QR Codes, Museums, and Equality

Reading chapter 12 of Mobile Learning: Transforming the Delivery of Education and Training (2009) for class, my thoughts kept coming back to QR codes. If anything, you can call me smitten with the little block of black and white. The chapter, called Using Mobile Technologies for Multimedia Tours in a Traditional Museum Setting (Laura Naismith & M. Paul Smith, 2009), explores the possibility of using mobile devices to enhance the learning experience within a museum. Museum goers were given the option between "two Flash-based multimedia tours," (p. 247) which included the use of handheld devices, promoting a "nonlinear exploration of the museum" with objects built into an overarching narrative (Naismith, L. & Smith, M.P., 2009, p. 253).

Since older museums are limited in their ability to alter the layout or structure of the displays, these multimedia tours were to supplement the already existing structure of the museum, easily transforming a static display into an interactive one. The authors describe how museums are meant to create "free-choice learning," (p. 249), allowing participants to investigate, explore, and develop new knowledge at their own pace, in their own style. "A common problem faced by museums is that visitors often do not make good use of the range of learning opportunities that they offer...Mobile technology can support visitors by providing both location-based information and guidance through this information based on the learner's interests and needs," (Naismith, L. & Smith, M.P., 2009, p.250 ).

Through low/no power positioning technologies within the handheld device (barcodes, RFID, infrared), the study was able to assess the benefit of such tours and the negative/positive aspects of each technology. Barcodes and RFID were deemed unacceptable due to cost of software programs to use them, as well as the display of the codes were deemed aesthetically displeasing and harder to use. The infrared technologies were deemed the most appropriate.

Most recently, QR codes have begun to spring up within museums, allowing persons with smartphones to access further information on a specific museum piece or display, and possibly creating a learning community where participants can add their own thoughts and memories (see QR Codes in National Museum of Scotland).

QR codes are cheap, easy to create and display, and are a great way to access information and communities in an instant. But if they are going be used more and more within education and public life, including within a museum setting, equality of access must be continually considered.

1. Ownership of smartphone-Not everyone owns a cell phone, let alone a smartphone. Though QR readers are free, the phone is not. If a museum includes QR codes, they should consider providing loan devices to be able for everyone to access the same information.

2. Ability to scan-Even if one has a smartphone, the ability to hold a phone steady enough to scan a QR code may vary from person to person. The museum staff (or educational staff) must be willing accommodate those students who may not be able to successfully scan the QR codes themselves.

3. Access to linked information-It is often custom for museums to provide audio to supplement the displays (including the study), and QR codes can be linked to videos as well. This information would not be accessible for the Deaf community. QR codes then could be made that are linked to a visual representation of information, American Sign Language, that would be beneficial for people who are Deaf. Also, for print information that is linked to the QR codes, audio versions would be beneficial for the blind.

It is exciting to think about the possibilities of these technologies and the opportunities to connect "just in time" learning in the real world, to learning within the classroom. Even with my excitement, I must always consider the implications of the technology and equal access.

We All are Cyborgs

Professor Pianfetti's recent blog post on technology, privacy, and security-especially concerning medical advances- made me contemplate the way I have started to view technology in light of health issues. I have grown up with technology. I have come to rely on the technology of computers and smartphones to provide access to information, as well as leisure and educational activities. Though I am almost never without my cell phone, I have the option of leaving it. If choosing to do so, I can be "disconnected" from the technology that has become almost a second limb.

That was before I was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes this past January. Now my life is

continuously connected to technology; insulin and pen needles, glucose meters and strips, and my phone. There are multiple apps that are targeted for people with diabetes-the one I liked the best is called Diabetes Buddy. I am able to record what I eat from a large database of items, calculate the number of carbs, record my blood sugar readings, and how much insulin I take everyday. I also can log activities or exercise that I do-the type, length, and how I feel. I can then easily email my blood sugars to my endocrinologist, or my food intake to my dietitian. Or if I have a question, I can quickly email my diabetes educator along with any information about my day to day life that would be helpful in answering. As much as I would do anything to not have diabetes, I am thankful to be diagnosed in a time where technology is expanding the quality, and extending the years, of life for diabetics. And the technology continues to progress.

As a new diabetic, I have only just begun to

master multiple manual insulin injections per day, but I have slowly started to see an insulin pump in my future. From the discovery of insulin to current research on the artificial pancreas, medical technology has improved the lives of diabetics around the world. The artificial pancreas seeks to mimic the human pancreas by creating a loop system between an implanted continuous glucose monitor and an insulin pump. The monitor tells the pump how much insulin to give, depending on blood glucose levels. The system is automatic, allowing the person to decrease manual glucose readings and eliminate manual insulin injections. (Please see the JDRF Arificial Pancreas Project for more information.)

As I begin to seriously think about the next step in managing my diabetes, I contemplate the positives and negatives of being literally connected to the technology that helps me live. When I was diagnosed, the one thought I came back to was that after spending my life relying on only myself, I now must rely on something outside of myself to survive. There will always be something external that I must have in order to live a full life. I was determined to not let a disease define me, but it is not something I can ignore. It is a part of me; something I constantly think about. And the technology that helps me live, is a part of me too-whether it is attached or not.

I am reminded of a book I had to read for undergrad called Rebuilt: How Becoming Part Computer Made Me More Human by Michael Chorost. Michael was hard of hearing growing up, but as an adult, became completely deaf, forcing him to make a choice: stay deaf with no previous contact with sign language or the Deaf community, or receive a cochlear implant. His book details his decision and the process of re-learning how to hear, as well as his internal struggle to define himself with the newly implanted technology.

As technology advances, the line between the technological device and the human on which it is being used can become blurred. While he struggled with the idea of being part human/part computer, I struggle with the decision of having a device constantly attached to me that is artificial. Currently, I am still somewhat in control of my disease-I am able to manually test, manually figure out how much insulin I should take, and administer the insulin myself. An artificial pancreas would push me to rely on the working function of the technology. I am subject to the in and outs of using technology-malfunctions and breakdowns. Part of me would not be human. We often think of technology as hard, cold, and lifeless. But I am slowly seeing technology come to life; bringing security and ease of mind.

Technology raises questions of privacy, security, reliability, and identity. Who are we with and without this technology? If a part of our body is replaced with technology, does that make us less human? Where do I end and the technology begin? Is this an issue that all of us face? Even those without health issues?

As technology improves, the line between human and technology will become even more blurry. Personally, I am excited about the possibilities; excited about the technology that gets out of the way to allow me to live my life. Cold, hard technology brings me life. I already can't wait until the day I don't have to stick my finger multiple times per day.