{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011274509803921568, 'mean_word_length': 4.957664233576643, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Use of a Video Assistive Device in a University Course in Laboratory Science: A Case Study

Many countries, including Canada (Government of Ontario, 2005) and the United States (U.S. Government, 2004) have legislated the provision of assistive devices for persons with disabilities during their education and subsequent employment to enable them to contribute more fully to society. The complex visual requirements of the laboratory component of many university science courses require a collaboration between a student with low vision and a particular university science department to determine which devices are appropriate for each student. A number of articles have addressed this issue for physics students who are totally blind and use special hardware (see, for example, Carver, 1967; Parry, Brazier, & Fischbach, 1997; University of Nottingham, 2009; Windelborn, 1999) or software (such as Thompson, 2005). The assistive devices described in those articles allow limited access to certain kinds of experiments, usually in mechanics, but are not applicable in general. In contrast, this article addresses the use of modern video technology to allow a student with low vision to participate almost fully in a standard university science program that includes laboratory experiments. CASE STUDY A student with low vision (the first author) registered in the introductory physics course at Trent University in the fall of 2009. His Snellen visual acuity fluctuates significantly, with an average acuity of about 20/400. This low acuity presented obvious difficulties for him with the laboratory component of the course, for which he relied on his lab partner for the setup of the apparatus and the collection of data, although he was a full participant in the data analysis. The student then decided to major in Trent's program in chemical physics. Because the required physics labs have visual components, these components needed to be evaluated for accessibility. The available options were to (1) continue relying on sighted classmates as in his first-year course, (2) create a different "theoretical physics" degree program that did not require a laboratory component, or (3) work with the student to find assistive technology that would allow him to participate in a meaningful way in setting up equipment and recording data. The student and the department agreed that familiarity with laboratory equipment and the skill in recording data properly were desirable benefits ensuing from the laboratory component and that would be expected by an employer of a physics or chemistry graduate, so the third option were the best one if it was possible. Even if the student continued into theoretical areas, laboratory experience would assist him in relating theory to an experiment. Selection of the assistive device Without an assistive device, the student could see the outline of a power supply or a signal generator but could not tell them apart visually or see the gradations on the dials. He could not select the voltage, current, or resistance on a digital multimeter or its banana-plug holes in which to insert patch cords. He also could not see his hands well enough to insert the patch cords even if he could have seen the holes. Thus, he could not assemble equipment, view physical results, or read meters to take data. For example, in the classic e/m (electron charge-to-mass ratio) experiment, he could not see the circular path of an electron beam in a magnetic field as evidenced by the faint glow from the excited mercury vapor or the pins that fluoresce, when struck by the beam, that determine the radius of the beam. To participate fully in an undergraduate experiment, he was required to see well enough to do all of these tasks while having his hands free to manipulate the equipment. The assistive device described here satisfied all these requirements. The student chose the Acrobat Panel and Long Arm (Enhanced Vision Systems, United States) for assessment. The weight is 3.5 pounds (1.6 kilograms) for the camera, long arm, and clamp, and 8 ounces (0. …