IHE Accessibility in OER Implementation Guide
Overview
This is the Implementation Guide developed by faculty at York Technical College.
May 11 - Section One: Landscape Analysis for Accessibility in OER in Local Context (Work on during May 11th implementation)
In this section, you and your team will engage in a Landscape Analysis to uncover key structures and supports that can guide your work to support Accessibility in OER. We exnourage to explore some of the questions from each category. You may or may not answer all of these questions, but this is an offering. We ask that you complete Parts One, Two and Six.
Part One: Initial Thoughts
What is your team's initial goal for this series?
Our main goal is to investigate methods of selecting and implementing OER on a wider scale. We would also like strategies to incorporate more levels of multiple means of action and expression into course assignments and assessments across various divisions.
Part Two: Introductory probing questions:
What does accessibility look like in our organization? How do we measure accessibility?
Accessibility includes course navigation, an accessible and inclusive environment, access to resources and materials, and ADA/WCAG compliance. We measure accessibility through a variety of tools, such as Ally, as well as manual accessibility reviews. Departments set accessibility goals, and individual faculty members set accessibility goals for the courses they teach.What does OER look like in our organization? How do we measure access to OER?
- Some departments/courses at the college use OER materials (i.e. textbooks, lab resources, supplemental materials), but the process of selection and implementation is inconsistent. Some departments have no experience with OER. In some courses, OER is embedded into our LMS through HTML, and in some cases it is linked in, so navigation also differs. For the courses that implement it within the LMS, it is more accessible and able to be read through screen readers. However, cases in which it is linked in may be less accessible to learners.
Part Three: Clarifying questions for accessibility:
What is the organizational structure that supports accessibility?
The ITE (Institute for Teaching Excellence) has been the driving force for most of our Accessibility Efforts.
Who generates most of the accessibility structures/conversation in our organization?
While faculty are responsibile for ensuring the accessibility of their learning resources, Tthe ITE (Institute for Teaching Excellence) has been the driving force for most of our Accessibility Efforts.
Where do most educators get support with accessibility?
There are plentiful resources and live help through the ITE.
What content areas might have the largest gaps in access to accessibility?
This is an area that we will need to investigate, although I suspect our technical programs have the biggest gaps.
Part Four: Clarifying questions for OER:
What is our organizational structure that supports curricular resources?
This occurs at the departmental level, often in collaboration with the ITE.
What is our organizational structure that supports OER?
There is no existing structure. This is part of our goal.
Who generates most of the curricular resources in our organization?
Faculy generate their own curricular resources, often in collaboration with the ITE or publisher partners.
Where do most educators get support with curricular resources?
This comes from publishers, the ITE, and a rich Professional Development program.
What content areas might have the largest gaps in access to curricular resources/OER?
This is an area that we will need to investigate, although I suspect our technical programs have the biggest gaps.
Part Five: Clarifying questions for Faculty learning and engagement:
What Professional Learning (PL) structures have the best participation rates for our educators?
We've seen mixed success in participation with face to face workshops, on-demand resources, and drop-in help sessions. It may vary more with the time that it is offered than the format itself.
What PL structures have the best "production" rates for our educators?
Workshops that focus on creating a deliverable are the best production value.
What incentive do we have to offer people for participating in learning and engagement?
There is currently no incentive structure for participating in learning and engagement, although we do have a minimum number of professional development hours that must be met each year.
Who are the educators that would be most creative with accessibility and OER?
This is something that we will need to investigate - certainly this team, as champions of Accessibility and OER, would be on the list, but we have creative and talented people across the campus.
Who are the educators that would benefit the most from accessibility and OER?
We think all educators could benefit, but the benefit to students is the driving force.
Part Six: Final Probing questions:
What is our current goal for Accessibility in OER and why is that our goal?
- Our main goal is to investigate methods of selecting and implementing OER on a wider scale. We would also like strategies to incorporate more levels of multiple means of action and expression into course assignments and assessments across various divisions. These are our goals because we lack consistency in OER implementation and wide-scale adoption of multiple means of action and expression.
Who have we not yet included while thinking about this work?
- We had not thought about including students in our conversation about OER and accessibility and getting their feedback and input during the process as well as after implementation.
What barriers remain when considering this work?
- One barrier we face is buy-in from all areas of the College. Some areas are reliant upon third-party courseware that performs auto-grading. Also, all areas need to be focused on improving the accessibility of courses and course materials for students, and even though many strides have been made in this area, there are still some departments less open than others. Some faculty members still question the qulaity of OER. Time constraints are also an issue for faculty across the College.
What would genuine change look like for our organization for this work?
- Implementation of a formal course materials review and adoption process. Consistent administrative support for accessible alternatives, content, resources, and environments. Enforcement of foundational accessibility standards in all courses. Facilitation of faculty inquiry groups to create and utilize multiple means of action and expression on key assignments and assessments in courses from various departments.
Section Two: Team Focus (Finish before May 25th to share during Implementation Session Two)
Identifying and Describing a Problem of Practice
The following questions should help your team ensure that you are focusing your collaboration.
What is your Team’s specific goal for this series? You may consider using AEM Quality Indicators for Creating Accessible Materials to help add to or narrow your work.
Our main goal is to investigate methods of selecting and implementing OER on a wider scale. We would also like strategies to incorporate more levels of multiple means of action and expression into course assignments and assessments across various divisions.
- What other partners might support this work?
- We believe that this would work be supported by the Institute for Teaching Excellence (ITE), the Special Resource Office, academic leadership, and individual department units.
What is your desired timeframe for this work?
We would like to spend the next year gathering feedback from the students, faculty and leadership of the college about what this kind of structure should look like and develop a plan from there.
How will you include diverse voices and experiences in this work?
We will ensure that we include students and faculty from all areas of the college to provide feedback and contribute to the vision.
Please create a Focus Question that explains your goal and provides specific topics that you would like feedback on. This is what you will share in your breakout groups for feedback.
How do we gain buy in for college-wide implementation of such an initiative?
(Save for during May 25th's session.) What feedback did you receive from another team during the May 25th Implementation Session?
We received the following feeback:
We need to more clearly define what "college wide implementation" means
We should use the cost savings benefit for students to promote buy in
Identify champions of the initiative and have them drum up support in different areas
Get impact statements from students that have used OER
In the plan we should require that a department has made a good faith effort at identifying OER resources before allowing them to require a more costly textbook.
Section Three: Team Work Time and Next Steps (Complete by the end of Implementation Session Three)
Sharing and Next Steps
What was your redefined goal for this series?
Our main goal is to develop a structure for selecting and implementing OER across more disciplines at our college. We would also like strategies to incorporate more levels of multiple means of action and expression into course assignments and assessments across various divisions.
What does your team want to celebrate?
We've learned some great new tools and resources to help our teams further their individual work, and we hope to be able to make a wider impact at a later date.
What did your team accomplish? If you have links to resources, please include them here.
We've generated great ideas and started working on an action plan. However our goal involves many additional stakeholders and will need to be vetted by some levels of administration before we can begin implementation.
What are your team’s next steps?
We'll involve academic leadership in discussions about our ideas.