Advertisement

Empowerment by Digital Media of People with Disabilities

Three Dimensions of Support
  • Christian Bühler
  • Bastian Pelka
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8547)

Abstract

The paper differentiates three dimensions of access for eInclusion instruments: Firstly, digital media are understood as environments that offer multiple channels for interaction between persons with disabilities and their environment. This dimension is challenged by barriers that hinder people to use digital media. Peer support could be understood as a second dimension: Social media can empower people to act as social innovators and help people with disabilities. Barriers are identified in the effort that has to be done or in unsuitable ICT-applications. On a third dimension, the advantages of “space” are explored: Public internet access points can be understood as a “space” that offers ICT access, support for individual needs and competences, facilitated by specialized staff. The high costs, missing political backing and need for competences could be understood as main barriers here. The paper suggests to capitalize on social innovation approaches to design new support instruments for eInclusion.

Keywords

Digital Media Social Media Public Access Point People with Disability Empowerment eInclusion Telecentre 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Paraguay, A.I.B.B.: eInclusion: Policies and Concepts Regarding Persons with Disabilities – Considerations about Brazil and Portugal. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII 2011. LNCS, vol. 6765, pp. 507–516. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaletka, C., Pelka, B., Diaz, A., Rastrelli, M.: eScouts: Intergen-erational Learning in Blended Environments and Spaces (ILBES) for social inclusion. In: European Distance and eLearning network (EDEN) (Hrsg.), Conference, June 6-9. Book of abstracts, Porto (2012), www.eden-online.org/system/files/Annual_2012_Porto_BOA.pdf
  3. 3.
    United Nations: The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD (2008), http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=13&pid=150
  4. 4.
    Facebook 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Busemann, K.: Wer nutzt das Social Web? Ergebnisse der ARD/ZDF-Onlinestudie 2013 in Media Perspektive 7-8/2013 Frankfurt am Main (2013), http://www.ard-zdf-onlinestudie.de/fileadmin/Onlinestudie/PDF/Busemann.pdf
  6. 6.
    Bühler, C.: Universal Design - Computer. In: Stone, J., Blouin, M. (eds.) Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE): International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation (2010), http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/146/ (Abruf: January 29, 2014)
  7. 7.
    Berger, A., et al.: Web 2.0 barrierefrei. Eine Studie zur Nutzung von Web 2.0 An-wendungen durch Menschen mit Behinderung. Aktion Mensch e.V. Online verfügbar unter, Bonn (2010), http://publikationen.aktion-mensch.de/barrierefrei/Studie_Web_2.0.pdfGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schaten, M., Lexis, M., Roentgen, U., Bühler, C., de Witte, L.: User Centered Design in Practice – Developing Software with/ for People with Cognitive and Intellectual Disabilities. In: Assistive Technology: From Research to Practice, AAATE 2013, pp. 815–822. IOS Press (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boschma, R.A.: Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment. Regional Studies 39, 61–74 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rissola, G., Garrido, M.: Survey on eInclusion Actors in the EU27 (2013), http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC84429.pdf
  11. 11.
    Lohrmann, L.: Trans eFacilitator comparative report (2013), http://www.adam-europe.eu/prj/9831/prd/1/1/3.6%20Comparative%20Report.pdf
  12. 12.
    Pelka, B., Kaletka, C.: eFacilitators: Functional Hybrids between ICT Teaching and Community Management. In: Deitmer, L., Gessler, M., Manning, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ECER VETNET Conference 2012: Papers Presented for the VETNET Programme of ECER 2012 at Cádiz, September 18-21. EERA Network: 02. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET), Wissenschaftsforum Bildung und Gesellschaft e.V, Berlin (2012a), www.ecer-vetnet.wifo-gate.org, http://www.b.shuttle.de/wifo/vetnet/ecer12.htm, http://vetnet.mixxt.org/networks/files/file.111156
  13. 13.
    Pelka, B., Kaletka, C.: Blended Learning Spaces as a Social Innovation for Local Inclusion, Integration and Employability. In: EIRP Proceedings, vol. 7 (2012b), http://www.proceedings.univ-danubius.ro/index.php/eirp/article/view/1362/1308
  14. 14.
    Howaldt, J., Schwarz, M.: Social Innovation: Concepts, Research Fields and International Trends. In: Henning, K., Hees, F. (eds.) Studies for Innovation in a Modern Working Environment - International Monitoring, vol. 5, p. 2011. Eigenverlag, Aachen (2010), http://www.sfs-dort-mund.de/odb/Repository/Publication/Doc%5C1289%5CIMO_Trendstudie_Howaldt_Schwarz_englische_Version.pdf (June 9, 2011)
  15. 15.
    Howaldt, J., Kopp, R., Schwarz, M.: Social innovations as drivers of social change – Tarde’s disregarded contribution to social innovation theory building. Social Frontiers. The next edge of social innovation research (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Bühler
    • 1
  • Bastian Pelka
    • 2
  1. 1.TU Dortmund University -Rehabilitation TechnologyDortmundGermany
  2. 2.Social Research Centre - Central Scientific InstituteTechnische Universität DortmundDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations