a bridge between accessibility and moocs: an adaptative model for developing new services for people...
TRANSCRIPT
A bridge between accessibility and MOOCs: an adaptative model for developing new services for
people with special needs
Francisco Iniesto
Supervisors: Covadonga Rodrigo & Timothy Read
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)
4th GO-GN Seminar
20-21 April 2015
Open Education Global
22-24 April 2015
Banff, Alberta
Canada
CONTEXT: LLL FOR PEOPLE WITH FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY
People with disabilities choose distance education universities (eLearning) for their studies. (50% UNED)
Evolution of enrolment of disabled students over period 2003 – 2015 at UNED
Disability 2013/2014
Physical 4454
Psychic 1736
Hearing 570
Visual 874
Total 7847
25542966
34623830
4283 4224
4808
6294 6104
74697670
7847
7469
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
CONTEXT: ACCESSIBLE MOOC LEARNING
.
Benefits such as:
• Openness
• Low cost
• Ubiquity
• Acquiring knowledge
• Social learning
• Achieving new competences
• Develop professionally
Image retrieved from Open Education Europa
The fact to make digital people with special needs increases the work rate in this collective
DOCTORAL WORK OBJECTIVE
• Adaptive model. • The system will help to find MOOCs that best suit their
professional needs and that are more accessible regarding his\her disability.
• Accessibility Analysis of both of eLearning platforms and educational resources.
• Personalization of the app: GUI adaptation to each assistive technology.
• Rated list of recommended MOOCs to best fit accessibility requirements and learning preferences.
The main objective of this doctoral work: Design a PERSONALIZED APP for RECOMMENDING MOOCs adapted to user needs: achieve new professional competences + learner’s preferences.
COMPETENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATION APP FOR PEOPLE WITH FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY
Enriched user profile. There are two main groups of information:
1. list of professional competences the user wants to achieve -> what the person wants to learn
2. User’s device personalization: preferences / needed assistive technologies -> technical needs regarding user’s functional diversity.
COMPETENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATION APP FOR PEOPLE WITH FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY
Professional profiles defined by competences.
The system should have professional skills defined to be mapped to user expectations.
MOOC content defined by achievable competences.
The information of competencies within the MOOC platforms and courses.
Accessible MOOCs.
Accessibility evaluation on MOOC platforms and their educational resources
-> automated recommendation list adapted to user’s functional diversity (user’s profile).
MOOC data definedby achievable competences
MOOC data definedby achievable competences
COMPETENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATION APP FOR PEOPLE WITH FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY
TASK 1: Development of an accessibility evaluation of MOOC platforms and courses to achieve a map of accessible MOOCs versus functional diversities.
TASK 2: Development of a holistic approach assessing accessibility in MOOCs using different tools (automatic tools, disability simulators,…)
TASK 3: Analysis of accessible metadata for user profile definition:
{assistive technologies, device user preferences instead of functional disability
TASK 4: Enriched user profile definition:
• functional diversity (from Task 3)
TASK 5: Accessibility map: MOOC vs user’s functional diversity
TASK 1: HOW SHOULD THE MODEL FOR AN ACCESSIBLE MOOC PLATFORM BE?
The minimum required level of accessibility :
Guarantee access to the content by means of the platforms.
Produce the content accessible in itself.
Evaluate the access conditions.
The technological platform.
The content of the MOOC must be the same for all of the students.
The students must be able to access the content using assistive technologies.
It is necessary to offer alternative textual descriptions for multimedia content.
Assistance must be provided.
TASK 1: CREATING ACCESSIBLE MOOCS. THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS
eLearning platform standards:
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 (2008)
Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology
1.0 (2014)
Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C (2013) Estándares y accesibilidad en el ciclo de creación de OERs mediante herramientas de autor. ATICA 2013
TASK 1: CREATING ACCESSIBLE MOOCS. THE IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS
•Documents:
o PDF, Word. Follow Accessibility guidelines for documents
•Videos (pills)
o Include subtitles.
o Sign Language Interpreter
o Include alternative text to the video content. Textual description
TASK 1: METHODOLOGY AND GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING ACCESSIBILITY IN MOOCS
A selection of a set of Web pages:
•The platform’s homepage.•A representative page of the course.•A course page including a form.•A course page including a forum.
Educational resources (Knowledge Pills)Text based: PDF, Word,…Multimedia, Video lessons.
Methodology that combines:
Conformance reviews.
Screening techniques.
(Brajnik ,2009; Sánchez Caballero, 2010,Sama et al, 2012; Hilera et al, 2013)
TASK 1: CASE STUDIES
"Estrategias de Marketing Online. Community Manager" (Miriada X. ).
"Emprendimiento y Desarrollo de Aplicaciones de Realidad Aumentada" (COLMENIA: Weprendo + UnX).
“As alteraçõesclimáticas - or contexto das experiências de vida” (UAbiMOOC)
"España+Francia+Cerca I" (UNED COMA).
Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C., Moreira Teixeira, A. (2014) Accessibility analysis in MOOC platforms. A case study: UNED COMA and UAb iMOOC. CAFVIR 2014
Iniesto F., Rodrigo C. (2014) "Accessibility assessment of MOOC platforms in Spanish: UNED COMA, COLMENIA and Miriada X. SIIE14
TASK 1: CASE STUDY RESULTS
All platforms obtain average results 5 – 6 /10 -> place for improvement. None of the platforms achieve reasonable values (higher than 60%).
For the educational content -> no standards (either platforms or accessible educational content). -> SCORM and accessibility guidelines.
Lack of full accessibility of audiovisual resources exist for all the platforms.
TASK 2: HOLISTIC APPROACH FOR EVALUATING ACCESSIBILITY IN MOOCS
Global or heuristic vision:
Evaluation through automatic accessibility tools :
WCAG Accessibility Validation: eXaminator
Disability Simulators:aDesigner
User Experience (UX)
Testing Tools: Sortsite
User evaluation
Educational content evaluation
The MOOC platform
The educational content.
Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C (2014) Pautas para la evaluación de la accesibilidad en las plataformas MOOC ATICA 2014
TASK 3: ANALYSIS OF ACCESSIBLE METADATA FOR USER PROFILE DEFINITION
Analysis of accessible metadata for user profile definition: {assistive technologies, device user preferences instead of functional disability}
Rodrigo C., Iniesto F. (2015) Holistic vision for creating accessible services based on MOOCs. Open Education Global Conference. 2015.
Learning Profiling:
•Display information: the user preferences to have information displayed or presented. For example, it is possible to define preferences related to text (fonts and colors), video (resolution), mouse (pointer, motion), etc.
•Control information: this set defines the user preferences to control the device: keyboard (virtual), zoom preferences, voice recognition.
•Content information: this set defines the user preferences for visualizing learning content.
•Privacy and data protection information: The privacy and the data integrity is considered very important, since the exchanged information can be closely related to the user’s functional diversity.
TASK 3: ANALYSIS OF ACCESSIBLE METADATA FOR USER PROFILE DEFINITION
Learning Resources:
•Technological: the technology to develop and edit the resources, authoring tools to facilitate the production of accessible materials or the adaptation of those already produced.
•Adapted Devices: when a user accesses a resource available on the Internet, it can be accessed directly or a device would have to be used specifically: screen reader, specialized mouse, virtual keyboard, magnifying glass, etc.
•Existing Inclusive Methodologies and Educational Standards: in this sense the XML markup languages have to be mentioned.
TASK 3: ANALYSIS OF ACCESSIBLE METADATA FOR USER PROFILE DEFINITION
IMS Access for All (AfA) : Personal Needs and Preferences (PNP) and Digital Resource Description (DRD) -> Multiplicity (Collections)
TASK 3: ANALYSIS OF ACCESSIBLE METADATA FOR USER PROFILE DEFINITION
Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C (2015) Accessible services for people with functional diversity based on MOOCs. EC-TEL 2015Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C (2015) Modelado de perfiles de usuario accesibles para servicios académicos basados en MOOCs. Interracción2015
Enriched user profile
TASK 4: ENRICHMENT OF USER PROFILE DEFINITION
Web form:
Design of the questionsPersonal dataUser’s device personalizationPreferences / needed assistive technologies. Users with special needs
Personalization of the app: GUI adaptation to each assistive technology.
Creation of a map of accessibility in MOOCs versus functional diversity
Heuristic evaluation:
Collect positive/negative indicatorsDefine user cases to evaluate a correct accessibilityVirtual users, learning scenariosUsers with special needs
MOOCs sort by level of accessibility.
Allow to search the educational resources that best meet the user's functional diversity.
TASK 5: DEVELOPMENT OF ACCESSIBILITY MAP
FUTURE WORK
TASK 2: Refinement of holistic approach.
TASK 3: Analysis of accessible metadata for user profile definition
-> Include microdata standards: AMP and LRMI (search engines)
TASK 4: Enrichment of user profile definition.
Image retrieved from Mary Robinson Foundation
Francisco Iniesto
Department of Computer Languages and Systems
School of Computer Science
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED),
Madrid, Spain
E-mail: [email protected]
LinkedIn: es.linkedin.com/in/franciscoiniesto/en