All roads lead to Rome: Four system efforts in higher education web accessibility Panel: Cheryl Pruitt, CSU system; Rob Carr, OK ABLE tech; Brenda Boyd, Quality Matters; Jonathan Whiting, NCDAE Facilitator: Cyndi Rowland, WebAIM

System level change Important work, difficult work Top 6 higher ed policy issues to watch (Roscorla, 2015) Models emerging nationwide Institutions Systems Within continuous quality improvement and accreditation cycles Are there common lessons to be learned?

Cheryl Pruitt California State University System

Accessible Technology Initiative Serving CSU Community members of all abilities ~460,000 students ~40,000 staff and faculty ~14,000 identified students with disabilities

Analyzing the problem- devising solutions Accessibility is a shared responsibility that involves everyone on campus and companies we do business with Accessibility is a consideration for every product we purchase, develop, or adopt webpage that is developed, deployed, and maintained document that is prepared multimedia that is produced The CSU solution is to build sustainable change through business process improvement and by promoting cultural change

CSU ATI Framework: Policy (Strategies/Goals & Success Indicators)/Priorities Continuous Process Improvement with Strong Executive Support Make a Campus Plan Work the Campus Plan Measure Progress 6 CSU Systemwide Audit and Business Services

Rob Carr Oklahoma ABLE tech

Web Accessibility in Higher Education Project (WAHEP) Statewide effort, Oklahoma systems of higher education Focus on web and digital accessibility in higher education Two broad focus areas Institution level: Policy Nuts and bolts: How to do accessibility

WAHEP Partners Oklahoma ABLE Tech, WebAIM, National Center on Disability and Access to Education (NCDAE), Southwest ADA Center, OK Department of Rehabilitation Services.

Components 29 institutional teams Two day, on-site training in Fall, 2012 Ongoing webinar series Policy development Project teams Accessible documents Common barriers in higher education sites Evaluating web sites for accessibility

Additional Support Remote workshops Onsite visits Project web site abletech/IT_Accessi bility/WAHEP/ Web Accessibility Tips Newsletters ABLE Tech WebAIM NCDAE

Ties that Bind Memoranda of Understanding Policy Primary web site accessibility Common across teams Supported by State Regents Catalyst for action

Brenda Boyd Quality Matters

More Than The Sum Of Its Parts QM Rubric Professional Development Peer Course Reviews Workshops Courses QM Live! Other QM Rubrics K-12 Publisher Continuing Ed

Consisting of: 8 key areas of course quality (General Standards) 43 Specific Review Standards including 21 essential Standards and detailed Annotations and examples of best practice for all 43 Specific Review Standards The Rubric Is the Core of QM

QM General Standards 8 General Standards 1.Course Overview and Introduction 2.Learning Objectives (Competencies) 3.Assessment and Measurement 4.Instructional Materials 5.Course Activities and Learner Interaction 6.Course Technology 7.Learner Support 8.Accessibility and Usability

Key Accessibility Specific Standards 8.2: Information is provided about the accessibility of all technologies required in the course. 8.3: The course provides alternative means of access to course materials in formats that meet the needs of diverse learners.

Standards are not prescriptive LMS and technology agnostic Annotations include many examples Research supported Inter-related & holistic About QM Specific Review Standards

The QM Peer Review Process

Jonathan Whiting National Center on Disability and Access to Education

GOALS model 1.Benchmark at the level of the institution. 2.Create an action plan. 3.Routinely revisit the benchmarking and planning process.

Resources GOALS project page: Blueprint for Institutional Web Accessibility: Benchmarking and Planning Tool: Cheatsheets:

Question #1 What are the things that are working well in your model? What successes would you like to share?

Question #2 What are persistent issues, or challenges you face in your model?

Question #3 What have you learned are the critical elements in your model necessary for successful outcomes?

Thank You Questions? Contact any panelist or