Implementing A Holistic Approach To E-Learning Accessibility

1. http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/conferences/alt-c-2005/http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/conferences/alt-c-2005/ Implementing A Holistic Approach To E-Learning Accessibility Lawrie Phipps JISC TechDis Service York Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk Email: Lawrie.Phipps@heacademy.ac.uk Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath Co-author: Caro Howell, University of Bristol Note: Permission is granted to record or broadcast this talk for non-commercial purposes. UKOLN is supported by: TechDis is supported by:

2. About This Paper • This paper: • Summarises the role of W3C WAI and WAI WCAG guidelines in helping to provide universal access to digital resources • Describes some of the difficulties experienced in implementing guidelines • Describes some of the limitations and dangers with the guidelines • Provides a holistic framework for e-learning accessibility BK

3. About The Speakers • Brian Kelly: • Works for UKOLN – a national centre of expertise in digital information management • Web adviser to the UK higher & further education and cultural heritage communities • Funded by JISC and the MLA • Lawrie Phipps: • Works for TechDis, an educational advisory service, working across UK, in the fields of accessibility and inclusion • Senior Advisor for Higher Education • Funded by the JISC This paper is based on the experiences gained by TechDis and UKOLN over several years in advising the HE/FE sector on best practices for Web accessibility BK

4. W3C WAI and WCAG • W3C (World Wide Web Consortium): • Body responsible for coordinating development of Web standards • WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative): • W3C group responsible for developing guidelines which will ensure Web resources are widely accessible • WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines): • One of three sets of WAI guidelines. WCAG provides advice of accessibility on Web content (e.g. HTML pages) • Other two WAI guidelines cover accessible user agents (UAAG) and accessible authoring tools (ATAG) BK

5. Which reflects your views most closely? Interpretation of WAI WCAG • How do you interpret WAI WCAG (must use ALT tags for images; HTML must be valid; must use style sheets for presentation; …): • Mandatory, with following characteristics: • Clearly defined rules Objective • Checking mostly objective • Penalties for non-compliance • Similar to checking that HTML complies with the standard • Advisory, with following characteristics: • Useful guidelines, to be interpreted in context • It's about providing useful, usable resources • Checking mostly subjective • It's similar to checking that a Web site is well-designed BK

6. I think this means the format is appropriate (i.e. HTML for slides) but others argue it means resources, expertise, … available WAI WCAG AA and AAA • In order to achieve WAI WCAG AA compliance: • Avoid deprecated features (e.g. FONT) • Use W3C technologies when available and appropriate (no Flash, MS Word or PowerPoint) • .. use the latest versions [of W3C formats] • Create documents that validate to published formal grammars (i.e. HTML must be valid) • In order to achieve WAI WCAG AAA compliance: • "Specify the expansion of each abbreviation or acronym in a document where it first occurs" (BBC?) • Specify document collections with the LINK element and "rel" and "rev" BK

7. The WAI Model • The WAI model for Web accessibility is based on three components: • Content • Authoring Tools • Browsers • Get all three right and you'll have universal accessibility • But: • We have no control over browsers & authoring tools • The browsers and authoring tools aren't great • The content guidelines are flawed • Is universal accessibility really possible?

8. WCAG and E-learning • WCAG 2.0 draft (implicitly) acknowledges that accessibility to everyone is not possible: “Our target is to make things as accessible to as many people as possible given the need to have practical techniques and criteria.” • But there are issues for learning e.g. "Make text content readable and understandable" • Issues: • How practical are guidelines in e-learning (rather than for informational resources)? • How practical are they in the HE context? • Contextual issues • Backwards compatibility issues • "Clearly identify who benefits from accessible content, and who will benefit from each requirement e.g • Impairments of intelligence, memory, or thinking • The inability to interpret and/or formulate language symbols, learning disabilities" BK  LP

9. The e-learning User Experience (in HE) LP

10. Usability • Accessibility is not a product • Creating a resource that is inclusive is a process • The process must involve users • The experience of the JISC X4L programme • Creating learning materials • A tick list for accessibility LP

11. Usability as a process … of accessibility, objectives and needs • You need to consider your context • What do your community want or need to access • Prioritise those areas – test them with the users LP

12. The Holistic Approach • Accessibility is only important in achieving a user's objective: • This objective does not (usually) state “I want to read Wuthering Heights on a Web site that is XHTML Strict and complies with WCAG AAA” • Create an ALT tag for pathos? • You have resources other than the Web LP

13. Pragmatism and Holism • You have limited resources: • Prioritise • Seek to implement a basic level of accessibility – but test the important resources with users • Usability of material is as important as accessibility • Be flexible, state that you want to support users and provide a contact LP BK

14. UsersNeeds TechDis – UKOLN Approach • Focuses on the user • and recognises importance of: • External pressures e.g. funders, QAA, … • Technical infrastructure • Resource implications • Learning & teaching outcomes • and requires quality assurance based on documented policies and systematic checking Holistic framework for e-learning accessibility published in CJLT: Remember UK legislation expects organisations to take "reasonable measures" BK

15. I-Map – A Case Study http://www.tate.org.uk/imap/pages/animated/primitive/picasso/nude_arms.htm • Independently of our work Tate Gallery were using a similar approach: • Need for an educational resources about Picasso/Matisse • Aimed at visually impaired users • Recognition that a universal approach was inappropriate • Developed a hybrid approach i-Map Web site breaks WAI guidelines (e.g. it uses proprietary formats) and took a user-focused and pragmatic (what expertise do we have) approach. Positive comments received from target audience

16. Further Developments • Need to develop a more formal methodology to support holistic approach to IT development programmes • JISC-funded QA Focus project developed methodology: • Supportive of open standards & best practices • Recognises need for diversity (due to immaturity of technologies, richness of usage scenarios, ...) • Recommendation that programmes allow for diversity & experimentation: • Argues for diversity rather than universality • Freedom to experiment on some areas • Tolerance of mistakes in some areas • Opt-out mechanisms This approach is being further developed through joint work with UKOLN, TechDis, AHDS & CETIS

17. Conclusions • To conclude: • WAI guidelines have been developed for a reason – so seek to understand them and implement them if and where appropriate. • Be flexible if implementation is difficult or conflicts with (for example) learning. • Think holistically! Students don’t come to HE to only sit in front of a screen. • Select guidelines / standards that mean something to the context of the resource. • Document your processes. BK

18. Questions • Any questions? Acknowledgements: Many thanks to JISC for funding UKOLN and TechDis and the QA Focus project.