Friday, October 5, 2012

Dr. Hadder

Part one: theoretical model

"Special needs" is standard terminology, but there is nothing special about the needs of an individual seeking equal access.

Humans are inherently limited. We can be outrun by a Jack Russell terrier, etc. but we can adapt. Shoes, houses, other humans are all assistive technology, although over time they are perceived of as "natural."

Disability is real, but contextual.

We forget that things were designed. Only when they fail, do we notice.

In the classroom, we try to avoid those failures.

Retrofit - to redesign the structure.

Universal design "roll downhill" and avoid the car crash.

Elevators ding, giving EVERYONE time to press the button to choose a floor.

Part two: nuts and bolts

Modality has to be verbal/voice recognition software.

Use word Track changes and comments, but consider computer literacy.

When writing on the board, say what you are writing as you write it. Good for visual and auditory learning styles.

Read aloud PowerPoints.

Cognitive load can become too great.

Pictures have to be described.

Ideology of individuality. Doing stuff by themselves is not necessarily the only way.

ODS can scan books.

Reading is one-dimensional. You cannot skim with your ears. Time-consuming. Cognitive load is also an issue.

Literacies is also an issue. Braille? Not necessarily. Software can be complicated. Multiple literacies involved and complicate one-size-fits-all approach.

Internet becoming less accessible. then there is a retrofit, then another car crash and so on. Web design is based on what looks good and works well for you. Not universal design. Consequently, we have to retrofit, which is expensive.

Misinformation: says accessible, but not really. Library e books are not accessible.

Design alternatives. Report "car crashes" "up stream."

Don't place responsibility for advocacy downstream on students.

Be aware. Recognize where you are and your responsibilities.

No comments:

Post a Comment