Artificial Intelligence in Education Meets Inclusive Educational Technology—The Technical State-of-the-Art and Possible Directions
Adaptive educational technologies as well as inclusion are two research fields that have a huge impact on current educational questions. Nevertheless, they are seldom seen together, which explains why there are not too many results in the intersection of the fields yet. This contribution discusses possible directions for combining Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) and inclusive educational technologies and shows some emerging practices. The introduction presents a state of the art on the history of adaptive learning technologies and on assistive technology (AT). A section that highlights the impairment/disability dimension of inclusion follows. Furthermore, emerging practices that combine accessibility/inclusion with Artificial Intelligence (AI) are discussed. The next section focuses on cultural dimensions of inclusion and the impact on AI in learning technologies. We then discuss the origins of cultural biases in technology and how to address this issue. Gender and ethnicity are connected to this cultural dimension and therefore are considered in this discussion as well. The conclusion describes the requirements for combining AI and inclusive learning technologies in the future. There is a need for more awareness of possible biases when creating learning systems and training algorithms with suitable data sets.
KeywordsAssistive technology Bias Cultural inclusion Disability Gender
- Baker, R. S., & Inventado, P. S. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics. In Learning analytics (pp. 61–75). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bouraoui, A., & Soufi, M. (2018). Br’Eye: An Android mobile application to teach Arabic and French Braille alphabets to blind children in Tunisia. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 357–364). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. (1982). Language and symbolic power.Google Scholar
- Bruno, B., Chong, N. Y., Kamide, H., Kanoria, S., Lee, J., Lim, Y., et al. (2017). Paving the way for culturally competent robots: A position paper. In 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Lisbon (pp. 553–560).Google Scholar
- Bull, S., & Kay, J. (2010). Open learner models. In Advances in intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 301–322). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- Buolamwini, J. (2017). Gender shades: Intersectional phenotypic and demographic evaluation of face datasets and gender classifiers (MIT master’s thesis).Google Scholar
- CAST. (2018a). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. URL: http://udlguidelines.cast.org/?utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=none&utm_source=cast-about-udl. Accessed February 11, 2019.
- CAST. (2018b). About universal design for learning. URL: http://www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl.html#.W443qugzbb0. Accessed September 04, 2018.
- Cohen, R. F., Yu, R., Meacham, A., & Skaff, J. (2005). PLUMB: displaying graphs to the blind using an active auditory interface. In Proceedings of the 7th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (pp. 182–183). ACM.Google Scholar
- Darvishy, A. (2018). PDF accessibility: Tools and challenges. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 113–116). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Ferreras, A., Poveda, R., Quílez, M., & Poll, N. (2017). Improving the quality of life of persons with intellectual disabilities through ICTs. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 242, 257–264.Google Scholar
- Gay, G., Mirri, S., Roccetti, M., & Salomoni, P. (2009). Adapting learning environments with AccessForAll. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A) (pp. 90–91). ACM.Google Scholar
- Godfrey, A. J. R., Murrell, P., & Sorge, V. (2018). An accessible interaction model for data visualisation in statistics. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 590–597). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- GPII.net. (2018). About the global public inclusive infrastructure (GPII). URL: https://gpii.net/about. Accessed September 04, 2018.
- Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42–57.Google Scholar
- Kushalnagar, R., & Kushalnagar, K. (2018). SubtitleFormatter: Making subtitles easier to read for deaf and hard of hearing viewers on personal devices. In: International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 211–219). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Manouselis, N., Drachsler, H., Vuorikari, R., Hummel, H., & Koper, R. (2011). Recommender systems in technology enhanced learning. In Recommender systems handbook (pp. 387–415). Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
- Miller, D. P., Nourbakhsh, I. R., & Siegwart, R. (2008). Robots for education. In Springer handbook of robotics (pp. 1283–1301). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- Ochoa, X. (2017). Multimodal learning analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Wise, & D. Gašević (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics (1st edn., pp. 129–141).Google Scholar
- Patzer, Y., & Pinkwart, N. (2017). Inclusive E-learning—Towards an integrated system design. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 242, 878–885.Google Scholar
- Patzer, Y., Russler, N., & Pinkwart, N. (2018). Gamification in inclusive eLearning. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 154–158). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Pop, C. A., Simut, R. E., Pintea, S., Saldien, J., Rusu, A. S., Vanderfaeillie, J., et al. (2013). Social robots vs. computer display: Does the way social stories are delivered make a difference for their effectiveness on ASD children? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(3), 381–401. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.3.f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Scheel, N. P., & Branch, R. C. (1993). The role of conversation and culture in the systematic design of instruction. Educational Technology, 33(8), 7–18.Google Scholar
- Schwarz, T., Rajgopal, S., & Stiefelhagen, R. (2018). Accessible EPUB: Making EPUB 3 documents universal accessible. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 85–92). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- Sevens, L., Daems, J., De, A. V., Schuurman, I., Vandeghinste, V., & Van, F. E. (2017). Building an accessible pictograph interface for users with intellectual disabilities. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 242, 870–877.Google Scholar
- Shakespeare, T. (2006). The social model of disability. In The disability studies reader (Vol. 2, pp. 197–204).Google Scholar
- Stone, P., Brooks, R., Brynjolfsson, E., Calo, R., Etzioni, O., Hager, G., et al. (2016). Artificial intelligence and life in 2030: One hundred year study on artificial intelligence. Report of the 2015–2016 study panel. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Doc: http://ai100.stanford.edu/2016-report. Accessed September 06, 2016.
- Volpato, L., Hilzensauer, M., Krammer, K., & Chan, M. (2018). Teaching the national written language to deaf students: A new approach. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs (pp. 163–171). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
- World Wide Web Consortium. (2008). Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/. Accessed February 11, 2019.
- Worsley, M., Barel, D., Davison, L., Large, T., & Mwiti, T. (2018). Multimodal interfaces for inclusive learning. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 389–393). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar