Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
The following is an evaluation report of the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities in the WHCCD eCampus. The evaluation is formative in nature, addresses faculty knowledge of accessibility regulations, faculty perception of the guidelines, and discusses recommendations next steps.
Table of Contents
Learning Reflection (AECT Standards) ........................................................................... 3 1.15 Evaluating and 5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation ................................... 3 5.1 Problem Analysis ................................................................................................... 3 5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement....................................................................... 3 5.4 Long-Range Planning ............................................................................................ 4 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 5 Purpose of the Evaluation ............................................................................................... 6 Central Questions ........................................................................................................ 6 Stakeholders ................................................................................................................ 6 Background Information .................................................................................................. 7 Characteristics ............................................................................................................. 7 Students Requiring Accessible Course Materials ............................................................ 7 Distance Education Courses .................................................................................... 8 Distance Education Strategic Plan (2009-2012) .......................................................... 9 Accessibility Legal Mandates ....................................................................................... 9 Characteristics / Goals of Accessibility in Distance Education Courses .................... 10 Evaluation Design ......................................................................................................... 10 Evaluation Model ....................................................................................................... 10 Evaluators Program Description ............................................................................... 11 Categories of Assessment ......................................................................................... 12 Existing records...................................................................................................... 12 DE Accessibility Survey and Questionnaire ........................................................... 12 Results & Discussion of Results .................................................................................... 13 Faculty Knowledge of Accessibility Requirements (Objective 1 and 2)...................... 13 Faculty Perception of Guidelines ............................................................................... 14 Faculty Support ......................................................................................................... 15 Faculty Rating of Course Accessibility ....................................................................... 15 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................. 16 Immediate Conclusions ............................................................................................. 16 Evaluation Insights....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Long Range Planning ................................................................................................ 16 Appendix ....................................................................................................................... 19 References .................................................................................................................... 24
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Executive Summary
The purpose of the evaluation was to explore web accessibility in the West Hills Community College Districts (WHCCD) eCampus internet-based courses as outlined in the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities issued by the California Community College Chancellors Office. Due to recent release of the guidelines, this evaluation is formative in nature. The evaluation examines several aspects of accessibility including faculty course development as well as students with disabilities that could potentially be affected by inaccessible course materials. Existing data, surveys, and questionnaires were used to determine the applicability of accessibility, faculty perceptions towards accessibility requirements, faculty knowledge of specific requirements, levels of support needed to meet the mandates, as well as facultys perception as to whether their course meets the requirements. An analysis of existing data, surveys, and questionnaires reveal information about the numbers of students that are potentially impacted by the requirements. It also reveals that faculty tends to be highly knowledgeable in many aspects of accessibility, require varying levels of support to meet the mandates, and have an overall positive attitude towards creating accessible online courses. Accessibility mandates will require ongoing training for faculty to ensure the mandates are being addressed. In addition, some clarification on the requirements need to be widely distributed to ensure that faculty are aware of issues that may come from choosing inaccessible content as well as how to obtain support from college staff to make the content accessible prior to placing the content in the learning management system. Immediate conclusions and long range planning are identified and recommended.
Page 5
Central Questions
Due to the recent release of the guidelines, this evaluation is formative in nature and is intended to answer the following questions: 1. How many disabled students do we currently serve that could potentially be affected by online course materials that do not meet the guidelines set forth by Valdeverde (2011)? 2. What are distance education facultys knowledge pertaining to website accessibility and legal mandates set forth in Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act? 3. Does distance education faculty have the requisite skills necessary to ensure their course content meets accessibility guidelines? 4. Does distance education faculty perceive that their course content meets accessibility guidelines? 5. Does online faculty have appropriate support in making their online courses meet the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines?
Stakeholders
Stakeholders for this evaluation include disabled students attending the college that participate in distance education courses as they are ultimately affected by content that does not meet accessibility guidelines. Faculty who choose course materials need to be knowledgeable in terms of selection of course materials and support staff available to assist in making content accessible. The technical staff in the ATT Department (Academic Technology and Training Department) involved in training and assistance in developing online course materials must ensure that faculty are both informed and supported in the development process. ATT Administration and the Disabled Students Department (DSPS) should be aware of activities take place to ensure that faculty are informed and supported in the process to ensure guidelines are met.
Page 6
Background Information
Characteristics
WHCCD has been teaching internet-based distance education courses for many years. Currently, faculty develops online courses with support provided by the Academic Technology and Training Department at one of the two campus-based faculty multi-media development labs. The district developed a strategic plan for distance education courses with input provided by multiple stakeholders. The recent release of The Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities was the catalyst for this evaluation as it requires all fully online courses to be meet accessibility guidelines for students with disabilities. Valdeverde (2011) The next few sections provides relevant background information on the number of students with disabilities served by the district, online enrollment, some information on the legal mandates of the guidelines, and finally, some background information on the evaluation.
Page 7
Psychological Disability
Other Disability Mobility Impaired Learning Disabled Hearing Impaired Developmental Delay Acquired Brain Injury
FIGURE 1 Source: California Community College Chancellors Office Data Mart (2011) Distance Education Courses WHCCD has been reporting fully online asynchronous courses since 2002-2003 (Figure 2) using Internet-based asynchronous instruction; although, asynchronous internetbased instruction was offered as early as 1996, just not reported. The chart below shows the growth of the program as reported to the California Community College Chancellors Office Data Mart (2011).
Page 8
FIGURE 2
Page 9
by a community college district using any source of state funds. (See Legal Opinion M 03-09.) Title 5, section 55200 explicitly makes these requirements applicable to all distance education offerings. Because accessibility is part of the distance education strategic plan, legal mandates, and documented guidelines, it has become very important to address it given the growth of enrollment in online programs as well as growth in the population of students with disabilities.
Evaluation Design
Evaluation Model
The model employed in this evaluation design was what Boulmetis & Dutwin (2005) refer to as the Goal-Based Model. The goal is to meet legal mandates outlined in the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities as well as identified weaknesses in the West Hills Community College Distance Education Strategic Plan. More information is available in the Background Information (previous section).
Page 10
To accomplish addressing the mandates and identified weaknesses, a review of existing records, a survey, and an electronic questionnaire were utilized in the design in an effort to obtain enough information to allow us to make decisions both immediately and for the future in an effort to achieve the goal of accessible course materials. The objectives are outlined in the Evaluators Program Description (see next section). Because the primary focus is on accessible course materials chosen by faculty, the survey and questionnaire were combined into one electronic format (see Appendix).
Are online faculty knowledgeab le about laws (ie. Section 508 of the Rehabilitatio n Act and other applicable statues)?
1. To be knowledgeabl e about laws related to distance education and accessibility. 2. To determine professional development needs. 2. To determine professional development needs.
Questionna ire
Online Faculty
Vice Chancellor of Educational Planning, Online Faculty, Educational Technology Specialists, DSPS Department
Does online faculty have the requisite skills to ensure their course content meets the guidelines?
Responses to DE Accessibility Questionnair e and Survey Attendance at accessibility workshops over next year
Questionna ire
Online faculty
Workshop sign in
Vice Chancellor of Educational Planning, Online Faculty, Educational Technology Specialists, DSPS Department Vice Chancellor of Educational Planning, Online Faculty, Educational Technology Specialists, DSPS Department Vice Chancellor of
Does online faculty feel that their course content meets the accessibility guidelines?
3. To identify courses that may require intervention to make the course materials accessible.
Online faculty
Responses to
Survey
Online
Educational Technology
Survey
Page 11
Evaluation Question
Program Objectives
Activities to Observe
Data Source
Population
Responsibility
Data Analysis
Audience
of support options when selecting course content 5. To make faculty aware of the DECT Grant and other accessibility resources
faculty
Specialist
Educational Planning
Categories of Assessment
Existing records A review of enrollment trends and population of students served with disabilities was obtained by utilizing the California Community College Chancellors Data Mart website (see References). The purpose of this section was to demonstrate the expected continuance of growth and relevance of the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities. DE Accessibility Survey and Questionnaire The purpose of the survey and questionnaire were to address all evaluation questions. A single electronic survey was delivered via email to all distance education faculty. The questionnaire portion was designed to determine faculty knowledge of accessibility requirements. It consisted of an open ended question as well as a number of True / False questions. The questions came directly from the Frequently Asked Questions section of the Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines for Students with Disabilities. They were developed in collaboration with the DSPS Department at WHCCD. The survey portion consisted of Likert scale questions and was designed to assess faculty perception and attitudes of the accessibility requirements. These attitudes are important considerations in terms of both training materials as well as support options that faculty need to design and facilitate course-related activities. The survey also asked faculty to rate the level of support they would require to perform specific tasks on course materials related to accessibility. This portion was designed to inform future training objectives and communication to distance education (online) faculty and were taken directly from the Distance Education Accessibility Requirements for Students with Disabilities document. This was designed to provide insight into specific training components in future semesters.
Page 12
% Correct
Figure 4 outlines another specific knowledge check on closed caption requirements. This question was separate from Figure 3 due to a few exceptions noted in accessibility guidelines and an attempt was made to determine whether distance education faculty were aware of the closed captioning exemption requirement for courses that were not archived (single use) video footage. Correct responses for the question were all answers listed, except for option D. The highest level of accessibility would be to have closed captions for all videos; however, this is not always achievable as can be seen in todays news clips being utilized in online courses. As long as faculty remove videos without captions prior to archiving, then there is an exemption. The only exception to the exemption is if a student requests closed captions due to an identified disability.
Page 13
FIGURE 4
15
01
32
Accessibility in An accessibility There are ample It takes too much It is my Making my Online Courses is rubric would be resources time to make an responsibility to course accessible achievable most helpful in available to me online course ensure all for students with determining the toensure my accessible Neutralrd party learning accessibility of course meets the without a high websites (such as disabilities can my online course. guidelines (ie, level of support. Publisher take away from DECT Grant, websites) are the rigor of the college support accessible for course staff, etcetera) students with disabilities
Agree
Strongly Agree
Page 14
Faculty Support
Figure 6 below shows faculty responses to the level of support they would require to ensure accessibility given the specific tasks (See Appendix A for specifics). Overall, a high number of faculty chose Full Support, High-Level Support or Some Support needed in all categories. Podcasting and closed captions were the highest level of support needed by faculty and both Accessibility Tasks fall within the multimedia category outlined by Valdeverde (2011) suggesting that as materials become more complex, a higher level of support is perceived by faculty. There were some faculty that marked No Support needed in a number of categories suggesting that they are independent in their ability to make their online courses accessible to students with disabilities. FIGURE 6
Number of Responses
15
10
No support
Accessibility Tasks
Page 15
FIGURE 7
could improve or that need accessibility enhancements. This page might become more visible if it were a part of all distance education faculty course sites. It is highly recommended that information be provided for engaging with the learning management system; for example, keyboard access, changing contrast, and increasing or decreasing text sizes in the students web browsers. Create tutorials for faculty on creating accessible course materials or choosing content using various content tools within Blackboard. This might include the following: o Navigation menus choices within the LMS that contain visual contrast o Best practices on font choices for the web and for printed materials. o How to add alternative text to images in multiple authoring programs including Word, PowerPoint, Blackboard, and other common authoring tools. o How to make audio content accessible to students with disabilities. o How to obtain assistance or learn how to closed caption instructor made videos. o How to check external sites like You Tube, Vimeo, and other popular sites for closed captions. o Podcasting best practices for teacher-made audio files. o Due to the requirement of creating accessible materials authored outside of Blackboard (such as Word, PowerPoint, Excel, Adobe PDF files), provide information or tutorials on how to make materials created with these authoring tools more accessible. o A list of existing resources that meet accessibility requirements. EduStream MERLOT, Annenberg, Khan Academy, and other open educational resources that meet accessibility requirements. WHCCD eCampus list of accessible digital content. Sample syllabi template with built in accessibility. Sample course sites with chosen accessible course menus. o A place to share accessible course materials. o A discussion board for collaboration amongst faculty. In future evaluation activities, it would be helpful to determine authoring tools and course materials commonly utilized by faculty to provide additional tutorials on checking content for accessibility. Consider revising the curriculum committee process that includes a component related to checking publisher materials for accessibility when distance education courses are being updated. Currently, the curriculum committee adds a Distance Education addendum for all courses that are taught fully online. This addendum should have a component that describes activities related to accessible course materials. Consider asking online faculty to review the measurement instrument (DE Accessibility Questionnaire and Survey) to determine if it is a fair measure of accessibility knowledge, needed support, and faculty attitudes towards the mandates.
Page 17
Continue the evaluation until a higher response rate is received. Given the legal requirement outlined by Valdeverde (2011) and potential risks associated with inaccessible course materials, an important consideration is to ensure all faculty respond.
Page 18
Appendix
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
References
Boulmetis, J., & Dutwin, P. (2005). The ABCs of Evaluation. San Francisco: JoseyBass. Bayaa, N., Shehade, H. M., & Bayaa, A. R. (2009). A rubric for evaluating web-based learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), pp. 761763. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00864.x California Community College Chancellors Office Data Mart. (2011). Full Time Equivalent Students (FTES) by Distance Education Status [Data File]. Retrieved from https://misweb.cccco.edu/mis/onlinestat/ftes_dist_de.cfm. California Community College Chancellors Office Data Mart. (2011). Student Services Programs (DSPS) [Data File]. Retrieved from https://misweb.cccco.edu/mis/onlinestat/programs_dist.cfm. Dick, W., & Carey, L. M. (1991). Formative evaluation. In L. J. Briggs, K. L. Gustafson, & M. H. Tillman (Eds)., Instructional design: Principles and applications (2nd Ed.), pp. 227-267. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Earle, R. (Ed.). (2000). Standards for the accreditation of school media specialist and educational technology specialist (4th ed.). Bloomington, IN: AECT. Guy, K. & Kraft, W. (2009, September). West Hills Community College District Distance Education Strategic Plan. Retrieved from http://www.westhillscollege.com/district/about/documents/strategic-plan-distanceeducation.pdf Valdeverde, S., Aborn, L., Brautigam, B., Johnson, J., Vasquez, L., Vasaquez, L., et al. (2011). Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines For Students with
Page 24
Disabilities. Distance Education Accessibility Task Force. California: California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office.
Page 25