This project explored a newly developed computer-based voice input, speech output (VISO) calculator. Three high school students with visual impairments educated at a state school for the blind and visually impaired participated in the study. The time they took to complete assessments and the average number of attempts per problem were recorded when they used the VISO calculator and their typical individualized method of calculation. The results indicated that the time to complete assessments and the average number of attempts per problem decreased as the students continued to use the VISO calculator. Students reported positive perceptions of the calculator, particularly noting the independence it provided as compared to their typical means of calculation. Implications for practice, limitations of the study, and future research directions are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AhlbergA.CsocanE. (1999). How children who are blind experience numbers. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 93, 549–560.
2.
AlgozzineB.O'SheaD. J.CrewsW. B.StoddardK. (1987). Analysis of mathematics competence of learning disabled adolescents. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 97–107.
3.
BarragaN. C.ErinJ. N. (2001). Visual impairments and learning (4th ed.). Austin, TX: ProEd.
4.
BealC. R.ShawE. (2008, March). Working memory and math problem solving by blind middle and high school students: Implications for universal access. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Las Vegas, NV.
5.
BlackorbyJ.ChorostM.GarzaN.GuzmanA. (2003). The academic and middle school performance of students with disabilities. Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS) Report. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
6.
BishopV. (2004). Teaching visually impaired children. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
7.
BurrillG.AllisonJ.BreauxG.KastbergS.LeathamK.SanchezW. (2002). Handheld graphing technology at the secondary level: Research findings and implications for classroom practice. Dallas, TX: Texas Instruments.
8.
CalhoonM. B.EmersonR. W.FloresM.HouchinsD. E. (2007). Computational fluency performance profile of high school students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 292–303.
9.
ChampionR. R. (1976/77). The talking calculator used with blind youth. Education of the Visually Handicapped, 8, 102–106.
10.
De La PazS. (1999). Composing via dictation and speech recognition systems: Compensatory technology for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 173–182.
11.
DevineE. G.GaehdeS. A.CurtisA. C. (2000). Comparative evaluation of three continuous speech recognition software packages in the generation of medical reports. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 7, 462–468.
12.
DickT.KubiakE. (1997). Issues and aids for teaching mathematics to the blind. Mathematics Teacher, 90, 344–349.
13.
EllingtonA. J. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effects of calculators on students' achievement and attitude levels in precollege mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 433–63.
14.
FarnsworthC. R.LuckerJ. L. (2008). The impact of assistive technology on curriculum accommodation of a Braille-reading student. RE:view, 39(4), 171–187.
15.
FerrellK. (2006). Evidence-based practices for students with visual disabilities. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(1), 42–48.
16.
FisherS. P.HartmannC. (2005). Math through the mind's eye. Mathematics Teacher, 99, 246.
17.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2005). Enhancing mathematical problems solving for students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 45–57.
18.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L.SeethalerP. M. (2007). Mathematics screening with progress monitoring at first grade: Implications for responsiveness to intervention. Exceptional Children, 73, 311–330.
19.
GoodrichG.BennettR. R.WileyJ. K. (1977). Calculators for the visually impaired used: An evaluation. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 71, 154–157.
20.
HechtS. A.VagiK. J.TorgesenJ. K. (2007). Fraction skills and proportional reasoning. In BerchD. B.MazzocoM. M. M. (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children? The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 121–132). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
21.
HelwigR.TindalG. (2003). An experimental analysis of accommodations decisions in large-scale mathematics tests. Exceptional Children, 60, 211–225.
22.
HembreeR.DessartD. J. (1986). Effects of hand-held calculators in precollege mathematics education: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17(2), 83–99.
23.
KennedyC. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon.
24.
KirchnerC.SmithB. (2005). Transition to what? Education and employment outcomes for visually impaired youths after high school. Journal of Visual Impairments and Blindness, 99, 499–504.
25.
KoesterH. H. (2004). Usage, performance, and satisfaction outcomes for experienced users of automatic speech recognition. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 41, 739–754.
26.
KotlerA. L.TamC. (2002). Effectiveness of using discrete utterance speech recognition software. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 137–146.
27.
LovelessT. (2004). Computation skills, calculators, and achievement gaps: An analysis of NAEP items. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
28.
MacciniP.GagnonJ. C. (2000). Best practices for teaching mathematics to secondary students with special needs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32(5), 1–22.
29.
MackC. G.KoenigA. J.AshcroftS. C. (1990). Microcomputers and access technology in programs for teachers of visually impaired students. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 84, 526–530.
MazzoccoM. M. M.DevlinK. T. (2008). Parts and ‘holes’: Gaps in rational number sense among children with vs. without mathematical learning disabilities. Developmental Science, 11, 681–691.
32.
MelroseS.GoodrichG. (1984). Evaluation of voice-output calculators for visually handicapped users. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 78, 17–19.
33.
MillerM. M.MenackerS. J.BatshawM. L. (2002). Vision: Our window to the world. In BatshawM. L. (Ed.). Children with disabilities (pp. 165–192). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
34.
NagleK.YunkerC.MalmgrenK. W. (2006). Students with disabilities and accountability reform: Challenges identified at the state and local levels. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 17(1), 28–39.
35.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Trends in International Matematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/timss.
36.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and NCTM standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
37.
National Federation of the Blind. (2009). The Braille literacy crisis in America. Baltimore, MD: Jernigan Institute, National Federation of the Blind.
38.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
39.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
40.
ParmarR. S.CawleyJ. F.FrazitaR. (1996). Word problem-solving by students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62, 415–429.
RiegerJ. M. (2003). The effect of automatic speech recognition systems on speaking workload and task efficiency. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25, 224–35.
43.
RubensteinR. N. (2001). Mental mathematics beyond the middle school: Why? What? How?Mathematics Teacher, 94, 442–444.
44.
SchmidtM. E. (1999). Middle grades teachers' beliefs about calculator use: Pre-project and two years later. Focus on Learning Mathematics, 21(1), 18–34.
45.
SireciS. G.ScarpatiS. E.LiS. (2005). Test accommodations for students with disabilities: An analysis of the interaction hypothesis. Review of Educational Research, 75, 457–490.
46.
SmithA. C.FrancioniJ. M.MatzekS. D. (2000). A Java programming tool for students with visual disabilities. Proceedings of the Fourth International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, New York, NY.
47.
StoegerB.BatusicM.MisenbergerK.HaindlP. (2006, July). Supporting blind students in navigation and manipulation of mathematical expressions: Basic requirements and strategies. In MiesenbergerK.KlausJ.ZaglerW. (Eds.), Computers helping people with special needs. Proceeding of the International Conference on Helping People with Special Needs, (pp. 1235–1242). Linz, Austria: Springer.
ThahaneL. N.MyburghC. P. H.PoggenpoelM. (2005). The life-world of visually-impaired adolescents: An educational guidance perspective. Education, 125, 393.
51.
WoodwardJ.BaxterJ.RobinsonR. (1999). Rules and reasons: Decimal instruction for academically low achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 5–24.
52.
XinY. P.JitendraA. K.Deatline-BuchmanA. (2005). Effects of mathematical word problem-solving instruction on middle school students with learning problems. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 181–192.
53.
YsseldykeJ.ThurlowM.SeyfarthA.BielinskiJ.MoodyM.HaighJ. (1999). Instructional and assessment accommodations in Maryland (Maryland/Kentucky Report 6). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MdKy6.htm.
