Introduction
The way we think about how people use computers informs our attitudes toward
how we design web sites. We often tend to think of those who use the
websites we design as passive users in the process rather than active
participants in a generative exchange. A productive starting point
for thinking about this is Brenda Laurel’s (1993) work that moves considerations
of how people interact with technology away from the notion of mere
“computer users.” Laurel views computers as theatre - an experience
that varies from viewer to viewer and that is dependent on varying experience,
attitudes, and ideas. Laurel suggests that humans working with computers
are not merely "users,” but human agents. The potential that a person
has, not as merely a computer user, but as a person acting with agency
to shape her own experience adds endless possibility to the conception
and mediation of identity and agency. This notion that there is agency
possible when using computers is an important one, because just as the
possibility for agency exists, so does the possibility for domination
and unequal power relations. Considering computer users as agents shaping
their experience offers hope for those trying to utilize computers and
the Internet as ways to ameliorate some of the less-than-desirable effects
of the information revolution. This notion of the agent also forces
web designers to think about the people who will be using their web
site – what experiences, background, learning styles, and abilities
they bring to the experience. Web designers often do not make these
considerations for a variety of reasons.
The rapid growth of the Internet has changed the ways people communicate,
teach, and learn, while at the same time increasing the isolation of
those who do not have access to information technologies. As methods
of teaching with Internet technologies continue to proliferate and more
educational materials are placed online, it is important that educators
consider the social, political, and pedagogic implications of disability
and difference and the Internet. What most discussions about accessibility
in education fail to recognize is that access is not about the “limitations”
of the individual, rather it is about society’s inability to accommodate
difference (Charlton, 1998). Similarly, educators who might be aware
of learning style and difference in a classroom setting often lose that
awareness in an online environment1.
Educators often do not consider the broader implications of accessibility
for two general reasons. Schools have, historically, delegated the issue
of disability to Special Education. This separation within schools has
created an environment where most teachers do not think of disability
as a larger issue. This tendency runs aground when education goes online.
Additionally, the notion of accessibility is ill defined and is often
only thought of in terms of specific disabilities, not benefit for the
larger community.
As an educational technologist, a continuing concern of mine is the teaching
of and use of technologies like the Internet in socially just and inclusive
ways. It is at the intersection of educational technology and efforts
for social justice where web accessibility comes into play. Accessible
web design ties in with many of the notions of the progressive tradition
of education. The progressive tradition in education, while initially
conceived to facilitate the education of democratically engaged citizens,
has broad implications for the teaching of technology. One of these
implications is respect for diversity. This requires that each individual
be recognized for her or his own abilities, interests, ideas, needs,
and identity. The progressive tradition also necessitates a critical
and socially engaged dialogue with concerns for issues of social justice,
equality, and access to learning. These concepts are even more vital
online. When education is taken out of the classroom – out of the traditional
school environment, a whole new range of possibilities and limitations
occur.
It is important to note that accessible web design benefits all. By ensuring
that content is accessible to a variety of individuals, many unintended
obstacles are removed from the process for all. While accessibility
most specifically refers to making web pages accessible to individuals
with disabilities, the principles that guide accessible design are broadly
applicable. When we place information on the web, we drastically increase
the potential audience for that information.
There
are multiple themes discussed within this article. These themes address
the questions: what
is accessibility; why is accessibility important in educational web
design; and who benefits from accessible web design? Toward this end,
several definitions of accessibility are offered in order to broaden
awareness of web accessibility for issues, the legal and social mandates
for web accessibility are discussed, and the broader implications for
accessibility are discussed. This article deals primarily with the issue
of accessibility, but issues of accessibility overlap in places with
issues of usability. Because of this overlap, usability issues will
be discussed but only as they pertain to accessibility. This article
is not a technical “how-to.” Granted, some technical information is
given, but the intent here is to provide an introduction to and context
of the issues at stake in educational web design. There are links to
additional information at the end of this article.
What
is Accessibility (and Usability)?
The challenge for designers of web-based educational materials is to create
materials that are engaging, appropriate, and accessible. The first
two terms immediately resonate with educators, and the third term, “accessible,”
probably does as well, but the exact meaning might be amorphous. Strictly
defined, accessible has the following definitions:
- Easy to enter
or reach physically
- Able to be
appreciated or understood without specialist knowledge
- Able to be
obtained, used, or experienced without difficulty
- Not aloof and
not difficult to talk to or meet with
- Susceptible
to or likely to be influenced by something
- Able to be
referred to from another possible world, so that the truth value
of statements about it can be given (Encarta world English dictionary,
1999)
Immediately, one might think accessibility refers to access to the technology
with which to utilize various educational media. This is an important
and relevant interpretation of the term. It is in this definition of
accessibility that we must consider the issues of the “Digital
Divide”: race and ethnicity, gender bias, and other areas where inequity
exists in regard to access to resources. This reading of the term accessible
is a crucial component in the progressive tradition of education, but
is also applicable to other conditions that technology necessitates.
Traditionally educators have accommodated individual needs without changing
courses (Bowe, 2000). Components of a standard curriculum are modified
in some way to make them accessible to an individual with a disability.
This is often referred to as accessibility – making materials accessible
to those with disabilities. Conversely, usability generally refers to
the functionality of a site for a broad group of people. Most
current legal and technical guidelines for web accessibility (e.g. the
W3C WCAG and Section 508 – discussed below) focus primarily on making
web content accessible to individuals with disabilities. This is an
important facet of web design. For the purposes of the article, these
guidelines and definitions will be used as starting points for discussion
on making accessibility an integral part of educational web design.
Accessibility concomitantly describes several processes: the ability of
the user to access information electronically; the efforts made by the
designer to enable a page to function with the assistive devices and
multiple technologies; and an understanding of the nature of difference
that might span the audience of a particular web site. Usually, efforts
toward accessibility will greatly increase the usability of a site as
well.
For the user, the challenge of accessibility is to identify the tools that
will provide the most convenient access to web-based and other electronic
information. For the designer, the challenge of accessibility is to
remove the obstacles that prevent these tools from functioning properly.
In many cases, these challenges are relatively simple to overcome; others
require a bit more thought and effort.
An important component
of understanding accessibility is understanding how disability is defined
and what technologies individuals with disabilities use. Disabilities
are broad and difficult to categorize. A 1997 report by the U.S. Census
Bureau2 categorized
19.6% of the U.S. population as having some sort of disability. Within
that group are individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments,
cognitive impairments and motor impairments. Each category describes
a much wider range of conditions. For example, vision impairments include
limited vision, color blindness, and blindness. These categories may
also describe temporary disabilities. For example someone with a broken
wrist may have difficulty using a mouse, but still needs access to the
Web to meet the day-to-day requirements of their job. At the same time,
statistics about individuals with disabilities may be misleading. As
we get older, most of us will face a disability of some kind. While
on the whole, nearly 20% of the U.S. population has a disability; these
numbers get higher as the population ages (see Table 1). For example,
almost 75% of the population over 80 years old has a disability. Thus,
accessibility is about more than just opening doors, it is also about
keeping them open. Accessibility allows us to maintain a level of independence
that age and disability would likely otherwise make difficult. For K-12
educators, issues of age might seem irrelevant, but ignoring them excludes
the parents, grandparents, teachers, and other adults who participate
in a child’s educational process.
Table 1
|
Prevalence
of Disability by Age: 1997
|
| |
Total
|
Number
w/Disability
|
Percent
w/Disability
|
| All ages |
267,665,000
|
52,596,000
|
19.60%
|
| Under 15
years |
59,606,000
|
4,661,000
|
7.80%
|
| 15 to 24
years |
33,961,000
|
3,430,000
|
10.10%
|
| 25 to 44
years |
83,887,000
|
11,200,000
|
13.40%
|
| 45 to 54
years |
33,620,000
|
7,585,000
|
22.60%
|
| 55 to 64
years |
21,591,000
|
7,708,000
|
35.70%
|
| 65 years
and over |
32,064,000
|
17,480,000
|
54.50%
|
