Date post: | 26-Jun-2015 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | glennvin |
View: | 451 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Learning 2.0 with Special Needs
Glenn VingerhoetsPromotor: Prof. dr. ir. E. DuvalCoordinator: José Luis Santos
2
TOPIC & GOALS
3
Topic
• Learning 2.0– Web 2.0: Enables collaboration & interaction– Learning environment
• Special needs– Aimed at mentally disabled
4
Goals
• Closing the digital divide• Improve competences• On the iPad– Fullscreen apps Less distraction– Touchscreen• Easier for people who struggle with motoric skills• Attention span because enjoy it more
– Screen large enough (compared to iPod etc.)
5
RESEARCH
6
Research
• Interactive: Interviews, contacting organizations, conference,…
7.19%
41.92%
20.96%
14.97%
12.57%
2.40%
Time Distribution
BrainstormLiteratureExisting applicationsIncluso ConferenceInterviewsContacting organisations
7
Research conclusions (1)
• Digital Divide • Private social networks Feel different• Literature focus– Technology Enhanced Learning (Tablets in classroom)– e-Accessibility for disabled (Guidelines)– Human Computer Interaction (Design + Evaluation)
• Existing apps– Learning: LMS (Learning Management System)– Disabilities:
• Communication solutions, AAC (Augmentive-Alternative Communication)
8
Research conclusions (2)
• Touchscreens take away the thinking of bringing the mouse to a button to do an action– Extended CHI in a way that mimics human
gestures• Need of adapted Text-to-Speech (less is more)• Tested existing Facebook apps– Tabs without pictograms Guessing
– Panicked when saw unknown friend request
9
IDEA
10
Facebook app with data gathering
• Accessibility to social technologies• Protected environment– Abuse– ‘Bad’ social behavior– Customizable
• 3 major levels• T2S Data gathering– Clustering similar students– Focus learning on certain words– Avoid certain texts
Support learning application
11
ITERATIVE PROCESS
12
Iterative Process• Spiral methodology
– Use results previous for following iteration• 5 iterations
– 3 x Mentally disabled– 1 x Guardians– 1 x Both
• Evaluation methodology based on:– Definition of goals
1. Guardians: Time + # taps2. Mentally disabled: # taps
– Scenarios• Mentally Disabled: Remembering how to execute a task (repeating scenarios)
– Questions (Profiling + User satisfaction)• Think aloud tests
13
Iteration I
• Paper prototype• Two parts:– Guardians: Setting up application– Mentally disabled: Use of Facebook
• Goals: Application usable by:1. Persons who might not have experience with
multitouch devices and/or social networks2. Persons with a mental disability
14
Iteration I - Paper prototype Overview
15
Iteration I - Conclusions
• Guardians:– 5 persons– 3 problems to be solved (Swiping, finding settings
icon & Segmented control supertype)– Good suggestions
• Mentally disabled– Disappointing– Hard for them– Not visual enough (lack of colors, handwriting,…)– Test with children for basic functionality
16
Iteration II
• Mockup since problems paper prototype• Focus on mentally disabled• iOS Interface Builder• Goal: Usable by mentally disabled person?
17
Iteration II - Conclusions
• 1 person with mental disability– Most scenarios successfully– Trouble with imagining something unreal
• Expert feedback– Really positive reaction– Dilemma selection Consistency with existing– Buttons: Always speak out loud + navigate
18
Iteration III
• Implementation of application– Facebook API– Text-to-Speech SDK (Nuance Dragon Mobile)– OpenFlow API
• Focus on mentally disabled• Goals:– Test new selection of words– Finding tabs with T2S support
19
Iteration III - Conclusions
• 5 mentally disabled• Observations– T2S supported tabs success– Selection of words too difficult– Problem with pressing speaker icon
Tendency to keep pressing Miss taps
20
Iteration IV
• Focus on guardians• Further implementation application– Text-to-Speech data gathering– Exporting to CSV– Improvements to paper prototype
• Goals: – Testing new functions– Testing problems paper prototype solved
21
Iteration IV - Conclusions
• 5 persons• Observations– All scenarios completed successfully
Guardians & teachers are able to use the application
22
Iteration V
• Focus on mentally disabled• Improvements– Hide speaker icon + made bigger– Ideal selection of words method in existing
application Contacted company (software engineering team)
• Goals:– Testing improvements
23
Iteration V - Conclusions
• 9 mentally disabled• Used existing application to test selection• Observations– New selection method big improvement– Hiding speaker icon also success
24
CONCLUSION
25
Results
• Learning power in its Text-to-Speech data gathering
• Successful to close the digital divide– Able to go on Facebook on their own without
guardian having to worry– Many positive reactions by teachers, parents AND
mentally disabled persons• “I’m going to steal iPad of my sister to get this app”
Gave enormous satisfaction
26
Major Difficulties
• Mentally disabled– Imagining something unreal – Could give wrong impression that application is not
good• Implementation– Getting used to working on mobile device Memory management
– Matching Facebook responses Type unclear– Selection not working as planned UIWebView
different when not a lot content
27
Possible Future Work
• Auto-translation functionality– Non-mentally disabled friends
• Extend application– Used by elderly people– In the car
28
DEMO
29
QUESTIONS?Thank you for your attention!