Hi everyone, and welcome

to this episode that is featuring the TCS Education System.

This webinar as you guys all know is about driving

inclusion with key partner institutions

and solving shared challenges.

I have the luck

today to be hosting

two people that I actually really admire,

and both of them I have known since last year.

I have learned from

both of them, and I think that it will be

a very interesting webinar for every

one of you, as well as for the people that

will receive the recording afterwards.

We have Scott Ready who is

the Accessibility Evangelist of Verbit here.

But he's also an accessibility evangelist in the market.

He's someone that has a voice that

represents the innovation of the market,

inclusion of the market,

and as well, he's

our Senior Customer Success Manager here at Verbit.

Then we have Lord Giddie,

Dr. Lord is

someone with a lot of experience in learning.

He's an experienced designer and

he is representing TCS Education System.

I will take it from here.

I will like Scott and Dr. Lord lead it.

Hopefully, it will be a great webinar.

Please everyone write their questions.

We will make sure to answer them at

the end of the webinar,

and we will try to answer as many questions as we can.

So please Scott go ahead and good luck.

Great. Thank you Jacques.

First of all, we wanted to share

some current information that has taken place.

If you'll advance the slide to the next slide.

Great. On November the 27th,

a decree was issued between

the National Association of the Deaf

and Harvard University.

This decree is really one of

the most prescriptive decrees that's been issued to date.

It identifies a wide range of digital environments

that must contain captioned content

and not only the fact that it's captioned,

but it also addresses captioning with accuracy.

So this is a monumental step forward for learners.

Many might say, "Well, we're not Harvard,"

and while this decree captures

the attention of a lot of people,

it wasn't based on the name of the institution

or the endowment that they receive,

but rather it's on creating

equitable learning experience for all.

I was once asked what I thought

the greatest hindrance to

digital access in education was.

My answer is, the underlying perception

that digital accessibility is optional.

This decree is one that brings us one step

closer to making sure it isn't optional.

Let's take a look at our agenda for this webinar

today and as Jacques had said,

all throughout this next hour

please submit your questions

through the Q&A or the chat sessions.

and at the end of the hour we'll be

able to address those.

But on today's agenda,

we're going to be addressing accessibility and

inclusion barriers in higher ed.

We're also going to talk about

the four higher education maturity model stages.

Next, we're going to talk about

crafting an inclusion plan.

You're going to be able to hear not

just how it could be done,

but you're going to actually hear the steps

as how it is being done

and garnering support and the necessary budgets,

how to execute and adjust the the plan,

and then learning also from

TCS educational system's relationships

with other key inclusion partners.

But then again, at the end questions and the answers.

So with that, let's talk a little

bit about accessibility and inclusion barriers.

We continue to focus on the inclusion efforts and how

key technology is enhancing

the engagement with content for all students,

not just those with identified learning needs.

So Lord, first of all,

let's go all the way back to

the inception of this initiative.

What were the motivators and initial challenges

to create TCS's inclusivity plan?

Thank you Scott. This was

quite a important topic as you mentioned.

I think for us, we

knew that there were

several issues that we needed to tackle.

TCS education system came into being in 2009,

and between 2009 and last year or so

we grew to about seven partner institutions,

and we also migrated

from different learning management systems.

So through that we knew that some of our courses,

they are not where they needed to be.

So we knew that some of the legacy courses through

the migration process had some design challenges.

In addition to that, we also knew that we needed

to look at design in an inclusive way.

So for the most part we were

focusing mostly on accommodation.

So a student would take

a course and then if there's an issue then the issue

would be addressed versus making sure that during

the design process that we are

taking the digital accessibility into consideration.

So they motivate us in terms

of why we started actually working on this.

It came from several factors.

Instructional design team knowing that there

are some issues that needed to solve.

But also from our students

from across our partner institutions where

they were asking questions

about how come I'm seeing this,

this is that, so in terms of students with

diverse abilities or students with disabilities.

Some of our partner institutions

were also asking questions,

meaning that they wanted to know, for example,

where do sources were going to come

from if we needed to do

a caption sorts or other types of remediation.

So we had a lot of issues

that were coming up that we needed to handle.

One of those issues was also a lack of

a digital accessibility policy,

So what we were working

with from the instructional design point of view was

that the expectation was that

the partner institutions would have

a digital accessibility strategy or plan.

But some of them didn't really have that in place,

so some things were falling into the cracks.

So that's one of the reasons why this became an issue.

So it was a number of things that were in play.

I think so many of us

that's on the webinar today and watching this

later can so relate with those issues and have

faced those exact same issues within our institutions,

and so I'm excited to hear

more from you as to how this is unfolding.

We're also seeing that more needs to be done like what

TCS is doing to assist the diverse

needs that you mentioned of the 21st century learners.

This includes captioning for

ESL English as a second language.

This also includes aging veterans,

multimodal learning and more.

So when we take a look at this,

it really encompasses a much larger,

broader perspective than just the students that have

self-identified as individuals with a disability.

When we take a look at

the four stages of a higher education maturity model,

universities are really wanting to move away from

the reactive state and really become much more proactive.

As this continues to grow,

institutions are realizing that

being reactive really creates

a very large challenge both fiscally

as well with staffing and the processes.

They're also realizing that it's not

an equitable experience for

the students to have to wait on

a remediation to take place in order for the students to

receive access to their content.

So we've designed a four stage higher

education maturity model that would be able to

help university leaders identify

the stages that the institution is in.

So let's take a look at

that maturity model and be able to

see how that maturity model is

helping institutions to progress through that.

So if we'll advance the slide to

the maturity model, there we go.

The four stages is starting with the far left

emerging that moves to applying the moves to

inclusion and into incorporating.

So when we talk about the beginning,

the emerging, the emerging stage is

really one that is very reactionary.

It is identifying students

that have been disclosed with a disability.

It's waiting for that student

to make a department typically,

the Office of Disability Services aware

that they're not able to engage with the content item.

The Department of Disability Services

then takes that item,

remediates that item, and provides that item

back to the student that made that request.

The next stage is applying.

This stage has a little more of

a proactive stance than the emerging stage,

but yet it's still relying on the student that has

disclosed a disability to be identified,

and then the institution is taking a look

at the courses that student is registered in,

going through that course and trying to make

that course more accessible

prior to the student starting.

But then the next stage in fusing,

is really taking a big change and really moving away from

relying on that student that identifies

themselves as a student with a disability,

and really taking a look at courses and programs and how

can we go about creating

those courses and programs to be more inclusive,

realizing that the steps that are taken in the

emerging and applying really benefit all students.

So for example, if I'm to use captioning.

Having a caption video and captioning that video and then

providing a link to that caption video

only to the student that made that request,

is denying access to all the rest of

the students in that class

that could benefit from that video.

Then in fusing stage is really providing

that access to all the students.

Then when we talk about the incorporating stage,

the incorporating stage is really a stage

where we're taking a look at

not just the courses or the classroom environment,

but we're taking a look at the entire student life cycle.

Students engage in a lot more than just their course,

and the student's experience at any institution

oftentimes is shaped by

those extra curricular activities.

Is a student able to engage in

those activities in an equitable way?

Are they able to go to sporting events?

Are they able to go to performances?

Are they able to engage in

all the various student activities that

take place on campus in

an equitable way that

helps to shape their experience

of being at that institution?

Those institutions that are doing

that on a broad scale throughout

the institution are going to be

those institutions that are in the incorporating stage.

There's been a lot of research that has

already been done throughout

various organizations that demonstrate

how creating inclusion benefits all students.

Some of the universities that have adopted

assistive technologies have created

those inclusive environments,

and really are addressing more

of the personalized learning.

So this inclusive approach really is

addressed and called Universal Design for Learning,

and there's been a lot of research out there if you

want further information about

Universal Design for Learning,

we have a webinar that we did with Cast,

and if you go back into archives,

we have a link there

to that webinar if you'd like to learn more about that.

So let's get to the topic here of Crafting

an Inclusion Plan and

Garnering Support and Necessary Budgets.

When we talk about that,

one of the first things that we need to talk about is,

how did you Lord go

about the change management that needed to take

place in order to gain

the needed buy-in and to ultimately succeed?

Yeah, it's still an ongoing process,

but I think we also were able to communicate very

clearly that with our partners,

that if we looked at

digital accessibility from the strategic point of view,

in that if we are

all putting our resources together for example,

that would end up saving more money.

Investors association where one institution was using

a different captioning system

and then another university was using a different one.

So we suggested to our partners that we

needed to come up with a think tank so to speak.

So we've selected some leaders from across the system,

to come help us in terms

of negotiating some of the things that we needed to be

able to do to achieve digital accessibility.

But even before that,

some of our partners from one of

our largest institution TCSPP,

had already put a digital accessibility

to one of the areas that they needed to focus there.

So it became a lot easier for us to be able to have

our key partners also moving towards that goal.

So in terms of who was involved

or who's involved in that process,

we knew that obviously instructional designers have to be

one of the key stakeholders

because they design all of

our online and blended courses.

We also knew that in order for

instructional designers to be able

to stay on target and do what they need to do,

that we needed to have leadership from academic affairs.

So particularly from TCSPP which is

our largest online program,

and they were very instrumental

and they continue to be instrumental in

terms of coming up with

not just ideas for what needs to happen but also putting

forth the resources that are

needed for us to be able to achieve goals.

At the system level,

because I work for the system,

we also needed to make sure that other partners

including IT because they help us with

a lot of some of the technical aspects.

We also wanted to make sure that we're including HR.

Initially, the idea was to

not just simply focus on students,

but to forecast broadly on

the entire organization, meaning that,

whoever interacts with our platforms, with our website,

that we were able to fully utilize

these systems and there

were challenges of course in that,

in some cases there's still that push back that, "Okay,

this is my area, why are you coming in from

instructional design and then

saying we need to develop a new policy."

So those were some of the things that we needed to be

able to do it but having

those partnerships was very helpful.

That's excellent. I hear you say

that there's a greater benefit if

we look at the economies of

scale by being able to get out of our silos

and really look at it from a holistic perspective.

Being able to really come together

and create a benefit for all of us

within the organization rather than each department or

each entity of the organization doing their own approach.

So I greatly appreciate that and that's one of

the things that I too really stress is that,

when you look at creating that accessibility plan,

that initiative for inclusion,

look at it holistically.

Don't look at it just from within

a very limited scope and you'll be able

to realize that it really takes

far less effort to do it holistically.

So how did you go about

the change management that needed take place,

but then be able to

really go and overcome those challenges like you said

about individuals not wanting

you to step into their territory

or to prevent you from crossing over into their areas?

Because oftentimes, unfortunately, in higher ed,

there's a feeling of this is our area,

and we will do it this way,

and in creating that ultimate change management

it's being able to really get

that buy-in across different departments.

Yeah, it's really an ongoing process

but for the most part we

strongly emphasize the need to see it as a stakeholder,

a couple of projects that we needed to

have multiple stakeholders present.

So open communication is important,

because we had to be transparent in that,

not only is this the right thing

to do but there are also some legal issues at hand.

So if we don't deal with this now,

down the line who knows,

something might come up where we are

leaving behind a lot of our end users.

So that was also initiated,

we needed to emphasize it,

but for the most part change management

is still an ongoing process.

We made sure that we

talked about going beyond accommodation but

looking at providing ongoing support and

training for the instructional design team as well

as for our other members

of the community including instructors

and those who design our courses.

So even as we speak,

we are still putting other elements in

place to help with managing that cultural shift.

So we are putting in place different types of trainings.

We are putting in place

websites that we are creating

specifically designed for digital accessibility,

but it's not a perfect plan

and it's not a linear process,

we have to sometimes go back

and fill in some of the the cracks.

But for the most part we see some change,

because just as an example,

a few months ago one of the programs said, "Hey,

we want to patch in this third party application,

could you look into it and see if it's accessible?"

They were speaking in terms of that, they said,

"Hey, we've seen the V path as an example

but we want to go further than that,"

and I thought that was really

promising because a few years

back nobody was talking about that.

But now we're seeing that type change.

Isn't that exciting when you do

see that change take place and

you start seeing the results of that change management,

and you're exactly right,

it's not a linear approach.

Oftentimes, if you look at

various proposals of change management

they put it in a very linear approach and it's not,

it's a very cyclical approach and

you capitalize on those winds like you just

mentioned about recognizing the need to go beyond

the V path and then continue to build on those wins.

One thing that the institutions keep telling me is

that it is critical, absolutely critical,

that they have the academic leadership sponsorship

in order to make this happen because without

that leadership sponsorship and support

then it's next to impossible.

Definitely, yes.

So Lord, with every initiative there is a cost,

and how was the budget and

the time allocation developed for this initiative?

Budgets is a tough one.

it's a tough one because we're also a system,

and we're a system that encourages

our partners to have ownership.

So for the most part our current budget model

such that our partners were handling

disability services and accommodations.

TCS System handles some of the technical parts,

for example, the LNS

and other IT related types of things.

So we needed to find a balance in terms

of if we said, "Hey,

we need to invest in a captioning system."

So the question then became

whose budget is going to accommodate that?

So we needed to make sure

that we can be able to come up with a plan

that would work for the system as well as for the schools.

But I think one of the other things that we started to do

was to be pragmatic and to prioritize.

We identified high impact types of projects or

if there was something that needed to be done

because we had a lot of people who were relying on that,

either being students or faculty members.

We would say this was something

that is being used across the board,

and if it's inaccessible,

it's going to affect everybody

or a large amount of people.

Therefore, we need to find a way to address that.

So one of the things that I thought for

us made it a lot easier was that we

also recognized the need to have a champion,

a [inaudible] champion, at the system,

so that individual can then speak

to these issues consistently,

and to be able to echo the need for a budget.

So we are still working on that.

We have seen some improvement in terms of

specific things that we had suggested needed to be done.

So in terms of creating

the whole that I have now as well

as other supporting activities

that will help manage digital accessibility,

but it's not a one-size

fits all in terms of how you approach the budget.

Yeah. You're exactly right.

I've seen the same thing depending

on if it's centralized,

decentralized, combination of centralized decentralized.

There's just so many variables that come into play

when you look at the budget process,

and as you said, Lord,

it's not a one-size fits all.

It really depends.

So helping to personalize and craft

that budget within a system level,

but then at each individual institution

to best accomplish that.

Now that we've covered

the preliminary activities that really

led up to the plan, Lord,

would you now please take us through the components

that you and your team have

put together as the initial plan.

One of the things that we did,

as I mentioned earlier, we needed to prioritize.

Obviously, with one of our main partners,

the Chicago School of Professional Psychology,

we decided to focus on that school.

TCSPP has about 5,600 students,

not all of them are taking

online courses but the online programs is

one of our fastest growing program.

So in terms of our digital accessibility plan,

we knew that we couldn't do everything at once.

So what we recommended was that we would first do

remediation alongside with the ongoing projects

because we have a team of

about 80 professional designers.

So phase 1, we

needed to make sure that

our courses were easy to navigate,

that the course structure supported that navigation,

that content was easy to read,

that we're following some of

the accessible design principles.

So an example being,

if you are including images,

you are including other texts.

But we also recognize that we needed to

also start looking at other issues such as multimedia.

So we are using a lot of videos,

a lot of audio, a lot

of lectures in a lot of our courses.

So we recognize that that's going to

take more resources and more time.

So that was our phase 2

because we needed to also get input from

our stakeholders in academic affairs and

their supporting services because we knew that some

of those older videos

we would have to reach back and say,

"Hey, this video looks a little old,

should we then create a new one?"

Instead of saying we are going

to put captions on that video.

So we knew that was going to be a negotiated type

of thing and we needed to put resources in place.

So that's our phase 2.

Our phase 3, we decided that then we will

focus on a combination of phase 1 and phase 2,

but phase 3 would also emphasize content accessibility.

So making sure that when you're putting

in content in our learning management system,

that that content is accessible.

So PowerPoints, PDFs, Microsoft Word documents,

so those documents that are used to facilitate learning.

So because those don't come from instructional designer,

they come from our subject matter

experts around [inaudible].

So we knew that obviously

that will also require us

going back and forth and saying "Hey,

now that you said you wanted

your students to use this website."

When we look at this website as

an example we realized that it's not accessible,

so we need to find a different tool.

So those are the three phases that we

identified for remediation but in

addition to the remediation,

we also understood the need for us to

also take a look at

the new courses as we designed new courses.

To make sure that we're

not going to have to go back remediate,

so that means we start at first with

some very core principles for accessible design.

Making sure that our courses meet industry standards,

that if you are putting in a video,

that video has the necessary support

in terms of captions,

making sure that if you're putting anything

that will hinder students from accessing that,

that you are providing an alternative format for them.

So those two things are going on at once,

the remediation as well as the looking forward.

We are putting in place,

as I mentioned earlier,

a training and support

for the instructional designers as well

as for other folks

who are also involved in quality development process.

We are also designing and developing other tools

that are stand-alone tools such

as a website dedicated for digital accessibility.

Where we'd also be able to

put some toolboxes and tools for

all of our users to be able to go

there and utilize those things.

So the three phases that I mentioned earlier,

they are not to be taken as linear.

So we do go back and forth,

but we want to make sure that we have

a cohesive plan, that,

as I mentioned, we are purchasing

the necessary tools and this

is where the budget becomes an issue.

Where as we identified need

for our courses to meet compliance,

and to go beyond compliance.

To be user friendly,

that you would need to have the tools and

resources for not just the professional designers

but for faculty when they're developing,

as an example, their videos and lectures.

So that is something that's an ongoing effort and

we hope that we can be able to look

back in a couple of years and say "Well,

we have all of the strategies in place and now we are

more focused on educating rather than

focusing on filling the holes."

It's not one of those things that you

just do once and then it's done.

You have to keep going back and forth.

That's excellent and I'm a huge advocate of

going to the physical accessibility environment and

I'm old enough to remember when municipalities had to get

concrete saws out and cut

the curbs out to create curb cuts.

But you don't see them cutting curb cuts out anymore.

They're [inaudible] in the environment

and when a sidewalk in a street is put in,

they are put in from the initial design.

So in the digital environment,

we're still giving our curb cut

concrete saws out and cutting out those curbs

and remediating it and

making fixes to the content that's already out there.

But like you said Lord,

hopefully here in the next couple of years,

we'll be past that phase and we can focus on

just the content that's being created.

I do have a follow-up question.

How much time did you allocate on each of those phases?

Because I think one of the questions that

many institutions have is,

do I have to do it all this year?

Or can I do this over a period of time?

What recommendation would you have as to

your approach that you've been

able to create regarding time-frame?

Yes. For phase one,

my recommendation for our team was

to dedicate about one to two years,

two years being more ideal.

Because we knew that we needed to- for example,

when we started we had

about 200 courses that we needed to

go into for that particular term.

So what we decided to do at each term,

before the term starts,

we'd go into the courses that were to be

offered at that particular term and remediate.

So we knew that we needed to set

specific time for that to be fulfilled and to be done.

We had one to two years for phase one and

then another year for phase two,

and then by year three we wanted to make sure that all of

those courses were remediated with phases 1,

2 and 3 but it depends on the size of your University or

because we are a system and we have

different universities that we

work with but primarily right now,

a lot of our efforts

are for the Chicago School of Professional Psychology,

but we are also working with

our other affiliates to

make sure that they are also on target.

Excellent. So a significant component

of TCSs initiative was to also duplicate

these efforts with your partner institutions.

How is this to be replicated

and what has been

the success rate of the duplication thus far?

Has it gone as quickly as you

anticipated or has there been

road bumps that you've run into?

It is an ongoing process

so we are still into the process.

But I think what has been helpful for us is

that our instructional design team

is designed such that we

have an instructional designer

dedicated to each of the schools.

So when we are talking about

remediation and talking about all of these phases,

we have somebody who is directly

responsible for a program.

We also have on-going

communication with leadership from all of

our affiliates so that we are keeping

them abreast of what we're doing and

they're also involved in terms of

understanding what needs to be done in terms of training,

in terms of different types of support.

But I think the key thing that we came up

with at the beginning of our process

was to come up with that think tank,

which then allowed us to be able to

have that open communication with

our key stakeholders from our partner organizations.

But it's critical to

maintain that relationship in terms of being

able to say here's what we're dealing with,

here is what's needed,

and here are the types of resources that we have,

and here are the resources we don't have,

and here is how we plan

to get to the finish line, so to speak.

So in terms of is it successful?

We are seeing success in that we

are putting in place a lot of standardization,

a lot of processes, a lot of ways

in which we can be able to demonstrate success.

A quick example is, initially when we started,

we were utilizing manual types of evaluations.

So I'll go into a course and evaluate it.

So now we are also using automated tools to be able to

go into a course and evaluate a course

and have some sort of analytics attached to that.

So I think that also helped in a way,

and we've been able to share those types

of tools with our partners.

So we can be able to see as we continue

to work on our courses,

they can be able to see where we were a year ago,

this is where we are going to be,

say, a year and a half down the line.

I love that.

I love how you're incorporating technology

in order to expedite, as well as to create efficiencies

around this whole process.

And really that's what technology's for.

That's the greatest benefit that we can use

technology to create those efficiencies.

Knowing what you know now,

having gone through part of that process,

is there anything that you would do differently

if you could then go back and start over again?

Yes. I will take the change management process,

the cost of change, very seriously.

I was taking it very seriously but I think I would

put more efforts in that,

and to try to really engage folks and to educate.

I mean, we are already working

with schools that are very educated and very engaged.

But in some cases you also have to

do a little bit more in terms of saying,

yes the costs might look good when you're

just looking at it because you

have the ability to see it, right?

But underneath it, there are other things that

are not working the way they are

supposed to be working, right?

So to be able to go beyond just the superficial

and to be able to educate folks in terms of,

you know, this is why this is important to do.

And I think another issue that I would emphasize is,

making sure that you do select that individual

who would be the evangelists,

the cheerleader for decision accessibility

and to provide that individual

with some authority so to speak,

or at least to provide

that individual with a lot of support

so that when they

are working on these types of initiatives,

they can feel some wind behind

them that's pushing them to keep going further.

But it is another one to be able to really know

and understand if there are

resources for digital accessibility.

You should be able to identify

them as early as possible and to know

that there will be

continuous support in terms of budgets,

particularly in terms of training as well as purchasing

the necessary tools and

resources for supporting accessibility.

So I think those are some of the things

that I would emphasize.

You know, it's interesting over,

you know I've been in education now for

over 20 years and accessibility over 30.

Change management is probably

oftentimes identified as the number one challenge

and getting an initiative

often running and the success of the initiative.

Oftentimes we- especially when we take

a look at something that has to do with accessibility.

We think, well that just should be. But yeah.


It doesn't happen that way.

And much like what you said, Lord,

I really appreciate the fact that you

said you can look at it from

one perspective and you think you've got it but

until you look at it from the user's perspective,

until you appreciate the challenge

of navigating when you don't use a mouse,

or the challenge of being able to really

comprehend what's being said

when the captions are not accurate because it's only been

used through a speech recognition only.

All of those challenges there that

the user that's using it actually experience.

When individuals get to that level of

appreciation then I think

the light bulb oftentimes will come off.

Let's move this in.

Well, first of all, before we

move into the questions and answers.

Lord, is there anything else that you felt that

was crucial in this overall process

that hasn't been mentioned yet?

No. I think we have covered a little bit,

and maybe something will pop up from the questions.

Okay. Excellent. Well, let's go into the questions.

I know that we've got

quite a few questions here to answer.

So Jacques, I'm going

to ask you to share with us what the questions are.

Yes, first of all, great webinar,

I really enjoyed it as a viewer.

It was great. Thank you so much for both of you

to sharing that. So I have a couple of questions.

I tried to put the questions that were similar together.

So the first question, and I'll say

two questions that have substance,

and then we'll answer to everyone else say,

through e-mail or whoever needs.

They have a grievance and they

can always ask more questions.

First of all, I'll go with this Scott.

One person asked, "Where do you see the majority of

the universities today in the

maturity stages?" Okay, that's one.

A second person asked another question which is related,

which is they're assuming

the way the majority of the universities

are not where they should be.

When do you expect them to

move towards the right turn up?

Excellent. Those two questions I absolutely love.

Can we go back to the slide

that shows the higher education maturity model?

The four stages.

Just a couple more slides,

and we will be there.

There we go.

So as you can see in this model,

the majority of institutions are

still at the emerging and the applying stage.

There are a few institutions that have

moved into the infusing stage.

When I say institution wide,

that means the entire institution.

There might be departments that are doing infusing.

For example, oftentimes we'll see

the online or

the e-Learning department saying that we're going

to create everything in our online environment to be

accommodating as well as

meeting the needs of various learning preferences.

But when we take a look at it institution-wide,

most institutions are either

at the emerging or the applying stage.

Now, the question was also asked,

"When do you think we'll get there?"

Well, when we see decrees that were issued,

like the one just here recently with

the National Association of the Deaf, in Harvard.

Unfortunately, here in the United States,

we are oftentimes driven by the legal demands.

I hate to have to say that,

but that's the fact,

that's the reality of it.

When I talk to institutions,

when I talk to leaders oftentimes, they say,

"Well, we're doing what we have to do in

order to meet the requirement."

So when that requirement legally continues to

increase and become clear and more prescriptive,

so will the institutions in moving

up the infusing and incorporating.

So when we take a look at the decree that

was issued with Harvard in NAD,

the National Association of the Deaf,

it addresses not just the course environment,

but it addresses the entire learning environment,

the entire institution.

It also addresses not just the providing of captioning,

but also the quality of the captions.

So I think when we start seeing

more and more decrees like that,

we will see more institutions moving beyond

just the applying and

maybe the infusing and

really taking a look at the incorporating.

Thank you for that's a great answer.

The last question that I put

like three questions together,

for Dr. Lord is,

first of all, I think you

answered during the conversation,

but I think what he's asking is, where should we start?

What will be the first thing that you will do if

you were an institution that wants

to do what you guys are doing?

Well, the first steps to start.

The second, and I'm putting here

two questions together is like there is budgets,

so how can you make sure a lot of

the times that you're being asked for a return?

What are you bringing back?

So the university will give you a budget.

What are you giving back to

the university or how can you measure it?

The question that is connected to it,

is how are you able to prioritize

between competing budgets from different stakeholders?

I think it's a little bit all together,

but you can take from there. That's your call.

Yeah. In terms of where do you start,

I think you start by first recognizing

the need for digital accessibility

and doing some research in terms of

some examples from similar organizations or

similar institutions that have went through the process.

For me, I think for us what was most important was

also researching other institutions.

Higher institutions that have done

a great job and learning from their examples.

So doing webinars such as this one

is a great thing because then you

can be able to learn from each other.

But for more specifically in terms of the actual doing,

for us it was important to prioritize

by looking at the types

of courses that we're working with,

the ones that needed the most

work and making sure that you

started with the ones that we consider

to be high impact types of courses,

so courses that we are taught more frequently.

So we knew that those needed to be taken

care of as soon as possible.

We also knew that it was important to work

with the academic leadership so

that they can be able to tell us for example.

Or not tell us, but to work with us in terms of say,

these are the types of courses that we taught this term,

and here are some

of the resources that may be helpful for you

in terms of instructional designers

who are the ones who are actually going into

the classes and intermediated.

But also making sure that you do have

the labor to do so to do the work.

For us that meant

creating a role for digital accessibility as well

as aiding some other folks that are working

with me in addition to the instructional designers.

So you just have to look at your unique situation and

prioritize and try to have a stakeholder approach,

so that you can be able to hear

from different perspectives in

terms of what is needed to happen.

We already know the main barriers

to produce digital accessibility.

So it helps to have that awareness

of the most common things that

will make it difficult for

diverse learners to be able to fully utilize a course.

Sometimes you may have to go beyond just a course,

but we get the entire digital ecosystem,

so other platforms that students and faculty are using.

I think the other question was on budget,

in terms of how can you

convince leadership or other stakeholders

that there'll be a return for the investment.

Well for us, number 1 just as an example.

We knew that a lot of

our headquarters use multimedia; videos,

audio, all that type of media.

We knew that in order to have a better handle we had to

have a multimedia strategy

and to have resources that will address that.

So one of that has to have

a video management system or platform.

So we said to them that we needed to have that.

That's something that we could all agree.

That in order for us to better handle videos,

we need to have a video management platform

that will benefit students,

that will benefit faculty.

The cost was practical, right?

So you also have to make sure that you

do the due diligence in terms of

assessing the tools that you are recommending.

For us, that meant

getting a Canvas studio because we work with Canvas.

So because it was really integrated into the LMS,

that was an easy thing for us to purchase.

But going beyond that,

we also understand that we would have to take a look

at other technologies related tools

and resources that would be a lot

more effective and more accurate,

particularly when you're dealing with captions.

You have to be able to be

practical in terms of your recommendations and you also

have to be able to show evidence of high impact use.

To be able to say, this tool will be utilized

by this percentage of our users, and therefore,

here's how you can be able to

see benefit in terms of student engagement,

in terms of delivering outcomes.

Because it's not just

to put materials and resources there,

it's also to make sure that students are able to

succeed. Was there another one?

It was perfect.

Scott, we're okay right from your side?


It was a pleasure to have both of you Dr. Lord and Scott.

As always, it's great to hear

from you and hear your top leadership,

and I'm sure that we will hear

more from Dr. Lord in our channels,

and it's great to hear his top leadership and what is he

doing to really lead the market on how it should be.

We shouldn't be waiting for

legislation to actually move forward.

We should actually be proactive and do

it as the maturity model explains.

Thank you so much everyone who attended,

and we will be sending the recording to everyone as well.

Thank you so much. Have a great day.

Thank you.

Thank you. Bye.