The drivers for institutional change outlined in chapter 11 can be devided into “carrots” or Sticks”. Seale suggests that the “stick” approch of useing legislation against institutions that fail to meet accessibility reuirements is not working for a number of reasons, including a lack of institutions being prosicuted and confusion over the interpretation of rules. I feel there is a danger that a spate of prosecutions against inaccessable elearning would lead to a barrier to the overall development of elearning within the FE community. The fear of being prosecuted could stop teaching staff from getting started with relearning, particularly if they are not comfortable with developing their own Information Learning Technology (ILT) skills. On the other end of the spectrum, experienced learning technologists may not be willing to develop and exploit technologies such as web 2.0, which have not been proved to meet legislation.
At an institutional level there could be a reluctance to invest time and money in developing elearning if the potential damage of getting it wrong is worse`than doing nothing at all.
If organisations such as the RNIB and DRC are given the role of prosecuting bad elearning, this could lead to a breakdown in relationships with those institutions which most need their advice and support.