Accessibility problems could be avoided if designers and developers integrated accessibility considerations from the start rather than treating them as an afterthought. Organizations must prioritize accessibility training, operations, and budgets to enable the development of more accessible user experiences. (Conclusion, para. 2)<\/p>\r\nHowever, as this respondent is concerned about the time creating accessible material would require of them, it is not clear if additional training would satisfy their concerns.\r\n\r\nUnderstanding how to best help post-secondary employees implement changes to create and choose more accessible content is a necessity to create more accessible and inclusive learning environments. Further research is needed into how to create and sustain momentum, increase institutional buy-in, and best methods to upskill employees. The costs are low and the benefits are immense.","rendered":"
When prompted, co-designers shared several practices and ideas for post-secondary staff to improve the student experience. Given the limited input students have in shaping their academic accommodations (refer to section 2.1.3), a general openness from instructors to understanding student needs was a common suggestion. More specifically, several co-designers noted that instructors proactively asking what would most benefit them was the single most effective way to support their success and make them feel included.<\/p>\n
Not every suggestion can, or should, be implemented. Kelly et al. (2024) concluded that \u201cit is likely impossible to create an online learning experience that is perfectly tailored to each student\u2019s individual needs; however, asking students about their preferences can help instructors tailor their courses where possible and appropriate\u201d (p. 392). Educators may not be able to give every student every request they make, but being open to conversation can greatly improve the student experience. Dolmage (2017) references a study in which \u201cthe students said, repeatedly, that professors would know what works and what needs to be done if they just asked their own students\u201d (p. 132). Unfortunately, \u201cin the modern university, students with disabilities are kept far away from the discussions within which their input could be most illuminating, most challenging\u201d (p. 43). Through the lens of \u2018nothing about us, without us\u2019, post-secondary is dramatically failing.<\/p>\n
Co-designers understood that accessible design is good design. The co-designers offered solutions that would make their experience, and thus the experience of all students, more accessible. When content is designed with accessibility best practices in mind, everyone benefits. The most studied format, web content, provides useful insight into the impact of accessibility on general user experience. Numerous studies find that higher levels of accessibility in web content benefits all users (Ekin et al., 2025; Palmquist & Oppmark, 2025). Briggs et al. (2024) found that \u201cmore rigorous conformance with accessibility standards can also improve the experience and performance of nondisabled persons\u201d (p. 321). Similarly, Schmutz et al. (2016) found that high levels of web accessibility conformance led to better performance including task completion time and rate of completion as well as improved user ratings about usability, aesthetics, and trustworthiness. Fritz et al. (2019) and Lazar et al. (2015) confirm that accessible content is rated as easier to use.<\/p>\n
Pinheiro et al. (2021) provide numerous examples, including closed captions, to illustrate that in general more accessibility directly benefits everyone, not just disabled people. Consider the curb cut (ramped section of sidewalk that creates a smooth transition between the street and sidewalk) which was initially created for wheelchair users. However, Greve (2007) found that 9 out of 10 \u201cunencumbered pedestrians\u201d go out of their way to use a curb cut. Features designed for disabled people benefit everyone.<\/p>\n
In education, Gelber\u2019s 2025 history of learning disabilities in American higher education shows a historical pattern in which teaching techniques implemented to assist disabled students (\u201csuch as stating the goal for the class session, highlighting key points, and providing clear written directions\u201d) become standard practices that made instructors more effective and benefited all learners (p. 28). Dolmage (2017) offers the example of describing visual content of slides as a practice dictated by law instead of \u201crecognizing that careful, thick description of visual content would be great teaching for all students\u201d (p. 89). Other work finds that \u201cdigital accessibility practices are not only beneficial for students with disabilities, but it is also valuable for all adult learners\u201d (Jackson, 2023, p. 110). Accessible course design benefits all students, not just disabled students (Case & Davidson, 2011; Fovet & Houghton, 2012). Nash et al. (2023) posits that inclusive pedagogy \u201csupports digital access for all learners\u201d (p. 212). Fovet (2020) suggests that inclusive design strategies meet most student needs and can reduce pressure on accessibility services and academic accommodations. The solutions posited by the co-designers may solve for one (themselves) but extend to many (all students, staff, and institutions).<\/p>\n
Given the changes to this project necessitated by the changing scope of post-secondary (as discussed in section 3.2.3), there is a pressing need for future research with employees as was planned. The initial intention was to interview post-secondary employees about the impact of the co-designed resource and the feasibility of implementing the changes suggested by the co-designers. A significant collection of literature exists exploring how the lack of training has a significant impact on accessibility (Sanderson et al., 2022; Briggs et al., 2024; Walz, 2024). One survey respondent lamented that \u201cthere is NO institutional recognition of the additional burden this places on us and very little meaningful support.\u201d The respondent is correct to suggest institutions could do more to support the creation of accessible digital learning material. As Gifford (2024) argues,<\/p>\n
Accessibility problems could be avoided if designers and developers integrated accessibility considerations from the start rather than treating them as an afterthought. Organizations must prioritize accessibility training, operations, and budgets to enable the development of more accessible user experiences. (Conclusion, para. 2)<\/p>\n
However, as this respondent is concerned about the time creating accessible material would require of them, it is not clear if additional training would satisfy their concerns.<\/p>\n
Understanding how to best help post-secondary employees implement changes to create and choose more accessible content is a necessity to create more accessible and inclusive learning environments. Further research is needed into how to create and sustain momentum, increase institutional buy-in, and best methods to upskill employees. The costs are low and the benefits are immense.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1655,"menu_order":4,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-683","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":590,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/683","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1655"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/683\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":769,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/683\/revisions\/769"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/590"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/683\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=683"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=683"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=683"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/lostintranslation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=683"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}