A journey to accessibility How Temple University is implementing an Accessible Information and Technology initiative university wide Barbara DolhanskyPaul.

A journey to accessibility

How Temple University is implementing an Accessible Information and Technology

initiative university wide

Barbara Dolhansky Paul PaireAssociate Vice President Executive Director

About Temple University

• Based in Philadelphia, one of Pennsylvania’s state-related research Universities, along with the University of Pittsburgh and Penn State

• 37,000 students and 5,700 employees• 17 schools and colleges including 8 professional

schools (including Dentistry, Law, Medicine, Pharmacy and Podiatry)• 140 bachelor’s degree programs• 126 master’s degree programs• International campuses in Tokyo, Rome, and

London with programs in China, Korea, Greece, Israel and more

• 1400 students registered with Disability Student Resources

Technology accessibility and the ADA

• “Colleges and universities have specific legal obligations to provide students, faculty, and staff with disabilities the same benefits, programs, and services.”

- Russlynn Ali, assistant secretary for civil rights U.S. Department of Education

• For the Dept. of Justice and the Dept. of Education, their major compliance interest and enforcement interest for the foreseeable future is access to technology.

• College and Universities need to get a good handle on this issue and their role in providing accessible technology.

• The problem is here now, and it is not going away.

Why Now?

• Greater reliance on technology in education.– Course management systems (Blackboard, Moodle, ANGEL.)– Smart classrooms with advanced audio visual technology.– On-line administrative processes.– Dramatic increase in on-line learning. – Growing adoption of electronic textbooks and eReaders in

classrooms. – Proliferation of iPad’s. – Growing use of Google Apps.

• As technology gets more complex compliance is becoming critical.• Proliferation of lawsuits.

How to change an organization

Get people motivated

Motivation for Executives

•Desire to be fair & equitable in delivering services•30 complaints or settlements (and one statement of interest) involving institutions of Higher Education

Current litigation in Higher Ed# of complaints brought by:10 National Federation of the Blind6 Department of Education5 Department of Justice4 American Council of the Blind4 Student Lawsuit2 Employee Lawsuit2 Reading Rights Coalition1 Disability Rights Advocate1 Texas Civil Rights Project

# types & of ADA issues raised:8 Accommodations6 eReaders6 Physical Spaces (ADAAG)4 Clickers4 Policy4 Websites3 Library2 application process2 Course Management System2 Course Registration2 Google Apps2 Instructional Materials2 Instructor’s Behavior2 Online course content2 Procurement1 ATMs1 Electronic Textbook1 Food Service

Self Audit

• Hired outside consultant to review:– Websites & Web applications (sample size=15)– Classrooms / Learning Spaces– Computer Labs

• Results: we were on par with other institutions that hadn’t addressed accessibility

Our Discovery

• Temple University found out we need to address:– Overall accessibility policy for information and

technology– Computer labs (128 computer labs & 3,648 workstations)– Instructional materials– Learning spaces/classrooms (~700 including labs/studios)– Library– Procurement of technology– Web based content– Web based systems

Pull together a guiding team

Accessible Tech Compliance Committee

• Chair (CIO)• 1 Staff (Executive director)• 4 Faculty representatives• 1 School / College technical (Director of Information Tech)• 1 Computer Services (Associate Vice President)• 1 Creative Services (Associate Vice President)• 1 Disability Resources and Services (Associate Vice President)• 1 Human Resources (Associate Vice President)• 1 Provost Office (Vice Provost)• 1 Library (Senior Associate University Librarian)• 1 University Counsel (Associate University Counsel)• 1 Facilities (Director of Architectural Services)

Project/Working groups

Web Liaisons

University -Wide

Web Review & Audit

InstructionalMaterials &Captioning

Training & Accessibility

Web Site

Assistive Technology

Online Learning Library Administrative

SystemsProcurement

Accessibility Liaisons

Project Director

Project co-chairs

Accessible Tech

Compliance Committee

Accessibility Liaisons

• An individual within each school or college, responsible for coordinating the accessibility remediation and compliance efforts for their respective area:– Establishes priorities of remediation– Evaluates accessibility during the procurement process – Works with budget unit head for funding accessibility

initiatives– Attends accessibility meetings and training– Provides annual reports on the individual school or, colleges,

progress towards remediation

Develop a vision and strategy

Vision = University policy

• We will be accessible • The person responsible for providing the technology or

information is responsible for making it accessible• If it can’t be made accessible we should consider removing it• Accessible Technology Compliance Committee which is

empowered to effectuate change and is responsible for:– Setting standards & guidelines– Setting Timetables– Enforcement– Granting exceptions

Scope & Budget Planning

• Initial assessment – Hire a consultant

• Instructional materials – Tools for DIYers– Farming out remediation

• Learning spaces & Computer Labs– Software– Hardware – Remediation of physical spaces

• Library and it’s components – Online catalog– Journals– Alt Format for Course reserves

• Multimedia – Captioning/Transcripts– Audio Descriptions/Transcripts– Captioning of live & live

streaming of events

• Web– Web auditing solution– web based systems

(replace/fix?)– Tools for testing– Accessibility Q&A staff as part

of the software development lifecycle

Survey other institutions

• Join Athen & EDUCAUSE’s “ITACCESS” listservs• Attend conferences to learn from other

institutions• Conference call with Cal State about how they

launched their initiative• Talk with San Francisco State about their

procurement process

Working groups develop standards• Web group

– Developed standards for web content• WCAG 2.0 AA for internally developed/sponsored sites• Section 508 for vendor controlled content• Established deadlines for compliance

– Issued an RFP for a web auditing tool• Assistive Technology group

– Developed standards for Computer labs – Developed standards for Classrooms (evolved into Learning Spaces)

• Instructional Materials group*– Started working on standards (abandoned in favor of how-tos)– Developing checklists

*Need to get faculty involved in Instructional Materials workgroup

Learning space standards• Worked with Disability Resources & Services to develop standards• Standards address:

– ADAAG specifications (i.e. reach distances & kick space for podiums)– Software– Hardware (including control panels for lights & AV equipment)– Smart carts

• Types of spaces– Auditorium/Theater space– Classrooms– Lecture hall– Seminar room– Studio space

• Developed a checklist based on the standards

Computer lab standards

• Standards address:– ADAAG specifications

• Reach distances (counter/workstation heights, peripherals)• Route to workstation• Kick space for workstations• # of accessible workstations• Signs & documentation

– Assistive Hardware (e.g. keyboards, trackballs, etc.)– Assistive Software– Pay to Print stations– Training student workers– Deadline for compliance

• Developed a checklist based on the standards

Purchasing

• Added language to purchasing policies requiring procurement (purchase or otherwise) of accessible information and technology

• Added language to RFP and contracts for accessibility & remediation

• Developed an Exceptions Request form and process workflow

Exceptions Request form• Name & description of the product or resource• Who is the audience? (And indicate approximately how many of each

type)• What is the cost? (single year and/or recurring)• Accessibility Roadmap? (and if so what's the timeline for compliance?)• Describe how it is used.• Is it currently in use?• Which of the 508 category(ies) is relevant to the product?• Is it required for coursework or job function?• What exception category (specified in section 508) are you requesting?• Explain why it meets the exception.• Describe the reasonable accommodation you will provide.

Exception Request work flow

Initial Request

Co-Chairs Review

ATCC Review

• Accessibility Liaison (or individual if there is no Accessibility Liaison) submits request to [email protected]

• Proof to make sure everything’s OK (may request clarification on some items)

• Request sent to co-chairs for review• Co-chairs may request clarification on some items

• Request sent to ATCC for review and decision• ATCC may request clarification on some items• Decision is sent to Accessibility Liaison (or initial requestor)

Library

• Investigating workflows to make scanned text and video course reserves accessible.

• Conducting an year-long review of all 500 database platforms and alerting vendors to compliance issues.

• Remediating their website.• Library programmers working with vendors to make products

accessible:– Ensemble video player.– Contributed to Omeka (open source software for online exhibition; very

popular among digital humanists and cultural institutions.)• Joining HathiTrust in large part to benefit print-disabled individuals so

they can have full-text access to the 11 million books, journals, etc.

Instructional Materials

• Surveyed file types on Learning Management System (Blackboard)

• Prioritized creation of checklists for the top four types of content first:

Word PowerPointExcel PDF

• Incorporating Universal Design aspects in checklists

Launching the initiative

• Communicate for buy in:– CIO went on a road show presenting to:

• Council of Deans• Faculty Senate• Business Managers• Collegial assemblies

– Presentation consisted of:• Overview of policy & project• Who is responsible (content creator is responsible)• We’re here to help & what we’ve done so far

Empower others to act

Launched Website

• Website launched to act as a clearinghouse for:– Policies– Guidelines– How-to materials– Quick tips– Link to community

Empowerment – in many forms

• Had Deans appoint “Accessibility Liaisons” in each school or college & formed committee

• Purchased a tool to allow users to audit their own web content/sites/systems

• Distributed guidelines for computer labs and smart classrooms

• Bi-weekly meetings with Accessibility Liaison committee

Make it easy in the beginning

Quick wins• Survey and remediate Computer Services’ centrally owned/managed

learning spaces & computer labs first:– Largest and most heavily used labs were remediated first– Received feedback on the standards and checklists to improve and clarify

requirements– Early remediation allowed us to determine average remediation costs

• Update all control panels in smart classrooms owned by Computer Services so they ‘talk’

• Launched new web accessibility standards at university wide web designers meeting

• Creative Services works with contractors to make sure new websites are accessible

• Hired a visually impaired student worker to assist with testing software

Stay with it

Sometimes things take time

• Instructional materials guidelines– 12 months and they’re still not finished– Reboot after 5 months– Switched from policy to checklists with How-To’s– Engaging larger group of faculty to assist with

determining how to tweak them for better adoption• Web auditing software

– Had problems with end users logging into to the server– Worked with vendor for patches

Annual Reports

• Understand how each school/college is progressing via annual report. Addresses:– Web sites– Instructional materials– Learning spaces – Computer labs

Budget – how much was spent?

• Central funding covered $500,000 to date for:– Remediating computer labs (central and schools/colleges)– Remediating learning spaces– Software to audit websites– Consulting and training

• Individual Schools/Colleges and Administrative Units have spent $83,000 to date for:– Remediating computer labs– Captioning

Note: figures do not include personnel costs

Lessons learned

• Sometimes it takes a while to get a workable solution• Deadlines are good, but be flexible• Communication is key (particularly top down)• Spread out the work (form working groups)• People want to help, make it easy for them• Don’t come with all the answers, let people be a part

of the process• Include representatives from facilities• Be flexible (i.e. exceptions request form)

On your journey

• Enjoy the good• Don’t let the bad drag you down• Accessibility, like penguins,

isn’t always black and white

Questions?

Photo credits• “Penguin” by cnystrom © 2005 and made available under a

Attribution-NoDerivs Generic 2.0 license• “Penguin Group Small”, “Trekking across the Antarctic Ice and Snow”

and “JV-091112 4425” by Antarctica Bound © 2010 and made available under a Attribution-NoDerivs Generic 2.0 license

• “Adelie Penguin Dive on Paulet Island”, Antarctica by nick_russill © 2007 and made available under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Generic 2.0 license

• “Ice cased Adelie penguins after a blizzard at Cape Denison” photograph by Frank Hurley provided by State Library of New South Wales

• “King Penguin Chick at Salisbury Plain” by Liam Quinn © 2011 under a Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic license