Tag: universal design in learning

Critical Learning Task #4: Race, Gender, Identity and Intersectionality in the Maker Environment

Brief

Design a critical and cohesive overview of race, gender, identity, and intersectionality in the maker environment. Introduce others to representational problematics in makerspaces and communities.

Choose your means of presentation so long it is multimodal.

Project: Inclusive Makerspace Twine Game 

This is an interactive text-based story surrounding a group of diverse makers that challenged the space’s gender norms and definition of “making” in the local makerspace the Iron Forge.

There are two main aspects of inclusivity that I focused on, specifically on gender and culture.

The story draws upon themes mentioned in the lecture by Kimberly Martin on   Centering Gender: A feminist analysis of makerspaces and digital humanities centres  especially the notions of the difference between “Making vs Crafting” and how that often is intertwined with the idea of “New Domesticity” when it comes to “softer” forms of making with sewing, knitting, weaving, etc. having it be dismissed as mere “craft”.

Another theme that really resonated with me in that lecture was the idea of “invisible labor” of women when it comes to expectations within makerspaces and the stereotypical gender roles affecting how work is organized into private and public spheres that in turn shape how we categorize tasks into “men vs women’s” work.

The narratives I have included are completely fictional and made with the help of ChatGPT. I wanted to utilize AI in this project as I was curious to see what stories it creates and the underlying biases and stereotypes that arises when it comes to inclusivity and diversity in makerspaces.

Below is an excerpt that I did not use in my story, but was given to me after prompting.

As the weeks passed, the dynamic between the men and women evolved. The men, who had been skeptical, began to respect the women’s leadership, learning new techniques and embracing projects they had never considered. Meanwhile, the women appreciated the technical knowledge the men brought, weaving it into their more holistic, creative projects.

By the end of the month, the makerspace had become a true melting pot of ideas, where gender was no longer a barrier to creation. Men and women worked side by side, designing everything from wind-powered kinetic art installations to smart home devices that responded to voice commands. They learned from one another, breaking down stereotypes and building something even stronger: a community that thrived on diversity and collaboration.

The women had taken charge, not by forcing the men out, but by expanding what was possible in the space—and in doing so, they had created a makerspace that belonged to everyone.

It felt like it was perpetuating the gender binary, even though there was one non-binary character in the story, and it felt like it was lumping “non-men” into one category of “women”. The erasure of non-binary-ness was somewhat surprising to me, and it played into a conundrum that I had when I was creating this project. Namely, the challenge of  wanting to “break gender stereotypes” but needing to lean into and “exaggerate” the stereotypes in order to highlight that gap. I felt like that was the case when I was reading some of the papers, like by talking about under-representation first entailed the re-enforcement of gender stereotypes!

In terms of culture, I think the story reflects the kinds of cultural assumptions nested within the creation tools used in makerspaces, especially the recent tendency for integration of Arduinos, circuit boards, e-textiles to add the “Art” into STEM. Many papers seems to place an emphasis on empowering girls to participate more in science and computational activities, but it feels like there is less of a push to empower boys to lean into their artistic side. Seo and Richard (2021) mentioned that bidirectionally responsive design (BRD) activities were shown to “dissipate gendered preconceptions, and the learners across gender equally saw value of crafting, coding, sewing and design”, which might be a start, but I am curious to investigate more into such design-thinking and the more practical aspects in a broader context.

Ideally, I would have liked to include characters that are based on lived experiences, and to make sure that the representations of the characters are reflective of people with such positionalities that the characters themselves occupy. Potential development would be by asking friends with culturally relevant maker experiences to be part of the storytelling.

Should I have more time, I would have liked to explore more into disability and accessibility aspect of makerspaces in terms of content and subject matter.

In terms of the making of this artifact, I would have liked to find ways to embellish the story with more visual elements, such as photos of the makerspace, the characters, the kinds of projects they are making, etc. to create a more immersive and visual experience.

 

References

Martin, K. (2017, November 28). Centering gender: A feminist analysis of makerspaces and digital humanities centers [Video]. Media Collections Online. https://media.dlib.indiana.edu/media_objects/47429d523

Norris, A. (2014). Make-her-spaces as hybrid places: Designing and resisting self constructions in urban classrooms. Equity & Excellence in Education, 47(1), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.866879

Parekh, P. (2024). Girls’ reluctance and intersectional identities in STEM-rich makerspaces. Education Sciences, 14(6), 628.

Seo, J., & Richard, G. T. (2021). SCAFFOLDing all abilities into makerspaces: A design framework for universal, accessible and intersectionally inclusive making and learning. Information and Learning Sciences, 122(11/12), 795-815.

 

The Maker In Me

Brief

Introduce yourself as a maker and reflect on your own professional philosophy and how you view yourself as a maker, as a critical and innovative thinker, and as a designer. You will align your own personal and professional philosophy for your learners within a maker environment. Your introduction will include:

    • A visual representation of your values, approach to making, and educational/leadership philosophy inspired by the course readings
    • Investigate multimodal means to design a creative and critical introduction
    • Include your goals for this course within your introduction

Some guiding questions:

    • How do you describe yourself as a maker, and your maker philosophy?
    • What is your current educational/leadership philosophy?
    • How does your philosophy fit into the maker movement?
    • What is your experience with Makerspaces?
    • What is your experience with EDIDA Frameworks?
    • Why are you taking this course? What are your expectations and goals?

 

Disability Representation – Toph Beifong from Avatar: The Last Airbender

 

Introduction

The series takes place in a world with elements inspired by various Asian and Indigenous cultures. Some people in this world have the ability to “bend” (i.e. manipulate) one of the four natural elements of earth, fire, water and air. The Avatar is a being that has been reincarnated and the only one that can bend all four elements.

The story follows young Avatar, Aang, and his friends Katara, Sokka and Toph on a quest to prevent the Fire Nation from taking over the world.

The Blind Bandit – Toph Beifong

One of the characters with a visible disability is Toph, who was born blind.
She was brought up in a wealthy royal household with overprotective parents that isolated her from the world to prevent her from getting hurt due to her disability.

Toph learned earth-bending skills from badger moles, blind creatures that live underground, which she related to. She would sneak off to earth-bending tournaments under the moniker “The Blind Bandit”, often defeating opponents that were more able-bodies, athletic and stronger than her.

Disability Representation

Toph is a powerful earth-bender, not despite her disability, rather because of her blindness. Her blindness heightens her perception to sound and touch through vibrations travelling through the ground.

In the beginning, Toph tries hard to prove that she can “carry her own weight” as a projection and overcompensation of her overprotective parents’ excessive coddling. She gradually overcomes her fear of “being a burden to others” through learning to lean on her friends for support and guidance throughout the series. This “counter-frame of interdependence” of solidarity and friendship between the team grows as they continue on their adventures.

In the series, Toph is portrayed through her strengths and weaknesses, such as showing how she navigates environments that are inaccessible to her (i.e. in the air or water), or when she lets her friends down in ways that are related to her disability in battles. Doing so moves away from the “supercrip” model of representation and offers a more “dis/humanized” perspective of how Toph is represented (Goethals et al, 2022) as we see her growth and character development.

Lastly, I want to acknowledge my positionality that this is a personal analysis of a disability representations as someone who is no blind. However, I was able to find discussion threads on Reddit with personal experiences of those who are blind, which provides a “cross-expertise, iterative and dialogic” approach to participatory framing analysis (Goethals et al., 2022).

I was able to learn earth-bending not just as a martial art, but as an extension of my senses. For them, the natural earthbenders, it wasn't just about fighting. It was their way of interacting with the world" 
---- Toph Beifong from Book 5 Episode 12: The Firebending Masters

References

Avatar: The Last Airbender. Directed by Michael Dante DiMartino, Bryan Konietzko, Nickelodeon Animation Studios, 2005-2008

Goethals, T., Mortelmans, D., Van den Bulck, H., Van den Heurck, W., & Van Hove, G. (2022). I am not your metaphor: Frames and counter-frames in th representation of disability. Disability & Society, 37(5), 746–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1836478

Purks, E. (2020, July 6). Writing disability: Black Girl’s Digest. Retrieved January 31, 2023, from https://www.blackgirlsdigest.com/post/writing-disability

 

Tipping Point – Open Education Resource Textbooks Case Study

Creation of Open Education Resource Textbook with Interactive H5P elements for FREN1205 – French Conversation course in the Modern Languages Department at Langara College

Introduction

For the case of technological displacement, we were curious to explore the tendency and shift from physical textbooks to digital Open Education Resources (OERs) in higher education institutions. We were specifically interested in the tensions and opportunities that arose from the transition to online teaching and learning after the pandemic, especially with the normalization of online and hybrid e-learning. 

We are grounding this inquiry of technological displacement in the case study of the creation of OER textbook with interactive H5P elements for a French conversation course at Langara College. In this assignment, we analyze the usability aspect of OERs from the instructor and student perspective, as well as explore the concerns of artificial intelligence, and issues surrounding digital labor in the process of creating OERs in higher education institutions. 

 

Motivation and Background

The FREN1205 – French Conversation course at Langara College is offered in-person with the utilization of a digital OER textbook Le Français Interactif created by the instructor Mirabelle Tinio. To support our work, we had the opportunity to speak with the instructor to learn more about the case study. All case study context provided in this assignment came from this conversation. Below are some of the motivators for the creation of the OER textbook from both the students’ and instructor’s perspectives. 

From the student perspective, the education landscape had been drastically transformed during the emergency transition to online teaching and learning during the beginning of the pandemic in 2020. The effects can be seen gradually resuming in-person teaching and learning once again in 2021, in which student surveys reflected that having additional supportive resources online available helped with their learning process and overall experience taking online courses. In addition, students reflected that physical textbooks were expensive and inaccessible, especially the ones that were ‘single-use’ for an individual course, and were less inclined to make such purchases.

From the instructor’s perspective, there were many factors that contributed to the transition of physical textbooks to a digital OER. The instructor that we interviewed had been teaching the French conversation course for the past at least 12 years. Though the original textbook they were using provided activities and exercises for everyday conversation scenarios, she found that the content was not up-to-date or culturally relevant enough for the students within the classroom. The instructor therefore found herself turning to other available language learning resources to patch together a curriculum plan that included vocabulary, grammar structure, and socio-cultural activities. The process was rather time consuming and she was never really satisfied with the existing resources. 

With both students and instructor identifying that the current resources were not meeting their needs, it became clear that another resource should be introduced to solve the problem of learning resources for this course. Here, we can use the concept of technological utility to demonstrate, in part, why a tipping point occurred. Utility asks the question of if the technology fulfills the users’ needs or if it does what the users need it to do (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 4). Physical textbooks were not meeting the learners’ and instructor’s utility needs, therefore, a new technology needed to be introduced. 

Simultaneously while working partially in the Educational Technology Department, there were many other instructors utilizing Pressbooks and other OER platforms to input resources into Brightspace, a learning management system. The existing integration of the learning management system and potential for further adaptation was an additional motivator for developing her own textbook as an OER for the class. 

The Tipping Point

The opportunity and tipping point presented itself when BCcampus Open Education Foundation Grant for Institutions applications were open for project proposals for specifically utilizing H5P for Pressbooks in 2021. The grant was intended for British Columbia post-secondary institutions wishing to explore, initiate or relaunch open educational practices, resources, support and training on their campuses. Through this grant, the instructor was able to secure additional funding and support for creating the French Conversation OER textbook. 

Benefits

Multi-modality, Interactivity and Flexibility  

Learning languages is an activity that is inherently multimodal and incorporates a combination of multi-sensory and communicative modes (Dressman, 2019). The utilization of online OERs makes it possible to include multimedia and interactive H5P elements such that students can actively engage with the learning content, allows for more diversity in learning methods, as well as increasing the accessibility of course content. 

Though the OER textbook included many different chapters and topics, each unit contained a similar format: the learning objectives, pre-test questionnaire, vocabulary, practice exercises, oral comprehension exercises, a post-test evaluation questionnaire, and self-reflection. This repeated format increases the OER’s usability because it is quickly learnable and memorable (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 33). The OER therefore creates a smoother user experience with less friction or frustration to navigate to the content than the physical textbooks, demonstrating again why this tipping point occurred (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 30).

The goal was to make the learning content accessible to both students and instructors with maximum flexibility and adaptability. Students could preview the units and prepare ahead of time before the classes; or review the units and practice on areas for further improvement, all at their own pace, with self-assessments available. Instructors can supplement the course delivery with additional resources, in-class activities or outing experiences, and utilize the textbook in a non-linear manner tailored to the needs and pace of the students in the classroom. 

Living Texts 

The content in the OER included resources that the instructor created and showcased content that previous students created as well, and can be seen as a co-created ‘living text’ (Philips, 2014) as a pedagogical tool, as well as a co-creation of knowledge within the classroom. 

For example, in the activity “Interview a Francophone”, the instructor uploaded recorded interview videos of previous student’s work, as an exemplar of what the assignment would look like when current students approached the activity themselves, but also as an exercise for current students to practice their listening comprehension and understanding of French conversation in context. The instructor identified that this was to also make the students feel appreciated for their active contribution towards the course, and recognized students as part of the co-construction of literacy knowledge through this kind of interaction (Philips, 2014). 

Creating an OER that operates as a living text supports increased usability because it allows for feedback to be implemented when offered by the learners (the users). A living text can push back against the challenge of “configuring the user”, where the designers imagine the “right way” for a user to engage with their technology instead of being open to how the users actually will engage with the technology (Woolgar, 1990). This OER as a living text can be adapted to user feedback and therefore there is not only one “right way” to use the resource. Instead, the OER can increase usability for a wider variety of users as instructors adapt it based on learner feedback. The instructor noted that keeping an OER like this up-to-date is very important. This is especially true if the OER is described by an instructor to learners as a living text that is responsive to their needs. 

Equity, Diversity and Inclusion 

As mentioned above, the multi-modality, interactivity and flexibility of the living texts contributes towards a classroom climate that reflects equity, diversity, and inclusion of the students that are currently taking the courses. This approach takes into consideration the positionality, lived-experiences, interests, and abilities of students within the classroom and their agency as an active participant in their own learning.

For example, taking the aforementioned activity of interview with a Francophone, with the crowd-sourced collaborative effort of the different interviewees, students are able to see the different kinds of ‘francophone-ness’ outside of the mainstream Eurocentric depiction of French speaking people, especially when it comes to the deep-rooted history of the French language as a tool of colonization. 

By embracing inclusive pedagogical approaches and recognizing students’ diverse contributions, this approach to creating OER textbooks creates a supportive and accessible learning environment, fosters a sense of belonging, and affirms the value of students’ unique contributions to the learning process. 

Challenges 

Current Concerns: Teamwork Makes the Dream Work 

One major challenge that the instructor encountered during the creation of this OER textbook was the lack of support from the institutional level, especially when new technological adaptations require more incentive and supporting resources to push for incorporation and utilization within the college, and furthermore, across institutions. Though the instructor did collaborate with other language instructors from the Modern Languages Department and advisors from the Educational Technology Department, there is a strong suggestion for creating a community of practice across institutions to support this work’s sustainability. The production of a brand new OER like this (as as its ongoing maintenance) involves significantly more time and energy than maintaining the status quo of using physical textbooks. There is a risk that the instructor’s digital labor of producing this kind of resource might be unknown by the institution if it is unseen. 

On a practical and logistical consideration, this ensures the articulation of courses are leveled and aligned across institutions, especially when it concerns the transferability of courses and credits for pathway programs, such as Langara College. On a more idealized and aspirational endeavor, this promotes the collaboration and commitment to sharing knowledge and resources, encouraging accountability, peer reviews and continuous development of teaching and learning practices, enabling the community to build on each other’s work and fostering a culture of openness and collaboration in education. 

Future Concerns: The Rise of Artificial Intelligence and Impact of Digital Labor  

Though the BCcampus grant did provide funding for the instructor to develop the OER textbook, there needs to be more support when it comes to compensation of the unseen invisible work that is added on to the already existing duties of a teaching faculty member. With increased digitization of instruction within higher education, comes an expectation of an accelerated pace of work (Woodcock, 2018, p. 135). There can be an expectation, even implicitly, within institutions that work becomes “easier” as a result of digital resources like this OER textbook. This can result in work pressures and time pressures expanding for instructors who have created digitized aspects of their work. 

Another risk for instructors is the value that is placed on published work to push an academic career forward (Woodcock, 2018, p. 136). The motivation to pursue the creation of open access work can be reduced if the institution the academic is working within has rewards for published work. While an OER like the one described in this case is a different kind of open access work than a journal piece, its creation and upkeep exist within the same labour hours for an instructor. The instructor must be significantly committed to the creation of the OER if there is limited institutional support, as described in this case, and also if there is institutional pressure to spend time doing other, more valued work, such as publishing at a more prestigious journal. 

Finally, there is a tension inherent in the use of artificial intelligence in relation to OERs. As with this case study, we know that producing and maintaining OERs can be time, labor, and resource-intensive. With the rise of large language models like ChatGPT in the past year, there is a potential to employ AI tools like this to support the creation of OERs. This might seem to reduce the human labour needed to create an OER like Le Français Interactif. However, we also know that AI tools like ChatGPT do not appropriately cite sources and can even ‘make up’ information. Uncited sources are problematic because they effectively steal intellectual property from other academics and false information is problematic because it diminishes the reliability and utility of the OER. 

Even more concerning is that AI language models are trained with data that can be biased and produce content that is embedded with this bias (Buolamwini, 2019). With an OER project like this outlined in our case study, it could be counter to the desire to create more culturally-relevant and inclusive resources to produce them in “partnership” with an AI tool. More relevant to this case study, regarding language translation, AI tools like DeepL can be helpful but are not yet at the point where they can translate as effectively as a human who speaks multiple languages. For this reason, instructors might be wary of using AI tools as “co-authors” for OERs to ensure the quality of the instructional or learning resource remains high. 

Conclusion

This case study demonstrates how the creation of an OER textbook for the FREN1205 – French Conversation course at Langara College exemplifies a pivotal shift in educational resources toward digital platforms. This tipping point is a response to the evolving needs of both students and instructors in the post-pandemic era of education. Ideally, an OER textbook offers learners enhanced accessibility, flexibility, and more inclusivity within their educational experience. However, challenges such as institutional support for digital labour and concerns surrounding the rise of artificial intelligence underscore the importance of institutional buy-in and ethical considerations as we integrate OER textbooks into the student experience.

References

Buolamwini, J. (2019, February 7). Artificial Intelligence has a problem with gender and racial bias. Time. https://time.com/5520558/artificial-intelligence-racial-gender-bias/. 

 

Dressman, M. (2019). Multimodality and language learning. In M. Dressman, & R. W. Sadler (Eds.), The handbook of informal language learning (pp. 39-55). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119472384.ch3

 

Issa, T., & Isaias, P. (2015) Usability and human computer interaction (HCI). In Sustainable Design (pp. 19-35). Springer.

 

Phillips, L. G., & Willis, L. (2014). Walking and talking with living texts: Breathing life against static standardisation. English Teaching : Practice and Critique, 13(1), 76.

 

Woodcock, J. (2018). Digital Labour in the University: Understanding the Transformations of Academic Work in the UK. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 16(1) pp. 129-142.

Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1, Suppl.), S58-S99.

Intellectual Production #1 – Users, Uses and Usability

Formulate a conception of usability and what is missing from the conception from an educational perspective —  what is educational usability?

Human Computer Interaction (HCI) is an interdisciplinary field of study concerned with the iterative design, evaluation, and implementation of  interactions between humans and technological interfaces as a system.

The principals of usability are guidelines that help measure the quality of human-computer interactions, taking into consideration of interface functionality, efficiency and effectiveness depending on user’s needs, contexts and level of satisfaction (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 30)

From an educational perspective, I believe that context and user’s needs should be prioritized when it comes to evaluating the educational usability of educational technologies and resources within a learning context. Ideally, this would be implemented as a system, such that the interfaces can assist the user’s with their learning process, and can be adapted to fit the user’s ever-changing needs. This means necessarily having interfaces that are accessible to fit the user’s needs physically, cognitively, culturally, and digitally to provide support that is contextualized.

Based on Woolgar’s paper, identify and discuss 2 examples of “usability gone wrong”.

In Woolgar’s paper (1990), he seemed to be concerned about usability testing within the “right context” of both the user and the environment.

Having chosen employees within the company as test subjects (p. 81) , it is unclear whether or not their behaviors will reflect that of what is expected by their target users. Even with the provided manuals, it is uncertain that the instructions are “sufficiently clear” to target users, such that the errors made in the usability tests could be misattributed to other factors (p.82). Lastly, due to the simulated environment, the test subjects even ironicized their attempts of creating an “objective test” , making it challenging to discern whether the test subjects behave in a way “natural” to target users at all (p. 86).

Lacking concrete definition of the machine and user personas, and simulation of “objective tests of natural user behavior” overall undermines the robustness and reliability of the usability test.

Discuss the differences seen in the two excerpts of “usability”

…the usability evaluation stage is an effective method by which a software development team can establish the positive and negative aspects of its prototype releases, and make the required changes before the system is delivered to the target users"  (Issa & Isaias, 2015, p. 29).
“…the design and production of a new entity… amounts to a process of configuring its user, where 'configuring' includes defining the identity of putative users, and setting constraints upon their likely future actions” (Woolgar, 1990).

Based on the two excerpts, it seems like both of them are converging on the idea of iterative and interactive systems to adjust and create better experiences for users when they utilize the interface.

The main difference seems to be that Issa and Isaias’s approach is more from “after-the-fact” feedback, such that improvement is based on the reactions and responses of users. On the other hand, Woolgar seems to make “before-the-fact” assumptions of the users to see whether the hypotheses are confirmed or not — hence “configuring” its users.

While both approaches create recursive feedback loops to push development of the interface and are initially “human-driven” in design, it makes me wonder —  how much of our interactions with technology are directed by human agency, and how much of our interactions are shaped more by the affordances of our technology?

References

Issa, T., & Isaias, P. (2015). Usability and human computer interaction (HCI) In Sustainable Design (pp. 19-35). Springer.

Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1, Suppl.), S58-S99.

Final Project- MySupport App (Helena and Sophy)

Our MySupport App is a centralized communication platform for support workers that assist students in special education.

Check out our website here: MySupport Website

Final Project Proposal – “MySupport” Database Web-Platform (Helena and Sophy)

Project Overview: MySupport

Our goal is to offer a digital centralized health management platform for special education students. Oftentimes, special education students have a large support network that can include a multitude of personal support workers (PSW) and individuals. For example, special education students can have school teachers, external tutors, speech therapists, physical therapists, and more depending on their needs.

Through our experiences working the public health system (Helena) and working with youths on the autism spectrum (Sophy), we realized there lacked an accessible and centralized platform for parents and PSWs to communicate and collaborate with each other.

Our platform serves to create a centralized space where all the support workers can input data, information, and clinical notes about the child’s progress for the parents and all the other PSWs to access. 

Challenges MySupport Tackles

    • Parents are overburdened with administrative tasks
      Students with special needs or extra support often need a large and expansive support network. Oftentimes, communication between PSWs is limited and parents need to devote a lot of time and energy to reiterating, organizing, and archiving information about their special needs child. Parents struggle with updating new PSWs and they are usually left with the task of ensuring that new PSW are given the information needed to appropriately support their child. Parents, who require more support to begin with, then are tasked with administrative duties that take time away from their ability to better care for their child and family.
    • Information is not centralized between PSWs
      Currently, information about special education students is not centralized in one place. The challenges this presents is that, they don’t have access to the information and progress that is being made by other PSWs that could better inform their practice and give the student the best support possible. An example being, that a student’s teacher could better help the student in the classroom if they are aware of the progress being made with the tutors or the speech therapist.Oftentimes, there can be a huge turnover rate of certain PSWs members on the team (e.g. tutors, educational assistants, etc.) such that it takes extra time and effort onboarding someone new. Having a centralized communication platform with information of the child available can streamline the process, and hopefully help with building rapport quickly between the child and new team members. An example being that with the profile and additional information available on the platform, the new member can have a better idea of how the child is motivated, their preferred ways of communication, and any additional behavior that PSWs should know such that they can build a connection to support their needs.
    • There is a limited ability to extrapolate data
      The disconnection between all the progress being made by each support worker also means there is no easy way to collectively track the child’s progress and attain real ent and important data. Oftentimes, there is no way for the parents or the PWS to collectively assess the child’s behavior and recognize patterns or changes. In addition, having context specific records of behavior patterns that pop up can also help the team understand what needs to be done to provide the right support.

MySupport Solutions

MySupport seeks to make the lives of parents and families easier by removing the burden of tracking and organizing feedback and progress between PSWs. Parents, especially in blended or divorced families where guardians are not always together to support the child may benefit from centralized communication. Further, with children that require a high level of support, extended family like grandparents might also be involved. MySupport allows all relevant parties caring for the child to stay updated and aware of their development. Effectively, the platform streamlines communication across all stakeholders and removes the possibility that information will be forgotten, lost, or missed.

Demographic and Target Audience 

  • Guardians of Special Education Children
    Parents of special education children could use this platform as a means of centralizing communication and communicating with all PSW.
  • PSWs Supporting Special Education Children
    The personal support workers who are working to support special needs children in all aspects of their life would benefit from a centralized platform that allows for progress management.

How Does it Work?

All personal support workers would be given access to the child’s profile and each PSW worker would have a respective section where they would be able to upload documents, add updates, and keep track of the child’s progress. Over the period in which they are supporting the child, each PSW would also have access to the other PSWs sections to be able to see their updates as well. Parents would be able to control who has access to each section, for example a parent might not feel comfortable with a tutor seeing the physical therapists updates, so the tutor would only have access to the school teachers updates. The control of visibility would be determined by the parents and the respective PSW. However, each PSW would have a dashboard where all the updates from other PSW would be centralized and organized so that they could stay in the loop with the students’ progress through written documentation. 

Further, our platform would include integrated survey and questionnaire methods that allow parents and PSW to keep track of progress being made using assessment methods that could then be extrapolated to find patterns and helpful data. 

Platform Outcomes

The centralized platform would mean that all the information and required documents would be added to the platform by individuals. Each individual would need to have a place to store their respective materials as well as one place where all the updates could be easily displayed, preferably in a chronological order. Further, this dashboard would act as a database that allows parents and PSW to search for information if they need to reference anything. 

Technical Components

We intend on deploying our product ona cloud-based customer relationship management (CRM) platform. The benefit of using a CRM platform in a healthcare management setting, is that it includes several automation and integration features that would make catering our product to several PSWs more inclusive. For example, being able to integrate Google Classroom schedules as well as an Outlook calendar into a centralized calendar system ensures that all important dates are automatically populated. Further, contact management and pipeline management are needed to help track and manage progress and internal development. 

Salesforce would be an ideal platform, as it is expansive, versatile, and scalable depending on the team’s needs, and the cloud-based portal would make the platform accessible. However, a limitation to using this platform is that the service is not free for small business or individual users. Meaning, it is more cost effective for the development of our prototype to look elsewhere and find a product that is more financially accessible in the time being. 

Similar CRM technologies include Hubspot, Zoho, Freshsales, Insightly, etc.  

For the demonstration of our tool, we plan to use Hubspot as it is more user-friendly on smaller scales and has more affordable plans. In the Free CRM Plan, the automation function is limited, and requires upgrade and payment. It can also be easily integrated with other external applications for file storage, spreadsheets, emails, databases, etc. 

Limitations 

Our main limitation is to ensure that the healthcare management system must comply with HIPPA health regulations and privacy concerns. 

Spam prevention powered by Akismet