W4A 2010 Education Tool to Support the Educational Process Chris Bailey

Christopher Bailey Dr. Elaine Pearson Teesside University [email_address] An Educational Tool to Support the Accessibility Evaluation Process

Main Issues
Guide novice auditors through an evaluation, raise awareness of accessibility.
Compile a detailed list of checks based on testing for well known accessibility principles
Support a contextual approach to evaluation.
Our students need support with accessibility:
Little existing knowledge of accessibility
Develop live websites for specific audiences
Accessibility personally a low priority
Limited access to disabled end users
Limited access to expert reviewers

Functionality (1)
The tool lists accessibility checks based on three evaluation contexts:
User Group
Site Features
Check Categories
For each check, the tool:
States the impact the issue has on users
Provides instructions on how to perform each check
Assists auditor in interpreting result of any automated check
Includes a video ‘how to’ walkthrough

Functionality (2)
Auditor records results of checks as they progress.
Print a template, or completed evaluation report.
Supports multiple users
Supports multiple site evaluations.
User can save/retrieve evaluations.

Evaluate by User Group
Auditor views prioritised checks for one user group
Compare different requirements of two user groups.
Importance of check is dynamic:
Critical Checks: Complete barrier, significant annoyance to user.
Important Checks: Noticeable annoyance or inconvenience
Allows auditor to see commonalities, but also identify exceptions.

Utilises the full database of checks, supporting the concept of universal accessibility
Checks are grouped to make process simpler and intuitive
Design Checks: overall visual design, e.g.: colour contrast
User Checks: testing with a human element, e.g.: keyboard accessibility, image text alternatives
Structural Checks: structure of web pages, e.g.: semantic HTML
Technical Checks: coding elements, e.g.: valid mark-up, metadata
Core Checks: Overall accessibility of site, e.g.: site map, accessibility statement
Considers roles in web development team
Evaluate by Check Categories

Evaluate by Site Features
Auditor selects elements of their site they wish to check, e.g.: data tables, forms.
Auditor selects content features of their website, e.g.: video files.
Checks are tailored to content of website:
Prioritises relevant checks
Streamlines process
Increases relevance
Eliminates redundancy.

Future Work
“ Dogfooding” – Create accessible RIA
Further development of tool over next 2-3 months.
Used for teaching Post Graduate students.
Expanded to include checks for other contexts, e.g.: WCAG 2.0, Mobile Devices, RIAs.
Test the performance of the tool:
Is it effective?
Are results consistent?
Compare with existing evaluation methods.

Christopher Bailey Dr. Elaine Pearson Teesside University [email_address] An Educational Tool to Support the Accessibility Evaluation Process

AEA Interface (1)
Example comparison of high priority checks for Dyslexia and Screen Reader User groups.

AEA Interface (2)
For each check the following information is provided:
Why the check is necessary
Step by step instructions on how to carry out the check
A video walkthrough

AEA Interface (3)
The AEA contains an integrated reporting mechanism so the auditor can record their results as they complete an evaluation.

W4A 2010 Education Tool to Support the Educational Process Chris Bailey

by chrisbailey000 on Apr 26, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

W4A 2010 Education Tool to Support the Educational Process Chris Bailey Presentation Transcript