A Scoping Review on Open Educational Resources to Support Interactions of Learners with Disabilities
This scoping review explored the trends in open educational resources (OER) that support the interactions of learners with disabilities and the challenges of supporting these interactions in such environments. Emerging OER and open educational practices allow learners to interact with digital learning resources in self-regulated learning. Since OER assume learners’ self-regulation, research has explored how to promote learner interactions to facilitate better engagement and motivation. Emerging research on OER-enabled pedagogy corroborate this trend. However, despite increasing interest in OER and open educational practices, few studies have demonstrated how OER support various types of interactions for learners with disabilities. Learners with disabilities are likely to experience challenges in interacting with OER due to their modality constraints. A comprehensive literature synthesis is essential to investigate the needs of learners with disabilities in their interactions in OER. In this study, we reviewed and synthesized existing research on how OER and open educational practices support the interactions of learners with disabilities across different OER platforms. Our findings suggest both research and design implications for future OER designs suited for learners with disabilities.
* Indicates articles included in data collection.
Amornrit, P. (2019, September 23–25). Using OER through open educational practices to enhance creative problem solving skills. In ICEMT 2019:Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Education and Multimedia Technology (pp. 197–200). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3345120.3345145
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Bittencourt, I. I., Baranauskas, M. C., Pereira, R., Dermeval, D., Isotani, S., & Jaques, P. (2016). A systematic review on multi-device inclusive environments. Universal Access in the Information Society, 15(4), 737–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0422-3
* Buehler, E., Comrie, N., Hofmann, M., McDonald, S., & Hurst, A. (2016). Investigating the implications of 3D printing in special education. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 8(3), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/2870640
* Bustamante, F. A. R., Amado-Salvatierra, H. R., Tortosa, S. O., & Hilera, J. R. (2018). Training engineering educators on accessible and inclusive learning design. The International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(5), 1538–1548. https://www.ijee.ie/contents/c340518.html
* Calle-Jimenez, T., Sanchez-Gordon, S., & Luján-Mora, S. (2014, April 3–5). Web accessibility evaluation of massive open online courses on geographical information systems. In 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (pp. 680–686). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2014.6826167
* Drake, J. R., O’Hara, M., & Seeman, E. (2015). Five principles for MOOC design: With a case study. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14, 125–143. https://doi.org/10.28945/2250
EDUCAUSE. (2020). The Horizon Report 2020TM teaching and learning edition https://library.educause.edu/resources/2020/3/2020-educause-horizon-report-teaching-and-learning-edition
Gil-Jaurena, I. (2014). Student support services in open and distance education. Open Praxis, 6(1), 3–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.6.1.111
* Hansen, A. K., Hansen, E. R., Dwyer, H. A., Harlow, D. B., & Franklin, D. (2016). Differentiating for diversity: Using universal design for learning in elementary computer science education. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education (pp. 376–381). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844570
Hashey, A. I., & Stahl, S. (2014). Making online learning accessible for students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(5), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0040059914528329
Hillman, D. C., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1994). Learner‐interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526853
Howard, M. (2003). An interactionist perspective on barriers and bridges to work for disabled people. Disability and Work program, Institute for Public Policy Research. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.503.7783&rep=rep1&type=pdf
IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2012). IMS GlobalAccessForAll® (AfA) Primer: Version 3.0 specification. Public draft 1.0. https://www.imsglobal.org/accessibility/afav3p0pd/AfAv3p0_SpecPrimer_v1p0pd.html
* Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C., & Moreira Teixeira, A. (2014, May 14–16). Accessibility analysis in MOOC platforms. A case study: UNED COMA and UAbiMOOC. In L. Bengochea, R. Hernández & Hilera, J. R. (Eds.), Actas del V Congreso Internacional sobre Calidad y Accesibilidad de la Formación Virtual (pp. 545–550). Universidad Galileo. http://www.esvial.org/cafvir2014/documentos/LibroActasCAFVIR2014.pdf
* Israel, M., Wherfel, Q. M., Pearson, J., Shehab, S., & Tapia, T. (2015). Empowering K-12 students with disabilities to learn computational thinking and computer programming. Teaching Exceptional Children, 48(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915594790
* Kane, S. K., Koushik, V., & Muehlbradt, A. (2018). Bonk: Accessible programming for accessible audio games. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 132–142). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3202185.3202754
Kocdar, S., Karadeniz, A., Bozkurt, A., & Buyuk, K. (2018). Measuring self-regulation in self-paced open and distance learning environments. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3255
* Koushik, V., & Kane, S. K. (2019, May 4–9). “It Broadens My Mind” Empowering people with cognitive disabilities through computing education. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300744
* Laiola Guimarães, R., & Britto Mattos, A. (2015, October). Exploring the use of massive open online courses for teaching students with intellectual disability. In Proceedings of the International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (pp. 343–344). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2811370
Lambert, S. R. (2019). Six critical dimensions: A model for widening participation in open, online and blended programs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5683
Leahy, M., Davis, N., Lewin, C., Charania, A., Nordin, H., Orlič, D., Butler, D., & Lopez-Fernadez, O. (2016). Smart partnerships to increase equity in education. The Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 19(3), 84–98. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/19_3
* Lee, Y., & Lee, J. A. (2019). A checklist for assessing blind users’ usability of educational smartphone applications. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18, 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0585-1
* Lin, C.-Y., & Chang, Y.-M. (2015). Interactive augmented reality using Scratch 2.0 to improve physical activities for children with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 1–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.10.016
* Ludi, S., & Spencer, M. (2017). Design considerations to increase block-based language accessibility for blind programmers via Blockly. Journal of Visual Languages and Sentient Systems, 3, 119–124. https://doi.org/10.18293/VLSS2017-013
* Meyer, A., & Fourie, I. (2016, June 6–11). Make the makers’ voices count: Combining universal design and participatory ergonomics to create accessible makerspaces for individuals with (physical) disabilities [Paper presentation]. 15th European Association for Health Information and Libraries Conference: Knowledge, Research, Innovation, Seville, Spain.
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
* Moeller, R., Bastiansen, C., Gates, L., & Subramaniam, M. (2015). Universally accessible makerspace recommendation to the district of Columbia public library. Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities and the Inclusive Future of Libraries, 40, 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020150000040010
* Moloo, R. K., Khedo, K. K., & Prabhakar, T. V. (2018). Critical evaluation of existing audio learning systems using a proposed TOL model. Computers & Education, 117, 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.10.004
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. http://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
National Center for Education Statistics at IES (2020). The Condition of Education 2020 (NCES 2020-144). U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020144.pdf
* Navarrete, R., & Luján-Mora, S. (2015a, December 9–11). OER-based learning and people with disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative and Blended Learning (pp. 25–34). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBL.2015.7387646
* Navarrete, R., & Luján-Mora, S. (2015b, April 8-10). Evaluating findability of open educational resources from the perspective of users with disabilities: A preliminary approach. In 2015 Second International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (pp. 112–119). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEDEG.2015.7114457
* Navarrete, R., & Luján-Mora, S. (2016). Improving OER Websites for learners with disabilities. In Proceedings of the 13th Web For All Conference 2016 (pp. 1–2). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2899475.2899517
* Navarrete, R., & Luján-Mora, S. (2018). Bridging the accessibility gap in open educational resources. Universal Access in the Information Society, 17, 755–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0529-9
Navarro, S., Zervas, P., Gesa, R., & Sampson, D. G. (2016). Developing teachers' competences for designing inclusive learning experiences. Educational Technology and Society, 19(1), 17–27. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/19_1
* Nganji, J. T., & Brayshaw, M. (2014). Designing and reflecting on disability-aware e-learning systems: The case of ONTODAPS. In Proceedings of 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 571–575). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2014.167
Ngubane-Mokiwa, S. A. (2016). Accessibility strategies for making MOOCs for people with visual impairments: A universal design for learning (UDL) perspective [Working paper]. Pan-Commonwealth Forum 8. Commonwealth of Learning and Open University Malaysia. http://hdl.handle.net/11599/2561
Okada, A., Rabello, C., & Ferreira, G. (2014). Developing 21st century skills through co-learning with OER and social networks. In Challenges for Research into Open & Distance Learning: Doing Things Better – Doing Better Things (pp. 121–130). European Distance and E-Learning Network. http://oro.open.ac.uk/41724/1/PE34_eden2014.pdf
Panke, S., & Seufert, T. (2013). What’s educational about open educational resources? Different theoretical lenses for conceptualizing learning with OER. e-Learning and Digital Media, 10(2), 116–134. https://doi.org/10.2304%2Felea.2013.10.2.116
* Paramasivam, V., Huang, J., Elliott, S., & Cakmak, M. (2017). Computer science outreach with end-user robot-programming tools. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education 2017 (pp. 447–452). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017796
Park, K., So, H.-J., & Cha, H. (2019). Digital equity and accessible MOOCs: Accessibility evaluations of mobile MOOCs for learners with visual impairments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5521
Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(4), 371-385. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1123
* Ratcliff, C. C., & Anderson, S. E. (2011). Reviving the turtle: Exploring the use of logo with students with mild disabilities. Computers in the Schools, 28(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2011.594987
Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed constructionism. In D. C. Edelson & E. A. Domeshek (Eds.), ICLS 96: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 280–284). International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.5555/1161135
* Ringland, K. E., Wolf, C. T., Faucett, H., Dombrowski, L., & Hayes, G. R. (2016). “Will I always be not social?” Re-conceptualizing sociality in the context of a Minecraft community for Autism. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2016 (pp. 1256–1269). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858038
* Ringland, K. E., Boyd, L., Faucett, H., Cullen, A. L., & Hayes, G. R. (2017). Making in Minecraft: A means of self-expression for youth with autism. In IDC 17: Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 340–345). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3079749
* Rodrigo, C. (2014). Accessibility in language MOOCs. In E. Martín-Monje & E. Bárceona (Eds.), Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries (pp. 106–126). De Gruyter Open Poland. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.7
Sanchez-Gordon, S., & Luján-Mora, S. (2020). Design, implementation and evaluation of MOOCs to improve inclusion of diverse learners. In Management Association. (Ed.), Accessibility and diversity in education: Breakthroughs in research and practice (pp. 52–79). IGI Global. http://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1213-5.ch004
* Sevilla, J., Herrera, G., Martínez, B., & Alcantud, F. (2007). Web accessibility for individuals with cognitive deficits: A comparative study between an existing commercial Web and its cognitively accessible equivalent. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 14(3), 12-es. https://doi.org/10.1145/1279700.1279702
* Snodgrass, M. R., Israel, M., & Reese, G. C. (2016). Instructional supports for students with disabilities in K-5 computing: Findings from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 100, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.011
Solomon, G. (2002). Digital equity: It’s not just about access anymore. Technology & Learning, 22(9). 18–22. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ652452
Spencer, S. A. (2011). Universal design for learning: Assistance for teachers in today’s inclusive classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 10–22. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1055639
Spooner, F., Baker, J. N., Harris, A. A., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., & Browder, D. M. (2007). Effects of training in universal design for learning on lesson plan development. Remedial and Special Education, 28(2), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F07419325070280020101
Sevilla, J., Herrera, G., Martínez, B., & Alcantud, F. (2007). Web accessibility for individuals with cognitive deficits: A comparative study between an existing commercial web and its cognitively accessible equivalent. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 14(3), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1279700.1279702
* Taylor, M. S. (2018). Computer programming with Pre-K through first-grade students with intellectual disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 52(2), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466918761120
Treviranus, J., Mitchell, J., Clark, C., & Roberts, V. (2014). An introduction to the FLOE project. In C. Stephanidis & M. Antona (Eds.), Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Universal Access to Information and Knowledge. UAHCI 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 8514). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07440-5_42
Treviranus, J. (2018). Learning differences & digital equity in the classroom. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen & K-. W. Lai (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_74-1
Van Allen, J., & Katz, S. (2019). Developing open practices in teacher education: An example of integrating OER and developing renewable assignments. Open Praxis, 11(3), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.11.3.972
Wiley, D., & Hilton III, J. L. (2018). Defining OER-enabled pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i4.3601
Willems, J., & Bossu, C. (2012). Equity considerations for open educational resources in the glocalization of education. Distance Education, 33(2), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.692051
Wobbrock, J. O., Kane, S. K., Gajos, K. Z., Harada, S., & Froehlich, J. (2011). Ability-based design: Concept, principles and examples. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 3(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/1952383.1952384
Wohlin, C. (2014). Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In EASE 14: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (pp. 1–10). Association of Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2601248.2601268
World Wide Web Consortium. (2020). Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) overview. Web Accessibility Initiative. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/
* Worsley, M., Barel, D., Davison, L., Large, T., & Mwiti, T. (2018). Multimodal interfaces for inclusive learning. In C. Penstein Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, U. Hoppe, R. Luckin, M. Mavrikis, K. Porayska-Pomsta, B. McLaren & B. du Boulay (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 10948). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93846-2_73
W3C. (2020). W3C Accessibility Guidelines. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/#guidelines
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.
This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.