Initial Project Proposal
Up to 70% of assistive technology is abandoned by consumers, and this alarming statistic shows no signs of improvement (Saul, 2022). Thankfully, some of this abandonment rate can be attributed to positive patient progress. For example, a woman who needs a cane for a back injury could abandon the technology because of improvement in her condition. But, a sizable percentage of the abandonment rate is due to factors such as poor device performance and user’s needs not being met.
Unfortunately, classrooms can’t escape this assistive technology abandonment rate. Teachers who attempt to utilize hearing, mobility, writing, physical, visual and communication aids for their students often abandon these technologies. Most of the time this is because they haven’t been properly trained on how to use the technologies, do not find them user-friendly, and have little access to administrative support (Sharpe, 2010). While technology has the potential to reduce accessibility barriers for disabled students, the current high rate of abandonment poses a significant challenge, depriving these students of the opportunity to fully benefit from such advancements.
Therefore, the research question at hand is: "Can enhancing teacher and student training programs effectively mitigate abandonment rates of assistive technologies in K-12 school classrooms, or is the challenge also rooted in shortcomings in conceptual modeling, physical design, or other design factors?" I plan to answer this question through interviews with both the student-users and teachers, which will be explained in more detail later on.
As a human factors engineer, we value the user’s expertise when it comes to designing or improving a product. Sometimes, when redesigning a product, human factors engineers even co-design with consumers. Saying this, I would like to interview teachers and student users who have abandoned assistive technology. Ideally, I would have the opportunity to interview teachers and student users who haven’t abandoned assistive technology as well. This way I can get thematic data on what is going right with the conceptual modeling, physical design, and training. Deciphering this data will allow me to draw conclusions on what we designers need to focus on improving - the training and support or physical elements such as the conceptual modeling.
I plan to conduct in-person interviews with individuals in Boston and Medford because it perplexes me that, even in regions with ample resources, teachers and students still abandon assistive technology. This is an indicator that there is something fundamentally incorrect with the design of the product. The teachers and student users of choice will be those who use/have used “mid to high-tech assistive technology.” According to Massachusetts Department of Primary and Secondary Education, high-tech is defined as: mouse emulators, digital whiteboards, text-to-speech software, word prediction software, speech recognition, and augmentative communication tools and applications that enable non-verbal students to communicate. Mid tech is defined as devices such amplification systems, specialized calculators, or talking switches (Chester, 2012). I am planning to reach out to the Massachusetts Department of Primary and Secondary Education to gain insight on what schools have implemented assistive technology either currently or in the past.
The interviews would be a set of open and closed-ended questions for the teachers. The abilities of the student user would have to determine how their interviews are executed. I plan on conducting interviews verbally but will accommodate any assistive communication technology the student typically uses. If they bring assistive technology, I will ask how it can be improved.
In conclusion, I hope my findings educate designers on how to improve assistive technology by hearing the voices of the people who use them every day. Products - especially those that help people function in their communities - should not be leading to such high abandonment rates. Substantial evidence suggests the ineffectiveness of these technologies; my research aims to shed light on strategies to enhance their efficacy.
References
Chester, Mitchell D. “Access to Learning - Assistive Technology and Accesible Instructional Materials.” Massachussetts Department of Primary and Secondary Education , Nov. 2012.
Saul, Helen. “Why Do People Abandon Assistive Technologies?” NIHR Evidence, 17 Aug. 2022, doi.org/10.3310/alert_46063.
Sharpe, Michael Edward. “Identifying Why Teachers Abandon Assistive Technologies.” NSUWorks, 2010, nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1300&context=gscis_etd.