AI-based apps can facilitate learning for all post-secondary students and may also be useful for students with disabilities. Here we share some reflections from discussions that took place during two advisory board meetings on the use of such apps for students with disabilities at the post-secondary level.

The present study set out to explore effective teaching techniques using PowerPoint for post-secondary students with disabilities by comparing their views to those of students without disabilities. 284 Canadian post-secondary social science students, 75 of whom self-reported a disability, were surveyed about what aspects of PowerPoint use helps them learn. The good news is that the results indicate many similarities between the views of students with and without disabilities. Although all students felt that having PowerPoint available online was highly desirable, for students with disabilities this was perceived as an important disability accommodation. All students preferred that PowerPoint slides be made available before class in both PowerPoint and PDF formats; however, this was particularly important to students with disabilities. All students preferred that professors walk around some of the time rather than simply stand beside the lectern, that they select slides with good contrast rather than an interesting but busy background template, that they write concepts in full sentences as opposed to key words only, and that PowerPoint images be accompanied by text rather than presenting images only. Overall, our findings show that well-designed PowerPoint slides which incorporate accessibility features (easily included by using the Accessibility Checker feature of PowerPoint) can benefit everyone. Notably, fewer than half (41%) of the students with disabilities had registered with the college to receive disability-related accommodations; therefore, it is important that PowerPoint, as used by professors, be accessible to this large segment of the population of students with disabilities. Informative slides with a clear template and good contrast, along with an engaging presentation style, are likely to benefit everyone. Our findings also show that, contrary to the fears of many educators, students are unlikely to miss class if slides are posted online. Moreover, this is equally true for academically stronger as well as weaker students.

We explored students’ perspectives about their professors’ use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and compared these to the views of professors deemed by their students to be excellent in their use of ICTs. 311 students completed an online questionnaire and nominated up to three of their professors who used technology in a way that worked well for them. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 114 of the nominated professors, who also completed a checklist of technologies used in their teaching. There are some technologies that students said worked well for them that not many professors used in their teaching, such as online tests / quizzes, podcasts, and clickers. However, there were some technologies that both students and professors agreed did not facilitate learning, such as digital text books, blogs and chat rooms. Finally, there was also agreement among professors and students about technologies that did help with learning, such as e-mails, videos and online submission of assignments.Both student and professor perspectives need to be considered when evaluating what technologies work in teaching. Future research should examine why students prefer certain technologies. In addition, reasons for the discrepancies between professors and student views needs further investigation.

Our goal was to explore the technology related pedagogical practices of college professors deemed by their students to be excellent in using technology in their teaching. We explored the views of 114 community / junior college professors who were nominated by their students as excellent in using technology in their teaching using both questionnaires and interview methods. Results were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results show no gender or years teaching in college differences in professors’ self rated proficiency or comfort with technologies. Results also show that most professors taught themselves how to use technologies with the help of online resources, through trial and error, and with help from colleagues and support staff. Challenges using technology were related primarily to technical problems, such as technologies not working and the institution's computers and networks being slow. However, professors in our sample usually had a back-up plan and found ways to carry on even if the technology failed. Our findings report on the most and least frequently used technologies in face-to-face teaching, on how professors typically used the course management system, on how professors communicate with students, including the very small number who used social media to do this, and the likelihood of allowing students to use their personal mobile technology in class. Our findings also show that the professors showed their students how to use technologies required for the course. We discuss the practical significance of our findings and their implications for faculty, students, and the institution itself. In particular, we make recommendations about the need for ongoing collaboration between the institution, the professors, and the students and about technology related professional development professors would like to see their college provide.

Dans le cadre d’un projet subventionne par le Fonds de recherche du Quebec - societe et culture, presentation des resultats des entrevues avec 114 enseignants du collegial qui ont ete choisis par leurs etudiants pour l’excellence de leur utilisation de la technologie. Ce travail aborde avec eux leur utilisation des plateformes numeriques et comment ils sont arrives a surmonter les defis lies a l’utilisation des technologies de l’information et des communications. Realise en collaboration avec Mary Jorgensen, Alice Havel, Catherine Fichten, Cristina Vitouchanskaia, Evelyne Marcil, Jillian Budd et Laura Schaffer

Ce document est base sur le rapport final d’un projet finance par le Fonds de recherche du Quebec – Societe et culture (FRQSC) et son partenaire, le ministere de l’Education et de l’Enseignement Superieur (MEES) dans le cadre du programme Actions concertees Perseverance et reussite scolaires.

Laura King, M.A. Robert Cassidy, Ph.D. Mary Jorgensen, B.A. Tali Heiman, Ph.D. Alex Lussier, DEC Maureen Hewlett, M.Sc. Catherine Fichten, Ph.D. Catherine Loiselle, M. A. . Alice Havel, Ph.D. Ryan Moon Rhonda Amsel, M.Sc. Nicole Perreault Tiiu Poldma, Ph.D. Odette Raymond, M.Ed Jillian Budd, M.A. Rafael Scapin, Ph.D. Shirley Jorgensen, M.B.A. James Sparks, M.Ed Evelyne Marcil, M.A. Roberta Thomson, M.A. Mai Nhu Nguyen, B.A. Marc Tremblay, B.A. Alexandre Chauvin, M.A. Susan Wileman, M.Ed. Jennison Asuncion, M.A.

This document is based on the final report of a projet funded by the Fonds de recherche du Quebec – Societe et culture (FRQSC) and its partner the ministere de l’Education et de l’Enseignement superieur (MEES) for the program Actions concertees Perseverance et reussite scolaires.