January 27, 2021

Agenda 

Reflect on 2020 

  • First year we started quarterly meetings (held Feb 20) 

  • Held 2 “listserv in real-time” sessions as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic (Apr 22nd, May 6th) 

  • Continued ATHEN/AHEAD discussions 

  • Support of the first-ever AHG Virtual Conference 

ATHEN Executive Council 

  • 60+ cumulative hours spend in monthly meetings 

  • 80+ cumulative hours spend outside of monthly meetings doing ATHEN work 

  • 61 / 262 days where there was a meeting, task, email or discussion about supporting ATHEN (23% of workdays) 

ATHEN Listserv 

  • Number of emails shared ~ 1,270 

  • Thread with most responses 

  • [Athen] Locked PDF  

  • [Athen] Grammarly with a screen reader? 

  • Busiest months 

  • April, March, Sept 

  • Number of people on listserv (1,000) 

  • Number of unique contributors (200) 

  • Number of people who contributed 30+ times (10)  

  • Hot topics = 12+ messages for 1 thread 

Old Business 

Update on By-laws vote 

  • We voted in Fall 2020.  

  • All changes were approved.  

  • Website has been updated. 

Member at Large special election  

  • RaLynn McGuire was elected. 

ATHEN Listserv/website 

  • It’s time to re-consider our listserv and website’s functionality.  

  • We started research in Fall 2020 but have come to some roadblocks.  

  • We are looking for volunteers to help us. 

New Business 

Teresa Haven Scholarship 

  • $1000 scholarship to a student with a disability 

  • Process including nomination by ATHEN member 

  • Open nominations in March 

  • Review applications in April 

  • Announce recipient in May 

  • How much contact are members having with students nowadays? 

    • Responses:

    • I have lots of contact, but it’s all virtual. 

    • Mostly email contact…not as much as in a face-to-face environment.  

    • I have very minimal contact with students anymore. 

    • I have lots of contact but also all virtual. 

    • I meet with students on Zoom and train them on alternate format[s]. 

    • Yes, I am in close contact with many students, and have multiple students who I Zoom with weekly or bi-weekly 

    • I have good contact, some virtual and some face-to-face. 

  • Should the Executive Council put out a call for scholarship applicants? 

    • Responses:

    • I say let’s do it 

    • That sounds good to me 

    • I do 🙂 

    • The students I know would definitely benefit from the scholarship. Some of them have fewer financial resources than before 

    • Yes, what Christa said. 

  • We are looking for volunteers to help us. 

Discuss Knowledge Sharing of Software Accessibility 

  • Pervasive Issue: Accessibility of Software 

  • Knowing the accessibility of a specific tool, software, app 

  • Understanding the process used to evaluate it 

  • Trusting the expertise of the persons testing 

  • Identifying how recent the testing was done 

  • Understanding the end user perspective 

  • 1 person vs. a community 

  • Type of adaptive technology 

  • What Is (Potentially Working) 

  • Putting out a call on the listserv 

  • What makes you trust someone’s competence in software accessibility testing? 

    • Responses:

    • Looking at their methodologies, what they tested, and how they tested. 

    • Using terminology correctly—not mixing up screen reader vs. text-to-speech. 

    • Testing it myself, having a student test it. 

    • Methodology is as important as competency. 

    • Whether they have completed one of the software testing training programs like Trusted Tester, IAAP Web Accessibility Specialist certification. 

    • I have a contract worker who is a JAWS specialist who will do manually testing with me. 

    • Are they an end user? 

    • Not using screen reader as sole base for testing accessibility 

    • If they identify as a JAWS user, etc. 

    • Methodology. Manual, automated, or a combination of both 

    • Also, knowing exactly what was tested. 

    • Naming the tools for testing specifically. 

    • Connecting any findings to WCAG

    • Focusing on functional accessibility more than technical/checklist approach. 

    • Yes. And which automated tools. 

    • What version of AT was used—most recent vs. older version. 

  • What makes one competent and qualified to share information about accessibility testing? 

    • Responses:

    • Being an end user of AT does not automatically qualify them as a competent accessibility evaluator. 

    • Agree with above.

    • Training programs mentioned previously…Trusted Tester, IAAP…agree with Dan. 

    • LOL! You’re assuming we HAVE an IT accessibility person. 

    • Being disabled also doesn’t automatically make someone an expert either, and certainly not in all AT. 

    • Competency equals expertise and experience. You need both because much of accessibility testing is subjective. 

    • Depends on the level of use of AT, my contract specialist is JAWS certified. 

    • I think experience in accessibility testing is ultimately important. 

    • Experience AS a tester and history of collaboration with other testers. 

    • I often get called on to test because I have both RESNA IAAP, and over 30 years in AT. 

    • My preference is to compare feedback to make a decision. I like having both the opinion from a trained tester as well as an end-user. Some testing is based on how the tool is intended to be used rather than how a user actually behaves. 

    • Member verbally added when something is a bug vs accessibility issue. Certain level of competence with tech. 

    • Member verbally added- having more than 1 expert involved is useful. 

    • Take it with a grain of salt and LOTS of perspectives and discussion. 

    • And having expert user and non expert user… 

    • Member verbally added correlations between UX and accessibility testing. How many people need to test it/be consulted. 

    • We need to solve the problem of how to collaborate. Having all of us testing individually is extremely inefficient. And as a group, we can leverage our collective buying power to put more pressure on vendors to address accessibility issues.

    • Member added to that conversation and shared that they’ve been trying to get web designers involved. Testers from disparate areas and backgrounds are coming up with different answers, despite using the same testing methodologies and tools.

    • We have a team on campus that reviews purchases of “high risk” ICT products. We are inundated with requests, and in order to keep up with the requests (so purchases can be done in a timely manner) our testing isn’t necessarily as in-depth as I would like to see. We are manually testing, meeting with vendors for accessibility demonstrations, and working with them as best as we can to drive them to create a more accessible product. But honestly, recently, we are going straight to our alternate access plans because products have (in some cases) severe accessibility conformance issues. 

    • EEAAPs are becoming a norm. 

  • How many of you respond directly to the person and not the listserv? 

    • Responses:

    • I typically respond to listserv always… 

    • I respond to the listserve. 

    • I usually respond personally. 

    • Member, I second this. 

    • I respond to the person not the listserve.

    • Member, we are in the same boat at our institution. 

    • I rarely have answers, just questions. I love when people respond to the group though because other people ask questions I want to know the answers to. 

    • I usually respond to the person. This is because of some legal concerns from campus lawyers. 

    • Digest mode can help with a busy listserv, but it makes it harder to respond to individual topics. 

    • Same here—I learn a lot from other folks’ questions. 

    • Would Anonymous questions and answers be an option? It’s one of the things I love about AHEAD.  

    • Member, that’s why I set up ONE Gmail account for all my listserv.

    • Yes, we scour the listserv for the answers.

    • Member, that is such a good idea, why didn’t I think of that sooner. 

    • I think a lot of us need training on list serve etiquette. I know I do. 

    • I also use digest mode 

    • The ATHEN list is not a Listserv. It’s a Mailman list—ListServ is a competing product. 

    • Member, thank you! 

    • It’s the “Xerox” of email lists. 

    • I struggle with looking at the archives. I can’t say that I do it because I never remember how to do that. 

  • How many of you ask to schedule or offer to schedule a meeting? 

    • Responses:

    • I prefer written communication, because I can refer back to it over and over 

    • I probably have offered to chat on the phone.

    • Agreed 

    • Agreed! 

    • I prefer email over the phone. Phone is my least favorite mode of communicating… 

    • At the bottom of EVERY message from the ATHEN list is a link to a web page that gives access to archives and other list functionality. 

    • I like written responses to my question for reference, but I am willing to get on calls to answer questions. 

    • I typically email info and offer to phone if needed. 

  • Does this meet your needs? 

    • Responses:

    • If I get a list response, it’s another “piece of the puzzle” to my question(s). 

    • I struggle when to use ATHEN or ITACCESS. 

    • tell me more about the IT list on Educause please 

    • https://www.educause.edu/community/it-accessibility-community-group 

    • thanks. I struggle with when to use ATHEN and when to use ALTMEDIA lists. I frequently duplicate on both forums 

    • FYI, there are about 1200 people on the EDUCAUSE listserv. You don’t need to be an EDUCAUSE member. And the WebAim list is very similar. 

    • Member is adding that using only the listserv is likely not to meet all needs, but is a great place to start and is helpful info. 

  • Doing the testing yourself 

  • Do you end up doing any testing yourself? Do you have the tools you need to do testing? If so, what does that look like? 

    • Responses

    • Yes, ANDI and manual testing. Testing subset of Trusted Tester tests. 

    • I test myself. I use a combination of automated, manual and functional testing. The approach is based on the impact of the product. Mission critical purchases are fully tested, low impact purchases not so much. This is 90% of my job. 

    • I do my own testing. I use aXe, keyboard, Voiceover, JAWS, and multiple browsers. I go between Mac, Windows, iOS, and Android. 

    • Member added they are starting to test MS Teams for accessibility. 

    • I conduct all documentation reviews and then also do functional testing on ICT with a higher expected user impact. I use automated tools and multiple screen readers/browsers. 

    • The use of the product affects how deep of a dive I complete. 

    • I came to higher ed from an accessibility consulting company, so I am partial to the methodology I learned there but have added to my toolset since leaving. Tools include JAWS, Chrome, NVDA, CCA, AMP, Access Assistant, Accessibility Insights, various favelets… Sometimes you have to try multiple tools to figure out what issues are present and the causes for them. 

    • I do also use bookmarklets. If I have questions, I do have native screen reader users complete some testing as well. 

    • The importance of testing top tasks is so important. For more on top tasks, see the work of Gerry McGovern. 

    • Member verbally added their testing process is as follows: 

      • Come up with list of functional tasks. 

      • Do a technical testing by using automated testing tool (i.e. axe). 

      • Do functional testing with keyboard only (don’t jump to using a screen reader). 

      • Use a screen reader to verify findings. 

      • Member adding as #5: Creating a priority of high-impact and show stoppers. 

    • Member, this is a fantastic point. I should have clarified that I use a screen reader to validate errors I’ve identified via other means. 

    • I agree with Member; I try to use JAWS and VoiceOver to verify what I have found through aXe, or believe to be an issue from keyboard evaluations. 

    • The permutations of operating systems multiplied by browser multiplied by assistive technology is so challenging. I’m always amazed by the number of issues that are specific to one browser or screen reader. 

    • It can go both ways—the screen reader can be used to validate something you see in the code, or it can be the trigger for code digging if you hear something come through that seems off. 

    • Member, I agree—it’s difficulty to test all of the variations. 

    • Yes, he is a contract worker. 

    • We are looking to outsource accessibility testing, but costs are a real issue. 

    • Variation on the “Are you paying vendors” question… How many of you REQUIRE vendors to pay a vendor to test their product? i.e., Is it a requirement in your purchasing procedures? 

    • I do not pay outside vendors. I have a student worker and co-worker that are native screen reader users. I also have three other screen reader users that contribute to products that they use for their positions at Institution. 

    • My university used a vendor until I came on, but I believe we will retain some relationship with a vendor for task flow testing or expertise needed from real users with disabilities. 

    • My contract worker works directly with me and when we are looking at an ePub for example, I request that he get access as well. If that isn’t possible, he tandems using JAWS in to my screen and reviews the materials to tell me if as a signed screen reader user, my findings are accurate and also finds things I may have missed. He’s been blind since birth, and also has an AS in computer science so he knows more about missing ARIA etc. 

    • Member adds they contract with 3rd parties for big, university-wide things like (website re-builds or database) but she still does internal functional testing. Most procurements evaluation are done in-house. 

    • All of my testing is in-house – as many methods as I can manage under time constraints 🙂 

    • We need to keep asking why customers are bearing the main share of identifying and fixing accessibility problems of the products we’re paying for. 

    • We are starting to require vendors to use a third party for testing, but we are concerned that many vendors will refuse to bid. It is already too difficult to business with State.