Week 13!

Well the festive season has been and gone so as usual I'm a tad behind on my reading. Decided to purchase Seale after all....it actually makes more sense as a hard copy rather than an online one (think that says more about me than the book lol!!)

Activity 1.1 Seale Chapter 6
1. On page 70, it is suggested that accessibility is frequently framed as a technical issue, rather than a pedagogical (learning and teaching) one. Can you think of any arguments, evidence, or examples from what you have read, or from your experience that could help lecturers (teachers, faculty) see accessibility as a pedagogical issue?
It's a team effort...can't have successful accessibility without both. Problem is that many lecturers would see it as a technical issue and therefore not their responsibility. Also that the technical side is there to enhance the pedagogy. In order to change this view there needs to be support given and possibly incentives (Stefani).
2. Some of the key principles that underpin different design approaches include: inclusivity, equity, holism, proactivity and flexibility. How are these principles defined in the literature? Are they sufficiently clear and consistent so that lecturers can apply them to their own practice?
Inclusivity - can this really meet the of all students with differing disabilities, unlikely? Equity - flexible and as lecturere are already attempting to meet individual needs of all their students then this may be attainable. Holism - lecturers may still need to provide alternative learning experiences for students and not just elearning ones (Cultural differences). Proactivity/flexibility - as with quality it's important to meet the needs at the beginning of the design and adapt and not once things go wrong.
Activity 1.2 Seale Chapter 7
1. There is a debate surrounding who is responsible (or most responsible) for accessibility. How helpful is this debate in ensuring that people working in post-16 education change their practices?
If those with technical skills, such as learning technologists, are not ultimately or solely responsible for ensuring accessibility, what responsibilities do you think they should have and why?
Learning technologists are just as responsible as other stakeholders...it's a team effort. Everyone needs to accept some amount of responsibility and accountability.
2. On pages 82–83, Seale uses an archaeology metaphor to try to encourage learning technologists to dig deeper beneath the surface of accessibility guidelines and standards. This is intended to develop a greater understanding of approaches to accessible design. How helpful do you think this metaphor is?
Iceberg may be better......
3. Can you think of an alternative metaphor, image, analogy or visualisation that could be used to help develop learning technologists’ thinking in this area?
On page 98 Seale discusses the tensions regarding the use of technical tools versus human judgement to evaluate the accessibility of learning resources. What is your position concerning this issue?
As humans develop and crate the tools you can't really have one without the other..can you?
4. Can we trust human judgement? If so, whose judgement should we trust – learning technologists working within educational organisations or external experts?
Depends on their motives/individual needs

Activity 1.3 Seale Chapter 8
1. How helpful do you think it is to have ‘specialised’ rooms or areas in an educational institution, which only disabled learners can use to access technology/online learning material?
Depends upon the disability (students individual needs). There is a place for them though. Studens musn't be alienated but cost is the deciding factor.
2. Do you think student support services need to employ accessibility or disability experts? If so, how might the role of these ‘experts’ complement or work against the role of other staff working within student support services?
It would depend on what their actual role was.
3. How are student support services organised or structured in your institution? In what ways do you think this organisation influences the way in which disabled learners are supported to use or access technology?
Personally at OU I've found them to be approachable and helpful. Their website is informative and easily navigated (by me!). They have followed up students for me via phone and email when there is a problem.
4. What would you change about the way in which students are supported in your institution and why? (You might find your notes from Week 4 relevant to this question.)

Activity 1.4 Seale Chapter 9
1. Apart from this course that you are studying now, think of a staff training event or resource that you have attended or accessed, related to accessibility and/or disability. If you have never attended such an event, imagine carrying out one of those listed in the resources or discussed in Week 3.

• What was effective or ineffective about the staff training event/resource?
• To what extent did the following factors influence the effectiveness of the experience for you: content or focus; structure or presentation; role or expertise of the leaders/developers?
• If you have not attended or accessed a staff training event/resource related to accessibility prior to this course, what are the reasons for this? Unsure except that OU has a diversity website that we are expected to access regularly.

2. Use your reflections and answers to Question 1 to develop a conceptualisation of what you think makes or defines an effective accessibility-related training event/resource and an effective trainer or staff developer.

3. Should accessibility-related staff development be made compulsory for all those who work in post-16 education?

• What are the reasons behind your answers?
• What do you think are the pros and cons of making accessibility-related staff development compulsory?

Activity 1.5 Seale Chapter 10
1. Does the organisation where you work have an accessibility (or similar) policy? Use your alternative context if you don’t work for a relevant organisation.
If yes:

• Who are the people responsible for writing the policy?
• What is their role/job title?
• Are they the most appropriate people in terms of roles and responsibility to be developing the policy?
• Who monitors the impact of, or response to, the policy?
• What is their role/job title?
• Are they the most appropriate people to be monitoring the policy, considering the roles and responsibilities of all staff in the organisation?

If your organisation does not have a policy, why do you think this might be?

• Does your organisation have someone in a senior position, whose job it could be to lead accessibility-related policies and initiatives?
• Are senior management aware of accessibility issues and simply choosing to ignore them?
• Has a decision been made that policies are not the right tool to use to try to change practice?
• If so, how is your organisation communicating to staff any desire or intention relating to accessibility?

2. How might you improve on accessibility-related policies that exist in your organisation? If none exist, what might you include in any new accessibility-related policy within an organisation?

• Does your organisation have other policies that should refer to accessibility? If so, do they refer to it? If not, in what ways should they refer to it?

3. Who are the key people who have a role in managing accessibility in your organisation?

• What helps or hinders them working together on accessibility-related issues?