Digitally Inaccessible Readings Take Extra Time and Extra Cognitive Load
Many learners with and without disabilities are aided by the curation and creation of digitally accessible texts.
Despite most academic publishers moving online, many textbooks, library books, archival materials and other research and teaching resources are still only available to learners in print. Certainly, libraries are improving access to materials in general by linking to online versions of texts but did you know that the library’s “read online” link is something of a misnomer? Many of the digital texts are digitally inaccessible to learners who use assistive technology to read.
Some digital texts have been saved in ways that render them completely illegible to screen reading and text-to-speech technology. Some can be read, but the heading structure is missing so the text can’t be navigated by a learner. Imagine trying to find your place in a textbook mid-way through term when you can’t visually flip to the page, and there isn’t a way to navigate by chapters. The most common digital accessibility error found in publishing is missing image and figure descriptions, both alt text for screen reader users and captions or contextual image descriptions that would support perception for vision-impaired readers and comprehension for many readers.
When the only available version of a text is a print version or a digitally inaccessible version, learners who read with a screen reader or text-to-speech technology have to find or request an alternate version of the text, or they won’t be able to read it. And that…takes…time.
Burdensome Delays
Disabled learners often experience significant delays in getting access to digitally accessible texts. Many discrimination lawsuits have been won on the basis of such delays. Very often, learners will attempt to work around the system to find a digitally accessible version themselves. This takes time. Or they will advocate for themselves within the system to have a version found for them (as is their legal right). This also takes time and places an inequitable burden on them. Usually, learners need to do a little of both.
Who knew?
Compounding this problem is that many educators, librarians and disability services staff are not sufficiently fluent in digital accessibility literacies to know if a text is digitally accessible or not. And, as you will see in the story that follows, some staff at the publishing houses don’t know how to tell either, sending learners round and round testing inaccessible file after inaccessible file.
The story Unhiding Some of the Extra Work documents the 24-day hunt for a digitally accessible version of a single book, ironically it’s a book written by a disabled author, about their experience of disability. It took 32 emails, sent back and forth between 8 paid staff and the learner. Ultimately, the publisher sent the library staff and the learner on two separate wild goose chases, and a disabled friend working at another university was the first to find an accessible version of the text.
What is it going to take?
# of emails 32
# words typed 4,000+
# days 24 to resolution
# of paid personnel involved 8
# of unpaid disabled friends helping 2
This is what it took for one learner to access one text. This story is presented here with the utmost respect for the work that all of the university staff put in to support the learner’s search. The library team really tried to make this happen. I hope sharing this account of events helps to illustrate the sort of day-to-day, extra load that learners with disabilities take on.
Unhiding Some of the Extra Work coming soon….
Reflection: After reading the Unhiding Some of the Extra Work, do you need to check in with learners about the accessibility of your course materials?
Further Reading
Fichten, C., Olenik-Shemesh, D., Asuncion, J., Jorgensen, M., & Colwell, C. (2020). Higher Education, Information and Communication Technologies and Students with Disabilities: An Overview of the Current Situation. In J. Seale (Ed.), Improving Accessible Digital Practices in Higher Education: Challenges and New Practices for Inclusion (pp. 21–44). Springer International Publishing.
McLarney, L. (2015, January). The TEACH Act: Frequently Asked Questions. Braille Monitor.
Wood, L. C., Axelrod, J., Downie, J. S., Furlough, M., Unsworth, J., & Wedaman, D. (2017). Libraries: Take AIM! Accessible Instructional Materials and Higher Education. 44.
Reflection
What connections did you make between this post and your digital praxis?
What would you like to try doing differently?
Why?
What hurdles might block your path?
What would make this work more accessible to you?
