I edited this post to select the proper category--CWOnline05 instead of "Conferences." Nothing else was changed.

Matt

I updated the post to link to the previous submission, to preserve the existing dialogue.

Hi John! I'm your official respondent.

I think this is a fascinating study of a neglected area. I agree that people in the academy don't discuss accessiblity and usability in the ways that you present, and that student voices are usually absent from these discussions. I just have one possible idea that comes out of my own research, and you're free to ignore it for this round of presentations, since it's more related to the long term implications of your research.

When I was working on my research into the composing processes of beginning Web designers, I found a similar dearth of discussion and a lack of perspectives from new designers. However, I found that looking at the ways that people did discuss and present Web design in scholarship and in pedagogy/practice was useful in showing me the gaps and allowing me to show the gaps to other people. Reviewing what was there in order to show what wasn't there helped me to deal with and demonstrate the gap (which also allowed me to have a lit review in my dissertation that wasn't just "No one wrote about this. :).

So, you might want to consider reviewing how accessibility is (and isn't) presented in the academy in terms of guidelines and practice-oriented documents as part of your review of literature. You could look at official university Web guidelines (Purdue's Marketing Communications office has Purdue's Official Web Standards, even if no one on campus follows them), at whether or not university resource sites for Web design include accessibility resources, at how accessibility is or isn't included in teacher training and instructional resource training/mentoring, and other places where accessibility is mentioned (as well as places where it isn't yet it would logically fit).

From my perspective, accessibility is usually paid lip service by university Web designers, instructional technology specialists, and the IT department. I also think that most teachers of technical writing (myself included) spend a day with Jakob Nielsen and the Bobby site and then move on.

I look forward to reading your work.

Erin Karper and Liz Monske have been asked to respond to this proposal.

John, I'll agree that Section 508 concerns get very little discussion in our field. When, in the past, I attempted to bring up Section 508 to some of my colleagues working with computers in writing classrooms, I got mostly dismissive responses -- and I think these are things that, as educators, we really need to be thinking and talking about. Are you familiar with the work of Margaret Price and Brenda Jo Breuggemann? Also, a question possibly implied by your study might be: do essays composed by student writers using screen readers like JAWS and/or voice recognition software like ViaVoice differ significantly from essays composed by student writers not using such technologies -- and if so, how?
--
Mike
http://www.vitia.org/

Hi John,
I'm Liz, your other respondent. I am glad that you are looking into this area. You mentioned in your submission that you have "attempted" to gain access for the past five months. Are you having problems with HSRB? That comment brought me back to nightmare issues I had with my original thesis topic in 1999--looking at writing processes of students with learning disabilities. I was extremely careful with wording and had everything go through approval with no problem with a research agenda similar to what you have planned. My problem developed when I gave my materials to special needs office for them to send them to students on campus. The office stapled a hot pink letter to the top of my materials stating that the materials they were sending were voluntary and that they did not support any need, opinion, or views of the enclosure; I wasn't told about the boilerplated letter that was attached. I ended up with 3 students out of a possible 300+ population that responded. After one of my interviews, one of the students said something to the effect of "this was actually really helpful, and I'm glad that I got beyond that mean letter." I asked him what letter he was referring to, and he showed me a copy.

I was horrified because it sounded really impersonal and that anything following the letter wasn't worth reading. When I discussed my frustration with the office, they said they had to do that for everything that wasn't directly sanctioned from their office. While I understand that now, it didn't help at the time, and I had to re-design my entire thesis. If you haven't discussed the possibilities of something like this already, I would recommend finding out the process of dealing with Adaptive Programs on your campus because your invitation has the potential of having a scary boilerplated hot pink memo attached to it. Even with that said, I am glad that you have 2 students to assist with your dialogue so far.

When you discuss web use for academic purposes, are you only considering university build sites, like a homepage and all of its links, library, search, online course catalogs etc.? Are you considering course-management tools? Faculty hypertexts? Blogs for Classroom use, whether hybrid or fully online? Or even using internet search engines like Yahoo or Google to do their academic work? Maybe even a combination of the aforementioned items?

Good luck. Liz

Thanks for changing the status of my post. I inadvertantly selected the wrong category.

Thanks, Charlie, for alerting me to this opportunity and for updating my post.

Liz, thanks for the great comments and questions regarding my research on accessibility. In response to your first question about my attempt to gain access, I appreciate your anecdote and suggestions. My invitation for participation was sent out through e-mail by the Dean of Students in Adaptive Programs. I really don't know what sort of disclaimer they may have included, but I did get 2 responses. I do think that possibly it needs to be marketed in a different way, though, in order to get better response. I will be discussing this with the Dean, who, interestingly enough, e-mailed me this week to check on my status. They are very interested in my project, and he asked if "we needed to send out another invitation" now that the semester has ended. Your suggestions and story will help me frame my questions when he and I meet again. So, thanks.

In terms of my discussion of web use, I am preliminarily attempting to find out what issues students are reporting. For the most part, in discussing with my two initial informants, it seems like the major area of issue is with individual instructor web sites that, because the instructors are most likely unaware, are very inaccessible. But, one of my students did mention that she was having some serious problems accessing even the university sponsored and designed sites (library, homepage, student info page, etc.). I appreciate your list of other possible technologies and web spaces that students might have problems with. I anticipate that, as I begin to find more students with a variety of disabilities and experiences, I will run into some of these other things (blogs, course-management tools, etc.). Ultimately, it is my intention to look at the accessibility issue through the eyes of the student. We, as instructors, have some preconceived notions of what might be more difficult for them to access, etc...this is what I want to avoid. So, as I begin to discuss, I will certainly be able to question my participants about these technologies, but, it is my hope that they willingly identify the technologies and accessiblity issues that they see hindering, or potentially hindering their academic success. Thanks again for you comments.

John

Mike, thanks for your comments and suggestions. I too have had some interesting reponses when mentioning accessibility to my colleagues. I think that, for the most part, accessiblity is often perceived as "some else's problem" or as "not too big of a deal." Basically, this seems to be in response to the typical lack of understanding of the issue as a whole. This is much of what precipitated my research. In fact, where I am currently employed, no mention of accessibility standards or the need for their implementation is mentioned. This was further fodder for my study. All new composition instructors are required to have a class website, yet the powers-that-be neglected to broach the accessiblity issues, let alone give any instruction or training in making our websites Section 508 and W3C compliant. I hope to remedy this, or, at the least, increase departmental and institutional awareness with my current study.

Although I am not familiar with the work of Margaret Price and Brenda Jo Breuggemann, I really appreciate the resource. It will be invaluable in informing and helping me to further frame my study. So, thanks.

Also, I really liked your idea about looking at the actual writing of students with disabilities and how that writing is determined by the technologies they use when composing and reading. I don't think that this study will be able to include that section, seeing as I am mostly concerned with a qualitative approach to understanding the depth of the problem. But, I do think that, once I complete my study, this will be an area that I will investigate at length. In all, I really feel like the accessiblity issue has the potential for several studies/articles. So, thanks for the idea.

John

Erin, thanks for your comments and suggestions. I certainly agree with you in terms of using "what is there" to illuminate "what isn't there." I will definitely do this when I take it out to the publication stage (assuming/hoping it will ever get there). At this point in my research, I am mainly concernced with looking at it qualitatively, giving the voice of issue to the actual users. The preponderence of what I have read is from web designers, scholars, academics, etc., and doesn't use the qualitative methods I hope to (interviews, focus group, case study). It is this aspect of my research on which this round will focus. Also, I just finished a qualitative research class with Patricia Sullivan (she says hi, by the way), and she really sold me on this type of research.

Also, I have looked at Purdue's guidelines and have discussed our current status in implementing those standards campus wide. I talked with the head of Adaptive Programs, and two Deans in that same office, as well as the head of the Adaptive Learning Programs Lab (ALPS) in Stewart center. All of these people, in addition to several others, are trying to find a way to "push/sell the section 508/W3C standards to the faculty and university." They also mentioned the concern (why it is taking so long to implement) of finding "someone to be the 'watchdog' of accessibility." The whole issue seems to be deeply steeped in red tape and bureaucracy.

Also, in doing some cursory research, it seems that the university has little assistance in designing accessible web sites. There are never any sessions available for instructors to take in connection to these issues. Furthermore, much of what precipitated my initial interest in this subject (other than my previous work) was when I first came to Purdue and was part of the mentor program. Accessiblity was NEVER mentioned, yet we are all required to have a course website...this is somewhat interesting. I hope to raise awareness in our program and across the institution with my study.

In all, I agree with all of what you said. Much of it will be extremely useful when I take this study out to its final stages. Thanks for your suggestions. I checked out your website; you have some great stuff. I might be contacting you for some permission to use your ideas as I hone my syllabus for next fall. I am teaching professional writing. Thanks.

John