The student team in the EnlighteNest box-Ryan Good, Payden McBee, Suzanne Baltar, Jessica Steuber, Christian Gann
Suzanne Baltar, Christian Gann, Ryan Good, Payden McBee, Jessica Steuber
Abstract
Public school systems, therapists, and parents are struggling to serve children with severe disabilities and conditions such as cerebral palsy. We have developed an activity box that will allow for multiple sensors that measure a student’s interaction with their environment. These sensors will activate multiple outputs—fan, lights, and music—that stimulate the child’s senses. We have also created an iOS application as a student assessment tool to track progress as well as provide user control over the box system (selection of outputs, etc.). The box is built to accommodate students in wheelchairs from the ages of 4-21 years. We have used a cyclic design method, lean launch pad, to iteratively test options for various subsystems.
Background
Many of these children suffer from combinations of sensory and mental challenges making traditional education impossible. Some companies have developed the concept of the “Little Room” that brings sensory input and manipulation in direct contact with the students. This provides the extremely basic action-reaction learning experience these children lack in other environments. “Little Rooms” are very low tech (usually toys strung from a ceiling) and typically built for toddler-sized children. Their small size combined with their expensive cost make it hard to justify putting Little Rooms in schools or homes. This project extends the concept of the Little Room by first incorporating multiple, electronic, heterogeneous stimulants and controls and adding a student assessment tool to track progress. We have developed an activity box, the EnlighteNest, that will allow for multiple sensors that measure a student’s interaction with their environment. Our project was designed to be a much larger system capable of fitting a wider range of students, while adding high-tech capabilities and keeping the cost as low as possible to increase the probability of these boxes being used in more schools and homes.
Methodology
As mentioned earlier, we used the lean launch pad method to develop our design. This method focuses on quick cycles of rapid prototyping. The whole design was centered on the concept of building, measuring, and learning. Our first step was to visit multiple schools in the area and see the type of tools and devices they had to work with disabled children. Many schools use sensors and buttons that are tied to a single output such as music or a fan. Simple buttons with one connection were costing schools around $80. Therapists at the schools stressed on us the difficulty in having multiple outputs since the buttons were so expensive they could usually only afford one. After those discussions, developing inexpensive sensors was moved to a high priority for us. We also needed get a good idea for the range of students that would be excellent matches for our system and understand the range of cognitive and motor skills we would need to accommodate for. The main thing we learned from these visits was the importance of adjustability in our design. Even two students with the same disability can be affected differently by it and have different limitations. Size of students was also a concern. After visiting the students and conducting extensive research on existing systems such as Little Rooms and the sensors/buttons commercially available, we decided that adjustability and versatility were the keys to making our system successful while keeping the cost very affordable. Our first development cycle was to build an inexpensive sensor. We began with a range finder. It works similar to sonar and detects movement within a specified range. Within a couple weeks we had a range finder programmed to detect movement within 12 inches of the device that would play a song when activated. Our first song was simple tones to the tune of “If You’re Happy and You Know It” without any words. We took our first subsystem prototype to a student to see how she liked it. The student’s parents as well as several therapists were present to help provide feedback. They all enjoyed the idea of a range finder very much and wanted one in the final system. From that session we learned that it would be important to aim the range finder very accurately since that student had very limited mobility. We also learned that we needed a lot of different songs (and actual songs rather than just tones) since the student got bored very quickly. The end of that development cycle brought us two new cycles: find a sensor arm that can adjust to different students at different locations and create a music playlist. We have had many cycles—some that can run in parallel with each other and some that must be sequential—and have used some very rudimentary ways to build prototypes. For example, we used multiple cardboard mockups for the box structure and ran copper wires through flex tubing for a sensor arm. We have also had development cycles for designing the application, the physical box structure, and making different outputs for each sensor. The lean launch pad method let us test a variety of subsystems and gain feedback subject matter experts every few weeks. It was very helpful in keeping us close to the issue and finding the best way to make a solution.
Results
The use of an iOS application for tracking progress is crucial to our system. It automatically tracks results and can easily display if a child is improving their cognitive and/or motor skills over time by using our box system. Our box has not been used consistently with one student or been in commission long enough to have accurate progress results at this time; however, we have received very positive feedback from our subject matter experts. They are sure that our system with multiple sensors and outputs will provide the sensory stimulation needed to provide an exciting and fun learning environment for the students. When we were testing various cycles with just our sensors not attached to the box, we had very successful results. Students were engaged and active in triggering the sensors. In fact, one girl was able to repeatedly kick to activate one sensor even though therapists had never been able to get her to control her lower extremities before the EnlighteNest. These sessions demonstrated the need for an application to autonomously track progress. The device times each session and counts hits and miss-hits. A hit is simply activating a sensor (any sensor) while a miss-hit is when a student activates a sensor before the output has finished (our outputs run for five seconds). Currently, therapists count the number of hits and miss-hits by hand. The application provides a much clearer tool for tracking progress over time. This is especially important considering that if schools can prove the device improves cognitive and motor skills via an official data tracking device rather than by hand, there is the possibility that Medicaid will provide funding to put our boxes in schools. We have tested the application’s ability to count hits and miss-hits on our own since for testing purposes it does not matter who activates the sensor, just if the application counts it. We found it is more efficient to count miss-hits by hand. There is a manual override on the app where the instructor can decrease the number of hits by one and add one to miss-hits. This also helps since it can be extremely difficult to differentiate between an intentional movement and a tremor. Therapists, as subject matter experts, have the best knowledge of the differences for each of their students they work with and thus we left that control in their hands. The application counts hits extremely accurately as long as it is properly connected to our data collection tool (Raspberry Pi) via Wi-Fi. Our sensors also are adaptable and can demonstrate possible improvements in motor skills in addition to cognitive skills. We have two different sensors: a range finder and a piezo. The range finder is attached to a two-foot modular hose that can be moved to one of eight locations in the box depending on the particular user’s abilities. It can be as close or far away from the student as desired, again depending on their ability. Over time it can be retracted further away to encourage more movement.
Range finder with modular hose attached to box
The piezo is a small strip attached to the wrist or elbow that measures a change in voltage when deflected. We have developed an algorithm that converts that voltage to an angle. The piezo has three different “zones”—ranges of angles—that are tied to different outputs. Some children are so limited in mobility that a wrist deflection is all they can manage. Our piezo device essentially turns one sensor into three (for the price of one!) for students with extreme mobility limitations. The therapists are very pleased and excited about the piezo sensor in particular. A very early version of the piezo is shown below.
Piezo mockup
Discussion/Conclusion
Our activity box system is an excellent tool for students with severe cognitive and/or mobile disabilities. Therapists struggled to provide various amounts of quality tools to enhance abilities and could typically use one or two buttons per student (and can only afford one or two buttons per school). Our system has two different sensors, but with a total of four different movements—moving in front of the range finder and each of the three zones on the piezo—to trigger an output which can be controlled by a therapist through the application. The total cost of one range finder, one modular hose to attach it to, one piezo, and the computer necessary to collect the data and transmit the data to the application is $76.52. Our system has four times as many trigger movements that are also more varied and controllable for a few dollars less than the buttons schools use now. We added the box structure to block out any outside stimulants and to provide an isolated learning environment for the student. The full box structure adds another $133.27 for a total of $209.79 for the box and the sensors. There are other small costs involved, such as a light strip and a fan, that increase the cost but by small amounts depending on the chosen devices. That cost to build is very low, especially in relation to the price of a Little Room, and will decrease if the box is mass produced. They have the freedom in the box to learn on their own, activate whichever sensor they want, and receive their favorite outputs. Students can have several sessions in our system and have a different experience each time. Our box adapts the Little Rooms into a high-tech device that can fit a much wider age range of students as well as provide stimulants to many senses. Schools will not struggle nearly as much to serve disabled children with our box at hand.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all of the therapists and subject matter experts that helped us with this project. It was truly an eye opening and heart warming experience for all of us. It didn’t take long for this to become more than just a school project for us. We couldn’t have done anything useful on this project without the knowledge and assistance of all the therapists who work with these children everyday. We would also like to thank our sponsor, FalconWorks, for bringing this idea to us and helping with funding and various expertise along the way. Finally, we deeply appreciate the daily persistence of our instructors stopping by to check in and offering very helpful critiques, particularly Captain Trimble, Lieutenant Colonel Laffely, and Dr. Direen.
Authors
Student Design Team
Christian Gann email:
c-gann@hotmail.com