Notes on Seale - Chapter 6

On page 70 (Seale, 2006) it is suggested that accessibility is frequently framed as a technical issue, rather than a pedagogical (learning and teaching) one. Can you think of any arguments, evidence, or examples from what you have read, or from your experience that could help lecturers (teachers, faculty) see accessibility as a pedagogical issue?

Marshall makes a good point in his post, that "the earlier you are considering this [accessibility] the more likely you are to see it as a pedagogical issue - the later in the design process, when you discover the problems, then you turn to the technical approach - my design doesn't work for this student, is there a technical fix? As we are only now beginning to think about this stuff from the ground up we are bound to be spending most of our efforts on adapting older curricula because that's what there is." I would definitely say that if accessibility is built into the planning of educational experiences from the outset it becomes part of the process ... which in my eyes is a healthy way of approaching it. Thinking of something as integral rather that something separate and just-another-thing-on-the-list. It links back to the chapters main points which seem to be about taking a proactive and flexible teaching approach. I guess it comes down to attitudes which have a better chance of change with greater understanding.

The blame-shifting and excuses (which I agree is something I have noticed in Seale's book) aren't really limited to accessibility either. There is a feeling of resentment and apathy towards elearning as a whole among some educators (especially those based in a traditional classroom setting). In my context getting teachers to provide their online curriculum in the first place is seen as a chore and something unnecessary and separate from their teaching. Adding accessibility into the mix is yet another challenge and likely to be met with some resentment. I can picture the conversation. "You mean you made me put all my course materials online and now your telling me the format is wrong/they aren't accessible/i have to do it all again?"

That's what happens when things are implemented without the input from specialist staff and with insufficient communication between senior management and the staff they need on board to make it successful - the teachers. I have an article about this somewhere. I will find it and post a link.

Some of the key principles that underpin different design approaches include: inclusivity, equity, holism, proactivity and flexibility. How are these principles defined in the literature? Are they sufficiently clear and consistent so that lecturers can apply them to their own practice?

There seemed to be a lot of overlap between the definitions of design approaches here. I think the moral of the story is that there is unlikely to be a one-size-fits-all approach to designing accessible learning experiences. Just as there is no one-size-fits-all definition of disabled students. Look at each situation on its own merits, think about the type of problems that are likely to arise and ways in which they can be overcome or avoided ... actually talking to technical staff or accessibility specialists or disabled students might be helpful too.