|
1. what did you find 1.1. interesting about the article? The entire concept, "Mobility-For-All", was interesting as a whole, particularly the multi-phase development system that was implemented. The issues described and addressed in Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project were well-thought out. Often we take for granted the "artifacts" around us and never consider that people with cognitive disabilities have more difficulties understanding them. Using the technology available today, we are able to design systems that can "transcend the need to understand complex artifacts". 1.2. not interesting about the article? Nothing we could think of. The entire article was easy to read and understand and the topic itself was fascinating. 2. what do you consider the main message of the article? There is a need to improve the current transporation system such that it is usable for all sectors of a community. Addressing this need is possible using innovative mobile technology (PDAs, cell phones, GPS tracking devices, etc). 3. what did you find interesting about the systems? 3.1. Personal Travel Assistant The real-time prompting ("get ready", "please board now") are helpful because they lessen the complexity of the bus system (i.e. bus schedules). In addition, the unobtrusive monitoring of clients provides a reliable safety net for any breakdowns that may occur. 3.2. Memory Aiding Prompting System (MAPS) The support community can program the device based on each client's personal needs. Also, the clients have audio/visual prompts and a "Panic Button" to request caregiver assistance. 3.3. Lifeline This system unobtrusively monitors clients' activities by keeping track of task steps and the expected time threshold. This system is particularly useful in the case of detecting simple breakdowns (such as a client getting on the wrong bus and not knowing it). With people who have cognitive disabilities, the potential for a breakdown (system or human errors) is more likely and the effects are more serious. The panic button provided in the device will help them get the immediate assistance they need. 4. do you know of other papers, ideas, and systems which are closely related to the article and the systems? The OnStar roadside-assistance service provides a similar tracking and support mechanism. If a car breaks down, clients can request outside assistance. Another tracking system already in use is the one used to monitor residents of halfway houses. 5. what do the article and the associated systems say about 5.1. design From the initial stages, end-users, in this case the clients and the caregivers, are involved in the design of the system. 5.2. learning In this particular context, learning to use public transportation independently, one requires several cognitive skills that most people overlook. Most users of public transportation are able to processes several cognitive steps at once whereas people with cognitive disabilities need to learn each skill explicitly. 5.3. collaboration "Mobility-For_All" works with other research projects (i.e. the MANTIS project) to find alternative implementations or potential enhancements to existing designs. Also, the client and support communities are collaborating with the "Mobility-For-All" project to find an appropriate solution to the transporation problem faced by the disabled. 5.4. innovative media to support these activities? PDAs, cell phones, MANTIS wireless sensor nodes, and GPS devices are used in an attempt to lighten the cognitive load of learning how to use the transporation system. 6. are themes discussed in the article which you would like to know more about? We would like to know more details about the actual design of the prompting PDA and the Lifeline system. 7. do you have any ideas how this research could / should be extended (based on your own knowledge and experience)? The next step would be to test these devices in real world situations with proper safety precautions in place (i.e. trained personnel). Only after thorough testing will we be able to determine if the system is even practical. As stated in the article, even in preliminary testing, the success rate was significantly low or required a significant amount of training to achieve success.
|
