Sandra Sanchez-Gordon Blog

Researcher and professor

Archive for noviembre 2013

nov/13

22

Publication: Retos de Accesibilidad en Geo-MOOCs

Appears in: IADIS Digital Library
Pages: 91-98
Publication year: 2013
ISBN: 978-972-8939-95-3
Conference: Conferencia Ibero-Americana WWW/Internet CIAWI 2013
Dates: 21-23 November, 2013
Location: Sao Leopoldo, RS, Brazil

Cite:

Calle-Jimenez, Tania; Sanchez-Gordon, Sandra; Luján-Mora, Sergio. Retos de Accesibilidad en GEO-MOOCs, Conferencia IADIS Ibero-Americana WWW/Internet 2013 (CIAWI 2013),  pp. 91-98, Porto Alegre (Brasil), November 21-23, 2013. ISBN: 978-972-8939-95-3.

Abstract:

El presente trabajo describe algunos de los retos que existen para lograr que cursos en línea sobre Sistemas de Información Geográfica (SIG) que se ofrecen mediante plataformas de Cursos en Línea Masivos y Abiertos (MOOCs) sean inclusivos. Es decir, accesibles para personas con diversas discapacidades. A estos cursos, se los conoce con el nombre genérico de Geo-MOOCs.

En accesibilidad web no interesan las condiciones específicas de las personas sino el impacto que dichas condiciones tienen en su habilidad para usar la web. En este contexto, se proponen las siguientes categorías de discapacidades: visuales, motoras y del habla, cognitivas y psicosociales. Además, se debe tomar en consideración que las discapacidades pueden ser permanentes, temporales o situacionales.

Existen varias estrategias para lograr que un MOOC sea de alta accesibilidad. Una opción es evitar ciertos tipos de funcionalidades y contenidos que no son accesibles a personas con discapacidades. Esta no es una buena solución, pues conlleva una reducción general de características que se ofrecen a los usuarios. Otra propuesta es desarrollar una versión genérica del MOOC y varias versiones alternativas para distintos tipos de discapacidades. Este camino tampoco es adecuado, pues el desarrollo y soporte de múltiples versiones es costoso y en muchos casos  no viable. Además, no resuelve el problema de la segregación a usuarios.

Por tanto, se requiere proveer métodos alternativos para llevar a cabo las distintas funcionalidades y para acceder a contenidos en formatos accesibles acorde a cada tipo de discapacidad. Para esto, se requiere profundizar en los requerimientos de accesibilidad y tecnologías asistidas. Con esto, se pretende definir mecanismos para solventar los retos asociados a la implantación de dichos requerimientos en Geo-MOOCs.

Keywords:

Accesibilidad Web, Discapacitados, Sistemas de Información Geográfica, SIG, Cursos en Línea Masivos y Abiertos, Geo-MOOCs.

References:

Accesibilidad Web, 2007. Pantallas táctiles para ciegos. Disponible en:
http://accesibilidadenlaweb.blogspot.com/2007/03/pantallas-tctiles-para-ciegos.html

Accesibilidad Web, 2011. Nuevo dispositivo para ver con las manos. Disponible en:
http://accesibilidadenlaweb.blogspot.com/2011/08/nuevo-dispositivo-para-ver-con-las.html

Accesibilidad Web, 2013. Interfaz táctil para sordociegos. Disponible en:
http://accesibilidadenlaweb.blogspot.com/2013/02/interfaz-tactil-para-sordociegos.html

ADA, 2013. Information and Technical Assistance on the Americans with Disabilities Act. Disponible en:  http://www.ada.gov/

Bryan, A., 2004. Going Nomadic: Mobile Learning in Higher Education. Educause Review, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 28–35.

Burgstahler S., 2002. Real connections: Making distance learning accessible to everyone. Disponible en:
https://www3.cac.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/PDF/distance.learn.pdf

Carter, J. et al, 2001. Web accessibility for people with disabilities: an introduction for Web developers. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, Vol.44, No.4, pp.225-233.

Christensen S., 2001. How We Work to Make the Web SPEAK. Computers in Libraries, Vol. 21, No.9, pp.30-34

CHS, 2008. Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura-España. Disponible en:http://www.chsegura.es/chs/index.html

De Waard, I., 2011. MobiMooc: using a mobile MOOC to increased educational quality for a diversity of learners through dialogue and ubiquity. Disponible en:
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/ICT/pdf/de_Waard.pdf

Drigas, A. et al, 2005. An e-learning management system for the deaf people. WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, Vol.1, No. 2, pp.20-24.

Farrelly, G., 2011. Practitioner barriers to diffusion and implementation of web accessibility. Technology and Disability, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 223-232.

Frank, J., 2008. Web accessibility for the blind: Corporate social responsibility or litigation avoidance?. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA, pp. 284-284.

Liyanagunawardena, T., et al, 2013. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp.202-227.

London Visitor, 2012. Find an Accessible Toilet in London. Disponible en:
http://www.visitlondon.com/traveller-information/essential-information/accessible-london/accessible-loos-in-london/

Pouncey, I., 2010. Web accessibility for cognitive disabilities and learning difficulties. Disponible en: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/cognitive-disability-learning-difficulty/

Prougestaporn, P., 2010. Development of a web accessibility model for visually-impaired students on Elearning websites. International Conference on Educational and Network Technology ICENT, China, pp. 20-24.

Sengupta, S., 2001. Exchanging ideas with peers in network-based classrooms: An aid or a pain. Language Learning & Technology, Vol. 5, No.1, pp.103-134.

Sun, Z. et al, 2009. On Accessibility of Concept, Principle and Model of Educational Web Sites Design. International Conference on New Trends in Information and Service Science NISS’09, China, pp. 730-733.

Transport Sydney Trains, 2010. Accessible Service. Disponible en:
http://www.sydneytrains.info/travelling_with/accessible_services/

W3C, 2005. Introducción a la accesibilidad Web. Disponible en:http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility.php

W3C, 2008. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Disponible en:http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

Word Health Organization, 2013. Word Report on Disability. Disponible en:http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/en/index.html

Wooseob, J., 2008. Spatial perception of blind people by auditory maps on a tablet PC. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 44, Nro.1, pp 1–8.

No tags

Appears in: IATED Digital Library
Pages: 5853-5862
Publication year: 2013
ISBN: 978-84-616-3847-5
ISSN: 2340-1095
Conference: 6th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI 2013
Dates: 18-20 November, 2013
Location: Seville, Spain

Cite

Sánchez-Gordón, Sandra; Luján-Mora, Sergio. Accessibility considerations of massive online open courses as creditable courses in engineering programs. 6th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation ICERI, pp. 5853-5862, Seville (Spain), 18-20 November, 2013

Abstract

This paper proposal is to include MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) as creditable courses in engineering programs at the National Polytechnic School of Ecuador. Currently, the curriculum of all the engineering students at the National Polytechnic School includes an elective subject of three credits chosen from the course offer of the university. The idea is to expand the options of elective subjects the students can choose from with lists of selected MOOCs from global providers such as Coursera and Udacity. In addition to fulfilling a number of requirements related to the content and duration of the courses, one important challenge is that these selected MOOCs should comply with web accessibility requirements specific for the special needs of non-native speakers.Web accessibility is the property of a website to support the same level of effectiveness for people with disabilities as it does for non-disabled people. As an accessible website is designed to meet different user needs, preferences, skills and situations, this flexibility also benefits people without disabilities in certain situations, such as MOOCs students who are non-native speakers.MOOCs do not differ much from online courses that have existed for many years: a syllabus, a calendar, educational materials (mainly videos), some activities or projects, quizzes (usually multiple choice questions) to assess students’ learning, and a forum to discuss with instructors and fellow learners. Their main interest lies not so much in the courses that offers, which are courses in a broad variety of topics endorsed by recognized educational institutions, but in the fact that MOOCs can build learning communities across a common field of study globally, massively and openly. Hence, instructors, teacher assistants and students come from diverse cultures and speak different native languages.Unfortunately, MOOCs rise new challenges on web accessibility. For example, cultural differences and background knowledge has to be taken in account when choosing contents, examples, and learning activities which might be unfamiliar or even offensive to certain cultures. Also, user interfaces requires special adaptations for non-native speakers.In this paper we will present a preliminary list of web accessibility requirements, we will highlight the challenges, and we will comment possible paths of solutions with the goal to a better understanding of the special needs of non-native speakers using MOOCs. This understanding will be the base for establishing criteria for a preliminary selection of MOOCs as creditable courses in engineering programs at the National Polytechnic School. Nevertheless, this criteria can also be useful for other higher education institutions interested in including MOOCs in their official programs.

Keywords

Engineering Curriculum, Massive Open Online Courses, Web Accessibility, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, User Interface, Non-native speakers.

Acknowledgement

This research has been partly supported by the projects MESOLAP (TIN2010-14860) and GEODAS-BI (TIN2012-37493-C03-03) from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

References

[1]   Kay, J., Riemann, P., Diebold, E., Kummerfeld, B. (2013). MOOCs: So Many Learners, So Much Potential. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 28(3), pp. 70-77.

[2]   Holmberg, B. (1995). The evolution of the character and practice of distance education. Open learning, 10(2), pp. 47-53.

[3]   Mackness, J., Mak, S., Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. Networked Learning Conference, pp. 266-275.

[4]   Pence, H.  (2012). When Will College Truly Leave the Building: If MOOCs are the Answer, What Is the Question? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 41(1), pp. 25-33.

[5]   Liyanagunawardena,T., Adam, A., Williams, S. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 14(3), pp. 202-227

[6]   Coursera.  (2013). About Coursera. Available online: https://www.coursera.org/about

[7]   Class Central. (2013). Free Online Education. Available online: http://www.class-central.com/

[8]   CIT. (2013). Preliminary results on Duke’s third Coursera effort Think Again. Available online: http://cit.duke.edu/blog/2013/06/preliminary-results-on-dukes-third-coursera-effort-think-again/.

[9]   MiríadaX. (2013). MiríadaX Our Philosophy. Available online: https://www.miriadax.net/nuestra-filosofia

[10] FutureLearn. (2013). Future Learn About. Available online: https://www.futurelearn.com/about

[11] Georgia Tech, (2013). Online Master of Science in Computer Science. Available on: http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/

[12] Rhoads, R., Berdan J., Toven-Lindsey, B. (2013). The Open Courseware Movement in Higher Education: Unmasking Power and Raising Questions about the Movement’s Democratic Potential. Educational Theory. 63, pp. 87–110

[13] New Media Consortium. (2012). Report on Higher Education in Iberoamerica 2012-2017, pp.15.

[14] Laplante, P. (2013). Courses for the Masses? IT Professional. 15(2), pp.57-59.

[15] Liyanagunawardena, T., Williams, S., Adams, A. (2013). The Impact and Reach of MOOCs: A Developing Countries’ Perspective. eLearning Papers. 33, pp. 1–8.

[16] Teng, L. (2007). Collaborating and Communicating Online: A cross-bordered Intercultural Project between Taiwan and the U.S. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 13, pp.33-48.

[17] Olaniran, B. (2009). Discerning culture in e-learning and in the global workplaces. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal. 1(3), pp.180-195.

[18] ISO. (2012). International Organization for Standardization’s ISO 9241-171 Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Guidance on software accessibility. Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-171:ed-1:v1:en)

[19] W3C. (1999). Weaving the Web Berners Lee. Available online: http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/Weaving/glossary.html

[20] W3C. (2008). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG 2.0. Available online: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

[21] Proctoru. (2013). Addressing accessibility concerns in online education. Available online: http://blog.proctoru.com/?p=345

[22] Luján-Mora, S., Saquete E. (2013). Mixing a MOOC with flip teaching in a traditional classroom. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, pp. 80-87

[23] Inside Higher Ed. (2013). Udacity project on pause. Available online: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/07/18/citing-disappointing-student-outcomes-san-jose-state-pauses-work-udacity#ixzz2gJYhPZeT

[24] SJSU. (2013). SJSU/EdX adds more campuses, courses. Available online: http://blogs.sjsu.edu/today/2013/sjsuedx-expansion/

[25] CONEA. (2009). Performance Evaluation Report of the Higher Education Institutions of Ecuador, pp. 5.

[26] EPN. (2009). National Polytechnic School’s Pedagogical Model, pp. 9.

[27] Kelly, B., Phipps, L., Swift, E. (2004). Developing a holistic approach for e-learning accessibility. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. 30(3), pp. 1-14.

 

No tags

Log in here!