Presentation from Libraries and Learning Resources (LLR), Nottingham Trent University April 2009

Accessibility as everyday good practice – understanding attitudes Presented by: Sarah Horrigan, eLearning Developer Marek Oledzki, Learning Technologist

This slide involved using the TurningPoint Electronic Voting System. The question asked was as follows: What we’d like to know is what do we feel accessibility is mainly about? Is it about: Making changes on request Accommodating disabled students’ needs Giving people access Providing things in more than one format Widening participation Meeting legal requirements Make a selection using your TurningPoint handsets by pressing the number which corresponds to the option you feel is most appropriate. The results will all be anonymous. Results: If there is an even distribution – then make the point that yes, accessibility can be about all of those things. If there is a particular skew towards one of the options – make a point about the more general nature of accessibility etc.

So, we’ve shown that we have a pretty good understanding of some of the main principles which lie behind accessibility. That being the case, what’s the problem? Why are we standing here today to talk about attitudes towards accessibility? Well, one of the roles that Marek and I both have is as members of the Accessibility Working Group and one of the group’s aims is to raise accessibility of awareness and embed accessibility within teaching and learning practice. Superficially it seems that people generally know what constitutes “accessibility” but, as a report from the Disability Rights Commission in 2004 pointed out, when it comes to translating that knowledge into practice, a gap exists.

We might actually say that if we know accessibility is an important issue... why do we do so little about it? Yes, that’s a little strong, perhaps, but, so often if we know about accessibility at all it seems we don’t act on that knowledge[1]. Understanding attitudes towards accessibility can help us begin to assess how best to change practice within our own teaching and learning context. What we’re going to do next is to explore some of the most commonly cited reasons for accessibility to be disregarded or given minimal importance. Are these reasons justified? What can we do about them if they are? [1] DRC (2004), “The Web – Access and Inclusion for Disabled People”, http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publicationsandresources/Documents/Disability/web_access_and_inclusion.pdf (Accessed 19 November 2008)

Is it lack of knowledge which goes beyond an acquaintance with the general concept of accessibility perhaps? In a recent survey about NTU’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) staff were asked about its accessibility features, i.e. the things which would help to transform knowledge into practice.

The following are a selection of comments which were made... “What in the name of all things is an assistive technology?” “I don’t understand these terms” “No idea what this is all about” “I have no idea what you are talking about unfortunately” These were not isolated comments. Out of all comments received, only three made a comment which demonstrated that they knew how these features might affect using NOW.

Maybe there is a lack of awareness translated into action. What else might lie behind this though? Is it also, perhaps a question of denial?

Have you ever heard or felt any of the above about the ‘accessibility issue’? “... but none of my students have a disability” “... but there’s nothing wrong with my materials” “... but they can use a screen reader, it’s fine” “... but it’s not my responsibility” I know I’ve heard them. I’m sure I’ve even felt them at one point or another!

The picture of limiting long term illness (LLTI) or disability in the UK taken from the results of the 2001 Census shows that: LLTI affects 1 in 6 people in the UK There is a steady increase with age While it affects less than 10% of those aged 16 – 29 it affects over 20% of those aged 45 – 59. However, looking at this only in terms of facts and figures doesn’t consider the whole issue and may not be that useful[1]. I have some questions: Is this denial helpful? What happens to disabled students who pass invisibly through the system? What happens about students who don’t disclose their issues or haven’t had them formally recognised? What about people who have temporary issues which present them with accessibility problems? If we break the conceptual link many people hold that accessibility issues are somehow the same as disability issues, then it allows us to consider the wider implications of accessibility in education. If we don’t do this, then we don’t give it the recognition it needs within our daily practice. [1] Seale, J. (2006), “E-Learning and Disability in Higher Education – Accessibility research and practice”, Routledge, Oxon, UK

Is it because accessibility’s complex? It can certainly come across that way. In some circumstances it’s not just complex, it’s confusing too.

Here’s an example – if you’ve ever done any web design and decided that you need to make your content accessible, one of the first things people direct you towards are the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Sound friendly enough, don’t they?

Above is an image of those Web Content Accessibility Guidelines done as a Wordle[1] diagram which displays word frequency by size of font. It’s very technical and not desperately user-friendly. If this was your only way of making a website accessible in your teaching, it would probably put you off looking at accessibility issues at all. A quote I like about these types of guidelines is the following, ““Standards are like sausages, I like sausages” he went on to say “but I’m not keen on exploring too closely how they’re made”[2]. The technical nuts and bolts have a role and let’s face it, guidelines are there for a reason. They provide a solid framework by which we can aim for a more accessible web environment… but… unless you are a web developer you do not need to know them in any great detail. They’re also only one aspect. Like the idea of accessible teaching and get the general gist of the guidelines, but don’t worry too much about the detail. Apart from anything – in those guidelines - where does communication, readability and considering the needs of your students fit in?[3] [1] “Wordle” created at http://www.Wordle.net [2] Kelly, B. (2009), blog entry on 13 February 2009, “Standards are like Sausages”, http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/standards-are-like-sausages/ (date accessed 20 February 2009) [3] Seale, J. (2006), “E-Learning and Disability in Higher Education – Accessibility research and practice”, Routledge, Oxon, UK

Other issues you might hear are whether it’s a question of aesthetics or a question of cost? Will your materials look ugly? Will they be expensive? In the vast majority of cases, the changes you make are neither.

We need to ask, “What does accessibility really mean to us in a ‘learning and teaching’ context?”

It’s helpful at this point to think about the difference between making something accessible on paper, and making something truly accessible. So, here’s an example. You have some content which you know can be read by a screen reader. No problem! Here’s what a screen reader might sound like, however...

An mp3 audio file of a screen reader plays. Speaking ALT text Visted link Access Matters alt plus one page has two Headings and four links Heading Level 2 Test case for Heading Level 2 Visited link Speaking ALT text This test case illustrates several methods of specifying ALT text for images. It can be used to determine exactly what screen readers or other assistive technology provide for various cases. Immediately following is an image with no ALT text at all. Immediately following is an image with ALT text of only two quote characters. Immediately following is an image with ALT text of quote space quote. Immediately following is an image with descriptive ALT text. Graphic bullet Comments are welcome at the Visited Link essay about this topic in the Access Matters blog. Copyright copyright 2005 Bob Easton. All Rights Reserved.

TurningPoint question slide In the example, how many images were on the page? None 1 2 3 4 Couldn’t tell The point here isn’t really whether or not you got it right. In actual fact, there were four images – they were 4 graphics of bullet points which if you looked at the slide, you would quickly be able to see them. The point of this is to ask yourself – was that an easy exercise? How would it be if you were listening to lengthy passages of screen reader text? What if you were, as in our example, not given the questions until after the passage? You had nothing to listen out for and by the time the questions came, it’s highly likely that you could no longer remember the text.

Just because that web page could be read by a screen reader didn’t mean that it would be that accessible. Actually, even if it weren’t read by a screen reader, not providing questions first wouldn’t enable students to skim ahead, look out for key phrases or read with a purpose.

The ability of a screen reader to read the information is not the ‘be all and end all’ of accessibility. When it comes down to it, thinking how to make your materials accessible can benefit all of your students. From the student who would like to read a transcript of a piece of audio or scribble notes on it, to the student who is a visual thinker and prefers to see concepts displayed diagrammatically. From the student who is visually impaired and won’t benefit fully from online video, to the student with a slow internet connection which would struggle to download a large file.

Slide shows a diagram which shows accessibility hidden behind a fog of myths / misinformation / lack of awareness which risk obscuring the real goal: inclusive teaching. So, why don’t we stop thinking about accessibility as a separate issue, affecting others and not ourselves?

Why don’t we look instead at the kind of teaching we want to deliver to our students? Why don’t we look at the things we want for them? We want to make our teaching effective and we want to maximize the learning experience for our students. If that’s the case, why would we want to put up barriers to that? An awareness of accessibility feeds directly into inclusive teaching. If we are more aware of our audience and their needs then we are better able to increase their ability to learn and benefit from our teaching.

The real question now is – what can we do about it? How can we embed accessibility into our practice? How can we practice inclusive teaching rather than just knowing it’s a good idea?

One of the most important things of all to remember is that small changes can make a big difference. Any steps we can make towards inclusive teaching are good. Any steps which we can accommodate easily into our everyday teaching are even better!

Although this may seem a little trivial, a useful mnemonic which conveys the basic principles of accessibility in your teaching is “INCLUDE” I = Images – think about how they’re used. What is their purpose in your material? Use alternative text to describe them so that a screen reader can identify them (there is no one best way to describe them - a recent survey by WebAIM (2008) indicated a variety of preference on just this issue), describe them in the body of the text and think about the message which you’re trying to convey by their inclusion etc. N = Net - put materials online. This is one of the easiest things you can do to make your content more accessible. Simply uploading your content won’t necessarily make it perfect in terms of accessibility, but the fact that it is available is a huge step in the right direction. If you’re already using the Content area in NOW to share lecture notes and resources with students – this is a really positive move. C = Clarity – make all communications clear Think about your writing style. This isn’t about dumbing down your language in an academic context – but the explanation of complex terms and concepts does not in itself need to be complex! Use readily understood language, avoid jargon, explain acronyms, use signposts to let your students know what’s coming – and all students will benefit. Another aspect of clarity is in the fonts you use. Sans serif fonts such as Arial, Helvetica and Verdana are far easier to read on-screen than serif fonts like Times New Roman. It doesn’t take much effort to change your font and it could make another big difference in terms of how easy your materials are to access for your students / colleagues. L = Layout - use white space, avoid clutter A cluttered page is always going to be hard to read. Imagine your student submits an essay in which they’ve used a small font, no space between paragraphs, small margins and U = Useful – consider how your materials will be used If you consider the purpose and use of all of your teaching materials it can help you decide how best you can make their delivery flexible. A transcript isn’t just for someone who’s visually impaired – it could benefit many of your students. Considering readability and structure of your documents can transform them for all students. Not just including an image ‘because you can’, but ensuring that you think about the teaching use of that resource can help you think about a) how it will benefit your students and b) what you need to do to make sure that you’re not disadvantaging others by their inclusion. D = Describe – resources, all resources, need describing Transcripts of materials are good... descriptive transcripts are better. Using alternative text for web-based images is good... describing them within the content as well is even better. Asking questions is good... letting students know that a question is coming is even better. E = Experience – ask about it, share it If you don’t know what would make things better for your students – how can you do anything about it? Ask about people’s experiences. Share your experiences. Treat inclusive teaching as a process rather than an end goal. You don’t have to ‘do’ accessibility perfectly, but you can aim to make gradual change by building on your experiences.

What should you remember from this presentation? Firstly, that as far as your teaching practice is concerned, accessibility = inclusive teaching. Secondly, that the “accessibility issue” is much better to address if we treat is as just something we should do because it’s part of the process of good teaching practice. Thirdly, changes can be simple. Changing a font. Checking the layout of a document. Putting materials online. Thinking about structure. Aiming for a readable writing style. All of these are simple changes to make but are good, accessible practice. A checklist is a useful tool, but it’s far better to embed inclusive teaching into ‘what you do’ than have to make changes further down the line. Fourthly, you don’t have to know everything about accessibility. You don’t have to know all of the Web Accessibility Guidelines. You don’t have to know the ins and outs of the law. Being aware of accessibility... even being an expert in accessibility issues isn’t enough to make real, meaningful change. So don’t aim to be an accessibility expert, aim instead to be an inclusive teaching practitioner. Finally, ask your students what they need! If they do have a specific accessibility issue then they will understand their issues far better than any assumptions you or I might make about it. There is no generic ‘disabled person’ just as there is no standard ‘any person’. Yes, accessibility can be seen as being confusing, complex, costly, irrelevant, ugly... but why not just think of it as being good, inclusive practice? Make a few small changes, keep building on your experiences and help make accessibility become everyday good practice.

Enhancing life-long learning, teaching and research through information resources and services

Accessibility as everyday good practice - understanding attitudes Sarah Horrigan, eLearning Developer Marek Oledzki, Learning Technologist

Accessibility is mainly about… Making changes on request Accommodating disabled students’ needs Giving people access Providing things in more than one format Widening participation Meeting legal requirements

What’s the problem?

If we know accessibility is an important issue…why do we do so little about it?

When asked about assistive technologies in a recent staff survey, the responses included…

Is it denial?

However… Affects 1 in 6 people in the UK There is a steady increase with age Less than 10% of those aged 16 – 29 BUT… more than 20% of those aged 45 – 59 Plus… accessibility is not a disability-only issue!

Is it because it’s complex?

It can look that way…

Source: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines, Wordle.net

Is it a question of aesthetics? Is it a question of cost?

There is no single answer – if we can understand some of the issues we can start to make change

So, what does accessibility really mean?

An example…

In the example, how many images were on the page? None 1 2 3 4 Couldn’t tell

It can impact all of us It can improve things for all of us

Accessibility Inclusive teaching Effective teaching Maximizing learning

Accessibility Inclusive teaching Effective teaching Maximizing learning

So… what can we do about it?

small changes = BIG DIFFERENCE

Images – think about how they’re used Net – use the Net, put materials online Clarity – make all communications clear Layout – use white space, avoid clutter Useful – consider how your materials will be used Describe – resources, all resources, need describing Experience – ask about it, share it

What should you remember from today? Accessibility = inclusive teaching Accessibility is part of a process of good practice Changes can be simple You cannot know everything about accessibility Ask your students what they need