Sensory Technology...The Next Steps for special needs.

Welcome
Intro +Aims
---------------------------

Background
Objectives
---------------------------

Evaluations
products +soundbeam+music box + marketplace
---------------------------

Technologies
camera vision+cctv+sensors +
---------------------------

Future
blue skies +sensors +robots +scanners
---------------------------

Suggestions
ideas +recommendations
---------------------------

My Work
soundtoys +touchscreen+software +
---------------------------

Whats Next
funding + How

---------------------------

Links +Contact
contribute +
---------------------------------

 

Welcome. Introductions and Aims

NOTE ALL PAGES IN THIS SITE ARE IN CONTINUAL DEVELOPMENT AND WILL CHANGE OFTEN IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS.

Lastest changes 1.2.2010.

R&D – Sensory Technology. Extending experience for special needs..

This R and D explore the needs of young people with complex disabilities in terms of their communication options. The aim is to create new options and understanding based on the current and future uses of technologies for special needs with a view to fundraising to create new and useful tools that would enables new experience for this group.  

The objective is to generative new ideas, imagine then create new technological possibilities, and to conceive of new ways for this group to communicate using digital technologies. 

Stanza has been commissioned by Lanternhouse International for this initial research.

Note. I will make this website and research open to the public, the website is also open for contributions.

A this stage the long term possibilities could include:-

Ways to use new tech to enhance the experience of the environment.  Using  sensors, vision tracking and locative media. (not just the standard products promoted via Bett Show or Space Kraft catalogue)

The focus of this piece of R&D is to create new options and visions for uses of new technologies and if necessary recommend the development of new tools or modular design processes and collaborations that might  enable this to happen.

Possible ways to involve musicians and artists to help develop the communication methods using new and to be specified technologies.
 

This R&D aims to explore:

  • Current provision - the provision currently available to this group in terms of interactive sensory communication equipment and multi-sensory environments.  For example: Sound Beam Space I2, Interactive image, Skoog Music etc
  • Possible development - What is possible in terms of technology ( brain scanners , sensors, wireless cameras, robotics, pdas etc?  What could be used to communicate with these students and for them to communicate with each other?
  • What are the real needs of the user outside of curricular based modules?
  • Transitional routes - There is much concern about what happens to students such as those at Beaumont when their college course comes to an end and that more needs to be available to support them in living as independently as possible. 
  • What options are there for sensory rooms?  Should they be abandoned or can one create a more aesthetic fulfilling independent experience that resonates to any movement and sounds that might enable students to just be in the space on their own to initiates events and processes and variables..
  • What can be developed for students to take with them and use outside the college environment. I comms devices GPS tracking. Use of portable devices is created for students to use?

 

This R&D involves visiting Beaumont College in Lancaster, meeting with the Principal Graeme Pyle and key staff including Sue Beresford.  It also involves visiting the students and staff to get a broad understanding of the issues and conditions involved.  The aim is to get an overall appreciation of the conditions involved, not develop specific relationships with individual students.

The R&D is about fact-finding and exploring possibilities.  We will try to be transparent in our goals and all the R and D will be shared and made pubic.

It’s important to be open to visiting other organisations/meeting other researchers.  Possible visits to further research include:

  • Sandside School is a special needs school in Ulverston which also has a sensory installation/Sound Beam room.  Students from here form part of the intake for Beaumont.
  • Visit Space Centre  - largest multi-sensory environment in UK. www.thespacecentre.org/spacecentral

 

This R&D would is for a three week period in early 2010

Outputs:

  • A presentation to Lanternhouse and Beaumont teams if requested.
  • A written report on findings which would provide input for funding bids
  • Sharing material for Lanternhouse website and online presence.
  • Concrete recommendations for next stage development and funding avenues.

This work may be developed in the future and there will be every opportunity for artists to develop a partnership as well as any other artists / technologists to make a contribution.

Initial Thoughts:

The users' enjoyment factor, seems to me to be the main reason to use any technology and develop experience. It begins to sound like one can be so focused on their own constructs / objectives that the students needs are in danger of being overlooked.

One questions which comes up.  Are they trying too hard to make the students have other kinds of experience, which might not be appropriate to them as individuals? How do they know what the students want if they cannot ask them…(in reference to the very special needs group) ..how is the experience evaluated?

The enjoyment factor is mentioned in the Space Centre mission statement they mention and  address this issue of user-enjoyment as an objective rather than the blue sky objective of autonomy and independence.


How do we know that a day out at the park might be equally valid, or indeed more stimulating, as creating a virtual climbing wall of a mountain like the Space Centre want to do. Why recreate the real world and make it virtual: take them up the real mountain.

I also question this approach, but from a slightly different perspective - the mental and emotional rather than physical impact - I am not entirely sure that their notion of 'enjoyment would necessarily be right for people with very special needs - why not give them  drugs? Could  this have the same potentially devastating // exhilarating possibilities? While the type of experience is controllable, the internal response to an alternative 'reality' might cause extreme unhinging to an individual who's world is small and secure. Do they need this expansion? What happens after the experience? Suppose they have a fabulous experience, will the individuals be able to process that they cannot stay in the experience - could it make them less happy with life in the long term?

These thoughts cause me to feel that I really don't know enough about the client base (ie end user).

What do they want? What do they need? What and how should they be challenged to explore / develop? How appropriate is it to expect autonomy / independence among this group? Will 'independence' become a pathway to isolation?

Ultimately, is this a brave new world in construction and communication technology development which will lead to the withdrawal of physical contact with other humans? In my very limited experience of working with special needs, these clients specifically enjoyed human interaction; and sensitivity to their individual needs, which I guess mostly comes from able bodied humans. In giving them technology which on the surface looks to improve their experience of life and communication possibilities with each other, one can see how funders might begin to withdraw support for the old school human touch? (one thing at the expense of another)

Another issue in terms of designing any system is understanding the users base. One cannot generalize. What does the science of brain scanning tell us about the capabilities of our client base. (Ethical problem). It would be useful to know and categorize input responses to any system developed. Put our client base in the middle of an experiment. To make and test such a system clients would have to  be placed at the centre of the research. (bigger ethical problem since they cannot even consent to do this)

I don’t have the answers to this all I can suggest are a series of projects based on my knowledge (that would definately offer alternatives to what I have seen. And in most cases I can offer and suggest alternatives that are better than for example sensory rooms I have seen. I  will incorporate these suggestions as project /documents in the my projects page and in this website

Ethics Policy

Ethical considerations and ethics policy? and code of conduct needs to be drawn up. What are the privacy and legal issues in this field of work?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to be involved in development, have something to say or contribute, or have a project in mind :- 

All research by Stanza.

All my artwork can be seen at my main website....www.stanza.co.uk

please email Stanza@sublime.net

 

For copyright regarding this document and the website please speak to...Lanternhouse International

 

Educate. Experience. Environment.