Towards Truly Accessible MOOCs for Persons with Cognitive Disabilities: Design and Field Assessment

International audienceMOOCs are playing an increasingly important role in education systems. Unfortunately, MOOCs are not fully accessible. In this paper, we propose design principles to enhance the accessibility of MOOC players, especially for persons with cognitive disabilities. These principles result from a participatory design process gathering 7 persons with disabilities and 13 expert professionals. They are also inspired by various design approaches (Universal Design for Learning, Instructional Design, Environmental Support). We also detail the creation of a MOOC player offering a set of accessibility features that users can alter according to their needs and capabilities. We used it to teach a MOOC on digital accessibility. Finally, we conducted a field study to assess learning and usability outcomes for persons with cognitive and non-cognitive impairments. Results support the effectiveness of our player for increasing accessibility

Effective Factors in Applying Descriptive Evaluation from Primary School Teachers’ Point of View

The present study attempted to investigate the effective factors in applying descriptive evaluation from Ardebil elementary schools second and third grade teachers’ point of view.  The method was descriptive - correctional. The research population included 700 primary schools’ second and third grade teachers (260 teachers from the first district and 240 teachers from the second district). From this number, 300 teachers (150 male and 150 female) were randomly selected by cluster sampling. The data were collected through researcher – made questionnaires. The formal validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by the specialists in the field and the reliability was calculated by K –Alfa (0.91). The data were analyzed by descriptive – inferential statistics methods (factor analysis). The result of the factor analysis indicated that 5 factors were significant from the point of view of teachers. From these 5 factors, psychological factors justified the highest percentage of the whole variance (21%). The other 4 factors had the following percentage of justification of variance, respectively: managerial factor (19%), educational (17%), procedural (7%) , and individual factors(4%)