Four Important Events

1. Four Important Events • E-Reader settlements • Department of Justice testimony to Congressional Subcommittee on Civil Rights • National Federation for the Blind complaints against nine Law Schools • 5/26/2010 Senate Hearings

2. E-Reader Settlements • Under the agreements reached today, the universities generally will not purchase, recommend or promote use of the Kindle DX, or any other dedicated electronic book reader, unless the devices are fully accessible to students who are blind and have low vision. The universities agree that if they use dedicated electronic book readers, they will ensure that students with vision disabilities are able to access and acquire the same materials and information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use. The agreements that the Justice Department reached with these universities extend beyond the Kindle DX to any dedicated electronic reading device

3. Department of Justice Samuel R. Bagenstos Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Department of Justice Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives Concerning Emerging Technologies and the Rights of Individuals with Disabilities Presented on April 22, 2010

4. Department of Justice The Department of Justice Position Regarding Website Accessibility. The Department of Justice has long taken the position that both State and local government websites and the websites of private entities that are public accommodations are covered by the ADA. In other words, the websites of entities covered by both Title II and Title III of the statute are required by law to ensure that their sites are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities.

5. Department of Justice The Department of Justice Position Regarding Website Accessibility. There is no doubt that the internet sites of State and local government entities are covered by Title II of the ADA. Similarly, there is no doubt that the websites of recipients of Federal financial assistance are covered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

6. Department of Justice The Department of Justice Position Regarding Website Accessibility. most colleges and universities today rely upon the internet and other electronic and information technologies in course assignments and discussion groups, and for a wide variety of administrative and logistical functions in which students and staff must participate.

7. Department of Justice People who have difficulty using a computer mouse because of mobility impairments, for example, may use an assistive technology that allows them to control software with verbal commands. But websites and other technologies are not always compatible with those assistive technologies. Captioning of streaming videos may also be necessary in order to make them accessible to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.And individuals with difficult memory or cognitive impairments may be affected by complex websites.

8. NFB Complaints • The National Federation of the Blind (NFB)  announced on May 5th  that they have filed nine complaints with the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, against prominent law schools for violating the civil rights of blind and other print-disabled law school applicants. The NFB complaints are based on these school's reliance on  Law School Admissions Council (LSAC) Web site  for on-line applications.  The complaints stat that the LSAC website (http://www.lsac.org)  is inaccessible to blind and print disabled applicants forcing blind applicants to  seek sighted assistance rather than independently using the LSAC system. • The complaints name: • The University of Chicago Law School • Yeshiva University’s Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law • Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School • University of Denver’s Sturm College of Law • Washington and Lee University School of Law • University of Miami School of Law • William Mitchell College of Law • Gonzaga University School of Law • Northeastern University School of Law

9. 5/26/2010 Senate Hearings Historic Senate Hearing Builds Compelling Case for Landmark Communications and Video Programming Technology LegislationFor further information, contact:  Mark Richert, Director, Public Policy, AFB(202) 469-6833mrichert@afb.netThe massive effort to put Internet-equipped accessible mobile phones and other technology into the hands of people with disabilities took yet another giant leap forward on Tuesday 5/26. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) held an historic and well-attended hearing of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet which he chairs to discuss how he and his Senate colleagues can move swiftly to enact comprehensive telecommunications and video programming legislation that would dramatically improve the ability of people with vision loss to benefit from the technology revolution.Compelling testimony from an Iraq War veteran who lost his vision in combat, along with presentations by an impressive array of witnesses from the deafness and technology industry communities, underscored the tremendous possibilities that are in store for all people with disabilities if only the most commonly available mobile and video programming technologies are designed with the unique needs of people living with vision loss and other disabilities in mind.Senator Kerry expressed the hope that comprehensive legislation will be passed in the Senate soon. The Senate legislation, S. 3304, the Equal Access to Twenty-first Century Communications Act, while flawed in several areas, does mirror in many ways the landmark bill currently pending in the House sponsored by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), H.R. 3101, the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, legislation that enjoys the endorsement of the disability community and major industry players. Rep. Markey also testified at yesterday's hearing and congratulated his Senate counterparts for their leadership.Given the growing momentum in Congress, there is increasing optimism that action in either or both chambers may be possible in time for the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act to be commemorated on July 26 of this year. Advocates should therefore continue to press their House and Senate members to support prompt passage of the strongest possible technology accessibility bill and to use H.R. 3101 as the model for such legislation.

10. Sorry, Five important events • 6/10/10 Joint “Dear Colleague” letter from OCR and DOJ regarding use of E-Readers. “It is unacceptable for universities to use emerging technology without insisting that this technology be accessible to all students.”

11. Wait, Six important events • 7/26/10 DOJ Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking “Accessibility of Web Information and Services Provided by Entities Covered by the ADA”

12. DOJ Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • When the ADA was enacted in 1990, the Internet as we know it today—the ubiquitous infrastructure for information and commerce—did not exist. Today the Internet, most notably the sites of the Web, plays a critical role in the daily personal, professional, civic, and business life of Americans. Increasingly, private entities are providing goods and services to the public through websites that operate as places of public accommodation under title III of the ADA. Similarly, many public entities under title II are using websites to provide the public access to their programs, services, and activities. Many websites of public accommodations and governmental entities, however, render use by individuals with disabilities difficult or impossible due to barriers posed by websites designed without accessible features.

13. DOJ Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • Beyond goods and services, information available on the Internet has become a gateway to education. Schools at all levels are increasingly offering programs and classroom instruction through websites. Many colleges and universities offer degree programs online; some universities exist exclusively on the Internet. Even if they do not offer degree programs online, most colleges and universities today rely on websites and other Internet-related technologies in the application process for prospective students, for housing eligibility and on-campus living assignments, course registration, assignments and discussion groups, and for a wide variety of administrative and logistical functions in which students and staff must participate.

14. DOJ Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • iii. Need for Department action • The Internet has been governed by a variety of voluntary standards or structures developed through nonprofit organizations using multinational collaborative efforts. For example…in the area of accessibility, the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the W3C¨ has created the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). • It has been the policy of the United States to encourage self-regulation with regard to the Internet wherever possible and to regulate only where self-regulation is insufficient and government involvement may be necessary. • Voluntary standards have generally proved to be sufficient where obvious business incentives align with discretionary governing standards as, for example, with respect to privacy and security standards designed to increase consumer confidence in e-commerce. There has not, however, been equal success in the area of accessibility. It is clear that the system of voluntary compliance has proved inadequate in providing website accessibility to individuals with disabilities.

15. O.K., Seven Important events • 8/12/2010 Chronicle of Higher Education Reports on National Science Foundation study. “College Web Pages Are 'Widely Inaccessible' to People With Disabilities”

16. STOP COUNTING!!! • 11/12/2010 NFB Complaint against Penn State • Areas included in the complaint: • Library and Library Website • Department Websites • Course Management Software • Classroom Issues • eLion • Clickers

17. Library and Library Website • Some of the problems with the library’s website include:  • Not all headings are listed on the main page. • The list of links does not list all links on the page. • An alphabetical list that appears on the page is not read aloud through the screen reader. • In searching for an ejournal, no headings appear in the displayed table. (The table includes links for information, to “get it” (the article) and to “save it.” None of these headings are accessible.) •  The library itself also has a touch screen “self check out” counter that is not accessible due to its touch screen interface.

18. Department Websites • Every academic department at Penn State is responsible for creating and maintaining its own website, but Penn State has not developed a set of guidelines for uploading accessible content nor required that the content be accessible. As a result, each department website offers a different set of accessibility barriers to blind users. Below is a sampler. • Office of Disability Services: The ODS website has accessibility barriers, including a badly structured request for assistance form and no clear heading markers. • English Department: Headings are not used appropriately, or in correct sequence, on certain pages. The tables that make up the calendar page do not have the appropriate cells marked as row or column headers. A number of graphics that appear to be used for manipulating the calendar do not have alternative text descriptions. • Computer Science and Engineering Department: The select box preceding the search edit field is not labeled. Most headings are not used correctly. Some graphics appear to be missing alternative text descriptions. • Communication Department: Not all the titles are announced and several graphics exist that are unlabeled. There are also several drop-down boxes that appear on a secondary page that a mouse must hover over in order to access the embedded links. None of the drop-down boxes are announced in the links list or by a screen reader. • For blind students to access course descriptions in their Department, they must be able to use the Department websites. Because of the design of the sites, students are unable to access links to the course descriptions, particularly graduate course descriptions. • College of Science: The site contains unlabeled graphics that appear to be connected to java script functions. The form to schedule a visit should also have checkbox groups properly labeled.