Advertisement

Towards Improving the e-learning Experience for Deaf Students: e-LUX

  • Fabrizio Borgia
  • Claudia S. Bianchini
  • Maria De Marsico
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8514)

Abstract

Deaf people are more heavily affected by the digital divide than many would expect. Moreover, most accessibility guidelines addressing their needs just deal with captioning and audio-content transcription. However, this approach to the problem does not consider that deaf people have big troubles with vocal languages, even in their written form. At present, only a few organizations, like W3C, produced guidelines dealing with one of their most distinctive expressions: Sign Language (SL). SL is, in fact, the visual-gestural language used by many deaf people to communicate with each other. The present work aims at supporting e-learning user experience (e-LUX) for these specific users by enhancing the accessibility of content and container services. In particular, we propose preliminary solutions to tailor activities which can be more fruitful when performed in one’s own “native” language, which for most deaf people, especially younger ones, is represented by national SL.

Keywords

Deaf needs Sign Language SignWriting User Experience e-learning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ardito, C., Costabile, M., De Marsico, M., Lanzilotti, R., Levialdi, S., Roselli, T., Rossano, V.: An approach to usability evaluation of e-learning applications. Universal Access in the Information Society 4(3), 270–283 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Marsico, M., Kimani, S., Mirabella, V., Norman, K.L., Catarci, T.: A proposal toward the development of accessible e-learning content by human involvement. Universal Access in the Information Society 5(2), 150–169 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bianchini, C.S., Borgia, F., Bottoni, P., De Marsico, M.: SWift: a SignWriting improved fast transcriber. In: Tortora, G., Levialdi, S., Tucci, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 390–393. ACM, New York (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fajardo, I., Vigo, M., Salmerón, L.: Technology for supporting web information search and learning in Sign Language. Interacting with Computers 21(4), 243–256 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Perini, M.: Les conditions de l’appropriation du français (écrit) langue seconde par les Sourds profonds locuteurs de la LSF: Analyse des difficultés et propositions méthodologiques. PhD thesis, Université de Paris 8, Paris, France (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antinoro Pizzuto, E., Chiari, I., Rossini, P.: Representing signed languages: theoretical, methodological and practical issues. In: Pettorino, M., Giannini, F.A., Chiari, I., Dovetto, F. (eds.) Spoken communication, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cuxac, C.: La Langue des Signes Française (LSF): les voies de l’iconicité. In: Cuxac, C. (ed.) Faits de langues, vol. (15-16). Ophrys, Paris (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Guarino Reid, L., Vanderheiden, G.: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, WCAG 2.0 (December 11, 2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG (retrieved November 11, 2013)
  9. 9.
    Paluch, K.: What is User Experience Design (October 10, 2006), http://www.montparnas.com/articles/what-is-user-experience-design/ (retrieved December 29, 2013)
  10. 10.
    Morville, P.: User Experience Design (June 21, 2004), http://semanticstudios.com/publications/semantics/000029.php (retrieved December 29, 2013)
  11. 11.
    So, Y., Veneziano, L.: Designing for Everyone: The Role of Accessibility in Service Design. UX Magazine (July 26, 2012), http://uxmag.com/articles/designing-for-everyone (retrieved December 29, 2013)
  12. 12.
    Stokoe, W.C.: Sign Language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. Studies in Linguistics 8 (1960); occasional papersGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fels, D.I., Richards, J., Hardman, J., Lee, D.G.: Sign language Web pages. American Annals of the Deaf 151(4), 423–433 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bianchini, C.S.: Analyse métalinguistique de l’émergence d’un système d’écriture des Langues des Signes: SignWriting et son application à la Langue des Signes Italienne (LIS). PhD thesis, Université de Paris 8, Paris, France (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garcia, B.: Sourds, surdité, Langue(s) des Signes et épistmiologie des sciences du langage: problématiques de la scripturisation et modélisation des bas niveaux en Langue des Signe Franaise (LSF). Mémoire de HDR, Université de Paris 8 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sutton, V.: Sutton Movement Shorthand: Writing Tool for Research. In: Stokoe, W.C. (ed.) Proceedings of the First National Symposium on Sign Language Research & Teaching, pp. 267–296. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Chicago (1977)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Prillwitz, S., Leven, R., Zienert, H., Hanke, H., Henning, J.: Hamburg Notation System for Sign Languages: an introductory guide, HamNoSys version 2.0. Signum, Seedorf, Germany (1989)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Channon, R., van der Hulst, H.: Notation Sytems. In: Brentari, D. (ed.) Sign Languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sutton, V.: SignWriting For Sign Languages, http://www.signwriting.org/ (retrieved from November 13, 2013)
  20. 20.
    Sutton, V.: Lessons in SignWriting. Deaf Action Commitee for SignWriting, La Jolla (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Di Renzo, A., Gianfreda, G., Lamano, L., Lucioli, T., Pennacchi, B., Rossini, P., Bianchini, C.S., Petitta, G., Antinoro Pizzuto, E.: Scrivere la LIS con il SignWriting: manuale introduttivo. ISTC-CNR, Rome, Italy (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Slevinski Jr., S.E.: International SignWriting Alphabet 2010 - HTML Reference, http://www.signbank.org/iswa (retrieved from November 10, 2013)
  23. 23.
    Sutton, V.: SignWriter-At-A-Glance Instruction Manual, SignWriter Computer Program Notebook. Deaf Action Commitee for SignWriting, La Jolla (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sutton, V.: ASL Wikipedia Project, http://ase.wikipedia.wmflabs.org/wiki/Main_Page (retrieved from November 10, 2013)
  25. 25.
    Frost, A.: The Frost Village, http://www.frostvillage.com/lang/ase (retrieved from December 27, 2013)
  26. 26.
    Borgia, F., Marsico, M., Panizzi, E., Pietrangeli, L.: ARMob - Augmented reality for Urban Mobility in RMob. Paper presented at the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (May 2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beyer, H., Holtzblatt, K.: Contextual Design: Defining Customer-centered Systems. Interactive Technologies Series. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bottoni, P., Borgia, F., Buccarella, D., Capuano, D., De Marsico, M., Labella, A.: Stories and signs in an e-learning environment for deaf people. Universal Access in the Information Society 12(4), 369–386 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    van Dam, A.: Post-WIMP User Interfaces. Commun. ACM 40(2), 63–67 (1997)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Borgia, F.: Informatisation de forme graphique des Langues des Signes: application l’ècriture de SignWriting. PhD thesis, Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France (Exp. 2014)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Efthimiou, E., Fotinea, S.E., Hanke, T., Glauert, J., Bowden, R., Braffort, A., Collet, C., Maragos, P., Lefebvre-Albaret, F.: Sign Language technologies and resources of the Dicta-Sign project. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 37–44 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabrizio Borgia
    • 1
    • 2
  • Claudia S. Bianchini
    • 3
  • Maria De Marsico
    • 2
  1. 1.Université Toulouse III - Paul SabatierToulouse Cedex 9France
  2. 2.Dip. InformaticaSapienza Università di RomaRomeItaly
  3. 3.Université de PoitiersPoitiers Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations