet, D. (2002). A Virtual Assistant for Web-based Training in Engineering Education. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems (LNCS 2363, pp. 9-24). Gerrard, P., Cunningham, J. B., & Devlin, J. F. (2006). Why consumers are not using internet banking: A qualitative study. Journal of Services Marketing, 20(3), 160–168. doi:10.1108/08876040610665616 Gervey, B., & Lin, J. (2000). The age factor: How internet use varies from teens to seniors. Advertising Age, 71(16). Gibb, G. S., & Dychesm, T. T. (2000). Guide to Writing Quality Individualized Education Programs: What’s Best for Students with Disabilities?Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

209

Compilation of References

Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 187–216. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.02.001 Glass, J. R., Hazen, T. J., Cyphers, D. S., Schutte, K., & Park, A. (2005). THE MIT spoken lecture processing project. In Proceedings of HLT/EMNLP on Interactive Demonstrations (pp. 28-29). Glass, J., Hazen, T. J., Cyphers, S., Malioutov, I., Huynh, D., & Barzilay, R. (2007). Recent Progress in the MIT Spoken Lecture Processing Project. In Proceedings of INTERSPEECH Conference (pp. 2553-2556). Glass, J., Hazen, T. J., Hetherington, L., & Wang, C. (2004). Analysis and processing of lecture audio data: Preliminary investigations. In Proceedings of the HLTNAACL (pp. 9-12). New York: Association for Computational Linguistics. Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1). Gong, W., Li, Z. G., & Stump, R. L. (2007). Global internet use and access: Cultural considerations. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 19(1), 57–74. doi:10.1108/13555850710720902 González, R., Gasco, J., & Llopis, J. (2007). E-government success: some principles from a Spanish case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(6), 845–861. doi:10.1108/02635570710758752 Graf, S., & List, B. (2005). An Evaluation of Open Source E-learning Platforms Stressing Adaptation Issues. In Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 163-165). Grami, A., Rao, G. S., & Rosen, M. A. (2005). Use of Laptops in Internet-Enabled Learning Spaces: Enhancing Electrical Engineering Education. Retrieved February 7, 2007, from http://www.cden.ca/2005/2ndCDENconference/data/10045.pdf Gray, C. (1994). Social Stories. New York: Future Horizons Inc.

210

Gray, C. (2005). Revealing the Hidden Social Code: Social Stories for People with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Alsina-Jurnet, I., CarvalloBecíu, C., Letosa-Porta, A., & Magallón-Neri, E. (2007). Aplicaciones clínicas de la realidad virtual en el ámbito escolar. Cuadernos de medicina psicosomática y psiquiatría de enlace, 82, 32-51. Haisken-De New, J., Pischner, R., & Gert, G. (2001). Private internet use. Economic Bulletin, 38(12), 409–412. doi:10.1007/s10160-001-0120-3 Halpert, B. (2004). Mobile Devices Security. In Proceedings of the 1st annual conference on Information security curriculum development (pp. 99-101). Hammel, J., Finlayson, M., & Lastowski, S. (2003). Using participatory action research to examine outcomes and effect systems change in assistive technology financing. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 14, 98–109. doi:10 .1177/10442073030140020801 Hammond, M. (2005). A review of recent papers on online discussion in teaching and learning in higher education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3). Hardy, C. (2000). ICT for All. London: David Fulton Publishers. Harmelen, V. (2006). Personal Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT’06) (pp. 816-818). Retrieved July 15, 2009, from http://doi. ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/ICALT.2006.263 Haywood, C., Brooks, P., & Burns, M. S. (1986). Stimulating cognitive development at developmental level . In Schwebel, M., & Maher, C. A. (Eds.), Facilitating cognitive development: Principles, practices, and programs (pp. 127–147). New York: Haworth Press. Heller, K. (2004). Identification of Gifted and Talented Students. Psychological Science, 46(3), 302–323.

Compilation of References

Henderson, V., Grinter, R. E., & Starner, T. (2005). Electronic Communication by Deaf Teenagers. Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology. Hetzroni, O. E., & Tannous, J. (2004). Effects of a Computer-Based Interaction Program on the Communicative Functions of Children with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 95–113. doi:10.1023/B:JADD.0000022602.40506.bf

HP. (2010). HP iPAQ Glisten. Retrieved January 29, 2010 from: http://www.hp.com/sbso/ special/computing/ ipaq-glisten.html?jumpid=ex_r295_go/glisten/1Q10ipaqglisten/kimsmb/112409 Hu, H., & Ren, Y. (2008). New developments in learning technologies and significance for education research. China Educational Technologies, 4, 1–6.

Heward, W. L. (2000). Exceptional Children – an Introduction to Special Education (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hughes, G., Hudgins, B., & MacDougall, J. (2004). Remote Sign Language Interpretation Using the Internet. In Proceedings of Second Annual Conference on Communication Networks and Services Research (pp. 345-350).

Heylighen, F. (2007). Characteristics and Problems of the Gifted: neural propagation depth and flow motivation as a model of intelligence and creativity. Retrieved February 26, 2010, from http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/ Giftednessmodel.pdf

Humar, I., Pustisek, M., & Bester, J. (2003). Developing Dynamic Educational Material with Integrated Mathematical Notation for Web-based E-learning System. In 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (Vol. 1, pp. T3F-19 - T3F-24).

Hinckley, P. (2009). Making change work. The American School Board Journal, 196(3), 27–28.

ICAMPUS. (2003). ICAMPUS Projects. Spoken Lecture Processing. Retrieved June 2009, from http://icampus. mit.edu/projects/SpokenLecture.shtml

Hirsh, S., & Killion, J. (2009). When educators learn, students learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 464–469. Hitchcock, C., & Stahl, S. (2003). Assistive Technology, Universal Design, Universal Design for Learning: Improved Learning Opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(4). Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. R. (1988). The Confucian connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 5–21. doi:10.1016/00902616(88)90009-5 Holmes, B., Tangney, B., FitzGibbon, A., Savage, T., & Meehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. In J. Personal author, compiler, or editor name(s); click on any author to run a new search on that name.Price, A. Willis, N. Davis & J. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE - Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3315-3320). Norfolk, VA.: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. (2004). 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. Italian Government. (2005). Requisiti tecnici e i diversi livelli per l’accessibilità agli strumenti informatici. Decreto Ministeriale 8 luglio 2005. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://www.pubbliaccesso.it/normative/ DM080705.htm Jaeger, P. T. (2004). The social impact of an accessible E-democracy. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 15(1), 19–26. doi:10.1177/10442073040150010401 Jaeger, P. T. (2008). User-Centered Policy Evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24–33. doi:10.1177/1044207308315274 Jaeger, P. T., & Thompson, K. M. (2003). E-government around the world: lessons, challenges, and future directions. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 389–394. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.08.001

211

Compilation of References

Jensen, E. (2004). Cerebro y Aprendizaje. Competencias e Implicaciones Educativas. Madrid: Narcea Ediciones. Jiménez, J., Revuelta, P., Ruiz, B., & Sánchez, J. M. (2008). Online Captioning System for Educational Resources Accessibility of Hard-of-Hearing people. In Proceedings Young Researcher. 11th Internacional Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2008) (pp. 22-31). Retrieved from http://www.icchp.org/ files/YR_Proceedings.pdf Jobber, D. (2004). Principles and Practice of Marketing (4th ed.). London: McGraw-Hill International. Johnsen, S. (2004). Identifying Gifted Students: A Practical Guide. Austin: Prufrock Press Inc. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49(1), 51–69. Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individual goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47–62. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.47 Johnson, A. (2008). Internet Strategies for Gifted Students. Gifted Child Today, 31(2), 58–64. Johnson, D. (2005). Sustaining change in schools: How to overcome differences and focus on quality. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). An overview of cooperative learning. In J. Thousand, A. Villa & A. Nevin (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning. Baltimore: Brookes Press. Retrieved January 27, 2008, from http:// www.co-operation.org/pages/overviewpaper.html Jonassen, D. H. (1995). Mindtools for schools. New York: Macmillan. Jorczak, R. L. (2008). The effects of task characteristics on higher-order learning in online collaborative learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

212

Judge, S. (2000). Accessing and funding assistive technology for young children with disabilities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(2), 125–131. doi:10.1023/A:1009507722653 Juznic, P., Blazic, M., Mercun, T., & Plestenjak, B. (2006). Who says that old dogs cannot learn new tricks? New Library World, 107(1226/1227), 332–345. doi:10.1108/03074800610677308 Kanevsky, D., Basson, S., Chen, S., Faisman, A., & Zlatsin, A. (2006). Speech Transcription Services. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Speech and Computer (SPECOM 2006), St. Petersburg (pp. 25-29). Keegan, D. (2005). Mobile Learning: The Next Generation of Learning. Retrieved from http://learning.ericsson.net/ mlearning2/files/workpackage5/book.doc Kersting, S. (1997). Balancing Between Deaf and Hearing Worlds: Reflections of Mainstreamed College Students on Relationships and Social Interaction. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2(4), 252–263. Kheir, R., & Way, T. (2007). Inclusion of deaf students in computer sciences classes using real-time speech transcription. In Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (ITiCSE’07) (pp. 261 - 265). New York: ACM. Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (in press). Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers & Education. Kinash, S., Crichton, S., & Kim-Rupnow, W. S. (2004). A review of 2000-2003 literature at the intersection of online learning and disability. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 5–19. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1801_2 King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar. H. Mandl & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computersupported collaborative learning (pp. 13-38). New York: Springer.

Compilation of References

King, N. J. (2003). Website Access for Customers with Disabilities: Can We Get There From Here? UCLA Journal of Law and Technology, 6. Kirby, B. L. (2005). What is Asperger syndrome? Online Asperger syndrome information and support site. Retrieved on December 12, 2008 from http://www.udel. edu/bkirby/asperger/aswhatisit.html. Kirk, S., & Gallagher, J. (2002). Educação da Criança Excepcional (3rd ed.). São Paulo, Brazil: Martins Fonte. Kondratova, I., & Goldfarb, I. (2006). M-learning: Overcoming the Usability Challenges of Mobile Devices. In International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies (ICNICONSMCL’06). Koper, R., & Manderveld, J. (2004). Educational modelling language: modelling reusable, interoperable, rich personalised units of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 537–551. doi:10.1111/j.00071013.2004.00412.x Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J., & Wong, V. (1999). Principles of marketing (2nd European Ed.). London: Prentice-Hall Europe. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kress, G., & Pachler, N. (2007). Thinking about the ‘m-’ in m-learning . In Pachler, N. (Ed.), Mobile learning towards a research agenda. London: WLE Centre. Kroth, R., & Edge, D. (2007). Assistive technology and devices. Counseling and Human Development, 39(9), 1–8. Kurtts, S. A., Matthews, C. E., & Smallwood, T. (2009). (Dis)Solving the Differences A Physical Science Lesson Using Universal Design. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(3), 151–159. doi:10.1177/1053451208326051 Kyle, J. G., & Woll, B. (1985). Sign Language: The Study of Deaf People and Their Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lahm, E. (2003). Assistive technology specialists: Bringing knowledge of assistive technology to school districts. Remedial and Special Education, 24(3), 141–152. doi:1 0.1177/07419325030240030301 Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. Lamel, L., Bilinski, E., Adda, G., Gauvain, J.-L., & Schwenk, H. (2006). The LIMSI RT06s Lecture Transcription System . In Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction (pp. 457–468). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/11965152_40 Lampropoulou, V. (1992). Meeting the Needs of Deaf Children in Greece. A Systematic Approach. Journal of the British Association of the Teachers of the Deaf, 16(2), 33–34. Lampropoulou, V. (1992). The Socioeconomic Status of Deaf People in Greece. Journal of the British Association of the Teachers of the Deaf, 16(4), 90–96. Lapadat, J. C. (2002). Written interaction: A key component in online learning. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(4). Lassar, W. M., Manolis, C., & Lassar, S. S. (2005). The relationship between consumer innovativeness, personal characteristics, and online banking adoption. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 23(2), 176–199. doi:10.1108/02652320510584403 Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136. doi:10.1016/S0740624X(01)00066-1 Leitch, D., & MacMillan, T. (2003). Innovative Technology and Inclusion: Current Issues and Future Directions for Liberated Learning Research. Saint Mary’s University. Letosa-Porta, A., Ferrer-García, M., & Guitiérrez-Maldonado, J. (2005). A program for assessing body image disturbance using adjustable partial image distortion. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 37, 638–643.

213

Compilation of References

Liberated Learning. (2003). Taking Liberated Learning to New Realms: Network Via Scribe Project. Saint Mary’s University.

Macneill, N., Cavanagh, R., & Silcox, S. (2003). Pedagogic principal leadership. Management in Education, 17(14), 14–17. doi:10.1177/08920206030170040401

Liberated Learning. (2007). Liberated Learning. IBM ViaScribe Voice Recognition Software Technology. Retrieved June 2009, from http://www.liberatedlearning. com/technology/index.shtml

Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2000). Marketing research: An applied approach (European Ed.). New York: Pearson Education Limited.

Lindblad, T. (1996). Language and Communication Programming and Intervention for Children with Autism and Other Related Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 20, 111–120. Liu, G.-Z., & Hwang, G.-J. (2009). A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards contextaware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. Lorenz, S. (1998). Effective in-class Support: the Management of Support Staff in Mainstream and Special Schools. London: David Fulton Publishers. Lowery, N., & Johnson, D. W. (1981). Effects of controversy on epistemic curiosity, achievement, and attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 115(1), 31–43. Lytras, M., Tennyson, R. D., & Ordonez de Pablos, P. (2009). Knowledge networks: The social software perspective. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Lytras, M. D. (2007). Teaching in the Knowledge Society: An Art of Passion. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 1(1/2), 1–9. doi:10.1504/ IJTCS.2007.014205 Lytras, M. D., & Sicilia, M. A. (2005). The Knowledge Society: A Manifesto for Knowledge and Learning. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning., 1(1/2), 1–11. doi:10.1504/IJKL.2005.006259 Lytras, M. D. (2007). The Semantic Electronic Government: Knowledge Management for Citizen Relationship and New Assessment Scenarios. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 3(1), 5-17.

214

Manning, S. (2006). The name assigned to the document by the author. This field may also contain sub-titles, series names, and report numbers.Recognizing Gifted Students: A Practical Guide for Teachers. The entity from which ERIC acquires the content, including journal, organization, and conference names, or by means of online submission from the author.Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(2), 64-68. Retrieved February 28, 2010, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/ content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1d/c9/13.pdf Mayer, R. (2005). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52. doi:10.1207/ S15326985EP3801_6 Mc Andrew, P., Goodyear, P., & Dalziel, J. (2008). Patterns, designs and activities: unifying descriptions of learning structures. Retrieved September 2009, from http:// kn.open.ac.uk/public/getfile.cfm?documentfileid=6000 McCoey, J. (2007). Methods for Improving Readability of Speech Recognition Transcripts. In Proceedings of the 1st Villanova University undergraduate Computer Science Research Simposium (pp. 43-55). Villanova, PA: Villanova University. McGreal, R., Cheung, B., Tin, T., & Schafer, S. (2005). Implementing Mobile Environments using Learning Objects: The Athabasca University Digital Reading Room. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (pp. 136-140). McLuhan, M. (1966). Media is the message. New York: New Books.

Compilation of References

Menchin, R. (1989). The mature market: A strategic marketing guide to America’s fastest growing population segment. Chicago, IL: Probus Publishing Company. Meyer, I., Müller, S., & Kubitschke, L. (2006). eInclusion – Towards a Coherent European Policy Response to Social Inequalities in the Information Society. Paper presented at eChallenges Conference. Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3). Retrieved January 22, 2009, from http://www.aln.org/publications/ jaln/v7n3/pdf/v7n3_meyer.pdf Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions and coping strategies. The Journal of Consumer Research, 123–143. doi:10.1086/209531 Microsoft Corporation. (2003). Understanding SAMI 1.0. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://msdn.microsoft. com/en-us/library/ms971327.aspx Mitchell, P., Parsons, S., & Leonard, A. (2007). Using Virtual Environments for Teaching Social Understanding to 6 Adolescents with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 589–600. doi:10.1007/s10803-006-0189-8 Miyamoto, K., Arakawa, K., & Takizawa, M. (2007). Integration of Caption Editing System with Presentation Software. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 4554, pp. 761-770). Beijing: Springer. Molla, A., & Al-Jaghoub, S. (2007). Evaluating Digital Inclusion Projects: A Livelihood Approach. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(6), 592–611. doi:10.1504/IJKL.2007.016835 Moody, S. (2000). Dyslexia—a psychotherapist’s guide. The Dyslexia Online Journal. Retrieved December 12, 2008, from http://www.dyslexia-adults.com/therapy.html

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1995). Distance Education: A Systems View. London: Wadsworth Publishing. Moreno, L., Iglesias, A., Castro, E., & Martínez, P. (2008). Using accessible digital resources forteaching database design: Towards an inclusive distance learning proposal. In Proceedings of the 3th Annual Conference on Innovation and Techonology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE 2008) (pp. 32-36). Madrid: ACM. Moschis, G. P. (2003). Marketing to older adults: An updated overview of present knowledge and practice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(6), 516–525. doi:10.1108/07363760310499093 Moseley, D., Higgins, S., Bramald, R., Hardman, F., Miller, J., Mroz, M., et al. (1999). Ways forward with ICT: Effective Pedagogy using Information and Communications Technology for Literacy and Numeracy in Primary Schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.leeds. ac.uk/educol/documents/00001369.htm Muris, P., Steerneman, P., Meesters, C., Merckelbach, H., Horselenberg, R., van den Hogen, T., & Van Dongen, L. (1999). The TOM Test: A new Instrument for Assessing Theory of Mind in Normal Children and Children with Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 67–80. doi:10.1023/A:1025922717020 Murray, D., Lesser, M., & Lawson, W. (2005). Attention, Monotropism and the Diagnostic Criteria for Autism. Autism, 9(2). doi:10.1177/1362361305051398 Murray, B. (2008). Underachievers. In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Retrieved February 21, 2010 from http://www.encyclopedia.com/ doc/1G2-3045302831.html Naeve, A., Lytras, M., Nejdl, W., Harding, J., & Balacheff, N. (2006). Advances of Semantic Web for E-learning: Expanding learning frontiers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(3), 321–330. doi:10.1111/j.14678535.2006.00608.x

Moore, M. G. (1989). Three Types of Interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6. doi:10.1080/08923648909526659

215

Compilation of References

Namazi, K., & McClintic, M. (2003). Computer use among elderly persons in long-term care facilities. Educational Gerontology, 29, 535–550. doi:10.1080/713844391 Neuwirth, S. (1993). Learning disabilities. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.kidsource.com/ kidsource/content/learningdis.html Ng, W., & Nicholas, H. (2007). Technology and independent learning. Roeper Review, 29(3), 190–196. doi:10.1080/02783190709554408 Nielsen, M. (2002). Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: Recommendations for Identification and Programming. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 93–111. NIMH. (1996). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. National Institute of Mental Health. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from http://www.himh.nih.gov/health/publications/adhd/nimhadhdpub.pdf Noell, G., & Gansle, K. (2009). Moving from good ideas in educational systems change to sustainable program implementation: Coming to terms with some of the realities. Psychology in the Schools, 46(1), 79–89. doi:10.1002/pits.20355 Nokia. (2010). Nokia E72. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/ nokia-e72/specifications Nokia. (2010). Nokia N97. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://www.nokia.ca/find-products/phones/nokian97#/main/landing Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: CRC Press. Northway, R. (1997). Integration and Inclusion: Illusion or Progress in Services for Disabled People? Social Policy and Administration, 3, 157–172. doi:10.1111/14679515.00046

216

O’Cass, A., & Fenech, T. (2003). Webretailing adoption: Exploring the nature of internet users’ webretailing behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10, 81–94. doi:10.1016/S0969-6989(02)00004-8 O’Conner, B. (1985). Access to moving image documents: Background concepts and proposals for surrogates for film and video works. The Journal of Documentation, 41(4), 209–220. doi:10.1108/eb026781 O’Neil, H., & Perez, R. (Eds.). (2008). Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. O’Neill, G., & McMahon, T. (2005). Student-centered learning: What does it mean for students and lecturers? In G. O’Neill, S. Moore & B. McMullin (Eds.), Emerging issues in the practice of University Learning and Teaching, AISHE, Dublin. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.aishe.org/readings /2005-1/oneill-mcmahonTues_19th_Oct_SCL.html OECD. (2001). Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Learning to Change: ICT in Schools. Ofsted. (2004). ICT Special educational needs and disability: towards inclusive schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications /index. cfm?fuseaction=pubs.summary&id=3737 Oliveira, E. (2007). Alunos sobredotados: a aceleração escolar como resposta educativa. Unpublished PhD Thesis presented to Minho University, Portugal. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/ handle/1822/7081?locale=en Oliver, M. (2006). Editorial: New pedagogies for e-learning? ALT-J, 14(2), 133–134. doi:10.1080/09687760600668453 Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2003). Human-computer interaction: Psychological aspects of the human use of computing. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 491–516. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145044 Ott, M., & Pozzi, F. (2009a). Exploring the new learning landscape: which added values for the new learners? In L. Gómez Chova, D. Martí Belenguer, I. Candel Torres (Eds.), EDULEARN09 Proceedings, International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies – IATED.

Compilation of References

Ott, M., & Pozzi, F. (2009b). Inclusive Education and ICT: Reflecting on Tools and Methods Paper presented at the AAATE2009 Conference, Florence 1 September 2009. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4. doi:10.1207/ S15326985EP3801_1 Pablos, J. P., & Villaciervos, P. M. (2005). El Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior y las Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación. Percepciones y Demandas del Profesorado. Revista de Educación, 337, 99–124. Panitz, T. (2007). Collaborative versus cooperative learning – a comparison of the two concept which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning. Online article. Retrieved October 2009, from http://home. capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopdefinition.htm Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Books. Papert, S. (1990). Introduction by Seymour Papert . In Harel, I. (Ed.), Constructionist learning (pp. 1–8). Boston: MIT Media Laboratory. Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology readiness index (TRI), A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320. doi:10.1177/109467050024001 Paredes, R. G. J., Ogata, H., Yano, Y., & Martin, G. A. S. (2005). A Multi-Model Approach for Supporting the Personalization of Ubiquitous Learning Applications. In IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’05). Park, S., & Ertmer, P. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problem-based learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 631–643. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-8535.2008.00858.x

Park, A., Hazen, T. J., & Glass, J. R. (2005). Automatic processing of audio lectures for information retrieval: Vocabulary selection and language modeling. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP’05) (pp. 497- 500). Washington, DC: IEEE. Parmanto, B., & Zeng, X. (2005). Metric for Web accessibility evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(13), 1394–1404. doi:10.1002/asi.20233 Parsons, S., Daniels, H., Porter, J., & Robertson, C. (2008). Resources, staff beliefs and organizational culture: Factors in the use of information and communication technology for adults with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 21(1), 19–33. Parsons, S., Mitchell, P., & Leonard, A. (2004). The Use and Understanding of Virtual Environments by Adolescents with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 449–466. doi:10.1023/B:JADD.0000037421.98517.8d Parsons, S., Mitchell, P., & Leonard, A. (2005). Do adolescents with autistic spectrum disorders adhere to social conventions in virtual environments? Autism, 9, 95–117. doi:10.1177/1362361305049032 Pereira, F., & Burnett, I. (2003). Universal Multimedia Experiences for Tomorrow. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 20(2), 63–73. doi:10.1109/MSP.2003.1184340 Perpiñá, C., Botella, C., & Baños, R. M. (2003). Virtual Reality in Eating Disorders. European Eating Disorders Review, 11, 261–278. doi:10.1002/erv.520 Petrides, Ll., Nguyen, L., Jimes, C., & Karaglani, A. (2008). Open educational resources: inquiring into author use and reuse. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1/2). doi:10.1504/IJTEL.2008.020233 Phipps, L., Sutherland, A., & Seale, J. (2002). Access All Areas: Disability, Technologies and Learning. York, UK: JISC.

217

Compilation of References

Pickton, D., & Broderick, A. (2005). Integrated marketing communications (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Pieterson, W., Ebbers, W., & van Dijka, J. (2006). Personalization in the public sector: An inventory of organizational and user obstacles towards personalization of electronic services in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 24(1), 148–164. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.12.001 Piety, P. (2004). The Language System of Audio Description: an Investigation as a Discursive Process. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 98(8), 453–460. Pilling, D., Barrett, P., & Floyd, M. (2004). Disabled People and the Internet Experiences, Barriers and Opportunities. York, UK: The Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.marcprensky.com /writing/Prensky%20-%20 Digital%20Natives, %20Digital%20Immigrants%20 -%20Part1.pdf Punie, Y., & Carneiro, R. (2009). The New Learning Generation. Editorial eLearning Papers 15. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index. php?page=volume Qiao, G., Li, N., & Peng, W. (2005). Probe on information technologies application in special education. Modern Distance Education Research, 6, 23–25. Raghunathan, A., Ravi, S., Hattangady, S., & Quisquater, J. J. (2003). Securing Mobile Appliances: New Challenges for the System Designer. In Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition (DATE’03). Retrieved from: http://www.uoit.ca Rea, D. (2009). Motivating Gifted Students . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 591–594). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. (2002). Underachievement in Gifted and Talented Students With Special Needs. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 113–125.

218

Renzulli, J. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Re-examining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–181. Renzulli, J., & Fleith, D. (2003). O Modelo de Enriquecimento Escolar. Sobredotação, 3(2), 7–40. Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Emerging Conceptions of Giftedness: Building a Bridge to the New Century. Exceptionality: A Special . Education Journal, 10(2), 67–75. Renzulli, J., & Reis, S. (2007). A Technology Based Program That Matches Enrichment Resources With Student Strengths. International Journal Of Emerging Technologies In Learning (IJET), 2(3). Retrieved March 7, 2010, from http://online-journals.org/i-jet/article/view/126/78. Report, O. (2001). Evaluating Educational Inclusion Guidance for Inspectors and Schools. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/assets/459.pdf Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Iglesias, A., & Moreno, L. (2009). APEINTA: A Spanish Educational Project Aiming for Inclusive Education in and out the classroom. In 14th Annual SIGSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Paris. Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Sánchez, J. M., & Ruiz, B. (2008). Closed Captioning for Accessibility of Hard of Hearing People in Educational Environment. Procesamiento del lenguaje Natural, 41, 305-306. Revuelta, P., Jiménez, J., Sánchez, J. M., & Ruiz, B. (2008). Multidevice System for Educational Accessibility of Hearing-Impaired Students. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology in Education (CATE 2008) (pp. 20-25). Crete: Acta Press. Ribeiro, J., Moreira, A., & Almeida, A. (2009a). An approach to Inclusion through Information and Communication Technology. In I. Gomes & R. Maia (Eds.), Proceedings of 1st International Congress on Family, School and Society – Special Education (pp. 1089-1102). Porto, Portugal: Educare.

Compilation of References

Rieffe, C., Terwogt, M., & Stockmann, L. (2000). Understanding Atypical Emotions Among Children with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 195–203. doi:10.1023/A:1005540417877 Riley, D. (2007). Educational Technology and Practice: Types and Timescales of Change. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 85–93. Riley, T. B., & Riley, C. G. (2003). E-governance to E-democracy: Examining the Evolution. International Tracking Survey Report, No. 5. Rimm, S. (2009). Underachievement . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 911–914). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Riva, G., Bacchetta, M., Baruffi, M., Rinaldi, S., Vincelli, F., & Molinari, E. (2000). Virtual Reality-Based Experiential Cognitive Treatment of Obesity and Binge-Eating Disorders. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 7, 209– 219. doi:10.1002/1099-0879(200007)7:3<209::AIDCPP232>3.0.CO;2-V Rivero, V. (2005). Moving it forward. The American School Board Journal, 192(9), 32–34. Rizzo, A. A., Buckwalter, J. G., Bowerly, T., Humphrey, L. A., Neumann, U., Rooyen, A., & Kim, L. (2001). The virtual classroom: a virtual reality environment for the assessment and rehabilitation of attention deficits. Revista Española de Neuropsicología, 3, 11–37. Robertson, T. S., & Kassarjian, H. H. (1991). Handbook of consumer behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Roblyer, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: How wireless handhelds may change computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Cognitive Technology, 1(1), 145–168. doi:10.1075/ijct.1.1.09ros

Rosenberg, M. J. (2000). E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age. New York: McGraw-Hill. Ross, S. M., Sullivan, H., & Tennyson, R. D. (1992). Educational technology: Four decades of research and theory. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(2), 5–8. doi:10.1007/BF02297045 Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51–70. Rutagemwa, H., & Shen, X. (2003). Modeling and Analysis of WAP performance over Wireless Links. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2(3), 221–232. doi:10.1109/TMC.2003.1233528 Ruth, S., & Doh, S. (2007). Is E-Government Ready for Prime Time? IEEE Computing, 11(2), 80–82. Saladin, M. E., Brady, K. T., Graap, K., & Rothbaum, B. O. (2006). A preliminary report on the use of virtual reality technology to elicit craving and cue reactivity in cocaine dependent individuals. Addictive Behaviors, 31, 1881–1894. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.01.004 Salomon, G., Perkins, P. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2–9. Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individuals’ cognition . In Salomon, G. (Ed.), Distributed cognition’s (pp. 111–138). New York: Cambridge University Press. Salway, A. (2007). A Corpus-based Analysis of Audio Description . In Garin, E., Díaz-Cintas, J., Orero, P., & Remael, A. (Eds.), Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description and Sign Language (pp. 151–174). Amsterdam: Rodopi. Sanger, L. M. (2006). The Future of Free Information. Digital Universe Journal, 2006(1).

219

Compilation of References

Sarikas, O. D., & Weerakkody, V. (2007). Realising integrated E-government services: a UK local government perspective. Transforming Government: People . Process and Policy, 1(2), 153–173. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students (3rd ed.). Essex, UK: Prentice-Hall. Sawhney, N., & Schmandt, C. (2000). Nomadic Radio: Speech and Audio Interaction for Contextual Messaging in Nomadic Environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(3), 353–383. doi:10.1145/355324.355327 Schenker, K. T., & Scadden, L. A. (2002). The design of accessible distance education environments that use collaborative learning. Information Technology and Disabilities, 8(1). Schultheis, M. T., Himelstein, J., & Rizzo, A. A. (2002). Virtual Reality and Neuropsychology: Upgrading the Current Tools. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 17, 378–394. doi:10.1097/00001199-200210000-00002 Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: Mastering the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Senos, J., & Dinis, T. (1998). Crianças e Jovens Sobredotados: Intervenção Educativa. Departamento de Educação Básica: Ministério da Educação. Retrieve January 1, 2008, from www.dgidc.min‐edu.pt/fichdown/ensinoespecial/ criancas_jovens_sobredotados.pdf Serra, H. (2004). O aluno sobredotado: compreender para apoiar - Um guia para educadores e professores. Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal: Gailivro. Shi, Y. (2007). The accessibility of Chinese local government Web sites: An exploratory study. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 377–403. doi:10.1016/j. giq.2006.05.004 Shudong, W., & Higgins, M. (2005). Limitations of Mobile Phone Learning. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’05) (pp. 179-181).

220

Sicilia, M. A., & García, E. (2003). On the concepts of usability and reusability of learning objects. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Siegle, D. (2004a). The merging of literacy and technology in the 21st century: A bonus for gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 27(2), 32–35. Siegle, D. (2005a). Six uses of the Internet to develop students’ gifts and talents. Gifted Child Today, 28(2), 30–36. Siegle, D. (2005b). The Internet as an Aide to Teaching the Gifted. Understanding Our Gifted, 17(4), 6–8. Siegle, D. (2004b). Learning Online: A Viable Alternative for Gifted and Talented Students. Technology Matters, 4(4). Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://www. dukegiftedletter.com/articles/vol4_no4_tm.html Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. Siemens, G. (2007). PLEs - I Acronym, Therefore I Exist. Elearnspace. Retrieved November 16, 2008 from http:// www.elearnspace.org/blog/2007/04/15/ples-i-acronymtherefore-i-exist Siemens, G. (2008). New structures and spaces of learning: The systemic impact of connective knowledge, connectivism, and networked learning. In A. Carvalho (Ed.), Actas do Encontro sobre Web 2.0 (pp. 7-23). Braga, Portugal: CIEd – Universidade do Minho. Silva, M. (1992). Sobredotados - suas necessidades educativas específicas. Porto: Porto Editora. Skelcher, C. (1992). Managing for Service Quality. Harlow, UK: Longman. Skyba, O. (2009). Online Gifted Education . In Kerr, B. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent (pp. 653–657). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Developmental and motivation perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161–1167. doi:10.2307/1130612

Compilation of References

Slavin, R. E. (1992). When and why does cooperative learning increase achievement? Theoretical and empirical perspectives . In Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Miller, N. (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups (pp. 145–173). New York: Cambridge University Press. Smutney, J. (2004). Meeting the needs of gifted underachievers – individually! Davidson Institute. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://www.davidsongifted.org/ db/Articles_id_10442. Spanish Government. (2007). Reglamento sobre las condiciones básicas para el acceso de las personas con discapacidad a las tecnologías, productos y servicios relacionados con la sociedad de la información y medios de comunicación social. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www.boe.es/g/es/bases_datos/doc.php?colec cion=iberlex&id=2007/19968 Stenberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. (2003). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/ CBO9780511615801 Stolurow, L. M. (1962). Implications of current research and future trends. The Journal of Educational Research, 55, 519–527. Strejcek, G., & Theil, M. (2002). Technology push, legislation pull? E-government in the European Union. Decision Support Systems, 34(3), 305–313. doi:10.1016/ S0167-9236(02)00123-9 Strickland, D., Marcus, L. M., Mesibov, G. B., & Hogan, K. (1996). Brief report: two case studies using Virtual Reality as a Learning Tool for Autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 651–659. doi:10.1007/BF02172354 Suppes, P. (1979). Current trends in computer-assisted instruction . In Yovits, M. C. (Ed.), Advances in computers (Vol. 18, pp. 173–229). New York: Academic Press. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4).

Szmigin, I., & Carrigan, M. (2000). The older consumer as innovator: Does cognitive age hold the key? Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 505–527. doi:10.1362/026725700785046038 Tablet, P. C. (2004). Becta technical Paper. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from www.becta.org.uk/subsections/ foi/documents/technology_and_education_research/ tablet_pc.do Tavangarian, D., Leypold, M., Nölting, K., Röser, M., & Voigt, D. (2004). Is E-Learning the Solution for Individual Learning? Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 2(2), 273–280. Taylor, R. L. (2000). Assessment of Exceptional Students: Educational and Psychological Procedures. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Tennyson, R. D. (2005). Using glass box simulations to accelerate and extend knowledge transfer. System Dynamics Review, 21, 243–267. Tennyson, R. D. (1988). An instructional strategy planning model to improve learning and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 35–45. doi:10.1016/07475632(88)90028-3 Tennyson, R. D. (1990). Cognitive learning theory linked to instructional theory. Journal of Structural Learning, 10, 249–258. Tennyson, R. D. (2006). Advancements in the integration of technology into higher education: Situated technologyenhanced learning support systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54, 129–131. Tennyson, R. D., & Jorczak, R. L. (in press). Benefits of CSCL for learners with disabilities . In Ordóñez de Pablos, P. (Ed.), Technology enhanced learning for people with disabilities: Approaches and applications. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Tennyson, R. D., & Breuer, K. (2003). Computer-based training: Advancements from cognitive science . In Piskurich, G. M. (Ed.), The ASTD handbook of instructional technology (pp. 24.1–24.12). New York: McGraw-Hill.

221

Compilation of References

Tennyson, R. D. (2005b). Linking learning theory with instruction . In Schott, F., & Hillebrandt, D. (Eds.), Outside behavior – Inside cognition? (pp. 62–94). Berlin: Springer. Tennyson, R. D. (1995). The impact of the cognitive science movement on instructional design fundamentals . In Seels, B. (Ed.), Instructional design fundamentals: A reconsideration (pp. 113–136). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology. Tennyson, R. D. (2005a). Learning theories and instructional design: An historical perspective tof the linking model . In Spector, J. M., Ohrazda, C., & Van Schaak, A. (Eds.), Innovations in instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill (pp. 219–235). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Tennyson, R. D. (1994). Knowledge base for automated instructional system development . In Tennyson, R. D. (Ed.), Automating instructional design, development, and delivery (pp. 29–60). Berlin: Springer. Tennyson, R. D., & Elmore, R. (1997). Learning theory foundations for instructional design. In R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives, Vol. I: Theory and research (pp. 177-182). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Thong, J.-M. V., Moreno, P. J., Logan, B., Fidler, B., Maffey, K., & Moores, M. (2002). SpeechBot: An experimental speech-based search engine for multimedia content on the web. IEEE Trans. Multimedia, 88–96. Thorne, D. T. (1996). Activities, events and services for and about seniors. Retrieved from http://www.infi.net Thornton, P., & Houser, C. (2004). Using Mobile Phones in Education. In 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’04). Timmers, P. (2008). EU E-inclusion policy in context. Info, the journal of policy, regulation and strategy for telecommunications, information and media, 10(5/6), 12-19. Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of E-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 354–369. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00594.x

222

Trancoso, I., Martins, R., Moniz, H., Mata, A. I., & Viana, M. C. (2008). The LECTRA Corpus – Classroom Lecture Transcriptions in European Portuguese. Proceedings of the Sixth International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’08). Marrakech: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). Tréhin, P. (2004). Computer Use for People with Learning Difficulties: Basic Needs. Berlin: Miesenberger Publishing. Trifonova, A. (2003). Mobile Learning – Review of the Literature. Technical Report DIT-03-009, Informatica e Telecomunicazioni, University of Trento. Trocchia, P. J., & Janda, S. (2000). A phenomenological investigation of internet usage among older individuals. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(7), 605–616. doi:10.1108/07363760010357804 Twining, P. (2007). Discussing ICT, Aspirations and Targets for Education: International Perspectives. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(2/3), 154–170. doi:10.1504/IJKL.2007.015549 U.K. Government. (2005). UK Disability Discrimination Act. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www. direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/ DisabilityRights/DG_4001068 U.S. Department of Justice. (2001). Guide to the Section 508 Standards for Electronic and Information Technology. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www.accessboard.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm UNESCO. (1998). World Declaration on Higher Education for the Twenty-First Century: Vision and Action. Retrieved from.http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/ wche/declaration_eng.htm UNESCO. (2001). Understanding and Responding to Children’s Needs in Inclusive Classrooms. Retrieved October 2009, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0012/001243/124394e.pdf

Compilation of References

UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Retrieved October 2009, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001402/140224e. pdf

Waheed, K. A. (2003). Interview. A World of Science. Retrieved October 2009, from http://portal.unesco. org /ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=11958&URL _DO=DO_ TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html

UNESCO. (2009). Education for all: human right and catalyst for development. In Education for All - Global Monitoring Report 2009. Retrieved October 2009, from http://www.unesco.org/en/efareport/reports/2009governance/

WAI/W3C. (2005). Introduction to Web Accessibility. Retrieved December, 26 2008, from http://www.w3.org/ WAI/intro/accessibility.php WAI/W3C. (2008). WAI Guidelines and Techniques. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/WAI/guid-tech.html

Vahid, B., Harwood, S., & Brown, S. (1998). 500 Tips for Working with Children with Special Needs. London: Kogan Page. Berners-Lee, T. (2004). The definition of Accessibility. Retrieved December 29, 2004, from http:// www.ocawa.com/Accessibility_8_en/Definition_30.htm

Waibel, A. (2005). CHIL keynote at LEARNTEC 2005 on CHIL. CHIL – Computers in the Human Interaction Loop. Retrieved June 2009, from http://chil.server.de/ servlet/is/2510/

van Es, R., & Koper, R. (2005). Testing the pedagogical expressiveness of IMS LD. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 229–249.

Wald, M. (2004). Using Automatic Speech Recognition to Enhance Education for All Students: Turning a Vision into Reality. In 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, session S3G (pp. 22-25).

Vavoula, G. N., & Sharples, M. & KLeOS (2002). A personal, mobile, knowledge and learning organization system. In M. Milrad, U. Hoppe, & Kinshuk (Eds.), Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Mobile and Wireless Technologies in Education (WMTE2002) Aug. 29-30, Vaxjo, Sweden (pp. 152-156). Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 Vigo, M., Arrue, M., Brajnik, G., Lomuscio, R., & Abascal, J. (2007). Quantitative metrics for measuring Web accessibility. In W4A ‘07: Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A). Vuori, S., & Holmlund-Rytkonen, M. (2005). 55+ people as internet users. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 23(1), 58–76. doi:10.1108/02634500510577474 W3C. (1998). Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Recuperado el June de 2009, de http://www.w3.org/WAI /

Wald, M., & Bain, K. (2007). Enhancing the Usability of Real-Time Speech Recognition Captioning through Personalised Displays and Real-Time Multiple Speaker Editing and Annotation. In Proceedings of HCI International 2007: 12th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (LNCS 4556, pp. 446-452). Beijing: Springer. Wald, M., & Bain, K. (2008). Using Speech Recognition for Real-Time Captioning of Multiple Speakers. Multimedia, IEEE, 56-57. Watanabe, T., & Kato, K. (2008). Computer-Supported Interaction for Preparing Logically Organized Documents. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 19, 428–434. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-87783-7_54 Way, T., Kheir, R., & Bevilacqua, L. (2008). Achieving Acceptable Accuracy in a Low-Cost, Assistive NoteTaking, Speech Transcription System. In Proceedings of Telehealth and Assistive Technologies (TeleHealth/AT 2008). Baltimore, MD: Acta Press. Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–39. doi:10.1016/0883-0355(89)90014-1

223

Compilation of References

Wilcox, S. (2003). The Multimedia Dictionary of American Sign Language. Learning Lessons about Language, Technology, and Business. Sign Language Studies, 3(4), 379–392. doi:10.1353/sls.2003.0019 Wilson, L. (2006). Look Ma Bell, No Hands! – VoiceXML, X+V, and the Mobile Device. XML Journal. Retrieved October 12, 2006 from: http://xml.sys-con.com/read/45792. htm?CFID=35964&CFTOKEN=D160E34C-DC597D3B-3DA79BF1ACFC6B42 Winn, W. (1990). Some implications of cognitive theory for instructional design. Instructional Science, 19, 53–69. doi:10.1007/BF00377985 Woodruff, S. I., Conway, T. L., Edwards, C. C., Elliot, S. P., & Crittenden, J. (2007). Evaluation of an Internet virtual world chat room for adolescent smoking cessation. Addictive Behaviors, 32, 1769–1786. doi:10.1016/j. addbeh.2006.12.008 Wu, S.-I. (2002). Internet marketing involvement and consumer behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 14(4), 36–53. doi:10.1108/13555850210764945 Xiao, L. (2007). The using of information technologies methods in special education. Journal of Henan Institute of Education General ( . Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 26(12), 81–83.

224

Yeager, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 60–66. doi:10.1037/00220663.77.1.60 Zascavage, V., & Winterman, K. (2009). Middle school educators should know about assistive technology and universal design for learning. Middle School Journal, 40(4), 46–52. Zeithmaml, V. A., & Gilly, M. C. (1987). Characteristics affecting the acceptance of retailing technologies: A comparison of elderly and non-elderly consumers. Journal of Retailing, 63(Spring), 49–68. Zhang, J. (2003). Modern Education Technologies - Theory and Applications. Beijing: Higher Education Press. Zhang, J., Zhu, X., & Cheng, J. (2006). Blind area of application and research of educational technologiesEducation of Disabilities, Modern . Educational Technology, 16(4), 13–15. Zhu, Z. (2002). Information Education Outlook. Shanghai, China: East China Normal University Press. Zoll, C., Enz, S., Schaub, H., Aylett, R., & Paiva, A. (2006). Fighting bullying with the help of autonomous agents in a virtual school environment. Dissertation, Trieste, Italy.

225

About the Contributors

Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos is a Professor in the Department of Business Administration and Accountability in the Faculty of Economics of the University of Oviedo, Spain. Her teaching and research interests focus on the areas of strategic management, knowledge management, intellectual capital measuring and reporting, organisational learning and human resources management. She serves as Executive Editor of the International Journal of Learning and Intellectual and the International Journal of Strategic Change Management. She also serves as Associate Editor of Behaviour and Information Technology. Jingyuan Zhao is a post-doctoral researcher and senior lecturer in Postdoctoral Centre & School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technologies (China). Her PhD is in Management Science and Engineering in Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and University Science and Technologies of China (USTC). Dr. Zhao’s expertise is on regional innovation management, high-tech industry cluster, knowledge management, technologies diffusion, organization learning. She serves as a Guest Editor for several international journals and is an Invited Reviewer for China’ state-run newspaper West Times to provide comments on the economy. Robert D. Tennyson is Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Minnesota. He is editor of a professional journal, Computers in Human Behavior. He also serves on editorial boards for four other journals. His research and publications include topics on problem solving, concept learning, intelligent systems, testing and measurement, instructional design, and advanced learning technologies. He has directed NATO sponsored workshops and advanced study institutes on automated instructional design and delivery in Spain and Norway. He has authored over 200 journal articles, books and book chapters. *** Ana Margarida Almeida holds a PhD in Sciences and Technologies of Communication and is an Invited Assistant Professor at the Department of Communication and Arts, University of Aveiro, Portugal. She is also the first cycle degree vice-director (New Communication Technologies Degree) and member of the Cetac.media research unit direction board. Her present research interests are related to digital inclusion, media for all and communication technologies to support citizens with special needs. Saif alZahir received his PhD and MS degrees in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh and the University of Wisconsin respectively. Currently, he is an associate professor with the computer science department at the University of Northern British Columbia – Canada. Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

About the Contributors

Dr. alZahir is involved in research in the areas of image processing, communications, multimedia, mlearning, and engineering education. He has authored or co-authored more than 75 journal and conference papers. Dr. alZahir is the editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Corporate Governance-London, Editor in Chief of international Journal Signal Processing, editor - Recent Patent on Signal Processing, editor - Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence. José Enrique Armendáriz-Iñigo received his degree in telecommunication engineering at the Universidad Pública de Navarra (2001) and a Ph.D. at the same university (2006). He is currently a temporary Associate Professor in the Departamento de Ingeniería Matemática e Informática at the same university. His research interests include: distributed systems, web services and service oriented architecture, and software systems, in general. He has contributed with over 40 publications, as well as a PC member or Scientific Journal Editor-in-chief or reviewer in these areas. For more information on his research, see the website: http://www.iti.upv.es/~armendariz/ Pablo Murta Baião Albino obtained his degree in Business Administration with an accreditation in Retailers’ cooperative from Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brasil (2001). He is also a specialist in Local development by International Labour Organization (Torino, Italy, 2007). Since 2006 he is a PhD student in Dpto. De Gestión de Empresas at Universidad Pública de Navarra. His current research interest is to study the factor that positively or negatively influence the development of enterprises in terms of their sizes and their respective sectors. Adolfo J. Cangas is a Senior Lecturer in Psychopathology and Intervention and Treatment Techniques at the University of Almería (Spain). He leads a research group on Psychoses named Clinical and Experimental Analysis of the Schizophrenic Spectrum Disorders, and has published several articles about bullying and mental disorders in adolescence. José Carmona is a hired researcher at the University of Almería (Spain) inside the research group named Clinical and Experimental Analysis of the Schizophrenic Spectrum Disorders. The main theme of his doctoral thesis and of the research line that they have carrying out is focused on the development of a computer assessment tool aimed at the detection of drug use, bullying and mental disorders in adolescents, through three-dimensional virtual environments. He has been developed mainly from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Mindfulness approaches, something that it has given him research experience and scientific publications in the field of psychological therapies. Diogo Casanova is doing is PhD in Multimedia on Education at the University of Aveiro in the field of ICT use in Higher Education and he works at the Digital Content Laboratory of the Research Centre for Didactics and Technology in Education. He did a Masters on Managing Information at the University of Aveiro. He has experience on running CPD courses for HE members of Staff mainly regarding the use of ICT on teaching strategies and on collaborative learning and participated in national and international professional meetings and conferences and as also published on book chapters and referee journals. Doirani Christou received her Bachelor in Business Administration from the Graduate Technological Education Institute of Piraeus, M.Sc.in International Marketing from University of Paisley, Scotland, U.K. She is working as export Marketing Manager in a firm dealing with disability elderly people. Her

226

About the Contributors

current research interests include, e-marketing and B2B relationship. Her research has been presented in International Conferences. Ricardo Colomo-Palacios is an Associate Professor at the Computer Science Department of the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. His research interests include applied research in People in IT, Software Process Improvement, Software Project Management and Business Information Systems. He received his PhD in Computer Science from the Universidad Politécnica of Madrid (2005). He also holds a MBA from the Instituto de Empresa (2002). He has been working as software engineer, project manager and software engineering consultant in several companies including Spanish IT leader INDRA. Susanne Croasdaile, PhD, specializes in curriculum and instruction, with a focus on instructional and assistive technology. She works with teams focusing on educational systems change to meet the needs of all learners in Virginia public schools. Virginia Department of Education’s Training and Technical Assistance Center at the Virginia Commonwealth University. Athanasios Drigas is a Senior Researcher at N.C.S.R. Demokritos. He is the Coordinator of Telecoms and founder of Net Media Lab since 1996. From 1985 to 1999 he was Operational manager of the Greek Academic network. He has been the Coordinator of Several International Projects, in the fields of ICTs, and e-services (e-learning, e-psychology, e-government, e-inclusion, e-culture etc). He has published more than 200 articles, 7 books, 25 educational CD-Roms and several patents. He has been a member of several International committees for the design and coordination of Network and ICT activities and of international conferences and journals. Moisés Espínola received his BS degree in computer science from the University of Almería, Spain. From 2005 to 2010 he has worked as computer lecturer at La Salle and as researcher at the University of Almería. He has worked in several national and international research projects on simulation with 3D computer graphics applied to psychology. In 2005 he joined to Information Systems Group and in 2008 he joined to Applied Computing Group. His research interests include Human-Computer Interaction, 3D Graphics Simulations and Remote Sensing. Ángel García-Crespo is the Head of the SofLab Group at the Computer Science Department in the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid and the Head of the Institute for promotion of Innovation Pedro Juan de Lastanosa. He holds a PhD in Industrial Engineering from the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (Award from the Instituto J.A. Artigas to the best thesis) and received an Executive MBA from the Instituto de Empresa. Professor García-Crespo has led and actively contributed to large European Projects of the FP V and VI, and also in many business corporations. He is the author of more than a hundred publications in conferences, journals and books, both Spanish and international. Juan Miguel Gomez-Berbís is an Associate Professor at the Computer Science Department of the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. He holds a PhD in Computer Science from the Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI) at the National University of Ireland, Galway and received his MSc in Telecommunications Engineering from the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM). He was involved in several EU FP V and VI research projects and was a member of the Semantic Web Services Initiative (SWSI). His research interests include semantic web, semantic web services, business process modelling, b2b integration and, recently, bioinformatics. 227

About the Contributors

Fernando González Gatica, Bachelor of Arts and Literature and Pedagogue (Catholic University, Chile) is a developmental cognitive and dynamic assessment specialist (International Center for the Enhancement of Learning Propensity, Israel). Before joining the Faculty of Education at Diego Portales University (Chile) he taught in High schools for 12 years. His research interests are concerned with children’s cognitive development and implications for socio emotional behavior. A particular focus has been the dynamic assessment of learning potential and cognitive intervention in population with educational special needs and young people in social risk. His current particular focus is concerned with the influence of a particular cognitive approach in social-emotional education and self-regulation in young children and adolescents. He is doing a Master degree in Educational and Psychological Intervention at University of Navarra (Spain). Israel González-Carrasco is an Assistant professor in Computer Science Department of Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain where he’s ending his Ph. D dissertation. He is co-author of several papers in international congress and his main lines of research are Expert System, Software Engineering and Neural Networks. Luis Iribarne received his MS and PhD degrees in computer science from the University of Almería, Spain. From 1993 to 1999 he worked in several national and international research projects on distributed simulation and geographic information systems (GIS). In 2001 he joined Data, Knowledge and Software Engineering Group and then became Associate Professor, University of Almería in 2002. In 2002 he co-founded the Systems Information Group, and in 2007 he founded the Applied Computing Group (leader). Javier Jiménez Dorado received the Telecommunication Degree from Universidad Carlos III of Madrid (Spain) in 2008. Recipient of COIT/AEIT Best Dissertation Award (ONO award on Interactive Television as Social Integration Agent) and CESEI (Spanish Chapter of IEEE Education Society) Best Dissertation Award 2008. He is currently finishing a Master in Bioengineering and Telemedicine in Polytechnic University of Madrid. He works as Technician-Researcher in the Spanish Center for Subtitled and Audio Description (CESyA) since 2007. His research interest is focused on assistive technology for disabled people. Sharon Jones, M.Ed., provides consultation, training and systems change support to teams of professionals and families working with individuals with disabilities. She has over 30 years of experience working with infants, young children, adolescents and young adults with a variety of disabilities. Sharon has written numerous articles, taught graduate classes and provides training at local, state and national conferences on effective strategies and program development in assistive technology, autism and early intervention to benefit students with disabilities. Virginia Department of Education’s Training and Technical Assistance Center at the Virginia Commonwealth University. Robert L. Jorczak is a private consultant. He is also a lecturer at the University of Minnesota on topics dealing with educational technology, learning and instructional theories, advanced computer mediated learning. His published work includes journal and book chapters on computer games, designing collaborative learning environments, and adult learning.

228

About the Contributors

Panagiotis Kyriazopoulos After his studies in Greece (B.A.B.A.) and his post-Graduate studies in UK (Marketing and Economics) he jointed to multination company where he worked for several years. Later on, he got his PhD in TQM from University of Thessalonica. In 1978 he joined to Technological Education Institute of Piraeus as Professor of Marketing. He has published more than 20 text books, many articles in Greek and International scientific magazines and he presented more than 22 research works in International conferences. He is the course leader of MSc in International Marketing which is running in collaboration with University of the West of Scotland, Scotland and he is editor of the Journal of Marketing and Operation Management Research. Tariq Khan is a lecturer at the Business School of Brunel University, UK. His PhD was gained in the area of Artificial Intelligent Systems for Education from the IT Institute at Salford University, UK. His research interests centre on educational technology and include multimedia systems, web 2.0 systems, cognitive and psychological models of learning, and the provision of education for learners with special educational needs. He has served as an evaluation expert for the European Commission in the area of Technology Enhanced Learning, and worked under funding from the EPSRC on Cognitive Systems. Dr Khan is a member of the British Computer Society, British Academy of Management and the Higher Education Academy in the UK. Dimitris Kouremenos is an Electrical and Computer Engineer and an associate of Net Media Lab of N.C.S.R. “Demokritos” since 1998. His research interests include e-services (e-learning, e-culture, e-government, e-health, e-business, e-commerce etc), as well as sign language issues in the domain of computer science. He is the author of 10 articles in the domain of computer science. Kelly Ligon, M.Ed., worked for several years with students with intellectual disabilities at the elementary, middle and high school levels. She earned her BS degree in Mental Retardation from James Madison University, Endorsement in Severe Disabilities from Virginia Commonwealth University and her M.Ed. in Special Education/ Assistive Technology from George Mason University. Kelly’s interests are in collaboration/ inclusion, assistive technology, augmentative communication and transition. She has helped school divisions to develop assistive technology services and teams through monthly support meetings, follow-up training, as well as providing professional development opportunities. Virginia Department of Education’s Training and Technical Assistance Center at the Virginia Commonwealth University. José Luis López-Cuadrado is a Teaching Assistant at the Computer Science Department of the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. His research interests include applied research in Artificial Intelligence, Software Integration, Web Information Systems and Process Improvement, Software Project Management and Business Information Systems. He received his MS in Computer Science from the Universidad Carlos III of Madrid (2004). He has been working as software engineer, and is co-author of several publications in international congresses. António Moreira holds a PhD in Didactics of Languages and is currently the Director of the Masters Course and Doctoral Programme in Multimedia in Education, at the University of Aveiro, where he also coordinates the Digital Contents Laboratory and the ERTE-PTE Competence Centre for teacher education in ICT. He supervises several MA, PhD and Post-Doctoral students, both in Didactics and ICT in Education. He is also the general editor of the online journal Indagatio Didactica. 229

About the Contributors

Fernanda Nogueira has a degree in Educational Sciences by University of Coimbra and is currently undertaking a PhD in Didactics at the University of Aveiro. She is a research member of Digital Contents Laboratory, one of the functional structures of the Research Center for Didactics and Technology in Teacher Education. Her research interests are directly related to teaching and learning strategies through educational Web applications, teacher education and citizenship education. Anastasios Ntanos is associate professor at the Department of Business Administration of Graduate Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus. He is graduate of School of Law and Public Administration. He received his PhD from the Pedagogical School, University of Athens. Prof. Anastasios Ntanos has cooperated with organizations, institutions and companies on the basis of human resources administration and education. His research work has published in several scientific journals. Linda Oggel, a Speech and Language Pathologist, has focused on developing effective practices for students with Autism Spectrum Disorders, incorporating augmentative communication in the classroom, and helping students with language/learning disabilities. Her experience includes working in the public schools in VA, IL and WI, and as a clinic supervisor at the University of Wisconsin. Michela Ott is senior researcher at the Institute for Educational Technology of the Italian National Research Council (ITD-CNR). At present, she carries out research in the field of: cognitive processes underpinning learning, educational use of software tools, e-learning, pedagogical planning, on-line education and special education. One of her main interest is “e-inclusion” in the field of education: she is the national responsible for one of the six actions of the project “New Technologies and Disability” promoted by the Italian Ministry of Education; in this framework she carries out specific research in the field of the accessibility of educational e-tools. She is also involved in research projects dealing with the educational use of digital Mind Games with the aim of supporting/enhancing students’ reasoning skills. Fernando Paniagua Martín has been a Faculty Member of the Computer Science Department at the Carlos III Technical University of Madrid since 2005. Currently, he is completing his PhD in Computer Science in the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. He also holds a Master in Computer Science and Technology. He has been working as software engineer and project manager in several companies. His research interests include Software Engineering, Audio-visual accessibility on the Web, Web 2.0 and Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Mona Pruett, an occupational therapist, has over 30 years of experience working with individuals with a wide range of disabilities in early intervention and school based programs. She has presented numerous workshops and written articles in the areas of assistive technology, sensory modulation, and working with families. Virginia Department of Education’s Training and Technical Assistance Center at the Virginia Commonwealth University. Pablo Revuelta Sanz received the Telecommunication Degree in the ETSI Telecommunications of the Carlos III University of Madrid in 2006 and Master in Advanced Electronic Systems in 2008 by the same University. He is currently a PhD student, researching on Image processing and other mathematical methods to develop technical aids for visual impaired people. He has received some awards regarding to hearing-impaired technical aids. He has been working 2 years for the Electronic Technology Department and, latterly, in the CESyA, since 2008. 230

About the Contributors

Jaime Ribeiro is a graduate in Occupational Therapy and has experience in technical and educational support of students with special educational needs. He has background in the study, counselling and prescription of Assistive Technologies. With training in Multimedia in Education he is currently a researcher of the Digital Contents Laboratory at the University of Aveiro. He is undertaking research on the use of ICT in the Education of Students with SEN in the framework of his PhD. He also has publications in the fields of ICT in Education for Students with SEN, ICT in Education and usability assessment. Belén Ruiz Mezcua holds a PhD in Physics by the ETSI Telecommunications of the Politécnica University of Madrid. She is currently a professor in the Information Technology Department of the Carlos III University of Madrid and Technical Director of the Spanish Center for Subtitled and Audiodescription (CESyA). She is the Deputy Director of the Institute for Technological Development and Innovation Promotion “Pedro Juan de Lastanosa”, being responsible for the laboratory on disability. She is Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Scientific Technological Park. She is a member of the Center for Technological Innovation in Disability and the Elderly. Irene Samanta is a faculty member of the Department of Business Administration, Graduate Technological Education Institute of Piraeus, she received her Bachelor in Business Administration from the Graduate Technological Education Institute of Piraeus, her Master degree from University of Paisley, UK. She is a Ph.D. candidate from University of the West of Scotland, UK. Her current scientific research activities include e-marketing, B2B relationship, Marketing Communication, Innovation Culture. Her research has been presented in more than 25 European and Global conferences with proceedings. In addition, she has published a number of articles in scientific Journals. She is member of the Editorial Committee in Strategic Outsourcing, an International Journal (EMERALD Group Publishing) and responsible for suggesting acceptance or rejection of each submission. José Manuel Sánchez Pena received his PhD (with honours) in Telecommunication Engineering, Polytechnic University of Madrid, 1993 (Thesis: Characterization of Ferroelectric Liquid Crystal Displays; Supervisor: Prof. José M. Otón). He is the recipient of the Extraordinary Doctorate Award from Polytechnic University of Madrid in 1993. He graduated in Telecommunication Engineering, Polytechnic University of Madrid 1989. Associate Professor (permanent), Electronic Technology Department, Carlos III University (30/09/1997- present) - Chair of Electronic Technology Department, Carlos III University (01/06/2007- present). He is author/co-author of 38 communications in JCR journals and more than 100 communications in international and national conferences/congresses, essentially dealing with liquid crystal displays, photonic devices and advanced instrumentation for applications in rehabilitation technology. Robert D. Tennyson is Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Minnesota. He is editor of a professional journal, Computers in Human Behavior. He also serves on editorial boards for four other journals. His research and publications include topics on problem solving, concept learning, intelligent systems, testing and measurement, instructional design, and advanced learning technologies. He has directed NATO sponsored workshops and advanced study institutes on automated instructional design and delivery in Spain and Norway. He has authored over 200 journal articles, books and book chapters.

231

About the Contributors

John Vrettaros is a Project Manager and an associate of Net Media Lab of N.C.S.R. “Demokritos” since 2000. His research interests include e-services (e-learning, e-culture, e-government, e-health, e-business, e-commerce etc), as well as environmental issues and renewable energy sources. He is the author of 30 articles in the domain of computer science. Jingyuan Zhao is a post-doctoral researcher and senior lecturer in Postdoctoral Centre & School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technologies (China). Her Ph.D. is in Management Science and Engineering in Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and University Science and Technologies of China (USTC). Dr. Zhao’s expertise is on regional innovation management, high-tech industry cluster, knowledge management, technologies diffusion, organization learning. She serves as a Guest Editor for several international journals and is an Invited Reviewer for China’ state-run newspaper West Times to provide comments on the economy.

232

233

Index

Symbols 3D computer simulation 195 3D technology 195

autobiographical memory 170 Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 103

A

B

able elderly 138 accessibility 44, 45 active learning 181 adaptive 1, 2 addictive behavior 198 analogical reasoning 167, 170, 173, 174, 178 anxiety disorders 196 artificial intelligence 11, 12, 18, 27 assistive technology (AT) 44, 45, 46, 54, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166 assistive technology devices 155 asynchronous discussion 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 AT coordination 156 AT facilitation 154, 160, 165 AT services 156, 160 Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) 196, 201 AT tools 155 audio description 121, 123, 124, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132 auditory stimuli 196 Autism 167, 168, 173, 174, 178, 179 autistic children 167, 168, 169, 170, 174, 176, 177, 178 autistic individuals 168, 170, 177 autistic learners 170, 177 autistic spectrum 169, 170 Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 177

behavioural intervention 169 Blackboard 181 Body Image Assemssment Software (BIAS) 198 Bologna Process 58, 59, 65

C Captioning Editing System (CES) 91 classroom environment 3 classroom learning (c-learning) 180, 182, 192 closed captions 123, 124 cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) 198 cognitive disabilities 106 cognitive load 167, 168, 171, 177, 179 cognitive load theory 167, 168, 171, 177 cognitive mechanisms 169 cognitive restructuring 198 cognitive skills 58, 62, 64 collaborative environments 2 collaborative learning 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 62 Collaborative Project-Based Learning (CPBL) 63, 64 collaborative work 64 communication disorders 106 communication skills 169, 171, 177 computer based education 12, 16 computer-based technologies 139 computer instruction 11, 12, 14 computer intervention 10, 13

Copyright © 2011, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Index

computerized catalog 10 computer research 12 computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 computer technologies 11 computer theory 12 constructivist pedagogy 62 Continuous Performance Task (CPT) 196 cooperative learning 1, 2, 8, 9 cotropical interaction 170

D daily life 137, 146, 147, 149 de facto 106, 109 de passé 182 digital divide 44, 48 digital native 109 Digital Television (DTV) 124 digital tools 108, 109, 111, 112, 113 disabilities 10, 11, 13, 23, 33 disabled people 44, 45, 48, 54 disabled students 89, 90, 91, 93, 97 distance education 35, 36 distance learning (d-learning) 44, 49, 50, 180, 181 distributed 10, 11, 27, 29 dual-channel assumption 171

E e-content 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 54 educational environment 155 educational e-system 45 educational fad 12 educational goal 60 educational help 64 educational programs 59 educational resources 89, 90 educational technology 2, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 168 educational theory 12, 15, 30 educational tools 106, 107, 108, 111, 117 education classroom 157, 158 education for all 89 education system 63 education systems 106 e-inclusion 44, 48, 54, 105, 108, 117

234

e-learning environments 44, 46, 47 Electronic government (E-government) 121, 122, 123, 133, 134, 135 electronic information and communications 35 electronic learning (e-learning) 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 90, 92, 101, 181, 182 electronic service (e-service) 122, 134 emerging knowledge base 11 enhanced learning 90, 91 equality of access 44, 46, 49 equal opportunity 90 European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) 59 European High Education Area (EHEA 59 European Union (EU) 106, 108, 122, 125, 127, 134, 135

F faculty 58, 63 fundamental aspects 169

G gifted individuals 68, 70, 84, 85 gifted people 68 gifted student 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85 grey market 138 group discussion 2, 3, 4 group dynamics 2

H handheld devices 181, 182, 183, 184, 188 hearing impaired 44, 45, 48, 49, 54 higher education 58, 60, 62, 63, 65

I inclusive classroom 107 inclusive education 89, 90, 107 information and communication technology (ICT) 34, 44, 45, 46, 48, 51, 54, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, 89, 90, 92, 93, 101, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 117, 119, 183 informationization 34, 36, 42 information processing 68 information revolution 12, 30

Index

information society 11, 108, 118 information technologies 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 instructional interventions 11, 14 instructional technology 156, 157, 159, 163 integrating classroom 107 integrative education 89 Intelligence Quotient (IQ) 68, 69, 70 intelligent systems 10 internet behaviour 138 internet marketing 138 internet technology 137

M

J

marketing environment 139 methodological knowledge 62 mind read 169, 170 mobile leaning 180, 181, 182, 184, 185, 186, 187 Moodle 181 multimedia 44, 45, 47, 49, 51, 53, 54 multimedia contents 123, 124 multimedia learning 167, 168, 170, 171, 173, 179 Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) 181, 184, 185, 188, 191

Joint Study Agreement (JSA) 91

N

K

National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) 123, 124

knowledge construction 2, 69, 74, 76, 78 knowledge economy 61 knowledge exchange 64

L laptop 183, 184, 192 leadership 157, 159, 160, 163, 164, 165, 166 learner control 10, 19, 25, 26, 28 learning activities 1, 2, 3, 6, 11 learning advantages 2 learning community 106, 108, 112, 115, 116, 117 learning difficulties 106, 167, 173 learning disabilities 10, 45 learning environment 2, 3, 6, 8, 10, 19, 38, 62, 64, 67, 68, 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 78, 81, 82, 84 learning materials 63 learning methodology 1, 2 learning methods 181, 182, 184 Learning Mobile Author (LMA) 181 learning motivation 68 learning needs 167, 168 learning objectives 2 learning process 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65 learning sphere 182 learning strategies 67, 68, 85 learning to learn 62 learning tools 68

O online collaborative learning 3, 7, 8 online environments 2 online learning 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 open captions 124 oral communication 3, 6

P peer-to-peer 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 personal digital assistant 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 189, 191 Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) 67, 69, 70, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88 phobias 196 Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) 169 public education 155 public schools 155, 156, 159 public sector 122, 135

R reference group affiliation 138, 139, 142, 143, 148 resource centers 37

235

Index

S school education 105, 107, 108 school environments 196 school of the future 105, 115 school of the past 105 school systems 105, 106 screen reader 2 self-regulation 10, 13, 21, 25 Short Message Service (SMS) 181, 182, 184, 185, 187, 188, 191 sign language 44, 48, 49, 53, 54 smartphone 181, 182, 183, 184, 190, 191 social disparities 106 social interaction 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 social skills 2, 3, 171 social system 122 software-based learning 181 special education 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 89 special education needs 69, 167, 171 special education schools 36, 37 special education services 36 special needs 67, 68, 72 speech recognition 91, 95 student learning 3 study environment 68 Synchronized Accessible Media Interchange (SAMI) 123, 124, 134 Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL) 123, 124, 133 synchronous discussion 1, 5

T Tablet PC 183, 184, 188, 192 teacher education 58 teaching strategies 167, 170, 172 technology acceptance model (TAM) 138, 139, 145, 146, 147, 151, 152 Technology Readiness Index (TRI) 138, 139, 145, 147, 152 theory of mind 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179 three-dimensional (3D) 194, 195, 199, 201 time-based media 123

236

traditional teaching 58, 59, 61, 65 triad of impairment 168, 169, 170, 171

U universal access 44, 46 user involvement 138

V video conference 44, 47, 48, 49 video publication 124 video vignettes 12 virtual classroom 64, 196, 197, 202 virtual environment 195, 197, 198 virtual learning 38 virtual learning environment 38 Virtual Reality (VR) 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202 virtual systems 63 virtual world 195, 202 visual elements 123 visual & hearing impairment 44 visually impaired 44, 45, 46, 47, 54 vocational education 37 voice over the Internet (VoIP) 180, 181, 188 VR therapy 196, 197

W web 2.0 67, 74, 76, 83, 84 Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) 125, 126, 133, 136 web collaboration 181 Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 123, 125, 126, 127, 134 Web Course Tools (WebCT) 181 Web environment 123 Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) 181, 185, 190, 193 with the times 137 Word Error Rate (WER) 90, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) 123, 125, 126, 133, 134, 136