Sensory impairments, such as visual impairment, deafblindness, deaf or hard of hearing (DHH), muteness, and Sensory Processing Disorder, present significant challenges for students in higher education. These challenges include difficulties in accessing information, participating in discussions, and adapting to academic environments.
Objective
This review aims to explore advancements in assistive technology that support sensory-impaired individuals in higher education and identify existing gaps in accessibility, usability, and educator preparedness, aligning with (UNSDG) (United Nations Sustainable Development Goals) 4’s goal of inclusive lifelong education by 2030.
Methods
We conducted a systematic literature review of 68 studies focussing on technological solutions such as assistive devices, adaptive learning platforms, and communication tools designed to enhance accessibility and inclusion in academic settings.
Results
While various assistive technologies have improved access, disparities in resource availability across institutions persist. Many educators lack adequate training to effectively integrate these technologies, and infrastructure limitations further hinder their use.
Conclusions
The findings underscore the need for further research to address accessibility gaps and improve educator training. By enhancing the adoption of assistive technologies, higher education institutions can create more inclusive learning environments, ensuring equal opportunities for all students, regardless of sensory impairments.
SteinmetzJDBourneRRABriantPS, et al.Causes of blindness and vision impairment in 2020 and trends over 30 years, and prevalence of avoidable blindness in relation to VISION 2020: the Right to Sight: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet Global Health2021; 9(2): e144–e160. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2214109X20304897.
4.
AlvesCCMonteiroGBMRabelloS, et al.Assistive technology applied to education of students with visual impairment. Rev Panam Salud Públic2009; 26(2): 148–152. DOI: 10.1590/s1020-49892009000800007.
ChisolmTHJohnsonCEDanhauerJL, et al.A systematic review of health-related quality of life and hearing aids: final report of the American academy of audiology task force on the health-related quality of life benefits of amplification in adults. J Am Acad Audiol2007; 18(2): 151–183. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18.2.7.
MurisPOllendickTH. Selective mutism and its relations to social anxiety disorder and autism spectrum disorder. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev2021; 24(2): 294–325. DOI: 10.1007/s10567-020-00342-0.
10.
KearneyCARedeM. The heterogeneity of selective mutism: a primer for a more refined approach. Front Psychol2021; 12: 700745.
11.
KoskelaMStåhlbergTYunusWMAWM, et al.Long-term outcomes of selective mutism: a systematic literature review. BMC Psychiatr2023; 23(1): 779. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-023-05279-6.
12.
KranowitzCS. The Out-of-Sync Child: recognizing and coping with sensory processing disorder. 2006.
13.
MillerLJSchoenSAMulliganS, et al.Identification of sensory processing and integration symptom clusters: a preliminary study. Occup Ther Int2017; 2017: 2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/2876080.
14.
AyresAJRobbinsJ. Sensory integration and the child: understanding hidden sensory challenges. Torrance, CA: Western Psychological Services, 2005.
15.
AmaniampongPNyavorM. Challenges of visually impaired students in the use of virtual learning platforms at Wesley College of Education in Ghana. Int J Res Studies in Educ2021; 10(6): 21–31. DOI: 10.5861/ijrse.2021.1.
16.
KhasawnehYJAKhasawnehMAS. Availability of voice-recognition devices to support visually impaired students in Saudi Arabian universities. J Wirel Mob Netw Ubiquitous Comput Dependable Appl2023; 14(3): 186–193. DOI: 10.58346/JOWUA.2023.I3.014.
17.
GillDGuptaR. Empowering visually impaired students through E-learning at higher education. Problems and Solutions2017; 22: 27–35. DOI: 10.9790/0837-2208072735.
18.
GothwalVKKodavatiKSubramanianA. Life in lockdown: impact of COVID-19 lockdown measures on the lives of visually impaired school-age children and their families in India. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt2022; 42(2): 301–310. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12928.
AmponsahSBekeleTA. Exploring strategies for including visually impaired students in online learning. Educ Inf Technol2022; 28: 1–23. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-022-11145-x.
21.
SwobodzinskiMParkerATWrightJD, et al.Seamless wayfinding by a deafblind adult on an urban college campus: a case study on wayfinding performance, information preferences, and technology requirements. Front Educ2021; 6: 723098. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2021.723098.
22.
KarampidisKTrigoniAPapadourakisGM, et al.Difficulties and disparities to distance learning during covid-19 period for deaf students –A proposed method to eradicate inequalities. Lect Notes Comput Sci2021; 1: 3–7. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-80421-3_1.
AljedaaniWKrasniqiRAljedaaniS, et al.If online learning works for you, what about deaf students? Emerging challenges of online learning for deaf and hearing-impaired students during COVID-19: a literature review. Univers Access Inf Soc2022; 22: 1–20. DOI: 10.1007/s10209-022-00897-5.
25.
BaroniFLazzariM. Remote teaching for deaf pupils during the Covid-19 emergency. In: Proceedings of the IADIS conference on e-learning 2020, Lisbon, Portugal, July 2020, pp. 978–989.
26.
WolseyJ-L. Perspectives and experiences of DeafBlind college students. Qual Rep2017; 22(8): 2066–2089. DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2739.
27.
SusantoSNandaDS. Teaching and learning English for visually impaired students: an ethnographic case study. Engl Rev: J English Educ2018; 7(1): 83.
28.
OtyolaWRKibanjaGMMugaggaAM. Challenges faced by visually impaired students at Makerere and Kyambogo Universities. Makerere J High Educ2017; 9(1): 75.
29.
VaibhaoGA. School, transition and visual arts higher education experiences of students who are deaf and hard of hearing. Educational Administration: Theor Pract2024; 30(4): 9433–9443. DOI: 10.53555/kuey.v30i4.434.
30.
ThoutenhoofdEDAdams LyngbäckLLindahlC. Education that lacks access to deaf experience: odd situations in Sweden. Nord J Stud Educ Policy2024; 1–12. DOI: 10.1080/20020317.2024.2382357, Submitted for publication.
31.
DonkorMAGhanneyRAWiafeDA, et al.Social studies teachers’ ICT proficiency for teaching in schools for the deaf in Ghana. Br J Educ2023; 11: 81–98.
NolanCDoyleJKLewisK, et al.Disabled students’ perception of the sensory aspects of the learning and social environments within one Higher Education Institution. Br J Occup Ther2022; 86(5): 030802262211268–030802262211375. DOI: 10.1177/03080226221126895.
34.
BradshawARLamettiDRMcGettiganC. The role of sensory feedback in developmental stuttering: a review. Neurobiol Lang2021; 2(2): 1–27. DOI: 10.1162/nol_a_00036.
35.
WilliamsJRobertsD. Sensory processing disorder and higher education: a review of the literature. J Postsecondary Educ Dis2020; 33(1): 1–10.
36.
NicoleRJewelE. A systematic review of sensory interventions for college students with SPD. Am J Occup Ther2024; 76(Supplement_1): 7610510189. DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2022.76S1-PO189.
37.
KotlerALTamC. Effectiveness of using discrete utterance speech recognition software. AAC (Augmentative Altern Commun)2002; 18(3): 137–146. DOI: 10.1080/07434610212331281231.
38.
HarumNBNiMSKEmranNA, et al.A development of multi-language interactive device using artificial intelligence technology for visual impairment person. Int J Interact Mob Technol2021; 15(19): 79. DOI: 10.3991/ijim.v15i19.24139.
39.
ChunM. Research on development of VR realistic Sign Language education content using hand tracking and conversational AI. J Adv Navig Technol2024; 28(3): 369–374. DOI: 10.12673/jant.2024.28.3.369.
40.
CamusLFiligheraA. Investigating transformers for automatic short answer grading. Artificial Intelligence in Education2020; 43–48. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_8.
JavedAAhmedN. A novel approach for image classification using deep learning techniques. J Adv Inf Technol2024; 15(2): 123–135. https://www.jait.us/show-242-1565-1.html.
43.
HuxKRankin-EricksonJManasseN, et al.Accuracy of three speech recognition systems: case study of dysarthric speech. AAC (Augmentative Altern Commun)2000; 16(3): 186–196. DOI: 10.1080/07434610012331279044.
44.
British Journal of Occupational Therapy. Disabled students’ perception of sensory aspects of learning. Br J Occup Ther2023; 86(5): 367. DOI: 10.1177/03080226221126895.
LiZYuQLuoH, et al.The effect of virtual reality training on anticipatory postural adjustments in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a preliminary study. Neural Plast2021; 2021: 9975862. DOI: 10.1155/2021/9975862.
47.
Frontiers in Psychiatry. Implications of sensory processing and attentional differences in academic settings. Front Psychiatr2021; 12: 695825. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.695825.
48.
Kumar ChelladuraiPLiZWeberM, et al.SoundHapticVR: head-based spatial haptic feedback for accessible sounds in virtual reality for deaf and hard of hearing users. In The 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS ’24), St. John's NL Canada,2717–30 October 2024, DOI: 10.1145/3663548.3675639.
49.
ChuangT-Y. Kinect-based system for visual-motor coordination and vestibular system enhancement in sensory processing disorder. J Rehabil Sci2017; 15(3): 205–217.
50.
FuWJiC. Application and effect of virtual reality technology in motor skill intervention for individuals with developmental disabilities: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Publ Health2023; 20(5): 4619. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20054619.
51.
ShawAJLubetzkyAV. A short bout of exercise with and without an immersive virtual reality game can reduce stress and anxiety in adolescents: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Front Virtual Real2021; 1: 598506. DOI: 10.3389/frvir.2020.598506.
52.
DimitriouA. VR-based balance rehabilitation for sensory impaired individuals: a randomized controlled trial. J Balance Vestibular Ther2019; 19(1): 87–96.
53.
RossiG. Imaginator: a customizable VR tool for sensory processing disorder treatment. J Occup Ther Virtual Environ2018; 14(2): 97–108.
54.
ZhaoJXuXJiangH, et al.The effectiveness of virtual reality-based technology on anatomy teaching: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Med Educ2020; 20(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-1994-z.
55.
ChengR. Virtual reality-based cognitive and sensory training for attention and sensory defensiveness in sensory processing disorder. J Cognit Rehabil2022; 18(1): 33–42.
56.
JayantCAcuarioCJohnsonW, et al.V-braille: haptic braille perception using a touch-screen and vibration on mobile phones. In: Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. New York, NY: ACM, 2010, pp. 295–296.
57.
RNRRamkamalMChananaP, et al.Elevating visually challenged children towards S&T education through scaling-up humanitarian technologies by networking with higher learning centres, NGOs, and parent-teacher partnerships. IEEE Conference Proceedings, 2016, p. 331. https://jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/public/201702262582296550.
58.
BeingoleaJRZea-VargasMAHuallpaR, et al.Assistive devices: technology development for the visually impaired. Design2021; 5(4): 75. DOI: 10.3390/designs5040075.
59.
NemadeSRichaIMapariR. Artificial vision-raspberry Pi based reader for visually impaired. 1st ed. Journal of Engineering Design and Computational Science (JEDCS), 2022, 1, pp. 1–3.
60.
PanagiPYeratziotisAFotiadisT, et al.“Signifier” video sharing platform and accessible media player for deaf users. In: Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Information Technology for Social Good. New York, NY: ACM, 2024, pp. 151–157.
61.
LuzTRLuiz Utsch de Freitas PintoRPoley Martins FerreiraR, et al.Caeski: an assistive technology for the communication of persons with deafblindness. Disability and rehabilitation. Assist Technol2024; 19(2): 281–291. DOI: 10.1080/17483107.2022.2087768.
62.
DuvernoyBToppSHaywardV. “HaptiComm”, a haptic communicator device for deafblind communication. In: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019, pp. 112–115.
63.
TheilABuchweitzLGayJ, et al.Tactile board: a multimodal augmentative and alternative communication device for individuals with deafblindness. In Jessica C and Markus L (Eds). 19th international conference on mobile and ubiquitous multimedia. New York, NY: ACM, 2020, pp. 223–228.
MadheshA. Full exclusion during COVID-19: Saudi Deaf education is an example. Heliyon2021; 7(3): e06536. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06536.
66.
TomasuoloEGulliTVolterraV, et al.The Italian deaf community at the time of coronavirus. Front Sociol2021; 5: 5.
67.
WeedenE. A model of an accessibility curriculum in higher education. Front Comput Sci2023; 5: 1139350. DOI: 10.3389/fcomp.2023.1139350.
68.
BetlejAGondekJGondekN. Ageing and keeping pace with technology: a grounded theory study on blind adults’ experiences of adapting to new technologies. Int J Environ Res Publ Health2023; 20(3): 1876. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20031876.
