iSTEP 2013: Exploring the Feasibility and Suitability of Assistive Technology at the Mathru Center for

Differently-Abled

Shree Lakshmi Rao, Aveed Sheikh, Avia Weinstein, Aditya Kodkany, Madeleine Clute, Madelyn Gioffre, Poornima Kaniarasu, Vivek Nair,

Ermine A. Teves, M. Beatrice Dias, M. Bernardine Dias

CMU-RI-TR-16-31

The Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213

June 2016

Copyright © 2016 TechBridgeWorld at Carnegie Mellon University

1

Exploring the Feasibility and Suitabilityof Assistive Technology at the MathruCenterforDifferently-AbledShree Lakshmi Rao, Aveed Sheikh, Avia Weinstein, Aditya Kodkany, MadeleineClute, Madelyn Gioffre, Poornima Kaniarasu, Vivek Nair, Ermine A. Teves, M.BeatriceDias,M.BernardineDias

2

AcknowledgementsWeextendsincereandheartfeltgratitudetoourpartner,theMathruEducationalTrustfortheBlindformentoringandadvisingusthroughoutthedurationoftheiSTEPresearchinternship.Specialthanksgoout toMs.G.R.Muktha forgivingus theopportunity toworkwith theMathruCenter forDifferently-Abled.Toallthestudents,teachingandnon-teachingstafffortheirpatienceandcooperationinworkingwithusandprovidinguswithawealthofinformationthathasassistedusincompletingthisresearch.Inaddition, we would also like to acknowledge Carnegie Mellon University for providing the academicinfrastructurenecessarytomakeourworkpossible.

AbstractThe use of assistive technology has been found to enhance the educational experience of disabledstudentsand improvetheir learningoutcomes. In low-incomecountries,however, finding inexpensiveand sustainable assistive technology is a challenge. This report outlines key findings pertaining to acomprehensiveneedsassessmentundertakenattheMathruCenterforDifferently-AbledaspartoftheiSTEP2013 internshipprogram,organizedby theTechBridgeWorld researchgroupatCarnegieMellonUniversity.Theobjectiveofthisstudywastounderstandwhetherandhowassistivetechnologycouldbe used to enhance the learning and teaching experiences of students and teachers at the MathruCenter for Differently Abled. Researchers interviewed teachers and staff, conducted observations ofcritical activities at the center both inside and outside classroom, elicited opinions of a local specialeducation expert, and administered participatory design experiments with teachers and affinitymatchingwith students.Results indicate that thereare indeedpossible technology interventions thatcould benefit the students and teachers at the Mathru Center through reducing the workload ofteachersandenhancingtheeducationalexperienceofstudents.Thereportconcludeswithadiscussionof possible technology solutions appropriate to suit the needs of the Mathru Center and a set ofrecommendationsforthenextiSTEPassistivetechnologyresearchprojectswiththeMathruCenter.

3

TableofContentsAcknowledgements......................................................................................................................................2

Abstract........................................................................................................................................................2

TableofFigures............................................................................................................................................4

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................5

TargetAudience.......................................................................................................................................6

ContributionsofthisWork.......................................................................................................................6

OutlineofReport......................................................................................................................................6

Background..................................................................................................................................................7

TechBridgeWorld......................................................................................................................................7

iSTEP.........................................................................................................................................................7

TheMathruCenterforDifferently-Abled.................................................................................................8

FreeSchoolfortheHearingImpairedandMulti-sensoryDisabledChildren.......................................9

FreeComputerTrainingClassesforUnderprivilegedChildren............................................................9

TeacherTrainingProgram....................................................................................................................9

ManufacturingandFreeDistributionofSanitaryNapkinsandLeafPlates..........................................9

NeedsAssessment.....................................................................................................................................10

Objectives...............................................................................................................................................10

RelatedWork.........................................................................................................................................10

EducationofChildrenwithDisabilities...............................................................................................10

AssistiveTechnologyforDifferently-AbledStudents.........................................................................13

ResearchMethods.................................................................................................................................14

Observations......................................................................................................................................14

Shadowing..........................................................................................................................................14

Interviews...........................................................................................................................................14

ParticipatoryDesignApproach...........................................................................................................14

Participants............................................................................................................................................15

Findings..................................................................................................................................................15

TeachingMethodology.......................................................................................................................16

SurveyofTeachingTools....................................................................................................................16

IdentifiedTeacherNeeds...................................................................................................................17

IdentifiedStudentNeeds...................................................................................................................18

4

RecommendationsforFutureWork..........................................................................................................19

TeacherTrainingTechnology.................................................................................................................19

LessonPlanningAssistance....................................................................................................................20

FlashCardGeneratingSoftware.............................................................................................................20

ComputerTraining.................................................................................................................................22

SignLanguageDictionary.......................................................................................................................22

SpeechPracticeSoftware.......................................................................................................................22

Multi-sensoryClassroomAssistant........................................................................................................23

EvaluatingFutureTechnologyProjectsattheMathruCenter...................................................................23

BaselineData..........................................................................................................................................24

PotentialChallengestoDataCollection.................................................................................................24

PossibleConfoundingFactors................................................................................................................24

ProposedEvaluationStrategies..............................................................................................................24

Conclusions................................................................................................................................................25

References..................................................................................................................................................25

TableofFiguresFigure1.TechBridgeWorld'spartnershipsacrosstheworld........................................................................7Figure2.ImagecollageofpastiSTEPteams[WillfixthiswhenIfinalizereport]........................................7Figure3.Nandini..........................................................................................................................................8Figure4.MathruCenterforDifferently-Abled.............................................................................................8Figure5.MathruCenterclassformulti-sensorydisabled...........................................................................9Figure6.MathruTrustcomputerlearningcenter.......................................................................................9Figure7.TeachertrainingwithCBRnetwork...............................................................................................9Figure 8. Production facility for sanitary napkin (left) and leaf plate produced at theMathru Center(right)..........................................................................................................................................................10Figure9.ResearcherinterviewingateacherattheMathruCenter...........................................................14Figure10.Anembossedalphabetcard......................................................................................................16Figure11.Flashcards.................................................................................................................................17Figure12.Animalfigurines.........................................................................................................................17Figure13.Flashcardsusedbytheteachers...............................................................................................17Figure14.Teachersworkingindividuallytoorganizethecardbydifficultylevel......................................17Figure15.Modelsusedbyteachersasteachingaids................................................................................18Figure16.Researcherexplainstheaffinitymatchingexercisetoastudent..............................................19Figure17.CardsgiventoMathruCenterstudenttoorganizebythelevelofdifficulty............................19

5

IntroductionThereareapproximately93millionchildrenworldwide(i.e.approximately1 in20ofthoseaged14oryounger) living with a moderate or severe disability of some kind [12]. This staggering statisticnecessitates the development of assistive tools that can help sustain a healthy life for these childrenirrespective of their disabilities. In recent years technological advancements have spearheaded thedevelopmentof innovativesolutionstomeettheneedsandaspirationsofdisabledchildren.However,accordingtotheWorldHealthOrganization, inmanylow-incomecountriesonly5-15%ofthepeoplewhoneedassistivetechnologyareabletoobtainit[12].Thisisprimarilyduetothehighcostinvolvedindeveloping, procuring and maintaining such technologies in these regions of the world. AssistivetechnologyisdefinedbytheTechnology-RelatedAssistanceAct(TechAct)of1988(P.L.100–407),andtheIndividualswithDisabilitiesAct(IDEA)of1990(P.L.101–476),as“anyitem,pieceofequipment,orproductsystem,whetheracquiredcommerciallyoff-the-shelf,modified,orcustomized,that isusedtoincrease,maintain or improve the functional capabilities of individualswith disabilities.”[5] There aretwo purposes of assistive technology. First, technology can augment an individual’s strengths bycounterbalancing the effects of a disability; and second, it can provide alternative methods forperformingatasksothatdisabilitiescanbecompensatedfororbypassedentirely[5].Severalassistivetechnologieshavebeen introducedtoaid inday-to-daytasks (e.g.powerchairs, screenreaders,etc.),but therehasalsobeena recent increase inemergingassistiveeducational technology,whichcanbeused to support andenhance the learningenvironment for childrenwithdisabilities. To this end, theTechBridgeWorld (TBW) research group at CarnegieMellonUniversity (CMU) has partneredwith theMathru Educational Trust for the Blind (Mathru Trust) in Bangalore, India to develop economicallyfeasibleassistivetechnologicalsolutionstoeducatestudentsatTheMathruCenterforDifferently-Abled(Mathru Center). This centerwas newly developed byMathru Trust to address the growing need foreducationalresourcesforchildrenwithmultipledisabilitiesorchallengesotherthanblindness.

The iSTEP (innovative Student Technology ExPerience) research internship was initiated by TBW toprovide CMU students the opportunity to work on technology projects that to address needs ofunderservedcommunities.ThisreportsummarizesthecomprehensiveneedsassessmentundertakenattheMathruCenterbytheiSTEP2013researchinternteamduringthecourseofnineweeksinthefield.Theobjectiveof this investigationwastodetermine ifandhowassistivetechnologycanplayarole insupportingandenhancingthecenter’seducationalanddevelopmentalgoalsforitsstudents.Thisreportdiscusses key findings from the field and highlights information pertaining to research methodsemployed to retrieve those findings. Researchers observed in-class student activities and assessedcreative teaching strategies usedby the teachers tomeet the varying educational needs of students.Additional informationwascollected through interviewswith teachers, staffandspecialeducators,aswell as participatory design experiments. This report concludes with recommendations for the nextiSTEPprogram,andfutureresearchopportunitiesandtechnologyprojectsattheMathruCenter.

6

TargetAudienceThisresearchprojectwasundertakenattheMathruCenter,whichcurrentlyhas fourteachersand27students.Allstudentshavevaryinglevelsandcombinationsofdisabilitiesincludinghearingimpairment,deafness,muteness,cognitive/mentaldisabilities,cerebralpalsyandspeechimpediments.Theobjectiveofthisstudywastounderstandwhetherandhowassistivetechnologycanplayaroleinsupportingandenhancing the learning and teaching experiences for students and teachers at the Mathru Center.Findingspresentedinthisreportarerelevanttospecialeducators,teachersandanyotherprofessionalsorgroupsworkingwithstudentswithdisabilities,particularlythoseattheMathruCenter.Thisworkisalsoapplicabletoresearchersandinnovatorsworkinginthefieldofassistivetechnology,whofocusondesigninganddevelopingtoolsforthispopulationofstudents.

ContributionsofthisWorkTheresearchprojectdetailedinthisreportwillhelpsupportandenhancetheeducationalenvironmentand experience for students with multiple disabilities. Research results presented here providemeaningfulinsightintothechallengesassociatedwithmeetingtheeducationalneedsofstudentswithvarying typesandcombinationsofdisabilities.These findingsalsoofferabetterunderstandingof thekinds of assistive technologies that can be incorporated in the educational environment of suchstudents.Inaddition,thisresearchprojectprovidesinsightsthatcouldinfluenceeducationalpracticesatspecializedinstitutionsthatcatertotheeducationalneedsofstudentswithvaryingdisabilities.Finally,the knowledge gained from this study could provide a basis for future work in the same field. Inparticular,theseresearchfindingswillserveasfoundationaldataforthenextiSTEPresearchteamwhowillbeworkingondevelopmentofassistivetechnologiessuitablefortheMathruCenter.

OutlineofReportThisresearchreportbeginswithbackgroundinformationonTBW,theiSTEPinternship,andtheMathruCenter.Researchmethodsarediscussednext,withanoutlineofresearchobjectives,areviewofrelatedwork,anddetailedinformationontheneedsassessmentconductedattheMathruCenter.Inparticular,thissectionincludesadescriptionofresearchparticipants,andadiscussionofdata-collectionmethodsandoutcomesofthestudy.Inaddition,thisreportsurveysexistingtoolsusedattheMathruCenterandidentifies any potential challenges that could be encounteredwhen implementing new technologies.Thereportconcludeswithadiscussionofpossibletechnologysolutionsappropriatetosuittheneedsofthe Mathru Center and a set of recommendations for the next iSTEP assistive technology researchprojectswiththeMathruCenter.

7

Background

TechBridgeWorldTBW is a research group that builds partnerships withunderserved communities internationally to create culturallyappropriate technology that adheres to each community’svision of progress (Figure 1). Founded in 2004, TBW leadsinnovation and implementation of technology solutions tohelp address challenges in technologically underservedcommunities across the world. They invent new tools,customize existing technology, and inspire and train futureresearchers and technologists. Based at CMU,TechBridgeWorldemploys theknowledgeand imaginationoffaculty,staffandstudentsinallofourprojects.

iSTEPTBWlaunchedtheiSTEPprograminthesummerof2009toprovideCMU students a real-world, real-work experience in applying theirknowledge and skills for creative problem solving in unfamiliarsettings (Figure 2). iSTEP is a 10-week unique summer researchinternship that provides students with the opportunity to conducttechnologyresearchprojectsinunderservedcommunitiesacrosstheworld. Both undergraduate and graduate students from CMU’sPittsburgh and Doha campuses are eligible to apply. TogetherwithTBW, the iSTEP team collaborates with local partners to betterunderstand the needs of the community and research technologysolutions that could help address some of those challenges. Thecombined TBW and iSTEP teams are globally-distributedwith iSTEP

internsbasedintheoverseaspartnerlocationandTBWfacultyandstaffbasedatCMU’sPittsburgh,USAcampus.TheiSTEPprogramisaveryrigorousandcompetitiveresearchinternshipprogramthatattractsexceptional students who demonstrate high levels of creative problem-solving skills, academicachievement,teamworkethicsandculturaladaptability,andhaveaglobalmindsetandbroadoutlook.Students selected for the iSTEP internshipprogramgainvaluableworkexperience through theirworkwith underserved communities in various parts of theworld. iSTEP 2013 internsworked on assistivetechnology projects in collaborationwith theMathru Educational Trust School for the Blind (MathruTrust) located in Bangalore, India. The multidisciplinary iSTEP 2013 team comprised of a mix ofundergraduate and graduate students and recent alumni from various schools at CMU including theSchoolofComputerScience,CarnegieInstituteofTechnology,TepperSchoolofBusiness,CollegeofFineArtsandMellonCollegeofScience.PastiSTEPlocationsincludedTanzaniain2009,Bangladeshin2010,Uruguay in 2011 and Ghana in 2012with projects in assistive technology, literacy tools, informationexchangeandenvironmentalsustainability.

Figure1.TechBridgeWorld'spartnershipsacrosstheworld

Figure2.ImagecollageofpastiSTEPteams(2009–2012)

8

TheMathruCenterforDifferently-AbledIn2001,Ms.GubbiR.MukthafoundedtheMathruEducationalTrustfortheBlind (Mathru Trust), which is an entity funded by private donors whosupport the education and development of blind children in India. ThatsameyeartheMathruTrustwentontoestablishtheMathruSchoolfortheBlind (Mathru School) in Bangalore, the largest city in the Indian state ofKarnataka. TheMathru School is dedicated to the growth, education andcare of visually impaired and blind children. After almost a decade ofsuccess with this school, the Mathru Trust sought to expand its reachthrough the development of a center to support students with multipledisabilities. The work described in this report was conducted at the newcenterforstudentswithhearingimpairmentsandmulti-sensorydisabilities.

Intheyear2010,theMathruTrustinitiated“ProjectNandini”undertheguidanceofSenseInternationalIndia (SSI). Themotivationbehind thisnewundertakingwas the compelling storyof a young, visuallyimpairedstudentnamedNandini(Figure3).In2006,NandinienrolledattheMathruSchool.Shespentfouryearsatthisschoollearningbrailleanddevelopinglifeskillsalongwithherpeers.Inthesummerof2010, she contractedchickenpox.Her family lived ina rural and impoverishedareaof IndiaandwasunabletoobtainnecessarymedicalprovisionstotreatNandini.Asaresult,shelostherhearingability,and is now both visually and hearing impaired. Project Nandini was established to cater to theeducationalneedsofstudentslikeNandini,whohavemultipledisabilities.

Under this project, in 2012 the Mathru Trustinstituteda free, residential schoolentitled the“Mathru Center for Differently-Abled” (MathruCenter) to support the education anddevelopment of hearing impaired and multi-sensory disabled children. This new center islocated in the Srinivasapura region, which isabout six kilometers away from the MathruSchool in Yelahanka (Figure 4). In addition todrawing inspiration from Nandini’s story, thecenterwasalsosetupprimarilyduetothefactthat many of the visually-impaired students at

theMathruSchoolalsohadotherformsofdisabilitiessuchashearingimpairment,deafness,muteness,cognitive challenges, cerebral palsy and speech impediments. The focus of the Mathru Center is toprovide studentswith an all-round education by supporting their social and emotional development,improving their communication, cognition and mobility skills, and enabling them to independentlymanage their day-to-day activities. In addition to its emphasis on education, theMathru Center alsohosts a range of different services for the community, including computer training and vocationalsupportforruralwomen.Thecenter’svariousactivitiesaredescribedbelow.

Figure3.Nandini

Figure4.MathruCenterforDifferently-Abled

9

FreeSchoolfortheHearingImpairedandMulti-sensoryDisabledChildrenThis school has qualified teachers and specialeducators who are trained in sign language and inmeeting the educational needs of students withhearing impairments, as well as those with multi-sensory disabilities (Figure 5). The school alsoteachesstudentssports,yoga,paintingandcrafts.

FreeComputerTrainingClassesforUnderprivilegedChildrenTheMathruTrustsetupacomputerlabwiththehelpand support received from the TATA Consultancygroup and a local group called Prayukthi (Figure 6).Basiccomputer lessonsareoffered freeofcharge tolocal underprivileged children from surroundingareas.

TeacherTrainingProgramThe Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR) networkacross India collaborated with the Mathru Trust toprovidequality education and training to teachers. Inthisregard,theMathruTrusthasbeenrecognizedasaCBR “Study Center” which not only provides freeeducation to children with disabilities, but alsoprovides training for teachers who educate thesechildren(Figure7).

ManufacturingandFreeDistributionofSanitaryNapkinsandLeafPlatesIn2012,theMathruTrustbeganaproductionunittomakesanitarypadsfortheunderprivilegedgirlsandwomen in the surroundingareas (Figure8).TheMathruTrustalso initiated themanufacturingofleaf plates,which is a natural productmadeby local ruralwoman from surrounding areas (Figure8).Theseleafplatesarethensoldatthelocalmarketandprovideasourceofincomeforthewomenwhocreatethem.

Figure5.MathruCenterclassformulti-sensorydisabled

Figure6.MathruTrustcomputerlearningcenter

Figure7.TeachertrainingwithCBRnetwork

10

NeedsAssessmentThefocusofthisresearchstudywastoconductathoroughneedsassessmentwithstaff,teachersandstudentsattheMathruCenter.TounderstandtheneedsoftheMathruCenter,researchersfollowedtheprescribed CMU Institutional Review Board (IRB) guidelines to interview teachers and staff, conductobservations of critical activities at the center both inside and outside classroom, elicit opinions of alocal special education expert, and administer participatory design experiments with teachers andaffinitymatchingwithstudents.

ObjectivesTheobjectiveofthisresearchinitiativewastounderstandwhetherandhowassistivetechnologycanbeutilized to enhance the learning and teaching experiences of students and teachers at the MathruCenter. In particular, researchers observed and assessed ways in which students with hearingimpairments and multi-sensory disabilities could be assisted in education through technology. Thisprovided a better understanding of the current educational state of students at the Mathru Centerincluding the needs of both teachers and students, and ways in which technology could be used toenhance the learning environment andoutcomes for students. Basedon data collected in this study,follow-upresearchcanbepursuedtodeveloptoolstobenefittheMathruCenter.

RelatedWorkTo informthis researchstudy, relatedworkwassurveyed to learnmoreaboutvariousmethodologiesand tools employed in the education of children who are diagnosed with the following disabilities:hearingimpairment,deafblindcondition,autismandcognitivechallenges.

EducationofChildrenwithDisabilitiesThedifferentdegreesofhearingloss(mild,moderate,severe,andprofound)suggestthatchildrenwithhearingimpairmentshavedifferentcommunicationandeducationalneeds[3][6].Moreover,anykindof educational endeavor related to a hearing impaired student needs to fully involve parents andimmediate family members. According to Mukuria and Eleweke, a major argument for the activeinvolvementofparentsintheeducationoftheirchildrenwithhearinglossisthat“95%ofthesechildrenare born to hearing parentswho have no previous experience and knowledge of raising a childwith

Figure8.Productionfacilityforsanitarynapkin(left)andleafplateproducedattheMathruCenter(right)

11

hearingloss.”[3]Theactiveinvolvementofparentsleadstobetterlearningoutcomesforthestudent.Mukuria andEleweke state that the goal of early intervention fromparents in the educationof theirchild is to foster effective parent–child communication and to provide an opportunity to acquirelanguage intheappropriatemodality(signorspoken).Thefactthathearing impairedchildrenarenotable to listen to their own voice poses an additional challenge to the learning and acquisition of alanguageduring theearly stagesof theirdevelopment.Thereare threemainavenues for thehearingimpairedtoaccess language:speechreading,hearing (formildormoderatehearing impairment),andsignlanguage[6].Somemayalsoemployacombinationofthesethreemethods,ortechniquesincludingvisual cues and face-reading to communicate with others [6, 10]. There are some disadvantagesassociated with each technique. Most notably, only about 50% of English speech reading can beobserved through lipswhile theother50% is spokenbehind closed lips,whichdoesnot facilitate theprocessofreadinglipstounderstandwhatthespeakeristryingtoconvey[6].

Inspecialeducational institutionsthatcatertotheneedsofstudentswithdisabilities,educatorsoftenutilize visual aids to teachhearing impaired students. This sameeducational techniquehas alsobeenobservedattheMathruCenter.Throughtheuseofimages,hearingimpairedstudentsarebetterabletograspconceptssuchasthenamesoftheanimals,differentmodesoftransport,humanbodyparts,etc.A number of studies pertaining to hearing impaired education consider visual aids to be a valuableeducational tool. Because sign language is relied heavily upon to communicate, deaf students arefrequentlydescribedasvisual learnersbytheirteachers,deaf individuals,andothers[1].Likereading,learning sign language is a verbal skill, even if it depends on vision rather than voice. Hence, apreferenceforsignoverspeechasthelanguageofinstructionisnotsufficienttoclassifysomeoneasavisuallearner[1].Therefore,itisimportanttoassesshearingimpairedstudents’visual-spatialabilities,in addition to their cognitive skills, prior to developing any kind of intervention to enhance theireducational experience. Having a good understanding of spatial relations is particularly important formastering mathematical concepts. For deaf students who have greater spatial relation skills, havingaccess to diagrams representing conceptual and relational information within a math problem canfacilitatetheirarrivingatasolution[1].

Special educators for primary classes often first teach students key concepts through reading andwritingactivities.Signlanguageisalsousedtoexplainthosesameconcepts.AccordingtoMukuriaandEleweke,“studentsusetheirknowledgeandskillsintheirfirstlanguage(signs)tolearnliteracyskillsintheir second language (English).” [3]Additionally, research related to thecognitiveandmetacognitiveabilitiesofdeaf learners, showed thatdeaf students tend tobe less likely than theirhearingpeers toautomaticallyutilize cognitiveabilities andknowledge that theyareknown tohave [1]. This indicatesthatlessonsneedtobeplannedinamannersuchthatthedifferentlearningneedsofhearingimpairedstudentsaresufficientlymet.AccordingtoMukuriaandEleweke,planningmusttake intoaccountthefollowingrequirements:“realisticdiagnosticassessmentofeducationalneeds, instructionthat focusesonspecificneeds,assessmentofgrowth,andevaluationofinstruction.”[3]

The educational approach for a hearing impaired student is radically different from that applied tostudentswhoaredeafblind,whichisaconditionindicatingthepresenceofadualsensoryimpairment,which involves the auditory and visual senses [2]. However, not every deafblind individual is either

12

completely deaf or completely blind [11]. Still, the impairment of both senses either partially orcompletelyposesuniquechallengesintheeducationandlanguagedevelopmentofdeafblindstudents.Each individual has fiveprimary senses to express and receive stimuli from the environment. Out ofthesefive,twoofthemarechieflyused:thevisualandauditorysenses.Inthecaseofdeafblindpeople,these senses are impaired and they have to therefore primarily depend on their sense of touch tointeractwiththeirenvironment.Touchandtasteareclosesenses,givinginformationonlyaboutwhatishappeningnow,withinarm’sreach[2,11].Themostwidelyusedtechniquetodirectlyteachdistancetoa deafblind student is the hand-under-hand approach that takes into account exploration withenvironmental objects [11]. Furthermore, the earliest technique ever used to teach language to adeafblindstudentinvolvedfingerspellingoftheAmericanSignLanguage(ASL)alphabetinthepalmofthe student’s hand.Using this hand alphabet technique, the studentwas taughtwords and conceptsabout her environment and the world [2]. Since most deafblind people have residual vision and/orhearing capabilities, appropriate educational techniques are used to alignwith and capitalize on thatdeafblind student’s most optimal sense(s), including partial hearing and/or sight. These techniquesinclude a combination of one or more of: (1) sign and body language, (2) hand gestures and (3)movements.Inaddition,“tactilesensesareoftenusedtoexploreenvironmentsandcommunicate”[2][11].Forexample,deafblindstudentswhohavelessvisualefficiencymayprimarilyusethehand-over-handapproachortactilemodeofsignlanguage.It isalsoimportantthattheeducationalenvironmentfordeafblindstudentsconsistofaclassorderoraconsistentclassactivity[2].Thisentailsestablishingaspecificorderofclassactivitiesthatenhancestheirlearning.Forinstance,asthestudententershis/herclassroom, the student approaches a specific shelf that contains objects that represent activities thathe/she will do during the day [2]. Other devices and techniques used in the education of deafblindstudents for communication purposes are: hearing aids, tactile signing, interpreting services,communicationdevicessuchasTellatouch(amanualbraillewriter),braillereading,large-printreading,tactilecommunicationcards,braillecardsandcardswithraisedlinesorimages[2].

Inthecaseofautisticchildren,educationalapproachesshouldaccountforthefollowingfactors[4]:

• Appliedbehavioralanalysis,whichbreakstasksintosmall,manageablepartstoachievesuccess• Structuredteaching,whichimpliesprovidingvisualandstructuralsupporttopreventfailure• Relationshipdevelopment,whichincludesdevelopingapositiveandnurturingrelationshipwith

theautisticchild• Socialskillstraining,whichteachesappropriatesocial interactionsthroughmodeling,scripting,

role-playingandtheuseofpersonalizedstories

Researchhasalsoshownthatapproximately70%ofindividualswithautismhaveintellectualdisabilities;althoughmore recent epidemiological studies state 40%. Furthermore, Dyches states “Some childrenwith autism are highly verbal, while approximately 50 - 75% of autistic children have little or nofunctional speech.” [4] There are several therapeutic tools andmethodsutilized tohelp enhance thespeechand languageofautistic children.These includespeech training,augmentativeandalternativecommunication,signlanguage,picture-basedsystems,andcomputerizedcommunicationdevices[4].

13

TheMathruCenterenrollsstudentswhodemonstratetypicalcharacteristicsofindividualswithcognitivedisabilities. According to Bakken, these include: “short attention spans, problems with short-termmemory, speech and language difficulties, deficiencies in generalizing information to new situations,challengeswithmotorskills,andlowfrustrationtolerance,especiallywithregardtoacademiclearningandabstract instructional activities.” [5] To cater to theeducational needsof studentswith cognitivedisabilities,itisvitalthatthelearningmaterialpresentedtothestudentisinagrouporaclusterform,ratherthan inarandomorder[5].Educationaltechniquesshouldalso includepracticewithflashcardsandpicturesinadditiontoarepetitionoftheeducationalcontent[5].Othermethodologiesthatplayasignificantrole intheeducationofstudentswithcognitivedisabilities includemodeling, imitation,andlearningthroughobservation[5].

AssistiveTechnologyforDifferently-AbledStudentsSeveral computer-based applications exist for hearing impaired students. A research team based inIndonesia developed an Indonesian Sign Language Computer Application that is designed to assistpeople, especially childrenwith hearing impairments to learn the Indonesian Language called Bahasa[6].Thisapplicationcomeswithsixmodules:(1)the“DictionaryModule”showsasignlanguagevideoorspeech reading video of theword entered, (2) the “Picture SelectionModule” allows users to createsentences in the Subject-Predicate-Object-Adverb (S-P-O-K) pattern using available pictures, (3) theWriting Sentence Module allows users to create sentences by typing words, (4) the “Free SentenceModule”allowsteachers (andparentsofchildren)toarrangesentencesthatarenotaffirmatives (e.g.questions,negativesentences, imperatives), (5)the“FingerSpellingModule”allowsusersto learnthefingerspellingforaperson’snameorforwordsthatdonothaveasignlanguage,and(6)the“NumeralSignMode” allows users to learn the numeral sign for numbers. This application can also serve as adigitaldictionaryforBahasaIndonesianSignLanguageforthosethatsupportsignlanguageteaching[6].

Anotherinternet-basedapplicationisthe“SignOnOne,”whichteachesbeginner-levelEnglishusingsignlanguage as the language of instruction [7]. This online course is comprised of 10 lessons on topicsrelevant to the Internet and thedeaf. “SignOnOne”operatesunder thepremise that English learningshould beginwith thewritten language taught using sign language. This application provides a visualrepresentation of the content of each sentence instead of a direct translation of the text [7].Additionally, it offers animations to further illustrate the substance of an English sentence. Theseanimationsareindependentofanyspecificlanguage,whetherwrittenorsigned[7].

Anotheravailabletoolisamobile-basedapplicationdevisedbyaBritishresearchteam.Thisapplicationserves as a communication tool combining British sign language with gesture-based mobilecommunicationtechnology[8].Thetoolcantranslatesignlanguageintotextonatouchscreenmobilephone, using a set of organized vocabularies integrated through gesture recognition technology [8].IBMCorporationhasdevelopedasimilarapplicationcalledtheViaScribe [9].This technologybasicallycovertsvoiceintotextandcanbeveryusefulforhearingimpairedusers.ViaScribecanalsobeusedtotranscribe speechor record speech in real-timeduring lecturesor class session. There is alsoa visualdictionary designed to develop the reading and writing skills of hearing impaired students [10]. Thisdictionarycurrentlycontainsatotalof235imagespertainingtofrequentlyusedwordsinaneveryday

14

context. Visuals included in the dictionary were based on 1,500 words found in the sign languagedictionaryoftheMinistryofEducationinTurkey.

Notably,mostexistingassistivetechnologyisapplicabletovisuallyorhearingimpairedpeople,orthosewithasingle,significantdisability.Thereareveryfew,ifany,toolsavailableforthosewhohavemulti-sensorydisabilitiessuchasthedeafblind.Thisstudyseekstoaddressthisshortcomingthroughunveilingtheneedsofchildrenwithmultipledisabilities,withthe intentionof informingfuturedevelopmentofassistivetoolstoaddresstheseneeds.

ResearchMethodsA variety of methods were employed to gain insight into the needs and challenges of teachers andstudents at theMathru Center. These included observations, shadowing teachers, teacher interviewsand participatory design methods including card sorting and an affinity matching exercise. Thesetechniquesaredescribedbelow.

ObservationsResearchers documented their observations across all classrooms at theMathru Center. In addition,observationswereconductedduringspecialeventsandrecreationalactivitiesatthecenter,inordertogaininsightintostudents’socialinteractionsandinterestsoutsidetheclassroom.

ShadowingThis is a contextual inquiry research method used to observe participants in their day-to-dayenvironment.ResearchersshadowedfourteachersattheMathruCenterduringthecourseoftheirworkday to understand the students’ and the teachers’ daily schedule. This was done regularly over thecourseof thenineweeks.Shadowingenabled researchers to immerse themselves into theenduser’senvironment,whichallowedforindepthobservationofclassesandthetypicalbehaviorofstudentsandteachers.

InterviewsFour teachers at the Mathru Center were interviewed.This included a new teacher who had extensive fieldexperience working with hearing impaired students inrural India. Another one of the teachers had priorexperienceworkingspecificallywithstudentswithmulti-sensory disabilities. Teachers were interviewedindividually and in-person in order to obtain detailedinformationoneach teacher’suniqueexperiencesat theMathruCenteraswellasatpriorteachingappointments(Figure9).

ParticipatoryDesignApproachForthisaspectofthestudyresearchersengagedteachersandolderstudentsfromtheMathruCenterindifferentactivities throughwhich theycould indicate theirpreferences for teachingand learning.Thisincludedtwoactivitiesforthestudentsandoneactivityfortheteachers.

Figure9.ResearcherinterviewingateacherattheMathruCenter

15

For one activity, students and teacherswere separately asked to sort a series of previously designedcards based on the difficulty level of the prompt. After the activity, answers and the difficulty ratingprovidedby the teacherswerenotedand similarities across teacherswerenoted.Cards thathad themaximumratingswereanalyzed.Asimilarexercisewasdonewiththestudentsinthe2ndstandardbutthepromptsprovidedtostudentstoorganizewererelevanttotheirexperience.Thishelpedresearchersunderstandwhich aspects of their teaching and learning experience are challenging for teachers andstudents,andalsohighlightedareastofocusonwhendevelopingassistivetechnologiesforcenter.

In the second affinity matching activity for students, researchers provided participants with a set ofpictures and asked them to indicate their affinity for the topic or subject by affixing a correspondingemoticon(expressingthreedifferentemotions:happy,sadorneutral)nexttothatimage.Studentswerethen asked to discuss with the researcher why they felt a certain way about specific subjects. Thistechniquehelped inspire students to consider subjects and topics that theywould like to learnmoreabout. This exercise was analyzed by providing numerical values to each of the “affinity” levels. Forexample,asmileyfacewasgivena“+1”whileaneutralfacewasgivena“0”andafrowningfacewasgivena“-1”.Informationcollectedthroughthisactivityhelpedresearchersmakerecommendationsforpossible technology interventions that would appeal to the teacher and student population at theMathruCenter.

ParticipantsParticipants in the research study includedboth teachers and students.A totalof four teacherswereinvolved in the research study. Three of the four teachersworked exclusivelywith the studentswithhearing impairments. One of the three teachers had prior experience in the field andwas trained inIndian Sign Language, while the other two teachers were trained after their appointment. A specialeducator with extensive experience with students with multiple disabilities was also included in theresearch. All 33 of the students enrolled at theMathru Center were included in the research study.Therearecurrentlyfourtypesofclassesofferedatthecenter:

(1) Multi-sensoryclass(MSI),whichincludeseightstudentswithmulti-sensorydisabilities;(2) 1ststandard,whichincludesfivestudentswithhearingimpairments;(3) 2ndstandard,whichincludesfourstudentswithhearingimpairmentsand(4) NurseryandPre-Nursery,whichincludes16studentswitharangeofdisabilities:

• Eighthearingimpairedstudents;• Twostudentswithbothcerebralpalsyandspeechimpediments;• Twostudentswithbothhearingimpairmentsandlearningdisabilities;• Threestudentswithcognitivechallenges;and• Onestudentwithbothavisualimpairmentandcognitivechallenges.

FindingsIn depth contextual inquiry at the Mathru Center through observations and shadowing teachersrevealed the distinct needs of teachers who work with hearing impaired students versus those whoworkwithstudentsintheMSIclass.

16

TeachingMethodologyAcrossallfourclassroomsintheMathruCenterteachersprovidestudentswithindividualattentionandrelyheavilyonphysicalorvisualteachingaidssuchasmodels,flashcards,etc.Teachersengagestudentsbyshowing theman imageorobjectandrepeating thenamesand featuresofwhat isdisplayeduntilstudentsunderstandwhatitis.Inaddition,teachersoftenteamupslowlearnerswithfasterlearnerssothatstudentscanlearnfromtheirpeers.Oneteacherreportedobservingthatstudentslearnfasterfromeachother rather than froma teacher. This observationwasbasedonher experience at theMathruCenteraswellasprioryearsofteachingatdifferentinstitutions.

In classrooms with students with hearing impairments, teachers use flash cards to show students avisualrepresentationofeverydayitemssuchasvegetables,fruitorfurniture.Teachersthenusefingerspelling to spell out thenameof thedisplayedobject.At every stepof this exercise, students repeataftertheteacher.Teachersalsoteachstudents lipreadingtechniquesbeforeaskingthemtospelloutthenameofanobject inEnglishontheblackboard.Thisprocess isrepeatedmultipletimeswitheachstudentintheclassandwitheachflashcardorvisualaid.

A similar process is employed by teachers in the MSI classroom, however the metrics they use tomeasureprogressisdifferentandthenumberofobjectsstudentslearnaboutislimitedtoaboutthreeor four per lesson. Additionally, each student in the MSI class requires more individual teacherattention.Forexample,thestudentwhoisdeafblindneedstheteachertocommunicatewithherusingtactilesign language,wherethestudent feels theteacher’shandasshesignstounderstandwhattheteacherissayingtoher.Thestudentrepeatsaftertheteachersotheteacherknowsifthestudenthasunderstoodwhatsheissaying.

SurveyofTeachingToolsAt theMathru Center, teachers predominantly use flash cards as teaching aids. Some of these flashcards are embossed so that the students with visionimpairments can interpret them through touch (Figure10).Flashcardsarealsousetodescribepartsofhumanbody, animals, trees and various objects such as a ball,table,etc(Figure11).Inadditiontoflashcards,teachersalsousefigurinesofanimalstodescribethemtohearingimpaired students (Figure 12). Thus, the majority oflessons are taught using visual or tactile aids such asembossedflashcards,figurines,andcharts.

Figure10.Anembossedalphabetcard

17

IdentifiedTeacherNeedsTeacherinterviewsandthecardsortingexercisehelpedshedsomelightontheneedsoftheteachers.

TimeManagementThis was identified as most difficult across allclassrooms with three out of four teachers rating“time management” as one of the top threechallenges during the card sorting exercise.Teachers mentioned that although they chart outwhattheyhavetocoverduringeachclass,theyarerarely able to complete lessons as planned sincethey need to cater to the varying capabilities andneeds of their students. The one teacher who didnotratetimemanagementasatopchallenge lateraddedthatmanaginghertimeduringclassisalittledifficulteventhoughsheaccountsfortheadditionaltime it takes to complete theprocess of repeatingeverythinguntilallstudentsunderstandit.

GettingAppropriateTeacherTrainingTeachers who came to the institution with notraining believed that this was the most difficultaspect of their experience, but at the same timerated “learning sign language” as easy. Masteringsignlanguagealonewasinsufficienttohelpmanagetheirvariousworkresponsibilities,particularlygiventhat these teachershadnoprior formal training towork with students with hearing impairments.

Figure11.Flashcards Figure12.Animalfigurines

Figure13.Flashcardsusedbytheteachers

Figure14.Teachersworkingindividuallytoorganizethecardbydifficultylevel

18

Additionally, teachers found it difficult to get access to appropriate training after joining theMathruCenter. Moreover, the instructor who originally trained them left the center during the 2013-2014academicyear.

FindingResourcestoHelpTeachStudentsTwooutoffourteachersratedthisasdifficultduringthecardsortingactivity(Figure14).Teachershaddifferent interpretationsof teachingresources.Oneteacher interpretedthemas trainedprofessionalsto help provide students with individual attention. Teachers who had not received formal, specialeducationtraining interpretedthemasbooksonsign languagethattheycouldrefertowhenneeded.The one teacherwhowas trained in teaching hearing impaired students interpreted themasmodels(Figure 15) and flash cards (Figure 13). A notable observationwas that teachers did not consider thetechnology,suchastheInternet,aresource.Thisispossiblybecausetheydonotcurrentlyutilizesuchtoolsnoraretrainedtousethem.

EngagingStudentsTwoout of four teachers foundengaging studentsdifficult,astheycouldnotinteractwithallstudentsatthesametime.Teachersworkwitheachstudentindividually while the other students sit idly.EngagingstudentsisparticularlydifficultintheMSIclassroom, where students require more one-on-one attention given each of their very distinctneedsandabilities.

UnderstandingtheNeedsoftheStudentsOverall,thiswasdeemedtheeasiesttaskbyteachers.Theyalsofounditeasytoprepareclassesbasedonstudentneeds.Teacherscreatemilestonesfortheentireclass,everythreemonths.Inaddition,everydaytheyspendtimesummarizingtheirdayinadailyreportandplanningtheirnextclasses.Thisprocessfacilitatesthetaskofpreparingforclasses.

IdentifiedStudentNeedsMoststudentsattheMathruCenterareundertheageofseven,andarestilllearningsignlanguageandother forms of communication. Therefore, they were unable to directly articulate their needs andchallenges.Inordertogaininsightintostudentneeds,cardsortingandaffinitymatchingexerciseswereconductedwith2ndstandardstudentswhiletheirteachertranslatedactivityrequirementstothem.

Figure15.Modelsusedbyteachersasteachingaids

19

AffinityMatchingThis activity was conceptualized to reduce theoverheadoftranslatingtexttothestudentsandtoencourage them to interpret the activity anywaythey want to (Figure 16). Students unanimouslyrated geography, learning about animals and thesolar system as the highest out of nine picturesrepresenting different objects, professions andfieldsofstudy.Onlyonestudentwasinterestedinthe human body, but three out of four studentswere interested in doctors/medicine. While twostudents put smiley faces beside a picture of

musicians, two others put frowning faces next tothat image, explaining that they haven’texperiencedmusic.

CardSortingAlthoughstudentsinitiallytendedtosaytheylikedeverything on the card, with the help if theirteachers theywere able to successfully completethecardsortingactivity(Figure17).

Overall, students rated “learning sign language”themostdifficulttask.Halfthestudentsreportedthat“learningscience”wasdifficult,andasimilarproportion found “learning English and Kannada”easy.Almostallstudentsfounditeasytoconversewith parents, although two students found“talkingtoclassmates”difficult.

RecommendationsforFutureWorkBasedonfindingsfromthisstudy,thefollowingrecommendationsweremadetofacilitateandenhancetheteachingandlearningexperiencesofteachersandstudentsattheMathruCenter.

TeacherTrainingTechnologyNotalltheteacherswhoarecurrentlyworkingattheschoolhaveanextensivebackgroundinworkingwith children who are hearing impaired or have multi-sensory disabilities. Therefore, teachersexperienceasteeplearningcurvewhileonthejob,andhavetolearnandadaptastheyteach.Onlyoneteacherattheschoolhasanextensivebackgroundworkingwithdeafstudentsandsign language.Sheassistsandteachestheotherteacherswhenpossible.However,thiscanbeaburden.

Figure16.Researcherexplainstheaffinitymatchingexercisetoastudent

Figure17.CardsgiventoMathruCenterstudenttoorganizebythelevelofdifficulty

20

Technology to assist in training new teachers on skills needed to work with students with variousdisabilitieswouldbeusefulfortheMathruCenter.Examplesofusefultoolsincludeadigitallibrarythatcan point teachers to available andpertinent online resources, and applications that offer themhelpwithlearningsignlanguage,handgesturesforsoundsandlipreading.

Thereare,however, somechallenges toconsiderwhendevelopingsuch technology for teachers.Oneissue is that each teacher’s base level experience and skills can vary significantly, so it could bechallenging toestablish tools that can cater to the various trainingneedsof teachers.With regard tocreatinganysignlanguagetechnology,theprimaryconcernisthatthesignlanguageusedattheMathruCenterisalocalvariationofIndianSignLanguageandhasnoofficialdictionarytoreference.

Therefore,developinga tool to teach this sign languagecouldprove tobedifficult.However, there isdocumentation thatoutlines thecurrentprocessorgeneral steps that thecenter takes toorientnewteacherstothisspecificversionofsignlanguage.Thisinformationcouldfacilitatethetechnologydesign,butperiodic checkswould still benecessary toensure the technology content isup-to-datebasedonanychangesthecentermayhavemadetotheirprocessfortrainingteachers.

LessonPlanningAssistanceTeachers currently spend more than 20 minutes each weekday as well as over an hour during theweekendplanninglessonsbasedontimetablestheypreviouslyestablished.Inadditiontothis,theyalsospendtimecreatingflashcards,buyingotherteachingaidssuchasanimalfigurines,andpreparingothervisualaids(e.g.drawings,charts,etc.)pertainingtoconceptssuchasthehumanfaceandbody.Whenplanning is not completed during the designated time, teachers will either work during their lunchbreaksorstudents’physicaltrainingclasses.Providingteacherswithtoolstoassistwiththelogisticsofday-to-day planning would alleviate some of this burden on teachers. In addition, it could affordteacherstheopportunitytoexplorenewteachingtechniquesandtools,aswellas focuson improvingtheirteachingskillsthroughtraining.

Automaticallyorelectronicallygeneratingvisualteachingaids(suchasflashcards,drawingsandcharts)would be beneficial in terms of removing the need for teachers to create or shop for these items.Additionally,establishingastandardtemplateforteachertimetablesandpossiblyauto-generatingthesetimetableseachyearcouldsignificantlycutdownpreparationtimeforteachers.However,theremightbe some challenges associated with creating and implementing such tools. For example, sincetimetablesarespecifictoeachuniqueclass, itmaybechallengingtoestablishastandardtemplateforthesetimetables.Furthermore,notallteachersfollowasetpatternorstyleofteaching;therefore,toolstoassist in lessonplanningwillneed to suit awidevarietyofneedsandpreferencesof the teachers.Nevertheless, if such technology is implemented at the Mathru Center, this could reduce the timeteachers spend planning lessons, creating timetables, and running errands to create and obtainclassroomsuppliesandteachingaids.

FlashCardGeneratingSoftwareFlashcardsarethemostfrequentlyusedteachingaidsattheMathruCenter,andteachersoftenhavetocreate theirown flashcards. This task takesupa significant amountof timeandefforton thepartof

21

teachers, but is necessary given how useful flashcards are to teaching students at the center. Acomputerprogramordevicedesigned to generate customized flashcards could assist teachers in thisendeavor, and reduce theamountof timeandwork theyneed toput into creating these visual aids.Additionally,suchtoolsshouldbeabletoproduceabroadervarietyandgreatervolumeofflashcardsforstudentstointeractwith.

Ideally,suchtechnologywouldincludeadiverseimagelibraryalongwithahighqualitysearchenginetomatchawordorphraseenteredbytheteachertoanappropriateimageorlistofimages.Additionally,iftheimagelibrarydoesnotreturnanyresultsforaparticularsearchquery,thereshouldbeanoptionforteachers to enter their own drawing or photo to correspond with the given word or phrase. Thesecustomizedadditionscanthenbereusedbytheteacherandwillbeaccessibletootherteachersaswell.Thistoolshouldalsooffertheoptionofprintingahardcopyoftheflashcardordevelopinganelectronicversionof it for sighted students to interactwith (e.g.ona computeror tablet). Thus, if teachersareable to create a set of flashcards under a specific topic, they could pass out a printed set of theseflashcardstostudentsorallowsightedstudentstobrowsethroughthecardsinavirtualenvironment.Thevirtualcomponentofthetoolcouldalsobeusefulforreviewingmaterialwithstudentsandpossiblytestingthemonvariouslessons.Amoreadvancedapplicationcouldallowforvideorepresentationsofwordsandphrases. Thismightbeparticularlyuseful to students learning sign languageas they couldobservehowtosignawordbywatchingarelevantvideodemonstration.Thetechnologywillneedtoincorporate separate user interfaces for teachers and students, where teachers can use the tool tocustomizeflashcardsetsfortheirstudents,andstudentscanengagewiththematerialcreatedbytheirteacher.Inaddition,studentdatacanbetrackedbyloggingtheinformationonalocalmachine,andifInternetconnectivityisavailablesendingittoaremoteserverforanalysis.

Challengesassociatedwith Internetaccessat theMathruCenter (and theBangalorearea, in general)couldcausedifficultieswithdevelopingthistypeoftechnologythatmayneedtodependsomewhatononlinedataandservices.Additionally, incorporatinganysign languagerelatedvideoor imagecontentwill be straddled with issues stemming from the fact that the center does not use a standardizedlanguagestructure.Consequently,teacherswouldmostlikelyneedtorecordthemselvessigningvariouswordsandphrases;however,thistaskcouldbetoodauntingforteachersbecause it isnotsomethingtheyareaccustomedtodoing.Furthermore,inorderforthevirtualstudentinterfacecomponentofthetechnologytoworksuccessfully itwouldneedtobe installedonaportabledevicesuchasa laptoportablet.However,thereissignificanthesitationonthepartofadministratorsatthecenterabouttheuseof tablets,becauseof the fear thatstudentswouldmisusethosedevices.Laptopscouldbeapossiblealternative, but theremay still be resistance toputting any relatively expensivedevicedirectly in thehands of students. The additional cost to the center, in terms of obtaining these portable devices,should also be factored into consideration for such technology. Alternatively, creating a specialized,portabledevicespecifically for flashcardgenerationcouldbeprohibitivelyexpensiveoran impracticaluse of resources. Finally, frequent power outages experienced in Bangalore would affect theimplementationofanytechnologythatisreliantonthelocalelectricalgrid.

22

ComputerTrainingStudents at theMathruCenterhaveoftenexpressed interest in learningmoreabouthow tooperatecomputers, and this type of education could certainly benefit them in the future. However, therecurrentlyisnocomputerinstructoratthecenterwhocancatertothespecialneedsofstudents.Hiringateachertotrainstudents incomputer literacy ischallenging,particularlyduetothe limitednumberofqualifiedcandidates.Therefore, there isaneedfor tools thatcanoffersomeguidancetostudentsonhowtoworkwithcomputers.Onepossibilityistodevelopacomputerprogramthatprovidesstudentswith foundational knowledgeonhow to interactwith computers through step-by-step instructionsorevenagamingplatform.Most importantly, any such technologyneeds to take into consideration thedifferentabilitiesoftheuniquestudentpopulationattheMathruCenter.Infact,thiswillmostlikelybethemostchallengingaspectof technologydevelopment,sincetheuser interfacewillneedtoaccountfor students who cannot hear and are still learning to read. Finally, as with any electronics, anycomputer program could be disrupted by frequent power outages, and may also be susceptible tocomputervirusesthatmay infectthecenter’smachines.Safeguardsandbackupsoftwarewillneedtobeputinplacetoaccountforsuchissues.

SignLanguageDictionaryStudents at the Mathru Center occasionally struggle with communicating with teachers using signlanguage.Also,whenstudentsgohometheyareoftenunabletousethesignlanguagetheylearnedinschooltoconversewiththeirparents.Currently,adefinedsignlanguagedictionaryforthesignsthatareused at the Mathru Deaf School does not exist. Similar to the Indonesian Sign Language ComputerApplicationmentionedintheRelatedWorksectionofthisreport,adigitalSignLanguageDictionarythatcapturesthatsignsusedattheMathruDeafSchoolcanhelpimprovecommunicationbetweenstudentsand teachers as well as their parents. The tool should allow teachers and students to create entriesusing video,whichwould capture them signing and/or fingerspelling theword. This tool also has thepotential of helping new Mathru Center teachers learn the sign language used at the school. It isimportantthatthistoolallowteachersandstudentstomaintainandupdatethedatabase.

SpeechPracticeSoftwareHearing impaired students at the Mathru Center spend a lot of time practicing how to sound outdifferent syllables andwords. As a group, students try to repeat (verbally)what their teacher as sheguides themtomake thecorrect sound.The teacherworkswith theentireclassaswellaswitheachstudentindividuallytoassesstheirperformanceandtrytocorrectthemwhennecessary.However,thisprocessisverytimeconsuminganddifficult.Technologytoassistwiththisprocessmightbeusefulbothto teachers and students. The imagined solution could involve software in the formof a gamewhichutilizes the microphone to hear whether or not the sounds students are making are correct. Forexample,studentscanpracticevolume,pitch,andenunciation.Thiswouldallowtheteachertoattendtomultiplestudents insteadofoneteacheratatimeasthesoftwarecangivethestudentvisualcuesandinstructions.

23

Multi-sensoryClassroomAssistantTheteacherfortheMSIclassroomattheMathruCenterfrequentlystrugglestokeepstudentsengagedwithdifferenttasks.Thisclassincludesadeaf,blindandmutestudent,anautisticstudent,andmentallychallengedstudents.Eachstudenthasuniqueneedsanddifficulties,andsocreatingexercisesthataresuitable for each child is challenging. Additionally, there is only one teacher and teaching assistantassignedtoworkwithallstudentsintheMSIclass.Instructorsneedtokeeptrackofwhateachstudentisworkingonatanygiventime,andtrytoensurethatall thechildrenreceiveappropriateandtimelyfeedback.This isaverychallengingtaskthatcouldpotentiallybefacilitatedthroughtheapplicationofappropriatetechnology.

Thiscanbeeitheravisualonaprojectororanapplicationonatablet.Theprojectorvisualwouldalmostbe like an educational game/video (possibly even interactive using the Xbox Kinnect or somethingsimilar)thatcoulddisplayontheclassroomwall.Thiswouldnotonlyacademicallyhelpthestudentsbutalsopossiblyassistinphysicaltherapy.Anexampleofagamewouldbeasfollows.Twoofseveraltypesof vegetables could be displayed on the wall from a projector. Students could stand in front of theprojector and interactively reach to images andmatch liked vegetables bymoving their arms to thevegetablesintheairanddirectinthedirectionwherethesecondcopyofthevegetableis.Overlappedvegetablesmakeasuccessfulpair.Manydifferenttypesofinteractiveeducationalgamescanbemade.Similartouchapplicationscanbemadeontabletsforstudents.

Twomainchallengesarise.Oneistheageandmaturityofthestudents.Tabletsareexpensivedevicesandyoungerormorechallengedstudentsmightstruggletoproperlyhandlethesedevices.Theotheristhewidevarietyofdifferentabilitiesofthestudents.Theapplicationswouldneedtobeabletocatertoseveraldisabilities.

EvaluatingFutureTechnologyProjectsattheMathruCenterThemaingoalofthisstudywastoassesstheneedsandchallengesattheMathruCenterinordertolaythegroundwork for future technologyprojects thatwouldbeundertakenat thecenteraspartof thenext iSTEP internship program. Findings from this study offer a rich set of data about the MathruCenter’sstudentsandteachers.However,priortodevelopingtechnologyinterventionsforthecenteritwillalsobecriticaltolookintoanymajorchangesthatmayhaveoccurredduringthetimebetweenthisstudyandtheintervention.Sincethiscenter iscurrentlyonlytwoyearsold, it isstillestablishingitselfand evolving. For example, next year the center plans to introduce a new class (3rd standard) andcontinue growing at a rateof one class per year.Additionally, therewill inevitably be changes in themakeupandbehaviorofthestudentandteacherpopulationatthecenter,sotechnologyinterventionswillneedtosuitthisupdateduserpopulation.Onceatechnologyhasbeenimplementedatthecenter,it will be important to monitor and evaluate this intervention to ascertain whether it is making thedesired impact on students and teachers. Below are suggestions for aspects to consider whenconductingsuchanassessment.

24

BaselineDataBaselinedataisimportanttoanyevaluation.Alongwithinformationcollectedfromthisstudy,datawillcontinuetobecollectedbytheTBWteamafter iSTEP2013.This informationshouldbeusefultotakeinto consideration when designing technology interventions for the Mathru Center and also whenassessingoutcomesfromimplementingthosetools.

PotentialChallengestoDataCollectionPotentialchallengestodatacollectioninclude:

1. Communicatingwithstudentstoobtaineitherqualitativeorquantitativedatacanbedifficult.2. Access to a qualified and reliable person to help translate informationmight be necessary if

researchersandparticipantsdonot speakacommon language. Locating suchan individual toassistwithtranslationmightbechallenging,especiallyinthecaseofsignlanguagetranslations.

3. Given thatall studentsat thecenterareminors, it isnecessary tohavea teacherorguardianpresent to help supervise and guide any testingwith students. This too can pose difficulties,particularlyintermsofschedulingtestingsessions.

PossibleConfoundingFactorsUsing a teacher to translate for the researcher can have both positive and negative consequences.Studentsaremorecomfortableandfamiliarwiththeirteacher,whichcanbehelpfulinextractingmoreaccurate information. At the same time, however, it is also possible that the teacher’s presencewillinfluence the student behavior and responses. Additionally, teachers may inadvertently bias theirtranslations of student responses. Such biases and confounding factors will need to be taken intoaccountwhenanalyzingdata.

ProposedEvaluationStrategiesProposedevaluationstrategiesforeachofthesuggestedtechnologyinterventionsaregivenbelow.

1. Training Teachers: Document the current process or general steps the Mathru Center takes toorientanewteachertotheschoolandcompareitwiththeequivalentprocessusingthedevelopedtool.

2. LessonPlanningAssistance:Maintainafolderordocumentinwhich,attheendofeachsessionortheendofeachweek,teacherscannotethetimeittookthemtoplanalessonusingthenewtool.Comparethisdatawithbaselineinformationcollectedthroughthisstudy.

3. FlashCards:Measurethetimestudentstaketolearnaparticularconcept,andcaptureanychangesingradesandretentionofinformationusingthenewtechnology.

4. ComputerLiteracy:Periodicallyteststudentsontheirperformanceoftaskstaughtviathecomputerliteracytool.Trackchangesinscoresovertimeandalsocomparetoacontrolgroupofstudentswhodonotinteractwiththetechnology.

5. SignLanguageDictionary:WhetherornotthetooliscapableofcapturingallofthesignsusedattheMathruCenterandifMathruCenterstaffcanmaintainthetool’sdatabase.Furthermore,thetimeittakes for teachers and students to learn the signs used at the school can provide insight into itseffectiveness.

25

6. SpeechPracticingHelper:Noteiflecturetimedecreasesbecausestudentisgettingresponsesbackquickerandadjustingvoicesfaster.Alsonoteifstudent’svolume,pitch,enunciationimprovesasaresultofthesoftware. Ifagameisdeveloped,measuringstudentengagementcanprovide insightintoitseffectiveness.

7. Multi-sensoryClassroomAssistant:Measuring the time it takes the students to learn the relatedtopics and measuring the overall satisfaction of the teacher who now will need to engage lessstudentsatanygiventime.

ConclusionsThisassessmentof theMathruCenter forDifferently-Abledhashelpedderiveabetterunderstandingaboutthecurrentstateofitseducationalenvironment.Findingsfromthisstudyprovidevaluableinsightinto the types of assistive technology that could address the needs of teachers and students at theMathruCenter.Researchers gathereda significantamountofdata through interviewing teachers andstaff, conducting observations of class activities, and administering participatory design experimentswith teachers and affinity matching with students. Research results indicate that there are indeedpossible technology interventions that could benefit the students and teachers at theMathru Centerthroughreducingtheworkloadofteachersandenhancingtheeducationalexperienceofstudents.

References

[1] CarolynMorrison, Jennifer Lukomski,GeorgiannaBorgna,CarolConvertino,andMarcMarschark,"Are deaf students visual learners?," Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 25, pp. 156-162,February2013.

[2] K M Chinn and J Wood, "Educating Children Who Are Deaf–Blind," Education of Children withSpecialNeeds,pp.621-627,2010.

[3] G.M.Mukuria and C. J. Eleweke, "Educating Childrenwith Deafness and Hearing Impairments,"EducationofChildrenwithSpecialNeeds,pp.628-633,2010.

[4] T T Dyches, "Educating Studentswith Autism and RelatedDisorders,"Education of ChildrenwithSpecialNeeds,pp.661-668,2010.

[5] J P Bakken, "Educating Students with Cognitive Disabilities," Education of Children with SpecialNeeds,pp.669-677,2010.

[6] SamudraPrasetio,JohannesAdiPumamaP.,andAndreasW.Yanuardi,"IndonesianSignLanguageComputerApplicationforTheDeaf,"in2ndInternationalConferenceonEducationTechnologyandComputer,2010,pp.89-92.

[7] Haoyun Xue and Shengfeng Qin, "Mobile Motion Gesture Design for Deaf People," in 17thInternationalConferenceonAutomation&Computing,Huddersfield,2011,pp.46-50.

[8] Marlene Hilzensauer, "Teaching English to Deaf Adults: "SignOnOne" - An Online Course forBeginners,"ICCHP2010,pp.185-192,2010.

26

[9] Jiacheng Xu and Xueli Qu, "The New Exploration of Hearing Impaired Written LanguageInstructionalwithSpeEchRecognitionTechnology,"inInternationalConferenceonInformationandMultmediaTechnology,Beijing,2009,pp.249-251.

[10]HasanKaralandLokmanSilbir, "Theresearchabout theusabilityofavisualdictionarydevelopedforthehearingimpairedstudents,"ProcediaSocialandBehavioralSciences,vol.9,pp.1624–1628,2010.

[11]Fred P. Orelove, Dick Sobsey, and K. Rosanne Silberman, Eds., Educating Children with MultipleDisabilities,4thed.Baltimore,UnitedStatesofAmerica:PaulH.BrookesPublishingCo.,2004.

[12]AbidAslametal.,"TheStateoftheWorld'sChildren2013:ChildrenWithDisabilities,"UNICEF,New York,AnnualReport978-92-806-4656-6,2013.