R EPORT O UTLINE
This article explores the challenges and opportunities in preference assessment, emphasizing an "inclusive design" approach that acknowledges the diversity among individuals with disabilities It outlines the research methods employed in the report and presents user preferences as functional requirements, shifting the focus away from medical conditions or diagnostic categories.
Section 5 consolidates research findings on enhancing preference customization and discovery, focusing on improving access for individuals with disabilities, effective practices for preference discovery in online environments, and the role of user and resource metadata in customization Section 6 outlines practical applications of these findings through eight guiding principles tailored to meet the needs of diverse users, along with actionable steps for developing a PGA working prototype Lastly, Section 7 summarizes the report's conclusions, highlighting significant achievements of the project thus far and suggesting future development directions.
The report includes two appendices: Appendix A outlines the PGA architecture, focusing on essential aspects such as security, components, user interface choices, client-server communication management, preferences frameworks, potential delivery methods, and fundamental system requirements Meanwhile, Appendix B explores how metadata can be utilized to align preference sets with interfaces, content, and tools.
Access to information and communication technology (ICT) is essential for engaging in various aspects of life, including commerce, culture, education, and social interactions As digital technology increasingly mediates daily activities—such as point-of-sale transactions, online services, and communication—the need for equitable access becomes critical This urgency is amplified by social dynamics, particularly the rising incidence of age-related disabilities among the aging baby boomer population, which poses a risk of exclusion for many individuals in Western societies.
While not digital natives, a significant portion of the population, known as digital immigrants, increasingly expects access to digital resources and services such as mobile applications, self-service kiosks, government websites, and home technologies in their daily lives This growing demand for digital access is expected to continue as the next wave of individuals, the children of baby boomers born between 1975 and 1995, many of whom are digital natives, begin to face age-related disabilities.
F RAMING THE P ROBLEM : E XISTING A SSESSMENT T OOLS AND S OLUTIONS
An integrated approach to accessibility in ICTs is essential for sustainability and interoperability, ensuring that accessibility features are embedded within mainstream products and applications Notable examples include VoiceOver in Apple devices, accessibility settings in various operating systems, and the inclusion of captions or text descriptions in digital content Additionally, flexibility in user interfaces and content presentation enhances accessibility This is supported by established guidelines, such as the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and compliant web development tools that adhere to the W3C’s Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines.
Despite advancements in integrated accessibility features and ongoing advocacy for inclusive design, many applications and products continue to cater primarily to the mainstream user This reliance on separate assistive technologies and post-production adjustments creates barriers for individuals with disabilities, who often must depend on specialized assistive technology (AT) systems These systems come with high costs, uncertain interoperability with existing ICT hardware and software, and often provide incomplete and unreliable access to mainstream features.
The knowledge surrounding the access needs of individuals with disabilities has largely been shaped by the assistive technology development process, driven by professionals and engineers aiming to improve accessibility This community has created various instruments, guidelines, and best practices for assessing the needs of individuals with disabilities and prescribing suitable assistive technologies However, most assessments primarily focus on identifying individual capabilities in comparison to a "normal" baseline, neglecting to evaluate how resources and user interfaces can be tailored to meet specific user needs Consequently, this often leads to a mismatch between tools and users, hindering effective support (Fiske et al., 2009).
Many individuals and families feel that the accommodations provided through these instruments are often influenced more by diagnostic classifications rather than their unique circumstances and needs This perspective highlights the importance of tailoring assistive technology solutions to better align with personal situations.
The Measurement System (ATOMS) offers a comprehensive overview of assistive technology outcomes, revealing that the majority of the 50 evaluated tools were found to be insufficient as measures of AT outcomes Furthermore, it highlights that current rehabilitation and health functional assessment instruments fail to adequately incorporate assistive technology devices and services as either primary or moderating variables.
Many individuals with disabilities face barriers to accessing assistive technology (AT) assessment services due to factors like location and cost Even when these services are available and users receive prescriptions for assistive technologies, significant shortcomings persist, as highlighted in the AT research literature.
1 ATs are not updated as regularly as other software, leaving users with outdated and unsupported technology options;
2 the prescribed AT system often matches a diagnostic classification rather than an individual’s actual needs and requirements;
Many users spend their time acquiring assistive technology (AT) systems without fully understanding how to use or configure them independently Instead of engaging with AT specialists to learn these essential skills, they often focus on obtaining systems that may not meet their needs, resulting in a lack of proper utilization and independence.
4 AT systems are usually expensive and out of reach for many low-income individuals;
5 most AT systems are available in only one context such as home or work but users encounter technology in every facet of daily life and are without AT; and
This accommodation system overlooks segments of the population who, while not disabled, could still gain from alternative access options Factors such as a noisy environment, malfunctioning headphones, or temporary disabilities like a sprained wrist highlight the need for more inclusive solutions.
Numerous studies indicate that users often experience dissatisfaction with their assistive technology (AT) systems due to various shortcomings (Mann et al., 1993; Hastings Kraskowsky & Finlayson, 2001; Fisk et al., 2009; Lenker et al., 2013) Additionally, many individuals tend to underutilize or completely abandon these systems (Reimer-Weiss & Wacker, 2000).
Users lacking financial resources or access to assistive technology (AT) systems often have to depend on others or do without essential support (Copley & Ziviani, 2004) This situation highlights the missed opportunities of inclusive design benefits, such as curb cuts, automatic doors, and captions, which could enhance accessibility for everyone (Scherer et al., 2005) To achieve global access, solutions must be mobile, context-independent, and seamlessly integrated into the technology-rich environments that users navigate daily.
A CCESS T HROUGH P ERSONALIZATION
To enhance access to ICT services, it is crucial to enable users to customize their interaction through interfaces and input methods tailored to their unique needs A common strategy has been to develop specific interface subsets for various disabilities, such as replacing images with text for blind users and activating keyboard navigation for those using alternative controllers However, this "medical model" approach overlooks the diverse nature of disabilities and the fact that access challenges can stem from various factors, including context, technology failures, access devices, temporary injuries, and permanent disabilities.
Accessibility that solves for “problem users” is not inclusive and only provides good solutions for individuals who are the stereotypical “problem users.”
Inclusive design emphasizes that any accessibility issues stem from the design itself rather than the user, particularly regarding disabilities When an interface is inaccessible, it highlights a failure to align with user needs and preferences This approach focuses on personalized solutions to enhance access for all users.
"One-size-fits-one" accessibility recognizes the diverse needs of users and the various factors affecting accessibility, tailoring design to individual requirements Initiatives like the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure, Fluid Learning Object Exchange, and Cloud4All empower users with sensory, physical, or cognitive limitations to identify and express their needs These systems automatically adapt information and applications to cater to each user's specific context, ensuring a personalized and inclusive experience.
This project has developed a comprehensive understanding of the field through various research methods, enabling the creation of tools that facilitate learning and experimentation with content transformations and user interface reconfigurations These innovations aim to enhance the usability and comprehension of accessed content or services By leveraging cloud-based solutions, users can significantly improve their accessibility to desired information or services.
D ISCOVERING S OLUTIONS FOR F UNCTIONAL N EEDS
This report emphasizes an inclusive design framework that prioritizes functional access over clinical diagnoses Users are empowered to select from various functional options, such as short text alternatives, text with images, or detailed descriptions, rather than being required to self-identify with a specific condition like blindness This approach acknowledges the diverse visual abilities among individuals classified as "blind" and accommodates different methods of interface interaction, including standard displays, braille displays, magnification, and screen readers Additionally, it benefits users without disabilities who may face temporary or situational constraints, such as small screens, slow internet connections, or forgotten glasses This functional perspective broadens accessibility beyond traditional definitions of disability.
A significant challenge in preference setting is assisting users unfamiliar with personalization options for services and interfaces When users engage with online systems for preference discovery, the design of the user interface must accommodate those who have yet to articulate their accessibility needs This report emphasizes the importance of helping users understand preference setting in an accessible and straightforward manner, particularly for those who may not be comfortable with technology or lack support from tech-savvy individuals Future design deliverables will focus on creating a user-friendly experience that fosters effective preference setting dialogue.
Creating an unobtrusive yet effective mechanism for preference discovery and selection is crucial for enhancing user experience The Discovery Tool outlined in Section 6 offers a promising solution to this challenge By empowering users to explore their preferences and navigate barriers to access, we can significantly boost digital inclusion and enhance the range of essential activities and services facilitated by digital systems.
M OTIVATING E XAMPLES
This report centers on three key concepts:
1 That technology mediated information and services are accessed for diverse goals, in diverse contexts and by diverse users with hugely diverse access needs
2 That we will empower individuals if we provide tools that help them discover and learn about and request individualized resources, services, and interface configurations
3 That the goals of the Preferences for Global Access work benefit all users and not just people with disabilities.
Sam often opts for speech input to enhance her productivity, and when her neck becomes fatigued from gazing at her laptop monitor, she utilizes speech output to listen to lengthy text passages instead of reading directly from the screen.
Kyle favors learning in American Sign Language and, when using English, he prefers content at a Grade 5 reading level Additionally, he requires video and audio materials to include either captions or ASL transcriptions for better comprehension.
Lois requires a touch screen with specific accessibility features to enhance her user experience She needs buttons that are at least 2 cm wide and font sizes of at least 32 pt to interact effectively Additionally, software filters must be implemented to recognize only prolonged taps lasting over 1 second, ignoring other screen touches These adjustments were made by her occupational therapist, and Lois is not aware of the exact specifications of her tablet setup or the applications she uses.
• Oliver is a visual learner and prefers graphical representations of information, and text to be read out to him He uses a dictionary and thesaurus frequently Visually cluttered views are distracting.
The examples provided highlight the diverse and intricate needs and preferences that enable individuals to effectively utilize technology for learning and various activities While some of these preferences are fundamental and enduring, others may change over time.
Preferences for device features can vary widely, with some being clearly articulated, like the request for a dictionary, while others may be less understood or difficult to communicate, such as the need for less sensitivity in touch screens Additionally, certain preferences are specific to particular devices, whereas others apply more generally across different contexts For instance, maintaining a consistent user experience in speech recognition often requires specific information, such as the appropriate voice model.
The goal of this report is to summarize research and to inform evidence-based ways to discover an individual's preferences, for all of the above situations and more.
This report presents findings derived from extensive research phases, including a literature review and the collection of examples related to preference approaches and mechanisms Subject matter experts (SMEs) within the PGA project team leveraged this research to enhance their understanding of access issues and barriers to entry Through collaborative discussions, they identified effective strategies for defining and presenting preference specifications The conclusions drawn from these discussions serve as a foundation for potential design solutions that can be prototyped and tested.
R EVIEW OF U SER P ROFILE S YSTEMS AND A CCESSIBILITY I NITIATIVES
A comprehensive review of user profile systems and accessibility initiatives was conducted to gather insights on how to help individuals discover their preferences This process began with a collaborative brainstorming session aimed at compiling a list of relevant initiatives and platforms that facilitate the collection of user preferences—both for individuals with disabilities and those without Additionally, the review focused on resources that match user preferences with web-based tools and promote accessibility through the establishment of standards and data protocols To ensure a thorough evaluation, a set of criteria was developed, addressing the key questions the project intended to answer.
• Intended purpose How does the initiative support accessibility, if at all?
• Disability-facing Is the initiative meant to explicitly support disabilities, or is it intended for other needs not tied to the disability community?
• Target audience Who is the key audience the initiative is trying to serve?
• Preferences covered What user preferences does the initiative cover, if any? How are preferences named and grouped?
To enhance accessibility and encourage participation, it is essential to identify effective strategies that facilitate entry for individuals with disabilities and the broader user community By analyzing successful initiatives, we can uncover mechanisms that remove barriers and promote inclusivity, ultimately ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to engage fully.
• Flexibility What can we learn from the initiative in terms of how to best accommodate new preferences that arise for users? Can preferences be set to vary by environment?
The initiative enhances our understanding of user preference assessment by exploring effective data collection methods It highlights how existing preference data can be utilized across various platforms and tools, fostering a more integrated approach to user insights This cross-platform leverage of preference data not only improves decision-making but also ensures that initiatives are better aligned with user needs and expectations.
• Flow and sequence What insights can we glean related to how platforms or tools can best order their requests for information from users to assess their preferences?
• Opportunities for leveraging their work Overall, how does the initiative inform our work? What are the broader lessons learned?
After establishing the review criteria, we created and shared a Google Docs spreadsheet titled "Global Preferences Platform Scan" with our subject matter experts (SMEs) The SMEs contributed additional platforms and initiatives, leading to an initial review of 61 options Ultimately, we focused on 27 platforms and initiatives that were most relevant to our project, as they effectively addressed the specified review criteria.
Table 1 presents a comprehensive review of 27 platforms and initiatives categorized into three main groups: preference management, discovery, or collection tools; initiatives that foster the development of accessibility standards; and a third category encompassing learning platforms, discovery tools, and content matching systems While some projects intersect multiple categories, they are organized based on their primary contribution to knowledge building within the PGA framework Key insights from the analysis of these platforms and initiatives are woven throughout the report, highlighting their relevance and impact.
Table 1: List of platforms and initiatives reviewed in depth
Preference management, preference discovery or preference collection
Accessibility standards, specifications, and data protocols
Other (learning platforms, learning discovery tools, and content matching systems)
● Microsoft Windows Ease of Access Center
● Accessible Portable Item Protocol (APIP)
● Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI)
● Flexible Learning for Open Education (FLOE)
R EVIEW OF L ITERATURE
A comprehensive literature review was conducted alongside an analysis of current profile systems to gather existing theories and empirical research related to user preferences The initial strategy involved developing a collaborative spreadsheet titled "Global Preferences Literature" to systematically document relevant findings.
The article serves as a template for subject matter experts and project partners to compile relevant articles, summarizing key insights and takeaways This initial review led to the identification of significant topic areas related to the project, such as supporting entry into preference environments, assessing preferences, organizing and presenting these preferences, and matching them to content, alongside considerations for system architecture and design Further literature was examined within these themes, revealing gaps and additional topics for exploration, including cognitive needs, differentiated learning, and learning resource metadata The insights gathered from this literature review are detailed in the findings section, with a comprehensive reference list provided at the report's conclusion.
C OLLECTION OF E XPERT F EEDBACK
The research involved gathering insights from subject matter experts (SMEs) who played a crucial role in enhancing the project Their contributions included engaging in discussions on innovations and key issues via the project listserv, reviewing and summarizing relevant articles for the literature review, evaluating preference platforms for the platform scan, taking responsibility for writing specific sections of the research report, and offering feedback throughout the report's development.
Mechanisms were also instilled to solicit feedback and input from other field experts, outside the project group
The Preferences for Global Access (PGA) team has actively shared their insights at various conferences, including CSUN and SXSWEdu, to gather user feedback on current preference systems and identify user needs Notably, Megan Simmons from ISKME and Colin Clark from OCAD presented on "Portable Profiles for High Access Learning" at South by Southwest Education Additionally, SME team members Jim Tobias from Inclusive Technologies, Rich Schwerdtfeger from IBM, and Madeleine Rothberg from NCAM showcased the project's advancements at the 28th Annual conference.
International Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference (CSUN), and Jutta
At Big Ideas Fest 2012, Treviranus and Lisa McLaughlin presented their project, actively engaging educators and inviting expert feedback from external stakeholders, including Internet2 To enhance collaboration, they encouraged cross-posting to the project listserv and the Cloud4All and Fluid work lists, fostering input from affiliated communities All members of the listserv have access to a shared Google folder containing collaborative working documents, project management resources, work plans, and timelines.
The project is grounded in the AccessForAll accessibility standard and design philosophy, acknowledging that individuals with disabilities represent a diverse group that defies simple diagnostic classifications It emphasizes that these categories can be misleading and may only partially address a person's unique needs and preferences Consequently, both disability and accessibility are perceived as relative conditions, with digital disability arising from a mismatch between individual requirements and the available resources, services, or environments.
The Preferences for Global Access (PGA) project aims to fulfill the needs of all users who encounter barriers in accessing content, tools, and services due to the limitations of the current system design This includes not only disabled individuals but also those who, while not formally classified as disabled, experience challenges that hinder their access.
P REFERENCES AS F UNCTIONAL D ESCRIPTIONS
This project outlines user preferences regarding the presentation of information, control mechanisms for technology applications, and desired supplementary or alternative content According to the initial AccessForAll specifications and standards established by Neville and Treviranus in 2006, these preferences are categorized into three main classes.
• Display requirements , which include the use of screen readers or enhancers, tiny phone displays, reading highlights, Braille, math readers and navigators, tactile displays, visual alerts and structural presentation.
Control requirements encompass the use of various input devices such as keyboards, trackballs, touch-screens, and switches, as well as software alternatives like onscreen keyboards, switch software, speech recognition, and mouse emulation Additionally, software modifications play a crucial role in enhancing control signals generated by these devices, including features like Sticky Keys, key repeat behavior adjustments, double click timing, and tremor suppression.
To enhance learning experiences, it is essential to incorporate diverse content requirements that utilize alternatives or supplements for each mode of display—auditory, visual, tactile, and textual Additionally, integrating effective learning aids can significantly support cognitive needs, ensuring a more comprehensive understanding and engagement for all learners.
The ISO 24751 initiative focuses on creating a standard for describing user preferences and digital resources, facilitating the matching of individual needs with optimal solutions This standard is implemented in various projects, including Flexible Learning for Open Education (FLOE), Cloud4All, and Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure (GPII) As user diversity grows, ISO 24751 has expanded to include additional preference categories, such as privacy and security—especially important for seniors—language preferences, and workflow-related choices, among others.
P REFERENCES M ATRIX
The PGA team conducted a comprehensive review of literature in education, special education, and information science, while also gathering insights from subject matter experts to develop a preferences matrix This matrix expands upon existing research by incorporating a diverse range of disabilities and needs, including cognitive and contextual considerations, as well as individual learning styles and preferences Table 2 presents a categorized list of these disabilities and needs, along with examples of their functional equivalents, highlighting that preferences can often overlap across multiple categories.
Our research into the preferences matrix highlights that cognitive needs significantly affect a broad range of users, yet current accessibility standards fall short in addressing these needs This inadequacy stems from the complexity and variability of cognitive requirements, the contextual nature of solutions, insufficient developer education on the needs of cognitively impaired users, and the absence of a unified approach to documenting these needs Hudson et al (2004) suggest strategies for enhancing web content accessibility for individuals with cognitive disabilities, such as employing inverted pyramid writing, summarizing information, utilizing expanding bullets, and providing options for both concise and detailed content Additionally, studies by Lewis et al (2012) indicate that MathML positively influences students' perceptions of their math abilities and leads to better math outcomes Building on this research and leveraging insights from experts in the cognitive field, we have compiled a comprehensive list of cognitive needs and preferences, detailed in Table 2 below.
Our research highlights the importance of examining how contextual and environmental factors influence user needs and preferences Hurst et al (2008) found significant variations in pointing performance among individuals with cerebral palsy across different settings, suggesting that relying on a single session for personalization may not be effective In response to such findings, the PGA team began compiling a list of context-related preferences, which includes factors like the environment (e.g., library, home, office), the type of device used (e.g., phone, laptop), the structure of the learning activity (individual or group), and the presence of a practitioner, teacher, or caretaker.
Table 2: Examples of user needs mapped to preferences
Examples of Constraints and Needs
To enhance accessibility, it is essential to implement larger, more readable fonts and optimize white space through careful character kerning and line length adjustments Features like an enlarged cursor, highlighted text, and improved contrast, including color reversal, significantly improve visibility Utilizing headings, text boxes, and borders, along with eliminating extraneous content such as ads, can further streamline the reading experience For hearing accessibility, incorporating visual alerts, captions, and frequency modulation is crucial Additionally, reducing background noise through audio engineering and providing sign language interpretation can greatly enhance comprehension and engagement.
Fine motor skills, dexterity and strength
Track ball, keyboard and mouse input modification utilities (e.g., StickyKeys), head tracking, eye gaze tracking, onscreen keyboard, alternative input systems including scanning, coded input, 2D and 3D gesture recognition, speech recognition
Chronic fatigue Print enlargement, increased font size, save, pause and resume task
Attention/concentration (also covers inhibition control)
To enhance user experience, it is essential to disable background audio, ads, and blinking text while providing user control over highlighting and reading math and text Features like recoverable history, reminders, breadcrumbs, and timers can aid in task management Implementing memory voice-to-text note-taking, video concepts, and calendar alerts further supports organization Additionally, maintaining activity and achievement logs, alongside helpful wizards and reminders, fosters repeated exposure to tasks for improved retention.
Linguistic comprehension Simplified text and structure; consistent use of terms, glossary/dictionary/thesaurus; translation into another language Math comprehension Speak text and symbols, explain mathematical concept
Reading comprehension Speak text, simple sentence structure, show graphic image or video/animation, a view bar for isolating text while reading, foreground and background color manipulation, font size increase
Enhancing visual comprehension can be achieved through supplementary images, customizable color schemes, and alternative text and audio options Effective problem-solving is supported by features such as goal tracking, breadcrumb navigation, teamwork collaboration, and access to a ‘lifeline’ for assistance from teachers or experts Additionally, self-monitoring tools like goal tracking, calendars, and activity logs help users track their progress and completion.
Emotional regulation practitioners play a crucial role in enhancing social interactions by providing alerts that redirect users to different issues or content, fostering positive feedback Effective planning tools such as goal tracking, calendars, breadcrumb navigation, wizards, and step tracking (e.g., "you are on step 5 of 7") are essential for guiding users through their progress and maintaining motivation.
Device or application used Access to settings on the chosen device or the application, and ways to supplement them Environment (location, setting, lighting, etc.)
Video and audio subtitles for noisy or silent environments, high contrast color schemes and brightness for low light; increased legibility
(including font size) when in motion (bumpy ride) Presence of caretaker, peer, or expert
Settings related to user customization vs caretaker customization, vs system customization
Mood/emotional state Mood log, mood mirror
Examples of Constraints and Needs
Learning scaffolds include essential tools such as annotation features, thesauruses, dictionaries, and social learning platforms that facilitate shared notes, comments, and collaborative projects The learning context offers various content types and formats, ensuring flexibility and access to supplementary materials Users can prioritize their to-do lists by rescheduling tasks based on urgency, accommodating both social and solitary learning preferences Additionally, the system connects learners to past evaluations or requests for support, providing tailored content based on previous confusion regarding specific topics.
Effective learning involves mechanisms that allow users to pause, stop, start, and record their progress, alongside repetition strategies that enhance retention Customizable settings enable learners to manage their time effectively, tailoring their experience to fit their preferences and schedules Additionally, incorporating deadlines and timers can help maintain focus and motivation throughout the learning process.
Motivation Gamification and rewards (e.g., badges and other recognitions of achievement); Competition and teamwork
This article emphasizes the importance of a multifaceted approach to preference discovery that accommodates diverse user needs For individuals with math comprehension challenges, tools like text highlighting and speech synthesizers enhance their learning experience Users can personalize their engagement by adjusting navigation speed, setting bookmarks, and accessing content summaries Similarly, blind users benefit from verbal cues indicating the start and end of expressions, while learners with attention deficits may find this additional information overwhelming Overall, the findings highlight the necessity for an ontology that addresses both traditional and functional user needs, acknowledging that evolving contexts continuously shape new preferences, warranting ongoing research to ensure their integration.
5 Key Findings: The Preferences Environment
This section summarizes research findings on enhancing preference customization and discovery, focusing on strategies to improve access and eliminate barriers for individuals with disabilities It highlights effective practices for discovering preferences in online environments and explains the role of user and resource metadata in facilitating customization.
U SER C USTOMIZATION
Do users bother to customize their ICT tools?
To effectively design needs and preference collection tools, it is crucial to comprehend how users engage with customization and the factors influencing their decisions While some studies indicate that experienced users tend to customize more frequently (Page et al., 1997; Sundar & Marathe, 2010), other research highlights a concerning trend of low end-user customization across various applications (Iyengar et al., 2000; Forrester, 2004; Spool, 2011) Understanding these dynamics is key to enhancing user engagement in customization processes.
Research by Spool (2011) indicates that users seldom modify their settings, a trend supported by studies revealing that low customization rates often stem from decision-making biases such as a preference for the status quo and decision avoidance (Samuelson & Zeckhauser, 1988; Ritov & Baron, 1992; Tykocinski et al., 1995; Dhar, 1996) Many users manage with default settings, but those who struggle with customization may feel excluded when preferences are difficult to set Trewin (2000) highlights specific barriers faced by less experienced users, including a lack of confidence in adjusting applications, insufficient knowledge on changing settings, unawareness of available options, challenges in identifying suitable solutions, and a sense of powerlessness over an unconfigured interface.
Factors that support user customization
Research shows that power users favor user-driven customization, while non-power users lean towards system-driven options This highlights a broader discussion about user preferences for adaptive customization, where systems create defaults or recommendations, versus adaptable customization that relies on user exploration and decision-making.
McGrenere et al., 2007) Each design approach, including a hybrid approach, has factors that may be advantageous for some users, while deterring other users (Trewin et al., 2002; Gajos,
In 2004, research introduced a method where practitioners can pre-select specific interface settings, encouraging users to adjust them through adaptive, adaptable, or hybrid systems However, it remains uncertain whether simplifying user customization leads to an increase in user-driven personalization.
The following sections contain specific factors that researchers have attributed to higher customization rates
5.1.2.1 Social interaction and peer support
Several authors discuss customization as a social activity, and point to key factors to support customization, specifically related to sharing with and leveraging peers These factors include:
Users can view configuration files and customization choices made by others, which encourages them to engage in their own customizations, as noted by Banovic et al (2012) and Rogers (2003) Additionally, Mackay (1991) discovered that while new users are generally more receptive to customization, they often lack the knowledge needed to make informed decisions.
Access to a supportive individual, such as a practitioner or a member of the user's social circle, is crucial for managing options and preferences (Forrest et al., 2008) This support is particularly important for older users, who often seek personal interaction and may prefer assistance over independently navigating challenges (Simon & Usunier, 2007; Lee et al., 2010).
The field features several established peer support networks, including Blind Planet and various local wheelchair user groups Popular social media platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn, Google Groups, and Twitter host assistive technology user groups, though their activity levels vary Discussions within these groups can be sporadic and lack organization, often leading to challenges in filtering posts and themes effectively.
In the consumer technology landscape, various initiatives aim to balance the dynamics between consumers and technology producers by enhancing consumer awareness and encouraging active participation in technology design One notable example is the A11y Camp initiative, a global movement that engages individuals with disabilities and their communities to collaboratively tackle accessibility challenges.
Disability-specific initiatives, such as the "Blind Geek Zone," offer valuable insights and advice on assistive technology tailored to individual needs While these peer-led efforts help gather user requirements and foster innovative solutions, the information remains fragmented and disorganized, limiting its effectiveness as a decision-support tool Nonetheless, they serve as important resources for understanding user preferences and driving customization in assistive technology.
Research indicates that experienced and high-frequency "power users" tend to customize their devices more than less experienced or low-frequency users (Spool, 2011; Marathe & Sundar, 2011; Banovic et al., 2012; Page et al., 1997) However, awareness remains a significant barrier to customization For instance, interviews with 16 smartphone and tablet users with developmental disabilities revealed that none were aware of accessibility settings, despite expressing interest when these features were described (Trewin, submitted for publication) Furthermore, studies show that power users favor user-driven customization, while non-power users lean towards system-driven personalization (Sundar & Marathe, 2010) Additionally, users' technical self-efficacy plays a crucial role in influencing their rates of customization.
• Confidence in configuring settings, and a sense of control over the unconfigured interface (Trewin, 2000; Forrester, 2004; Weintraub, 2006).
• Trialability, or the users’ confidence in undoing and redoing customization (Rogers, 2003; McGrenere et al., 2007).
• Intrinsic personal innovativeness, in terms of being more likely to try new things as early adopters (Rogers, 2003).
Training opportunities that provide explicit exposure to customization tools enhance user engagement, as demonstrated by Banovic et al (2012), who found that users with direct experience customized their tools more quickly Moreover, non-power users showed the greatest responsiveness to such exposure.
• Response to software change, or the users’ preference to restore previous features by customizing so that the software works as it did before the change (Mackay, 1991).
The Keyboard Optimizer is a prime example of how current platforms enhance users' technical efficacy by featuring a prominent "undo" button This functionality allows users to experiment with various customizations effortlessly, enabling them to easily revert or reapply their preferences.
Factors related to the perceived complexity and overall ease of use have also been cited within the literature as impacting customization rates:
• Offering fewer configuration choices or options, to reduce, for example, the possibility of overwhelming the user (Iyengar & Lepper 2000; Reutskaja & Hogarth, 2009).
• Categorization and bundling of options to support sensemaking and a feeling of control over the unconfigured application (Mogilner et al., 2008).
• Easy access to the customization tool by the user, and ease in finding the settings or options needed (Trewin, 2000; Forrester, 2004).
• Low level of difficulty and anxiety for the user in customizing (Venkatesh et al., 2003)
Bunt et al (2007) discovered that providing users with rationales for customization, particularly those recommended by the system, enhances trust, understandability, and predictability.
Automatically rendered interfaces designed for specific disabilities allow users to interact and customize their experience according to their individual needs and diverse capabilities (Gajos et al., 2007).
Social media platforms like Facebook enhance user experience by integrating customization settings within relevant contexts, such as placing privacy and tagging options near account settings This strategic layout allows users to easily access and modify their preferences as they navigate the site Similarly, Microsoft Windows Ease of Access Center simplifies the customization process by presenting clear and easily activated options on the control panel's starting screen, ensuring that users can make informed decisions about their settings right from the outset.
A third example of an initiative that simplifies the customization process is the Global
The Accessibility Reporting Initiative provides users with a range of features tailored to five disability categories, enabling them to easily understand and select the options that best suit their needs Each feature is accompanied by an explanatory popup for clarity, and all features are displayed simultaneously for user convenience Additionally, the Sophia Learning Styles Personalization Tool aids users in customizing their experience by allowing them to create a personalized learning profile through a series of guided questions.
The wizard enables users to determine their preferred learning styles, including auditory, visual, verbal, interpersonal, or applied approaches By incorporating straightforward questions from the learner's perspective into the user experience, the tool facilitates easy and seamless customization of learning preferences.
5.1.2.4 Alignment to outcome and performance expectations
Factors related to users’ expectations on the benefits of customization to their performance and productivity also surfaced as important within the literature:
G ETTING U SERS IN THE D OOR
Points of tangency in daily living
Research indicates that technology users often lack awareness of available preference options and face limited customization opportunities, even with common applications and devices Daily interactions with technology and people present numerous chances to enhance user understanding of technological capabilities and to encourage the expression of personal preferences.
Receiving a new device often motivates users to invest time in personalization (Kane et al., 2009) In educational contexts, personalization can be enhanced by utilizing data from standardized testing, student transfers, or participation in remedial and enrichment programs One effective tool for this is the Accessible Portable Item Protocol, which supports tailored learning experiences.
The APIP Standard facilitates the development of customized tests to meet the unique accessibility requirements of students by utilizing data from current school information systems Future research may uncover additional opportunities for enhancing accessibility in educational assessments.
• Libraries or bookstores (for example, data stemming from requests for large print books or captioned videos).
• Emergency preparedness (information on how individuals want to be notified, who should be contacted if 911 is dialed, etc.).
• Home technology installations (e.g., an engineer installing a set-top box for a television could help a new user to configure the interface, and then provide a link to a more comprehensive assessment process).
• Data stemming from medical visits, which may reflect changes in functional abilities, temporary or permanent.
To enhance user experience, it's crucial to create preference settings that cater to immediate needs while also providing pathways for deeper evaluations Ensuring a seamless integration with users' daily lives can mitigate the frustration often associated with technological interfaces Many users may harbor negative feelings toward evaluation tools, perceiving them as judgmental or reductive regarding their abilities and identities, which can lead to resistance.
Extensions of mainstream technology
Mainstream technologies often offer options for customizing the user interface through permanent settings or by directing users to external assistive technologies For instance, the Windows Ease of Access wizard allows users to modify operating system features and suggests additional assistive technology options; however, it lacks an operational link between the wizard and these external tools.
Preferences can also be made available through add-on modules for mainstream technologies For example, the IBM WebAdapt2Me project was delivered as plugins for the Internet
The integration of a preference toolbar in Explorer and Firefox browsers allows users to easily adjust settings with a single click, providing immediate feedback on their current web page This contextual placement of preferences empowers users to make informed decisions and quickly modify settings when default values are not suitable for specific pages For instance, users can enable or disable features to enhance their browsing experience on-demand.
The 'Hide background image' feature enhances user experience by allowing individuals to view text without distractions from poorly designed pages Popular applications like social networks and online games, including reaction tests and puzzles, shape user preferences that can be analyzed and adapted An example of this is Lumosity, an online brain training program offering nearly 40 games focused on memory, attention, flexibility, speed, and problem-solving Lumosity creates a tailored training program based on user responses regarding their improvement goals, such as boosting workplace productivity and maintaining focus.
Furthermore, the research community has begun to explore the potential of unobtrusive performance monitoring to identify access barriers, with some success The Dynamic
Keyboard is a utility program that tracks typing patterns to customize keyboard accessibility settings for users with varying needs (Trewin, 2004) Similarly, Hurst et al (2008) examined mouse usage to uncover real-time pointing issues, revealing significant daily fluctuations in pointing ability This suggests that continuous monitoring and adjustments could be advantageous for other input methods as well.
Extensions of clinical practice
In educational settings, assistive technology and accessibility practitioners play a crucial role in evaluating users and helping them secure short-term accommodations while also fostering long-term skills in self-assessment, advocacy, and problem-solving While some professionals may embrace a cloud-based approach to accessibility preferences, others may struggle to integrate externally-developed tools that diverge from their established evaluation protocols and testing methods.
Prior research highlights the significance of technical self-efficacy and ease of use in user customization, emphasizing the need to tailor preference environments to the specific tools and practices of various professionals Different domains, such as audiology, special education, and occupational therapy, utilize distinct tests, tools, and professional norms, necessitating that preference tools be dimensionally flexible to accommodate these variations.
Trewin et al (2002) explored the integration of innovative tools into technology assessment processes, specifically highlighting the Keyboard Optimizer—a tool designed for keyboard accessibility settings that utilizes a 'configuration by demonstration' approach This tool was evaluated during professional assessment sessions, enabling practitioners and users to quickly establish an effective initial configuration based on users' typing demonstrations and subsequent adjustments The findings indicated that users appreciated the automatic selection of specific settings, aligning with previous research that suggests many users, particularly older individuals, benefit from personalized interactions when customizing their settings (Simon & Usunier, 2007; Lee et al.).
In recent years, occupational speech therapists have increasingly utilized tablet devices during therapy sessions, allowing them to collect valuable data that informs recommendations for personalized adaptations This trend highlights the importance of leadership support in effectively managing options and preferences in therapeutic practices.
Research in education indicates that students may not be effectively benefiting from practitioner assessments and accommodation decisions Fuchs and Fuchs (2001) highlighted that teachers often lack sufficient data regarding student needs, leading to decisions that fail to enhance performance Additionally, Higgins et al (2012) discovered that inadequate training in choosing test accommodations results in teachers over-selecting accommodations for their students.
A disparity between practitioner training on assistive technologies and their job requirements has also been noted in the literature (Smith & Kelley, 2007; Judge & Simms 2009)
Training in assistive technology does not always translate to proficiency in mainstream technology's accessibility features Practitioners with assistive technology training may lack confidence in selecting or adjusting mainstream software for users This highlights the necessity to transition from a prescriptive service model to a more adaptive approach It is essential to recognize that practitioners cannot simply "prescribe" mainstream interface features, nor can we expect users to handle all customizations independently A more effective solution involves a flexible, context-sensitive process that promotes continuous exploration of user preferences over time.
I NITIAL E NTRANCE INTO A P REFERENCE E NVIRONMENT —A U NIQUE P ROBLEM
Language determination
The most challenging aspect of starting the discovery process is language selection, particularly when traditional methods, like displaying flags, are ineffective for individuals with visual impairments Additionally, presenting languages orally can be time-consuming and problematic if the person does not recognize that language selection is part of the task, especially when their native language and sensory abilities are unknown Therefore, it is crucial to identify a suitable language for communication before using the evaluation tool, ensuring that the user can understand at least the initial language chosen for interaction.
To effectively identify a language that a user can understand, it is essential to implement methods that do not assume any specific communication modality, such as print, speech, or sign language One approach could involve displaying a selection of flags representing various countries and languages on the initial screen As users hover over the flags with their cursor, they would hear the corresponding speech and see the sign language representation Additionally, the most likely languages for that region could be listed vertically at the top of the page, with the names of the languages spelled out in their native script Following this initial display, the remaining flags could be organized in rows across the page for easier navigation.
Many individuals unfamiliar with computers may not understand the purpose of a cursor, and traditional instructions to use arrow keys may not be effective Visual prompts are only beneficial for those with sight, while users unable to operate a keyboard may struggle with touchscreen interactions due to limited screen size and a lack of knowledge about scrolling.
Even the use of flags can be problematic Some countries have one flag, but many languages
In certain areas, identifying the appropriate sign language can be challenging without prior knowledge of the individual's regional background and the language they comprehend It's important to recognize that while some countries may share a spoken language, they can have distinct sign languages, as seen in the differences between the U.S and England.
Understanding at least one language or communication method is crucial for effective interaction with computers Once a preferred language is established, the system can tailor its responses to the user's specific dialect However, before this can happen, it is essential to identify a physical means for the user to communicate back Without this ability to respond, the system cannot gather any meaningful information from the user.
Physical response mode
After establishing the language, the next step is to identify an effective way for users to respond Initially, it is sufficient to find a viable method rather than the optimal one Once a method is identified, it serves as a foundation for discovering more effective alternatives.
It's important to recognize that not all users can utilize the arrow keys and return key on a keyboard, which necessitates finding alternative input methods for those individuals To facilitate the discovery process, it's essential to establish a way for users to physically interact with the discovery tool, ideally allowing them to signal up, down, select, and go back for improved reliability and efficiency Single switch scanning can serve as a viable input method, whether by using the keyboard as the single switch or by connecting specialized switches such as sip-puff, eyebrow, or headrest-mounted options.
Individuals should have the option to utilize various communication aids, such as alternative keyboards or touchscreens While touchscreens offer a more straightforward cognitive experience, they still necessitate adequate motor control, reach, and endurance When an assistant is present, it can simplify the process of determining how the individual will input signals, making it easier than relying on automatic detection However, it’s important to note that having an assistant is a helpful shortcut rather than a mandatory requirement.
Communication/response reliability
Effective communication is achieved through the use of large print, speech, and sign language The next step involves confirming that clear communication is in place This is done by asking targeted questions to assess the individual's understanding of the arrow keys and the enter key.
Communication modality
After confirming that the user can effectively navigate using the arrow keys and the enter key, it's essential to determine their preferred communication modality, whether it be text, sign language, or speech If the individual requires alternative communication methods, such as a specialized symbol set, a more in-depth evaluation is necessary Additionally, some users may prefer to communicate using multiple formats, such as large print combined with speech.
Preferred settings for communication modality
To enhance the efficiency of evaluations, it is essential to identify an individual's preferred print size and speech rate Understanding the smallest font size they can read reliably, along with their optimal speech rate for comprehension, allows for a more effective assessment process This tailored approach minimizes the need for excessively large print or slow speech, ultimately improving understanding and communication.
Importance of confirmation of any assumptions
When utilizing this discovery tool alongside a teacher or professional, the initial phase may progress more swiftly with their guidance; however, the tool is designed to independently verify all inputs from the practitioner It will utilize the practitioner’s hints as a foundation but will confirm critical aspects such as language, modality, size, scan rate, and speech rate to avoid potential negative impacts from inaccurate assumptions This confirmation process is essential to ensure valid results and to address any misleading user responses Only after establishing and verifying the preferred language, modality, and response mechanisms can a comprehensive evaluation of user preferences begin.
P REFERENCE D ISCOVERY
In reviewing available preference discovery and refinement systems, some promising strategies and approaches surfaced, including:
Decision support strategies enhance user experience by streamlining the decision-making process One effective method is trichotomous branching, utilized in OTFACT to assess assistive technology outcomes This strategy limits the questions posed to users based on their previous answers, allowing for a focused assessment Users respond to a set of three options: “no problem,” “some problem,” and “can't do at all,” which helps to bypass irrelevant questions and zero in on necessary features If a user indicates “some problem,” additional targeted questions follow to refine the options Another approach is successive approximation, where the system facilitates iterative refinements, guiding users toward a satisfactory decision.
• Games Games can be used as a means of engaging the user in preference discovery
Games encourage exploration, experimentation and risk taking while allowing valuable information to be gathered regarding what works and what does not work for the user.
Data-driven tools are essential decision-making instruments that enhance user self-awareness by measuring performance on tasks These tools provide valuable feedback, guiding users in making informed choices based on their preferences.
User interface integration enhances user experience by seamlessly incorporating preference adjustments directly into the interface This is achieved through responsive control panels that present relevant choices based on the current task, allowing for efficient customization of user settings.
Smart prompts can enhance user experience by providing tailored suggestions that maintain focus on the task at hand When applied thoughtfully, these prompts help users make informed decisions and refine their preferences For instance, they can highlight recurring patterns and suggest shortcuts, ultimately streamlining the user's workflow.
M ATCHING P REFERENCE S ETS TO I NTERFACES , C ONTENT , AND T OOLS
Refining preferences
After a match is attempted, users or their support teams can give feedback on how well the match meets their accessibility needs This feedback is valuable for improving both the match and the preference statement Additionally, collective feedback from various users helps enhance the understanding of effective solutions for individual users and determines the optimal resource or user interface configuration that aligns with specific preferences.
The feedback data holds significant potential to fill crucial knowledge gaps about individuals with disabilities, particularly in education Traditional educational research often disregards the learning outcomes of these students as mere noise in the data, making it challenging to achieve statistical power for drawing meaningful conclusions However, the AccessForAll process facilitates the collection and aggregation of extensive individualized data, highlighting effective strategies and practices tailored for individuals with disabilities.
Paradata: Dynamic metadata
Paradata refers to the usage data of learning resources, encompassing both quantitative metrics, such as the frequency of content access, and pedagogic context derived from user interactions Coined by the National Science Digital Library project, paradata can enhance recommendation engines by leveraging user preferences to suggest relevant resources to similar users However, the manual creation of metadata for extensive resource collections is labor-intensive, and many web-based resource providers often fail to offer sufficient basic metadata, including accessibility information.
Emerging initiatives are working to enhance data collection by utilizing paradata patterns For instance, a comprehensive database of paradata can be developed as educators and learners engage with, recommend, and combine resources in innovative ways These usage patterns and peer recommendations will reveal which resources effectively address specific user needs and preferences, similar to how e-commerce and library catalogues suggest related items based on user behavior Furthermore, paradata can be integrated with educational resource properties as suggested by the Learning Resources Metadata Initiative, optimizing accessible education resources.
Web Schemas/Learning Resources at http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LearningResources) to maximize resource fit
A paradata system effectively aggregates extensive ratings and usage patterns, facilitating the emergence of valuable information that aids users in locating resources A notable example of this is the Learning Registry, a collaborative initiative between the Department of Education and the Department of Defense This open-source technical system aims to integrate both paradata and metadata related to the vast array of available learning resources.
Internet supplied to it by many partners, including both private and non-profit providers of learning resources In the context of open educational resources, tools such as the OER
Quality Rubric tool on OER Commons (created in partnership with Achieve) have been developed for sharing refined quantitative and qualitative paradata with the Learning Registry.
Advanced tools evaluate detailed features of learning resources, such as ratings for technological interactivity, to enhance alignment with specific learning outcomes and educational standards Unlike paradata elements like view counts, which indicate popularity, rubric tools offer more precise matching capabilities Expanding these systems to assess accessibility can effectively identify which resource aspects are inaccessible Additionally, these tools enable users and practitioners to express their needs for alternative resources, fostering a more tailored educational experience.
Responsive preference adjustment
The World Wide Web Consortium is now developing a vehicle to deliver user preferences from the browser to a web application called the W3C Indie UI User Context
The Indie UI Context specification, though still in draft form, aims to provide essential information to align a learner's needs and preferences with online content Its key feature is the ability for devices to adjust these preferences based on their operational context, which is particularly vital for mobile devices For instance, functional requirements like subtitles can be automatically configured in response to challenging conditions, such as a poor signal-to-noise ratio caused by loud background noise.
The research findings significantly influence the conceptualization and design of the Preferences for Global Access (PGA) solution Consequently, we can outline the guiding principles for developing a global access tool and define its architectural framework The following sections will elaborate on these elements and the next steps in the process.
G UIDING P RINCIPLES
The research findings outlined in Section 5 above point to a number of guiding principles for addressing the needs of a diverse set of users.
Designing for diversity is crucial in creating a preference discovery environment that meets the varied needs of users This involves tailoring language, user experience, and the complexity of choices to suit individual goals and contexts Whether users make choices independently or with assistance from professionals, the design must accommodate their unique requirements to enhance overall satisfaction and effectiveness.
Avoid making assumptions based on disability classifications, as medical diagnostic categories often lead to inaccurate conclusions about user needs and preferences For instance, knowing a user is "blind" does not clarify whether they prefer Braille or speech Disability is just one aspect that can influence preferences and may not be the primary factor Instead of relying on stereotypes, consider using functional classifications, such as alternatives to visual information, to better understand user requirements.
When discovering user preferences, it's essential to consider a wide range of factors beyond just disabilities Important elements include contextual influences, environmental limitations, individual goals and motivations, the roles users play, and the assistance they have access to By taking these diverse aspects into account, a more comprehensive understanding of user needs can be achieved.
To foster a culture of exploration and experimentation, it's essential to create a supportive environment that alleviates users' fears of system failure This can be achieved by ensuring all actions are reversible, thereby boosting user confidence in their ability to explore freely Users should have the option to revert to previous settings, allowing them to experiment without the fear of permanent consequences Ultimately, encouraging users to play, make mistakes, and try new strategies will enhance their overall experience and engagement.
To enhance decision-making, it is crucial to showcase preferred options through realistic simulations or immediate implementations This approach helps individuals visualize their choices, comprehend the implications, and evaluate whether the selected option aligns with their unique needs.
To enhance decision-making, it is essential to integrate practical support by providing users with relevant data on successful strategies and preferences tailored to their specific needs This information should be conveyed clearly to avoid overwhelming users or influencing their choices prematurely Additionally, incorporating features that facilitate direct communication with peers, experts, and leaders can further enrich the decision-making process.
Users should always be informed about preference decisions made on their behalf, ensuring that all choices are made with their consent While users can opt to forgo notifications for less significant decisions, this choice should remain reversible, allowing them to change their preferences at any time.
To enhance user experience, preference decisions should be seamlessly integrated into the workflow, allowing users to make just-in-time choices without interrupting their processes This approach ensures that users can easily adjust their preferences within the context of their tasks, promoting efficiency and satisfaction.
To enhance user experience, it is essential to allow for continuous refinement of preferences Users should have the flexibility to adjust their settings based on specific contexts or sessions, as well as the option to select more general or global preferences This capability not only empowers users but also ensures that their choices remain relevant and tailored to their needs.
To enhance user experience, preference discovery environments must be designed for extensibility, enabling users to express new and unexpected preferences This can be achieved through advanced search functionalities that connect users' search terms with relevant sets of preferences, facilitating the discovery of previously unconsidered options.
A RCHITECTURE AND THE D ISCOVERY T OOL
Over the past decade, our research and experience in designing preference editing tools have shown that a one-size-fits-all approach does not suffice due to the vast diversity in users' experience levels, technological comfort, abilities, ages, and other influencing factors It is essential to communicate in a language that resonates with learners, providing them a comfortable environment for discovering their needs and experimenting with new settings Consequently, the PGA software architecture must accommodate this diversity, enabling designers and developers to create tailored user interfaces for various user groups.
We envision an ecosystem featuring a variety of preference editing user interfaces and tools, each with unique strengths and approaches These editors are detailed in Appendix A, alongside an initial draft of the system architecture for the Discovery Tool A comprehensive system architecture will be created for the project's second deliverable, which will accompany the Discovery Tool prototype To provide context, it is crucial to summarize the key components of the system architecture that support the Discovery Tool, highlighting its reliance on essential yet undeveloped browser enhancements needed for the tool's final version.
The PGA software architecture supporting the PGA Discovery Tool is based on the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure (GPII) system architecture and will provide the following services:
• A user authentication framework to facilitate preference gathering and IT content adaptation and selection based on user preferences
• A flexible UI Component Library that will facilitate content adaptation
A scaffolding framework enables the development of tools that can be seamlessly integrated into web applications, enhancing user experience by providing essential functions Examples of these tools include breadcrumbs, reminders, and site maps, which collectively assist users in navigating and interacting with the application effectively.
• Full and Quick Preference Editors
• Matchmakers used to match resources, such as web content, to users needs
• An Enactor Framework that allows content delivery to respond to user preferences such as activating subtitles throughout the current web page.
• A flexible UI Option Panel on which to build settings tools such as the Discovery
• ToolA persistent data store for storing user preferences
• A FlowManager to allow an application to access GPII services to facilitate adaptation to meet a user’s needs.
• Native platform accessibility features including matchmakers, assistive technology catalogs, and browser plug-ins
The PGA Discovery Tool is an essential element of the GPII strategy, aimed at helping users identify their needs through various methods, ultimately enhancing their online experience.
N EXT S TEPS : T HE P ROTOTYPE
To tackle the significant design challenge of creating an accessible discovery tool without knowing specific accessibility needs, our next project phase will focus on developing a prototype of a browser-based Discovery Tool This innovative tool is designed as an interactive platform for users to explore and identify their preferences, ultimately enhancing their web experience and facilitating easier access to preferences editing.
The Discovery Tool empowers users to express their preferences seamlessly within the content they are engaging with, eliminating the need for confusing modal changes By integrating directly into the page, it allows users to explore various presets—collections of preferences that automatically adjust the content This interactive experience gently introduces users to transformative options they may not have previously considered, enhancing their overall engagement and satisfaction.
Presets are designed to enhance user experience by adapting to the content type on a page For instance, if a user is viewing video content, the presets will focus on video transformation, while text-heavy pages will feature text alternatives or transformations Additionally, presets can differ based on the device used, such as a desktop website compared to an interactive kiosk The goal is to create discovery tools that are customized with presets reflecting the content enhancements and alternatives available for both the content and the device.
The Discovery Tool's activated presets immediately transform the content users engage with, allowing for quick reversion to the original view or exploration of alternative presets Users can save preferred settings by creating an account, storing them in the cloud This tool integrates with the Preferences Management ecosystem, including the Full Editor and Quick Editor, which prioritize user needs without rigid categorizations Instead, they offer a robust search feature with a flexible ontology encompassing simple, technical, and medical terms Research indicates that current systems are at varying stages of readiness for the effective implementation of the envisioned Discovery Tool.
Deliverable 2 will showcase the prototype for this project, demonstrating achievable transformations within the OER Commons environment as a content delivery system for learning, emphasizing preference match-making It will analyze current transformation possibilities at the browser or operating system level versus those requiring implementation on a content delivery system Further details about the prototype will be elaborated in Deliverable 2, with the first draft scheduled for submission on July 23, 2013.
Many individuals with disabilities still lack access to essential assistive technology, hindering their full societal participation and potential Research indicates that a personalized approach, considering diverse user preferences, is crucial for effectively reaching a wider audience Current accessibility compliance often adopts a one-size-fits-all method, which fails to accommodate the varied needs of users This approach tends to focus narrowly on specific medical definitions of access, neglecting the broad spectrum of disabilities, including less visible conditions like cognitive impairments.
This research highlights the essential requirements for supporting cognitively impaired users, emphasizing the timely need for broader inclusion as personalization and improvements to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are underway Additionally, the shift towards mobile IT delivery underscores the necessity for new accessibility compliance criteria, positioning them as key drivers in mainstream technology.
This research addresses the challenge of effectively capturing the diverse needs of users and enhancing their learning about preference settings It emphasizes that preference discovery should involve tools that reduce user time investment, engage them appropriately, and provide immediate access to modify preferences Additionally, it highlights the importance of decision-making tools that promote self-awareness, enabling users to assess whether their changes enhance their experience and allowing them to revert decisions easily without risking their established preferences This approach contrasts sharply with current systems, which often cater to a narrow user base, making preferences difficult to locate and utilize, ultimately failing to create solutions that suit the broader audience.
This research enhances our understanding of facilitating user engagement through the development of digital presets, which assist users in navigating obstacles during preference discovery Effectively managing the initial challenges of preference setting is crucial for ensuring global accessibility.
This report highlights significant gaps in current assistive technology, particularly for reading digital math, which is primarily limited to proprietary solutions that function on specific browsers and desktop platforms Essential digital math formats like MathML are not natively rendered by browsers, necessitating additional content delivery systems or plug-ins To address these challenges, there is a critical need for investment in open-source browser math verbalization tools and the implementation of MathML rendering across all modern browsers, rather than relying solely on educational solution providers The prototype will require substantial enhancements to accommodate a wider array of assistive technologies that cater to diverse user needs, including cognitive requirements Additionally, there is an urgent need to develop systems that empower users and practitioners to express their demand for specific resource alternatives, as many web-based resource providers lack sufficient basic and accessibility metadata.
The next phase of the PGA project serves as a crucial foundation for further investment aimed at addressing identified gaps and opportunities Building on the AccessForAll personalized approach to digital inclusion, the PGA project enhances consumer self-awareness and autonomy while recognizing diverse user needs and individual uniqueness It also supports assistive technology professionals in providing more comprehensive services, benefiting both users with and without disabilities Overall, the report highlights the PGA project's commitment to an inclusive accessibility framework, where assistive technology assessment, training, and delivery are integrated, and disability is viewed as a relative condition, ensuring resilience and inclusivity in these processes.
Appendix A – System Architecture for Preference Editing and Discovery
Over the past decade of researching and designing preference editing tools, we've found that a one-size-fits-all approach does not cater to the diverse needs of users Factors such as experience levels, technological comfort, abilities, and age significantly influence user interface design for preference discovery It is essential to communicate in a way that resonates with users, providing them with a comfortable environment to explore their needs and experiment with settings The Preferences for Global Access (PGA) software architecture must embrace this diversity, enabling designers and developers to create tailored user interfaces that meet the varying needs of different users.
We envision a diverse ecosystem featuring various preference editing user interfaces and tools, each designed with unique strengths and approaches Many of these editors are currently under development as part of the broader Global Public Inclusive initiative.
Infrastructure (GPII) effort –for example, as part of the Cloud4all, Flexible Learning for Open Education (FLOE), and other projects, including:
The comprehensive editor empowers users to view and modify all their preferences across various devices, applications, and contexts This interface is designed for optimal use on larger screens, catering to focused interactions that occur less frequently.
The quick editor offers users a seamless way to modify their preferences and settings in real-time, tailored to the specific content they are currently editing.
And within this PGA project: