Abstract
In considering the role that technology and e-learning can play in helping students access higher education and an effective learning experience, a large amount of the current research and practice literature focuses almost exclusively on accessibility legislation, guidelines and standards, and the rules contained within them (Abascal et al., 2004; Chisholm & Brewer, 2005; Gunderson & May, 2005; Paolucci, 2004; Reed et al., 2004; Slatin, 2005). One of the major problems of such an approach is that it has drawn higher education practitioners into thinking that their objective is to comply with rules. I argue that it is not (Seale, 2006). The objective should be to address the needs of students. The danger of only focusing on rules is that it can constrain thinking and therefore practice. We need to expand our thinking beyond that of how to comply with rules, towards how to meet the needs of students with disabilities, within the local contexts that students and practitioners are working. In thinking about how to meet the needs of students with disabilities, practitioners will need to develop their own tools. These tools might be user case studies, evaluation methodologies or conceptualizations:DOI: 10.1080/09687760500480025
Highlights
In considering the role that technology and e-learning can play in helping students access higher education and an effective learning experience, a large amount of the current research and practice literature focuses almost exclusively on accessibility legislation, guidelines and standards, and the rules contained within them (Abascal et al, 2004; Chisholm & Brewer, 2005; Gunderson & May, 2005; Paolucci, 2004; Reed et al, 2004; Slatin, 2005)
Draffan and Rainger present a model for the identification of challenges to blended learning for students. In doing so they argue against approaches that focus on remediating the perceived ‘problems’ that students with disabilities have: The model proposed, provides a starting point for the identification of challenges to learning from a socio-cultural perspective rather than a medical or rehabilitation perspective. This holistic perspective is key to moving ‘thinking’ towards a more inclusive learning approach that embraces the needs of all learners such as those for whom English is a Second or Other Language (ESOL) regardless of a defined disability
The arguments presented in Phipps and Kelly’s model of a holistic approach to accessible e-learning are reflected by many of the contributors in this issue
Summary
In considering the role that technology and e-learning can play in helping students access higher education and an effective learning experience, a large amount of the current research and practice literature focuses almost exclusively on accessibility legislation, guidelines and standards, and the rules contained within them (Abascal et al, 2004; Chisholm & Brewer, 2005; Gunderson & May, 2005; Paolucci, 2004; Reed et al, 2004; Slatin, 2005). In thinking about how to meet the needs of students with disabilities, practitioners will need to develop their own tools These tools might be user case studies, evaluation methodologies or conceptualizations: The descriptions of what we know about current accessible e-learning practice are multilayered and complex. Mike Wald explores how Automatic Speech Recognition can be re-conceptualized as a technology that can assist with receptive as well as expressive communication, while David Sloan and colleagues challenge our understanding of assistive technology by arguing that multimedia can be viewed as an assistive technology for people with a range of needs: For all these groups, arguably the most inaccessible way of presenting information is through a long page of on-screen text It follows that presenting information in alternative ways—pictures, diagrams, animated diagrams, video clips, audio recordings—is far more effective in conveying information and experiences, and supporting comprehension and retention of information.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
