Using ICT with people with special education needs: what the literature tells us PDF

Preview

Summary

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0001-253X.htm AP 58,4 Using ICT with people with special education needs: what the literature tells us 330 Peter Williams, Hamid R. Jamali and David Nicholas CIBER, School of Library, Archive and Informati...

Description

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0001-253X.htm

AP 58,4

330 Received 21 November 2005 Revised 20 May 2006 Accepted 8 June 2006

Using ICT with people with special education needs: what the literature tells us Peter Williams, Hamid R. Jamali and David Nicholas CIBER, School of Library, Archive and Information Studies (SLAIS), University College London, UK Abstract Purpose – To provide a review of the past studies on use of information and communications technology (ICT) for people with special education needs (SEN) to inform a major research project on using ICT to facilitate self-advocacy and learning for SEN learners. Design/methodology/approach – Literature review, encompassing academic journals indexed in education, information science and social sciences databases, books, grey literature (including much internet-based material), and government reports. Information was gathered on the perceived benefits of ICT in SEN, and the use of some specific applications with people having various conditions. A number of usability studies, mainly Internet and web technologies, are also outlined. Findings – Although the literature shows a great number of ICT initiatives for people with all kinds of disabilities, there has been a surprising lack of research into the usability of the various applications developed, and even less concerning those with learning difficulties. The review of existing literature indicates a lack of attention to the application of ICT for people with SEN, compared to the other groups of disabled people such as visually impaired. Originality/value – Findings highlight the need for more research on usability aspects of current and potential applications of ICT for people with SEN. Keywords Communications technologies, Education, Learning disabilities, Disabled people, Aids for the disabled Paper type Literature review

Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives Vol. 58 No. 4, 2006 pp. 330-345 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0001-253X DOI 10.1108/00012530610687704

Introduction Although the use of ICT in mainstream education has its origins in the 1970s, it has only been in recent years that the government has recognised the importance of and paid special attention to the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) in special educational needs (Stevens, 2004). The current emphasis on inclusion (Dyson et al., 2004; Ofsted, 2004), and the ever-advancing technologies have stimulated much interest in using various ICT applications for both individualised learning and for integrating students or pupils with disabilities into a mainstream school environment. This paper examines the literature on use of ICT for people with special education needs (SEN) in order to present an overview of perceived benefits and use of some specific applications including the internet, virtual environments and adaptive devices. The article also gives an overview of how various systems have been used for people having various conditions, and outlines a number of usability studies mainly web and Internet technologies. One of the aims is to highlight those aspects and areas of the application of ICT with people with SEN that have not received enough attention and

need to be better studied. The review was undertaken to inform Project @PPLe: Accessibility and Participation in the World Wide Web for People with Learning Disabilities, a cross-disciplinary initiative, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council’s (ESRC) PACCIT programme. The project’s main focus is to develop a multimedia learning environment (LE), providing learning resources and tools for self advocacy for the SEN community. The LE aims to provide routes to learning materials and accessible content for learners matched to individual needs and preferences. Its evaluation in use will help to model effective approaches to the design and delivery of multimedia for this audience. Perceived benefits of ICT in SEN Many writers have extolled the benefits of using ICT in a learning environment with SEN. Florian (2004) described six such uses of ICT. These are: (1) Facilitating tutor programmes: the tutor programme represents a type of teaching with technology entailing individualised computer-based learning programmes. (2) Improving exploratory learning: with the help of technology, exploratory learning environments have been developed, similar to tutor programmes. Whereas the former are about teaching, exploratory learning environments allow pupils to interact with the material and have more control over their learning. The internet is an example of how ICT can be used in an exploratory manner. (3) Using ICT as a tool: this type of learning with ICT is about the skills involved in using the tools of technology, such as word-processing programmes, in other words, the tools found in non-educational environments such as the home. (4) Help in communication: there are many assistive technology devices available to help pupils communicate, such as voice synthesisers. (5) Used for assessment purposes: a computer-based assessment system can be more than just a device for recording and summarising data. Singleton (2004), cited in Florian (2004), mentioned some advantages of computer-based assessment including savings in time, labour and cost, interested test motivation, greater precision and standardisation of administration. (6) Used as a management tool: teachers of pupils with SEN are required to develop individual education plans designed to address identified learning difficulties. ICT can help teachers in this respect. The Internet is an increasingly popular management tool for SEN professionals for the same reason. Thomas (1992) felt that ICT could bring certain benefits to students with emotional and behavioural difficulties. He regarded it as an “enabler”, whereby ICT can facilitate access by students to learning which increases motivation, fosters self-competition and confidence and improves self-esteem. There are other benefits of ICT mentioned in the literature also, including its role in rehabilitation of disabled people. Midgley (1993) pointed out that there is a consensus that one of the most useful forms of vocational rehabilitation for many people with disabilities is training in the use of ICT. He described three models for such training for people with disabilities, as follows:

Special education needs

331

AP 58,4

332

(1) The workshop model. This appears to be the least used model for ICT training despite its long history. The basic rational of the workshop approach is that work experience is the key to rehabilitation. (2) The educational model. In this model training is provided within regular educational establishments, with the emphasis on education rather than vocation. (3) The systemic vocational rehabilitation model. This model refers to the creation of a structured, goal-directed approach that combines more than one form of help in order to meet peoples’ individual needs. Based on the experience achieved from using IT in Meldreth Manor, a school for students with severe learning difficulties, Banes and Walter (2002) echo Florian’s (2004) claim that ICT can help in communication. They maintained that it is also exciting to use and a positive challenge to most of the pupils. However, they also warned that there is a possibility that its excitement overtakes its value to the pupil and may lead to the exploration of issues that would be best explored in other ways, such as using a telephone, computer, or books. Johnson and Hegarty (2003) also discussed web sites as educational motivators for adults with learning disabilities. Based on the results of their study, they argued that web sites can be a valuable and motivating educational asset if quickly accessible, graphics-based and closely matched to a student’s interest. They believe that these requirements do not mean that special web sites for people with disabilities need to be developed: design-for-all principles, applied to web sites, will in their view, improve accessibility and promote inclusion. Use of specific applications Use of the internet The internet has been described as “the most pervasive and educationally far-reaching innovation in ICT” (Hegarty, 2004, p. 129). It has now become so ubiquitous that many organisations are trying to make their web sites accessible to people with special needs. The Special School, Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) (which provide education for pupils who are out of school for a variety of reasons, including exclusion or early pregnancy) and the World Wide Web project (Abbott and Cribb, 2001) aimed to establish the extent of internet use among special schools and PRUs in England and Wales. One of the objectives of the project was to find out about the factors which might have hindered or encouraged the use of the web in these institutions, especially with regard to the creation of homepages or sites for the school or unit. In order to understand the impediments to, and advantages of, web use from the perspective of teachers, questionnaires were sent to all such institutions in England and Wales. Of the 2,056 questionnaires sent, 55 per cent were returned. The first aim of the survey was to establish the rate of internet access among these institutions before the arrival of the standard fund equipment. It was suggested that well over 90 per cent of secondary schools and possibly 50 per cent of primary schools had at least one Internet-connected computer by late 1997. In special schools and PRUs, the survey returns showed that only 25 per cent of institutions had an internet connection at the time. A total of 2.4 per cent only had access through a staff member’s individual accounts. Only 3 per cent of the institutions returning the survey had created an institution web site. Where schools did not have internet access, their reasons varied

but were usually related to cost (45 per cent), lack of equipment (60 per cent). Very few (6 per cent) saw no advantage at all in internet access and 5 per cent reported that staff attitude was obstructive to development in this area. The survey indicated related neglect in the area of development of ICT in special education in the past that appears to be continuing, at least in some parts of the country, despite significant new funding from government and local authorities. Besides the survey, four institutions were selected as case studies for interview. Interviews indicated the possibility of using ICT to bolster identity, reduce isolation, and bring the special skills to these schools and units to the mainstream community, an activity which would be of mutual benefit. The case studies also illustrated many obstacles, technical as well as ideological, which may prevent positive developments. Funding turned out to be a major problem for even the most innovative of schools (Abbott and Cribb, 2001). A more recent survey by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES, 2003) showed an average of 31.3 computers per school in special education in 2003 compared to 28.6 and 192.7 computers in primary and secondary schools respectively. The survey also revealed that 99 per cent of special schools were connected to the Internet; the figure is the same for both primary and secondary schools. The average number of pupils per computer was 3.0 in special schools compared to 5.4 in secondary schools. Of the special schools, 50 per cent also appeared to have their own web sites compared to 82 per cent of secondary schools (DfES, 2003). Other research has shown poor internet access for people with disabilities. Another study by the DfES (2001) found access to and use of the internet lower for disabled people than for the general population. Of disabled people, 19 per cent as against 30 per cent of the general population, had internet access. A later survey, on behalf of the DfES, (Russell and Stafford, 2002) found the figures to be 36 per cent and 55 per cent respectively, an increase, but with differential access maintained. This is cause for concern, as studies have shown that the internet can be beneficial for disabled people. For example, a UK survey carried out by the Leonard Cheshire charity (Knight et al., 2002) found that 54 per cent of disabled respondents considered internet access “essential”, as opposed to only 6 per cent of the general population. In their review of literature on internet access for people with disabilities, Pilling et al. (2004, p. 7) conclude that “the evidence available is broadly very positive on disabled people’s attitude to the Internet”. Virtual environments A virtual learning environment (VLE) is a set of teaching and learning tools designed to enhance a student’s learning experience by including computers and the internet in the learning process. VLEs offer the potential for users to explore social situations and “try out” different behaviour responses for a variety of simulated social interactions (Kerr et al., 2002). It has been suggested that VLE’s are particularly useful for people with autism and may provide the ideal method for social skills training. One of the challenges for the VE developers is how to allow freedom of exploration and flexibility in interactive behaviour, without the risk of users deliberately or inadvertently missing important learning goals. “Scaffolding” embedded within the VLE software can aid the user’s learning in different contexts, such as individual, tutored or group learning situations. (Scaffold learning refers to structuring activities by organised materials, clear

Special education needs

333

AP 58,4

334

instructions and a hierarchical system of prompts.) Kerr et al. (2002) described two single-user VLE scenarios that were developed within an Asperger’s Syndrome interactive project, and presents observation results from initial trials conducted at a user school. The VLEs were developed to promote social skills learning in adolescents with Asperger’s Syndrome: the first taking place in a virtual cafe´ and the second on a virtual bus. In both scenarios the user’s task was to find a seat and sit down. Cromby et al. (1996), as cited in Standen and Brown (2004, p. 97) named three characteristics for VLEs regarding their application for people with learning difficulties. First, VLEs create the opportunity to learn by making mistakes but without suffering the real, humiliating or dangerous consequences. Second, the virtual world can be manipulated in ways the real world can not be. And finally, in VLEs, rules and abstracts can be conveyed without the use of language or other symbol systems. Rose and colleagues at the University of East London (e.g. Rose et al., 1999, 2002; Mendozzi et al., 2000) have undertaken much work on the use of virtual environments for people with cognitive disabilities and brain injuries. A particularly relevant paper is that by Rose et al. (2002) on the efficacy of training people with learning disabilities in a virtual environment. Two studies were undertaken. In the first, 30 students with learning disabilities were placed in an active or a passive experimental group. Active participants explored a virtual bungalow searching for a toy car. Passive participants watched the active participant and searched for the toy car. All participants then “performed spatial and object recognition tests of their knowledge of the virtual environment” (Rose et al., 2002, p. 627). In the second study, 45 participants first engaged in a “steadiness tester task” (guiding a hoop through a twisted piece of wire). Their performances were noted before they were randomly allocated to three groups – a real training group, a virtual training group and a no training group – designed to enhance their steadiness skills. After training, the participants undertook a second test trial on the “steadiness tester”. Results showed that the learners were capable of using a virtual environment and were motivated to use this training method. In the first study, exploration of the virtual environment was found to enhance memory of the layout of the bungalow but not of the virtual objects. In the second study, virtual training was found to transfer to real task performance, suggesting the use of virtual environments can aid learning for this user group. A similar team (Brooks et al., 2002) examined the use of a virtual kitchen for vocational training by 24 catering students with learning disabilities. Students were first pre-tested on four food preparation tasks and identification of hazards in their own training kitchens. They were subsequently trained on one food preparation task and three hazards in: (1) their own training kitchens; (2) the virtual kitchen; (3) specially designed workbooks. They were then retested in their own training kitchens on all the tasks’ hazards. Virtual training was as beneficial as real training and more beneficial than workbook and no training in the food preparation tasks. However, there were no differences in the hazard identification task. The researchers concluded that virtual

training had a more beneficial effect on real task performance, depending on the task, than workbook training, even when the virtual kitchen was not modelled on the real training kitchen. Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems include ICT applications such as speech synthesisers, and hardcopy resources such as books and charts of symbols, pictures, words. Many children who have little or no functional speech face many barriers to communication and to developing peer relationships, so it is important that they are helped by AAC systems. There is little understanding of the characteristics of interaction between children using AAC and their speaking peers. Clarke and Kirton (2003) report findings from an analysis of interactions between 12 children with physical disabilities using AAC systems and their speaking peers in school. Results showed that the functions most commonly used by children using AAC systems were confirmation/denial (38.2 per cent) and self/shared expression (30.9 per cent). Children using AAC systems made fewer initiations (speaking first) and more responses than their speaking peers but there was no significant difference between the frequency of turns taken by children using AAC systems and their peers. Adaptive devices Nisbet and Poon (1998) point out many SEN learners have difficulty using the standard keyboard and mouse. Hardy (2000) is amongst many commentators to discuss aids for those with disabilities to aid Internet access. These include: . Mouse over control. Some people find it difficult to move the mouse pointer over a link and then click the mouse button. A short javascript code enables automatic activation when the mouse is moved over the link (command: on mouseover). . Autoscroll. People who do not have good control over the mouse may find it difficult to scroll down a page. Java script can make a page scroll automatically (see www.wsabstract.com/). . Link listing. Java script can list all links on a web page and assign a keyboard letter to each, and the keyboard can be used to activate them. The UK based “Skill: The National Bureau for Students with Disabilities” (at www. skill.org.uk/), has a fact sheet explaining the different types of assistive technologies, with advantages and suggestions for potential users (Skill, 2002). It includes: (1) Access utilities software: which can alter the responsiveness of the keyboard, slowing the rate at which a character will repeat when a key is pressed, so that only definite depressions are recognised. (2) Keyguards: which are rigid overlays of metal or plastic fitted over the keyboard with holes to allow access to individual keys. This makes it harder to hit the wrong key and therefore enables more accurate typing. (3) Mouse alternatives: which include: . pointing devices – used to provide access to computers for people who cannot use any kind of keyboard;

Special education needs

335

AP 58,4

.

.

336

touch sc...