For this reflection, please read the following:
- Kathrin M. Gerling, Regan L. Mandryk, and Michael R. Kalyn. 2013. Wheelchair-based game design for older adults. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, , Article 27 , 8 pages. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2513383.2513436
- Patrick Carrington, Kevin Chang, Helena Mentis, and Amy Hurst. 2015. "But, I don't take steps": Examining the Inaccessibility of Fitness Trackers for Wheelchair Athletes. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 193-201. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2809845
In your reflection, address the following topics in 400-600 words (total, word count not including the questions you write for class):
In Gerling et al., they were able to adapt the existing Kinect technology to be more accessible to people in wheelchairs. However, in Carrington et al., they suggest that an entirely new wearable fitness tracker has be to created. What other sorts of fitness technologies have you used, and how possible is it to adapt to people in wheelchairs?
Gerling et al. focused on wheelchair use by older adults, while Carrington et al. worked with athletes who use wheelchairs. How much do you think each paper's results generalize to a set of wheelchair users who are younger or use wheelchairs temporarily?
Please feel free to reflect on other portions of the paper (including strengths and weaknesses) if you find the above questions not fulfilling the word count.
Please remember to write 3-5 discussion questions for class.