Developing and evaluating a technology enhanced interaction framework and method that can enhance the accessibility of mobile learning
Part of : Themes in science and technology education ; Vol.7, No.2, 2014, pages 99-118
Issue:
Pages:
99-118
Abstract:
This paper focuses on the development and evaluation of a Technology Enhanced Interaction Framework and Method that can help with designing accessible mobile learning interactions involving disabled people. This new framework and method were developed to help design technological support for communication and interactions between people, technology, and objects particularly when disabled people are involved. A review of existing interaction frameworks showed that none of them helped technology designers to consider all of the possible interactions that occur at the same time and in the same place (i.e. face to face situations). Since almost all learners and teachers now have access to mobile technologies the new framework and method provide great potential for learning through interactions in these face to face situations. The components of the framework are described and explained, and examples of interactions are provided. The Technology Enhanced Interaction Framework has been developed and validated using technology designers and accessibility experts. To help designers apply the framework, the method has been developed and validated using technology designers and accessibility experts, and was successfully evaluated with technology designers.
Subject:
Subject (LC):
Keywords:
Mobile Web, interaction framework, disability
References (1):
- Abowd, G. D., & Beale, R. (1991). Users, systems and interfaces: A unifying framework for interaction. In D. Diaper & N. Hammon (eds.), Proceedings of HCI’91: People and Computers VI (pp. 73-87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Bain, K., Basson, S., Faisman, A., & Kanevsky, D. (2005). Accessibility, transcription, and access everywhere. IBM Systems Journal, 44(3), 589-603.Berne, E. (1964). Games People Play – The Basic Hand Book of Transactional Analysis. New York: Ballantine Books.Broll, G., Siorpaes, S., Rukzio, E., Paolucci, M., Hamard, J., Wagner, M., & Schmidt, A. (2007). Supporting mobile service usage through physical mobile interaction. In S. Ceballos (ed.), Fifth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (pp. 262-271). NY: IEEE.Cambra, C. (2009). Comprehension of television messages by deaf students at various stages of education. The American Annals of the Deaf, 153(5), 425-434.Cook, A., & Hussey, S. (1995). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Pratice. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.Dix, A. (1994). Computer supported cooperative work - a framework. In D. Rosenburg & C. Hutchison (ed.), Design Issues in CSCW (pp. 23-37). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.Dix, A. (1995). Cooperation without (reliable) communication: Interfaces for mobile applications. Distributed Systems Engineering, 2(3), 171-181.Dix, A. (1997). Challenges for cooperative work on the Web: An analytical approach. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 6(2-3), 135-156.Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, D. G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-Computer Interaction. Madrid, Spain: Prentice Hall.Dror, I. E., & Harnad, S. (2008). Cognition distributed: how cognitive technology estends our minds. UK: John Benjamins, B.V.Ellis, J. R., Ridolfi, G., & Zwirner, F. (1991). Groupware: Some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM, 34(1), 39-58.Flanders, N. A. (1960). Interaction Analysis in the Classroom: A Manual for Observers. Michigan: University of Michigan.Foulger, D. (2004). Models of the Communication Process. Retreived 5 December 2014, from http://davis.foulger.info/research/unifiedModelOfCommunication.htm.Gaines, B. R. (1988). A conceptual framework for person-computer interaction in complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 18(4), 532-541.Harper, P., & Clark, C. (2002). Mobile phones and Deaf people. Australia Association of the Deaf. Retreived 5 December 2014, from http://deafaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/MobileIssues.pdf.Hsi, S., & Fait, H. (2005). RFID enhances visitors' museum experience at the Exploratorium. Communications of the ACM, 48(9), 60-65.Isaacs, E., Walendowski, A., Whittaker, S., Schiano, D. J., & Kamm, C. (2002). The character, functions, and styles of instant messaging in the workplace. In C. Neuwirth & T. Rodden (eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 11-20). NY: ACM.Jetter, H.-C., Geyer, F., Schwarz, T., & Reiterer, H. (2012). Designing Collaborative Interactive Spaces. In G. Tortora, S. Levialdi & M. Tucci (eds.), Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (pp. 818-820). NY: ACM.Klink, M. (2006). The use of interaction methods in a blended learning environment: evaluating methods in blended learning environment in two courses of a Masters program at the university of south Australia, unit systems engineering & evaluation centre. Master thesis University of Twente. Retreived 5 December 2014, from http://essay.utwente.nl/55969.Larson, A. J, Raman, T. V., & Raggett, D. (2003). W3C Multimodal Interaction Framework. Retreived 5 December 2014, from http://www.w3.org/TR/mmi-framework.Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.Lee, D. S., Armitage, S., Groves, P., & Stephens, C. (2009). Systems for supporting group learning. Retrieved 22 April, 2014 from https://www.oucs.ox.ac.uk/ltg/teachingwithtechnology/CMC.pdf.Merrill, M. D. . (2008). Reflections on a four decade search for effective, efficient and engaging instruction. In M. W. Allen (ed.), Michael Allen's 2008 e-Learning Annual (pp. 141-167). NJ: Pfeiffer.Norman, D. A. , & Draper, S. W. (1986). User Centered System Design: New Perspectives On Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Petrie, H., & Bevan, N. (2009). The evaluation of accessibility, usability and user experience. In C. Stephanidis (ed.), The Universal Access Handbook (pp. 1-30). London: CRC Press.Rukzio, E., Broll, G., & Wetzstein, S. (2008). The Physical Mobile Interaction Framework (PMIF). Technical Report LMU-MI-2008-2. University of Munich. Retreived 5 December 2014, fromhttp://www.academia.edu/2679506/The_Physical_Mobile_Interaction_Framework_PMIF_.Sacks, H. (1974). An Analysis of the Course of a Joke's Telling in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sheng, L., & Xu, J. (2010). Using social software to improve learning performance of deaf university learner. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on the Information Management and Engineering (ICIME) (pp. 703-706). NY: IEEE.Suebvisai, S., Charoenpornsawat, P., Black, A. W., Woszczyna, M., & Schultz, T. (2005). Thai automatic speech recognition. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '05) (pp. 857-860). NY: IEEE.Sung, Y.-T., Chang, K-E., Hou, H.-T., & Chen, P.-F. (2010). Designing an electronic guidebook for learning engagement in a museum of history. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 74-83.The Australian Hearing (2004). Australian Hearing Annual Report 2003–04. Chatswood, Australia: Australian Hearing.Vyas, D., Dix, A., & Nijholt, A. (2008). Role of artefacts in mediated communication. In M. Czerwinski & A. Lund (eds.). Proceedings of CHI 2008 (pp. 1-8). Florence, Italy: ACM.Wald, M. (2002). Hearing disability and technology. In L. Phipps, A. Sutherland, & J. Seale (eds.), Access all areas: Disability, technology and learning (pp. 19-23). University of Southampton: JISC Techdis Service with ALT. Retrieved 22 April 2014, from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10725.Wang, S.-K. (2008). The effects of a synchronous communication tool (Yahoo Messenger) on online lerners' sense of community and their multimedia authoring skills. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(1), 59-74.
