Date | May 2018 | Marks available | 2 | Reference code | 18M.3.HL.TZ0.1 |
Level | HL | Paper | 3 (model questions) | Time zone | no time zone |
Command term | Identify | Question number | 1 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Students should be provided with the pre-release document ahead of the May 2018 HL paper 3 examination, this can be found under the "Your tests" tab > supplemental materials > May 2018 HL paper 3 pre-release document: Accessibility.
Improving the accessibility to the curriculum for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND)
Source 1: Tayton School
Tayton School is a primary school that teaches 500 children aged between 5 and 12. There are three classes in each year group, with a maximum of 24 students in each class. The school’s motto is “Education for Everyone”, and inclusion is at the heart of the school’s mission.
The school’s Inclusion Department consists of five full-time staff, led by Sandra, and 10 learning support assistants who are active in working with the children. Sandra has recently produced a report on the students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in the school, in which she found that the increasing numbers of students, and the types of SEND, means that the schools needs to invest in expanding the amount of support for the students (see Table 1).
Table 1: SEND at Tayton School
Sandra’s report argues that, next year, the work of the Inclusion Department would be more effective if the school purchased educational digital technologies, such as social robots and assistive technologies.
Source 2: Social robots in education
Sandra researched social robots and came back to the department meeting with this information:
In 2020, a report on the use of social robots in education was published by a prestigious university professor, who concluded that social robots have the potential to be a key player in education in the way textbooks and whiteboards have been in the past. A social robot has the potential to support students in ways that could never have been envisaged 20 years ago. However, there are significant technical limitations, particularly linked to the social robot’s ability to interact with students, that will restrict their usability for the next few years
Source 3: Mary sees the positives
Mary, one of the learning assistants at Tayton School, says:
“As a parent of two school-age children, I think the potential introduction of social robots has both advantages and disadvantages. My children thought the idea of having a robot that sits with them very exciting, and I think they would do what the robot asks without questioning it. The robot will also be much more patient while they are learning their times tables!” (See Figure 1).
Figure 1: Students interacting with a social robot
[Source: pexels.com]
Source 4: James has doubts
James, another learning assistant at Tayton School, is wary of the overuse of digital technology in schools for children with special needs based on his experiences in other schools. He has found some research that supports his ideas.
[Source: pexels.com]
Identify two characteristics of a social robot that will make it accepted by students.
Tayton School has 30 students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Describe one assistive technology solution that could be used by these students.
Markscheme
Answers may include:
- Robots can be between 25 and 50 cm in size and work with students at eye level.
- Robots can have facial expressions that students can respond to.
- Robots can be personalized, such as using the student’s name or remembering things about them in their interactions.
Award [1] for each characteristic of a social robot identified up to [2] max.
Answers may include:
- Apps to help organize tasks.
- Mind mapping apps allow children to organize their thoughts and ideas, which can be reviewed.
- Apps to act as reminders and timers.
- Apps to set reminders can help children stay on task.
- Apps to stop you being distracted.
- Apps to block out any distractions, such as quieting notifications, blocking other apps.
Award [1] for identifying an example of an assistive technology solution and [1] for the description of that assistive technology up to [2] max.