[Athen] RE: Canvas Vs Blackboard ? Cost and Expense model. athen-list Digest, Vol 78, Issue 17

Bill Grubaugh grubaugh at sfsu.edu
Thu Jul 26 15:03:44 PDT 2012


Hi Dan, Thanks.
Following up Public/Student and Staff/Faculty evaluation method.

> 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.


Of course forewarning and notice of barriers at either interface front (Public/Staff or Staff) is important before contractual agreements - Aim being to reflect response to issues back to Vender not absorbed them unknowingly within the Institution.

The Public/Staff evaluation method may be useful post *Green Paper* report (End User and Author side interface analysis). Something one may contextually consider when preparing a final *White Paper* cost and -product expense report.


>From talking with Procurement Buyers and Admins. I've found the post Green Paper presents a common stymie point; -What next; how do you/we approach weighing comparative barriers between companies/products?


This can sometime breakdown to a blind tally of *one for one* barrier count without regard for an Institutions remediation/accommodation expenses; expenses often time accepted with contractual caveats for Industry to apply (or not apply) the access/usability findings of Public and/or Private Edu. Institutions.

In the end - after the *Green Paper* some cost and expense risk analysis comes into play; the Public and Staff interface analysis method just one approach aimed to streamline comprehension, and system wide application of ICT Procurement process.

When complete I'd be interested in the Canvas Data - will send you a line.

Another one for the Tool Chest is -
INTERlearning.org (in participation with SRI International). URL https://www.nterlearning.org/ . INTERlearning uses Shibboleth authentication.

I found out about this via U.S. Department of Energy training sessions.
Login:
https://www.nterlearning.org/web/guest/course-details?cid=236

SRI is an independent, nonprofit research institute conducting client-sponsored research and development for government agencies, commercial businesses, foundations, and other organizations. http://www.sri.com/about

Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: athen-list-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu [mailto:athen-list-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of athen-list-request at mailman1.u.washington.edu
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 12:02 PM
To: athen-list at u.washington.edu
Subject: athen-list Digest, Vol 78, Issue 17

Send athen-list mailing list submissions to
athen-list at u.washington.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
athen-list-request at mailman1.u.washington.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
athen-list-owner at mailman1.u.washington.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of athen-list digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. FW: [SEC508] SSB BART Group (SSB) announces the opening of
the SSB ACE Institute for Learning, created to fill the need for
expert training in the IT accessibility and Section 508
Compliance market space. (Sam Joehl)
2. RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list Digest, Vol
78, Issue 16 (Bill Grubaugh)
3. Re: RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list Digest,
Vol 78, Issue 16 (Dan Comden)
4. Re: RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list Digest,
Vol 78, Issue 16 (Wink Harner)
5. Accessible Online/Distance Learning Resources (Buckley, Matthew)
6. (going) paperless DSR Office (Gershman, Cindy)
7. Re: RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list Digest,
Vol 78, Issue 16 (Dan Comden)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:02:26 -0400
From: Sam Joehl <sam.joehl at ssbbartgroup.com>
Subject: [Athen] FW: [SEC508] SSB BART Group (SSB) announces the
opening of the SSB ACE Institute for Learning, created to fill the
need for expert training in the IT accessibility and Section 508
Compliance market space.
To: athen-list at u.washington.edu, STC AccessAbility SIG
<stc-accessibility at mailman.stc.org>
Message-ID: <0caf0166bf0d83de27566fa8a7a57e56 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

SSB BART Group (SSB) is proud to announce the opening of the SSB ACE Institute for Learning <https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/>, created to fill the need for expert training in the IT accessibility market space.




>From September 25 - 28, 2012 the ACE Institute will provide the Fall

>2012

Training Days.



During the training days leading accessibility experts from SSB and Jacobs Technology Inc. will present courses on Accessibility Concepts<https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/accessibility_basics.php>
, Web Accessibility
<https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/web_accessibility.php> , Electronic Document Accessibility<https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/accessible_documents.php> , and Managing Procurement Processes for Section 508 Compliance<https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/section_508_procurement.php> .
Classes will be held in a metro accessible state-of-the-art training facility in Washington DC.



https://ace.ssbbartgroup.com/register.php





Debra Ruh
Chief Marketing Officer
SSB BART Group
debra.ruh at ssbbartgroup.com

804.749.3565 (o)
804.986-4500 (c)
Accessibility on Demand

Follow us: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/#!/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/#!/SSBBARTGroup>
| LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog>
| Newsletter <http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120725/215358f7/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:34:14 +0000
From: Bill Grubaugh <grubaugh at sfsu.edu>
Subject: [Athen] RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list
Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16
To: "athen-list at u.washington.edu" <athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID: <ACFE0E1E24F61342B33214F4B6C7B3C01BFE53 at EMX41.ad.sfsu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

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 facing?

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.

Does Blackboard also have a comparatively equal problem?

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?


>From Dan:

"While many modules are overall accessible, some key elements, including the grading module, have what appear to be serious accessibility problems, esp for keyboard/screenreader users."

Bill Grubaugh MS HF/E
email grubaugh at sfsu.edu

________________________________________
From: athen-list-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu [athen-list-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu] on behalf of athen-list-request at mailman1.u.washington.edu [athen-list-request at mailman1.u.washington.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:01 PM
To: athen-list at u.washington.edu
Subject: athen-list Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16

Send athen-list mailing list submissions to
athen-list at u.washington.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
athen-list-request at mailman1.u.washington.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
athen-list-owner at mailman1.u.washington.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of athen-list digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. An Intensive on-line AT Training Program for Professionals in
Rehabilitation Services - Starting soon! (hirschma at uwm.edu)
2. Canvas LMS vs. Blackboard (Wulf, Christina - wulfcx)
3. Re: Canvas LMS vs. Blackboard (Dan Comden)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:40:35 -0500 (CDT)
From: hirschma at uwm.edu
Subject: [Athen] An Intensive on-line AT Training Program for
Professionals in Rehabilitation Services - Starting soon!
To: athen-list at u.washington.edu
Message-ID:
<303620146.279543.1343158835670.JavaMail.root at mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"


TechSpec Assistive Technology Program: An Intensive Training Program for Professionals in Rehabilitation Services:
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM), Rehabilitation Research Design and Disability Center (R2D2), and the Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute at the University of Wisconsin - Stout are pleased to present the TechSpec Program, which provides a stipend for an intensive, on-line, Assistive Technology and Accessible Design (ATAD) Program of Study.


The Certificate in Assistive Technology and Accessible Design, which is awarded at the completion of the TechSpec Program, is an interdisciplinary, collaborative program through the UWM College of Health Science's Departments of Occupational Therapy and Communication Sciences Disorders and the School of Education's Department of Exceptional Education. This 1 ?? to 2-year part-time graduate study program is designed to meet the increasing demand for assistive technology and universal design expertise within the field of rehabilitation.



We???re starting soon! We are limited to 8 participants. Interested rehabilitation/education providers can obtain more information or an Application Kit from Aura Hirschman. Applications are due by Aug. 10, 2012. Contact information: Phone (414) 229-
1139 or email hirschma at uwm.edu.
--

"Design for People with Disabilities is Better Design for Everyone"

(for more information and resources - http://access-ed.r2d2.uwm.edu/)

Aura M. Hirschman, MS, CRC
Outreach and Training Coordinator
R2D2 Center, Enderis Hall, Room 135
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
P.O. Box 413
Milwaukee, WI 53211-0413

(414) 229-1139
Fax (414) 229-6843
TTY (414) 229-5628



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120724/af0fd4da/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 20:59:41 +0000
From: "Wulf, Christina - wulfcx" <wulfcx at jmu.edu>
Subject: [Athen] Canvas LMS vs. Blackboard
To: "athen-list at u.washington.edu" <athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<C41D9021A0DB5F40A4E065737DCB653D2657A365 at IT-EXMB3.ad.jmu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi all -

I'm quite new to this list, so please let me know if this isn't the proper forum for this question.

My university is considering shifting to a new Learning Management System. The university has narrowed the choices down to sticking with Blackboard 9.1 (which we currently use) or moving to Instructure's Canvas LMS.

I've been asked to research and compare the accessibility of the two programs. I've found plenty of info online, especially about Blackboard, but would love to hear any first hand experiences--positive or negative--that users have encountered using either Blackboard or Canvas.

I'm particularly interested about how user-friendly the systems are for screen-readers users. A system may be technically accessible but not particularly easy to use.

Thanks so much for any help - if you have suggestions for other listservs or venues where I might get additional feedback, please let me know!

Many thanks,
Christina Wulf


Office of Disability Services
Accessible Media & Technology Assistant
James Madison University
Wilson Hall 208
540-568-5046
wulfcx at jmu.edu





------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 15:27:22 -0700
From: Dan Comden <danc at uw.edu>
Subject: Re: [Athen] Canvas LMS vs. Blackboard
To: Access Technology Higher Education Network
<athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAFUsdKThuxVB4S-p_WSmiyKwKt=ApNZvpEm4t2qN3Eg1dRCa8g at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Christine,

I've nearly completed assessing our pilot implementation of Canvas.

While many modules are overall accessible, some key elements, including the grading module, have what appear to be serious accessibility problems, esp for keyboard/screenreader users.

I would encourage a complete assessment of both options before making a choice. If you'd like to see my draft notes, drop me a direct email note.

-*- Dan

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Wulf, Christina - wulfcx <wulfcx at jmu.edu>wrote:


> Hi all -

>

> I'm quite new to this list, so please let me know if this isn't the

> proper forum for this question.

>

> My university is considering shifting to a new Learning Management System.

> The university has narrowed the choices down to sticking with

> Blackboard

> 9.1 (which we currently use) or moving to Instructure's Canvas LMS.

>

> I've been asked to research and compare the accessibility of the two

> programs. I've found plenty of info online, especially about

> Blackboard, but would love to hear any first hand

> experiences--positive or negative--that users have encountered using either Blackboard or Canvas.

>

> I'm particularly interested about how user-friendly the systems are

> for screen-readers users. A system may be technically accessible but

> not particularly easy to use.

>



--
-*- 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120724/7274d4f1/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
athen-list mailing list
athen-list at mailman1.u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list


End of athen-list Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16
******************************************




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:07:47 -0700
From: Dan Comden <danc at uw.edu>
Subject: Re: [Athen] RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list
Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16
To: Access Technology Higher Education Network
<athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAFUsdKRPKDNc3bUT8UQhLwCVTq-zA=i0dnSzPrQeaLN06oq=aA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

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 facing?

>


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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120725/822b342d/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:25:09 -0700
From: Wink Harner <wink.harner at mesacc.edu>
Subject: Re: [Athen] RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list
Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16
To: Access Technology Higher Education Network
<athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAF3P_xOMvcFVrDt2gCQ7g1eE=xY4x5xhRQg_RsRHB-_2-=+9LQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Thanks Dan. Let me know if I can create a special section for you to login to Canvas.
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 facing?

>>

>

> 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

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120725/f45fa4eb/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:41:51 +0000
From: "Buckley, Matthew" <buckleym at missouri.edu>
Subject: [Athen] Accessible Online/Distance Learning Resources
To: "athen-list at u.washington.edu" <athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<56FC9F3A1043F04988C256EF483D51D011489D at UM-MBX-N01.um.umsystem.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hello,
Does anyone know of any resources or listservs that primarily discuss accessibility in online classes/distance learning? You can email me off list if you know of any resources or listservs.
Thank you very much for your time.


Matthew E. Buckley | Coordinator | University of Missouri ~
Disability Services | S5 Memorial Union | Columbia, Missouri 65211
*: 573.882.3684 | 7: 573.884.5002

[http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/z1M25/hash/5u84f48n.gif]<http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Columbia-MO/MU-Office-of-Disability-Services/206767089569?ref=ts&__a=7&ajaxpipe=1>

"To the world you may be one person. But to one person you may be the world." - Vic Preseli ******************Confidentiality Notice****************** Email is not a secure form of communication; confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender of the error and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120726/a6778d48/attachment-0001.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1447 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
Url : http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120726/a6778d48/image001-0001.gif

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:47:33 -0700
From: "Gershman, Cindy" <cgershman at pima.edu>
Subject: [Athen] (going) paperless DSR Office
To: " (athen-list at u.washington.edu)" <athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<FDEE88C033017A4399C77B5B4E8887C89A65D3C5BB at DO-MB01.pcc-domain.pima.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Posting for a colleague; forgive the cross-posts.

We need some feedback from those of you who work in a paperless or near paperless office. Our office will be using a on line database soon. Thanks in advance for answers to the questions below.
What are the negatives of becoming paperless?
Did you scan proof of disability and return the original to the student?
How did you start the process on current files?
Thanks
Carol Barnes

Carol Barnes

Disability Resource Specialist
Pima Community College, West & Community Campuses
520-206-3132
520-206-3139 (fax)
carol.barnes at pima.edu<mailto:carol.barnes at pima.edu>


Cindy Gershman
Advanced Program Coordinator, Alt Format Disabled Student Resources Pima Community College Tucson, AZ
520-206-6688
cgershman at pima.edu<mailto:cgershman at pima.edu>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120726/2db8732d/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:49:36 -0700
From: Dan Comden <danc at uw.edu>
Subject: Re: [Athen] RE: Canuvs Vs Blackboard ? for Dan: athen-list
Digest, Vol 78, Issue 16
To: wink.harner at mesacc.edu, Access Technology Higher Education Network
<athen-list at u.washington.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAFUsdKQ_8HUe0zoqerk7bPeAQ7Gbbt9YS2GupKxMM2ZDwD2_RQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Thanks Wink, we have a Canvas system set up here. I'm in as both a student and an instructor. We're also using it to launch books for our Etext pilot project so it's all kind of awkward. I am a bit amazed that nobody else has flagged the accessibility problems!

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Wink Harner <wink.harner at mesacc.edu> wrote:


> Thanks Dan. Let me know if I can create a special section for you to

> login to Canvas.

> 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 facing?

>>>

>>

>> 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

>> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list

>>

>>

> _______________________________________________

> athen-list mailing list

> athen-list at mailman1.u.washington.edu

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list

>

>



--
-*- 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/athen-list/attachments/20120726/01fa61c8/attachment-0001.htm

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
athen-list mailing list
athen-list at mailman1.u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/athen-list


End of athen-list Digest, Vol 78, Issue 17
******************************************





More information about the athen-list mailing list