290 likes | 303 Views
This article discusses the importance and implementation of a digital accessibility training program in the enterprise. It covers key concepts, training plans, content development, and delivery methods for the program.
E N D
Spurring the Elephant: Implementing a Digital Accessibility Training Program in the Enterprise Beth Crutchfield Terri Fellers
Agenda • Introduction • Key Concepts • Training Plan • Content Development • Delivery
Business Drivers Why do we care? Digital accessibility programs are driven by a mixture of the following factors:
Overarching Model Digital Accessibility Maturity Model (DAMM) High level areas of activity or competence needed for an effective digital accessibility program. Program maturity is measured along ten key dimensions: Governance, Risk Management, and Compliance Communications Policy and Standards Legal and Regulatory Fiscal Management Development Lifecycle Testing and Validation Support and Documentation Procurement Training
Training Plan Goals Have the knowledge in place to ensure sites and applications are compliant with accessibility policy The ability to maintain that knowledge over time and staffing changes The ability to certify knowledge transfer to key roles
Target Roles Core Development Roles • Designers • Developers • Quality Assurance • Project and Product Managers Documentation Roles • Technical Writers • Communications and Marketing Procurement • Procurement • Contract Specialists • Vendors Other Roles • Customer Service Representatives • Human Resources
Sample Curricula and Courses Accessibility Awareness • Accessibility Concepts • Section 508, WCAG, ADA, CVAA, AODA Accessibility Testing and Evaluation • Audit Methodology, Testing Tools Document Accessibility • Acrobat, InDesign, MS Office Mobile Accessibility • Overview, iOS for Testers, iOS for Developers Web Accessibility • Overview, Basics and Advanced Support • Handling Accessibility Issues
Training Rollout Plan Time based implementation of the training matrix When do specific roles need to complete specific training? What is the refresh period for training? What triggers training needs to occur?
Basic and Expert Tracks Training internal accessibility experts is expensive Easy fix - split up the tracks Procedurally tier out accessibility development issues • Front line employees • Internal experts • External experts
Basic and Expert Tracks The right class for the right person Attendance roles that best match the course content Tracks are broken up into specific areas so that attendees get the most out of the time
Assistive Technology Training Do not recommend organizations train Developers or QA to perform functional or user acceptance testing with AT Focus on normative testing against best practices Supplement with functional testing by individuals with disabilities that use the AT on a daily basis Sighted users testing with AT can result in radically inaccurate results
Coaching Support Provide coaching support for trainees • Recurring, scheduled sessions • Help Desk support Allows trainees to bring issues to an expert Keeps the issue fresh in individuals minds Allows for tracking what issues are unclear in training
Please(!), not just PowerPoint Slides PowerPoint driven training is boring Video training is better • 2-3 minute videos Simulation training is best Practical reality is a mix of these methodologies
Course Development Overview Create a series of courses implementing the training matrix Defining the content Defining the knowledge checks Defining a certification process
Course Development Methodology • Kickoff • Design Document • Delivery Approach • Technical Specifications • Goals • Objectives • Outlines • Specific Best Practices • Storyboard • Introduction • Goals and Objectives • Modules • Exercises • Assessments • Demonstrations • Review Cycles • Development • Deploy
Module Content Grouped by media types (Images, Data Tables, Forms) Content: • Description of relevant accessibility issues • Compliant and non-compliant examples • How to fix • How to unit test • Speaker notes or narration transcript
Build vs. Buy Building courses • Cheap if we don’t account for time • Custom by definition • Takes a lot of time Buying courses • Expensive if we don’t account for time • Not custom by default • Quick Common Practice • License base courses • Customize a subset • The more frequently a course is taken, the more critical it is to customize it • In large organizations seat time is the dominant cost
Delivery Options On-site Instructor-Led Training Classic classroom based training Web-based Instructor-Led Training Remote training Online Self-Paced Training Deploy courses via SaaS or to the organization’s learning management system
On-site Instructor-Led Training Organizations typically see highest satisfaction ratings and knowledge retention with this method of delivery More engagement from students However, most expensive option
Mixed Delivery Models Basic courses often benefit from live demonstrations and examples of AT • Allows team members to experience accessibility challenges firsthand • Communicating the human impact Advanced courses available online in a self-paced fashion Provides the benefits of classroom and online training
Accessibility Summits A Shotgun approach to kicking off a program Methodology: Offsite assessment work Onsite, hands-on intensive, custom training Onsite consulting work with relevant groups Offsite, ongoing coaching support for teams
Thank You Contact Us Beth Crutchfield VP of Policy and Program Services beth.crutchfield@ssbbartgroup.com Terri Fellers Accessibility Team Lead terri.fellers@ssbbartgroup.com Follow Us @SSBBARTGroup linkedin.com/company/SSB-BART-Group facebook.com/SSBBARTGroup SSBBARTGroup.com/blog
About SSB BART Group • Unmatched Experience • Focus on Accessibility • Solutions That Manage Risk • Real-World Strategy • Organizational Strength and Continuity • Dynamic, Forward-Thinking Intelligence • Fourteen hundred organizations(1445) • Fifteen hundred individual accessibility best practices (1595) • Twenty-two core technology platforms (22) • Fifty-five thousand audits (55,930) • One hundred fifty million accessibility violations (152,351,725) • Three hundred sixty-six thousand human validated accessibility violations (366,096)