Creating and Managing Accessibility Compliance Reports with Grant Teams

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Veronica Vold

unread,
Nov 30, 2022, 7:04:48 PM11/30/22
to CCCOER Community Email
Hi everyone! 

I have two questions for you! Thanks for thinking about this with me. FYI, this query is cross-posted.
  1. How are OER programs creating and sharing accessibility compliance reports for grant teams authoring OER? There are so many wonderful checklists out there, but I'm looking for an actual report template that lays out the results of a review and flags issues to fix/address. What does your report, document, or instrument look like? If it's openly licensed, would you consider sharing it with me?
  2. What is your process for discussing with grant teams the accessibility issues noted in a compliance report? Do you set up a meeting to first review the accessibility compliance report together, and then schedule subsequent meetings to review progress and validate changes? Are there strategies that you've found that help grant teams to feel empowered to make changes rather than overwhelmed?
Thanks for your help! With warmth,

Veronica

Veronica Vold, PhD 
(Pronouns: she/her)
Open Education Instructional Designer

Delmar Larsen

unread,
Dec 1, 2022, 12:07:38 AM12/1/22
to cccoer-...@googlegroups.com

Veronica:

We (LibreTexts) opted to use technology to facilitate ACR generate, curation and dissemination. Specific comments below.

On 11/30/2022 4:04 PM, Veronica Vold wrote:
Hi everyone! 

I have two questions for you! Thanks for thinking about this with me. FYI, this query is cross-posted.
  1. How are OER programs creating and sharing accessibility compliance reports for grant teams authoring OER? There are so many wonderful checklists out there, but I'm looking for an actual report template that lays out the results of a review and flags issues to fix/address. What does your report, document, or instrument look like? If it's openly licensed, would you consider sharing it with me?

We wanted to have a digital tracking of the accessibility compliance reports (for books; technology is a more different centralized set of ACRs). Specifically, we needed to have a very detailed set of criteria and we didn't find the existing templates to suit our purposes (we have a team of students from student disability centers going over select texts and they needed things to be specific). Our accessibility team identified 81 criteria (the same used to evaluate complete WCAG 2.1 conformance professionally) and we narrowed it down to 20 quick ones while we write up the rest (and program automatic evaluation). You can see our mini-ACRs protocol on our Commons&Conductor system (https://commons.libretexts.org) which we use for OER project management/construction system. Accounts are free to the community and each Conductor project has a ACR section. However, the technology is optimized for LibreTexts books (table of contents is pulled in automatically). Each criterion is a toggle switch to indicate that subject on a specific page has been addressed. We know this is overkill compared to most other approaches we reviewed in the community, but it allows us to slowly and steadily address all the criteria for WCAG conformance - a simple set of 5 or 10 checkmarks simply fail to address this properly.


  1. What is your process for discussing with grant teams the accessibility issues noted in a compliance report? Do you set up a meeting to first review the accessibility compliance report together, and then schedule subsequent meetings to review progress and validate changes? Are there strategies that you've found that help grant teams to feel empowered to make changes rather than overwhelmed?

We built an real-time auto-a11y checker into the editor so authors can check/address the big eight most common a11y issues at content creation. That goes a long way in getting a functioning ACR.

Authors are able to review the ACR criteria in the Conductor at any time, but we favor external review of output rather than teaching each aspect of WCAG conformance to the authors. It is best to have them focus on the subject matter and let (most, but not all) of the a11y efforts be focused on by dedicated team (mostly students from disability centers). I know that other campuses that use LT go through a more formal a11y review and feedback to authors at different stages of development.

Let me know if you desire more information.

Cheers,

Delmar



Thanks for your help! With warmth,

Veronica

Veronica Vold, PhD 
(Pronouns: she/her)
Open Education Instructional Designer
--
If you have any questions about or technical difficulties with this email list, contact liz...@oeglobal.org
To find out more or be added to this list visit https://www.cccoer.org/community-email/
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CCCOER Community Email" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cccoer-adviso...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cccoer-advisory/7dfd85d9-a291-46d0-be6d-fba761a275d7n%40googlegroups.com.
-- 
************************************************************
	Delmar Larsen
	Professor
	Department of Chemistry
	University of California, Davis
	One Shields Avenue 
	Davis, CA 95616
	+1 (530) 754-9075

	dla...@ucdavis.edu
	http://LarsenLab.ucdavis.edu

	Founder and Director of the LibreTexts Project
	http://libretexts.org
	The Future is Open
************************************************************
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages