A10.4: EFN 2 (Progress Memo)

• Content Summary

This progress memo serves to document the unit entitled Technology as a Clinical Tool. The section has spanned about four weeks that have included a great amount of content. There were two defining assignments in this section that although they may seem dissimilar they strike in the same vein.  The first assignment included an evaluation of software that is specific to someone with a communication disorder that can either help maintain, teach, or re-teach a communication skill. Evaluating software requires the evaluator to look at several aspects that consider the quality, appropriateness, and the effectiveness of the software. Key questions that I learned when assessing software are: how many viewpoints are taken into consideration if this software is going to be used? This means that if I want to implement software I need to look at the client, parent/guardian, and implementer to gauge how the specific software will serve its supposed purpose. I think that there are several facets to consider but I think by far the most important is; Does this fulfill the needs of the individual? I did learn about my specific software but, I learned more about the process of choosing tools for therapy or assessment, not just tools specific to technology. Secondary to completing the software evaluation we were required to assess the work of our peers. The assignment was to look at other software evaluations and note the strengths and weaknesses of our reviewees. From this experience I was exposed to different writing styles and processes of evaluating. This helped me to learn about my performance. I learned that being concise is a good way to express meaning and maintain the attention of my reader. I also learned that is hard to evaluate peers because they often have a different perspective and I do not want to limit their creativity because of my own thoughts. I think that peer reviewing is a good tool to modify work but I also think that it would be nice to review and talk about it with the person face-to-face. The second major assignment was the adaptive technology assignment. This assignment required the student to discover the definition and purpose of adaptive technology. From what I have learned about adaptive technology, I will describe it as this; an adaptive technology is any technology that aids someone in accomplishing a task; specifically, a task that requires the user to focus on rehabilitation, habilitation, or the maintenance of a skill.  Adaptive technologies are technologies that serve to improve someone’s functional abilities whether in communicational, vocational, or everyday living type of setting. Although an adaptive technology can serve many people, this unit focused on how these technologies can aid populations that SLP’s commonly serve. We had to find information on who, what, why, where, when, and how the technologies were used. This helped to create a general outline of the project. The hardest thing for me about this project was condensing information down to fit the length requirements. Although cutting information is hard, I think it really hopes to focus in on the important parts of the material. Synthesizing information is a hard task to accomplish but I think that it is most useful to really gain an understand of a specific subject area.

 

• Process Summary

I have notice a change in my habits of completing work. I break the work to be done down in a step-by-step process. For example, I have the habit of being implusive and trying to finish things in one go-around. I am now trying to make everything a process that spans a few days. I feel like this helps keep my thoughts together in that I have time to process information and make changes as I go through a process of complying, re-organizing, and creating new information. I found that I am more successful when I take a few days to break something apart and then put it back together. I also do this with the discussion question of the week, I take a day or so to really think about the question and read what others are saying to try and find a new perspective.

 

I also had the opportunity to refine my skills with PowerPoint. I have not used this program since high school but because I have been using much more technology since then, I am using this program more efficiently. I also like PowerPoint because it helps me to organize my thoughts. I am a very visual learner so the information that I have put together will stay with me longer because I have the strong visual connection to the information. I have also become more efficient in using the wiki program setup for the class. I can maneuver more quickly and I know how to accomplish posting and revising the information that I put on the wiki.

 

• Assessment/Reflection

I thought that the process of putting a presentation together was very valuable to me. I have learned a lot from making sure that I have proper permission for images and other content that is included in my work. As a student I think it is vital to know how to pull resources in the appropriate manner because much of my professional career will include the same tasks. I think that as students get farther in school and gain more knowledge about a field they often forget that although we have this knowledge, the people that we serve do not, that is why we have a job. From this observation I think that it is important to make information concise and simple to understand. As professionals that really rely on interpersonal communication, I think that it is imperative to have this skill. I also really like reading the discussion. I enjoy being able to get other perspectives and thoughts from other people in class because it allows me to see the different standpoints that an SLP can take. It is interesting to see the underlying cultural currents and personal values of my classmates. Again, I think this concept relates back to interpersonal communication and that the more exposure we have to different viewpoints we will be able to look at information or ideas in several different ways.

A8.1: Adaptive Technology Project: WiVik on-screen keyboard [Revised]

A9.1: Adaptive Technology Project-Self Evaluation

This self evaluation will be guided by standards taken from The Foundation for Critical Thinking that can be located at http://www.criticalthinking.org.

 I believe that i have met the standards required for this project to check for clarity i went back through to make sure that my statements made sense. I modified wording on a few slides to avoid unnecessary words that may make passages more lengthy and confusing. I also pulled the definition of adaptive technology from another source because not everyone supports Wikipedia and i do no want to discredit my work because someone may or may not have an opinion of Wikipedia. I think I made the relevance clear by illustrating WiVik as an adaptive technology. I thought that it was important to address the subject of adaptive technology by using a definition found in the IDEA Act that is written by the government. I think this connection makes the presentation and purpose stronger. I think that the clarity has improved with the changes that I have made. The images used reinforce meaning because they give a graphic display of the program or tools associated with WiVik. I think information in the presentation in accurate and can be verified by the references. Hyperlinks are provided so that people that read the presentation via the Internet will be able to immediately check the accuracy of information; however, journal articles are not instantly available. I think I could have been more specific in some instances but i because we were under length guidelines, I had to be as specific as possible in a small amount of words. I think the presentation has depth and the factors that make this difficult are being able to separate or combine the project categories when necessary. For example, where and who, relating to the technology, can either be addressed separately or together. I decided to put them together to make it more clear. I think that I addressed logic by coming up with a good order for the slides presented. I think that it is important to have good flow so that it makes sense. I think that the presentation is logical and easy to follow. I think that the central idea is that Wivik is an adaptive technology that can aid users in communication. I think that all the aspects of the central idea have been covered and support the significance of the project. I also do not believe that there is any trivial information found within the presentation. I feel like it is important when doing reports or presentation on a software to not endorse your materials. I think that there are benefits to this software but i have to describe them not sell the product. I do not feel that the presentation in biased nor does it support any population more than another.

A9.4: Research Question on Literacy

Draft Research Question: What are the steps that a person can take to increase/improve their literacy?

A9.3: Better Dog Food Website Evaluation

The following is a website evaluation that evaluates the site www.betterdogfood.com. The tool used to guide this evaluation is, “Evaluating Sources and    Sites on the Web & Internet: a tutorial”. The evaluation guide was created by Jennifer Sharkey, Assistant Professor of Library Science at Purdue University Libraries and can be accessed at http://www.lib.purdue.edu/InternetEval/.

Objectivity:

The purpose of this website, assumed from the content, is to provide products for dogs by selling items (via the Internet) such as dog food. The website endorses the love of dogs vs. the love of cats. The endorsement is accomplished by saying that everybody loves dogs and then claims that those who do not like dogs, like cats. The information and claims located on the website are biased and are based solely on the author/website opinion.

Accuracy:

The company does not cite any sources for information or development purposes. The site authors, Rebecca H. and Carl M, have small pieces of information about their past job experiences but information about the authors does not parallel previous background to the current site. The link for Rebecca is a link that brings up broken images and an faulty website that seems to be connected to the Purina website. Carl M. is mentioned to have background information in public speaking and what seems to be information about some digital networking experience. All information seems to be a biased construct of the organization because of the radical claims and lack of research and resources used in the formation of the site.

Authority:

The author’s names are unrecognizable. Rebecca’s role is said to be the president and chief creative officer of betterdogfood.com while Carl is said the be the chairmen/CEO/founder of the website betterdogfood.com. There is a link on one of the pages that says betterdogfood.com is owned by petchick when the link is followed an Outlook e-mail pages is provided with Rebecca’s email in the send window. Earlier it was unclear that she was in fact the owner of the site. E-mail addresses are included for both but Carl’s address was accessed via the link in his biographical section; however’ Rebecca’s is provided through hyperlink found within the text. The biographical information was lacking in content and did not seem relative to the purpose of the site. For example, in Carl’s biography it said that he was an international speaker and there was a hyperlink provided that came up to be a transcript written by Carl on the Internet World Exhibit dated 2006. The name of the hyperlink was a ‘kazakhstan’ which i thought to be a poor choice because it was about a particular event and not the country. This poor naming is seemingly unrelated to the content of the website and lacks in appropriate categorization. There was a rating of the website found via hyperlink provided within the website to an ‘eopinion’ page that had a rating from a user. The user rated the site as being 1 star out of 5 categorizing the site as

Currency:

The copyright was indicated on the following pages: homepage, investor page, and store front page. The date the site was created, first post, and any revisions were not found on the website. The page content does not necessarily demand updating although it would be in the best interest of the company to do so. If the company were to have specials or sales then the website would need to be updated. Almost all links are not in working order however, this was explained in that the sites ‘E-commerce provider’ went out of business so product links and other graphic interfaces are either not working or partially working. Other links found within the page are not correct;for example, there is a passage that says ‘we are the first food related dot com’ and then it provides a hyperlink that is assumed to serve as an example. This link navigates away from a page and send the user to another company overview page. This company is unrelated in that it is a company that has to do with the stock market.

Coverage:

Almost all topics within the website are superficially addressed and developed. The link that tells about the available stock options within betterdogfood.com seems to be well developed but I do not know much about stocks. The inconsistency in the way the financial information is presented compared to the other content within the site may relay that this site is fraudulent or attempting to scam users. There are links that are used for examples but the links are either incorrect or not working or they are completely unrelated to the topic at hand. I do not see any of this information as being valuable for anyone. There really is no content in the site; the information is inaccurate and unclear and visibly biased.

A8.1: Adaptive Technology Project: WiVik on-screen keyboard

A8:3 Response to Eschet-Alkali and Amichai-Hamburger

Date: October 17, 2008

Source:

Amichai-Hamburger,Y., & Eschet-Alkali, Y. (2004). Experiment in digital literacy. Journal of Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7, 421-429.

 

Purpose:  The main purpose of this text is to inform the reader of skills involved when performing in a digital environment and to analyze what skills are stronger in three different age groups, high school, college, and adults (with college degrees).

 

Question: The key question the authors are addressing is how are different age groups using or not using the five defined skills (photo-visual, reproduction, branching, information and socio-emotional literacy) in understanding and implementing information, in or from digital environments? The second question is how can results from this study impact educators and software designers to make decisions about development of skills or programs in their respective populations.

 

Information: The most important information in this article is the model created by Eschet that defines the five skills suggested for benefiting in a digital environment. These include, photo visual skills, reproduction literacy skills, branching literacy skills, information literacy skills, and socio-emotional literacy skills. To me photo-visual skills are referents; for example, a computer user would know that the X, found in the upper right-hand corner of a computer screen is the exit button. Although these buttons may look differently, one gathers that they may look different but serve the same function of exiting a screen. Reproductive skills are being able to take text from one environment and use that text to make new meanings. An example of this would be taking information from one source and possibly paraphrasing (giving credit to the author(s)) it to add to another body of information. The Branching literacy skill, is a term the authors use to describe ones ability to navigate through a digital environment. I think of branching as being able to work at a computer and operate several ‘windows’ at the same time or being able to take information from one setup and convert it to another desired setup. The authors also mention a fourth skill that is information literacy. This is the user’s ability to evaluate information to pick characteristics such as factual versus non-factual information, biased and non-biased information. The last skill that the author’s describe is socio-emotional literacy. This is a skill that involves digital pragmatics; how to interact in an environment when presented with different types of situations.

 

Inferences/Conclusion: From the information the authors’ present (listed above) results from their study that describe the ways in which populations in different age groups (high school, college, and adults with college degrees) possess and implement each skill. The conclusions from this study are based on the assumption that the younger population have better skills and will succeed more in a digital environment, more so than the older populations. The researchers found that this scenario is not always the case. The adults scored lower in the reproduction and information literacy skills. The college level participants scored the highest in the socio-emotional literacy skill. High school and college level participants average the same level of skill in the photo-visual and branching category. Because of these results the authors’ assumptions, although correct to a certain degree, were refuted by the findings.

 

Concept: The key concept we need to understand in this article is that this information found in this study could be used to aid educators and others that would value this information, in setting up assignments, web pages, and other services to the specifications of their targeted demographic.

 

Assumptions: The main assumptions underlying the authors’ thinking is some of the reasons as to why their results yielded as such.  Within the discussion section the authors do mention reasons as to why results could be this way but I think that they neglect some sociological and cultural factors. When considering generational stratification, the authors consider certain elements like the younger generation having more exposure to digital environments. They do recognize this difference but they fail to recognize that because younger generations have had more exposure, digital skills have been engrained into their culture. Yes, they have had longer exposure but the exposure has been from a much younger age, supposing that they have learned closer to the period of ‘digital language acquisition’. The younger the population the more that they would indirectly learn and the older would have to learn more directly.    

 

Implications: If we take this line of reasoning seriously, the implications are that the web would be designed in a way that would allow people with different capacities to have a place that is more ‘tailor made’. As the authors point out, educators should look at this information and realize that there needs to be improvement in the areas of information and reproduction skills. It my experience, in higher education settings, that educators push students to make sure they are properly deciphering information from the web.

 

Points of View: The main point of view presented in this article is that one of the authors developed the model of the five skills necessary to benefit in a digital environment. Because of this connection to the study I think that there is a certain form of bias on the authors’ parts. Both have an interest in this question and use some their beliefs to further enhance their model. The authors are also advocates for improving digital literacy and overall skill which is apparent in the conclusion section of the research article.

 

A7.3 Software Evaluation (Revised): Boardmaker Software Family V6 6

Evaluator: Abigail Richards

 

Software Title: Boardmaker Software Family V6

 

Publisher: Mayer-Johnson

 

Publisher’s Website: http://www.mayer-johnson.com/default.aspx     

 

Type of Software: Treatment/ Assessment

 

Software Platform/Requirements:

Windows: 2000 or higher with 512 Mb RAM, 400 Mb Free Disk Space.

Macintosh: 10.2.8 or higher.  RAM: 256MB, Free Hard Drive Space: 350MB

Demo Version: only available for Windows

 

• Treatment/Assessment Area •

 

            Boardmaker can be used in personal, educational, or therapy settings. This software is designed to aid non-verbal or limited verbal communicators. However; it could be used to assess and treat the following: People with aphasia, autism, cognitive deficits, voice disorders, traumatic brain injury, as well as speech disorders. This program also includes 44 languages, so those learning English as a second language may also benefit from this tool. Because this program is flexible in nature it could be utilized in different ways to accomplish many aspects of communication to further enhance by habilitating and rehabilitating those with specials needs as well as use for general education.

 

• Objective •

 

            This software is designed to help those with communication difficulties or other disabilities to communicate or to help supplement the users’ communication. This software uses a picture representation index that allows people to expressively communication wants, needs, or ideas. This software can also be used in general education settings.

 

• Documentation and Supplementary Materials •

 

            Technical Documentation is not included with the demo version of this software however, a 244 page document of instructions including written step-by-step instructions and on-screen simulated instructions are available online at the Mayer-Johnson website (listed above). Instructions are comprehensive and as concise as possible to illustrate all capabilities of this software. The user’s guide is setup in chapters and within each chapter there is a topic overview section that lists the topics discussed in that chapter. Instructions include but are not limited to the following: directions on the use of a ‘mouse’ or other type of adaptive pointing device in which the software is navigated, communication board setup, working with multiple boards, using board templates, color changes to backgrounds symbols, text and pictures. An important chapter, the “symbol finder section” can be used to adapt pictures and symbols. Here, the user can search word categories and modify titles of picture symbols according to the users needs as far as cognition, function, preferences, or goals are concerned. This section would be most useful in individualizing the software to best fit the needs of the user. Modifications within the software can allow for effective management and understanding when creating or using a communication board. The user’s guide also includes information about system requirements and additional support for the software. More additional support can be located on the webpage under the tab ‘support’ where there are frequently asked questions and subscribe to an RSS feed to get the most update information. Also, there is a training section located on the website that includes options for online training or training from a company representative. Each of these options can help the user or specialist customize a program that best suites the needs of the user and teacher.

 

            The Objective given by the company is that, “this software covers a broad range of  communication and special needs.” This objective is limiting in that it does not describe ways in which this tool can be utilized and for which populations it is intended. Further, the general term of ‘broad range’ lacks in description of what the software aims to accomplish for the user. However, I do not know if the purchased version would include a more descriptive objective, broadening the terms for the purpose of its usage. If one is familiar with the premise of the software can deduce how the software could be used to aid in therapy and assessment.

 

            As far as learning activities are concerned, this tool could be utilized in several ways. The user could either be a specialist (that provides boards for his or her client(s)), personal use at a home, or at a specialized learning center. If a therapist had Boardmaker they could  incorporate the communication boards (made from this software) into the goals for the client. Goals could include: teaching someone how to use this program either in or outside of the therapy session, or modifying the boards intended purpose to aid in the assessment or therapy of a client. If the user was to implement this software for private use, they could create customized boards to relay ideas, wants, and needs in an individualized context. Boardmaker could be used for solely for communication to as a supplemental tool to aid in communication. The ways in which this program is used is client and context dependent, there are many possibilities.

 

            Learning activities and materials for enrichment are not included in this software. This may be because this software does not have lessons or drills, all the information is created by the user or facilitator but that is not to say someone could not incorporate these things; it would have to be constructed as needed. The software does not include a description of how the program can be used. On the website for Mayer-Johnson there is an activities forum that users or specialist can access in order to obtain ideas of how others are using Boardmaker. Other activities are through personal forums that can be accessed through the internet. Other tip information can be found through the Mayer-Johnson website under the Boardmaker ‘tips’ tab that can help specialist create an number of  activities such as setting up and IEP program.

 

• Age Appropriateness •

 

            The content in this software can be appropriate for many ages and can be individualized  as needed. The program allows for scripts that would be useful for children and adults. Appropriateness is dependant on how the board is created and used. Concepts maybe to high level or low level depending on the strengths and abilities of the client but may be adjusted to fit the needs of the individual. Depending on the client’s abilities, the client maybe able to make a communication board for themselves or they may have to have someone to create their boards for them. For interactive requirements, assistance maybe required for some users, but not all, depending on the client’s abilities. For example, if one had limited dexterity or no use of their hands other    technologies may be incorporated like a rolling device so that the client may maneuver through the program to set up or modify their board(s). An on-screen keyboard  is accessible through the tool bar of the software page. The keyboard includes symbols for punctuation exactly like a regular keyboard. So someone with modified pointing tool could communicate using all levels of communication including word, phrase, sentence, and conversation level.

 

• Program Content •

            Since the objective is very vaguely stated, the instructions do not align with the objective.           Instructions for this program are simply directional in the nature. The program allows for flexibility so as long as the user knows how to manipulate the program window and toolbar then the possibilities are left up to the creativity of the user or assisting individual. The directions for this software are not based on current research but this could be because the directions describe how to use the software not really about the content. There are no learning programs that teach information found within the software. Instruction depends on the learner or teacher. The directions for using the software however; are not suitable for all. Good reading comprehension and direction following skills are needed if one is to use the directions to figure out how the software can work.        This is why assistance may be required for individuals that are cognitively or physically impaired.

 

            The picture symbols found in the software are current and include picture items that could be included in current events such as the Olympics and the presidential election. The program includes actions, emotions, and daily living tasks that are school and work related. This allows the information to be generalized in almost any communicative situation. The amount of symbols provided, and the fact that symbols can be modified or            created, allows the user to have an opportunity to communicate just as others would. This flexibility can add value to the program for its users. More importantly, this software allows the user to communicate about personal values, interests, and goals.

 

            The program is free of stereotypes because all pictures either include both male and female representations in the picture symbols or they have gender neutral people such as stick figures that do not denote gender, race, ethnicity, or age. A sexuality pack is available on the software (for those that want it) to include ideas associated with sexual preferences along with other content. This content is nondiscriminatory. Although the sexuality pack is appropriate for some it may not be for others.

 

• Presentation/ Ease of Use •

 

            Software formatting is not presented in a clear manner. Directions are needed to be able to use the program to its fullest capacity. The instruction manual is 244 pages long and it is not conducive to all populations that can use this software. Depending on the user, navigation through the program may be difficult. The help guide is available on-screen. However, it requires internet access to get to the users guide, which may present a problem for some. If the software was to be purchased, the software guide would be included in paper format, but not all users are going to be able to access or understand this easily. Help options are comprehensive in the fact that there are 244 pages, but this may not be the most time efficient or effective way for any user. Although the guide is broken down in to chapters, good reading skills and comprehension are needed in order to make sense of the presented information. Depending on the users experience with technology, this will determine the ability to navigate the program and the help options. The user is in complete control of the pace of this program because nothing is timed. The user has unlimited time to spend with in the program to make the needed materials. The user can also exit from any screen.

 

            The title sequence is shown while the software is loading/opening and quickly removes as the software page opens. The title sequence is unavoidable. After the title sequence appears there are three categories in which to choose from. The first one is, ‘create a new board’. The second category is, ‘open a saved board’, and the third is, ‘create a template’. The template has preset boards like schedules that include multi-step schedules. The templates also include weekly calendars and direction following boards that are setup to          use if someone was doing a reading task.

 

            Presentation of the picture symbols may be logical to some users again, depending on their abilities, including cognition, and age. Illustrations as far as pictures and symbols are clear. However, concepts and understanding maybe not be as helpful to some people depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Examples found in the instruction manual and the on-screen simulated tutorial may be helpful to some. For a specialist, the instructions are probably appropriate, however; instructions may not be as intuitive to others.

 

            The text found within the software is clear and can be modified by readjusting the size, font, and color which allows the user to specialize their board to make it legible, according to their needs. Texts boxes with borders can be created so that boards are uniform and clear. There is a ‘free form’ tool which allows the user to draw on the board or a tool for the application of geometric shapes. There is limited punctuation and      grammar, but all spelling seems to be correct. The client can type in letters that are similar to that word and the symbol locator may be able to find it for them or point them in the right direction. The category listings are helpful when finding a larger group of symbols. The ability to read is helpful, but not necessary as long as the user can identify actions, objects and ideas to fulfill communicative intent. Screen displays offer adjustable sizes that could be helpful for the user, especially for those with visual  impairments. Flip books could be made to aid in the ease at which symbols are found and used. Boards can be grouped by category and relative contexts.

 

• Effectiveness•

 

            The company that produces this software does not have any statements regarding the effectiveness of this software. Effectiveness of this software depends on how it is used or taught. The software must meet the person’s needs in order for it to facilitate the user’s communicative environment. Boards or books could be created for scripts, such as ordering at a restaurant or completing a transaction at a bank. This too will aid the user in real life contexts and environments. By organizing boards in to different categories, communication efficiency can be increased. The recalling of information is again, dependent on the specific user. Because symbols and text can be used together, there is the likelihood that this will increase recollection.

 

            This software can be used in assessment or therapy, depending on how the software is implemented to achieve certain targets. From a student speech pathologist standpoint, this software could be used in language and articulation areas including stimultability testing/therapy, base rating, language therapy, articulation flash cards, etc. The number of ways in which this software could be used can increase the value of this particular software to a speech-language pathologist. The possibilities of this software are lent to the creativity of the user. The implementation of the software, coupled with the individual, will determine the effectiveness of this software as a learning tool.

 

• Practice/ Assessment/Feedback •

 

            Practice activities are not provided within the software, but practice techniques can be implemented by the specialist(s) that are recommending/using the software. Practices can be modified to fit the topic and audience appropriately. Because this software is dynamic, reinforcement and goals can be created by specialists in a therapy or learning environment. Boardmaker enables the user to fulfill open-ended responses, mainly         because that is the foundational purpose of the software, if implemented and used correctly. Visual schedules, worksheets, flashcards and more can be made with Boardmaker. This flexibility allows for people with and without disabilities to benefit from this software. Collaborative learning experiences can also be implemented     depending on its use. For example, if the user is participating in a group therapy session with others that use similar forms of communication, this environment can aid in establishing feedback and reinforcement, as well as ideas pertaining to how others use similar devices. All of the above are accessible per users or instructors discretion.

 

• User Interface and Media Quality •

 

            Boardmaker relies on graphics to enhance their software. Because of that, most all of the graphics are great in quality and enhance the instruction and use of this program. Without the good quality graphics, Boardmaker would not be useful in fulfilling the needs of its users. Boardmaker does not use animations. There is no audio on this version of Boardmaker, but versions are available that support audio use.

 

• Equity/Fairness/Anti-Bias •

 

            This software is gender neutral because almost every picture symbol has an option to make the symbol involving either male or female. There is also an option for figures to be ‘stick figure’ as to not relay any type of gender. As for cultural bias, Boardmaker is available in 44 languages and has many cultural symbols. For example, the symbol for President had an American flag, but the option for a plain flag that could be filled in to    specify is also available. Boardmaker strives to make the symbols as gender neutral and culturally unbiased as possible. The software does have symbols related to violence, like fighting. But these symbols do not endorse violence; it is just an idea or expression that can be communicated. As mentioned previously, this software has the option of obtaining a sexuality pack that includes politically correct language regarding terms such as       homosexuality. This software is non-discriminatory, but does include the capability to talk about such topics, just as anyone else has the capability to discuss such matters.

 

 

• Cost Information •

 

Boardmaker V6 :  For Windows and Macintosh = $329.00

 

 

 

 

A6.5 Software Evaluation: Boardmaker Software Family V6

Evaluator: Abigail Richards

 

Software Title: Boardmaker Software Family V6

 

Publisher: Mayer-Johnson

 

Publisher’s Website: http://www.mayer-johnson.com/default.aspx     

 

Type of Software: Treatment/ Assessment

 

Software Platform/Requirements:

Windows: 2000 or higher with 512 Mb RAM, 400 Mb Free Disk Space.

Macintosh: 10.2.8 or higher.  RAM: 256MB, Free Hard Drive Space: 350MB

Demo Version: only available for Windows

 

Treatment/Assessment Area:

 

Boardmaker can be used in personal, educational, or therapy settings. This software is designed to aid non-verbal or limited verbal communicators however; it could be used to assess and treat the following: People with aphasia, autism, cognitive deficits, voice disorders, traumatic brain injury, as well as speech disorders. This program also includes 44 languages, so those learning English as a second language may also benefit from this tool. Because this program is flexible in nature it could be utilized in different ways to accomplish many aspects of communication to further enhance by habilitating and rehabilitation those with specials needs as well as use for general education.

 

Objective:

 

This software is designed to help those with communication difficulties or other disabilities to communication or to help supplement the users’ communication by using a picture representation index that allows people to expressively communication wants, needs, or ideas. This software can also be used in general education settings.

 

Documentation and Supplementary Materials:

Technical Documentation is not included with the demo version of this software however, a 244 page document of instructions including written step-by-step instructions and onscreen simulated instructions are available online at the Mayer-Johnson website (listed above). Instructions are comprehensive and as concise as possible to illustrate all capabilities of this software. The user’s guide is setup in chapters and within each chapter there is a topic overview section that lists the topics discussed in that chapter.  Instructions include but are not limited to the following: directions on the use of a ‘mouse’ or other type of adaptive pointing device in which the software is navigated, communication board setup, working with multiple boards, using board templates, color changes to backgrounds symbols, text, pictures, and cells. An important chapter, the “symbol finder section” can be used to adapt pictures and symbols. Here, the user can search word categories and modify titles of picture symbols according to the users needs as far as cognition, function, preferences, or goals are concerned. This section would be most useful in individualizing the software to best fit the needs of the user. This can allow for effective management and understanding of the software to make development of boards more maneuverable. The user’s guide also includes information about system requirements and information on where the user can locate additional support for this product. More additional support can be located on the webpage under the tab ‘support’ where there are frequently asked questions and where one could subscribe to the sites RSS feed. There is a training section located on the website that includes options for on-location training, online training and on demand training for individuals or aids. Each helps the user or specialist customize a program that best suites the needs of the user and teacher.

 

The Objective given by the company is that, “this software covers a broad range of communication and special needs.” This objective is limiting in that it does not describe ways in which this tool can be utilized and for which populations it is intended. Further, the general terms of ‘broad range’ is lacking in description of what the software aims to accomplish for the user. However, I do know if the purchased version would include a more descriptive objective, broadening the terms for the purpose of its usage. I do think that people familiar with the premise of the software can deduce how the software could be used to aid in therapy and assessment.

 

As far as learning activities are concerned, this tool could be utilized in several ways. The user could either be a specialist (that provides boards for his or her client(s)), personal use at a home, or at a specialized learning center. If a therapist had Boardmaker they could incorporate the communication boards (made from this software) into the goals for the client. Goals could include: teaching someone how to use this program either in or outside of the therapy session, or modifying the boards intended purpose to aid in the assessment or therapy of a client.

 

If the client used this for personal use, they could customize boards to relay ideas, wants, and needs to others that are specific in an individualized context. Boardmaker could be a supplemental tool in communication or it could be the focal tool for communication.  The ways in which this program is used is client and context dependent, there are many possibilities.

 

 Learning activities and materials for enrichment are not included in this software. This maybe because this software does not have lessons or drills, all the information is created by the user or facilitator but that is not to say someone could not incorporate these things, but it would have to be constructed as needed. They do not include ideas of how the program is to be used. On the website for Mayer-Johnson there is an activities forum that users or specialist can access in order to obtain ideas such as language activities. Other activities are through personal forums that can be accessed through the internet. Other tip information can be found through the Mayer-Johnson website under the Boardmaker ‘tips’ tab that can help specialist create an number of activities such as setting up and IEP program.

 

Age Appropriateness

The content is this software can be appropriate for many ages and can be personally adjust to fit anyone that may be using it. The program allows for scripts that would be useful for children and adults. Appropriateness is dependant on how the board is created and used. Concepts maybe to high level or low level depending on the strengths and abilities of the client but may be adjusted to fit the needs of the individual. Depending on the client’s abilities, the client maybe able to make a communication board for themselves or they may have to have someone to create their boards for them. For interactive requirements, assistance maybe required for some users, but not all, depending on the client’s abilities. For example, if one had limited dexterity or no use of their hands other technologies may be incorporated like a rolling device so that the client may maneuver through the program to set up or modify their board(s). An onscreen keyboard is accessible through the tool bar of the software page. The keyboard includes symbols for punctuation exactly like a regular keyboard. So someone with modified pointing tool could communicate through all levels of communication including word, phrase, sentence, and conversation level.

 

Program Content

Since the objective is very vaguely stated the instructions do not align with the objective. Instructions for this program are simply directional in the nature. The program allows for flexibility so as long as the user knows how to manipulate the program window and toolbar then the possibilities are left up to the creativity of the user or assisting individual. The directions are not related to current research in that the directions to do apply to the content of the software but how to use the software. There are no learning programs that teach information found within the software. Instruction depends on the learner or teacher. The directions for using the software however; are not suitable for all. Good reading comprehension and direction following skills are needed if one is to use the directions to figure out how the software can work. This is why assistance may be required for individuals that are cognitively or physically impaired.

 

The picture symbols found in the software are current and include picture items that could be included in current events such as the Olympics and the presidential election. The program includes actions, emotions, and daily living tasks that are school and work related. This allows the information to be generalized in almost any communicative situation. The amount of symbols provided, and the fact that symbols can be modified or created, allows the user to have an opportunity to communicate just as others would. This flexibility can add value to the program for its users. More importantly, this software allows the user to communicate about personal values, interests, and goals.

 

The program is free of stereotypes because all pictures either include both male and female representations in the picture symbols or they have gender neutral people such as stick figures that do not denote gender, race, ethnicity, or age. A sexuality pack is available on the software (for those that want it) to include ideas associated with sexual preferences along with other content. This content is nondiscriminatory. Although the sexuality pack is appropriate for some it may not be for others.

 

Presentation/ Ease of Use

Software formatting is not presented in a clear manner. Directions are needed to be able to use the program to its fullest capacity. The instruction manual is 244 pages long and it is not conducive to all populations that can use this software. Depending on the user, navigation through the program may be difficult.  The help guide is available onscreen. However, it requires internet access to get to the users guide, which may present a problem for some. If the software was to be purchased, the software guide would be included in paper format, but not all users are going to be able to access or understand this easily. Help options are comprehensive in the fact that there are 244 pages, but this may not be the most time efficient or effective way for any user. Although the guide is broken down in to chapters, good reading skills and comprehension are needed in order to make sense of the presented information. Depending on the users experience with technology, this will determine the ability to navigate the program and the help options.

 

The user is in complete control of the pace of this program because nothing is timed. The user has unlimited time to spend with in the program to make the needed materials. The user can also exit from any screen.

 

The title sequence is shown while the software is loading/opening and quickly removes as the software page opens. The title sequence is unavoidable. After the title sequence appears there are three categories in which to choose from. The first one is, ‘create a new board’. The second category is, ‘open a saved board’, and the third is, ‘create a template’. The template has preset boards like schedules that include multi-step schedules. The templates also include weekly calendars and direction following boards that are setup to use if someone was doing a reading task.

 

Presentation of the picture symbols may be logical to some users again, depending on their abilities, including cognition, physical aspects, and age. Illustrations as far as pictures and symbols are clear. However, concepts and understanding maybe not be as helpful to some people depending on their strengths and weaknesses. Examples found in the instruction manual may be helpful as well as the onscreen simulated tutorial, which is completely dependent on the user. For a specialist, the instructions are probably appropriate, however; it may not be as intuitive to others.

           

The text found within the software is clear and can be modified by readjustment of size, font, and color which allows the user to specialize their board to make it legible, according to their needs. Shadow boxes can be created so that boards are uniform and clear. There is a free form tool which allows the user to draw on the board or a tool for the application of geometric shapes. There is limited punctuation and grammar, but all spelling seems to be correct. The client can type in letters that are similar to that word and the symbol locator may be able to find it for them or point them in the right direction. The category listings are helpful when finding a larger group of symbols. The ability to read is helpful, but not necessary as long as the user can identify actions, objects and ideas for their communicative intent. Screen displays are adjustable in sizes that could be helpful for the user, especially for those with visual impairments. Flip books could be made to aid in the ease at which symbols are found and used. Boards can be grouped by category and relative contexts.

 

Effectiveness

 

Effectiveness of this software depends on how it is used or taught. The software must meet the person’s needs in order for it to facilitate the user’s communicative environment. Boards or books could be created for scripts, such as ordering at a restaurant or completing a transaction at a bank. This too will aid the user in real life environments and contexts. By organizing boards in to different categories, communication efficiency can be increased. The recalling of information is again, dependent on the specific user. Because symbols and text can be used together, there is the likelihood that this will increase recollection.

 

This software can be used in assessment or therapy, depending on how the software is used when achieving certain targets. From a student speech pathologist standpoint, this software could be used in language and articulation areas including stimultability testing/therapy, base rating, language therapy, articulation flash cards, etc. The number of ways in which this software could be used can increase the value of this particular software to a speech-language pathologist. The way in which the software is used is lent to the creativity of the user. The implementation of the software, coupled with the individual, will determine the effectiveness of this software as a learning tool.

 

Practice/ Assessment/Feedback

 

Practice activities are not provided within the software, but practice techniques can be implemented by the specialist(s) that are recommending the software. Practices can be modified for appropriateness to the topic and audience. Because this software is dynamic, reinforcement and goals can be applied if the tools are used in a therapy or learning environment. Boardmaker enables the user to fulfill open-ended responses, mainly because that is the foundational purpose of the software, if implemented and used correctly. Visual schedules, worksheets, flashcards and more can be made with Boardmaker. This flexibility allows for people with and without disabilities. Collaborative learning experiences can also be implemented depending on its use. For example, if the user is participating in a group therapy session with others that use similar forms of communication, this environment can aid in establishing feedback and reinforcement, as well as ideas pertaining to how others use similar devices. All of the above are accessible per users or instructors discretion.

 

User Interface and Media Quality

 

Boardmaker relies on graphics to enhance their software. Because of that, most all of the graphics are great in quality and enhance the instruction and use of this program. Without the good quality graphics, Boardmaker would not be useful in fulfilling the needs of its users. Boardmaker does not use animations. There is no audio on this version of Boardmaker, but versions are available that support audio use.

 

Equity/Fairness/Anti-Bias

 This software is gender neutral because almost every picture symbol has an option to make the symbol involving either male or female. There is also an option for figures to be ‘stick figure’ as to not relay any type of gender. As for cultural bias, Boardmaker is available in 44 languages and has many cultural symbols. For example, the symbol for President had an American flag, but the option for a plain flag that could be filled in to specify is also available. Boardmaker strives to make the symbols as gender neutral and culturally unbiased as possible. The software does have symbols related to violence, like fighting. But these symbols do not endorse violence; it is just an idea or expression that can be communicated. As mentioned previously, this software has the option of obtaining a sexuality pack that includes politically correct language regarding terms such as homosexuality. This software is non-discriminatory, but does include the capability to talk about such topics, just as anyone else has the capability to discuss such matters.

 

Cost Information

 

Boardmaker V6 :  For Windows and Macintosh = $329.00