Campus Technology

Click here to receive your FREE subscription to Campus Technology

Newsletters

A Public Consortium Emphasizes the Importance of LMS Accessibility

10/3/2006

Why Should We Care How Accessible Our LMS Is?

It is likely no one will question the legal responsibility of universities to accommodate disabled learners. So the initial question of “why accommodate?” answers itself: We have to. But this answer is far from satisfying, and only opens the floodgates for the critics. Undoubtedly someone makes the claim: “The legal requirement forced on universities to make complex software, such as an LMS, accommodate users of assistive technologies, hampers deployment, limits functionality for the non-disabled, and ultimately hobbles pedagogy.”

Although technical hurdles increase in some instances of complex interactivity when developers are required to code with accessibility in mind, it is highly likely that the end product will be more robust as a result of the increased attention. The effort that g'es into re-imagining a complex interactive interface so that it better accommodates assistive technologies has an added effect of improving the overall quality of the interface. It is a simple case of having to approach a problem from multiple perspectives. The interface is more thoroughly conceptualized, more flexible, and necessarily adaptable to a wider variety of platforms and browsers. The interface becomes enriched rather than impoverished through the rigor required to make it accessible. And, as a result, the usability of the interface improves for all users.

Considering content design, there is no question the clarity and overall quality of content improves from the extra planning and composition care that must be taken when authoring and structuring content to accommodate users with disabilities and users who access the LMS via assistive technology. Additionally we see that content is more likely to be more easily reusable. The semantically-rich content and structure best suited to people with disabilities is also better indexed by search tools used by all. Thus, learning objects are more likely to get better exposure in any community of learners.

Consortium Working Directly with LMS Developers

Product managers and programmers at Desire2Learn (D2L), our Consortium’s LMS, have a direct interest in accessibility. The University of Toronto Adaptive Technology Resource Centre performed audits and analyzed the current product. D2L’s project manager and its usability specialist directly liaise with the Consortium. In addition to maintaining an internal checklist for developers, D2L has built into its code build process hooks that prevent the product from compiling unless it satisfies certain interface-level accessibility standards.

Most significantly, however, D2L will be working directly with disabled users at Consortium member universities to perform usability tests. It is this last effort which we believe will have the most lasting effect. The Consortium can be used to mediate the cultural divide between developers and users with disabilities, and we believe this process will result in tangible improvements in access. As we have stated elsewhere, designing for accessibility is an ongoing and interactive process. Without direct usability testing, it is simply not legitimate to vouch for the functional accessibility of any LMS.

Take Responsibility

Individual instructors must take responsibility for creating the best learning experience possible for students online as they do in-class. Lack of accessibility is not always the fault of programmers and designers alone. The following list of ten tips conveys the importance and the ease of creating accessible online materials.

1. Importance of “Alt” Text – Not only is it important for students who use screen readers, but it can also provide an opportunity for instructors to re-think the descriptions of images, the usefulness of images and the grouping of similar images. This can serve as the impetus for reorganizing your course materials to increase their effectiveness and better convey the information you are providing. Images that convey information (that is, non-decorative images), graphs, and other graphics in Word, PowerPoint, PDF, and HTML, should all have alternative text descriptions that are useful for all students.
2. Use of PowerPoint – PowerPoint is very heavily used for course materials by many instructors. It is best to have PowerPoint open in its native application, rather than within the browser. It is recommended that you include in the text that links to PowerPoint the phrase, “right-click and download to desktop before viewing.” This has the advantage of making it trivial to save the presentations for later viewing and, in relation to accessibility, it overcomes the problem of PowerPoint loading within the browser. Such a strategy also allows users to print handout versions of the file with three or six slides per page, which can save students a considerable amount of money over a semester. However, when PowerPoint presentations are displayed within the browser (via the Windows Active-X component) their accessibility can be compromised for screen reader users and users who rely on the keyboard to navigate. In terms of accessibility, it is preferable to use an HTML alternative to PowerPoint. One very convenient method for outputting PowerPoint into HTML is the Accessible Web Publishing Wizard for Microsoft Office, which outputs PowerPoint into well-structured and accessible files. Also see WebAIM’s excellent tutorial on creating accessible PowerPoint .
3. Look for Features That Allow Un-Docking of Frames and Alternative Layouts – Make sure to inform students of these features to help alleviate screen navigation issues that arise from frame based layouts. Using frames can severely restrict what users see, especially if the screen resolution is set to the largest size allowed by their monitor. Providing maximum screen real estate for larger concepts that are utilizing multimedia presentations is a best practice that all users will appreciate.
4. Online Quizzes, Homework or Learning Activities – Create less work for yourself by removing the timed component from quizzes. Instead of allotting 30 minutes to complete the quiz, allow 3 or 4 hours. Research has shown that the majority of students will complete the exam within your expected timeframe. However, by dedicating more time to complete a quiz, you give students with documented disabilities and students with English as a second language the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge of the course material without the stress of a timed exam. Also, without a time allotment for your quiz, you reduce the need to make arrangements for “special access” or other mandated testing accommodations. For more information including publications and citations go to: http://drc.arizona.edu/teach/extra-time-research.html, and be sure to inform yourself about your campus’s policies regarding testing accommodations for students with disabilities.
5. Online Quizzes, Homework or Learning Activities – Most Web based tools that accomplish these assessment activities allow an instructor to control certain display options. If you are given choices for display, please use the vertical layouts rather than horizontal. With a vertical layout, screen readers read the information more accurately based on the hidden table structure that the programmers implemented for the student interface. This layout will be greatly appreciated by all students because the format is much easier to read. The quiz may require more scrolling to finish, but each question will be focused on assessing knowledge and not comprehension of technology or deciphering screen layouts.
6. PDF – When creating anything in PDF make sure to use the “convert to PDF” function in Adobe Acrobat rather than printing your document to the PDF Print Distiller or using the “print as PDF” function. Using the convert to PDF Plug-In in Word or any other program that supports it or using Acrobat Professional itself, to perform the conversion “marks up” the PDF with tags that provide structure to the document that allows a screen reader to access its text. PDFs are inaccessible to screen readers unless they are converted in this manner. For good pointers on this technique, see WebAIM’s excellent tutorial on PDF and Word.
7. Auto-Refresh of Frames and Screens – Sometimes these are on by default and all screen reader users will need to turn them off. It forces the page to reload at pre-set intervals, causing the screen reader to start over at the top of the page. This can severely distract students while they are in the middle of a learning activity.
8. Equations Editors – The equations that can be built by Web-based editors are not easily seen by different browsers and are very difficult or impossible for screen readers to decipher. If you choose to use an equation editor, please provide concise and accurate text descriptions of the formulas and actions being done in the mathematical exercise. All students will thank you for the descriptions.
9. HTML and Java-based Chat Clients/Tools – These tools are essentially unusable to students who access with screen readers. They are also non-optimal for users with mobility impairments. If you need to communicate in a synchronous environment, we recommend having a separate communication venue for students that have disabilities. E-mail, phone, or discussion boards are all better alternatives than synchronous chat tools.
10. Captioning – If you incorporate video or audio containing speech into your materials, it is imperative that the multimedia have synchronized text captioning or a text transcript. Synchronized captioning is called for in video, or if your audio is accompanying a slide show (PowerPoint or other) in which the words spoken are related to particular slides. For a couple of excellent tutorials on captioning for the Web see the articles by WebAIM and these guidelines from the National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM).

Ongoing Efforts: Examples from Our Institutions

A New Position at OSU. A new usability specialist role to oversee accessibility initiatives has been created at Ohio State to oversee technology initiatives university-wide and work directly with disabled faculty and staff. We are conducting internal testing with assistive technology and working with clients. OSU has also spawned a users group focusing on users with disabilities and our/their technology needs. This increasingly active group conducts usability testing for current and new software introduced into the university community, including our LMS.

Built-in Attention to ADA Compliance at University of Arizona. The University of Arizona held a two day workshop in the spring of 2006 on learning activities and assessments with a focus on having the ADA compliance issues built into the creation experience. The Learning Technologies Center Tutorials for instructional technologies have best practices for ADA compliance built into them so that instructors cannot tell the difference. This removes the point of emphasis of ADA Compliance being an after thought or testing for it after completing the build process and makes it part of the build process in a way that benefits all students.

Consortiums for Feedback to Vendors and Users

We opted to publicly post our issues, concerns, and ideas to help motivate change. These issues and ideas surface organically from individual interests and real-world functionality. Our assessments allow for inter-institutional collaboration to share information and solve problems.

Join Us!

Your contributions matter! Regardless of your LMS, please review comments and add your own ideas. Visit the University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign Center for Instructional Technology Accessibility Collaborations online at http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/collaborate/.

• Campus Technology |
• Education Plaza |
• EduHound |
• T.H.E. Journal

Copyright 1998-2008 1105 Media Inc.. See our Privacy Policy