Technology and education

knowledgeability Disability and TechnologyAccording to the U. S. De spokespersonment of Commerce, much than half of all Americans put on the net profit in some air, but persons with a disability ar more(prenominal) thanover half as likely to dupe access to the net income as those with show up a disability and temporary hookup just under 25% of those without a disability have never workd a personal information processing system, sozzled to 60% of those with a disability fall into that category. In addition among those with a disability, concourse who have impair vision have even scorn rates of profit access and are little likely to physical exercise a ready reckoner regularly than people with hearing and mobility problems (National Tele conferences and Information Administration, 2000, p. xv).Cyndi Rowland, music director of the Web Accessibility in Mind (WebAIM) project at universal time State Universitys Center for Persons with Disabilities, calls for a nati onal solution to the problem of inaccessibility, in particular if we are to abide by civil rights legislation, federal rulings, and common morality (Rowland, 2000, p. 10). Understanding the circumstantial pick ups and concerns of students with disabilities may aid educators, information engine room designers, and cultivational institutions to ensure that students with disabilities, particularly those who are subterfuge or visually impaired, are non left behind in this proficient revolution.The Internet and the mesh have become an integral part of higher statement, transforming the educational experiences of all students. In 1997, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the outside(a) body that oversees the protocols and operations of the Internet, holdd the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). WAI is responsible for promoting web functionality for people with disabilities and establishing accessibility guidelines. In this age of information processing system technology, m any of the tools infallible to enable students with disabilities to obtain equity in education and beyond already exist. For those involved in educational institutions, these tools can provide opportunities and freedom, eliminating the obstacles and barriers that many of the real systems unruffled enable.A review of the publications related to attitudes and other barriers that people with disabilities moldiness contend with every day at school and at work, the integration of computer technology in postsecondary education, and the needs and concerns of students with disabilities, in particular those who are blind or visually impaired, may provide some insights for in store(predicate) policies and guidelines regarding access and use of computer technologies for students who are blind or visually impaired.Technology Enhancing Modern EducationExperiences of people with visual impairments in the workplace and their use of computer technology and the Internet was the focus of a qual itative bring conducted in Australia by Williamson, Albrecht, Schauder, and Bow (2001). Primarily through and through focus group interrogation, the researchers presented the perceive benefits and concerns of the tuitions participants. Most agreed that the Internet enabled them to participate in an information and communication format that is proper a primary source for many people. numerous also saw the Internet as enabling them to be less reliant on others and, therefore, facilitating an attach in their own privacy.However, some were have-to doe with roughly a reduction in companionable contact and an breeding in isolationism. An additional concern was that there would be a abate in the quality of services from such entities as the government and banks because more is beingness done online. Training was viewed as critical to successfully employ the Internet and computer technology. This, it was believed by many, was the key to achieving equality in the workplace, e ven many felt it was a low priority by agencies and workplaces. constitute was also viewed as a barrier to accessing computers and the Internet.With various Internet advances, more individuals in all sectors of the community are working from home. For visually impaired members of community the Internet has the potential to free them from the restrictions they have experienced in the past while seeking to obtain employment. Once the challenges of access have been surmounted, visually impaired users can take their places in the digitalized workforce (Williamson et al., 2001, pp. 693-4).With computer technology becoming a part of all college students educational experiences, how are postsecondary schools preparing students for a computer- commixd future(a)? To determine how the use of various technologies affect student cultivation, Shuell and Farber (2001) conducted a orbit of 728 sighted under calibrate and graduate students at a large northeast university, where they ensnare that, in general, students perceived the use of computer technology in their programmes to be very beneficial. Students also believed that the use of communication technology brought an increase in their sense of involvement in a course.Eighty-eight percent of the archetype indicated that their use of computer technology attended them learn materials and skills, and 75 percent indicated that utilise computer technology improved the quality of interaction with their instructor. Students also viewed the use of dynamic computer presentations and the Internet in lectures very favorably it kept their interest, and the students believed that it improved their learning. Students also favored electronic forums as a way to interact with their peers (e.g., netmail, listservs, and newsgroups) and believed that the use of these forms of computer technology increased the quality of these interactions.Another enkindle finding in this reading was that students who go outed themselves to b e more independent tended to act more favorably to these technologies and the learning benefits associated with them. One theme of this write up was the perceptiveness that students had of the ability for computer technologies to enable independent learning. When serving the needs of students with disabilities, independence is a key factor to consider.Lewis, Coursol, and Khan (2001) examined the use and effect of computer technology on student development and education. They surveyed 124 sighted undergraduate students who tended to(p) a regional public institution in the Midwest. Technology choices, which include use of email, the Internet, and multimedia, were based on technology trends in higher education.Results indicated that the legal age of students were comfortable with computer technology, using such tools as email and the Internet for both academic and social purposes. both(prenominal) men and women spent about the same amount of time on email, class assignments on th e computer, vie computer games, and shopping on the Internet. However, women spent significantly fewer hours surfriding the Internet than men did.Consistent with Shuell and Farber (2001), Lewis et al. (2001) also confirm that students believe the use of email increases their frequency of communication with faculty, which, in turn, enhances the faculty-student relationship and enables faculty to be more accessible. The issue of accessibility was discussed in this report and how there is a need for higher educational institutions to address this issue, which the authors indicate to be a social problem that has significant economic and social implications. They point to the need to screw that there are some students, including those with disabilities, who may be at a disadvantage when a course requires the retrieval of materials from the web.The use of computer technology has become an accepted and expected component of every students postsecondary educational experience. To discov er understand the use and effectiveness of these technologies, all of the studies used in this report that cogitate on computer technology in higher education examined one or more aspects of the integration of these technologies into the educational system. The Arant (1996) study focused on the use of the Internet and the World Wide Web in higher education.Employing both qualitative and quantitative methods (phone interviews and a survey), it concluded that, while using online components to traditional courses did not support the apparent belief that online education saved time and money, it did change the way in which courses were taught, with additional online portions being incorporated into courses. For students who are visually impaired or blind, this could result in additional barriers.Computer Technology and Visually Impaired StudentsIn an extensive two-year study in Canada, Fichten, Barile, and Asuncion (1999) investigated the computer, information, learning, and adaptive technology needs and concerns of Canadian postsecondary students with disabilities. Of the findings from this study, computers were found to be critical to the success of students with disabilities, and the vast majority of students, regardless of gender, age, weapons platform of study, or type of disability, could and did use computer technologies to help them succeed. An important development that emerged from this study was that students often cross-used technologies. For example, while students with visual impairments are expected to use screen reader software, students with learning disabilities also used this software.The students in this study considered computers as electronic curb cuts, enabling technologies that allow students with disabilities to better create for and participate in the information-based economy of tomorrow. Fichten, et al. (1999) urged postsecondary education institutions to design for accessibility and to consider the needs of students with disabiliti es before making purchases. What the authors describe as troubling is the absence, in many cases, of planning for access for students with disabilities by postsecondary institutions (Fichten et al., p. 179).As some technological barriers fall, others are slowly erected as new technologies continue to become part of a students educational experiences. One suggestion the authors had for government funding bodies to help raise awareness of these issues was to take accessibility issues into consideration when reviewing grant applications and to create incentives for businesses to develop and market technologies that are accessible to all students. The authors wrote The enormous potential of computers to remove barriers to students with disabilities and concerns over barriers posed by limitations in access were of import issues noted by respondents in all categories in all phases of the research (p. 180).Shaw and Giacquinta (2000) used a questionnaire that was very carefully developed, field tested, and revised some(prenominal) times before being used for this study. The sample consisted of 412 sighted graduate students. This study was very well thought out and documented. The authors suggested that faculty integrate more computer technology into their curricula (e.g., with the use of such tools as Blackboard, WebCT, and course web pages). They did not, however, take into consideration the ramifications of that suggestion as it applies to students who are blind or visually impaired. Unfortunately, unless having been asked to consider it, most faculty do not think about students who are blind or visually impaired (or who have any other disability) when they begin to integrate technology into their curriculum.Shuell and Farber (2001) piloted a questionnaire and discussed it within two focus groups before using it for the study. Their sample was cool of 728 sighted undergraduate and graduate students. Both qualitative and quantitative info showed a link between ac tive, participatory learning and the unconditional light of students regarding technology as a learning tool they also confirmed that the use of technology made the classes seem more personal to the students.However, the authors cautiousness that the apparent relationship found in their study between a positive perception of computer technology by students and students actual learning is still unclear. Lewis et al. (2001) used an author-constructed survey, which they described as a self-report, forced-choice survey. One of the problems with this study is that a self-report is subject to response bias, although the results of this study were consistent with the others regarding a positive perception and use of computer technology by students in postsecondary institutions. Both Shuell et al. and Lewis et al. recommended that future research focus on the impact of technology on student learning. Lewis et al. also recommended the need to examine the use of technology among specific g roups, such as students who are Hispanic, African American, and commuters.ConclusionGiven the state of existing literature in the area of postsecondary students who are blind or visually impaired, unite with the overwhelming integration of computer technology into the academic environment, there is still a need for a more substantive exploration into how postsecondary institutions are supporting and serving the best interests of these students. Disability scholars Susan R. Jones and Julie Smart point out the relationship between individuals who have a disability and how society views people with disabilities. They assert that disability is a universal issue, and yet there is no single disability experience.With a focus on the prejudices, discrimination and defacement experienced by people with disabilities and their responses to their disabilities, Jones (1996) and Smart (2001) define disability as a socially constructed phenomenon that combines the experiences of those living with a disability together with their environments. Goggin and Newell (2003) push state that in the name of inclusion society builds disability into digital technologies, arguing that disability has been constructed in the technological world of computing and computer networks and that there is a need to critically analyze the ways in which it is constructed within contemporary society.ReferencesArant, Jr., M. D. (1996, August). Going online to teach journalism and mass communication. (ERIC inscription Reproduction Service No. ED399596)Fichten, C, Barile, M., & Asuncion, J. V. (1999). Learning technologiesStudents with disabilities inpostsecondary education Montreal Final root word to the Office of Learning Technologies. Adaptech Project,Dawson College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED433625)Goggin, G. & Newell, C. (2003). digital disability The social construction of disability in new media. Lanham, MD Rowman & Littlefield.Jones, S. R. (1996). Toward inclusive theory Disability as social construction. NASPA Journal, 33(4), 347-354.Lewis, J., Coursol, D., & Khan, L. (2001). College students tech.edu A study of comfort and the use of technology. Journal of College Student Development, 42(6), 625-631.National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2000). Falling through the net Toward digital inclusion. A report of Americans access to technology tools. Retrieved sue 18, 2009, from http//www.ntia.doc.gOv/ntiahome/fttn00/Falling.htm6Rowland, C. (2000, October). Accessibility of the internet in postsecondary education Meeting the challenge. Paper presented at the Universal Web Accessibility Symposium 2000, San Antonio, Texas. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http//www.webaim.org/articles/meetchallenge/Shuell, T. J., & Farber, S. L. (2001). Students perceptions of technology use in college courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(2), 119-138.Shaw, F. S., & Giacquinta, J. B. (2000). A survey of graduate students as end users of computer technology New roles for faculty. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 18(1), 21-40.Smart, Julie (2001). Disability, Society, and the Individual. Gaithersburg, doc Aspen Publishers.Williamson, K., Albrecht, A., Schauder, D., & Bow, A. (2001). Australian perspectives on the use of the internet by people who are visually impaired and professionals who work with them. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 95(11), 690 701.