1 / 42

Rosa Navarrete-Rueda Department of Informatics and Computer Science

ESCUELA POLITÉCNICA NACIONAL. Open Educational Resources as an opportunity for access to learning for people with disabilities in Latin American and Caribbean. Rosa Navarrete-Rueda Department of Informatics and Computer Science National Polytechnic School (Ecuador) Sergio Luján -Mora

ryder
Download Presentation

Rosa Navarrete-Rueda Department of Informatics and Computer Science

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ESCUELA POLITÉCNICA NACIONAL Open Educational Resources as an opportunity for access to learning for people with disabilities in Latin American and Caribbean Rosa Navarrete-Rueda Department of Informatics and Computer Science National Polytechnic School (Ecuador) Sergio Luján-Mora Department of Software and Computing Systems University of Alicante (Spain)

  2. Context • Oportunities • UNESCO recognize the current relevance of Open Educational Resources (OER) to widen education at all levels. • There is a global conscience about rights of people with disabilities. • Problem • The barriers that restrict access for people with disabilities to non-formal learning in web based environments.

  3. Content • The premises • The problem • The proposal • The evaluation/Results • Discussion and future work

  4. Theproblem • Perspectives: • Website: Limited number of OER websites that offered content in Spanish language (prevalent language in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries), and quite a few of them have accessibility barriers for people with disabilities. • Contents: The educational resources have accessibility issues.

  5. The proposal • Verify in some important websites the availability of OER which: • Meet accessibility criteria, • Their contents are in Spanish language and, • Their contents are designed for an educational level equivalent to upper high-school. • In order to recommend their use for self-learning and teaching support in LAC countries

  6. Theproposal • Thewebsitesforanalysisshouldhavecontents: • In Spanishlanguage (prevalentlanguage in LAC countries), • Appropriate for an educational level equivalent to upper-high school as minimum.

  7. Websites for selection

  8. Theproposal • Issuesconsideredfortheevaluationproposal 1 5 2 OER Accessibility 4 3

  9. Theproposal 1 5 2 OER Accessibility 3 4

  10. The evaluation • Accessibility on the home page of the website. • Home page is the first interface for the user, so must be accessible to enable the retrieval of educational resources. • Evaluation was based on WCAG 2.0, through automated tools.

  11. The evaluation • Accessibility on the home page of the website • WCAG 2.0 has been developed by W3C. • It has been adopted in most international legislation about web accessibility. • It is a referenceable technical standard of 2008, basedon a set of successcriteriathat are nottechnology-specific. • It has12 guidelines organized under 4 principles: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable and Robust. • Conformance levels: A, AA both are mandatory, AAA is desirable.

  12. The evaluation • Accessibility on the home page of the website • Automated tools for evaluation: • TAW (Web Accessibility Test) isbased on WCAG, gives a number of problems detected according to conformance level. • Acheckerproduces a report of all accessibility problems for the selected guidelines.

  13. The evaluations results (1) • Theevaluationconsidertheconformance WCAG 2.0 level AA whichismandatory. • Home pages in all websites analyzed have accessibility issues, especially for visual disabled people.

  14. Theproposal 1 5 2 OER Accessibility 4 3

  15. The evaluation • Search facility • Verifyifthe searching interface includesrefinementscriteriaaboutresources, like: • educational level • subject or topic, • format, • language, • accessibility features. • And, if the searching criteria could be used with boolean operator “and”.

  16. Theevaluationresults (2) * Not as search criteria but as a link on the website

  17. Theevaluationresults (2) OER Commons Language

  18. OER Commons Subject • This website admits the use of boolean operator "and" with different search criteria. Level Format Accesibility

  19. OER Commons • NotalltheresourcesreportedforSpanishlanguageactuallycorrespond to thislanguage. • In some cases, when the search included "Accessibility" features, did not get any results

  20. OCW Consortium Criteria • This website does not admit the use of boolean operator "and" with different search criteria.

  21. Open CoursewareConsortium • The searching by language or Category delivers a list of courses without any order.

  22. OCW Universia Language Criteria • This website does not admit the use of boolean operator "and" with different search criteria.

  23. Theproposal 1 5 2 4 3

  24. Theevaluation • Features of the website • Highlight the features of the website that foster or hinder accessibility in the website itself and also in the available resources.

  25. Theevaluationresults (3) • OER Commons • Content providers are almost a thousand of institutions and organizations, it doesn’t have direct participation from universities. • The website improves the user experience with some options over the web interface. • The website provides accessibility information about the resources.

  26. Theevaluationresults (3) • OCW Consortium • Content providers are associated universities around the world. • Links to individual resources lead to each university's OCW page. • The website does not include information about accessibility

  27. Theevaluationresults (3) • Universia OCW • Content providers are universities associated from many countries around the world. • The website provides an option in menu bar for language and areas, authors, keywords and universities. • The website does not include information about accessibility

  28. Theproposal 1 5 2 4 3

  29. Theevaluation • Universities involved • We evaluated qualitatively the awareness of accessibility in the universities involved in the websites analyzed.

  30. Theevaluationresults (4) • OER Commons • The resources came from Connexions Collection and GeogeBraInstitution. • There were not universities involved.

  31. Theevaluationresults (4) • OCW Consortium • There were 12 universities from Spain, and only 3 universities from LAC countries, with available resources in Spanish language. • We only considered the universities with an active OCW site.

  32. Theevaluationresults (4) • Universia OCW • We considered only universities from LAC countries that appear as providers. • Some OCW sites from universities involved were not available at the date of this research, and many others mentioned in the project does not had resources available.

  33. Theproposal 1 5 2 4 3

  34. Theevaluation • Accessibility of theresources • This evaluation tests accessibility criteria in the resources of the OCW site. • Web pages: automated evaluation tools • Non-text resources: alternative formats • Portable Document Format (PDF): tagged file. • Verify if resources meet accessibility criteria for visual and auditory disabilities.

  35. Theevaluationresults (5) • OER Commons

  36. Theevaluationresults (5) • OCW Consortium

  37. Theevaluationresults (5) • OCW Consortium • The previous table only shows the universities from Spain, with the major number of resources and those universities that belong to LAC countries. • Some important universities have educational resources suitable for people with visual and auditory disabilities, but not the entire contents of an specific course meets accessibility criteria. • The universities from LAC countries correspond to Colombia, México, Costa Rica y Ecuador, and those resources do not meet accessibility criteria.

  38. Theevaluationresults (5) • Universia OCW

  39. Theevaluationresults (5) • Universia OCW • The previous table only shows universities from LAC countries that not already evaluated. • All universities have accessibility issues, and the resources are not suitable for visual disabled people. • The number of available resources is still low.

  40. Discussion and future work Preliminary study • Limited number of OER websites with content in Spanish language. • Universities from Spain surpass the universities from LAC countries in accessibility awareness.

  41. Discussion and future work • Improve the actual situation in this matter in LAC countries requires the commitment of governments and universities. • Future research would be valuable to establish a more accurate and thorough assessment of the availability of resources in areas of specific knowledge.

  42. ESCUELA POLITÉCNICA NACIONAL Open Educational Resources as an opportunity for access to learning for people with disabilities in Latin American and Caribbean Rosa Navarrete-Rueda rosa.navarrete@epn.edu.ec Sergio Luján-Mora sergio.lujan@ua.es @sergiolujanmora

More Related