More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Disability, ICT and eLearning Platforms: Faculty-Facing Embedded Work Tools in Learning Management Systems

Author:

Sushil K. OswalAuthors Info & Claims

ASSETS '19: Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

Pages 105 - 111

https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3355620

Published: 24 October 2019 Publication History

Abstract

This paper contributes to the current discussion in the field of human-computer interaction design (HCI) on the accessibility and design of eLearning tools embedded in the online platforms for higher education. Presenting the preliminary results of a longitudinal study of the accessibility of the faculty-facing pages of Canvas learning management system, it aims at drawing the attention of designers, developers, and manufacturers to the barriers erected by the ableist LMS designs for disabled faculty. The paper asks for improvements in design processes by embracing participatory design methods and by paying attention to the recommendations included in this paper.

References

[1]

Abdulrahman Alamri and Tandra Tyler-Wood. 2017. Factors Affecting Learners with Disabilities--Instructor Interaction in Online Learning. Journal of Special Education Technology 32, 2: 59--69.

[2]

I. Elaine Allen and Jeff Seaman. 2010. Learning on demand: Online education in the United States, 2009. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/learningondemand.pdf

[3]

Ronald E. Anderson. 1992. Social impacts of computing: Codes of professional ethics. Social Science Computer Review 10, 2: 453--469.

[4]

Julie A. Barron, Laura Fleetwood, and Ann E. Barron. 2004. E-learning for everyone: Addressing accessibility. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development 16, 4: 3--10.

[5]

Sebastian Denef, Leonardo Ramirez, Tobias Dyrks, Tobias Schwartz and Ahmad-Amr Al-Akkad. 2008. Participatory design workshops to evaluate multimodal applications. In Proceedings of the 5th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: building bridges (NordiCHI 2008), 459--462. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1463160.1463219.

Digital Library

[6]

Hendrik Drachsler, Katrien Verbert, Olga C. Santos, and Nikos Manouselis. 2015. Panorama of recommender systems to support learning. Recommender systems handbook (2nd. ed.), Francesco Ricci, Lior Rokach and Bracha Shapira (eds.). Springer, Boston, MA, USA, 421--451.

[7]

Nafsaniath Fathema and Kyra Sutton. 2013. Factors influencing faculty members' Learning Management Systems adoption behavior: An analysis using the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Trends in Economics Management & Technology 2, 6: 20--28.

[8]

Nafsaniath Fathema, David Shannon and Margaret Ross. 2015. Expanding the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to examine faculty use of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching 11, 2: 210--232.

[9]

Catherine S. Fichten, Jennison V. Asuncion, Maria Barile, Vittoria Ferraro and Joan Wolforth. 2009. Accessibility of e-learning and computer and information technologies for students with visual impairments in postsecondary education. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 103, 9: 543--557.

[10]

James Fleck. 1994. Learning by trying: the implementation of configurational technology. Research policy 23, 6: 637--652.

[11]

Morten Goodwin, Iain Sutherland, Frode Roarson, and Tom Drange. 2012. Assessing the accessibility of E-learning. In Proceedings of Norsk konferanse for organisasjoners bruk av informasjonsteknologi (NOKOBIT 2012), 145--158.

[12]

Mari Luz Guenaga, Dominique Burger, and Javier Oliver. 2004. Accessibility for e-learning environments. In Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP '04), 157--163. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--540--27817--7_23

[13]

Sylvain Hanneton, Malika Auvray and Barthélemy Durette. 2010. The Vibe: a versatile vision-to-audition sensory substitution device. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics 7, 4: 269--276.

Digital Library

[14]

Nicholas P. Holmes, Gemma A. Calvert and Charles Spence. 2007. Tool use changes multisensory interactions in seconds: evidence from the crossmodal congruency task. Experimental Brain Research 183, 4: 465--476.

[15]

Rex Hsieh, Akihiko Shirai, and Hisashi Sato. 2019. Evaluation of Avatar and Voice Transform in Programming E-Learning Lectures. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA '19), 197--199. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3308532.3329430

Digital Library

[16]

Natasha Jones, Kristen Moore and Rebecca Walton. 2016. Disrupting the Past to Disrupt the Future: An Antenarrative of Technical Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly 25, 4: 211--229.

[17]

Scott R. Klemmer, Michael Thomsen, Ethan Phelps-Goodman, Robert Lee, and James A. Landay. 2002. Where do web sites come from?: capturing and interacting with design history. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '02), 1--8. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/503376.503378

[18]

Thomas Koelewijn, Adelbert Bronkhorst and Jan Theeuwes. 2010. Attention and the multiple stages of multisensory integration: a review of audiovisual studies. Acta Psychologica 134, 3: 372--384.

[19]

Wiebke Köhlmann. 2012. Identifying barriers to collaborative learning for the blind. In Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2012), 84--91.

Digital Library

[20]

Ravi Kuber, Wai Yi and Graham McAllister. 2007. Towards developing assistive haptic feedback for visually impaired internet users. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '07), 1525--1534. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240854

Digital Library

[21]

Mukta Kulkarni. 2019. Digital accessibility: Challenges and opportunities. IIMB Management Review 31,1: 91--98.

[22]

Kodihalli Ramanna Kumar, S. Ravi and S. K. Srivatsa. 2011. Effective e-learning approach for Students with Learning Disabilities. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research 2, 11: 1--5.

[23]

Tanya J. McGill, Jane E. Klobas and Stefano Renzi. 2011. LMS use and instructor performance: The role of task- technology fit. International Journal on E-Learning 10, 1: 43--62.

[24]

Joan M. McGuire. 2014. Universally Accessible Instruction: Oxymoron or opportunity? Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability 27, 4: 387--398.

[25]

Lotfi B. Merabet, Lorella Battelli, Souzana Obretenova, Sara Maguire, Peter Meijer and Alvaro Pascual-Leone. 2009. Functional recruitment of visual cortex for sound encoded object identification in the blind. Neuroreport 20, 2: 132--138.

[26]

Lourdes Moreno, Ana Iglesias, Rocío Calvo, Sandra Delgado and Luis Zaragoza. 2012. Disability Standards and Guidelines for Learning Management Systems: Evaluating Accessibility. In Virtual Learning Environments: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications, I. Management Association, USA (ed.). Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA, USA, 1530--1549.

[27]

Julius T. Nganji. 2018. Towards learner-constructed e-learning environments for effective personal learning experiences. Behaviour & Information Technology 37, 7: 647--657.

[28]

Sushil K. Oswal. 2013. Accessible ePortfolios for Visually-Impaired Users: Interfaces, Designs, and Infrastructures. In ePortfolio Performance Support Systems: Constructing, Presenting, and Assessing Portfolios, Katherine V. Wills and Rich Rice (eds.). The WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, 135--153.

[29]

Sushil K. Oswal. 2014. Participatory design: Barriers and possibilities. Communication Design Quarterly Review 2, 3: 14--19.

Digital Library

[30]

Juhani Pallasmaa. 2005. The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

[31]

Gabriel Pita, Diego Zabot, Jean Rosa, Ecivaldo Matos. 2017. Adapting the SPIDe to include visually impaired users in interaction design. In Proceedings of the XVI Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC 2017), 53.

Digital Library

[32]

Michael Polanyi. 1966. The Logic of Tacit Inference. Philosophy 41, 155: 1--18.

[33]

Christopher Power, Helen Petrie, Vasily Sakharov, and David Swallow. 2010. Virtual learning environments: another barrier to blended and e-learning. In Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2010), 519--526.

[34]

Maurice Ptito, Solvej M. Moesgaard, Albert Gjedde and Ron Kupers. 2005. Cross-modal plasticity revealed by electrotactile stimulation of the tongue in the congenitally blind. Brain 128, 3: 606--614.

[35]

Dagfinn Rømen and Dag Svanæs. 2008. Evaluating web site accessibility: validating the WAI guidelines through usability testing with disabled users. In Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: building bridges (NordiCHI '08), 535--538. https://doi.org/10.1145/1463160.1463238

Digital Library

[36]

Lawrence Rosenblum. 2011. See what I'm saying: The extraordinary powers of our five senses. WW Norton & Company.

[37]

Olga C. Santos. 2008. A recommender system to provide adaptive and inclusive standard-based support along the elearning life cycle. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Recommender systems (RecSys '08), 319--322. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1454008.1454062

Digital Library

[38]

Andrea Serino, Michela Bassolino, Alessandro Farne and Elisabetta Ladavas. 2007. Extended multisensory space in blind cane users. Psychological Science 18, 7: 642--648.

[39]

Julia Simner and Vera U. Ludwig. 2012. The color of touch: a case of tactile-visual synaesthesia. Neurocase 18, 2: 167--180.

[40]

Sheethal Liz Tom, Noluntu Mpekoa and James Swart. 2018. Factors that affect the provision of visually impaired learners in higher education. In 2018 Conference on Information Communications Technology and Society (ICTAS), 1--5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTAS.2018.8368741

[41]

Jutta Treviranus, Jan Richards, and Colin Clark. 2019. Inclusively Designed Authoring Tools. In Web Accessibility, Yeliz Yesilada and Simon Harper (eds.). Springer, London, UK, 357--372.

[42]

Mitchell Tyler, Yuri Danilov and Paul Bach-y-Rita. 2003. Closing an open-loop control system: vestibular substitution through the tongue. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience 2, 2: 159--164.

[43]

James Ward, Michael J. Banissy and Clare N. Jonas. 2008. Haptic perception and synaesthesia. In Handbook of Haptic Perception, Martin Grunwald (ed.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 259--265.

Cited By

Freire APaiva DFortes R(2020)Acessibilidade Digital Durante a Pandemia da COVID-19 - Uma Investigação sobre as Instituições de Ensino Superior Públicas BrasileirasRevista Brasileira de Informática na Educação10.5753/rbie.2020.28.0.95628(956-984)Online publication date: 14-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.5753/rbie.2020.28.0.956
Brito EDias G(2020)LMS accessibility for students with disabilities: The experts’ opinions2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141046(1-5)Online publication date: Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141046
Gleason CValencia SKirabo LWu JGuo AJeanne Carter EBigham JBennett CPavel A(2020)Disability and the COVID-19 PandemicProceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3373625.3417023(1-14)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3373625.3417023

Index Terms

Disability, ICT and eLearning Platforms: Faculty-Facing Embedded Work Tools in Learning Management Systems
1. Applied computing
  1. Education
    1. Learning management systems
2. Human-centered computing
  1. Accessibility
    1. Empirical studies in accessibility
  2. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. HCI design and evaluation methods

Recommendations

Is Deafness a Disability?: Designing Hearing Aids Beyond Functionality
C&C '19: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Creativity and Cognition

The question whether deafness is a disability causes controversial and emotionally charged debates. The experience of hearing loss is different from the experience of being born deaf, as well as the need and willingness of using hearing aids. Following ...
Negotiating Gender and Disability Identities in Participatory Design
C&T '19: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Communities & Technologies - Transforming Communities

Standpoint theory draws our attention toward how researchers' identities shape the production of knowledge. Their standpoint depends on previous experiences and their sense of identity, as well as on their social position relative to research ...
The role of design fiction in participatory design processes
NordiCHI '18: Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

Participatory design is in essence very malleable as any design technique could lend itself to it, as long as users and stakeholders are involved. Design fictions however, have more often been used as either a vehicle for critical designs, or as a sheer ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ASSETS '19: Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

October 2019

730 pages

ISBN:9781450366762

DOI:10.1145/3308561

General Chair:
Jeffrey P. Bigham
Carnegie Mellon University., USA
,
Program Chairs:
Shiri Azenkot
Cornell Tech, USA
,
Shaun K. Kane
University of Colorado Boulder, USA

Copyright © 2019 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGACCESS: ACM Special Interest Group on Accessible Computing

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 October 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ASSETS '19

Sponsor:

SIGACCESS

ASSETS '19: The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

October 28 - 30, 2019

PA, Pittsburgh, USA

Acceptance Rates

ASSETS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 41 of 158 submissions, 26%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 436 of 1,556 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
413
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)32
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 22 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Freire APaiva DFortes R(2020)Acessibilidade Digital Durante a Pandemia da COVID-19 - Uma Investigação sobre as Instituições de Ensino Superior Públicas BrasileirasRevista Brasileira de Informática na Educação10.5753/rbie.2020.28.0.95628(956-984)Online publication date: 14-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.5753/rbie.2020.28.0.956
Brito EDias G(2020)LMS accessibility for students with disabilities: The experts’ opinions2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141046(1-5)Online publication date: Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141046
Gleason CValencia SKirabo LWu JGuo AJeanne Carter EBigham JBennett CPavel A(2020)Disability and the COVID-19 PandemicProceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3373625.3417023(1-14)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3373625.3417023

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents