Creating tactile graphics in school settings: A survey of training experience,competence,challenges,and future support needs

Abstract

This study investigated training experience, self-reported competence, challenges, and future support needs of Teachers of Students With Visual Impairments (TVIs) in creating tactile graphics. The researchers developed an online survey to gain information about what training the teachers previously experienced, how competent they perceived in tactile graphic creation skills, and their challenges and support needs. Almost half of the participants had no training experience in creating tactile graphics. Participants with training responded that attending conference or workshop sessions and searching online resources were relatively more helpful. The participants with more than 3 days of training experiences self-rated their competencies than those with less training. As a lack of time and resources was identified as challenges, we suggest using online tactile graphics supporting TVIs to save time and efforts for creation work across various subject areas. Supporting the needs in three-dimensional printing requires more training experiences in hardware/software skills and collaborations with experts to create realistic hands-on materials for learning of students with visual impairments.

Keywords

3D printing professional development tactile graphic repository tactile graphics visual impairments

Introduction

Providing instruction for students and obtaining oriented outcomes largely depend on the types of instructional materials and strategies incorporated. Multiple means of instruction and diverse materials depending on students’ needs may significantly enhance students’ expected learning outcomes. Also, the universal design of learning is an important theoretical framework emphasizing the significance of modes of delivery (Meyer et al., 2014). Textbooks, presentation materials, and instructional text used in classroom settings utilize various means of visual representations. Research suggests that graphical representations result in more effective learning outcomes (Aisami, 2015). While graphic materials serve important roles in conveying essential information, they are not inherently accessible for students with visual impairments (VIs) (Zebehazy & Wilton, 2014a). Students with low vision may access these graphical materials using a low vision device or an assistive technology, students with VI who do not have functional vision may require gaining access to these materials through tactile format.

Tactile graphics are defined as “a variety of print illustrations that contain information conveyed in graphic formats” (Braille Authority of North America, 2010). The purpose of tactile graphics is to convey content in maps, charts, building layouts, schematic diagrams, and images of geometric figures through haptic sensory modality. They are not simple reproductions or raised line versions of the print but transformed representations of adapted images, including tactile symbols easily tangible and understandable for a sense of touch. Considerations on visual features such as colors and perspectives should be managed based on being easily interpreted with equal access to information. Although types of tactile graphics may vary depending on creation methods and materials the primary goal of tactile graphics is to provide an alternative to the vision-intensive information that sighted peers access without barriers.

Teachers of students with VI (TVIs) provide instruction for the use of tactile graphics, and adopt and modify visually formatted educational materials into tactile graphics. Although the majority of tactile graphics adhere to their original visual materials, omission of graphics without proper descriptions, lack of guidelines in developing quality tactile graphics, and insufficient amount of training provided to TVIs make it difficult for students with VI to appreciate the full function of tactile graphics for learning. First, skills of students with VI for understanding tactile graphics have been recognized in the field as an obstacle when tactile graphics are used for instruction (Zebehazy & Wilton, 2014b). Second, poor quality of tactile graphic materials and lack of tactile graphics were considered to create a significant gap for students with VI (Emerson & Anderson, 2018). While the roles played by TVIs in the use of tactile graphics for learning of students with VI are significant, few studies have been published to identify how TVIs are engaged with tactile graphics.

TVIs are responsible for creating tactile graphics in school settings and teaching knowledge and skills for proper reading and interpretation of tactile graphics. They need to be professionally trained in creating tactile graphics based on their students’ current level of skills (Spungin et al., 2007). Creating tactile graphics does not merely mean altering a visual illustration by embossing the image but a process that aims to enhance the tactile perception of students with VI (Miller et al., 2010). TVIs should assess students’ current abilities, design tactile graphics for better perception, and teach physical and cognitive skills to read various types of tactile graphics (Wright, 2008). Students with VI need to acquire spatial and tactual perception skills to understand concepts displayed in tactile graphics when using the sense of touch (Bischop, 2010).

Despite these challenges, previous studies have shown how high-quality tactile graphics have positively influenced students with VI in learning. Rule (2011) reported that students with VI in a planetary science program using tactile graphics had a positive attitude and solid understanding of the content knowledge. The program utilized various two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) tactile learning resources such as contour maps, models of craters, asteroids, and topography of Mars. The participants showed effectiveness in understanding scientific concepts even in a short-term camp. Zebehazy and Wilton (2021) studied 40 students with VI in the use of tactile graphics and compared their performance with teacher ratings regarding the relationship between student performance differences and teacher-rated factors. Results indicated that significant differences in performance between print and tactile graphics users were observed in bar graphs and maps, and total correct responses on all tasks. These findings suggested that accessible tactile graphics could support students with VI in learning.

It is important to provide students with VI with high-quality tactile graphics. Efforts have been made in developing and creating high-quality tactile graphics (Gonzalez et al., 2019). TVIs may face challenges in creating high-quality tactile graphics based on the educational needs of individual students with VI. Many teachers lack sufficient training and experience, resources, and time to create tactile graphics (Sheppard & Aldrich, 2001). Also, technical proficiency is required for handling related software and hardware when creating computer-assisted tactile graphics. A national study’s results have pointed out that inadequate awareness of TVIs and competence related to technology are obstacles to developing the skills needed to create high-quality tactile graphics (Zhou et al., 2012).

It is apparent that additional research is needed to further understand TVIs’ experiences, challenges, and support needs in creating tactile graphics. The primary focus of existing studies was about investigating the effectiveness of using tactile graphics in tactile acuity and discrimination (Albert, 2006; Jehoel et al., 2006); however, there were few studies that documented TVIs’ experience with regard to tactile graphics and their training, existing support, application of skills in creating tactile graphic materials, and instructional strategies and ideas to work with students with VI.

The purpose of this study is to answer the following research questions:

Research Question 1. What training experiences did TVIs receive related to creating tactile graphics?

Research Question 2. How do TVIs self-report their knowledge and skills for creating tactile graphics?

Research Question 3. What challenges do TVIs face when creating tactile graphics in school settings?

Research Question 4. What future support would help TVIs create tactile graphics for students with VI?

This study is informed by the theoretical framework based on Universal Design for Learning (UDL). The UDL identifies diverse needs of learners in an educational environment that can be adjusted for all student’s strengths and needs (Center for Applied Special Technology, 2011). The core of the approach is a curriculum where educational goals, methods, materials, and assessments support students to become lifelong learners who are skillful, knowledgeable, and purposeful in their lives. UDL is based on providing multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression. Among the three principles, multiple means of representation and engagement guide the needs of students with VI with regard to access to educational materials and services. Since tactile graphic allows students with VIs to fully participate and be engaged with educational opportunities, the UDL and its guiding practices can support the demands of students with VIs. There is not one means of representation that will be optimal for all learners; providing options for representation is critical. All four research questions addressed in this study are associated with the UDL principles and served an essential role in constructing the survey, analyzing the data, and interpreting and suggesting the implications of this study.

The Institutional Review Board at the University of Arizona approved this study’s ethical and compliant conduction. An electronic informed consent form was used to provide the research purpose and acquire participants’ consent.

Data collection and analysis

Online survey development

Two researchers in this study developed an online survey that includes 22 questions related to the research questions. The survey was administered using Qualtrics, a web-based survey development software. The survey asked each participant to sign an informed consent form that included the purpose of the study, a survey overview, and an estimated time for completion before participating in the survey. The questionnaire consisted of five categories: (1) demographics, (2) previous training experience, (3) self-reported competence, (4) challenges, and (5) future support needs. The researchers used multiple types of question items such as multiple-choice questions, self-reported ratings with a 5-point Likert-type scale, and open-ended questions. The details of question items are as described in Table 1.

Table 1.

Details of survey question items.

Category	Question
Demographics	Select certification(s) you currently have. Make sure to select all that applies. How many years of experience do you have in teaching students with VI? Which school setting best describes your current teaching position?
Previous training experience	Have you had any professional development experience for creating tactile materials? If yes, how many hours of professional development experience have you had? How helpful were these types of training experiences for learning knowledge and skills in creating tactile graphics?
Self-reported competence	Please rate each item based on how you are competent, given the statements below.
Challenges	What challenges do you face when creating tactile graphics in school settings?
Future support need	What areas of support would help you to create tactile graphics?

VI: visual impairment.

Regarding self-reported ratings, the participants were asked to select a specific level ranging from “not competent” to “highly competent” to rate their competence with the 13 items. The items were developed and adapted from the standards and guidelines for tactile graphics, published by the Braille Authority of North America and the American Printing House for the Blind. In addition, open-ended questions asked participants to specify what challenges they experienced in creating tactile graphics in school settings. At the end of the survey development phase, three external reviewers (one faculty member and two doctoral students with TVI experience) reviewed the survey to determine content validity by reviewing if the items represent the aspects of research questions based on their previous research and teaching experiences in the field (Rubio et al., 2003).

Eligible participants for this study were certified TVIs currently working with students with VI in the United States. The researchers advertised the recruitment flyer with survey links through the two email listservs of the California Transcribers and Educators for the Blind and Visually Impaired and the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired as well as a Facebook social group, Teachers of the Blind and Visually Impaired, and Teachers of the Blind and Visually Impaired/Orientation and Mobility Specialists with follow-up reminders. The survey was available for 4 weeks as of the survey release day. Collected data were automatically stored on the Qualtrics database where the researchers only could access and manage.

Participant demographics

The participants (n = 46) were asked to answer demographic questions about certification, years of teaching, and job setting. For example, some of the participants had certification as orientation and mobility specialists or assistive technology specialists in addition to a TVI license. Also, 75.6% of the participants served as itinerant TVIs who spent most of their school time in the general education classroom (n = 31). Details on participant demographics are described in Table 2.

Table 2.

Demographics of participants.

Item	n	%
Current position
Teacher of students with VI (TVI)	36	78.3
Certified orientation and mobility specialist (COMS)	8	17.4
Certified assistive technology instructional specialist for people with VI (CATIS)	2	4.4
Year(s) of experience
0–5	8	18.6
6–10	11	25.6
11–15	6	14.0
16–20	5	11.6
20+	10	23.3
Prefer not to say	3	7.0
Setting
School for the blind	3	7.3
Itinerant	31	75.6
Resource room/self-contained	4	9.8
Other	3	7.3

VI: visual impairment.

Data analysis

Descriptive statistics and mean-comparison methods were utilized to summarize and analyze the collected data. The researchers presented frequencies, means, and percentages in descending order and summarized open-ended written responses. The participants were grouped into three based on the amount of previous training experience: (1) more than 3 days of training, (2) up to 3 days of training, and (3) no previous training. The analysis utilized a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test for mean comparison to determine a statistically significant difference in the participants’ scores depending on the training experience (Privitera, 2017).

The researchers utilized the open-coding method to analyze open-ended written responses. This method identifies a concrete structure of qualitative data by assigning specific keywords to the participants’ responses (Saldaña, 2015). In addition to gaining familiarity with the data, the researchers examined the responses using verbatim words as codes and compared them based on emerging similarities and consistent patterns. Given the question asking about challenges, seven keywords were generated. The researchers identified and agreed on similar patterns and common themes. The emerged themes were debriefed based on the study experiences and research findings for validating the findings’ credibility and transferability (Connelly, 2016).

Results

Training experience

When the participants were asked if they had received training for creating tactile graphics, 22 out of 43 participants answered that they had no training experience (51.2%). Eighteen participants had less than 3 days of training (41.9%), and the other 3 had more than 3 days of training (6.9%). Regarding types of training, seminars, conferences, and workshops were most frequently selected (33.3%), followed by university courses in teaching preparation programs (17.3%), self-study (16.0%), mentoring/coaching (14.7%), and in-service training courses (12.0%). The experienced participants rated seminars, conferences, and workshops as the most helpful, followed by self-study and mentoring/coaching. Also, the participants selected online resources as a favorite resource for creating tactile graphics. The details on training experience are reported in Table 3.

Table 3.

Training experience.

Item	n	%
Hour(s) of training (n = 43)
None	22	51.2
Less than 3 days	18	41.9
More than 3 days (24+ hr)	3	6.9
Type of training (n = 48)
Attended seminars, conferences, and workshops	25	33.3
Enrolled courses in teaching preparation programs	13	17.3
Conducted self-study	12	16.0
Did mentoring/coaching	11	14.7
Attended in-service training courses	9	12.0
Other	5	6.7

Self-reported competence

Participants were asked to self-rate their competence in creating high-quality tactile graphics, using 5-point Likert-type scale. The scores of these items averaged 3.33 out of 5, between the scale neither incompetent nor competent and competent. Three items with the highest scores were (1) making a distinguishable area, (2) using different colors for students with residual vision, and (3) proofreading the graphics created by touch to verify the quality. However, the participants rated themselves lower on the items on technology proficiency, such as software and hardware. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference in average competence between the groups who had more than 3 days and less than 3 days of training experience, whereas there was no difference between the groups with less than 3 days and no experience. Therefore, this result shows that the training experience plays a significant role in contributing to improving competence to make sure quality tactile graphics. The details of ANOVA results are reported in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4.

Self-reported competence scores.

Item	n	%	SD
1. Understandings of general guidelines for designs of tactile graphics	37	3.46	1.13
2. Making an area distinguishable from surrounding areas	37	3.81	1.11
3. Using appropriate lines such as lead lines, arrows, and broken lines	37	3.51	1.30
4. Using appropriate symbols (points and textures) when creating tactile graphics.	37	3.59	1.22
5. Using appropriate labels to identify an area, line, or point symbol	37	3.54	1.22
6. Using distinguishable colors for students who have some visual acuity	37	3.95	1.17
7. Considering of size of a graphic and paper according to the Guideline for Tactile Graphics	36	3.50	1.27
8. Consideration of design techniques for transcribing complex diagrams such as simplification, elimination, and separation	37	3.30	1.26
9. Proofreading the graphics created by touch to verify the quality	35	3.30	1.20
10. Using a checklist for making decisions about tactile graphics	37	3.20	1.28
11. Operating more than one computer-related software	37	2.43	1.43
12. Operating more than one hardware to produce tactile graphics	37	2.73	1.47
Average		3.36	1.26

SD: standard deviation.

Table 5.

ANOVA results for hours of training.

Variable	df	Sum of Squares	Mean Squares	F	p
Hours of training	2	6.63	3.31	4.20	.023*
Error (within)	37	29.14	0.79
Total	39	35.77

ANOVA: analysis of variance.

η² = SS_between / SS_total = 6.63 / 35.77 = 0.185.

p < .05.

Challenges

In open-ended written responses, we identified the two themes that emerged in challenges, a lack of time and resources. TVIs addressed that creating tactile graphics is time-consuming work even though the creation work is not ready to send out within a short time. In school settings, the amount of graphic information to consider converting into tactile graphics is overwhelming as well as converting a graphic into a tactile diagram takes much longer than simply preparing a visual image. Also, the participants addressed the needs of high-tech options and online resources with multimedia. While high-tech options for creating tactile graphics can allow TVIs to create high-quality materials, online resources will be able to fill the gap in the lack of training options and exchanging and sharing ideas and resources. The detailed information regarding emerged themes, keywords, and sample quotes are described in Table 6.

Table 6.

Result of qualitative data coding.

Theme/keyword	Quotes
Lack of time
Overwhelming A lot of time	“It’s very overwhelming and takes a lot of time to create.”
Time-consuming	“The realistic challenges in that position were that I do use a LOT of the time-consuming stuff (tactile graphics) and how much time needed to create a good graphic.”
Too often, On-the-fly	“One major problem is that tactile graphics are too often needed on-the-fly”
Lack of resource
No high-tech resources	“Lack of resources. I would have loved to have had 3-D printers and thermoform machines at my disposal. We had a Phoenix Graphics machine, but instead mid and low-tech options were our go-to. Learning how to effectively use puff paint is an art.”
Video examples	“Perhaps needs a short video to show classroom teachers about why and what materials will be needed to be created by VI staff.”
Blog links, samples	“I think it will be very helpful if you can create useful resources and/or VI blog links similar as Pinterest where TVIs can share their work samples to exchange ideas.”

VI: visual impairment.

Future support needs

The participants were asked to select what future support would help them to create tactile graphics. Among the multiple-choice items, 3D printing skill (24.0%) was the most frequently selected item, followed by practice in making tactile graphics (17.3%), operating computer-related software (17.3%), related skills for tactile graphic design (14.4%), operating printing hardware (13.0%), and creating mathematics-related materials (12.5%). The results indicated that TVIs are more interested in 3D printing, including handling more innovative hardware/software such as design software and 3D printers for providing realistic tactile experiences and competence in creating conventional 2D tactile graphics.

With regard to the types of future support needs, the largest percentage of the participants needed to learn 3D printing skills (n = 25, 24.0%) followed by practices of making tactile graphics (n = 18, 17.3%), operating computer-related software (n = 18, 17.3%), related skills for tactile graphic design (n = 15, 14.4%), operating printing hardware (n = 14, 13.0%), and creating mathematics-related materials (n = 13, 12.5%).

For types of support, one-fifth of the responses (n = 22, 20.8%) indicated professional development opportunities with online resources (n = 20, 18.9%) followed by adequate funding for equipment (n = 16, 15.1%), remote technical support from assistive technology specialists (n = 16, 15.1%), informal peer support (n = 13, 12.3%), formal support networks (n = 10, 9.4%), and “Help desk” style online community (n = 8, 7.6%).

Discussion

This study investigated TVIs’ training experiences, self-rated competence, challenges, and future support needs in creating tactile graphics. Hours of training are identified as a significant factor for predicting competence, but half of the participants had no training experience in their teacher preparation and career path. This finding highlights the importance of more continuing education opportunities to learn knowledge and skills in creating tactile graphics, supporting TVIs prepared with recent creation methods and quality examples. Also, it is suggested that regional and online conferences/workshops will foster related skills in creating tactile graphics based on students’ tactile skills and preferred materials. Innovative creation methods and materials need to be frequently shared and introduced through these professional development opportunities because technology advances quickly.

To support pre-service teachers, it is recommended that university programs provide additional opportunities to experience case studies and technology options in creating tactile graphics, including courses and internships. The survey results indicated that the participants preferred in-service professional development opportunities to university courses. More than two-thirds of TVIs’ programs included creating tactile graphics in their courses and assessment methods in their curriculum (Rosenblum & Smith, 2012). Thus, the programs need to combine their courses with practice-centered teaching experiences allowing teachers to implement tactile graphics in case studies.

Regarding competence, the score of the use of software and hardware is relatively lower than low-tech manual creation options. This finding is aligned with the results of a national study reporting that TVIs lacked confidence in using tactile graphics devices and computer-generated graphics (Zhou et al., 2012). Technology readiness is necessary for serving as TVIs because they need to utilize hardware and software options to create tactile graphics (Council for Exceptional Children Division on Visual Impairments and Deafblindness, 2018). When considering that high-quality tactile graphics require advanced technology options for creation and duplication, continuing education opportunities specialized in learning specific tactile graphics software and hardware, supporting TVIs’ development of technology proficiency would create additional venues in adopting high-tech tactile graphics for students with VI.

Regarding challenges, the participants were concerned about the lack of time and resources for creating tactile graphics. These results align with the findings of Sheppard and Aldrich (2001) regarding that additional time and resources served as a significant motivator when creating tactile graphics. TVIs informed that creating tactile graphics in time was challenging because assignments or adapted materials required very short turnaround time. Students find the converted tactile graphics complicated even though they are simplified and eliminated. Substantial time to appropriately interpret and adapt to the tactile format can be beneficial for TVIs to create high-quality creations. The concerns related to limited time for decision-making and creation appear significant, thus simplified forms of the standards and checklists and creation kits can help reduce creation time.

For resources, exemplary multimedia samples need to be offered to show creation procedures and takeaways in virtual settings. Adaptable tactile image samples can play as source files. Video resources can show step-by-step instructions will guide to learn exemplary creation procedure meeting standards and guidelines’ requirements for tactile clarity. The online resources can convey lessons on introducing knowledge and skills as well as recent creation methods related to tactile graphics.

Surprisingly, one-fourth of the respondents indicated a need for training in 3D printing as one of the future support needs. The 3D-printing technology, one of the fastest emerging technologies in recent years, is beneficial for providing hands-on experiences for students with VI to learn visual-intensive concepts and knowledge, such as math, science, or geography (Kortenkamp et al., 2022). This technology can provide realistic learning experiences enabling the learning of academic concepts for students with VI traditionally experiencing challenges in school settings (Hasper et al., 2015). As 3D printing needs high user proficiency, additional professional development opportunities and online resources are necessary to improve teachers’ readiness and confidence in handling related hardware and software options. Therefore, collaboration with 3D printing experts will allow TVIs to develop knowledge and skills to produce realistic hands-on learning resources. Future research is needed to design a collaboration model of educators and 3D printing experts to create high-quality 3D objects.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. The study had a small sample size; therefore, the findings may not generalize to the whole professional population. Since responses were collected via an online survey platform, some participants may have come from other parts of the world than the United States. Since the researchers did not specifically request that only US residents participate, this study cannot exclude this possibility. While tactile graphics may be widely used worldwide, the researchers expect that reported findings of the study may best represent the current practices in the United States. Another limitation of the study is that the self-selection of respondents may be biased. For example, only those interested in tactile graphics may have decided to participate in the study, causing the study findings to overrepresent the responses of those focused on the topic.

Implications

The results of this study indicate that TVIs still need continuous professional development opportunities related to creating tactile graphics. In addition to technology competency for options, advanced technology, lack of time and resources were identified as the primary challenges. Based on the findings of this study, we conclude with two implications and suggestions that would help to support TVIs and to overcome a lack of training experience.

First, it is suggested to use online repositories and to store sample image files, techniques for creation, and user experiences so that TVIs could save time in designing and developing tactile graphic images and techniques. Downloadable images can help TVIs to save time by duplicating or modifying existing tactile images based on individual students’ learning goals and subject areas. While non-profit organizations and agencies such as American Printing House for the Blind Tactile Graphic Image Library provide downloadable source files to aid in creating tactile graphics, many TVIs develop tactile graphics images on-the-fly rather than through utilizing existing resources and collaborative networks with other teachers. More repositories and community networks are needed to share practitioner-created tactile graphics resources and ideas for visual-intensive subject areas.

Second, additional efforts will need to encompass collaborative interactions that foster connections between TVIs and multidisciplinary professionals for creating high-quality tactile graphics for students with VI. Assistive technology specialists, technology teachers, or 3D printing engineers may provide TVIs with external resources, sophisticated hardware and software options, and noble ideas for designing and creating tactile graphic materials. Building district- or regional-level communities can contribute to the development of practitioners’ knowledge and skills as well as promote TVIs and other professionals to share resources related to tactile graphics. For example, a larger school district employing multiple number of TVIs may consider offering in-service opportunities where TVIs can share their approaches and practices in creating tactile graphic materials. During these meetings, TVIs can collaboratively work to create materials for an individual student by reflecting specific goals and styles of each student that they are working with. Flexible online interactions and networking opportunities via the Internet will fit with the busy schedule of TVIs much more effectively.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Jinseok Park

References

Aisami

R. S.

(2015). Learning styles and visual literacy for learning and performance. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 538–545.

Albert

(2006, July). Math class: An application for dynamic tactile graphics [Conference session]. International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons, Berlin, Germany.

Bischop

(2010). Exceptional needs standards. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

Braille Authority of North America. (2010). Guidelines and standards for tactile graphics. http://www.brailleauthority.org/tg/

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.0. http://udlguidelines.cast.org

Connelly

L. M.

(2016). Trustworthiness in qualitative research. Medsurg Nursing, 25(6), 435.

Council for Exceptional Children Division on Visual Impairments and Deafblindness. (2018). Initial specialty set: Blind and visual impairments. https://community.cec.sped.org/dvi/professionalstandards/initialbvi

Emerson

R. W.

Anderson

(2018). What mathematical images are in a typical mathematics textbook? Implications for students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 112(1), 20–32.

Gonzalez

Guerra-Gomez

J. A.

(2019, October). Tactiled: Towards more and better tactile graphics using machine learning [Conference session]. The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.

10.

Hasper

Windhorst

R. A.

Hedgpeth

Van Tuyl

Gonzales

Martinez

Farkas

Baluch

D. P.

(2015). Methods for creating and evaluating 3D tactile images to teach STEM courses to the visually impaired. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(6), 92–99.

11.

Jehoel

McCallum

Rowell

Ungar

(2006). An empirical approach on the design of tactile maps and diagrams: The cognitive tactualization approach. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 24(2), 67–75.

12.

Kortenkamp

S. J.

Park

Alshuli

Tsinajinie

Buxner

Topor

Hong

(2022). Touching the solar system: A tactile project-based learning astronomy program for students with visual impairments. University of Arizona.

13.

Meyer

Rose

D. H.

Gordon

(2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.

14.

Miller

Pather

Muilbury

Hasty

O’Day

Spence

(2010). Guidelines and standards for tactile graphics, 2010. The Braille Authority of North America.

15.

Privitera

G. J.

(2017). Essential statistics for the behavioral sciences. SAGE.

16.

Rosenblum

L. P.

Smith

(2012). Instruction in specialized braille codes, abacus, and tactile graphics at universities in the United States and Canada. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(6), 339–350.

17.

Rubio

D. M.

Berg-Weger

Tebb

S. S.

Lee

E. S.

Rauch

(2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94–104.

18.

Rule

A. C.

(2011). Tactile Earth and space science materials for students with visual impairments: Contours, craters, asteroids, and features of Mars. Journal of Geoscience Education, 59(4), 205–218.

19.

Saldaña

(2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.

20.

Sheppard

Aldrich

F. K.

(2001). Tactile graphics in school education: Perspectives from teachers. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 19(3), 93–97.

21.

Spungin

S. J.

Ferrell

K. A.

Monson

(2007). The role and function of the teacher of students with visual impairments: A position paper of the Division on Visual Impairments Council of Exceptional Children. Council for Exceptional Children.

22.

Wright

(2008). Guide to designing tactile illustrations for children’s books. American Printing House for the Blind. https://www.prcvi.org/media/1124/aphtactilesguide.pdf

23.

Zebehazy

Wilton

(2014a). Charting success: The experience of teachers of students with visual impairments in promoting student use of graphics. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 108(4), 263–274.

24.

Zebehazy

Wilton

(2014b). Straight from the source: Perceptions of students with visual impairments about graphic use. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 108(4), 275–286.

25.

Zebehazy

K. T.

Wilton

A. P.

(2021). Graphic reading performance of students with visual impairments and its implication for instruction and assessment. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 115(3), 215–227.

26.

Zhou

Ajuwon

P. M.

Smith

D. W.

Griffin-Shirley

Parker

A. T.

Okungu

(2012). Assistive technology competencies for teachers of students with visual impairments: A national study. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106(10), 656–665.