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.
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. Bye.