Symposium One: Effective Models, Frameworks, and Approaches (2017)

Research and practice literature within the fields of accessibility, disability and technology frequently identifies that practice within post-compulsory/post-secondary education institutions need to change or improve in order to ensure the full inclusion of students with disabilities. It is also not uncommon for this literature to point to specific models, frameworks or approaches (for example, universal design) that might inform such a transformation of practice. The premise of this first symposium is that we need more in-depth questioning and examination of the value and efficacy of such models, frameworks or approaches. In this symposium, through individual presentations and a range of group activities we applied a critical lens to the fields that study students with disabilities, ICT, post-compulsory/post-secondary education and employment. Our goal was to seek answers to the following questions: 

• What evidence is there that universal design is effective in various applications and contexts and with a variety of stakeholders? Can this model inform the practice of all relevant stakeholders within post-compulsory education? 
• What other models, frameworks or approaches exist and which stakeholders are they aimed at? 
• How do various models, frameworks or approaches translate into practice? 
• Do we need to develop new models, frameworks or approaches? If so, for what applications and stakeholder groups? 
• How can models, frameworks or approaches transform practice? Are there alternative conceptual tools to help stakeholders utilize technologies with students with disabilities in more inclusive and accessible ways? 

Tuesday, March 14 

What current models, frameworks or approaches exist and how useful are they?

8:30 – 9:00 am
Registration 

9:00 – 9:15 am
Welcome and Introduction
Sheryl Burgstahler (University of Washington, United States) and other members of the Ed-ICR leadership team Jane Seale (ED-ICT network leader, The Open University, UK); Tali Heiman (Open University, Israel); Catherine Fichten (Dawson College, Canada) and Björn Fisseler (FernUniversität, Germany)

9:15 – 10:00 am
Introductory Ice-Breaker Activity 
Sheryl will lead a 5-10 minute engagement exercise that sheds light on the experience of disability

Jane will follow up with an activity that encourages people to share in pairs or threes one thing that they do well in relation to support and delivery of ICT for students with disabilities and one thing they would like to do better

10:00 – 11:00 am
Presentation: Setting the Scene 
An overview of models in the field and the questions we need to ask of them
By Jane Seale 

Paper will be circulated prior to meeting

Title: What models, approaches or frameworks exist in the field of disability, ICT (information and communication technology) and post-secondary education; are they successful in transforming the support and delivery of ICT for disabled students or do we need new ones?

11:30 – 12:45 pm
International Panel 
A panel discussion with one person from each participating country: Tali Heiman (Israel); Alice Havel (Canada); Chetz Colwell (UK); Dan Comden (US) and Christian Buehler (Germany)

Title: What typical models, approaches or frameworks are used in each country for supporting and delivering ICT for disabled students in post-secondary education and how successful are they?

12:45 – 1:45 pm
Lunch and Networking 

1:45 – 2:45 pm
Presentation 
Applying models in practice: an individual perspective
By Sheryl Burgstahler

Title: How design frameworks and models have informed her work

2:45 – 3:45 pm
Round-Table Discussions 
Small group discussions focusing on what models, frameworks or approaches they use in their own practice, how they use them and the factors that influence the value and utility of the models, frameworks or approaches

3:45 – 4:30 pm
Plenary 
Led by Jane

Overview of discussions

Wednesday, March 15 

Do we need new models, frameworks or approaches or just better evidence for our existing models--what are the implications for research?

8:30 – 9:00 am
Registration, Networking 

9:00 – 9:30 am
Summary and Reflection 
Led by Jane Seale, Leader of the Ed-ICT Network

9:30 – 10:15 am
Participant Panel Discussion: Design Issues
Facilitated by Sheryl

What are the design issues regarding ICT with respect to the institution and students with disabilities in post-secondary education? …and how if at all do models and frameworks contribute to resolving those issues?

10:15 – 11:00 am
Participant Panel Discussion: Transition Issues 
Facilitated by Sheryl

What are the ICT issues related to transition to employment for students with disabilities? …and how if at all do models and frameworks contribute to resolving those issues?

Participant Panel: Student Issues 11:30 – 12:30 pm
Facilitated by Sheryl

Students with disabilities will share their experiences of how the support and delivery of ICT has impacted on their learning and transitions between education levels and to employment 11:30-12:30

12:30 – 1:30 pm
Lunch and Networking 

13:30 – 3:00 pm
World Café  
Led by Jane

At each of the tables Jane will place a flip chart with a question or statement (derived from previous day and half discussions) and ask each group to respond to that by mind-mapping their response to the question on the flip-chart. (pens and post-its provided)

The groups will rotate around the tables- so that they can add their own responses to the original question and respond to other peoples’ responses if they wish. The mind-map expands with each rotation. 

Questions will focus on what research is needed to resolve the issues highlighted in relation to models and frameworks; what is needed to move practice forward and how research and practice might inform one another.

3:00 – 3:45 pm
Plenary 
Led by Jane

Overview of world café outputs and discussion on where to next regarding research plans for the group.

What is meant by Neurodiversity and what do Neurodiverse students want?

Ronda Jenson, Northern Arizona University and Scott Bellman, NNL Project Director

Video Link (Length: 1:03:05)

As shared by Scott Bellman, DO-IT’s Neuroscience for Neurodiverse Learners (NNL) project provides hands-on experiences in neuroscience disciplines, networking opportunities, and resources to high school and early post secondary students. The project also provides resources for educators and stakeholders such as a website and online knowledge base, workshops, video productions, and publications.

Neurodiverse learners we work with in the NNL project face academic challenges related to specific learning disabilities (e.g., dyspraxia, dyslexia, dyscalculia), attention deficit disorders (ADD, ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), Tourette syndrome, and other conditions impacting cognitive processing.

Within the NNL project, high school and early postsecondary students learn about and engage in scientific communication, social skills and teamwork, college preparation, leadership building, self-advocacy, neuroscience and neural engineering, and ethics related to emerging technologies.

NNL uses principles of universal design (UD) by proactively designing materials and activities that are accessible and inclusive for individuals with a broad range of characteristics, including disabilities. Below are examples of how we implement these principles:

• Offerings are available both on-site and online.
• All activities provide dedicated spaces for reflection and quiet.
• Materials are provided in a variety of formats, and captions are provided for videos and video conferencing activities.
• Students are offered multiple ways to engage in learning.
• Project staff prepare “social narratives” to describe what students can expect before an activity occurs, or before coming to campus. For example, prior to NNL's annual summer camp, students are sent images of the campus, buildings, and classrooms where they will be conducting work. The images are supplemented with descriptions of each space.

The project offers hands-on learning and student-guided learning. For example, during summer camp activities, students are asked about topics they would like to explore, and then the topics are added to the camp curriculum. Such student-driven topics have included the effect of meditation on the brain, the impact of music on the brain, and neuroscience in movies. 

The project promotes near-peer leaders, defined as neurodiverse STEM students who are slightly older than our main project participants. Near-peer leaders are very effective at helping students navigate the learning content, participate in discussions, and engage in activities.

Another project that focuses on neurodiverse students is the Discover Your Unique Advantage in STEM (DYNA STEM) project. DYNA STEM has gathered information to elevate the voices of 21 neurodiverse undergraduate students in STEM across three states: Arizona, Missouri, and Ohio. The project encourages developing an understanding of universal design, adult learning principles, trauma-informed approaches, and embracing intersectionality. It offers the following suggestions for STEM educators:

• Acknowledge undergraduate students as adult learners who bring diverse learning histories to the classroom.
• Acknowledge that learning histories may be positive, negative, or indifferent.
• Acknowledge the intersectionality of cultural backgrounds, identities, and personal histories.
• Acknowledge differences in the ways undergraduate students perceive, approach, and interact with new information and skills.

The students who engaged with DYNA STEM shared what they want in education settings:

1. Specific, clear instructions
2. Flexibility for self-guided learning
3. Balance of peer learning, hands-on, and direct instructions (aka-not just lecture or not just group project)
4. Choice: Options to choose and not choose activities or steps
5. Visuals and graphics, not just text-based
6. Opportunities to be creative
7. Clear, logical applications to real-world STEM work
8. Sensory stimuli focused on specific tasks
9. Physical space options for standing and sitting, with options for orientation in the space
10. Clear social expectations

Through interactions with neurodiverse students, educators are encouraged to explore the following questions:

• What does intersectionality mean to undergraduate neurodiverse students?
• In what ways do we acknowledge neurodiverse undergraduate students as adult learners?
• What can we do to show respect for the trauma-histories neurodiverse undergraduate students may have?

How Can Universal Design Impact Neurodiverse Learners?

Sheryl Burgstahler, NNL PI 

Video Link (Length: 1:00:52)

An inclusive environment embraces all potential participants who meet requirements with or without accommodations and makes sure everyone feels respected and engaged. Ability exists on a continuum, where all individuals are more or less able to see, hear, walk, read printed material, communicate verbally, tune out distractions, learn, or manage their health. This is also true of abilities related to neurodivergence, such as learning differences and differences in cognitive processing–such differences exist on a continuum.

Most disabilities of neurodiverse learners have invisible disabilities—meaning they aren't obvious to most people—and many students don’t report their disabilities to postsecondary disability service offices. Regardless, we want to ensure that students have access to the classes and labs we teach, as well as the learning resources we share. 

Students’ identities are also multi-faceted, which means we must take an intersectional approach that acknowledges that some students are from more than one underrepresented group. Students who are neurodiverse may also identify as black or African American, a woman, or other minority identities. It is important to listen to students and to be sensitive to their identities and ways they have been discriminated against.

How society views disability has changed throughout the years. People with disabilities historically have been eliminated or excluded from society, segregated from the general population, aimed to be cured, rehabilitated, accommodated, and finally, accepted and included as they are. The modern approach has its roots in social justice and aims to allow all people to feel included, including those with disabilities.

There are two approaches for making college and university campuses accessible: accommodations and universal design (UD). Accommodations are reactive and address the inaccessible features of a product or environment to make it more accessible to a particular individual (e.g., captioning a video when a student with a hearing impairment requests it). Universal design is a proactive approach for creating a product or environment accessible to the most diverse group possible (e.g., captioning all videos by default). A building with stairs at the entrance and a separate ramp for people with wheelchairs is technically accessible, while a building with a single entrance that everyone can use is universally designed.

Universal design doesn’t just help people with disabilities—sloped entrances help people moving carts, and captions help those learning English or in noisy environments, as just a few examples. Universally designed technology should have built-in accessibility features and ensure compatibility with assistive technology.

UD is an attitude that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. It can be implemented incrementally, focuses on benefits to all students, promotes good teaching practice, does not lower academic standards, and minimizes the need for accommodations. UD can be applied to all aspects of learning, including class culture and climate, physical environments, delivery methods, products, and information resources, delivery of feedback, and assessments. 

To review an easy to use checklist, visit Equal Access: Universal Design of Instruction. For more tips, you can follow the 20 Tips for Teaching an Accessible Online Course.

Disability Representation in the Media

Kayla Brown, DO-IT Project Coordinator

Video Link (Length: 0:30:32)

Media representation is the way in which the media portrays particular groups, communities, and experiences. This includes the accuracy of portrayals, the diversity of perspectives, and whether those portrayals perpetuate negative stereotypes. It's not just about quantity—it's about quality. This session explored common tropes in the media about disability and examined examples of neurodivergent characters.

Examining the media is important because television and movies influence the way people think. If portrayals exhibit negative stereotypes, this will affect how we see groups of people as a whole. One unique aspect of many neurodiverse characters is that they are coded as having a disability. Coding characters means that they are written in a way to imply something about them, such as having a disability. A character may have the behavior of someone with autism, but it is not confirmed explicitly through dialogue or from the writers. 

If we can increase the number and quality of media representation of people with disabilities, we can begin to introduce the world to more accurate depictions of people with disabilities. We can start a real conversation about disabilities and establish points of reference for it. In this way, fictional characters in television and movies have the power to alter prevailing ideologies and attitudes in society.

Accessible Technology for Neurodiverse Learners

Gaby de Jongh, University of Washington

Video Link (Length: 0:52:09)

Accessible electronic and information technology can be used by people with a wide variety of abilities and disabilities and incorporate the principles of universal design. Assistive technology can maintain or improve functionality and provide numerous benefits to neurodiverse learners by addressing specific learning needs, supporting strengths, and promoting independence. Assistive technology helps remove barriers to learning by providing accessible alternatives to traditional methods. It can accommodate various learning styles, sensory sensitivities, and physical challenges, ensuring equal access to educational materials and opportunities.

Assistive technology should be selected based on individual needs and preferences, and it should be accompanied by appropriate guidance and support from professionals and educators to ensure effective training and implementation. There are many examples of assistive technology that may benefit neurodiverse learners:

• Social communication aids, such as social skill training apps, video modeling tools, or augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices
• Social engagement opportunities and classes or discussions on communication skills
• Text-to-speech software that reads text aloud, making it easier to comprehend and process information--text-to-speech software can adapt to the specific needs, preferences, and pace of neurodiverse learners, which allows for individualized instruction, customization of learning experiences, and easier engagement
• Visual schedules, reminders, task managers, and digital planners that help learners stay organized, manage time effectively, and improve executive functioning abilities
• Noise-canceling headphones, ambient sound generators, or apps that block distractions, enhance concentration, and create a more conducive learning environment
• Sensory-friendly interfaces, adjustable lighting, and/or noise reduction options create a more comfortable and inclusive learning environment

Interactive Panel with Postsecondary Support Services Professionals

Full Video Link (Length: 1:02:23)

Panelist Introductions and Opening Statements

• Katie Abrams & Genna Kieper, Director and Employment Services Coordinator, respectively, WSU Roar (Length: 00:07:05)
• Kim Thompson, Senior Director, Seattle University Disability Services
• Shannon Garcia, Program Manager of Accessible Text & Technology, University of Washington Disability Resources for Students
• Facilitator: Eric W. Trekell, Program Operations Specialist, University of Washington DO-IT Center 

The Transition Cliff

Shannon talked about the challenging transition students face coming to a big university. That segued into a comment by Eric that, in his prior experience as Director of the Center for Disability Services at Everett Community College, he spent about 40% of his time at accommodations planning meetings educating parents and students on the significant differences between accommodations, modifications, and services, including the very different accommodations processes between K-12 and higher education. Katie shared what WSU’s Responsibility, Opportunity, Advocacy, and Respect (ROAR) program refers to as the “Transition Cliff'' that students with disabilities face in leaving high school and going into any postsecondary setting.

Success vs. Access

Kim raised the topic of “success vs. access.” She encouraged further thinking about the idea of success vs. access and noted that she is not arguing for modification of course outcomes. She notes that rigid schedules of institutions and postsecondary educators seem designed for the convenience of faculty and staff, while the K-12 system has more transparency in teaching. The gap between secondary education and higher education seems to be getting wider, which reduces both access and potential for success. 

Activate Caring

Many individuals at the Institute care about disability for one reason or another. They may have a disability or have a child with a disability, or care about the topic for some unknown reason. But how about those faculty who are disconnected from the subject, other than receiving an accommodation notification from the campus disability services office?  How do you help “activate” caring in others? How do you make it urgent and important? Some solutions involve looking at disability through a social justice, equity, and diversity lens. 

Getting Others Onboard

Continuing the “activate caring” discussion, how do we reframe this message for the people in power, the people who can provide funding on our campuses? How are we meeting students from diverse backgrounds? 

Trauma-Informed Lens

Considering the pandemic, how are disability services professionals approaching this work from a trauma-informed lens? Are disability services professionals partnering with other Student Affairs offices such as Counseling Centers? 

Intersectionality

There’s evidence that non-white students with disabilities are the least likely students to seek services with the DS office. How do you address that issue? Solutions can include discussing “culturally relevant pedagogy,” seeing the student as a whole person. Recognize that many students may not find connections within disability services office staff. Such staff can create relationships with other groups on campus such as the Black Student Union, LGBTQIA+ centers, and Indigenous People centers. Be responsible for bringing students together. 

Washington State University’s (WSU) Responsibility, Opportunity, Advocacy, and Respect (ROAR) Program

More information specifically on the WSU ROAR program and how it operates on the WSU campus. WSU ROAR connections with the Access Center and other WSU student support centers. 

Documentation

This section of the panel included a conversation about medical documentation and inequities in the US healthcare system, the rise of the student self-report as documentation, and documentation as a gate-keeping mechanism.

Panel: A Conversation with Postsecondary Neurodiverse Students 

A panel of University of Washington students shared their experiences and answered questions about access and inclusion. The panel was facilitated by Eric W. Trekell, Program Operations Specialist at the University of Washington DO-IT Center.

Student Introductions and Experiences 

Students were asked to begin by introducing themselves, and then to spend eight to ten minutes sharing some of their experiences in academia. They were asked to reflect on barriers experienced because of their neurodivergence and to share thoughts on what post secondary staff members (e.g., faculty members, advisors, resident assistants) could do to reduce barriers and make those experiences better. 

Senior in Biophysics 

I am a senior in biophysics (he/him) who identifies as a Mexican man with ADHD. I was diagnosed at 14 or 15 and received pretty standard accommodations in high school. Going into my post‑secondary education, I didn't have many issues receiving additional accommodations, though I did sometimes feel isolated from the mainstream track for students. It was hard for me to create study groups with students if I struggled with a schedule or was tested differently; this then could make it harder to get the most out of my coursework.

I did find help from the Office of Minority Affairs and Diversity, which has an instructional center. I spent a lot of time there with a tutor, which helped me stay engaged. I did well enough that I became a tutor and that engaged me further and gave me motivation in my own free time to really look at the material deeply and come to class more prepared, which helped me adhere to a schedule. Tutoring helped me become more invested in the UW and really feel like I was a part of something.

Junior in Atmospheric Science and Chemistry

I am a junior in atmospheric science and chemistry (she/her), who identifies as African American, with dyslexia and autism spectrum disorder. I also love the Office of Minority Affairs and Diversity tutoring center! I would also like to highlight the fact that I am one person—I don’t represent all people within my communities and identities. There is no one accommodation that makes everything better. 

One thing I want my professors and teaching assistants to do is ask their students to be respectful of the conditions their peers might be going through. I have experienced negative language in the classroom. I can't tell you how many Autism jokes and ADHD jokes or comments I hear, and it makes me feel afraid of my peers. It’s hard to focus in a classroom when you feel like that. 

Another thing is accessible visuals: People don’t seem to know how dyslexia actually works. I see things in my head from different angles, which causes paragraphs to swap around, and words to flip in sentences. I've gotten good at reading due to a lot of practice. However, this three-dimensional thinking makes me good at physics, chemistry, and math. 

My advice for educators and students: Try to make visuals dynamic in a classroom, use dynamic colors and large fonts and separate paragraphs so it is easier to distinguish the sentences. Furthermore, do not just come up and pet my service dog. I cannot tell you how often people come up to me and just start petting her without asking.

Ph.D. Student in Computer Science

I am a Ph.D. student (they/them) majoring in computer science, and studying sociology and social work, who identifies as having self-diagnosed autism spectrum disorder. For the majority of my life I presented as a white, cis, neurotypical boy and I fit the gendered, racial, and educational profile of a middle class family; all of the stereotypes of who is expected in higher ed spaces. I've come out about seven times at this point in my life, and at some point I just stopped. Many people don’t understand how hard it is to make friends when you are just a little bit different from others. You can only bend so much into fitting societal expectations, and masking constantly is draining and unhealthy.

In my undergraduate, I felt like I fit in computer science, but it was hard working within a community that conveys “If you can't follow directions perfectly without making any mistakes, then you shouldn't be a computer scientist or engineer.” In my Phd program, I had the privilege of sharing a lab with someone who was out and proud and autistic, which really let me come out as queer and autistic.

Now I am out in many ways, and I get all of the harmful nonsense; I speak at conferences and get responses like “Is it hard being here and autistic? You don't look autistic! Trans people can't be autistic! Oh, you talk way too well to be autistic!” But still, there's a beautiful community that I have with other folks and I have made strong connections due to my identity.

Master’s Student in Computer Science

I’m a master’s student in computer science (she/her) who identifies with child onset fluency disorder (formerly diagnosed as stutter). I have always stuttered, and it didn’t bother me until elementary school when other kids started commenting. In fourth grade, someone made the comment like “It is so annoying that you talk like that, and I don't want to be friends with you!” From that moment on I realized it wasn't normal and I tried to hide it as much as possible. 

I went to speech therapy in middle school. My therapist tried to teach me strategies to get rid of my stutter; they didn't work at all and honestly made it worse. At the time I blamed myself; I thought I wasn't working hard enough to be normal. I didn't meet anyone else who stuttered until I went to college. I got really good at hiding my stutter by switching words and running everything through in my head before I said it; this may sound like a good solution, but it’s exhausting when you have to do it while you are talking. I ended up staying quiet most of the time. 

In college, I took a presentation and networking class where you could meet other students. There were all of these presentation assignments and graded discussions where you have to say something insightful a certain number of times to get full points. This class was such a nightmare for me. I would stutter through my name and my presentations, and other students would quickly stop talking to me. I finally disclosed to my teacher; that was a big deal, because I had never told anyone before. She was really nice about it and gave me the option to do a different assignment besides presentations and considered my stutter when evaluating my assignments. 

I started to disclose more to people after that. It didn't always go as smoothly. Some people thought I was stupid, or if I didn’t stutter a lot in the moment, then people wouldn’t believe me. My sophomore year, I joined the group Students Who Stutter; we talked about ways to request accommodations. That was helpful for all of us in the club. I also started a club called ABILITY. We now have over 100 members and 3 events per quarter.

Senior in Communications and International Studies

I am a senior (she/her) in communications and international studies who identifies as a white woman with dyslexia and processing disorder. For me, the best definition of dyslexia is to imagine you see or read something, but when you look again, it is a completely different word or image. That happens to me all the time. It makes me feel like I am constantly deficient in the English language.

Having a disability, I was segregated from my classmates a lot. Kids notice when you disappear for two hours a day going to speech therapy or the “special room.” My mother had to pick which classes I would miss to go to speech therapy. That disadvantaged me because then I had to spend extra time catching up. 

Even in college there are affects. For example, the classmate who asks “Where were you? There was a test today.” I have to decide if I want to disclose my disability or not each time. Or if a professor sets me up to differentiate me by saying “No laptops allowed in the class,” but I have an accommodation for a laptop, which results in “Why does she get a laptop but I don't?” I feel like professors can try to force students to focus in a specific way, which then affects other students who need other ways to learn or focus.

I also have a lot of internalized ableism. Mentors often tell me to introduce myself and disclose to professors. I don't follow that. I encourage students I mentor to do that when I help them, and it is a great thing. But I am still fighting the stigma I feel, and I’m so used to masking or pretending to be normal. I am lucky to have attended a high school where a teacher recommended me to the DO-IT Scholars program, which offered me free support and technology to help with my disability and supported my transition to college. 

Audience Questions

The floor was then opened up for audience members to ask questions and all participants were given the opportunity to answer.

Would you rather work with a disability service provider who then coordinates with faculty, or would you rather work directly with faculty to get your accommodations met?

• As a student, I am going to talk to whomever I am most comfortable talking to.
• If faculty seem friendly, I’m going to talk to them.
• Sometimes faculty are more understanding than the disability office staff.
• I’m weary about always having to disclose my autism; I don’t know how many stereotypes I’ll trigger by disclosing.
• Whoever folks feel comfortable with. If that’s the disability office? Phenomenal. Faculty? Even better.
• I had a great TA once who said “I received this letter; do you want to come to the office to talk about it?” Usually I’m the one who has to reach out and it’s exhausting.
• I had a professor reach out and offer to discuss accommodations over email. That was great; I didn’t have to do the work.
• I think for the faculty being proactive and reaching out to students is great. It makes me feel like I won’t waste a whole hour going to their office hours on my own initiative to talk about my accommodations.

Somebody mentioned it feels like a full‑time job having to talk to professors. What can you suggest to access advisors and disability service providers to make your lives easier?

• Don’t be stingy with accommodations! There are a lot of things I’ve asked for that fit “reasonable” that I had a hard time receiving.
• It’s important for access advisors to understand that a lot of students transferring from high school with IEPs are not taught how to advocate for themselves.
• Provide resources that will help students prepare for their appointments with you. Especially initial appointments. Make information about your office and your services easy to find.
• I would encourage you to develop a tool that students can take to their first classes, to help them talk to their faculty.
• I used extended time on exams every time. But I have to submit the request to use the extended time, every time, too! Rework the system so there’s less maintenance the student has to do.
• Avoid giving your new students “the starter pack”. The set of accommodations that students always get for Anxiety such as extra time on exams, copies of materials, approval to record. Do a deeper dive and listen carefully to each student. Check in with them and ask if they felt listened to. 

How have you come to feel comfortable disclosing and talking about your disabilities? What else would you recommend to students and faculty to help students come to this same point?

• I love who I am. I love all the pieces of me and I wouldn’t change anything about who I am. That’s a privilege for me and my experience; not everyone has my experience.
• I’m fortunate to run into more people who care than people who don’t. But I can’t say I’m entirely comfortable being up here.
• My advice would be to focus on the people who care and want to know. This is a safe room, full of people who care, so it’s easier.
• I think students with intersecting identities have more practice at this. Students for whom disability is only one aspect of identity - we deal with others - racism, sexism, homophobia, classism. We get tired of it and start pushing back and speaking out.
• Look at us - every one of us has several intersecting identities. 

Is it helpful if faculty disclose their disabilities to their students?

• If faculty talk about who they are at the start of class, that’s all they can do. It’s up to students to then decide when they will start advocating and fighting for themselves.
• Faculty can give students comfort and even a sense of community when they disclose.

Some of you have mentioned struggling to get some of your accommodations. Do you feel like you might face a threat of retaliation if you speak out for yourself or other students?

• One thing I’ve found helpful is knowing my rights. There is legislation that protects us. I had to fight a lot for many accommodations and I was willing to be audacious in pushing. I was willing to scare them and talk about lawsuits. So teach other students their rights.
• I appreciate you asking this question - looking at the audience in this room, a lot of people seem surprised, even horrified that there are students who have to fight so hard to get some accommodations and still don’t get what they need.
• If the official channel isn’t working, we have other options, if we’re willing to be activists.

What is (1) helping and (2) holding back your progress on implementing Policy #188?

Factors that promote IT accessibility efforts include the following:

• Access360 grants that offer a yearlong mentorship opportunity for cross-functional campus teams as they implement accessibility policies on a broad scale to effectively, efficiently and equitably serve students, employees and community members
• capacity building institutes that offer opportunities to talk more in depth about accessibility issues and find more resources
• strong support received from campus leadership, supervisors, purchasing, administration, faculty, and other groups
• trainings offered to staff and faculty
• ongoing engagement continued across campus through events, emails, workshops, reminders, and discussion groups
• resources offered by Washington State Board for Community & Technical Colleges, Accessible Technology Services, Disability Services, and other groups
• committees created to continue engaging on accessibility topics and push for change around campuses
• standards confirmed and stipulated in a method that is easy to understand, carry out, and enforce

Factors that hold IT accessibility efforts back include the following:

• inadequate numbers of staff members to tackle necessary tasks
• not enough people educated in accessibility issues
• lack of appropriate resources to share
• a procurement process that does not always consider accessibility when purchasing new hardware and software
• costs to make IT accessible that are higher than the institution or individual departments are willing to pay
• the State‘s lack of processes in place to enforce accountability practices
• staff and faculty that resist change or see accessibility as a disability services not an IT issue
• lack of mandatory IT accessibility trainings for all staff and faculty
• inadequate buy-in from leadership can make accessibility a lower priority
• inaccessible testing software and methods, creating a complication for faculty and students
• different website platforms that offer different accessibility features, thus making it difficult to train the average web developer or staff member on accessible practices

What are key steps you are planning to take to implement Policy #188, short term and long term?

Short term, we plan to

• set regular meeting schedule and invite new members to the Accessible Technology Team;
• keep stakeholders and others on campus informed on a quarterly basis, as well as share resources and awareness;
• determine spending costs on training options and create a schedule of training opportunities;
• reorganize the budget to include accessibility practices;
• select which staff can follow through with specific tasks and create an ongoing auditing process;
• review all policies and make sure all standards include accessibility; and
• update Canvas resources for faculty to include more demonstrable accessibility info.

Long term, we plan to

• follow through with scheduled, routine audits of accessibility;
• review and revise the accessibility plan to include specific language, suggestions for Benchmark Survey of Access360, an executive summary, a training schedule, and target deadlines;
• establish workflows for approving procurements, design, and modification of web applications;
• establish a team for testing applications and systems for compliance;
• identify stable, long-term funding for captioning, as well as assign staff to coordinate;
• identify staff to run training for accessible document creation and promote these trainings to faculty and staff. Offer PDF remediation and conversion to HTML for some;
• meet again after Policy #188 is updated;
• add accessibility knowledge to job descriptions;
• train web developers and publishers on WCAG;
• update procedures in October 2019 to match new WCAG 3.0;
• meet with leadership teams to help get buy-in and create higher priorities for accessibility;
• include students with disabilities who could assist in reviewing, testing, and developing accessible technology; and
• create a campus-wide plan for accessibility.

Participants were asked to read and write their responses and reactions to seven statements (derived from the previous day and half of discussions). The statements were rotated around the tables so that participants could add their own responses to the original question and respond to the responses of others if they wished. Questions focused on what research is needed to resolve the issues highlighted in relation to models and frameworks; what is needed to move practice forward and how research and practice might inform one another?

Each statement is presented below and followed by some of the responses.

An important part of the solution to accessibility and inclusion is to adopt both a top-down and bottom-up approach.

• Revolving door of champions/administrators 
• YES
• Break that glass ceiling, but I think that’s only possible from the top
• Who’s the change agent? Spend time convincing them?
• Clear statement from the “top” might really help those at the “bottom”
• Reset the pyramid!
• Absolutely- this is how system change happens. One without the other is only a Band-Aid.
• Horizontal approach, solidarity not charity
• Yes. By using two opposite approaches you encourage people at all levels to be involved. This also contributes to more diverse perspectives being expressed and taken into account throughout the process. Follow-up question to think about...When trying to implement a bottom-up approach, how do you get the students who are traditionally in a more quiet, insubordinate role to create a push for change? 
• I believe in bottom-up
• Give the “bottom” representation
• Does “bottom” include students and consumers? 
• Definitely agreed! However, “top” needs to be fully active and engaged with the “bottom” = communication + collaboration between the two
• Tried the bottom-up model for many years. Ready to move to top-down. Conclusion - you need both as they bring different aspects to the solution to accessibility/inclusion
• Some schools can do top-down but any school can do bottom-up
• Value 
• There can be two tops, 1 Government, 2. Organizational
• Flexibility, balance  
• External forces...Government, compliance 
• Both are important - it can depend on the institution which works best 
• Of course! There must be highest level (funder/government) support all the way down to the individuals. Request an input on accessibility needs to push from both directions. 
• We need buy-in
• (Hierarchy and equality) not only as a chain process, but interlinked and inter-active. Government to leadership to faculty to staff, student to faculty to leadership to government, society use of ICT exchange 
• I agree. Would also like to see people at top explain their position to those lower down and vice-versa, from bottom up   
• Resources and external drivers (legal, etc.)

A successful model for framework is one that stimulates a post-secondary education (PSE) institution to transform its systems and processes rather than enables it to carry on doing what it already does.

• Stimulates positive change
• Model can be aspirational 
• A model can be an inspiration 
• A model should educate and be not assume prior knowledge
• I like what Robert Prisig discusses in Lila where he talks about both static and dynamic quality; what needs to stay in function while changing cell structure regularly 
• Maybe both! 1) Can describe current processes 2) could be designed to purpose systemic change. So an institution that wants to change should have 2 models/frameworks to describe what is status and what is desired 
• With evaluation of results of change
• Yes! Nothing should be “enabled” - institutions should always aim for all students to have fully equal and successful participation of all students. A model should set an example that an institution can follow 
• When there is buy-in YES!
• Developing the framework/model can still serve as a source of stimulation for the PSE. The process is important.
• Do models stimulate change? Or do models change because they respond to what is changing “out there” (e.g., new technology)
• A model or framework helps to structure process, communication, responsibilities, criteria, indications, measurements, etc. 
• It is possible that a successful model is in place. Is change needed then?
• The framework/ model can’t be imposed but must be created within the PSE community itself 
• Why does it have to be either or why can’t we stimulate new and support what works 
• A model should be used as a guideline for step-by-step best practices 
• Are there any truly successful models? Aren’t the models all more of theories about how something could work? Who decides what is successful/effective? What if what it already does is more effective than implementing a specific model 
• I don’t think we have truly successful, appropriate, and effective models. If there were our work would have been done.

We need to develop our existing models and frameworks rather than come up with new ones.

• If our current model worked we wouldn’t be here 
• Can we use existing models to inspire new models?
• Needs to adjust to change
• We need both—Why constrain ourselves either way?
• What are our existing models?
• I agree that we should further develop existing models and frameworks BUT we need to respond to missing context and develop new ones 
• Models need time to grow and mature and take root. We need to reflect and assess whether the growth is still guiding our. We also need to consider the changing audience for the models … the early adoption/innovations vs. the more cautious adopter and slow to change 
• HYBRID of old and new
• Learn from existing and decide then - if needed restart completely new
• Theory vs. practice > that is the question. We need to respect our different orientations and use them to have a balanced approach. Thus theory and practice = model
• Can sharing of our good practice create models
• Maybe stop worrying about models and abstractions and more daily practice. 
• We need to develop our existing models to ensure that they are effective. However, using the same model all of the time risk becoming outdated and irrelevant in the presence of new technology 
• What comes out of our daily practice? 
• At what point do we decide an approach is broken? When litigation appears?

Adopting both a reactive and proactive approach to accessibility and inclusion is the best approach.

• Proactively reactive - anticipate problems even if you are proactive
• Plan for the proactive. Be ready for the reactive - should be part of the proactive plan
• Hybrid
• Some needs in some contexts cannot be anticipated. 
• Need to plan for reactive processes - need full resource and support
• Need to monitor and measure reactive processes to see if they should be part of reactive or become part of proactive
• Who determines what reactive and proactive is? It should be more than black and white! We need grey!
• Proactive is always better but reactive approaches must be quick - like the U.S. Digital Service or the UK Government Digital Service - a quick turn-around - no waiting lists
• Proactive is the goal. Reactive is (and probably will always be) a necessity. 
• There is still a place for both but we should aspire to just having accessibility without remediation or accommodation. 
• Build in evaluations! Check points. 
• Reactive comes from not being proactive. 
• Proactive and reactive approaches are important - Proactive: think of possible issues that could arise. Reactive: thinking on your feet; reacting at the time. You cannot anticipate every possible issue, but some issues can be avoided or have a more effective solution with more forethought. Approaches can be more/less effective for different situations/environments/population. Proactive requires a greater base of knowledge in the beginning on a continuum.
• Explore the limits of both approaches. What is better done proactively? What is better done in reaction to?
• Proactive always is the best approach. However, sometimes you will have reactive approaches if the situation is unusual or unexpected. 
• Navigate bureaucracy
• Proactivity is #1 and Reactivity is #2 because sometimes it might be too late to react.
• Learn from the reactive cases for continual improvement. 
• If not proactive, will always have to be reactive.
• Who is proactive or reactive? Staff, faculty, student, leadership?
• Proactive would be best but we will always have to have a reactive approach. 
• Sometimes a reactive approach can be better targeted at individual requirements
• Proactive in the wrong direction can bind resources (waste), which would be needed elsewhere (reactive).
• Proactive approach is not well developed.
• Rapid response cannot always predict new necessity. 
• Fire prevention education - fire gets out, run, put it out
• Yes, UD and AT and other accommodations
• Technology changes rapidly
• We have no choice but to have both to address all problems. 

The only models worth having or developing are those that are testable.

• Every model should be able to measure
• By testable - if you mean validated that’s not important for me. If you mean useable - that’s critical. For me a model needs to go beyond theory. In fact, some models may come out of practice - thus already “tested.” Are used to “describe” what’s already been done so others can replicate it. 
• I agree
• Agreed!
• Diversify data, not numbers, but other things
• Need to evaluate outcome of use of model
• Can we isolate? Can we test as it is hard to isolate? Testing the model of outcomes are two different things. 
• No: model can serve as an aid for thinking, developing, describing.
• It is always good to evaluate what you are doing so that you call adaptive/improve with feedback
• Some actions have positive tangible outcomes with no need to accurately measure those. Do we need a 98.2% level of compassion or could we just be content with an unspecified increase in compassion?
• I’m unclear on the statement. What does an untestable model look like? Wouldn’t any be testable?
• We need to optimize the model - we need to define the components. Maybe if we can test components in an expected model it look we evaluate components?
• Model components - define - test. 
• People are not always data
• Always! Never!
• Who defines “testable”? How exactly do you determine how well it does on this test? If models are mainly theories, I think it is important to develop any effective models in order to take other ideas/perspectives into account. Maybe a model isn’t testable now, but it may be when built upon or in the future.
• It depends on how we define models! I think there is an important role for models to expand our vision of what we can be and do… so I disagree. 
• Sometimes the really important things can not be tested! Maybe indicators if at all!
• Work on one thing at a time vs. all at once. 
• Can be evaluated?
• Should be testable otherwise how do we know?
• Costs effective model - measure success
• People, technology, user skills
• Student feedback - qualitative, quantitative
• What are testing?
• Isn’t anything testable with some thought and creativity?
• Can it be replicated in different settings?
• Untrue - they’re also good for documenting processes and practices. The practice outputs and outcomes should be measurable.
• Bizarre
• Models used as a strategy have to prove their usefulness - not useful? Come in with a different/better model
• How do we measure “affective” benefits of UDL?
• “Got no data? It didn’t happen.”
• Data driven processes needed to measure results; to come up with directions for future development and research.

We don’t need one single model or framework, we need different ones for different problems, contexts or audiences.

• Comfort level changes based on context
• Maybe one common framework or template that provides the structure for multiple models to fit into. That way we’ll have a common language for discussion but relevance for different contexts and audiences.
• Hybrid.
• An issue with multiple models is choosing between them! purpose/context/audience needs to be clearly described
• Standards - customized - localization - possibilities ----> choose what works
• We need constant reflection and updating of dynamic models/frameworks
• … but elements of a good process model could work in a variety of contexts
• A set of models which are compatible. Developmental models <---> Models of operation. Models need to be adjustable to context. XXX model
• I think this is an important point. We need multiple models to fit different problems… but there has to be a unifying value or theory. They have to be compatible. 
• Are these changes just different components of a model? But one model unlikely. 
• Need: Micro, meso, macro models with different lenses/foci/contexts no “ring to rule them all” “Best practices”/compliance is a model
• I like the concept of levels of models. Having one overarching model with the capacity to be adapted in various scenarios can be useful for giving groups a starting point and an idea of how to adjust to meet their specific needs
• I think “best practices” are building blocks for models but not an actual model
• I am really not sure. If one model is flexible enough, perhaps one is enough. But a very inflexible model will break like the Tacoma-Narrows Bridge! How do we balance being prescriptive enough to be useful, but flexible enough?
• Some models will be inherently “better” -- who and how that’s decided is also an important consideration
• Something has to be set to have a model
• Everyone needs to say same thing for a model to work
• I don’t see how you can have just one model - things need to be flexible/adaptable to apply at a variety of places
• An overarching, broad framework could inform multiple tailored models
• Would a “meta-model” be an option? When do we drop/delete “unusable” models?
• How are models developed? What kind of data is used?
• What’s the focus and the function of models? Who is supposed to use the model?

We need a model that will guide senior managers regarding best practice in relation to policy, strategy and governance. 

• Well-thought out guidelines that include the opinions/thoughts of people w/ disabilities (instead of/as a model)
• The administration needs to have human experience to see the impact. 
• 1st need them to embrace a11y + UD.
• Senior managers need knowledge and need to be able to expand their knowledge
• Open minded and willing to change
• A model or a set of principles
• Never met a senior manager who developed policies, strategies based on a model of accessibility to IT. Maybe, budget student success, unions, etc. 
• Do younger/lower level managers not need any guidance? Why do we need to call out specific manager, rather than implementing training for all managers/workers?
• Models cannot capture everything, need to convey to management importance of accessibility. Otherwise, they will work around problems with model as a guide. 
• Worries - becomes “all talk” not action. 
• Checklist approach
• Centralized accommodations support implementation
• Important for institution specific drives can be accounted for. 
• Staff/HR policy
• What models are normal/acceptable for this audience? (business/management style of models?)
• What is a model? Wouldn’t a policy or guideline work?
• This model has to be embraced by a broader, institutional community.
• Model is too static a concept in terms of what would help senior managers- process sounds more dynamic and flexible. 
• Policy Leadership Purchasing Training Remediation Retention Requirement
• Senior managers seem to be driven more by metrics (success, budget) than models. Accessibility is difficult to measure for the most part. This presents a challenge selling it to execs.  
• Broad models “so they are applicable”
• Inform model
• Department policies
• Define operationalizing - best practice - policy - governance - strategy
• Managers training strategies (people)
• Must be continuous training ---> real outcomes
• How to measure outcomes
• I appreciate the focus on practice as it informs policy
• Needs to be unique to each school.

Overview of World Café Outputs and Discussion on Where to Go Next Regarding Research Plans for the Group

Facilitated by Jane 

Questions presented followed by some of the responses are presented below.

What have you gotten out of the last few days, what are your thoughts on models and their use? Where are they too theoretical and where are they practical? Where does it lie for top-down and bottom-up, or proactive verse reactive? What are the conclusions we’ve come up with?

• We need more data—the efficacy of models and accessibility should be based on data.
• What counts as data? Data is not necessarily numbers, it can be observable practice or interviews, or it can be different statistics based on studies. 
• In the paper I wrote, the 9 models I identified, some were pulling from case studies. Does that count as data? 
• Making accessibility improvements is difficult, because accessibility is not a switch that can be turned on and off. We don’t know if a product will ever be perfectly accessible. Accessibility is a process. It’s hard to collect data on a process and an improvement.
• We had a discussion about how data can be measured as users and as technology. There’s way to measure a tool or a website but measuring people is harder. Separating these two may be necessary.
• Do we want data to develop models or data to evaluate models? It’s kind of the chicken and the egg scenario.
• We aren’t necessarily measuring accessibility, but the effectiveness of a model. 
• A model has some facts to measure. For example, if you’re applying universal design to a course, you could measure how students do in a course verse students who aren’t given universal design in a course.
• Senior management is not driven my models, but my metrics. Measuring accessibility is difficult. Senior management wants to know the number of accessibility issues within a software, not an abstract discussion about models.
• If we have a model and we try to implement, we can measure how well we implement something but not necessarily measuring the model itself. We can make a conclusion based on how well the model is implemented or methods of implementation but not the model itself.
• Does this assume the model is working?
• But if the concept is implemented, then I can measure only that implementation not the actual concept itself. If someone implements it a different way, then it may work better or worse.
• Data that helps us come up with models, data that tests a hypothesis, and data that evaluates how we use and implement a model.

What will you do when you go back to your day job?

• As a student leading a disabilities group, this has opened my eyes for how we can use technology in our meetings. We’ve never taken the time to see how we can be more inclusive using technology, and now I’ve realized how important it is.
• We’ve brought together different people in different roles and interest.
• Time for us to really start curating the models that exist. We have a lot of organic models being used without labels or names or instruction. It seems important that we spend some time really analyzing this work and really sketching out what we’re doing and how we’re doing it and where we can improve or change.
• I noticed that a lot of us are articulating models even though we never saw them as models before. There is a need for curating these “models.”
• Funding can bring weight to it and help connect institutions. Could an organization like AHEAD help curate models within institutions? Could institutions spend the time sketching out what they are doing and compare them, through an organization like AHEAD? People can often crave a way to have their work be acknowledged, and this could be a way it is done.
• I would love to take our different practices that are in place and map them together and see how they compare.
• As a teacher, I have written down notes about my own teaching practices and how to improve those. I have a clearer understanding of where to go in my research, especially from the panel discussions. 
• I want to talk to my students who are studying ICT and technology and see if I can appeal to them on how they can include accessibility in their own teaching and educational pursuits.
• From a student perspective, there are many influential universal design models. Please don’t regard a student with a disability as an accessibility specialist—all people with disabilities are different and students with disabilities often don’t know how to accommodate others, let alone even the best way to accommodate themselves.
• Look at the marriage between ICT and AT: if the ICT doesn’t have accessibility features, it will need AT to use it. For example, I use Zoom or a screen reader when using Google Docs. Sometimes AT can cause ICT to malfunction or crash.
• We have specific models for UDL/UDI. How technology is actually used within a specific class. I want to have the guidelines to analyze widely used technologies in conjunction with AT to better have an idea of how it works and create data and a professional judgment/subjectivity.

Stakeholder groups represented in the symposium included

• student service leaders and administrators,
• faculty members,
• students, and
• professional organizations.

The following individuals participated in the symposium.

Karen Alkoby
​Gallaudet University
The United States of America

Shannon Aylesworth    
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
The United States of America

Cynthia Bennett
University of Washington
The United States of America

Jeffrey Bigham
Carnegie Mellon University
The United States of America

Lisa Brandt
Portland Community College
The United States of America

Christian Buehler
Technical University, Dortmund
Germany

Sheryl Burgstahler
University of Washington
The United States of America

Anne Carpenter
The Evergreen State College
The United States of America

Deb Castiglione
University of Kentucky
The United States of America

Chetz Colwell
​The Open University, UK
United Kingdom

Dan Comden
University of Washington
The United States of America

Tim Coughlan
The Open University, UK
United Kingdom

Lyla Crawford
University of Washington
The United States of America

Markus Deimann
​FernUniversität, Hagen
Germany

Joseph Feria-Galicia
UC Berkeley
The United States of America

Catherine Fichten
Dawson College and McGill University
Canada

Björn Fisseler
FernUniversität, Hagen
Germany

Alan Foley
Syracuse University
The United States of America

Alice Havel
Dawson College
Canada

Doug Hayman
University of Washington
The United States of America

Tali Heiman
The Open University, Israel
Israel

Samantha Johns
Portland State University
The United States of America

Dana Kaspi-Tsahor
The Open University, Israel
Israel

Laura King
Dawson College
Canada

Howard Kramer 
AHEAD / University of Colorado
The United States of America

Raja Kushalnagar
​Gallaudet
The United States of America

Megan Lawrence
Microsoft
The United States of America

Jonathan Lazar
Towson University
The United States of America

Elizabeth Lee
University of Washington
The United States of America

Emanuel Lin
UCLA
The United States of America

Lynn Lumens
North Carolina State University
The United States of America

Patricia Malik
University of Illinois
The United States of America

Dorit Olenik-Shemesh
The Open University, Israel
Israel

Hadi Rangin
University of Washington
United States of America

Grey Reavis
North Carolina State University
The United States of America

Cyndi Rowland
Utah State University
The United States of America

Sally Scott
AHEAD
The United States of America

Jane Seale
The Open University, UK
United Kingdom

JooYoung Seo
Pennsylvania State University
The United States of America

Christian Vinten-Johansen
Pennsylvania State University
The United States of America

You can find the full text for Policy #188, information about waivers, and the minimum accessibility standard by visiting the following:

• Policy #188
• Standard #188.10 – Minimum Accessibility Standard
• Policy #103 – Technology Policy & Standards Waiver Request

The UW’s Accessible Technology website includes a variety of resources:

• the IT accessibility policy and guidelines for the UW
• legal issues and civil rights complaints and resolutions nationwide
• instructions and tips for making IT accessible
• more resources for creating and procuring accessible IT products

The DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) website contains the following:

• information about DO-IT projects
• evidence-based practices that support project goals and objectives
• resources for students with disabilities
• educational materials for teachers and administration

DO-IT maintains a searchable database of frequently asked questions, case studies, and promising practices related to how educators and employers can fully include students with disabilities. The Knowledge Base is an excellent resource for ideas that can be implemented in programs in order to better serve students with disabilities. In particular, the promising practices articles serve to spread the word about practices that show evidence of improving the participation of people with disabilities in postsecondary education.

Examples of Knowledge Base questions include the following:

• Are electronic whiteboards accessible to people with disabilities?
• Are peer review tools accessible?
• Are there computer keyboards designed to be used with only one hand?
• Are touch screens accessible?
• Do postsecondary institutions have to provide assistive technology (for example, screen enlargement or voice recognition software) to students with disabilities who enroll in distance learning courses?
• Does a postsecondary institution have to provide specific hardware or software (known as assistive technology) that an individual with a disability requests so that they can access information technology used on campus?
• Does making our school web content accessible mean I cannot use multimedia on my site?
• How can educational entities determine if their websites are accessible?

Individuals and organizations are encouraged to propose questions and answers, case studies, and promising practices for the Knowledge Base. Contributions and suggestions can be sent to doit@uw.edu.

For more information on making your campus technology accessible and to learn more about accessible learning or universal design, review the following websites and brochures:

• The University of Washington’s hub for information on accessible technology, featuring how to create and develop accessible documents, videos, and websites, can be found at Accessible Technology.
• WCAG 2.0 are the expected guidelines to be followed for all websites.
• The Access Technology Center’s website.
• A list of thirty different web accessibility tips, and how to implement those tips.
• Accessibility training and certification.
• More information about accessibility standards and procurement.
• Cheat sheets for making accessible documents and content, as well as a plethora of other resources for accessible websites, can be found at the NCDAE.
• The AccessDL website shares resources for making distance learning and online courses accessible.
• Accessible University’s website featuring common web accessibility principles and solutions.
• A brochure on universally designing distance-learning programs.
• A brochure on what accessible distance learning is and how it helps students.
• A brochure on the top tips for creating an accessible distance-learning course can be found at the 20 Tips website.
• A brochure on why accessible web design matters, and some resources to make your website accessible, can be found at Accessible Web Design.
• Blindmath is a listserv for those who want to learn more about all issues around accessible mathematics.
• More information on universal design in education can be found at the Center for Universal Design in Education.

Conferences can be a great way to share resources, collaborate, and come up with new ideas. Consider attending the following:

• ATHEN (Accessing Higher Ground)
• CSUN
• ATIA
• Closing the Gap
• Smaller, local IT conferences, like TechConnect
• NW E-Learn
• EDUCAUSE
• Building Bridges
• Faculty Accessibility Retreat for 2-year colleges

The Washington State Accessible IT Capacity Building Institute on Policy #188 was funded by Access Technology Services at the University of Washington. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the CBI presenters, attendees, and publication authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Washington.

Accessible Technology Services
University of Washington
Box 354842
Seattle, WA 98195-4842
www.washington.edu/accessibility/
doit.uw.edu/
206-685-3648 (voice/TTY)
888-972-3648 (toll free voice/TTY)
206-221-4171 (FAX)
509-328-9331 (voice/TTY) Spokane

© 2018 University of Washington. Permission is granted to copy this publication for educational, noncommercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.