1. The California State University’s Accessible Technology Initiative CSUN Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference Los Angeles, California March 21, 2007

2. Today’s Presentation  Overview of ATI Project: Mary Cheng, Director, Accessible Technology Initiative, CSU Chancellor’s Office  Web Accessibility: Wayne Dick, Professor and Chair of Computer Science & Engineering, CSULB and Academic Technology Accessibility Coordinator  Instructional Materials Accessibility: Gene Chelberg, Campus Executive Sponsor and Director of Disability Services, San Francisco State.  Procurement: John Charles, CIO and Executive Sponsor, CSU East Bay  Licensing Digital Collections: Lisa Moske, Director, Systemwide Electronic Information Resources, CSU Chancellor’s Office  The CSU Center for Accessible Media (CAM): Mark Turner, Director, CAM, CSU Chancellor’s Office

3. Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) www.calstate.edu/accessibility Reflects CSU commitment to provide equal access to information resources and technologies to individuals with disabilities. "It is the policy of the CSU to make information technology resources and services accessible to all CSU students, faculty, staff and the general public regardless of disability.“ CSU Executive Order 926 www.calstate.edu/EO/EO-926.html Goals: –Systemic change –Institutionalize accessibility –Change CSU culture

4. Case for Action ATI Federal Mandates and Recent State Legislation Government Code 11135 (Section 508) Recent Office for Civil Rights Actions in 4 CSUs Policy Directive EO 926 from Systemwide Audit

5. ATI: Beyond Legal Mandates  Vision: To create a culture of access for an inclusive learning and working environment.  Mission: To help CSU campuses in carrying out CSU policy as articulated EO926 by developing guidelines, implementation strategies, tools and resources.  Principle: To apply universal design, an approach to the design of products and services to be usable by the greatest number of people including individuals with disabilities.  Strategy: To stimulate collaboration to effect changes that will ultimately benefit all.

6. The CSU System  23 diverse campuses CSU Maritime 860 FTE CSU Fullerton 36,000 FTE  417,000 students  40,000 faculty and staff  Largest university system in the nation How do you institutionalize accessibility in this context?

7. ATI: Three Implementation Priorities Web Accessibility Procurement of Accessible E&IT Instructional Materials Accessibility

8. Project Plan  Phased-in implementation plan with specific milestones for each of the three priorities  Six-year work plan with full compliance reached by 2012  Accountability via end of year reports  First year emphasis: campus assessment, planning and training Project Plan defined in Coded Memo AA 2007-04 www.calstate.edu/ACADAFF/CodedMemos/AA-2007-04.pdf

9. Campus Project Structure Campus Executive Sponsors Project Managers Web Accessibility Team Instructional Materials Team Procurement Team

10. Communication, Coordination and Collaboration Procurement CoP Web Accessibility CoP Instructional Materials CoP Executive Sponsors ATI Director Center for Accessible Media (CAM) Director AT Expert (TBF) Acad Tech Access Coord & Web Specialist Central ATI Team Campus Teams Vehicles of communication: Communities of Practice (CoP) teleconferences, Listservs, Blackboard site for internal communication, ATI website for external facing info

11. Instructional Materials (IM) Priority Toward a universal design model for creating and adopting instructional materials Presented by Gene Chelberg Executive Sponsor and Director of Disability Services San Francisco State University

12. Scope  Printed materials: textbooks, course readers/course packs, articles and handouts, etc.  Digital materials: instructional websites, e-reserves, digital library materials  Multimedia: audio & video

13. “Effective Communication” as the standard  “Equally Effective” Communication Access –Timeliness –Accuracy –Appropriate Manner and Medium

14. Challenges in meeting “Effective Communication” Standard  Current practice: Ad-hoc retrofitting of materials to make them accessible is not working –Office for Civil Rights complaint: lack of timeliness of alternate formats of textbooks

15. Challenges in addressing behavioral change  Changing faculty behavior, e.g. early adoption of textbooks.  Changing business processes in the authoring of instructional content and development of digital resources (for example putting captions to multimedia, making structured Word documents, etc.)

16. Other factors demanding a new approach  Increasing use of digital content, web-based materials and online instruction  Increasing use of multimedia (podcasting)

17. IM accessibility—Universal Design Model Working Definition –The incorporation of accessibility considerations into the design of institutional programs and services from project inception Benefits –Ensures usability by widest possible pool of users –Allows for persons with disabilities to gain access to IM at same time non- disabled peers –Less time and resource-intensive to include accessibility features early-on than to retrofit –Reduces risk management because this approach demonstrates a systematic, rather than ad hoc approach to accessibility –Often benefits other at-risk populations such as students with ESL issues, remedial coursework needs –Facilitates the future repurposing of content

18. An Example: Early Adoption of Textbook  Campus plan to institutionalize a new practice to ensure timely adoption of textbook by faculty  Enlisted support from campus academic senates to adopt resolutions supporting timely textbook identification  Created video resource of student stories to help faculty understand the need to incorporate accessibility in their classroom (“From Where I Sit”)  Sharing accessible materials via the CSU Center for Accessible Media (CAM)  Collaborate on a tool that streamlines the process for identification of textbooks

19. Universal Design = Universal Benefit  Early textbook adoption decreases textbook cost for all students

20. Licensing Digital Collections Application of the Procurement Process to Electronic Library Materials Acquisition By Lisa Moske, Director Systemwide Electronic Information Resources California State University, Office of the Chancellor

21. Scope  CSU-SEIR (Systemwide Electronic Information Resources) manages over 60 systemwide agreements, covering over 200 resources, for the 23 CSU libraries  Digital content for libraries is licensed from and hosted by both commercial and non-profit vendors –Scholarly journals, index & abstracts services, statistical information, encyclopedias, general reference, directories, archives, aggregated resources –Over 25,000 full text titles –Resources cover core programs, including Arts and Humanities, Life and Physical Sciences, Social Sciences, and professional programs  Information is delivered and searchable on web-based platforms

22. Advisory Process  CSU-SEIR works closely with each of the campus libraries and with the Electronic Access to Information Resources (EAR) Committee, an advisory committee appointed by the Council of Library Directors –SEIR, in partnership with the libraries and with EAR, engages the ongoing effort to inform vendors and providers on systemwide needs, including accessible technology  The EAR Committee recommends resources of systemwide interest, advises on systemwide collection development criteria and standards, and performs formal product reviews –The EAR review process was revised in 2006, and includes a special evaluation form for 508 compliance and accessibility

23. Challenges  Informing the publishers of digital content about accessibility is an ongoing and challenging effort –In 2003, the Chair of the EAR committee invited the vendors SEIR works with to engage in a dialog about accessibility. Only a handful of vendors responded.  Vendors have varying levels of understanding of the requirements; many must make substantial changes in their business practices and product development cycles to comply  SEIR requests that vendors fill out the VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) and discusses compliance and/or company timelines for building compliant platforms during contract negotiations for renewing agreements and when considering new resources –Fortunately, we notice ongoing, progressive change and increased understanding –Before new resources are considered for systemwide purchase, vendors must exhibit compliance or have a timeline for compliance in place

24. Positive Change  The CSU’s negotiations and conversations with vendors are creating a broader awareness that will benefit the wider community  Vendors are showing more awareness and understanding of the needs and are more responsive to requests for information and for change  Accessibility and/or compliance clauses or statements are being included in publishers’ licenses –Adding compliance statements to current and new systemwide agreements is progressively building the record, and will eventually allow campuses to track accessible products and services

25. CSU Center for Accessible Media (CAM) Supporting campus efforts to provide timely alternate formats of instructional materials By Mark Turner, Director CSU Center for Accessible Media California State University, Office of the Chancellor

26. CAM Background  Significant growth in alternate media requests in late 1990’s  Even following passage of AB 422 in 2000 –Difficulties securing files from publishers –Most etext was still produced in-house –Production costs were high –System was not leveraging or sharing resources

27. CAM Development  Established as CSU authorized center in 2004 –Centralizes listings of etext holdings for CSU –Coordinates requests of etext from CSU –Facilitates intra-campus distribution of etext to CSU campuses –Systematizes tracking of alternate media requests and fulfillments

28. CAM Structure  Technology –Web-based interface –Database back-end –Hosted on Chancellor’s Office network  Staffing –Campus Authorized Agents –Project Director –Campus Liaison

29. CAM Goals  General goals –Increase timeliness of delivery –Increase operational efficiencies –Increase cost-savings –Leverage CSU resources  Specific goals –Increase publisher compliance –Eliminate redundant requests to publishers –Eliminate redundant in-house production –Decrease in-house production of alternate media

30. CAM Usage  20,000 logins  90 active users across most campuses  6,400 titles  3,000 publisher requests  1,400 inter-campus requests  1,100 entries for publisher contact/request info

31. CAM Strategic Goals (1 of 3)  Integrate with system-wide ATI initiative –Evaluate emerging technologies –Serve as CSU lead on accessible instructional materials –Evaluate current technology infrastructure –Consult on technology procurements and projects –System-wide promotion of universal design concepts –Conduct training sessions emphasizing promising practices, tools, and templates

32. CAM Strategic Goals (2 of 3)  Expand/improve functionality of CAM infrastructure –Establish central repository for alternate media materials –Incorporate federated search capabilities –Expand list of supportive alternate media formats –Provide automate lookup/validation of holdings information –Explore central resources for production of specialized alternate media formats

33. CAM Strategic Goals (3 of 3)  Connect with industry stakeholders –Media publishers –Technology manufacturers –Bookstores  Explore partnerships/collaborations –Educational systems –Alternate Media repositories  Impact national and State policy –Technology standards groups –Legislation

34. Presenter Contact Information  Mary Cheng: mary.cheng@csueastbay.edumary.cheng@csueastbay.edu  Gene Chelberg: chelberg@sfsu.educhelberg@sfsu.edu  Lisa Moske: lmoske@calstate.edulmoske@calstate.edu  Mark Turner: mturner@calstate.edumturner@calstate.edu

35. References: Related Resolutions of the Academic Senate of the CSU  Support of SB 302 (Kuehl), AS-2614-03, May 5-6, 2005 http://www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2002-2003/2614.shtml  Students’ Access to Academic Information Technology, AS-2700-05 FA, May 5-6, 2005 http://www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2004-2005/2700.pdf http://www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2004-2005/2700.pdf  Provision of Accessible Electronic Material by Publishers, AS-2730-06/AA, January 26-27, 2006 www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2005-2006/2730.shtml www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2005-2006/2730.shtml  Faculty Role in Mitigating the Costs of Textbooks, May 4-5, 2006 www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2005-2006/2747.pdf www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Resolutions/2005-2006/2747.pdf

36. References: Legislative Links  Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act (Federal) –No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States …shall be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance ” http://ericec.org/sect504.html  Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (Federal) –Provides a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/pubs/ada.txt  California Education Code § 67302 (AB 422) (1999) (State) –Requires publishers to provide e-text to eligible students with print-related disabilities http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/99-00/bill/asm/ab_0401-0450/ab_422_bill_19990915_chaptered.html  Section 508 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act (1998) (Federal) –Applies accessibility standards to procurement and development of electronic and information technologies by federal government agencies www.section508.gov SB 105 (Burton), 2002 (State) applied section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act to state governmental entities regarding accessibility of electronic and information technology http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0101-0150/sb_105_bill_20020929_chaptered.html SB 302 (Kuehl), 2003 (State) –applies Section 508 to the CSU and codified in California Government Code 11135 (effective January 2004) http://www.spb.ca.gov/civilrights/documents/CALIFORNIA_CODES_11.pdf

37. The Accessible Technology Initiative www.calstate.edu/accessibility