Swales' Three-Move Model for Introductions (4/13/2010)

Swales’ Three-Move Model for Introductions

(Digital Literacy and Visual Impairments)

Bradford McKeon

Move 1: Establishing a Territory

With each passing day it seems like technological innovation is growing. Our use of the computer ranges from submitting homework to doing out own taxes. In a world where people can read everything from a screen, how does a blind person survive? It is important to make sure that those who cannot use regular everyday technology are accounted for.

Move 2: Establishing a Niche:

Many people assume that digital literacy presents a barrier for the blind. I wanted to know how the blind might adjust to a visual technological world. Instead of focusing on creating and improving helpful technologies, people often just say that there is a road block for the blind. I am focusing on the helpful technologies for the blind that make literacy easier, as well as adjusting to the technological age we live in.

Move 3: Occupying the Niche:

I set out to find research on the different technologies that are in place to assist the blind, including screen magnifiers and text to speech technologies. I wanted to learn about what was already out there, and how it can be improved. Overall I found many different technologies that are in place to assist the visually impaired. I would like to help show that digital literacy can be a helpful thing for the blind too. I have summarized different findings of several types of technologies for the visually impaired. I will present them, as well as any counter-claims and room for improvements in the different technologies.

Written Quiz On Chapters 7/8 Definition Vs. Fact

I started my research with a simple question. I just wanted to know how the blind adapt to our ever changing technological world. According to Everything’s an Argument by Andrea Lunsford, “Factual arguments tend to be driven by perceptions and evidence. A writer first notes something new or different or mistaken and wants to draw attention to it.” When I started I considered my topic an argument of fact. I noticed something that I took interest to and that is how I developed my subject.

I was hoping to find out what technologies were out there for the blind, and how they were accommodated in a society where almost everything can be done from the computer. According to Lunsford one of the first steps in identifying a factual argument is to identify the issue and then research the hypothesis. My hypothesis was that digital literacy can actually be a helpful thing for the blind. It was at this point however, that I ran into some trouble defining my hypothesis. What would a researcher consider to be “helpful?” What would a visually impaired person consider to be “helpful?” This is where my argument became more based on definition.

I figured a good place to start was to see what the researchers and experts were saying about the topic. According to Anne Morris and Helena Brading in their article E-literacy and the grey digital divide: a review with recommendations, “Visual impairment, strokes and Parkinson’s disease, for example, can all be barriers to using technology.” While this is true, and many researchers would agree, I wanted to know what kind of technologies were out there that were designed to assist the blind. This is more of an argument of definition, arguably what is helpful and what is not helpful. I found a lot of research that listed pages of different tools designed to help the visually impaired use computers. For example Hasselbring and Glaser stated in their article Use of Computer Technology to Help Students with Special Needs, “Fewer individuals recognize the great number of benefits that computer-based technologies may afford children with disabilities.” They go on to list many different “helpful” technologies that all make using the computer easier for the blind such as Descriptive Video Services that give auditory descriptions of visual words on a screen.

As I start to piece together all of my research, it is obvious to me that I am formulating an argument of both fact and definition. While I can argue just how accurate and encompassing a statistic may be, I can also argue what different researchers consider to be “helpful.” In Multiliteracies for a Digital Age Selber talks about “Functional Literacy.” I want to know if there is anything out there that can help the blind achieve functional literacy in terms of a computer, and being able to perform everyday tasks. With all of this in mind, I am piecing together my argument making sure that I have solid facts and clearly defined terms, because without that research would not be credible.

Reflection of Research Thus Far (4/6/2010)

After completing all of my research thus far, I can conclusively prove one thing. Researchers and writers are completely divided on my issue of how digital technology impacts the visually impaired. My specific question is basically to find out if technology can actually be a good thing for the blind and literacy. The conversation has been very interesting so far. Many researchers write pages and pages of data and examples that prove that digital literacy is a good thing for the visually impaired. For example, Ted Hasselbring and Candyce Williams Glaser (http://www.jstor.org/stable/1602691?seq=14) present an entire table filled with many different technologies that help the blind learn like everyone else with computers. Among the list are Computer Screen Magnifiers and Descriptive Video Services. Other researchers like Anne Morris and Helena Brading argue that, "Visual impairment, strokes and Parkinson’s disease, for example, can all be barriers to using technology" (http://jil.lboro.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/JIL/article/view/RA-V1-I3-2007-2/30).

I have not had any trouble finding research to answer my question, and support my theory, that technology can actually help the blind. However, there are a few problems with the research I have found. One problem is that many times the researcher does not take a definitive stand for either side of the issue. For example a researcher will provide proof that technology creates a roadblock for the blind, but in a later paragraph will list all of the helpful technologies that assist the blind. I feel this is a weak stance for a writer to take, but as long as the information is credible I can use it for my research. Another problem is the age of the research. Technology is changing every single day, and it is difficult for research to keep up. Research quoted from the 1980's will be outdated for the conversation in 2010. This means that as a researcher myself I have to watch to see when something was published, and judge its validity from that.

Overall the research process is going well and there is an abundance of information. Even thought I have to judge my information carefully, it is very easy to find the necessary information I need. My topic is coming along nicely, and my research question is becoming more and more defined with each new research article I find.