University teaching skills in ICT and disability. The case of the Autonomous Community of Madrid

Vol.:(0123456789) Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12314-2 1 3 University teaching skills inICT anddisability. The case oftheAutonomous Community ofMadrid PedroRomán‑Graván1· JoséFernández‑Cerero1· MartaMontenegro‑Rueda1 · MiguelMaríaReyes‑Rebollo1 Received: 19 December 2022 / Accepted: 27 October 2023 / Published online: 7 December 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract Teachers must be prepared to serve all learners, regardless of their abilities or needs in this information and communication society. This implies developing the necessary competences to provide inclusive education to all students. The purpose of this study was to investigate the opinion of university teachers in the Autonomous Community of Madrid on their training in the use of technologies to support students with disabilities. To carry out this research, a descriptive approach combining both quantitative and qualitative methods was used. The final sample consisted of 106 university teachers (information collected through questionnaires) and 8 professionals from ICT Production Resource Centres and Services for People with Disabilities in the respective universities (information collected through interviews). Two data collection instruments were used: an ad-hoc questionnaire as a data collection instrument, and a semi-structured interview. The results of the study showed that university teachers have a low level of competence in the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) to support students with disabilities. The lack of teacher training negatively affects the inclusion process in university education institutions. Higher education institutions need to promote the training of teachers in the use of technologies to cater for diversity. Keywords Information and communication technology· Disability· Teacher education· Higher education * Marta Montenegro-Rueda [email protected] Pedro Román-Graván [email protected] José Fernández-Cerero [email protected] Miguel María Reyes-Rebollo mmre[email protected] 1 Department ofTeaching andEducational Organization, University ofSevilla, C/ Pirotecnia s/n, 41013Seville, Spain 12654 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 1 Introduction Currently, digital technologies have enormous potential to generate significant changes, although we have not yet fully discovered how to take advantage of all their benefits (UNESCO, 2021). Specifically, in the field of education, it presents important opportunities to improve the quality, accessibility and equity of education (European Commission, 2012), but we are still far from achieving an effective integration of these technologies in education.Universities and higher education institutions cannot remain detached from this technological reality; instead, they must formulate, create, and implement educational and training policies and initiatives to avoid standing on the sidelines of technology. Consequently, higher education institutions should actively engage in teaching and learning processes facilitated by technology, ensuring that no one is left behind. It’s important to keep in mind that the quality of an education system is gauged by the quality of its educators (OCDE, 2018). Therefore, the cultivation of various skills, including digital proficiency, is deemed a fundamental element in achieving educational inclusivity. In this vein, various policies developed in recent years across Europe call upon higher education institutions to embrace inclusivity. Several international declarations underscore this point, including those of the European Union (2012), the United Nations (2015), The European Union Strategy2020 (European Commission, 2010), and the 2030 Agenda, particularly Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 on education (European Union, 2012). In light of this, the significance of inclusion and equity serves as the bedrock for delivering quality education and fostering learning opportunities for all students, including those with disabilities.In this context, this study stands out for its innovative approach focused on assessing the level of training in the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) among university faculty, especially in relation to support for students with disabilities. Its relevance lies in the contribution it will make to shed light on the current situation of training in assistive technologies in higher education, specifically about the inclusion of students with disabilities. In addition, this study will raise the urgent need to implement concrete and specific measures to improve the training of university faculty in this crucial field. Its potential impact extends to promoting a more inclusive and accessible academic environment for all students, regardless of their abilities. 2 Research onICT anddisability inhigher education Scientific production in relation to the integration of ICT in higher education for students with has been growing steadily in recent years. Studies focus on two directions, on the one hand on the opportunities offered by ICTs to students with disabilities, and on the other hand, on the limitations encountered in their implementation (Montenegro-Rueda & Fernández-Cerero, 2021). According to the United Nations International Convention on the Rights of Persons with 12655 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 Disabilities (2006), students with disabilities are those who have "long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others". In the educational context, this definition refers to those students who have special educational needs arising from their disability, and who require specific adaptations, support, and resources in order to access learning and participate fully in the educational environment. In this sense, more attention should be paid to inclusion and equity as the foundations for quality education and learning, which requires not only the need to remove architectural barriers, but also virtual spaces and non-inclusive processes. This, many, many authors have identified the obstacles faced by these students during their trajectory in the education system (O’Byrne et al., 2019; Odame etal., 2021), where classroom practices are considered an obstacle to permanence (López Gavira etal., 2021). It is in this context, where technology and communication are fundamental, that teachers need to be prepared to serve all students, including those with disabilities (Sánchez etal., 2019). Technologies can constitute the framework that will allow them to carry out tasks adapted to their possibilities and interests, in such a way as to provide these university students with greater opportunities for labour market insertion and social autonomy. Hence, learning with ICT as support for people with disabilities has been receiving a strong boost in recent years, mainly through scientific publications and the development of assistive technologies (Fernández-Batanero etal., 2022a). The digital training of university teaching staff is essential to adequately serve students with disabilities, as it allows them to adapt their teaching to the specific needs of each student (García-Sánchez etal., 2019). Their lack of training in the use of technologies negatively affects the inclusion process in university educational centres (Contreras etal., 2020). This training should not only focus on the use of technological tools, but also on the adoption of an inclusive perspective and attention to diversity, with the aim of fostering educational inclusion (Sandoval-Escobar etal., 2020). Due to the importance of the inclusion of technology to cater for students with disabilities in the university environment, a priority line of action has been highlighted that has revolved around the "professional development of teachers" with the aim of training them in technological competences and educational inclusion (Fernández Batanero etal., 2021a), both in the international context, demonstrating the specific urgency of adjusting the digital teacher training of teaching staff in university institutions (Manaour Almutairi etal., 2020). In the Spanish context, studies on ICT in general are also abundant, but those in relation to technology and disability in higher education are very limited. It is true that, despite this, there is a growing concern on the part of teachers about their training, in order to improve the expectations of this type of students through ICT (Fernández Batanero etal., 2022a). Technological training is one of the main obstacles that teachers face when responding to the needs of students with disabilities (Kurt etal., 2016; Agreda Montoro etal., 2019; Sánchez etal., 2019; Montenegro-Rueda & Fernández-Cerero, 2021). 12656 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 It is important to point out that the technological training of teachers has been very relevant after the health crisis caused by COVID-19, where it has become clear that, for example, the age of the teachers has been an important aspect when it comes to facing the technological challenges posed by ICT; different studies have even associated it with mental health problems (Gyampoh etal., 2020). In this sense, in this study we will focus on two main variables related to teachers: gender and age. Focusing the study on gender and age rather than years of experience is justified due to their relevance in the educational context, as gender and age can influence teachers’ adoption and perception of information and communication technologies (ICT), particularly in the area of inclusion of students with disabilities. Furthermore, this gender perspective is important for identifying possible gender inequalities in digital competence and could lead to more targeted approaches to address gender technology gaps. In this specific local context of the Autonomous Community of Madrid, Spain, exploring how gender and age influence teachers’ digital competence will provide valuable information for local educational policies and teacher training. Furthermore, by considering these factors along with others, such as training and perceived barriers, a multidimensional approach is created that will contribute to a better understanding of the situation and needs of teachers in relation to technology and the inclusion of students with disabilities, which in turn will allow for more targeted and effective recommendations to improve university education in this context. In conclusion, university institutions are aware of the high positive impact that an effective integration of these tools can have as support for students with disabilities (Perera-Rodríguez & Moriña Díez, 2019; Montenegro-Rueda etal., 2023), not in vain, most universities have specific support services to respond to the needs of these students (Román Graván & Fernández Cerero, 2022), developing an inclusive culture by offering very interesting specific resources, preferential attention to students, raising awareness in the university community, with a centralised access system or programme in these specific services that allows immediate detection and support for these students (Moliner etal., 2019). In this context of technological training and disability, we propose the following study with the intention of further investigating and promoting an increasingly inclusive education. 3 Objectives andresearch questions The general objective of the study was to investigate the level of training and technological knowledge that university teachers in the Faculties of Education Sciences in the Autonomous Community of Madrid (Spain) have regarding the application of ICT as a support for students with disabilities, The data will be based on questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to show what the real situation is. Obtaining this data will allow us to evaluate the situation and take effective measures to improve university education in the country. This research has been carried out through the following three specific objectives: 12657 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 a) To find out whether the level of training and technological knowledge is determined by the gender of teachers. b) To find out whether the level of training and technological knowledge regarding the application of ICT in people with disabilities is the same or different depending on the age of the teachers. c) To find out what factors are associated with the promotion and development of training experiences, as well as the barriers and obstacles encountered by teachers when it comes to inclusive digital training. More specifically, questions have been addressed: Q1. Are university teachers prepared to use information and communication technologies as learning aids for students with disabilities? Q2. Does teacher gender have a significant influence on the level of digital competence? Q3. Is there a relationship between the age of university teachers and their level of digital competence? Q4. What factors are associated with the promotion and development of ICT training experiences for students with disabilities? Q5. What barriers or obstacles hinder the training of these teachers? 4 Method 4.1 Design andsample In order to meet the objectives of the study, a descriptive research design based on a mixed method (quantitative and qualitative) was chosen. A cross-sectional, descriptive, and predictive quantitative study was carried out, which included university teachers from the Autonomous Community of Madrid, and this information was collected by means of a questionnaire. Questioning teachers about their digital competence in teaching students with disabilities is valuable because it allows them to identify strengths and weaknesses, personalise training and improve digital inclusion in the classroom. The qualitative part is based on an interpretative paradigmatic perspective, and from a clearly naturalistic ontology and epistemology (Grounded Theory), proposed by Glaser & Strauss (1967). The information collection strategy was a semi-structured interview with key informants from university support centres (directors and managers of ICT Production Resource Centres and Services for People with Disabilities in the respective universities). It is important to interview the directors of the universities’ digital resource centres and student disability services, as these professionals are responsible for providing the necessary support and resources for teachers to improve their digital competence and ensure inclusive and quality education for all students, including those with disabilities. Heads of these centres can provide information on the programmes and resources available to improve teachers’ digital literacy, as well as the strategies and tools that are being implemented to ensure accessibility and inclusion in online learning. In addition, 12658 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 service managers for students with disabilities can provide valuable information about the needs and demands of students with disabilities, and how teachers can adapt their teaching and materials to make it accessible and appropriate to the different needs of students. In short, interviews with these professionals can provide valuable insights into the level of digital readiness of university teaching staff and the measures needed to improve their digital competence and inclusion in learning. With regard to the context of the study (Autonomous Community of Madrid), it must be said that it is home to the largest concentration of students in Spain and one of the largest in Europe. Located in the centre of the Spanish state, it contains in its territory (academic year 2021–2022) 6 public universities and 11 private universities, with more than 18,457 university teachers, of which more than 2000 are attached to education centres and faculties. In order to collect data, a non-probabilistic purposive and snowball sampling was used, guaranteeing at all times the protection of the privacy of the participants. The subjects were recruited using non-probability, purposive, snowball sampling, since the aim is to obtain detailed information from a specific population that is difficult to reach or is not properly recorded in a database. Data collection took place during the academic year 2021–2022, during the months of November and January. In this study we worked with a sample of 106 university teachers from the Community of Madrid, all of them belonging to the Faculties of Education Sciences of 4 public universities (Universidad de Alcalá, Universidad Autónoma, Universidad Complutense and Universidad Rey Juan Carlos) and 6 private universities (Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio, Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Universidad Camilo José Cela, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Universidad San Pablo CEU and Universidad Pontificia Comillas). The sample consisted of 37 men (35%) and 69 women (65%). The number of teachers from public universities was 55 (51.94%) and 51 (48.06%) from private universities. Figure 1 shows the percentage of teachers who completed the questionnaire according to age. 6.40% 11.50% 56% 26.90% Under 30 years old. Between 31 and 40 years old. Between 41 and 55 years old. Over 55 years old. Fig. 1 Percentage of participants according to age 12659 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 By age, teachers aged between 41 and 55 stand out (n = 59, f = 56%), followed by those over 55 (n = 28, f = 26,9%). To a lesser extent, teachers aged between 31 and 40 (n = 12, f = 11,5%), and the youngest: under 30 (n = 7, f = 6,4%). With regard to the interviews, 6 professionals from the support services (ICT Production Resource Centres and Services for People with Disabilities) were interviewed. 37.5% (n = 3) of the key informants were men and 62.5% (n = 5) were women. 4.2 Sources ofdata collection 4.2.1 Questionnaire The instrument consisted of two blocks. The first block is made up of data concerning the teachers (gender, age). The second block is made up of a total of 61 items distributed in 7 dimensions (general (G), visual (V), auditory (AU), motor (M), cognitive (C), accessibility (ACC) and services (S)) (Annex 1).This part of the instrument consists of a Likert-type scale with 6 scores where value 1 referred to "you feel completely ineffective" and value 6 referred to "I master it completely". Table1 presents the dimensions and associated items. The validation of the questionnaire (content validity) was carried out using the expert judgment technique. For this, a group of 56 judges was initially selected who have professional experience in educational technology, professional experience in the context of special education, experience in the use of technologies with students with disabilities and have worked in an educational institution related to the field of education. area of special education. To select the judges we used the "Expert Competence Quotient" or "K-Quotient", which was calculated using the following formula: K = 1⁄2 (Kc + Ka), where Kc is the "Knowledge Coefficient" or the information the expert has about the topic or problem posed; and Ka is the "Argumentation Coefficient" or the substantiation of the experts’ criteria (Cabero Almenara etal., 2016). These data are obtained directly from the Table 1 Dimensions and associated items Dimensions Descriptions Items General General aspects of accessibility and regulations 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 Visual Accessibility for individuals with visual impairments 13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25 Auditory Accessibility for individuals with hearing impairments 26,27,28, 29, 30, 31, 32 Motor Accessibility for individuals with motor impairments 33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40 Cognitive Accessibility for individuals with cognitive impairments 41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49 Accessibility Overall accessibility for everyone 50,51,52,53,54,55,56 Services Support services and resources for disabilities 57,58,59,60,61 12660 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 evaluation offered by the expert in question A for Kc "Knowledge Coefficient" and in question B for Ka "Argumentation Coefficient" in Annex 2.The values used to determine the expert’s position are (Cruz Ramírez & Martínez Cepena, 2020): – 0.8 < K < 1.0 high competition coefficient. – 0.5 < K < 0.8 average competition coefficient – K < 0.5 low coefficient of competence In our study, the K coefficient was higher than 0.8 in 36 of the 56 experts initially selected, and it was this sample that was finally used to validate the questionnaire. The experts made their estimates in successive, anonymous rounds, trying to reach a consensus, but maintaining maximum autonomy on the part of the participants (Delphi Method). The reliability of the instrument was determined using Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s Omega (Ventura-León & Caycho-Rodríguez, 2017; Montenegro-Rueda & Fernández-Batanero, 2023), whose values are shown in Table2. The values obtained, according to O’Dwyer & Bernauer (2013), indicate high levels of reliability for both the whole instrument and its different dimensions. A total item correlation was also performed to assess whether the elimination of any item increased the reliability of the instrument, but this was not the case. The instrument had not been previously analysed to confirm its exploratory and confirmatory validity, so an analysis was carried out to check this. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used under the maximum likelihood method with varimax rotation. The KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) test was 0.934 and Bartlet’s test was significant (χ2 = 4213.824, p < 0.05). The final version explained 84.25% of the true variance. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed that the teachers’ data fitted the proposed theoretical model adequately. The coefficients met the thresholds established by Bentler (1989) and Schumacker and Lomax (2004). This model corroborated the factor structure formulated in the CFA, which consisted of six correlated latent variables. AMOS V.24 software was used to make the structural equation model. After validation, it was complemented by a pilot study, with the participation of 18 subjects with similar characteristics to Table 2 Reliability index Dimension Alpha Omega General (G) 0.965 0.970 Visual (V) 0.975 0.978 Auditory (AU) 0.968 0.971 Motor (M) 0.974 0.979 Cognitive (C) 0.979 0.981 Accessibility (ACC) 0.958 0.959 Services (S) 0.978 0.974 Total 0.991 0.998 12661 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 the main study population, under informed consent via Google Drive through an electronic form. The results obtained in the pilot test confirm that the instrument is highly reliable and stable (α = 0.948). 4.2.2 Interviews The key informant interviews were semi-structured and were based on an initial script organised around 5 dimensions: awareness and teacher preparation; development of training experiences; promotion of training; barriers to the development of training plans; priority in training. The selection of interview topics was based on a review of the existing literature on teacher education in the field of disability. From this review, the most relevant themes and dimensions of teacher education in this area were identified and an initial script of questions for the semi-structured interviews was organised. These topics were considered relevant to address the objectives of the main study, which sought to analyse the level of training of university teaching staff in the use of ICT and attention to diversity, particularly for students with disabilities.For its validation of the interview, the expert judgment strategy was obtained, using the Delphi method (Linstone & Turoff, 1975). The validation was carried out through a document attached to the interview, which arose from a set of open questions delivered to experts, initially selected by 36 judges. For the elaboration of the categories and the evaluation of deciding the answers as correct or incorrect of the interviewees, it has been conditioned by criteria of consistency and reliability. In this sense, after the construction process of the category system (matching between coders), and from the moment in which the coders (6 researchers) have made use of the category system (reliability), an adequate kappa coefficient has been obtained above of 0.75 (Fleiss, 1981). 4.2.3 Procedure Contact with the centres was made by means of a telephone call to those responsible, together with a letter of invitation to participate voluntarily in the research. The questionnaire was administered online and can be consulted at the following web address: https:// bit. ly/ fopti cydiscuest ionar io In relation to the interviews, it was decided to interview key informants (heads of ICT Production Resource Centres and Services for People with Disabilities in the respective universities), also because of our interest in understanding their perception, as professionals in management and training in education, of teacher training in ICT and disability, as well as the possible indicators that determine this training. It is important to know the opinion of these professionals, because through it it is possible to detect the real needs of teachers, since the supply of training depends on the demand made by them. The interviews were conducted by telephone by members of the working team, with an average duration of 15min. The selection procedure was carried out randomly, based on the invitation made in the first telephone contact with the university centres. 12668 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 beneficial use of ICT in inclusive education goes beyond mere fluency and ease of use, but requires an attitude and disposition towards their application and use in a pedagogically appropriate way. Therefore, it is essential to promote training initiatives and the use of ICT in education, regardless of the age of the teachers to be able to implement the technologies with students with disabilities. (Rodríguez Espina etal., 2014; Fernández Batanero etal., 2022c). With regard to the factors associated with the promotion and development of training experiences on the use of ICT by students with disabilities, it is clear that not only the lack of a specific training plans, but also the organisation of courses, seminars, workshops, etc. condition the promotion and development of experiences. These results are in line with other previous studies (Moliner etal., 2019; Román Graván & Fernández Cerero, 2022). Thus, the scarce supply of training in this line hinders the training of these teachers, as the increase in training courses could encourage teachers to use digital resources more frequently with these students (Tandika & Ndijuye, 2019). This coupled with "low awareness of issues such as learner diversity" or to the "lack of access to technology" make them intangible barriers. This aspect coincides with the study by Moliner etal. (2019) in the Valencian context. Furthermore, the development of digital competences in diversity is essential to ensure inclusive and equitable education. These courses are often designed in a generic way and do not consider the educational needs of students with disabilities. However, diversity training courses in digital environments can be effective when they are based on a learner-centred approach, adapted to the specific needs of learners with disabilities and use appropriate technological tools (Hernández-Ruiz, 2020). Ultimately, analysing the level of digital training of university teaching staff to serve students with disabilities is important for several reasons (Fernández Batanero etal., 2022b): Accessibility: Technology and digital tools can improve accessibility for students with disabilities. However, teachers need to be adequately trained to use these tools and make classroom content accessible to all. Adaptation: A teacher with good digital training will be able to adapt his or her lessons and teaching materials to the specific needs of individual students with disabilities. For example, students with visual impairment may need materials in Braille or audio format, while students with hearing impairment may need subtitles or sign language interpreters. Inclusion: Digital teacher training can contribute to the inclusion of students with disabilities in university life. If faculty are trained to meet the needs of students with disabilities, they will feel more integrated into the university community and have a better chance of academic success. 7 Conclusions Through our study, we have been able to determine the knowledge and skills of university lecturers in the use of information and communication technology (ICT) to support students with disabilities. One of the main conclusions is that university 12669 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 teachers in the Community of Madrid have a low level of training in the use of ICT to integrate students with disabilities. Although this conclusion cannot be generalised to other autonomous communities or cities in Spain, it is true that the level of training of university teachers in the use of ICT is limited at national level, as demonstrated in a recent study (Fernández Batanero etal., 2022a). A second conclusion of the study is the scarcity of existing training provision in digital skills with an inclusive orientation. In summary, it is important to highlight that the teachers are ensuring the continuity and academic success of students with disabilities at university. Therefore, it is necessary that this group is willing to keep up to date and to adopt an open attitude towards training and the implementation of innovative and inclusive strategies in their teaching practice. 7.1 Limitations Some of the main limitations of our research are the use of self-perception instruments, which means that the information collected reflects what teachers think they know about the use of ICT to support students with disabilities; and the low participation rate in the study (low number of participating teachers) which could affect the generalisability of the results. It would be necessary to replicate the research in other autonomous communities and check if the data remain like generalise the results. Similarly, we are aware of the low participation of key informants, hence the need to increase their number in future research. 7.2 Future research Today’s higher education institutions are increasingly calling for up-to-date and innovative education that includes the use of digital tools in the teaching–learning process for all students, including those with special educational needs due to disabilities. In this sense, the implications go in two directions. On the one hand, the need to design, develop and implement training plans and teacher counselling in relation to technologies and people with disabilities. Only in this way will we be able to comply with European policies that demand universities that are more committed to inclusion. On the other hand, and because of the above, only with the necessary technological training will teachers be able to make effective use of the technological resources available to the entire educational community. In this sense, future work to enable researchers to make further progress in this area is aimed at: – Investigate the specific barriers faced by university teachers in implementing assistive technologies for the inclusion of students with disabilities, and how these barriers can be overcome. – Evaluate the effectiveness of specific training programmes in the use of ICT for inclusion of students with disabilities in improving the competence and capacity of university teachers. 12670 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 – Investigate how assistive technologies for the inclusion of students with disabilities can be integrated into the teaching and assessment of university courses. – Evaluate the accessibility and inclusion of digital educational resources and online learning platforms used in higher education to ensure that they are accessible to students with disabilities. – Investigate how collaboration and coordination between professionals from ICT Production Resource Centres and Disability Services and university lecturers can be improved to ensure inclusive education for all students. – To explore the relationship between the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education and their academic and professional success. Annex 1 QUESTIONNAIRE 1 2 3 4 5 6 I have a general knowledge of the possibilities offered by ICT for people with disabilities I know the difficulties caused by different types of disabilities in using ICT Can select specific ICT according to different people’s physical, sensory and cognitive characteristics I am aware of different resources and documents specifically dedicated to analysing the possibilities of ICT for people with different types of disabilities I am aware of educational experiences in applying ICTs for people with different types of disabilities I know of mobile applications which can be used with people with special educational needs I know Augmented/Virtual Reality applications that can be used with people with special educational needs I know what 3D printing technology can do to help people with special educational needs I am aware of the main limitations that may condition the use of ICT by learners with disabilities I consider myself competent to locate educational materials for people with special educational needs online In general, I feel prepared to help learners with certain disabilities in the use of technical aids and the use of ICT I can design activities with generalised educational software for students with special educational needs I am able to explain the possibilities offered by a Braille typewriter I know the possibilities offered by Kurzweil reading machines for visually impaired students I am aware of the possibilities offered by telescopes for visually impaired pupils I recognise different computer programmes specifically designed for visually impaired people 12671 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 QUESTIONNAIRE 1 2 3 4 5 6 I am familiar with different screen magnification programmes to facilitate access to the computer for visually impaired students I know different screen reader softwares, such as JAWS, Tiflowin, etc.… I can produce didactic materials in a word processor, eliminating the aspects that make it difficult for visually impaired people to use it I am able to list different tiflotechnological materials that enable visually impaired people to access numeracy I know of specific browsers for visually impaired people I am aware of different websites where educational resources for people with visual impairment can be found I am aware of the possibilities that ICT offers the visually impaired student I am aware of the possibilities that 3D printers offer to visually impaired students I am able to use sign language I am able to express messages according to sign language I am able to identify different computer resources for voice and speech enhancement I am familiar with different educational software programmes that stimulate language and the acquisition and development of oral and written language skills I am able to identify different websites where educational resources for people with hearing impairment can be located I am able to apply teaching strategies supported by ICT to facilitate the inclusion of students with hearing impairment I am able to make ICT-supported curricular adaptations for students with hearing impairment Generally speaking, I am aware of the possibilities that ICT offers to hearing impaired learners I am familiar with different speech re-education programmes I know different types of keyboards for people with different types of mobility limitations I know the uses of switches, toggles and pointers I know of software that controls the computer by voice I know the basics of alternative augmentative software systems to facilitate communication for people with motor disabilities I locate websites containing educational resources for people with motor disabilities I am able to apply ICT-supported teaching strategies to facilitate the inclusion of learners with motor impairments I am aware of the possibilities offered by ICT for students with motor disabilities I am aware of the possibilities that 3D printers are offering for the manufacture of prostheses I can cite some educational programmes used for the rehabilitation of cognitive skills 12672 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 QUESTIONNAIRE 1 2 3 4 5 6 I am able to cite different websites where educational resources for people with cognitive disabilities can be located I can use specific software to produce materials for a concept keyboard I am able to apply ICT-supported teaching strategies to facilitate the inclusion of learners with cognitive disabilities I am able to make ICT-supported curricular adaptations for subjects with cognitive disabilities I am able to describe the main limitations that multimedia materials may contain for use with people with cognitive disabilities I can locate websites that contain educational resources for people with cognitive disabilities I am aware of the possibilities offered by ICT for students with cognitive disabilities I know the potential offered by Apps or mobile applications dedicated to cognitive training or rehabilitation of people I am aware of the possibilities offered by operating systems and browsers to modify certain levels of programme operation (speed, font size, pointer type, etc.) and make the programme more accessible to people with different types of disabilities I know what accessibility testing is for websites I am familiar with the general WAI/W3C guidelines for making websites accessible I am able to create web pages with high accessibility parameters I am able to adapt computer equipment to the educational needs of any person with a disability I know different institutions that are involved in the study and research of website accessibility I am able to cite different accessibility tests I am aware of the services that my university offers for people with disabilities If I have a student with a hearing impairment I know where in my university I can direct them I am aware of the services offered in my faculty for people with special needs I know the services my university offers to people with motor impairments I know the services my University offers to people with visual impairment Annex 2 Dear teacher and researcher, We ask you to answer honestly in order to select the experts for the questionnaire. A) Please tick in the appropriate box the degree of knowledge you have about the following topics: ICT teacher training, ICT and inclusive education, disability, 12673 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 accessibility, ICT and disability,….. Please rate yourself on a scale of 0 to 10 (where 0 is no knowledge and 10 is complete knowledge of the state of the art). 01 0 Note: The score Kc (knowledge coefficient - value from 0 to 10) is obtained. B) Self-assess the degree of influence that each of the following sources has had on your knowledge and views on teacher training in ICT, ICT and inclusive education, disability, accessibility, ICT and disability, …… Low Medium High Theoretical analysis carried out by you Your experience gained from your practical activity Study of work on the subject carried out by Spanish authors Study of work on the subject carried out by foreign authors Your knowledge of the state of the problem abroad Note: The Argumentation Coefficient (Ka) is obtained by assigning a series of scores to the different sources of argumentation that the expert has been able to wield. The table shows the scores for the evaluation of the sources of argumentation. Funding Funding for open access publishing: Universidad de Sevilla/CBUA. This work was financed by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, within the framework of the State R & D & I Programs aimed at the Challenges of Society (PID2019-108230RB-I00) and the State Research Agency (AEI)) (Project reference / AEI / 10.13039 / 501100011033). Project title "Training of University teachers in ICT as support for students with disabilities". Data availability The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to the anonymity of the participants but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Declarations Statements on open data and ethics The data described in this paper contains no personal, or personally identifiable information. Conflicts of interest There is no conflict of interest regarding this work. 12674 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/. References Abad Miguélez, B. (2016). Investigación social cualitativa y dilemas éticos: de la ética vacía a la ética situada. Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales, 34, 101–120. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5944/ empir ia. 34. 2016. 16524 Agreda Montoro, M., Ortiz Colón, A.M., Rodríguez Moreno, J. & Steffens, K. (2019). Emerging technologies. Analysis and current perspectives. Digital Education Review, 35, 186–210. Retrieved from http:// greav. ub. edu/ der. Accessed 12 Sept 2022 Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS structural equations program manual. BMDP Statistical Software. Inc. Bentler EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual 1989. Cabero Almenara, J., Fernández Batanero, J. M., & Córdoba, M. (2016). Conocimiento de las TIC Aplicadas a las Personas con Discapacidades. Construcción de un Instrumento de Diagnóstico. Magis, Revista Internacional de Investigación en Educación, 8(17), 157–176. Contreras, J. M., Velázquez, S. L., & García, A. L. (2020). La formación digital del profesorado universitario para la inclusión educativa de las personas con discapacidad. Revista Complutense De Educación, 31(1), 117–131. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5209/ rced. 63268 Cruz Ramírez, M. & Martínez Cepena, M. (2020). Origen y desarrollo de un índice de competencia experta: el coeficiente k. Revista Latinoamericana de Metodología de la Investigación Social – ReLMIS, 19, 40–56. European Commission. (2010). Europe 2020: A strategy for Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Working paper. European Commission. (2012). Un nuevo concepto de educación: invertir en las competencias para lograr mejores resultados socioeconómicos. Publications Office of the European Union. European Union. (2012). Estrategia Europa 2020: una estrategia para un crecimiento inteligente, sostenible e integrador. Comunicación de la Comisión Europea. COM (2010) 2020 final. Fernández Batanero, J. M., Cabero Almenara, J., Román Graván, P. & Palacios Rodríguez A. (2022a). Knowledge of university teachers on the use of digital resources to assist people with disabilities. The case of Spain. Education and Information Technologies. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s1063902210965-1 Fernández Batanero, J. M., Román Graván, P., Montenegro Rueda, M., & FernándezCerero, J. (2021b). El impacto de las TIC en el alumnado con discapacidad en la Educación Superior. Una revisión sistemática (2010–2020). EDMETIC, 10(2), 81–105. Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Román Graván P., Montenegro-Rueda, M. & Fernández-Cerero, J. (2022c). Conocimiento del profesorado universitario sobre el uso de recursos digitales para atender a personas con discapacidad. El caso de la Comunidad Autónoma de Castilla-La Mancha. REIFOP. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 98(36.2), 63–78. https:// doi. org/ 10. 47553/ rifop. v98i36. 2. 93947 Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., & García-Martínez, I. (2022b). Assistive technology for the inclusion of students with disabilities: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development., 70, 1911–1930. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s1142302210127-7 Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Métodos estadísticos para tasas y proporciones. John Wiley and Sons. García-Sánchez, J. N., Sampedro-Requena, B. E., & Alonso-Muñoz, L. (2019). Competencia digital para la atención a la diversidad: estudio del profesorado universitario de la Comunidad de 12675 1 3 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 Madrid. Education in the Knowledge Society, 20, 19–38. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14201/ eks20 19201 938 Gibbs, G. (2013). El análisis de datos cualitativos en investigación cualitativa. Ediciones Morata. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). El descubrimiento de la teoría fundamentada. Aldine Press. Gyampoh, A. O., Ayitey, H. K., FosuAyarkwah, C., Ntow, S. A., Akossah, J., Gavor, M., & Vlachopoulos, D. (2020). Tutor perception on personal and institutional preparedness for online teachinglearning during the COVID-19 crisis: The case of Ghanaian colleges of education. African Educational Research Journal, 8(3), 511–518. Hernández-Ruiz, A. (2020). La formación en atención a la diversidad en entornos digitales: Análisis y propuestas de mejora. Revista Electrónica De Investigación Educativa, 22(2), 44–56. INTEF. (2018). Uso de las TIC en el profesorado español. Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional. Kurt, A. A., Colak, C., Donmez, P., Filiz, O., Turkan, F., & Odabasi, H. F. (2016). Opportunities for students with disabilities in higher education institutions in Turkey: Where is ICT? International Journal of Special Education, 31(1), 104–113. Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (1975). Introducción. In H. A. Linstone & M. Turoff (Eds.), El método Delphi: Técnicas y aplicaciones (pp. 3–12). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. López Gavira, R., Moriña, A., & Morgado, B. (2021). Challenges to inclusive education at the University: the perspective of students and disability support service staff. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 34(3), 292–304. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13511 610. 2019. 15781 98 ManaourAlmutairi, S., Abdul-Aziz Gutub, A., & Awad Al-Juaid, N. (2020). Motivating teachers to use information technology in educational process within Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning (IJTEL), 12(2), 200–217. Marcelo, C., Yot, C., & Mayor, C. (2015). university teaching with digital technologies. Revista Comunicar, 45(3), 117–124. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3916/ C45201512 Martínez-Cantos, J. L., & Castaño, C. (2017). La brecha digital de género y la escasez de mujeres en las profesiones TIC. Panorama Social, 25, 49–65. Mercader, C., & Duran-Bellonch, M. (2021). Female higher education teachers use digital technologies more and better than they think. Digital Education Review, 40, 172–184. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1344/ der. 2021. 40. 172184 Moliner, O., Yazzo, M. A., Niclot, D., & Philippot, T. (2019). Universidad inclusiva: percepciones de los responsables de los servicios de apoyo a las personas con discapacidad. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 21, e20, 1–10. https:// doi. org/ 10. 24320/ redie. 2019. 21. e20. 19 Montenegro-Rueda, M. & Fernández-Cerero, J. (2021). Desafíos de las TIC en la Educación Superior. En Carmen Burgos Videla, José Juan Carrión Martínez, Antonio Luque de la Rosa y Francisco Ignacio Revuelta Domínguez (Coords.). Innovaciones y aprendizajes flexibles en entornos formativos universitarios. Dykinson. Montenegro-Rueda, M., & Fernández-Batanero, J. M. (2023). Adaptation and validation of an instrument for assessing the digital competence of special education teachers. European Journal of Special Needs Education. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 08856 257. 2023. 22165 73 Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & Fernández-Cerero, J. (2023). Impact of ICT on university students with visual impairment. British Journal of Special Education, 50(1), 28–48. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ 14678578. 12433 O’Dwyer, L. M., & Bernauer, J. A. (2013). Quantitative research for the qualitative researcher. SAGE publications. O’Byrne, C., Jagoe, C., & Lawler, M. (2019). Experiences of dislexia and the transition to university: A casestudy of five students at different stages of study. Higher Education Research & Development, 38, 1035–1048. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 07294 360. 2019. 16025 95 OCDE (2018). Políticas docentes efectivas: Conclusiones del informe PISA. PISA: Edición de la OCDE. Retrieved from https:// www. oecd. org/ pisa/ Polit icasdocen tesefect ivasConcl usion esdelinfor mePISAResum en. pdf.Accessed 10 Sept 2022 Odame, L., Opoku, M., Nketsia, N., & Nanor, B. (2021). University experiences of graduates with visual impairments in Ghana. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 68(3), 332–346. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 10349 12X. 2019. 16813 75 Perera-Rodríguez, V. H., & MoriñaDíez, A. (2019). Technological challenges and students with disabilities in higher education. Exceptionality, 27(1), 65–75. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09362 835. 2017. 14091 17 12676 Education and Information Technologies (2024) 29:12653–12676 1 3 Rodríguez Espina, H., Restrepo Betancur, L. F., & Aránzazu, D. (2014). Alfabetización informática y uso de sistemas de gestión del aprendizaje (LMS) en la docencia universitaria. Revista De La Educación Superior, 43(171), 139–159. Román Graván, P., & FernándezCerero, J. (2022). Formación del profesorado universitario en TIC y discapacidad. El caso de la Universidad de Sevilla. International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation (IJERI), 17, 135–151. https:// doi. org/ 10. 46661/ ijeri. 6168 Romero Alonso, R., Riquelme Plaza, I., & Halal Orfali, C. (2019). Barriers in teacher perception about the use of technology for evaluation in higher education. Digital Education Review, 35, 170–185. Sánchez, R. L. I., Encinas, I. D., Arce, J. A. Z., & Verdugo, A. I. D. C. (2019). The inclusion of students from high level education with disabilities through ICT’s. In 2019 International Conference on Inclusive Technologies and Education (CONTIE) (pp. 160–1603). IEEE. Sandoval-Escobar, M., Ochoa-Orozco, M. R., & Melchor-Coutiño, M. (2020). Formación docente en la era digital: una mirada desde la atención a la diversidad. Revista de Investigación Académica, 59, 341–352. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Psychology Press. UNESCO. (2021). Reimaginando juntos nuestros futuros. Un nuevo contrato social para la educación. Retrieved from https:// unesd oc. unesco. org/ ark:/ 48223/ pf000 03793 81_ spa.Accessed 11 Sept 2022 United Nations (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Retrieved from https:// www. un. org/ devel opment/ desa/ disab iliti es/ conve ntionont her ightsofperso nswit hdisab iliti es. html. Accessed 10 Sept 2022 United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Report No. A/RES/70/1. United Nations. Ventura-León, J. L., & Caycho-Rodríguez, T. (2017). El coeficiente Omega: Un método alternativo para la estimación de la confiabilidad. Revista Latinoamericana De Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 15(1), 625–627. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.