Formalización de un marco metodológico para la implementación de un proyecto educativo virtual accesible

  1. Héctor R. Amado-Salvatierra 1
  2. José Ramón Hilera González 1
  3. Salvador Otón Tortosa 2
  1. 1 Universidad Galileo, Guatemala
  2. 2 Universidad de Alcalá, España
Journal:
Educación XX1: Revista de la Facultad de Educación

ISSN: 1139-613X,  2174-5374

Year of publication: 2018

Volume: 21

Issue: 2

Pages: 349-371

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/EDUCXX1.15591 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Educación XX1: Revista de la Facultad de Educación

Abstract

The development of education faces a constant evolution and the adoption of new information and communication technologies (ICTs) for education is reflected in the inclusion of virtual courses in the educational process. However, accessibility in virtual platforms and courses has not been taken into account in the educational process, especially in developing countries that do not have legislation that encourages the consideration of accessibility, a very important benefit for students with disabilities. This paper proposes a methodology to take accessibility into account in the different processes of the life cycle of a virtual educational project. The creation of this methodology has taken place under an iterative process, based on an international standard, and complemented with practical experiences. In order to validate the proposed methodology, an accessible virtual training course for teachers was prepared. The methodology was validated with an iterative design consisting of three phases. Following this experience, comments and suggestions were gathered from several stakeholders in the virtual education process. As part of a cooperation initiative between European and Latin American universities, the proposed methodology was distributed through mass training for teachers. A total of 12 editions of the prepared course have been taught, 8 editions in a blended-learning approach and 4 courses with an online learning focus. A total of 1,182 teachers have participated in the training experience (509 men and 673 women). This study provides a methodology based on a framework for describing the quality of educational processes. This will allow any institution to use this methodology as a reference in order to work on the changes needed to incorporate accessibility into their own production processes for virtual courses.

Bibliographic References

  • AENOR (2010). UNE-EN ISO/IEC 19796-1:2010 Tecnología de la información. Enseñanza, educación y formación. Gestión, aseguramiento y métricas de la calidad. Parte 1: Aproximación general. Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación.
  • AFNOR (2004). AFNOR Z 76-001 French Code of Practice in e-Learning. Asociación Francesa para la Normalización.
  • BS (2010). BS 8878:2010, Web accessibility, code of practice. British Standard. Burgstahler, S. (2006). The development of accessibility indicators for distance learning programs. Research in Learning Technology, 14(1), 79-102.
  • Burgstahler, S., Anderson, A. & Litzkow, M. (2011). Accessible Technology for Online and Face-to-Face Teaching and Learning. En K. King & T. Cox (Eds.), The professor’s guide to taming technology: leveraging digital media, Web 2.0, and more for learning (pp. 201-218). Nueva York: Information Age Publishing Inc.
  • CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). Wakefield, MA. Recuperado de: http://bit.ly/1kOa73K
  • CEN (2011). CWA 16266: Curriculum for training ICT Professionals in Universal Design. Comité Europeo de Normalización.
  • Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., &Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers & Education, 43(1), 17-33.
  • Cooper, M. (2007). Making online learning accessible to disabled students: an institutional case study. En J. Seale (Ed.), Approaches to Developing Accessible Learning Practices. Conceptualising Best Practice (pp. 103-115). Nueva York: Routledge.
  • DIN (2004). DIN PAS 1032-1 Learning, Education and Training focussing on e-Learning. Part 1: Reference Model for Quality Management and Quality Assurance. Planning, Development, Realisation and Evaluation of Processes and Offers in Learning, Education and Training. Instituto Alemán de Normalización.
  • Guglielman, E. (2013). Rethinking e-learning accessibility: Toward didactic guidelines to design inclusive activities. En D. Parmigiani, V. Pennazio y A. Traverso (Eds.), Learning & Teaching with Media & Technology (pp. 80-89). Brussels: ATEE.
  • Hersh, M. (2014). Evaluation framework for ICT-based learning technologies for disabled people. Computers & Education, 78(1), 30-47.
  • ISO (2005). ISO/IEC 19796-1:2005, ITLET Quality management, assurance and metrics, Part 1: General approach. International Organization for Standardization.
  • ISO (2009). ISO/IEC 19796-3:2009, ITLET Quality management, assurance and metrics, Part 3: Reference methods and metrics. International Organization for Standardization.
  • ISO (2015) ISO/IEC 36000:2015, ITLET (Information Technology - Learning, Education, and Traning - Quality for Learning, Education and Training - Fundamentals and Vocabulary. International Organization for Standardization.
  • Kelly, B., Sloan, D., Brown, S., Seale, J., Petrie, H., Lauke, P., & Ball, S. (2007). Accessibility 2.0: people, policies and processes. En S. Harper & Y. Yesilada (Coords.), Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A) (pp. 138-147). Nueva York: ACM.
  • Kelly, B., Lewthwaite, S., & Sloan, D. (2010). Developing countries; developing experiences: approaches to accessibility for the real world. En C. Asakawa, H. Takagi, L. Ferres & C. Shelly (Coords.), Proceedings of the 2010 international cross disciplinary conference on web accessibility (W4A) (art. 3). Nueva York: ACM.
  • McAndrew, P., Farrow, R., & Cooper, M. (2012). Adapting online learning resources for all: planning for professionalism in accessibility. Research in Learning Technology, 20(4).
  • Santos, O.C., & Boticario, J.G. (2015). Practical guidelines for designing and evaluating educationally oriented recommendations. Computers & Education, 81(1), 354-374.
  • Seale, J. (2007). Disability, technology and e-learning: challenging conceptions. En J. Seale (Ed.), Approaches to Developing Accessible Learning Practices. Conceptualising Best Practice (pp. 1-9). Nueva York: Routledge.
  • Seale, J. (2006). E-learning and disability in higher education: accessibility research and practice. Nueva York. Routledge.
  • Slater, R., Pearson, V., Warren, J., & Forbes, T. (2015). Institutional change for improving accessibility in the design and delivery of distance learning–the role of faculty accessibility specialists at The Open University. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 30(1), 6-20.
  • Smith, C., Spiegel, H., & Cox, B. (2010). The Missing Piece: The Need for Training Online Faculty to Design Accessible Online Courses. National Social Science Technology Journal, 4(1), 4.
  • Phipps, L., & Kelly, B. (2006). Holistic approaches to e-learning accessibility. ALT-J: Research In Learning Technology, 14(1), 69-78.
  • W3C (2012). WAI: Strategies, guidelines, resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities. Web Accessibility Initiative. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Recuperado de http://bit.ly/1Egf1Q7
  • Yi, Z., Zhiting, Z., Xiaoyong, H., & Qing, L. (2004). Specification for service quality management system of e-learning. En W. Liu, Y. Shi & Q. Li (Eds.), Advances in Web-Based Learning–ICWL 2004 (pp. 400-406). Berlin: Springer.
Data source: Dialnet