[Athen] RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list Digest,
Vol 78, Issue 16
wink.harner at mesacc.edu
Wed Jul 25 21:25:09 PDT 2012
Thanks Dan. Let me know if I can create a special section for you to login
On Jul 25, 2012 5:12 PM, "Dan Comden" <danc at uw.edu> wrote:
> Hi Bill
> Answers below, in-line
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Bill Grubaugh <grubaugh at sfsu.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Dan et. al.
>> Thanks for the feedback on Canvas. You mentioned That Canvas's Grading
>> module has serious accessibility issues; is this faculty facing or, student
> The grading module I examined is faculty-facing. At the moment I don't
> have a complete student view of all Canvas features.
>> I ask because, if it is faculty facing then the likely hood of individual
>> accommodation may be in place and/or, could be readily implemented for this
>> LMS feature/function; while the company tends to the problem.
> That is possibly an option, depending on the severity of the problem.
> However if we know that we have faculty that are screen reader users, or
> keyboard-only users, or speech input users, it is important to point out
> accessibility shortcomings in a product before they are purchased or
> deployed. If there is no apparent method for users (from either student or
> faculty sides) to use an application independently, and we know about it
> beforehand, that problem should be addressed straight away, not after a
> contract has been signed.
>> Does Blackboard also have a comparatively equal problem?
> I do not know. I have not used or tested Blackboard in many many years.
> Perhaps someone else in ATHEN-land can respond?
>> If and when doing comparative assessments of products do you weigh -
>> what I'd call public facing interface features over staff facing interface
>> accessibility? E.g., If two products are not fully accessible yet one has a
>> fairly good student facing interface, yet the faculty facing has issues and
>> the other is converse student facing is troublesome the one with the
>> faculty issues may be a better choice - depending on the critical needs and
>> functional requirements of the Requester. Then again the critical need in
>> education is to reach students so I guess that should be factored into the
>> product functionality from the get-go.
>> What do ya think?
> This was not a comparative assessment, it's an examination of our Canvas
> pilot implementation with a focus on non-mouse access. I used
> keyboard-only, screenreading and speech input methods to interact with the
> LMS. I also glanced at default font and color choices.
> From an overall accessibility perspective, I don't think it matters
> whether a significant problem is from the student side or the faculty side.
> Also don't forget there often is a third side: that of system admin or
> superusers that may interact with the system at a different level than
> either students or faculty -- that interface and any relevant modules
> should be accessible as well.
> With our current knowledge of what is needed for application and web
> accessibility, I find it hard to justify implementing or deploying a
> product that essentially prohibits someone from accomplishing a key
> component of their job. In the case of faculty, a key job component is
> entering and publishing grade information.
> By no means do I intend to single out a single vendor. But I do have to
> say I'm frustrated with companies that market their products as "disability
> friendly" or "ADA Compliant" when it's obvious that their knowledge of such
> matters apparently ends at the time they write those phrases. I don't think
> this is the case with Canvas, as some modules appear to be fairly
> accessible. It's a comment about other vendors I've observed over the years.
> And while I'm on a rant, I'll point out that seeing the specific phrase
> "ADA Compliant" in connection to applications or web pages is a pretty good
> indicator to me that the vendor does not understand accessibility because
> they can't even articulate the standards language properly.
> It's implied, but I'll state it openly here: I'm not speaking for my
> employer/institution; these are opinions that result from my experience.
> I look forward to comments!
> -*- Dan Comden danc at uw.edu <danc at washington.edu>
> Access Technology Center www.uw.edu/itconnect/accessibility/atl/
> University of Washington UW Information Technology
> athen-list mailing list
> athen-list at mailman1.u.washington.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the athen-list