Using Inclusive Design for People with Cognitive Limitations to Develop Online Training in the Workplace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whether it's downloading applications, doing research, using communication tools, shopping online, filling out a form or finding directions, having good digital competencies is essential in our contemporary society. But what about people with cognitive limitations (PCLs)? It appears that more than 31% of PCLs do not have the basic competencies to face this new digital reality and thus function harmoniously in society. To enable them to become autonomous in activities requiring the use of the Internet via a tablet, a research and development project is underway to create TAQ-TIC, an online digital literacy learning environment adapted to their needs. Using an inclusive design approach that puts the learner at the heart of the creation process, we validated the design, usability, and pedagogical readability of TAQ-TIC with PCLs. Findings emerged that allowed us to make recommendations for online training intended for PCLs, notably the addition of navigation indicators and contextual aids, the cleaning up of screen pages both graphically and textually, and the predominant use of video-based content.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".