During the sessions, we got a
general acceptance and enthusiasm on participation but with sporadic situations of resistance or disinterest.
We had more difficulty connecting to the students who, somehow, were going through a period of great emotional instability in their lives and, occasionally, with extremely shy students, we also observed saturation mixed with reservation to participate.
Some of the participants showed more difficulty to concentrate on a task. On these situations we tried to work with them, connecting and sharing participation. Some of them got really excited with the proposals: clapping, beating their feet on the ground and singing loudly in Special SOUND setups; exploring their bodies in multiple ways, sitting, standing, running, jumping, spinning, in Special MOVEMENT setups; and interacting with their self-images and appearance in Special ME setups, working their identity through self-portrait, using a webcam to film themselves freely — changing the view plan or subject and discovering the visual impact of video effects like colour and contrast.
We had more difficulty connecting to the students who, somehow, were going through a period of great emotional instability in their lives and, occasionally, with extremely shy students, we also observed saturation mixed with reservation to participate.
Some of the participants showed more difficulty to concentrate on a task. On these situations we tried to work with them, connecting and sharing participation. Some of them got really excited with the proposals: clapping, beating their feet on the ground and singing loudly in Special SOUND setups; exploring their bodies in multiple ways, sitting, standing, running, jumping, spinning, in Special MOVEMENT setups; and interacting with their self-images and appearance in Special ME setups, working their identity through self-portrait, using a webcam to film themselves freely — changing the view plan or subject and discovering the visual impact of video effects like colour and contrast.
Participants were
extremely different, so we got diverse reactions. For example, one of the students
refused to participate except for in Special
ME environments — session 6, prototype G — and she just gave us her true attention when she found
interest interacting with her own image, by capturing live video. On the other
hand, a student who had more difficulty co-ordination physical
equilibrium overcame motor constrictions exploring
tirelessly each environment and staying in sessions, in most cases, beyond the time
stipulated.
During the observation process, considering intellectual skills of the students, we documented easiness in understanding the environments, interfaces and different kinds of interaction, discriminating images and sounds. We tried to perceive the attention of the students — maintenance, division and alternation — through their attitudes and development of their own interaction methods. Students could explore image settings such as colours, black and white, brightness, transparency, saturation or contrast, and they could switch sounds.
We recorded their preferences and talked with them about those experiences. We could perceive their intentions, appreciating to see the resulting images, wanting to save them, demonstrating interest in their own work and giving us a positive feedback.
During the observation process, considering intellectual skills of the students, we documented easiness in understanding the environments, interfaces and different kinds of interaction, discriminating images and sounds. We tried to perceive the attention of the students — maintenance, division and alternation — through their attitudes and development of their own interaction methods. Students could explore image settings such as colours, black and white, brightness, transparency, saturation or contrast, and they could switch sounds.
We recorded their preferences and talked with them about those experiences. We could perceive their intentions, appreciating to see the resulting images, wanting to save them, demonstrating interest in their own work and giving us a positive feedback.
On emotional skills, we wanted to observe the interest and
involvement with proposals, and the facility to adapt and regulate their reactions
to the context. Behaviour was not an easy fit for a student who was always very
excited and anxious as well as two others who showed some apathy, preferring to
talk about other things. However, in most cases we perceived satisfaction from their
smiles and laughter and their constant search for feedback.
On personality skills, we
noticed curiosity, excitement, persistence and cognitive flexibility to setup
interaction challenges. Most students accepted and adapted to all proposals,
even when they were so different, coming freely to fruition.
On interpersonal
and intrapersonal skills, we observed approval of the
project, with a certain fascination. In most cases, participants arrived at and
left sessions with a positive attitude. We believe we witnessed moments of
great self-confidence and autonomy, in some cases interspersed with fears and
lack of self-confidence in their own actions. Whenever we could, we positively reinforced performance, increasing
self-confidence, self-esteem and self-concept of participants. On Special ME setups, collaborative
interaction increased by the live video potential, emphasized communication
opportunities to give feedback to the students promoting more evident self-confidence.
On psychomotor skills, we felt that for some of these students there was a
great opportunity to demonstrate physical skills of which they became proud —
such as pirouettes, ball tricks, imitation of voices — increasing the feeling
of inclusion, and also as a way to overcoming physical requirements and motor constrictions with joy. And as we were not asking them to
use a specific physical ability, they could value and use whatever they had in
them to express themselves. And this was the same with artistic
skills: we just valued the individual expression of these students to explore
sound and image, identifying different exploration methods and sensitivities.
Publications
2014 Sá, K.; Almeida, M.; Moreira, A. (2014) “Encouraging Ability with Interactive Artistic
Environments”. BRAGA2014: Embracing Inclusive
Approaches — 14-17 July 2014, Braga, Portugal. Available in http://webs.ie.uminho.pt/e-book/
2013 Sá, K. (2013) Os ambientes artísticos interativos na inclusão de alunos com Necessidades Educativas Especiais. PHD, available in http://ria.ua.pt/handle/10773/10970
2012 Sá, K.; Almeida, M.; Moreira, A. (2012) “Special INPUT: Promoting Ability with Interactive Artistic Environments”. 9th International Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies — ICDVRAT 2012 —10-12 September 2012, Laval, France. Available in http://www.icdvrat.org/2012/papers/ICDVRAT2012_SP19_Sa_etal.pdf
2012 Sá, K.; Almeida, M.; Moreira, A. (2012) “Interactive Artistic Environments Inclusion through art”. ResearchDay 2012. Aveiro University. Poster.
2011 Sá, K.; Almeida, M.; Moreira, A. (2011) “ Ambientes Artísticos Interativos : Recursos Educativos no Apoio às
Necessidades Educativas Especiais”. Cadernos
SACAUSEF - Acessibilidade de recursos Educativos
Digitais. N.6, Available in http://erte.dgidc.min-
edu.pt/index.php
section=400&module=navigationmodule
2011 Sá, K.; Almeida, M.; Moreira, A. (2011) “Ambientes
Artísticos Interativos no Currículo de Alunos com
Necessidades Específicas Individuais”. Atas do I
Encontro Nacional "Superar Barreiras com TIC: Políticas,
Ideias e Práticas", Universidade de Aveiro, 17 e 18 de
Junho de 2011. Indagagio Didáticas, Revista online do
Centro de Investigação em Didática e Tecnologia na
Formação de Formadores. V.3, n.2. Available in http://revistas.ua.pt/index.php/ID/article/view/1045