ERIC EJ1114676: Straight from the Source: Perceptions of Students with Visual Impairments about Graphic Use

2014·0.06 MB·English

by  ERIC

CEU Article
Straight from the Source:
Perceptions of Students
with Visual Impairments
about Graphic Use
Kim T. Zebehazy and Adam P. Wilton
Structuredabstract:Introduction:Thisstudyanalyzedtheresponsesofasurvey
of students with visual impairments in Canada and the United States about their
use of tactile and print graphics. Demographic, Likert scale, and open-ended
questions focused on perceptions of quality, preferences, instruction, and strat-
egies. Methods: Percentages of agreement for tactile and print graphic users are
reported.Comparisonsweremadebetweenthetwogroups.Results:Studentsfelt
positive about the quality of the graphics, but density and complexity were
identified as challenges. Students varied as to whether they felt graphics sup-
ported their understanding of concepts. Both groups indicated that written
descriptions were helpful. Students in this survey were positive about knowing
how to use strategies that help them access graphics. Discussion: Tactile graph-
ics appear to play an additional role in inclusion for some students. Attention to
instructional needs should not overlook students with visual impairments who
use print graphics. Additional inclusion of quality written descriptions may
support understanding of graphical information. Implications for practitioners:
Conceptual understanding would be supported by helping students recognize
where graphics and descriptions are useful. Timeliness of access to graphics in
theclassroomandattentiontoqualitygraphicsthatreducecomplexityandclutter
remain important.
V
isual displays of quantitative data are mathematics curricula (Friel, Curcio, &
commonplace in our technological soci- Bright, 2001; National Council of Teach-
ety (Postigo & Pozo, 2004). Increasing ers of Mathematics, 2000). Reflected in
demand for the skills and knowledge to these curricula is the goal that students
efficiently access these data correspond develop the “ability to interpret and pro-
with the emergence of statistics and data duce graphical representations” (Yeh &
management as key elements in school McTigue, 2009, p. 435). This skill set is
referred to generally as “graphicacy.”
(Åberg-Bengtsson & Ottosson, 2006).
This survey was funded by the Social Sci-
ences and Humanities Research Council of For students with visual impairments,
Canada (SSHRC). data encoded in visual graphics pose an
275
©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014
CEU Article
intuitive challenge, particularly for those priateness of adaptations on state or pro-
studying in the areas of science, tech- vincialassessments.Participantsweremore
nology, engineering, and mathamatics likely to agree that print graphics on large-
(STEM; Beck-Winchatz & Riccobono, scale assessments were more appropriately
2008; Smith & Smothers, 2012). In order adaptedthantactilegraphics,butagreement
to mitigate the impact of vision loss on was limited for both formats (less than
access to graphical data, teachers of stu- 50%; Zebehazy & Wilton, 2014a).
dents with visual impairments provide This finding is particularly worrisome
specialized materials and instruction given the high graphical content of many
(Rosenblum & Smith, 2012). standardized assessments. Yeh and Mc-
Practices and perceptions regarding Tigue (2009) reviewed late elementary
graphics use by students with visual im- and middle school standardized science
assessments from 14 U.S. states adminis-
pairments are primarily understood via
tered from 2003 through 2007. Results
research with samples of teachers of stu-
indicated that, of graphical representa-
dents with visual impairments (for in-
tionsfoundacrossstatesandgradelevels,
stance,Sheppard&Aldrich,2001)oruni-
nearly 80% were essential to arriving at a
versity programs preparing teachers of
correct answer for a given test item (Yeh
students with visual impairments (for in-
& McTigue, 2009). Since teachers of stu-
stance, Rosenblum & Smith, 2012). Ze-
dents with visual impairments did not en-
behazy and Wilton (2014a) examined
thusiastically endorse the quality of test
practioners’ perspectives via an online
item adaptations for graphics in both tac-
survey of 306 teachers of students with
tilegraphicandprintgraphicformats,stu-
visual impairments in Canada and the
dents with visual impairments may be at
United States. The survey probed their
an inherent disadvantage on standardized
preferences,practices,andbeliefsrelating
assessments.
to graphics use by students with visual
Intermsoftheirownpracticerelatedto
impairments in the areas of quality, in-
graphicacy, teachers of students with vi-
structional practices, and importance of
sual impairments emphasized the impor-
graphics to student learning. Overall, re-
tance of providing direct instruction to
sponses emphasized the importance of
both tactile graphic and print graphic us-
both tactile graphics and print graphics to
ers beyond what is delivered in the gen-
learning outcomes for students with vi-
eral classroom. However, they were not
sual impairments. In terms of the quality
likely to agree that they instructed stu-
of the graphics, there was a significant
dentsinhowtogeneratetheirowngraph-
difference in how teachers of students
ics. Given that graphicacy encompasses
with visual impairments rated the appro-
both the ability to understand and to create
graphics,somestudentswithvisualimpair-
ments may be missing essential skills for
EARN CEUS ONLINE
efficientuseofgraphicsatschool(Aldrich,
by answering questions on this article.
For more information, Sheppard, & Hindle, 2003).
visit: (cid:2)http://jvib.org/CEUs(cid:3). Theliteraturereviewedthusfarhasex-
amined the quality and utility of graphics
276
JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014 ©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved
CEU Article
forstudentswithvisualimpairmentsfrom impairments. The authors posit that stu-
the teacher’s perspective. There is a dents can be keen observers of school life
dearth of perception-based research with and of teachers’ instructional practices
samplesofthoseschool-agedstudents.Of (Busher, 2012). Therefore, students in the
the few existing studies, Aldrich and currentsamplewereuniquelypositionedto
Sheppard (2001) utilized focus groups of commentonthequalityofthegraphicsthey
students with visual impairments aged 9 use and on the effectiveness of teachers of
to 19 years at specialzed schools. The students with visual impairments’ instruc-
researchers recorded students’ percep- tion in accessing and analyzing graphical
tions of the quality and utility of tactile information.
graphics. Aldrich and Sheppard (2001)
noted that younger students were more Method
likely to favor the use of tactile graphics INSTRUMENT
than were older students. Younger stu-
Inordertogainafirsthandperspectivefrom
dents in particular enjoyed the process of
users of graphics, the researchers designed
creating their own tactile graphics. In
an online survey for students with visual
terms of effective display of information
impairments about their perceptions and
in tactile graphics, students felt at a dis-
practices using graphics. The survey con-
advantagetotheirsightedpeers.Basedon
taineddemographic,Likertscale,andopen-
students’ responses, Aldrich and Shep-
ended questions. Most of the Likert scale
pard (2001) concluded that many tactile
questions were rated on a 5-point scale:
graphics were “too derivitive and ‘sight-
stronglyagree,agree,neutral,disagree,and
ist’”andcalledfortactilegraphicsthatdo
strongly disagree. Four statements asking
not simply “translate” the visual graphic
students to rate their skill level used a dif-
(p. 72). Although the variable quality of
ferentscale:verywell,well,neutral,some-
tactile graphics detracted from students’
what, and not at all. For all statements, the
positive perceptions, participants noted
respondents could also select, “I don’t
that direct instruction by teachers in the
know.” Tactile graphic and print graphic
use of tactile graphics and teachers pre-
students responded to parallel statements,
viewing them were significant determi-
whichwerewordedtorefertotheirrespec-
nants of effectiveness when engaging
tivemedium.Afewquestionswereunique
with graphical information.
to one medium.
The current study contributes to the
extant research by documenting and ana-
lyzing the perceptions of students with DISSEMINATIONANDANALYSIS
visual impairments with visual access to In November 2011 the researchers dis-
graphics, in addition to those of students seminated the student survey at the same
whoaccessgraphicalinformationviatouch. timeasthegraphicssurveyforteachersof
The goal of the study was to represent stu- students with visual impairments (Zebe-
dents’ voices in the educational literature hazy & Wilton, 2014a). An e-mail invi-
devoted to tactile graphic and print graphic tation sent to teachers of students with
use,andtocontrasttheseperspectiveswith visual impairments across Canada and
those of teachers of students with visual the United States included the link to the
277
©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014
CEU Article
Table1
Within-grouppercentagesfordemographiccharacteristics.
Characteristic TGusers PGusers
Gradelevel
4–6 16%(n(cid:4)10) 15%(n(cid:4)5)
7–9 32%(n(cid:4)20) 24%(n(cid:4)8)
10–12 52%(n(cid:4)33) 61%(n(cid:4)20)
Schoolplacement
Schoolfortheblind 25%(n(cid:4)16) 39%(n(cid:4)13)
Schoolfortheblindandlocalschool 2%(n(cid:4)1) 6%(n(cid:4)2)
Publicschool(full-timeclassroom) 16%(n(cid:4)10) 27%(n(cid:4)9)
Publicschoolandresourceroom 30%(n(cid:4)19) 27%(n(cid:4)9)
Other(notspecified) 28%(n(cid:4)18) 0%(n(cid:4)0)
Frequencyofgraphicuse
3ormoretimes/week 45%(n(cid:4)28) 52%(n(cid:4)17)
1–2times/week 24%(n(cid:4)15) 21%(n(cid:4)7)
Afewtimesamonth 24%(n(cid:4)15) 24%(n(cid:4)8)
Almostnever 6%(n(cid:4)4) 3%(n(cid:4)1)
Useofgraphicsbycontentarea
Math 91%(n(cid:4)58) 88%(n(cid:4)29)
Science 86%(n(cid:4)55) 88%(n(cid:4)29)
Socialstudies 70%(n(cid:4)45) 88%(n(cid:4)29)
Health 23%(n(cid:4)15) 42%(n(cid:4)14)
Languagearts 19%(n(cid:4)12) 39%(n(cid:4)13)
Art 19%(n(cid:4)12) 24%(n(cid:4)8)
Music 8%(n(cid:4)5) 21%(n(cid:4)7)
Gym 3%(n(cid:4)2) 18%(n(cid:4)6)
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
student survey and an e-mail for parents, Results
with a request to pass the link on to stu-
PARTICIPANTS
dents with visual impairments in grades
Ninety-seven students took the survey in
4 through 12 who might be interested in
whole or in part. Sixty-four of the stu-
participating. The survey remained open
dents (66%) were tactile graphic users
for approximately six months, with a
and33(34%)wereprintgraphicusers.The
reminder e-mail sent halfway through.
students represented two Canadian prov-
The authors’ university ethics board ap-
inces(n(cid:4)13;14%)and23states(n(cid:4)82;
provedthestudy,includingthemannerof
86%). For print graphic users, 30% (n (cid:4)
dissemination and informed consent. Re-
sults are reported descriptively using per- 10) reported viewing regular print graph-
centages based on the total number of ics with no enlargement, 36% (n (cid:4) 12)
respondents who answered that particular reported viewing enlarged versions of
question. Within-group percentages (tac- graphics, and 27% (n (cid:4) 9) reported us-
tile graphic users and print graphic users) ing a low vision device to view graphics
are used when comparing responses be- most of the time. Table 1 lists the within-
tween the two mediums. group percentages for grade level, school
278
JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014 ©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved
CEU Article
Table2
Percentagesofagreementregardingqualityingraphicsuse.
Graphic Strongly Strongly Idon’t
Quality-relatedstatements type agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree know
Graphicsonassessmentsortests PG(n(cid:4)33) 9 52 12 15 3 12
arethesameformataswhatI TG(n(cid:4)59) 20 44 10 10 3 1
useduringclassroom
instruction.
MostofthegraphicsIuseare PG(n(cid:4)33) 18 46 15 15 6 0
goodquality. TG(n(cid:4)59) 27 36 22 9 3 3
InclassIalwayshaveagraphic PG(n(cid:4)30) 37 50 7 3 3 0
tousewhenmypeersarealso TG(n(cid:4)59) 17 27 17 31 5 3
usinggraphics.
Colorishelpfulformetoseeand PG(n(cid:4)29)) 45 21 17 14 3 0
understandgraphics. TG NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ifrequentlyusethetactilegraphic PG NA NA NA NA NA NA
supplementstomytextbooks. TG(n(cid:4)59) 17 27 19 24 5 9
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
placement, frequency of graphic use, and graphics,whileprintgraphicuserstended
content areas where graphics were used. to be more neutral. However, neither
group strongly indicated (less than 50%
PERCEPTIONSOFQUALITY agreeingorstronglyagreeing)thatgraph-
One set of statements focused on quality. ics helped them to understand concepts
Two statements were presented to only better than text alone. Greater than 50%
one group: a statement about the useful- of the respondents in each group also
ness of color for print graphic users and a indicated that descriptions paired with
statement about use of a tactile supple- graphicswerehelpful.Tactilegraphicus-
ment to textbooks for tactile graphic us- ers, in particular, agreed or strongly
ers. In general, the majority of students agreed with this statement (92%). Al-
felt that graphics were of good quality, though enthusiastic about wanting access
although print graphic and tactile graphic to graphics, tactile graphic users were
users answered differently regarding the alsomorelikelytoagreeorstronglyagree
availability of graphics at the same time (50%) that 3-D models were preferred
as their peers. Table 2 shows the specific over graphics, as compared to print
percentages of agreement for each state- graphic respondents (33%). Neither print
ment about quality. graphicnortactilegraphicuserstendedto
make their own graphics to understand
PREFERENCESOFGRAPHICUSERS information. Table 3 shows the specific
Another set of statements focused on percentages of agreement for each state-
preferences. One statement about the use ment related to preferences.
ofdescriptionsinplaceoftactilegraphics
was only asked of tactile graphic users. PERCEPTIONSOFSKILLS
Tactile graphic users, in general, were ANDINSTRUCTION
morelikelytoagreeorstronglyagreethat Two sets of statements focused on the
they liked and wanted more access to skills, instruction, and support needed for
279
©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014
CEU Article
Table3
Percentagesofagreementregardingpreferencesingraphicsuse.
Preference-related Graphic Strongly Strongly Idon’t
statements type agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree know
IlikeitwhenIhave PG(n(cid:4)33) 12 30 42 6 3 6
graphicstolookator TG(n(cid:4)60) 42 42 8 2 3 3
access.
IwishIhadmore PG(n(cid:4)30) 13 17 40 10 7 13
accesstographics. TG(n(cid:4)59) 25 27 25 17 2 3
Ifindithelpfultohavea PG(n(cid:4)33) 27 30 15 9 12 6
descriptionalongwith TG(n(cid:4)59) 56 36 7 2 0 0
thegraphics.
Iprefertohave PG NA NA NA NA NA NA
descriptionsinplace TG(n(cid:4)59) 22 15 27 17 14 5
oftactilegraphics.
Graphicshelpmeto PG(n(cid:4)30) 13 20 37 13 13 3
understandconcepts TG(n(cid:4)59) 17 25 25 20 7 5
betterthantextor
descriptionsalone.
Iprefermodelsor PG(n(cid:4)30) 10 23 43 20 3 0
objectsinsteadof TG(n(cid:4)58) 24 26 35 14 0 2
visualortactile
graphics.
Imakemyowngraphics PG(n(cid:4)29) 3 24 21 45 3 3
tohelpme TG(n(cid:4)59) 5 15 10 49 19 2
understandmaterial.
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
reading and understanding graphics. The mentsaboutskillsrelatedtoreadingand
majority of both groups indicated that understanding graphics. Table 5 dis-
they were taught how to use graphics. plays the specific statements and the
Tactile graphic users were less likely percentages of agreement. In general,
(47% agreeing or strongly agreeing) than 50% or greater of the respondents in
print graphic users (66%) to indicate that each group agreed or strongly agreed
they could keep up with their peers when they could perform the skills indicated
using graphics. Greater than 50% of both in each statement.
groups indicated that it is helpful to have
someone preview graphics with them QUALITATIVERESPONSES
(59% of print graphic and 75% of tactile Participants were also asked the follow-
graphic users agreeing or strongly agree- ing four open-ended questions:
ing); however, print graphic users were
less likely (38%) than tactile graphic us- 1. In what ways do you find graphics
ers (56%) to agree or strongly agree that helpful in your classes?
previewing actually occurs. Table 4 lists 2. In what ways do you find graphics
thespecificstatementsandpercentagesof challenging?
agreement. 3. What would help you use graphics
In addition to the general statements better?
in Table 4, respondents were also pro- 4. What strategies do you use to read
vided with a set of four specific state- graphics that are unfamiliar?
280
JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014 ©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved
CEU Article
Table4
Percentagesofagreementregardingskillsandinstructioningraphicsuse.
Instruction-related Graphic Strongly Strongly Idon’t
statements type agree Agree Neutral Disagree disagree know
Iwastaughthowtouse PG(n(cid:4)33) 39 49 3 3 3 3
graphics. TG(n(cid:4)59) 48 36 5 9 0 3
IfIdon’tunderstanda PG(n(cid:4)30) 27 40 13 13 3 3
graphic,Iknowwhat TG(n(cid:4)59) 19 36 19 17 3 7
todotofigureitout.
Iamabletokeepupwith PG(n(cid:4)30) 23 43 10 23 0 0
mypeerswhenusing TG(n(cid:4)59) 15 32 19 25 3 5
graphicsduring
assignmentsor
instruction.
Myteacher(orother PG(n(cid:4)29) 14 24 7 31 14 10
person)previews TG(n(cid:4)59) 20 36 15 17 9 3
graphicswithmebefore
Ineedtousethemin
class.
Ifinditusefulwhen PG(n(cid:4)29) 21 38 7 17 10 7
someonepreviewsor TG(n(cid:4)59) 44 31 14 9 2 2
orientsmetoagraphic.
Itiseasytoreadgraphics. PG(n(cid:4)29) 28 24 31 10 7 0
TG(n(cid:4)59) 14 31 25 20 9 2
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
The response rate for each question sensusonanydiscrepanciesthroughdiscus-
ranged from 24 to 50 respondents. Both sionandreferringbacktothedata.Table6
researchers coded the data for the most lists the prevalent responses for print
common responses made by print graphic graphic and tactile graphic users for each
and tactile graphic users. The researchers question. In addition to the general strate-
thencomparedcodesandcametofullcon- gies given by tactile graphic users, some
Table5
Percentagesofagreementonspecificskillstatementsforreadinggraphics.
Graphic Very Notat Idon’t
Skill-relatedstatements type well Well Neutral Somewhat all know
Iknowhowtosystematically PG(n(cid:4)28) 21 29 18 14 7 11
exploreorusegoodhand TG(n(cid:4)55) 31 33 16 18 0 2
movementstoexplorea
graphic.
Iknowhowtouse PG(n(cid:4)28) 29 36 14 7 4 11
descriptionspairedwith TG(n(cid:4)55) 35 38 9 15 2 2
graphics.
Iknowwhatkindsof PG(n(cid:4)28) 25 40 11 11 11 4
questionstoasktogain TG(n(cid:4)55) 35 27 13 20 0 6
informationabout
graphics.
Iunderstandcommonparts PG(n(cid:4)28) 39 43 7 7 4 0
ofgraphicsthatIlookfor TG(n(cid:4)55) 33 40 9 15 4 0
whenexploringanew
graphicorpicture.
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
281
©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014
CEU Article
Table6
Prevalentresponsestoopen-endedquestions.
Question PGUsers TGUsers
Waysgraphicsarehelpful Helpvisualizesituationsand Helpfulinmathandscience;helpsto
text;helpunderstandsome knowwhatishappeninginclass(for
concepts(forinstance, instance,onboard,whatteacheris
quantities) talkingabout,etc.);helpsenforce
certainconcepts(forinstance,visual
concepts)
Waysgraphicsare Toosmallortoodetailed; Spacingtoocluttered,complex,or
challenging enlargementissues;difficulty symbolstooclose;texturesnot
followinglines distinctenough;3-Dshapespresented
as2-Dgraphics;notenoughlabelsor
description
Whatwouldhelpinusing Improvedqualityofcolor,labels, Descriptionsprovidedwithgraphics;
graphicsbetter lessclutter previewwithteacherandtimeto
preview;bettertexture,spacing,and
lesscomplexity
Strategiesusedtoread Askateacherorfriend;usetext Askteacherorfriendorparaprofessional
unfamiliargraphics ordescriptionaroundthem; forhelpordescription;locatekeyread
lookattitlesorheadings descriptionsifavailable;readtitleand
labels;feelonepieceatatime,locate
generalshapesandtextures;usethe
problemorquestions
PG(cid:4)printgraphic;TG(cid:4)tactilegraphic.
respondents also noted specific strategies USEFULNESSANDUSABILITYOFGRAPHICS
relatedtohandmovements.Theseincluded:
Tactile graphic users had a stronger prefer-
using a left-to-right strategy; going around
ence for graphics than print graphic users.
the perimeter first; using a top-to-bottom,
This is perhaps because print graphic users
right-to-left strategy; scanning the graphic
were more likely to report that they had
anddeterminingapointofreference;asking
graphicsatthesametimeastheirpeerscom-
theteachertoreadthegraphicasthestudent
paredtotactilegraphicusers(87%agreedor
scanslandmarkssheorherecognizes;start-
stronglyagreedascomparedto44%).Neither
ing at the left side and moving down the
group, however, strongly connected with the
graphic in a column-like fashion; and fol-
ideathatgraphicshelpedthemtounderstand
lowing the lines to try to figure it out.
concepts better than with text alone or via
Discussion another method (for instance, 3-D models).
Although students indicated that graphics
Overall, this group of respondents seemed
helped in math and science, more specific
to have received effective insruction in
qualitativeresponsesindicatedthat the com-
graphics, given that the majority indicated
thattheyhadbeentaughthowtousegraph- plexity of some graphics (for instance, 3-D
ics and that tactile graphic users were con- images, maps, too many details) inhibited
fident in their skills for reading graphics. theirusefulnessforunderstandingconcepts.
Within the data set, a number of interest- This finding mirrors that of Aldrich and
ing contrasts between tactile graphic and Sheppard (2001), where students high-
print graphic users emerged that are lightedseveralissuesrelatedtotheproduction
worth discussing. oftactilegraphicsasbarrierstousefulness.
282
JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014 ©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved
CEU Article
Data in the study presented here sug- In the qualitative responses, a popular
gestthattactilegraphicusers’enthusiasm strategy common to both groups was to
for graphics may, in part, be related to seek a description or explanation from a
feelings of inclusion. Even though less teacher, friend, or paraprofessional.
than half of the tactile graphic users felt Provision of quality written descriptions
that they could keep up with peers when in the classroom has the potential for sup-
using graphics, one of the main qualitative porting students in understanding concepts
findings from tactile graphic users was the in graphics and their access to assessment
indicationthathavinggraphicshelpedthem material. Given the onset of more computer-
to understand and feel connected to what based testing, descriptions will be impor-
was going on in the classroom. tant for access. In a study of the use of
The usefulness and accessibility of imagedescriptiononassessments,Carveret
graphics for print graphic users also can- al. (2012) found students to have a strong
notbeoverlooked.Printgraphicusersdid preference for image descriptions and also
not strongly endorse several statements found braille-reading students to be more
relatedtotheusefulnessofprintgraphics. likely to answer questions correctly even
For example, only 23% of print graphic when there were image descriptions with-
usersstronglyagreedthattheycouldkeep out tactile graphics. In the current survey,
up with peers in the classroom when us- only 37% of the tactile graphic users ex-
ing graphics to complete classwork. The pressed agreement or strong agreement for
overall neutrality of print graphic users descriptions in place of graphics, but an-
regarding graphics also highlights a need other27%wereneutral.Contextandexpe-
to further examine print graphic user rience should be considered when helping
needs as they relate to effectively using students to understand their accommodation
graphics. preferencesandneedsaswellaswhichcom-
binationsareusefulindifferentsituations.
DESCRIPTIONS
Intermsofoverallutilityofprintgraphics CONTRASTSWITHTEACHERS’
and tactile graphics, both groups dis- PERCEPTIONS
playedastronginclinationtowardwritten Several similarities and contrasts found
descriptions. Fifty-seven percent of print between the perceptions of students and
graphic users and 92% of tactile graphic those of teachers of students with visual
users felt that having written descriptions impairments(Zebehazy&Wilton,2014a,
withagraphicwasbetterthanthegraphic 2014b) regarding graphic use are also
alone. Qualitative responses by tactile worth noting. Teachers of students with
graphic and print graphic users also indi- visual impairments, similar to students,
cated that graphics were improved when viewed written descriptions paired with
written descriptions or more textual sup- tactile graphics as useful. Although both
port(forinstance,labelsorcaptions)were teachers of students with visual impair-
included. Previewing of graphics by a ments and students were less likely to
teacher or other adult is a related support. agree or strongly agree that descriptions
Both groups valued this support but were in place of graphics were preferable, the
lesslikelytoindicatethatitwasavailable. percentage of students (37%) who agreed
283
©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014
CEU Article
withthisstatementwashigherthanthatof agreeing or strongly agreeing; Zebehazy
teachers of students with visual impair- & Wilton, 2014a). Yet teachers of stu-
ments(11%).Also,tactilegraphicusersand dents with visual impairments said in the
teachers of students with visual impair- open-ended questions that “successful
ments were in agreement about the impor- tactile graphics users” had opportunities
tance of providing graphics to them at the to make their own graphics and noted
same time as their peers in the classroom making graphics as a teaching strategy
(44% and 54% agreeing or strongly agree- (Zebehazy&Wilton,2014b).Aldrichand
ing, respectively; Zebehazy & Wilton, Sheppard’s (2001) study upholds these
2014a). findings, noting that the younger students
Teachers of students with visual im- in their study enjoyed making their own
pairments were more optimistic about the tactile graphics. This contrast between
potentialforgraphics(84%printand72% what is considered important and what is
tactile) to support concept development beingdonehasimplicationsforbothprint
thanthestudentswereinthissurvey(33% graphic and tactile graphic users.
print graphic; 42% tactile graphic). It is
important to understand this difference IMPLICATIONSFORPRACTITIONERS
more fully in order to avoid making as- The conclusions outlined in the previous
sumptions about what students are gain- sections are of direct relevance to practi-
ing from the use of graphics in the class- tioners, since the data are drawn from the
room. In the qualitative data for teachers students they support. The following list
of students with visual impairments (Ze- summarizes the implications.
behazy&Wilton,2014b),theimportance
of developing concepts through early in- 1. Providingsystematicinstructioninthe
tervention and exposure to graphics was use of graphics, including opportuni-
highlighted. Along with the comments ties for making graphics, is important
madebystudentsaboutthecomplexityof forbothtactileandprintgraphicusers.
graphics,amountofexperienceandexpo- 2. Assessing the accessibility needs and
sure may also be contributing factors to skill levels with graphics will help
the perception of the usefulness of graph- identify instructional areas of need for
ics for understanding concepts. print graphic users.
An area that warrants further pedagog- 3. Forprintgraphicsreaders,providingen-
ical consideration is the role of making larged graphics or using low vision de-
one’s own graphics in helping students to vicesorassistivetechnologymaynotbe
understand graphical data and concepts. sufficient to ensure full access and un-
Low percentages of students in both derstanding of graphical information.
groups (27% print graphic; 20% tactile 4. Providing timely print and tactile
graphic) indicated that they made their graphics may affect students’ percep-
own graphics to help them understand tions of belonging and connection to
materials. Similarly, teachers of students the classroom environment. Tactile
with visual impairments were not likely graphics may bear a special signifi-
to teach students how to make graphics cance beyond simple access to graph-
(41% print graphic; 36% tactile graphic ical information.
284
JournalofVisualImpairment&Blindness,July-August2014 ©2014AFB,AllRightsReserved