Accessibility & Inclusion in L&D: Perspectives

#ShowYourWork

In preparing for today's panel on Accessibility & Inclusion in L&D as part of The Learning Guild online conference "The Instructional Designer: From Analysis to Evaluation" I contacted the other panelists to get a sense of their perspectives on the topic and to look for areas for possible questions for the event. Their responses seemed worth sharing and are offered here with their permission.

Ariana Saunders: My role on the panel is to highlight inclusive approaches during the design and facilitation phases of training. In my experience, when using an inclusive approach and involving potential learners or folks who are in similar roles, the training is more engaging and accessible and honors diversity. I came into the L&D world via a program evaluation and quality improvement lens in the non-profit sector (IDD, child welfare, and now homeless services/supportive housing). As you may know, everyone's favorite solution to an opportunity for improvement is: training! And since I didn't always have the subject matter expertise or experience in some of the skills that needed improvement, it meant heavily relying on SMEs to help create the content as well as working with leadership to address what the actual learning goals are (which often led to conversations about how training can't fix supervisory or leadership challenges, but that's a whole different story/tangent). I focus more on…making the design and content of our courses representative of our audience both visually and linguistically (i.e. focus on person-centered and plain language).

I’d love for folks to walk away knowing some of the benefits of focusing on accessibility and inclusion. Fighting the “do we have to?” mentality with innovative solutions and clear outcomes (e.g., learners will be more engaged, retain more, be able to readily apply what they learn, and want to come back!). In my current role, much of the field is focusing on prioritizing lived experience over traditional education or degrees, so we are also very focused on accessibility from a language, timing/schedule, and technology angle (so many try to join on their phone while in the field).

Jean Marripodi: My expertise in this area is dealing with literacy issues around ESL learners and those with reading challenges. Making it accessible means providing alternatives and scaffolding to help understanding.

Some steps are easy: providing closed captioning, a glossary, transcriptions during presentations and virtual meetings, and tools that read the text out loud that are built right into the software.  Most people think of the complexity of accessibility and the back-end steps of alt-tags and focus order. There are some things that we can institute into our practice that make things easier for everyone. 

Nick Tillem: “Accessibility extends beyond traditional disability considerations, acknowledging the diverse challenges learners may face, such as language barriers. Another accessibility barrier that isn't only disability is infrastructure equity. People who live in rural areas may not have the same access to high-speed internet, which could impact downloading and virtual training events. Accessibility isn't only disability but impacts everyone.

When it comes to accessibility, I tend to emphasize personal perception on disability. It's crucial to recognize that individuals may experience situational, temporary, or permanent disabilities.

For example:

Permanent: Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Temporary: Ear infection

Situational: Working at home with a loud environment due to pets or kid

Understanding and addressing these diverse needs is key to creating truly inclusive learning experiences.

Additionally, It's fascinating how our personal scripts, whether influenced by a medical or cultural model of disability, shape our approach to overcoming barriers. By identifying and alleviating these barriers, we not only support those with disabilities but create an environment that benefits everyone.

For example, most people have a medical model of disability which focuses on "fixing" people. Others may have a cultural model of disability, which celebrates individuals who believe it is just part of their culture, think Deaf people who use American Sign Language. 

In my professional life, our team focuses on practical solutions within our sphere of influence, such as developing learning experiences, training resources, or web-based training. It aligns with our belief that making incremental changes can collectively contribute to a more accessible learning environment.

What I tell people is using basic models of learning design, you support accessibility. By starting with what barriers our learners are encountering, bridges the gaps that we overlook when we design without accessibility. If teams think they are perfect, or cannot find barriers, I always suggest three things:

1. Design a personal accessibility statement that invites users to reach out if they have trouble accessing content

2. Survey your learners

3. Invite users on your board of trustees to ask what barriers they are encountering.

Christine Selinger: My own background in accessibility is of both a personal and professional nature. I identify as a disabled person (specifically using identity-first language). My professional background is in adult education. I started my career as an ID 13 years ago for a non-profit in Toronto, Ontario, Canada which developed learning products for people with mobility disabilities. We focused heavily on ensuring our content was accessible for clients who could not use a traditional mouse or keyboard, and expanded from there. Nearly 8 years later, I went on to be the Director of Education and Events for the Abilities Expo, a trade show for people with all disabilities that operates in 8 American cities and, at the time, 1 Canadian city. In this, my focus shifted to physical accessibility of live educational initiatives (from the built environment to captioning to sign language interpretation to sound pollution and onward). When the pandemic hit in 2020, we moved our shows to a digital space, and had the challenge of meeting our attendees' needs in a virtual environment. We made it work, but it certainly highlighted the many challenges we have in ensuring our online spaces of learning are accessible! I’ve been back in an ID role since 2021, creating online learning products for Canadian Blood Services and helping them to create a more digitally inclusive space, whilst also consulting on accessibility for a variety of corporations here in Canada under my own name.

My focus lately has been on ensuring that our spaces are socially accessible, meaning I pay close attention to language and visual representation of disability. The focus of my research has been how our representation of disability either upholds or dismantles stereotypes and stigma about disability. In terms of what that looks like in eLearning, it’s making sure that the images and words we use are inclusive of disability. Often when we look for disabled people in stock imagery, for example, you get nondisabled models sitting in hospital-type wheelchairs and looking sad. We also have common phrases which heavily rely on disability stigma such as “lame” or “paralyzed” (outside of describing someone as paralyzed), and other phrases which co-opt disability identities in a harmful way, such as “turn a blind eye” or “tone-deaf”. None of that portrays a particularly positive image of what it means to be disabled. If I had a take-away for this session, based on what you outlined, it would be to critically examine how and where disabled people or disabled identities are used in our courses.  

I try to highlight how the legal requirements should be the bare minimum. True accessibility is much more than that and serves a wider purpose. Accessibility makes everything more accessible for everyone, regardless of whether they identify as disabled or not (the curb cut effect!).

Jane Bozarth:   My own interest in/perspective on accessibility: My first 10 years in L&D were spent in the training department of a large state-run hospital for developmentally disabled adults. The view of accessibility there was a matter of making the world more livable for our clients according to their abilities and conditions rather than prescribing one-size-fits-all solutions. I took this with me when eLearning came along and, while I paid attention to technical standards I also tried to offer alternatives and choices as much as I could: font size that could be adjusted regardless of the “rule”, closed captioning that could be turned off, audio narration that could be turned on, printable material where that made sense, etc. Many people have low vision; many of us wear corrective lenses; many of us choose to turn captions on when we watch TV. The goal, for me, is to consider what will make the learning experience better for anyone who encounters it. I often think of this when I check into a hotel and take my wheeled luggage up a ramp that wasn’t built for me but makes my day easier. Accessible and inclusive for everyone. Make sense?  Another concern of mine, also from those hospital days, is that so much L&D work assumes everyone has a college degree and sits at a desk. We had housekeepers, groundskeepers, and food service workers who not only did not work at desks but also often had some challenges with literacy. This is sometimes due to learning disabilities or weak education, but also – increasingly- -due to workers whose first language is not that of the employer. I feel we should be paying more attention to that.