Comments on: We Need an Assistive Technology Strategy not Devices https://edutechdebate.org/assistive-technology/we-need-an-assistive-technology-strategy/ Educational Technology Debate Wed, 16 May 2012 15:41:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jim Tobias https://edutechdebate.org/assistive-technology/we-need-an-assistive-technology-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-1482 Jim Tobias Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:16:36 +0000 http://edutechdebate.org/?p=679#comment-1482 Great article, and right on the money. Another option to consider is putting accessibility capabilities in the network. A school district, government, enterprise, or NGO could install these features so that users have immediate access to them wherever they are. They may also allow broader opportunities for new AT, because developers will be freed from the need to develop their own platforms from the ground up, and from most of the software distribution costs. This idea has been most comprehensively proposed in the "National Public Inclusive Infrastructure" project. Information about NPII can be found at <a href="http://npii.org/." target="_blank">http://npii.org/.</a> Great article, and right on the money. Another option to consider is putting accessibility capabilities in the network. A school district, government, enterprise, or NGO could install these features so that users have immediate access to them wherever they are. They may also allow broader opportunities for new AT, because developers will be freed from the need to develop their own platforms from the ground up, and from most of the software distribution costs.

This idea has been most comprehensively proposed in the "National Public Inclusive Infrastructure" project. Information about NPII can be found at http://npii.org/.

]]> By: Darlene Parker https://edutechdebate.org/assistive-technology/we-need-an-assistive-technology-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-1472 Darlene Parker Sun, 21 Feb 2010 19:14:34 +0000 http://edutechdebate.org/?p=679#comment-1472 Fernando, thank you for your timely post regarding accessibility. This is an important area which has not been a focus for organizations who are introducing ICT in developing countries. Your point considering the sustainability of continuing to use a proprietary solution when moving to the workplace is such a valid concern, which is often overlooked when accepting donated or price reduced software. Even the gov't departments responsible for training handicapped users are very limited in their strategy to help with future employability. It was very frustrating for me when presenting FOSS alternatives, along with a training program that would increase accessibility beyond the budget devouring proprietary solutions, to see the lack of planning. The largest project this particular government had underway was to have civil employees travel throughout the country to register/document the handicapped. Yet the limited computer labs were terribly under utilized. On a positive note, I have engaged with the Kenya Society for the Blind to help present Open source alternatives such as espeak, Orca, and Vinux, a customized Ubuntu for visually impaired users <a href="http://vinux.org.uk/." target="_blank">http://vinux.org.uk/.</a> It is exciting to work on this project as it can be a great model for other countries as we will have an effective M&E process in place. During my testing I have been lucky to connect with developers in other countries who work with organizations such as Braille without Borders. You may find this writer to have some great insights about accessibility <a href="http://playingwithsid.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://playingwithsid.blogspot.com/</a> On a final note, accessibility in ICT continues to be a challenge even in developed countries. The move to automated kiosks for services such as airline check-ins etc is based on touchscreen technology & there has not been a similar pace to ensure that visually impaired users have access to these services. Fernando, thank you for your timely post regarding accessibility. This is an important area which has not been a focus for organizations who are introducing ICT in developing countries. Your point considering the sustainability of continuing to use a proprietary solution when moving to the workplace is such a valid concern, which is often overlooked when accepting donated or price reduced software.

Even the gov't departments responsible for training handicapped users are very limited in their strategy to help with future employability. It was very frustrating for me when presenting FOSS alternatives, along with a training program that would increase accessibility beyond the budget devouring proprietary solutions, to see the lack of planning. The largest project this particular government had underway was to have civil employees travel throughout the country to register/document the handicapped. Yet the limited computer labs were terribly under utilized.

On a positive note, I have engaged with the Kenya Society for the Blind to help present Open source alternatives such as espeak, Orca, and Vinux, a customized Ubuntu for visually impaired users http://vinux.org.uk/. It is exciting to work on this project as it can be a great model for other countries as we will have an effective M&E process in place.

During my testing I have been lucky to connect with developers in other countries who work with organizations such as Braille without Borders. You may find this writer to have some great insights about accessibility http://playingwithsid.blogspot.com/

On a final note, accessibility in ICT continues to be a challenge even in developed countries. The move to automated kiosks for services such as airline check-ins etc is based on touchscreen technology & there has not been a similar pace to ensure that visually impaired users have access to these services.

]]> By: Fernando Botelho https://edutechdebate.org/assistive-technology/we-need-an-assistive-technology-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-1457 Fernando Botelho Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:00:02 +0000 http://edutechdebate.org/?p=679#comment-1457 Thank you Paul. I agree that a lot of training and support is needed but I do not think this is specific to FOSS. This happens to anyone who is not first-to-market and number one in sales in wealthy economies. There are many commercial proprietary assistive technologies that are completely unknown in developing countries, just like some FOSS solutions, simply because marketing to an extremely diverse and geographically disperse community, such as persons with disabilities, is too expensive. I also agree with you regarding the need for technologies that work on a variety of devices, in particular, low-cost ones. eSpeak and Dasher are two good examples of such FOSS assistive technologies. Fernando Botelho Thank you Paul.

I agree that a lot of training and support is needed but I do not think
this is specific to FOSS. This happens to anyone who is not
first-to-market and number one in sales in wealthy economies.

There are many commercial proprietary assistive technologies that are
completely unknown in developing countries, just like some FOSS solutions,
simply because marketing to an extremely diverse and geographically
disperse community, such as persons with disabilities, is too expensive.

I also agree with you regarding the need for technologies that work on a
variety of devices, in particular, low-cost ones. eSpeak and Dasher are
two good examples of such FOSS assistive technologies.

Fernando Botelho

]]> By: Paul Lamb https://edutechdebate.org/assistive-technology/we-need-an-assistive-technology-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-1454 Paul Lamb Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:19:02 +0000 http://edutechdebate.org/?p=679#comment-1454 Great post Fernando! I think you make an excellent point about the need for a focus on software that is freely available. I would just add that the software ideally needs to work on multiple platforms AND on low end and affordable devices. IMHO there is also a tremendous need for training and support of good software, not just making the software available. This is particularly true in the case of FOSS. Would you agree? Great post Fernando! I think you make an excellent point about the need for a focus on software that is freely available. I would just add that the software ideally needs to work on multiple platforms AND on low end and affordable devices. IMHO there is also a tremendous need for training and support of good software, not just making the software available. This is particularly true in the case of FOSS. Would you agree?

]]>