[Athen] FW: BlindNews: Court case shows that education must be accessible

[Ron Stewart]

Interesting case out of the UK

Ron

IT-Director.com (UK)
Monday, January 29, 2007

Court case shows that education must be accessible

By Peter Abrahams

By: Peter Abrahams, Practice Leader
Bloor Research

In a recent article, I argued that vendors need to look at the accessibility
of all stages of their sales cycle-not just the product itself. In
particular this should include accessible education and this has been
highlighted in a recent successful legal action.

Sam Latif is an IT project manager at Procter and Gamble in the UK and has
been registered blind since 1988. In 2004 she decided to further her career
and her professional expertise by studying for and (hopefully) acquiring the
"Project Management Professional", qualification, known as the "PMP" from
the Project Management Institute which is based in the US. She had
significant difficulty obtaining the necessary course reading material in a
format that she could use and further difficulty with sitting the
creditation examination which she did pass.

She, with the assistance of the Disabilities Rights Commission in the UK,
took her grievance to an Employment Tribunal and has been awarded #3000
compensation in respect of injuries to her feelings. A more detailed
description of the case can be found in an Outlaw.com article.

LINK:
http://www.out-law.com/page-7692

Several important issues come out of this case that all IT vendors should
consider:

The case was brought under UK law against a US based organisation. This
suggests that companies should aspire to best practice in accessibility and
not just the letter of the law in their jurisdiction. The new UN Convention
on Disabilities should greatly aid this process. 

LINK:
http://www.it-director.com/blogs/Abrahams_Accessibility/2006/12/un_conventio
n_on_disabilities_adop_.html

Being able to acquire externally recognised qualifications is vitally
important for people with disabilities and every effort should be made by
the software vendors and educational establishments to assist. 

Educational material includes not only specialist course material but all
related reference documentation and all of this needs to be accessible. 
Trying to retrofit accessibility on to existing documents is hard. The
Institute provided both PDF and Word versions of the documents but neither
was suitable for a screen-reader. The problem goes back to the authoring of
the documents. If they had been structured properly using style sheets they
could have been made accessible. The sad thing is that a well structured
document is easier for everyone to use and much easier for the author to
modify but so few organisations know how to use styles properly. 

Providing suitable facilities for examinations is complex. Allowing extra
time is straightforward but needs to be seen to be fair to all students.
Providing students with a human reader/transcriber and a quiet environment
for them may be necessary. The best solution is to enable the student to use
the assistive technologies (screen-readers, voice-recognition, tactile
diagrams etc.) they are familiar with; the challenge is how to do this
without breaking the normal technology provided by the examiners and not
allow the student to abuse the situation by having access to private 'crib'
information. 

As with most accessibility issues, resolving the situation early in the
design cycle is by far the best solution and will, by its nature, create
other usability benefits to the wider community.

As a post script I would suggest that the Reading Employment Tribunal, that
heard the case, learns from this case and puts its own house in order. The
findings are available in PDF, RTF, DOC and HTML versions but none of them
has been structured (no headings, titles or even ordered lists were used),
so they are all relatively inaccessible. The PDF version is a scanned
document so a screen-reader cannot read anything. In my opinion legal
documents in any modifiable format are of dubious value. What is needed is
an accessible PDF version. I am sure this problem is not confined to Reading
but is true of most court documentation and an issue that the DRC should
raise and resolve.

http://www.it-director.com/blogs/Abrahams_Accessibility/2007/1/court_case_sh
ows_that_education_mu_.html

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00115.txt
URL: <http://mailman12.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20070131/030184fb/attachment.txt>