Review Article

Bibliometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on the Accessibility of an Integrated E-Learning Model for Students with Disabilities

Ahmad Hamza Obidat 1 *
More Detail
1 Al-Hussein Bin Talal University, JORDAN* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(3), July 2022, ep374, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12064
Published: 01 May 2022
OPEN ACCESS   2583 Views   1234 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The main objective of this study is to present a bibliometric analysis of research on e-learning accessibility at the global level. The bibliometric literature was comprised of 1,325 documents, after data pre-processing, published in Scopus database, covering the period from 1985 to 2021. First, a performance analysis was conducted to assess the publication performance of authors, institutions, countries, and other actors. Second, a science mapping analysis was performed to reveal the structure and dynamics of the e-learning accessibility field. As a result, the most productive, sources, authors, institutions, and countries were identified. Also, the collaboration patterns between particular actors were assessed. Furthermore, the e-learning accessibility research themes and their interrelationships were uncovered. This study contributes to the literature by providing useful information about the e-learning accessibility research status quo and, helps policymakers to achieve effective research planning. That is, it helps in objectively identifying strengths and gaps in e-learning accessibility research in terms of its growth, development, themes, impact, and coverage.
Keywords: bibliometric analysis, e-learning, accessibility, disability, educational technology

CITATION (APA)

Obidat, A. H. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on the Accessibility of an Integrated E-Learning Model for Students with Disabilities. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(3), ep374. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12064

REFERENCES

  1. Abbad, M. M., Morris, D., & De Nahlik, C. (2009). Looking under the bonnet: Factors affecting student adoption of e-learning systems in Jordan. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i2.596
  2. Abou-Zahra, S., & Brewer, J. (2019). Standards, guidelines, and trends. In Y. Yesilada, & S. Harper (Eds.), Web accessibility (pp. 225-246). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_13
  3. Al-Arimi, A. M. A.-K. (2014). Distance learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 82-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.159
  4. Ali, W. (2020). Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Studies, 10(3), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v10n3p16
  5. Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2017). Digital learning compass: Distance education enrollment report 2017. https://www.bayviewanalytics.com/reports/digtiallearningcompassenrollment2017.pdf
  6. Amka, A., & Dalle, J. (2022). The satisfaction of the special need’ students with e-Learning experience during COVID-19 pandemic: A case of educational institutions in Indonesia. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep334. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11371
  7. Anderson, P. (2016). Web 2.0 and beyond: Principles and technologies. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b12087
  8. Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2016). An e-learning theoretical framework. Educational Technology and Society, 19(1), 292-307.
  9. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  10. Ashraf, M. M., Hasan, N., Lewis, L., Hasan, M. R., & Ray, P. (2017). A systematic literature review of the application of information communication technology for visually impaired people. International Journal of Disability Management, 11, e6. https://doi.org/10.1017/idm.2016.6
  11. Baldwin, S. J., & Ching, Y.-H. (2021). Accessibility in online courses: A review of national and statewide evaluation instruments. TechTrends, 65(5), 731-742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00624-6
  12. Ballew, B. S. (2009). Elsevier’s Scopus® database. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 6(3), 245-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/15424060903167252
  13. Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index?—A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y
  14. Barreto, A., & Hollier, S. (2019). Visual disabilities. In Y. Yesilada, & S. Harper (Eds.), Web accessibility: A foundation for research (pp. 3-17). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_1
  15. Bates, T. (2018). The 2017 national survey of online learning in Canadian post-secondary education: Methodology and results. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(29), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0112-3
  16. Bellis, N. D. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press.
  17. Bennett, C. L., & Keyes, O. (2020). What is the point of fairness? Disability, AI and the complexity of justice. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing, (125), 5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386296.3386301
  18. Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2006). A graph-theoretic perspective on centrality. Social Networks, 28(4), 466-484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2005.11.005
  19. Borgia, F., Bianchini, C. S., & Marsico, M. D. (2014). Towards improving the e-learning experience for deaf students: e-LUX. In C. Stephanidis, & M. Antona (Eds.), Universal access in human-computer interaction. Universal access to information and knowledge (pp. 221-232). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07440-5_21
  20. Brown, J., & Mirri, S. (2013). E-learning accessibility. https://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/E-learning_Accessibility
  21. Burbules, N. C., Fan, G., & Repp, P. (2020). Five trends of education and technology in a sustainable future. Geography and Sustainability, 1(2), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2020.05.001
  22. Burgstahler, S. (2015). Opening doors or slamming them shut? Online learning practices and students with disabilities. Social Inclusion, 3(6), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v3i6.420
  23. Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: A review. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-1
  24. Buzio, A., Chiesa, M., & Toppan, R. (2017). Virtual reality for special educational needs. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Workshop on Intelligent Interfaces for Ubiquitous and Smart Learning (pp. 7-10). Limassol, Cyprus. https://doi.org/10.1145/3038535.3038541
  25. Cahapay, M. B. (2020). Rethinking education in the new normal post-COVID-19 era: A curriculum studies perspective. Aquademia, 4(2), ep20018. https://doi.org/10.29333/aquademia/8315
  26. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280
  27. Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003
  28. Cano, S., Arteaga, J. M., Collazos, C. A., & Amador, V. B. (2015). Model for analysis of serious games for literacy in deaf children from a user experience approach. In Proceedings of the XVI International Conference on Human Computer Interaction (pp. 1-9). Vilanova i la Geltru, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1145/2829875.2829885
  29. Cavanaugh, C., Repetto, J., Wayer, N., & Spitler, C. (2013). Online learning for students with disabilities: A framework for success. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341302800101
  30. Chang, V., & Fisher, D. (2003). The validation and application of a new learning environment instrument for online learning in higher education. In M. S. Khine, & D. Fisher (Eds.), Technology-rich learning environments: A future perspective (pp. 1-20). World Scientific Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812564412_0001
  31. Chiang, J. K., Kuo, C.-W., & Yang, Y.-H. (2010). A bibliometric study of e-Learning literature on SSCI database. In X. Zhang, S. Zhong, Z. Pan, K. Wong, & R. Yun (Eds.), Entertainment for education. Digital techniques and systems (pp. 145-155). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14533-9_15
  32. Chukwuemeka, E. J., & Samaila, D. (2020). Teachers’ perception and factors limiting the use of high-tech assistive technology in special education schools in North-West Nigeria. Contemporary Educational Technology, 11(1), 99-109. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.646841
  33. Cisneros, D., Monzón, F. H., & Paz, F. (2021). Accessibility evaluation of e-government web applications: A systematic review. In M. M. Soares, E. Rosenzweig, & A. Marcus (Eds.), Design, user experience, and usability: Design for diversity, well-being, and social development (pp. 210-223). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78224-5_15
  34. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
  35. Coulter, N., Monarch, I., & Konda, S. (1998). Software engineering as seen through its research literature: A study in co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(13), 1206-1223. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1998)49:13<1206::AID-ASI7>3.0.CO;2-F
  36. Dabbagh, N. (2005). Pedagogical models for e-Learning: A theory-based design framework. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 25-44.
  37. Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
  38. Duhaney, L. M. G., & Duhaney, D. C. (2000). Assistive technology: Meeting the needs of learners with disabilities. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27, 393.
  39. Edwards, A. (2008). Assistive technologies. In S. Harper, & Y. Yesilada (Eds.), Web accessibility: A foundation for research (pp. 141-162). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-050-6_10
  40. Evans, N. J., Broido, E. M., Brown, K. R., & Wilke, A. K. (2017). Disability in higher education: A social justice approach. Jossey-Bass.
  41. Fatima, N., & Abu, K. S. (2019). E-learning research papers in Web of Science: A biliometric analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1-14.
  42. Fernández-Álvarez, D., Frey, J., Labra Gayo, J. E., Gayo-Avello, D., & Hellmann, S. (2021). Approaches to measure class importance in knowledge graphs. PLoS ONE, 16(6), e0252862. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252862
  43. Fichten, C. S., Asuncion, J. V., Barile, M., Fossey, M., & Simone, C. D. (2000). Access to educational and instructional computer technologies for post‐secondary students with disabilities: Lessons from three empirical studies. Journal of Educational Media, 25(3), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358165000250303
  44. Fichten, C., Olenik-Shemesh, D., Asuncion, J., Jorgensen, M., & Colwell, C. (2020). Higher education, information and communication technologies and students with disabilities: An overview of the current situation. In J. Seale (Ed.), Improving accessible digital practices in higher education (pp. 21-44). Palgrave Pivot. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37125-8_2
  45. Forgrave, K. E. (2002). Assistive technology: Empowering students with learning disabilities. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 75(3), 122-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650209599250
  46. Fu, H.-Z., Ho, Y.-S., Sui, Y.-M., & Li, Z.-S. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of solid waste research during the period 1993-2008. Waste Management, 30(12), 2410-2417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.06.008
  47. Gadd, E., & Rowlands, I. (2018). How can bibliometric and altmetric suppliers improve? Messages from the end-user community. Insights, 31(38), 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.437
  48. García-Redondo, P., García, T., Areces, D., Núñez, J. C., & Rodríguez, C. (2019). Serious games and their effect improving attention in students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(14), 2480. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16142480
  49. Gauthier, É. (1998). Bibliometric analysis of scientific and technological research: A user’s guide to the methodology. Statistics Canada.
  50. Gilbert, R. M. (2019). Planning and implementing inclusive designs. In R. M. Gilbert (Ed.), Inclusive design for a digital world (pp. 145-155). Apress. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-5016-7_8
  51. Glazier, R. A., Hamann, K., Pollock, P. H., & Wilson, B. M. (2021). What drives student success? Assessing the combined effect of transfer students and online courses. Teaching in Higher Education, 26(6), 839-854. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1686701
  52. Godoi, T. X. D., Junior, D. P. D. S., & Valentim, N. M. C. (2020). A case study about usability, user experience and accessibility problems of deaf users with assistive technologies. In M. Antona, & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Universal access in human-computer interaction. Applications and practice (pp. 73-91). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49108-6_6
  53. Gronseth, S. (2018). Inclusive design for online and blended courses: Connecting web content accessibility guidelines and universal design for learning. Educational Renaissance, 7(1), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.33499/edren.v7i1.114
  54. Gugenheimer, J., Plaumann, K., Schaub, F., Vito, P. D. C. S., Duck, S., Rabus, M., & Rukzio, E. (2017). The impact of assistive technology on communication quality between deaf and hearing individuals. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 669-682). Portland, Oregon, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998203
  55. Harper, S., & Chen, A. Q. (2012). Web accessibility guidelines. World Wide Web, 15(1), 61-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11280-011-0130-8
  56. Henry, S. L. (2018). Essential components of web accessibility. https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/components/
  57. Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). Education goes digital: The evolution of online learning and the revolution in higher education. Communications of ACM, 48(10), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.1145/1089107.1089139
  58. Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to the general curriculum: Universal design for learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990203500201
  59. Hofmann, J. (2018). Blended learning: What works in talent development. Association for Talent Development.
  60. Houston, L. (2018). Efficient strategies for integrating universal design for learning in the online classroom. Journal of Educators Online, 15(3), 96-111. https://doi.org/10.9743/jeo.2018.15.3.4
  61. Hung, J.-l. (2012). Trends of e-learning research from 2000 to 2008: Use of text mining and bibliometrics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01144.x
  62. Impey, C., & Formanek, M. (2021). MOOCS and 100 days of COVID: Enrollment surges in massive open online astronomy classes during the coronavirus pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 4(1), 100177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100177
  63. Iniesto, F., & Rodrigo, C. (2014). Accessibility assessment of MOOC platforms in Spanish: UNED COMA, COLMENIA and Miriada X. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Symposium on Computers in Education (pp. 169-172). Logrono, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE.2014.7017724
  64. Iniesto, F., & Rodrigo, C. (2016). A preliminary study for developing accessible MOOC services. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 6(2), 126-150. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v6i2.117
  65. Ismaili, J., & Ibrahimi, E. H. O. (2017). Mobile learning as alternative to assistive technology devices for special needs students. Education and Information Technologies, 22(3), 883-899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9462-9
  66. Istenic Starcic, A., & Bagon, S. (2014). ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970-2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 202-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12086
  67. Jdaitawi, M. T., & Kan’an, A. F. (2022). A decade of research on the effectiveness of augmented reality on students with special disability in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep332. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11369
  68. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2016). Higher education and the digital revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs, social media, and the Cookie Monster. Business Horizons, 59(4), 441-450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.03.008
  69. Kapo, A., Kacapor, K., & Mujkic, A. (2016). Is the continuance a new buzz word? Bibliometric and co-citation analysis of e-learning continuance. TEM Journal, 5(3), 332-338. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM53-13
  70. Katz, J. (2013). The three block model of universal design for learning (UDL): Engaging students in inclusive education. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1), 153-194.
  71. Kentnor, H. E. (2015). Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 17(1), 21-34.
  72. Kim-Rupnow, W. S., & Burgstahler, S. (2004). Perceptions of students with disabilities regarding the value of technology-based support activities on postsecondary education and employment. Journal of Special Education Technology, 19(2), 43-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340401900204
  73. King-Sears, M. (2009). Universal design for learning: Technology and pedagogy. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(4), 199-201. https://doi.org/10.2307/27740372
  74. Kocur, D., & Kosc, P. (2009). E-learning implementation in higher education. Acta Electrotechnica et Informatica [International Journal of Electrotechnical and Informatica], 9(1), 20-26.
  75. Korkmaz, G., & Toraman, C. (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 293-309. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.110
  76. Korucu, A. T., & Alkan, A. (2011). Differences between m-learning (mobile learning) and e-learning, basic terminology and usage of m-learning in education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1925-1930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.029
  77. Kurt, S. (2019). Moving toward a universally accessible web: Web accessibility and education. Assistive Technology, 31(4), 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2017.1414086
  78. Lazar, J. (2019). Web accessibility policy and law. In Y. Yesilada, & S. Harper (Eds.), Web accessibility (pp. 247-261). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_14
  79. Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: A historical review. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 15-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.001
  80. Lewis, C., & Seeman, L. (2019). Policy and standards on web accessibility for cognitive and learning disabilities. In Y. Yesilada, & S. Harper (Eds.), Web accessibility (pp. 281-299). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_16
  81. Li, J., Wang, M.-H., & Ho, Y.-S. (2011). Trends in research on global climate change: A science citation index expanded-based analysis. Global and Planetary Change, 77(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.02.005
  82. Liasidou, A. (2014). Critical disability studies and socially just change in higher education. British Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 120-135. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12063
  83. Lim, C. P., & Churchill, D. (2016). Mobile learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 273-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1113705
  84. Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2011.577938
  85. Loreman, T. (2017). Pedagogy for inclusive education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.148
  86. Ludlow, B. L. (2015). Virtual reality: Emerging applications and future directions. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(3), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687051503400302
  87. Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 266-275). Aalborg, Denmark.
  88. Martin, F., Bacak, J., Polly, D., & Dymes, L. (2021). A systematic review of research on K12 online teaching and learning: Comparison of research from two decades 2000 to 2019. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1940396
  89. McCain, K. W. (1990). Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 433-443. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199009)41:6<433::AID-ASI11>3.0.CO;2-Q
  90. McKeown, C., & McKeown, J. (2019). Accessibility in online courses: Understanding the deaf learner. TechTrends, 63(5), 506-513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00385-3
  91. McMurray, S. (2019). The impact of funding cuts to further education colleges in Scotland. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(2), 201-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1357072
  92. McNicholl, A., Casey, H., Desmond, D., & Gallagher, P. (2021). The impact of assistive technology use for students with disabilities in higher education: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 16(2), 130-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1642395
  93. Mike, K. (2015). Disability and eLearning: Opportunities and barriers. Disability Studies Quarterly, 35(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v35i1.3815
  94. Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). E-learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001
  95. Moore, M. (2015). Historical perspectives on e-learning. In B. H. Khan, & M. Ally (Eds.), International handbook of e-learning volume 1 (pp. 41-50). Routledge.
  96. Moreno, L., Iglesias, A., Calvo, R., Delgado, S., & Zaragoza, L. (2012). Disability standards and guidelines for learning management systems: Evaluating accessibility. In Information Resources Management Association (USA) (Ed.), Virtual learning environments: Concepts, methodologies, tools and applications (pp. 1530-1549). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0011-9.ch712
  97. Morton, M., & Guerin, A. (2017). Sociocultural perspectives on curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment to support inclusive education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.147
  98. Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49(3), 581-596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011
  99. Müller, H.-M., Kenny, E. E., & Sternberg, P. W. (2004). Textpresso: An ontology-based information retrieval and extraction system for biological literature. PLoS Biology, 2(11), e309. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020309
  100. National Deaf Center. (2020). Pandemic taking unique toll on deaf college students, according to new poll. https://www.nationaldeafcenter.org/news/pandemic-taking-unique-toll-deaf-college-students-according-new-poll
  101. Ok, M. W. (2018). Use of iPads as assistive technology for students with disabilities. TechTrends, 62(1), 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0199-8
  102. Okolo, C. M., & Bouck, E. C. (2007). Research about assistive technology: 2000-2006. What have we learned? Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(3), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340702200303
  103. Okolo, C. M., & Diedrich, J. (2014). Twenty-five years later: How is technology used in the education of students with disabilities? Results of a statewide study. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900101
  104. Oleszkiewicz, A. (2021). Blindness enhances interpersonal trust but deafness impedes social exchange balance. Personality and Individual Differences, 170, 110425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110425
  105. Oliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2003). Exploring technology-mediated learning from a pedagogical perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 11(2), 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1076/ilee.11.2.111.14136
  106. Pace, C., Pettit, S. K., & Barker, K. S. (2020). Best practices in middle level quaranteaching: Strategies, tips and resources amidst COVID-19. Becoming: Journal of the Georgia Association for Middle Level Education, 31(1), 2-13. https://doi.org/10.20429/becoming.2020.310102
  107. Palvia, S., Aeron, P., Gupta, P., Mahapatra, D., Parida, R., Rosner, R., & Sindhi, S. (2018). Online education: Worldwide status, challenges, trends, and implications. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 233-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262
  108. Panigrahi, R., Srivastava, P. R., & Sharma, D. (2018). Online learning: Adoption, continuance, and learning outcome—A review of literature. International Journal of Information Management, 43, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.05.005
  109. Pappano, L. (2012). The year of the MOOC. The New York Times, 2(12), 2012.
  110. Parmanto, B., & Zeng, X. (2005). Metric for web accessibility evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(13), 1394-1404. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20233
  111. Paul, R., & Roth, F. P. (2011). Characterizing and predicting outcomes of communication delays in infants and toddlers: Implications for clinical practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42(3), 331-340. https://doi.org/doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2010/09-0067)
  112. Perera-Rodríguez, V.-H., & Moriña Díez, A. (2019). Technological challenges and students with disabilities in higher education. Exceptionality, 27(1), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2017.1409117
  113. Pernice, K., & Nielsen, J. (2001). Usability guidelines for accessible web design. https://www.nngroup.com/reports/usability-guidelines-accessible-web-design/
  114. Petrick, E. R. (2020). A historiography of human-computer interaction. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 42(4), 8-23. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2020.3009080
  115. Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Smart from the start: The promise of universal design for learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 197-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250102200402
  116. Poore-Pariseau, C. (2010). Online learning: Designing for all users. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(4), 147-156.
  117. Qayyum, A., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2019). The state of open and distance education. In O. Zawacki-Richter, & A. Qayyum (Eds.), Open and distance education in Asia, Africa and the Middle East (pp. 125-140). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5787-9_14
  118. Rao, K., Edelen-Smith, P., & Wailehua, C.-U. (2015). Universal design for online courses: Applying principles to pedagogy. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 30(1), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.991300
  119. Rodrigues, H., Almeida, F., Figueiredo, V., & Lopes, S. L. (2019). Tracking e-learning through published papers: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 136, 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.007
  120. Roemer, R. C., & Borchardt, R. (2015). Meaningful metrics: A 21st century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, altmetrics, and research impact. Association of College and Research Libraries.
  121. Rogers-Shaw, C., Carr-Chellman, D. J., & Choi, J. (2018). Universal design for learning: Guidelines for accessible online instruction. Adult Learning, 29(1), 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159517735530
  122. Rose, D. (2000). Universal design for learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(3), 45-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340001500307
  123. Rousseau, R., Egghe, L., & Guns, R. (2018). Becoming metric-wise: A bibliometric guide for researchers. Cambridge, Chandos Publishing.
  124. Sandeen, C. (2013). Integrating MOOCS into traditional higher education: The emerging “MOOC 3.0” era. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45(6), 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2013.842103
  125. Sangrà, A., Vlachopoulos, D., & Cabrera, N. (2012). Building an inclusive definition of e-learning: An approach to the conceptual framework. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 145-159. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i2.1161
  126. Seale, J. (2020). Introduction. In J. Seale (Ed.), Improving accessible digital practices in higher education (pp. 1-19). Palgrave Pivot. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37125-8
  127. Seale, J. K. (2013). E-learning and disability in higher education. Routledge.
  128. Seale, J., & Cooper, M. (2010). E-learning and accessibility: An exploration of the potential role of generic pedagogical tools. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1107-1116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.017
  129. Shethia, S., & Techatassanasoontorn, A. A. (2019). Experiences of people with visual impairments in accessing online information and services: A systematic literature review. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(2), 39-66. https://doi.org/10.17705/1pais.11203
  130. Smith, D. D., & Tyler, N. C. (2011). Effective inclusive education: Equipping education professionals with necessary skills and knowledge. Prospects: Comparative Journal of Curriculum, Learning, and Assessment, 41(3), 323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-011-9207-5
  131. Smith, R. O., Scherer, M. J., Cooper, R., Bell, D., Hobbs, D. A., Pettersson, C., Seymour, N., Borg, J., Johnson, M. J., Lane, J. P., Sujatha, S., Rao, P., Obiedat, Q. M., MacLachlan, M., & Bauer, S. (2018). Assistive technology products: A position paper from the first global research, innovation, and education on assistive technology (GREAT) summit. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(5), 473-485. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1473895
  132. Solovieva, T. I., & Bock, J. M. (2014). Monitoring for accessibility and university websites: Meeting the needs of people with disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 27(2), 113-127.
  133. Špiranec, S., & Ivanjko, T. (2013). Experts vs. novices tagging behavior: An exploratory analysis. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 456-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.076
  134. Stone, C. (2017). Opportunity through online learning: improving student access, participation and success in higher education. https://apo.org.au/node/94591
  135. Takagi, H., & Asakawa, C. (2017). New challenges in web accessibility. Universal Access in the Information Society, 16(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-015-0436-x
  136. Tan, J., Fu, H.-Z., & Ho, Y.-S. (2014). A bibliometric analysis of research on proteomics in Science Citation Index Expanded. Scientometrics, 98, 1473-1490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1125-2
  137. Terra, A. L., Agustín Lacruz, C., Bernardes, Ó., Fujita, M. S. L., & Bueno de la Fuente, G. (2021). Subject-access metadata on ETD supplied by authors: A case study about keywords, titles and abstracts in a Brazilian academic repository. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(1), 102268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102268
  138. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. (1997). The individuals with disabilities education Act of 1997, 34 CFR § 385.4 C.F.R. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/
  139. Tibaná-Herrera, G., de Moya-Anegón, F., & Fernández-Bajón, M. T. (2018a). Global analysis of the e-learning scientific domain: A declining category? Scientometrics, 114, 675-685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2592-7
  140. Tibaná-Herrera, G., Fernández-Bajón, M. T., & De Moya-Anegón, F. (2018b). Categorization of e-learning as an emerging discipline in the world publication system: A bibliometric study in SCOPUS. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(21), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0103-4
  141. Tibaná-Herrera, G., Fernández-Bajón, M.-T., & De-Moya-Anegón, F. (2018c). Output, collaboration and impact of e-learning research: Bibliometric analysis and visualizations at the country and institutional level (Scopus 2003-2016). Profesional de la Informacion [Information Professional], 27(5), 1082-1096. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.sep.12
  142. Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. T. (2018). Reach everyone, teach everyone: Universal design for learning in higher education. West Virginia University Press.
  143. Walter, C., & Ribière, V. (2013). A citation and co-citation analysis of 10 years of KM theory and practices. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 11(3), 221-229. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2013.25
  144. WHO. (2011). World report on disability. https://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf
  145. WHO. (2020). Disability and health: Key facts. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health
  146. Wisher, R. A., Brusso, R. C., Curnow, C. K., Hatfield, J., Paddock, A., & Spain, R. D. (2015). Formulating best practices and guidelines for emerging e-learning technologies. In B. H. Khan, & M. Ally (Eds.), International handbook of e-learning volume 1 (pp. 127-139). Routledge.
  147. Wouters, P., Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorp, H., & Van Der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0031311
  148. Xie, S., Zhang, J., & Ho, Y.-S. (2008). Assessment of world aerosol research trends by bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 77, 113-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1928-0
  149. Zhu, X., & Liu, J. (2020). Education in and after COVID-19: Immediate responses and long-term visions. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 695-699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00126-3
  150. Zilz, W., & Pang, Y. (2021). Application of assistive technology in inclusive classrooms. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 16(7), 684-686. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1695963