UI/UX Designer
Sector
Education Technology, Assistive Technology, Accessibility
Challenge
Students with dyslexia struggle with remote learning due to inconsistent platform layouts, unreadable materials (text size, font styles, colors), and absence of AT features. This results in more time and effort to get their workload completed.
My Role
User Research, Wireframing, Interactive Prototyping (Lead), Usability Testing
Project Time
3 months (Sep - Dec 2024)
Dyslexia is specifically a learning disability, impacting how one can read and write. While its a wide spectrum, for the most part it will generally include issues with recognizing words visually, identifying new words, and understanding basic phonology, like letters and pronunciation In remote learning environments, those with dyslexia have much more difficulty than their peers, having to adapt to this new format.
Understanding the material given is usually difficult on its own, with this lack of understanding causing side effects like frustration, mood swings, lack of motivation for studying, and difficulty with continuing learning These issues may only increase by remote learning, as there is usually less live support offered by teachers, less alternatives to learning material (such as offering different formats), and less structure than the usual format of in person instruction.
The following technologies have been crucial in enhancing accessibility for students in remote learning environments.
Text-to-speech (TTS) tools such as Google Docs and NaturalReader allow students to listen to written content, helping them overcome challenges with reading comprehension
Speech-to-text (STT) tools like Google Speech Recognition and Dragon NaturallySpeaking enable students to dictate their thoughts, bypassing writing difficulties commonly associated with dyslexia.
Many students encounter barriers when attempting to use assistive technologies (ATs)
Text-to-speech (TTS) tools such as Google Docs and NaturalReader allow students to listen to written content, helping them overcome challenges with reading comprehension
Text-to-speech (TTS) tools such as Google Docs and NaturalReader allow students to listen to written content, helping them overcome challenges with reading comprehension
Some students are unaware of TTS features built into Google Docs and only discover them independently
Lack of guidance or structured introduction to tools often leaves students to navigate their accommodations on their own.
Students may view AT as fragmented or even meaningless when it is only permitted in limited contexts (i.e.: specific assignments or tests only).
Communication is reduced between students and instructors in remote settings. making it even more difficult to establish a supportive and flexible learning plan.
The use and effectiveness of assistive technology often depend on students’ awareness and confidence.
Even though many devices are equipped with AT apps, students may not be familiar with the versions available across different platforms. One student described being unaware of TTS features in Google applications until they stumbled upon them independently, shifting their AT use from tablets to more robust platforms like computers Notably, this discovery came without assistance from educators or parents.
Comfort in using AT tools is also shaped by the mutual agreement between student and teacher. When students feel restricted in when or how they can use these tools, it fragments their learning experience and discourages meaningful engagement. In remote settings, where real-time instructor feedback is less accessible, these constraints can have a greater impact.
Sudents' willingness to continue using AT may depend on how they perceive their diagnosis and personal progress. Some abandon AT tools after reaching a certain level of improvement, while others avoid using them to prevent standing out in class, or because they find it hard to multitask during lessons. Customization issues where AT tools don't meet specific needs may also lead to reduced engagement.
Existing assistive technologies like text-to-speech and speech-to-text tools help students overcome reading and writing challenges, but their impact is often limited by lack of awareness, guidance, and consistent support. Concerns about standing out, and tools not fitting their specific needs can further discourage long-term use and engagement.
LearnAble_Staakeholders.pngIn our effort to improve remote learning for students with dyslexia, it is important to consider the perspectives of three key groups: students, teachers, and parents or guardians. Each plays a distinct role in shaping the learning experience, whether directly or indirectly.
Students who are currently enrolled in remote learning programs and have been diagnosed with dyslexia are the primary users we aim to support. Their experiences, challenges, and preferences are central to our work. Engaging directly with these students will ensure that the solutions we design are grounded in their real needs.
Teachers with experience working with students with dyslexia, particularly in remote learning environments, are critical partners in this process. Their insights into instructional challenges, system limitations, and areas where additional support is needed will help guide the development of more effective teaching tools and practices.
Parents and guardians are important stakeholders to consider as they play a key role in supporting students’ academic success at home. Improvements to remote learning environments will lessen their worries and further promote individual and academic progress for their students.
By focusing on these groups, we aim to build a more accessible and supportive remote learning experience for students with dyslexia.
Five students, four instructors, and three teaching assistants (TAs) were interviewed to gain more insight. Students 16-21 years old were selected to align with LearnAble's target population of high school and college students. TAs and instructors also teach at this level.
Notes were taken during all interviews and organized into an affinity diagram to identify recurring themes.
LearnAble_AffinityDiagram.pdfThe affinity diagram revealed eight major themes across 85 post-it notes:
Of the five students interviewed, four had been diagnosed with dyslexia, while one had not. This allowed for meaningful comparison.
The primary distinction between students with dyslexia and those without lies in how significantly interface-related challenges impact their learning timelines. While both groups encountered similar difficulties—such as a cluttered interface, impaired concentration, a need for real-time instructor responses, and a desire for better organization and linear navigation—these issues had a disproportionate effect on students with dyslexia.
For students without dyslexia, these obstacles were minor disruptions that did not significantly hinder their daily progress. For example, one non-dyslexic participant noted that although the interface sometimes impacted their concentration, it remained manageable due to their ability to reach instructors quickly. They also demonstrated a tendency to self-organize content and generally described their remote learning experience as positive.
In contrast, for students with dyslexia, these same issues often served as major barriers, seriously affecting their productivity and time management. Tasks that might take one or two days for a student without dyslexia could take up to a week for a student with dyslexia. What is a temporary delay for some becomes a persistent obstacle for others. Notably, students with dyslexia reported additional struggles related to readability, particularly stemming from poor aesthetic design choices in assignments.
Data gathered revealed key patterns in teaching assistant (TA) practices within remote learning environments. Many defaulted to text-heavy materials and were unfamiliar with assistive technologies such as text-to-speech or screen readers. Frustrations with rigid learning management systems were common, as these platforms lacked the flexibility to support students with diverse needs. TAs expressed a strong need for platforms that support adaptive content, including audio, visual, and interactive formats.
Without real-time interaction, many TAs found it difficult to identify students’ needs. They recommended embedding tools like Zoom or Discord and incorporating interactive features like quizzes and diagrams to promote engagement and accessibility. The most pressing takeaway was the need for better training and integrated tools to help TAs support students with learning disabilities. TAs also emphasized the importance of having tools that allow them to track student progress and offer proactive support.
Instructor interviews added further context. Some instructors reported that students felt like a “bother” when asking for help, which led them to revise their teaching and assignment structures to reduce cognitive load. Encouragingly, a few instructors had taken the initiative to learn about the assistive tools their students used. Still, there remains a need for a stronger, more systemic approach to ensure all instructors are equipped to support diverse learners. Our design accounts for varying levels of instructor engagement by including built-in accessibility features and contextual guidance throughout the platform.Existing assistive technologies like text-to-speech and speech-to-text tools help students overcome reading and writing challenges, but their impact is often limited by lack of awareness, guidance, and consistent support. Concerns about standing out, and tools not fitting their specific needs can further discourage long-term use and engagement.
Using qualitative and quantitative data collected from interviews during the contextual inquiry, I developed three personas to better empathize with both primary and secondary users. Jaime (a 20, Student with Dyslexia) represents LearnAble’s primary audience. However, the interface layouts and aesthetics are also designed to benefit users like Nathan (20, Student without Dyslexia) and Carol (40, Instructor).
There are a few key differences between the students with and without dyslexia and also the professors themselves in the context of remote learning.
A student with dyslexia (Jaime) inherently has different practices than a student without: (Nathan) due to their learning disability, the way they learn differs vastly from the student without the disability. This includes routine (how often they do their work and at what pace/order), how they do assignments (how long it takes, their chronological process, how much they understand from it), and goals (how well the assignment is done vs how much of it is done). We find that a student with dyslexia tends to take longer on their assignments to both understand them and work on them, work at a more chronological pace, take longer overall to go through their classes and assignments, and have a goal more focused on actually completing the assignment itself rather than the quality of the assignment.
As for the professor (Carol), there are different stakes between the professor and the students, mainly that they are more focused on how much the student is retaining from the learning material and how well, rather than how much they have done.
The storyboard highlights this disconnect and proposes solutions to support students with dyslexia in online learning environments. Key features could include clear, chronological timelines, multiple assignment format options, and accessible design elements like dyslexia-friendly fonts and simplified layouts.
Unlike their peers, students with dyslexia often require more time to understand and complete assignments, tend to follow a step-by-step routine, and focus more on finishing tasks than perfecting them. Professors, however, are usually more concerned with how much students retain, creating a gap between student needs and academic expectations.
Currently, many digital platforms are overwhelming, with unclear navigation and rigid formats that limit how students engage with content. This can increase frustration and reduce learning outcomes for students with dyslexia.
Designing more inclusive, flexible, and accessible learning tools can lead to the creation of environments where all students have the opportunity to thrive—no matter how they learn.
The conceptual design of this prototype is guided by a holistic approach that integrates ecological, interactional, and emotional perspectives. The overall goal is to support dyslexic students by creating an adaptable, accessible, and inclusive remote learning environment. Central to this concept is the metaphor of a “digital library,” an interface that is organized, easy to navigate, and rich in supportive resources.
The conceptual design of this prototype is guided by a holistic approach that integrates ecological, interactional, and emotional perspectives. The overall goal is to support dyslexic students by creating an adaptable, accessible, and inclusive remote learning environment. Central to this concept is the metaphor of a “digital library,” an interface that is organized, easy to navigate, and rich in supportive resources.
The conceptual design of this prototype is guided by a holistic approach that integrates ecological, interactional, and emotional perspectives. The overall goal is to support dyslexic students by creating an adaptable, accessible, and inclusive remote learning environment. Central to this concept is the metaphor of a “digital library,” an interface that is organized, easy to navigate, and rich in supportive resources.
The conceptual design of this prototype is guided by a holistic approach that integrates ecological, interactional, and emotional perspectives. The overall goal is to support dyslexic students by creating an adaptable, accessible, and inclusive remote learning environment. Central to this concept is the metaphor of a “digital library,” an interface that is organized, easy to navigate, and rich in supportive resources.
Think-Aloud Protocol had users vocalized thoughts in real-time while interacting with the prototype. They were occasionally prompted with clarifying questions (e.g., “What do you expect this button to do?”). These Sessions were documented through audio recordings or notes.
Post-Session Survey which users completed afterwards. This 5-question survey used a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.”Among thing assessed were ease of use, visual clarity, and layout effectiveness.
The one thing all users agreed upon was how seamless the navigation flow was as indicated by survey responses being "Somewhat Agree" and "Strongly Agree". The remaining questions tested indicate ways in which how LearnAble can be further worked on to meet individual needs.
When it comes to the layout of the interface, user's had mixed feedback on how cluttered they perceived the layout to be, with observations from, "This interface is well-organized and free of clutter" to "some parts of the interface are cluttered or overwhelming."
Feedback on color schemes, font sizes, and styles affecting readability also recieved mixed reactions from users. Observations ranged from "No issues with readability or color scheme" to "occasional difficulty reading due to color contrasts" and "Difficulty with font size and text spacing."
Overall, there was a push for more customization potions among respondents.
While the current LearnAble prototype is structurally sound and visually accessible, true inclusivity requires more than a functional interface. The consistently positive feedback on navigation validates our structural design decisions and confirms that users were able to move through the interface with ease. However, this consistency in flow contrasts with the variability in user needs and preferences when it comes to readability and visual comfort.
Key insights point to the importance of personalization. The diversity of feedback regarding text size, spacing, and color contrast highlights that a one-size-fits-all approach is insufficient. Even when a design is technically accessible, it may still fall short for individuals with visual sensitivities or cognitive differences. Clean, uncluttered spaces helped reduce cognitive load, while areas perceived as overwhelming or visually dense detracted from user comfort and focus.
Designing for accessibility means designing for flexibility. In future iterations, the platform must offer customizable settings to allow users to tailor their experience according to their own needs, whether that involves font scaling, layout density, or contrast options. While this iteration relied on general student feedback, there is a clear need for more targeted testing with neurodiverse users, particularly those diagnosed with dyslexia, to ensure the design can truly support all learners.
