Activity 1.1 Questions based on Seale Ch 6
“Accessibility has not been framed as a pedagogical or teaching issue requireing pedagogical responcies and solutions” (pp70)
Although accessibility my be seen as a technical issue, there is a pedagogical move towards personalised learning. Personalised learning includes giving students choice and a range of options and choices. This incorporates accessibility issues.
“Today, people want the service to be organised around them, not them around it. They want high quality service, tailored to their specific needs and at a time and place convenient for them…” Tony Blair as cited in http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/DfES%20Personalisation.pdf
“Inclusive design involves designing curricula that aim to include students with disabilities from the outset.” pp71
“Equitable use: the design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities.” pp71
Holistic Design: Various descriptions”Schenker and Scadden (2002), Holistiuc design means starting with the pedagogy first …then addressing accessibility as it relates to collaborative learning” (pp74) “Kelly et al (2004) holistic design means providing accessable learning experiences, not necessarily accessible elearning experiences” (pp74)
“Being proactive involves thinking about the needs of disabilities at the begining of the design….process…”(pp75)”Being flexable involves thinking of appropriate ways to offer equivilent and alternative access to the curriculum…”(pp75)
The definitions seem to overlap and are at times vague and confusing.
Activity 1.2 Questions based on Seale Chapter 7
Debating the responsibilities for accessibility.
I think it is more benificial to decide what the responcibilities are and how they need to be alocated rather than debating who has ultimate responcibility, as this can be seen as an exercise in passing the buck.
“The legislation, guidelines, standards and tools are mearly aechealogical artefacts that have been scattered on the surface of significant archealogical site.” (pp82)
I think that this analogy gives the impression that the guidelines are only a small part of a more detailed process.
I would use the analogy of the guidelines standards and tools being a collection of maps and routes to a particular destination. The important thing is getting there, not which route you use.
Technical tools Vs. Human Judgement
I think technical tools for specific resources or looking at specific accessibility issues can be useful, however I feel there is a danger when too much responcibility is placed on these tools. There needs to be a shared responsibility to look at the bigger picture and ensure the resource is truely accessible rather than just pass an automated test
Activity 1.3 Questions based on Seale Chapter 8
When disabled learners are segregated by having designated rooms or computers to use reinforces barriers between them and other learners. Accessibility is not just for learners who have been identified as being disabled. Some of the FE colleges I work with have fully intergrated departments where elearning, accessibility and other departments work together to ensure resources are accessable to all. There are also FE colleges I work with there the Accessibility support department seem to see it as their role to get resources which can only be used by “their” disabled learners, and are very defensive and protective.