Audio assistive technology and accommodations for students with visual impairments: Potentials and problems for delivering curricula and educational assessments

Abstract Audio assistive technology and testing accommodations have become an increasingly prevalent and potentially useful means of promoting inclusivity in education. Technologies such as text-to-speech and other forms of audio information representation have helped to make curricula more accessible to people with visual impairments and other disabilities. Auditory accommodations in educational testing have also been implemented in an attempt to ensure equitable access to educational evaluations for people with disabilities. The potential benefits of audio assistive technology and accommodations notwithstanding, barriers remain to the implementation of audio in education for people with disabilities. Concerns with validity in audio tests, technical difficulties in the delivery of audio, and general stigma associated with the use of assistive technology and accommodations present formidable challenges that must be met before the full potential of audio assistive technology can be realised. This review examines current practices, potentials, and problems with the use of audio assistive technology and accommodations in educational settings.

[1]  Judy Edworthy.  Does sound help us to work better with machines? A commentary on Rauterberg's paper ‘About the importance of auditory alarms during the operation of a plant simulator’ , 1998 .

[2]  Wai Yu,et al.  Using Non-speech Sounds to Improve Access to 2D Tabular Numerical Information for Visually Impaired Users , 2001, BCS HCI/IHM.

[3]  John H. Flowers,et al.  THIRTEEN YEARS OF REFLECTION ON AUDITORY GRAPHING: PROMISES, PITFALLS, AND POTENTIAL NEW DIRECTIONS , 2005 .

[4]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Graphs in Print , 2002, Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning.

[5]  John H. Flowers,et al.  The ear’s versus the eye’s potential to assess characteristics of numeric data: Are we too visuocentric? , 1992 .

[6]  J. Panel.  Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities , 2013 .

[7]  Jacob O. Wobbrock,et al.  In the shadow of misperception: assistive technology use and social interactions , 2011, CHI.

[8]  C. J. Kolk.  Intelligence Testing for Visually Impaired Persons , 1977 .

[9]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Evaluating text descriptions of mathematical graphs , 2010, ASSETS '10.

[10]  J. Jutai,et al.  Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS) , 2002 .

[11]  Leanne R. Ketterlin-Geller,et al.  Knowing What All Students Know: Procedures for Developing Universal Design for Assessment. , 2005 .

[12]  Benjamin K. Davison.  Evaluating auditory graphs with blind students in a classroom , 2012, ASAC.

[13]  Paul Blenkhorn,et al.  How Blind Users' Mental Models Affect Their Perceived Usability of an Unfamiliar Screen Reader , 2003, INTERACT.

[14]  O. Konur.  Teaching disabled students in higher education , 2006 .

[15]  E. Bouck.  Chapter 6 Technology and students with disabilities: Does it solve all the problems , 2010 .

[16]  Jeffrey E. Boyd,et al.  CORRECTIVE SONIC FEEDBACK FOR SPEED SKATING: A CASE STUDY , 2010 .

[17]  Gerald Tindal,et al.  Research on Mathematics Test Accommodations Relevant to NAEP Testing. , 2004 .

[18]  Brian W. Wojcik,et al.  Is There an App for That? , 2012 .

[19]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Data density and trend reversals in auditory graphs: Effects on point-estimation and trend-identification tasks , 2008, TAP.

[20]  Penelope Sanderson,et al.  The multimodal world of medical monitoring displays. , 2006, Applied ergonomics.

[21]  Dennis D. Munk,et al.  A Model for Preparing Special and General Education Preservice Teachers for Inclusive Education , 2007 .

[22]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Auditory Interfaces and Sonification , 2009, The Universal Access Handbook.

[23]  Marianne K. Dove.  Advancements in Assistive Technology and AT Laws for the Disabled , 2012 .

[24]  Cristina Delogu,et al.  Cognitive factors in the evaluation of synthetic speech , 1998, Speech Commun..

[25]  Kurt F. Geisinger,et al.  Psychometric issues in Testing Students With Disabilities , 1994 .

[26]  Margo Vreeburg Izzo,et al.  Supported eText: Effects of Text-to-Speech on access and Achievement for High School Students with Disabilities , 2009 .

[27]  Mary E Reynolds,et al.  A comparison of learning curves in natural and synthesized speech comprehension. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[28]  Gregg C. Vanderheiden,et al.  Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 , 2008 .

[29]  Brian R. Bryant,et al.  Individuals with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities Use of Assistive Technology Devices in Support Provision , 2012 .

[30]  Lorna M. Brown,et al.  DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR AUDIO PRESENTATION OF GRAPHS AND TABLES , 2003 .

[31]  Michael A. Nees,et al.  CORRELATIONS AND SCATTERPLOTS : A COMPARISON OF AUDITORY AND VISUAL MODES OF LEARNING AND TESTING , 2012 .

[32]  S. Alper,et al.  Assistive Technology for Individuals with Disabilities: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature , 2006 .

[33]  Robert Wall Emerson,et al.  Exploring the Relationship between access Technology and Standardized Test Scores for Youths with Visual Impairments: Secondary Analysis of the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 , 2010 .

[34]  Nancy M. Foasberg.  Adoption of E-Book Readers Among College Students: A Survey , 2011 .

[35]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Musical soundscapes for an Accessible Aquarium: Bringing Dynamic Exhibits to the Visually Impaired , 2007, ICMC.

[36]  Christopher Frauenberger,et al.  A survey on common practice in designing audio in the user interface , 2007 .

[37]  Tohru Ifukube,et al.  Maximum listening speeds for the blind , 2003 .

[38]  Stephen G. Sireci,et al.  Test Accommodations for Students With Disabilities: An Analysis of the Interaction Hypothesis , 2005 .

[39]  Steven M. Hetzler,et al.  THE THREE “ R ” S : REAL STUDENTS IN REAL TIME DOING REAL WORK LEARNING CALCULUS , 2007 .

[40]  William M. Stern,et al.  Shape conveyed by visual-to-auditory sensory substitution activates the lateral occipital complex , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[41]  S. Camille Peres,et al.  Sonification of statistical graphs , 2003 .

[42]  Rachel McCrindle,et al.  Audio space invaders , 2000 .

[43]  James M. Royer,et al.  Testing Accommodations for Examinees With Disabilities: A Review of Psychometric, Legal, and Social Policy Issues , 2001 .

[44]  Steven P. Frysinger,et al.  A Brief History of Auditory Data Representation to the 1980s , 2005 .

[45]  John H. Flowers,et al.  “Sound” alternatives to visual graphics for exploratory data analysis , 1993 .

[46]  Stephen Barrass,et al.  Probing Preferences between Six Designs of Interactive Sonifications for Recreational Sports, Health and Fitness , 2010 .

[47]  Diamantino Freitas,et al.  Enhancing the Accessibility of Mathematics for Blind People: The AudioMath Project , 2004, ICCHP.

[48]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  Mathematics and Accessibility: a Survey , 2007 .

[49]  Ron Wakkary,et al.  Exploring ambient sound techniques in the design of responsive environments for children , 2007, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[50]  Terri L. Bonebright,et al.  Testing the effectiveness of sonified graphs for education: A programmatic research project , 2001 .

[51]  Gregory Kramer,et al.  An introduction to auditory display , 1994 .

[52]  Koorosh Naghshineh,et al.  Creating Accessible Science Museums With User-Activated Environmental Audio Beacons (Ping!) , 2005, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[53]  R. Markham,et al.  Visual Items in Tests of Intelligence for Children , 1999 .

[54]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Listener, Task, and Auditory Graph: Toward a Conceptual Model of Auditory Graph Comprehension , 2007 .

[55]  Mikael Fernström,et al.  Audio games: Fun for all? All for fun! , 2003 .

[56]  Roxann Roberson-Nay,et al.  Constructing knowledge. The role of graphs and tables in hard and soft psychology. , 2002, The American psychologist.

[57]  Kristen Shinohara.  A new approach for the design of assistive technologies: design for social acceptance , 2012, ASAC.

[58]  Aaron Allen,et al.  What Frustrates Screen Reader Users on the Web: A Study of 100 Blind Users , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[59]  Matthias Rauterberg.  About the importance of auditory alarms during the operation of a plant simulator , 1998, Interact. Comput..

[60]  William Winn,et al.  Non-Speech Sound in Human-Computer Interaction: A Review and Design Guidelines , 1994 .

[61]  Thomas R. Kratochwill,et al.  Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Testing Accommodations on the Scores of Students with and without Disabilities , 2001 .

[62]  I. V. Ramakrishnan,et al.  More than meets the eye: a survey of screen-reader browsing strategies , 2010, W4A.

[63]  B. Elbaum,et al.  Effects of an Oral Testing Accommodation on the Mathematics Performance of Secondary Students With and Without Learning Disabilities , 2007 .

[64]  Cheryl Kamei-Hannan.  Examining the Accessibility of a Computerized Adapted Test Using Assistive Technology , 2008 .

[65]  K. Alkahtani.  Teachers' Knowledge and Use of Assistive Technology for Students with Special Educational Needs , 2013 .

[66]  John H. Flowers,et al.  Cross-Modal Equivalence of Visual and Auditory Scatterplots for Exploring Bivariate Data Samples , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[67]  M. Thurlow.  Research Impact on State Accommodation Policies for Students with Disabilities , 2007 .

[68]  Stephen Barrass,et al.  Exploring Function and Aesthetics in Sonifications for Elite sports , 2009 .

[69]  Nigel Papworth,et al.  BEOWULF: A GAME EXPERIENCE BUILT ON SOUND EFFECTS , 2007 .

[70]  M. Scherer,et al.  Assistive Technology Use and Stigma , 2004 .

[71]  G. Gupta,et al.  Helping visually impaired students in the study of mathematics , 1999, FIE'99 Frontiers in Education. 29th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Designing the Future of Science and Engineering Education. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.99CH37011.

[72]  Terri L. Bonebright,et al.  Sonific ation Report: Status of the Field and Research Agenda , 2010 .

[73]  Robert P. Dolan,et al.  Applying Principles of Universal Design to Test Delivery: The Effect of Computer-Based Read-Aloud on Test Performance of High School Students with Learning Disabilities , 2005 .

[74]  Robert Upson.  SONIFICATIONS AS MATHEMATICS TEACHING TOOLS , 2001 .

[75]  Jennifer Mankoff,et al.  Is your web page accessible?: a comparative study of methods for assessing web page accessibility for the blind , 2005, CHI.

[76]  Steven M. Hetzler,et al.  TWO TOOLS FOR INTEGRATING SONIFICATION INTO CALCULUS INSTRUCTION 1 , 2006 .

[77]  Kok Wai Wong,et al.  Similarities and differences between learn through play and edutainment , 2006 .

[78]  Robert Helwig,et al.  An Experimental Analysis of Accommodation Decisions on Large-Scale Mathematics Tests , 2003 .

[79]  Blaine F. Peden,et al.  Data Graphs in Introductory and Upper Level Psychology Textbooks: A Content Analysis , 2000 .

[80]  Accommodations on High-Stakes Writing Tests for Students with Disabilities. Research Report. RR-04-13. , 2004 .

[81]  S. Bolt,et al.  Item-Level Effects of the Read-Aloud Accommodation for Students With Reading Disabilities , 2006 .

[82]  Terence Cavanaugh.  EBooks and Accommodations , 2002 .

[83]  Esther Janse,et al.  Word perception in fast speech: artificially time-compressed vs. naturally produced fast speech , 2004, Speech Commun..

[84]  Robert W. Massof,et al.  Auditory assistive devices for the blind , 2003 .

[85]  V. Sloutsky,et al.  Is a picture worth a thousand words? Preference for auditory modality in young children. , 2003, Child development.

[87]  Richard Connelly.  Lessons and tools from teaching a blind student , 2010 .

[88]  Fredrik Winberg,et al.  QUALITATIVE ASPECTS OF AUDITORY DIRECT MANIPULATION A CASE STUDY OF THE TOWERS OF HANOI , 2001 .

[89]  R. Silvestri,et al.  Assistive Technology Use by Students With LD in Postsecondary Education , 2012 .

[90]  A. Vanbiervliet,et al.  Predictors of assistive technology use: The importance of personal and psychosocial factors , 2005, Disability and rehabilitation.

[91]  Tony Stockman,et al.  The design of interactive audio soccer , 2007 .

[92]  Marcus Watson,et al.  Sonification Supports Eyes-Free Respiratory Monitoring and Task Time-Sharing , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[93]  T. Hull,et al.  Performance of Blind Children on Digit-Span Tests , 1995 .

[94]  Jennifer Richardson,et al.  Middle School Special Education Teachers’ Perceptions and Use of Assistive Technology in Literacy Instruction , 2013, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[95]  S. E. Phillips.  High-Stakes Testing Accommodations: Validity Versus Disabled Rights , 1994 .

[97]  General Education Teachers' Attitude Regarding the Use in Their Classes of Assistive Technology by Students with Learning Disabilities , 2005 .

[98]  A Webster,et al.  Special educational needs code of practice , 1994 .

[99]  Marc Schröder,et al.  Expressive Speech Synthesis: Past, Present, and Possible Futures , 2009, Affective Information Processing.

[100]  Spencer J. Salend,et al.  Using Technology to Create and Administer Accessible Tests , 2009 .

[101]  Mark A. Horney,et al.  Supported eText: Assistive technology through text transformations , 2007 .

[102]  Constantine Stephanidis,et al.  Electronic Educational Books for Blind Students , 2009, The Universal Access Handbook.

[103]  G. Tindal,et al.  Teachers' Knowledge of Accommodations As a Validity Issue in High-Stakes Testing , 1998 .