UKOLN is supported by: What Does Accessibility Mean To The Blogging Community? Addressing Institutional Barriers Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath UK This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat)

2 Contents Barriers: IT Services  Librarians Academics  Senior managers Users  … Infrastructure, systems,.. Addressing The Barriers Richer models  Cultural change Shared understanding Staff development … Note the focus of this talk is on technical barriers – the non- technical barriers are likely to be of greater importance

3 Technical & Cultural Barriers Technical Barriers: Will it work?  Is it interoperable? Is it secure?  Is performance acceptable? Do we have the expertise, resources, … … Cultural and Organisational Barriers: Departmental / organisational culture IT Services  Librarians Academics  Senior management Users  … Systems Infrastructure  Assessment … Barriers

4 Nobody Likes Us - The Users' View IT Services: Don't understand learning and teaching and think that students only ever use the Web for messing around. Have no interest in what the users actually want and generally prefer to give the users what they themselves think they want. (I've seen senior IS staff dismiss the data gathered in formal user requirements gathering exercises because it doesn't fit their own viewpoint.) Tend to work in silos (example: student information systems team which won't talk to the VLE team), and will do anything to avoid working with others outside of their own silo. They have no concept of team working across services or with academic staff. Consultation usually consists of them telling you what they are going to do. If you tell them what you want they don't listen! IT Services Barrier Do these comments ring any bells? If not, how can you be sure?

5 A Blairite Vision Of Control? The government wishes to introduce: ID cards Greater powers of arrest … in order to minimise the dangers of global terrorism IT Services (esp. networking staff) seem to wish to: Manage applications used by users Ban certain software … in order to minimise dangers of computer attacks The rational for organisations to wish to introduce greater control mechanisms is understandable. But citizens / users may regard such measures as not also necessary and may tolerate some level of risk-taking. (And do any of the above "sex up" the information to achieve these goals?) The rational for organisations to wish to introduce greater control mechanisms is understandable. But citizens / users may regard such measures as not also necessary and may tolerate some level of risk-taking. (And do any of the above "sex up" the information to achieve these goals?) IT Services Barrier

6 Beware The IT Fundamentalists We need to avoid simplistic solutions to the complexities: Accessibility Fundamentalist: we must do WAI WCAG Vendor Fundamentalist: we must need next version of our enterprise system (and you must fit in with this) Open Standards Fundamentalist: we just need XML Open Source Fundamentalist: we just need Linux User Fundamentalist: must do whatever users want Legal Fundamentalist: it breaches copyright, … Ownership Fundamentalist: must own everything we use Perfectionist: It doesn't do everything.. we'll do nothing Simplistic Developer: I've developed a perfect solution – I don't care if it doesn't run in the real world IT Services Barrier IT Director, March 2006 "I could give names of the individuals in my department!"

7 The Librarian Fundamentalists Librarians: Think they know better than the user e.g. they don't like people using Google Scholar; they should use Web of Knowledge (who cares that users find it easier to use Google Scholar & finds references they need that way?) Think that users should be forced to learn Boolean searching & other formal search techniques because this is good for them. Don't want the users to search for themselves (cf folksonomies) because they won't get it right. They still want to classify the entire Web - despite the fact that users don't use their lists of Web links. Want services to be perfect before they will release them to their users. They are very uncomfortable with the concept of 'forever beta' (because they don't believe that their users have the capability to figure these things out for themselves and work around the bugs). Library Barrier

8 The Problem With Academics The enthusiasts academics will be: Here, encouraged by Web 2.0 descriptions Cheering the critiques of the service departments However: Many academic are conservative & won't care Many will feel threatened Many won't like WiFi in lecture theatres, students chatting on IRC, Googling answers, … Many will soon ask for WiFi to be removed, blocked from lecture theatres (including areas where it's not yet available!) Academics Barrier

9 Problems With Senior Management / Users Senior management: Don't understand technologies Can be conservative More comfortable with conventional business relations with vendors May be over-cautious about being sued … Users: Can be conservative Many don't understand technologies Those that do may use the technologies in dangerous ways … Other Barriers

10 Addressing the Barriers How do we address such barriers: A change in culture Being more open (surely what HE is about?) Revisiting AUPs Developing more sophisticated models for standards, accessibility, open source, … Integrating IT Policies With Institutional Policies Developing key principles Ongoing debate and discussion Addressing The Barriers

11 Need To Change Catch Phrases Computer Says No! Time to ditch this catch phrase Wikis? IT Services says no Folksonomies? Library says no Skype? UKERNA says no Wikis? IT Services says no Folksonomies? Library says no Skype? UKERNA says no Yer, but, no, but, yer Time to embrace the ambiguities acknowledged by Vicky Pollard Yer, like Wikis are well cool, but, OK so I copied my homework, but, like I always copy my homework Images from BBC Web site Need for Culture Change X

12 Richer Models We need to develop and deploy richer models to reflect: Complexity of our institutions Innovative approaches we often seek Complexity of the technologies.. In a variety of areas including: Web accessibility Risk management Organisation culture Openness and ownership … Richar Models

13 Risk Management Tensions: Internet is a nasty place We "can get away with a lot … without the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse turning up." UKOLN is developing a risk management model for deployment of Web 2.0 technologies based on: Agreements (we have a contract, an understanding) Understanding of service provider (e.g. Google) Costs/implications of change Ease of migration User engagement User education …

14 Acceptable Use Policies (AUP) Is Skype Permitted over JANET? "The Computing Service is frequently asked for a ruling on whether Skype may legitimately be used... the Computing Service considers that use of Skype contravenes the JANET Acceptable Use Policy, although UKERNA does not concur with this view." Missing The Point? There may be (religious) debates over the interpretation of UKERNA's words. But Did the policy come from God? Is it infallible? Why do we hide behind AUPs? Proposal: An AUP is meant to work on behalf of an organisation, helping to ensure the effective use of IT by its users. An AUP should not be used as a control mechanism to prevent usage which IT staff may frown upon. Proposal: An AUP is meant to work on behalf of an organisation, helping to ensure the effective use of IT by its users. An AUP should not be used as a control mechanism to prevent usage which IT staff may frown upon. Revisiting AUPs

15 The Need For An AUPP AUPs: Shouldn't be cast in stone: technologies change; usage changes; culture changes (e.g. AUPs banning social use; ; Web; messaging; …) Therefore need for mechanisms for changing AUPs and engagement with users Proposal: We need an Acceptable Use Policy Process (AUPP) We need mechanisms to ensure users can input into the discussion process We need more flexibility in our AUPs (e.g. to reflect blended learning, pervasiveness of IT; …) Revisiting AUPs

16 Example of AUPP For Skype Background: P2P applications banned: typically used for downloading copyrighted materials Legitimate uses of P2P grow e.g. Internet telephony Discussions: Skype is proprietary; lack of management control; can degrade performance; SIP provides open alternative; … Skype works; minimal support needed; provides rich functionality not available with SIP (e.g. video; shared browsing; etc.); my remote colleagues use Skype; … Pragmatic Solution (Yer, but no, but yer): Evaluation period Network problems in halls  banned there in response to user concerns; discouraged on campus, until technical solutions (e.g. network shaper) tested, with plans to then liberalise policy (or SIP is usable) Revisiting AUPs

17 Need For Shared Understanding UKOLN/UCISA/CETIS workshop on “Disruptive Technologies” agreed on potential benefits for principles on mutual understanding between user community and IT Services Draft Principles for Service Providers User Focus: We will ensure that priority is given to a user focussed approach to our services. Avoiding Dogma: We will develop policies (e.g. standards, open source, accessibility, …) but these will evolve and won't be used in a dogmatic way. Responsive to Change: We will seek to be responsive to changes in technology, user needs, cultural and political developments. Good Communications: We will establish (and monitor) effective communications channels Learning: We recognise that HEIs will seek to make use of IT in innovative ways and we will support such innovation Draft Principles for Service Providers User Focus: We will ensure that priority is given to a user focussed approach to our services. Avoiding Dogma: We will develop policies (e.g. standards, open source, accessibility, …) but these will evolve and won't be used in a dogmatic way. Responsive to Change: We will seek to be responsive to changes in technology, user needs, cultural and political developments. Good Communications: We will establish (and monitor) effective communications channels Learning: We recognise that HEIs will seek to make use of IT in innovative ways and we will support such innovation

18 Proposed Principles (2) Draft Principles for Developers Scalability: Developers will recognise that there will be scalability issues to be addressed if innovations are to be deployed into service. Sustainability : Developers will recognise that innovations need to be sustainable if they are to be deployed into service. R eliability : Developers will recognise that a high level of reliability is needed if innovations are to be deployed... Integration : Developers will recognise that innovative services may need to be integrated with existing systems. Consistency : Developers will recognise that innovations need to be harmonised with existing systems (e.g. avoid replicating functionality, …) (Also need something on security) Draft principles available Notes on Wiki available Draft principles available Notes on Wiki available

19 Being Open Implementing an open approach should not be difficult: We have tradition of sharing & using OSS The HE sector is now more open to discussing open access issues (e-prints, financial issues, …) We're being open with our Blogs Creative Commons (CC) provides a legal framework What can we do: Make support resources available with CC licence: see paper on "Let's Free IT Support Materials!" Exploit UKOLN's QA Focus briefing documents: 90+ documents available with CC licence Share your own case studies, staff development materials, etc. Let's Be More Open NOTE Talk on "What Does Openness Mean To The Web Manager" to be given at IWMW 2006 on th June 2006

20 Questions Any questions., comments?