The Accessibility of MOOC Platforms from Instructors’ Perspective

Sanderson, Norun; Chen, Weiqin; Bong, Way Kiat; Kessel, Siri

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40238-3_13

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to incorporate the use of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) in the context of MOOC [23, 24, 27-30, 33-36, 38, 39, 43, 44, 46-48, 50, 51, 55-57, 59, 60], other guidelines, standards, and specifications should be more deeply studied, e.g. the W3C Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) [35,36,44,46,50,55,59], W3C User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UUAG) [35,36,44,46,55], W3C Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM) [44,46,56], W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Ageing Education and Harmonization (WAI-AGE) [23], Guidance on Applying WCAG to Non-Web Information and Communications Technologies (WCAG2ICT) [44], W3C Mobile Accessibility Task Force [44], IMS Access for All (AFA) Personal Needs and Preferences (PNP) [41,55,57,58], IMS AFA Digital Resource Description (DRD) [36,41,55,58], IMS Learner Information Profile (LIP) [58], IMS AFA Learner Information Package Accessibility for LIP (ACCLIP) [36,41,55,57,58], IMS AFA Meta-data Information Model (ACCMD) [36,41,55,58], IMS Accessible Portable Item Protocol (APIP) [36,55], Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI)…”

Section: Moocs and The Identification Of Accessibility Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Existing relevant studies report results on testing accessibility at content level [33,[45][46][47] using heuristic evaluations [23,30,38,46,50,53,56], automated testing tools [27,28,33,34,38,46,51,53,56], disabilities simulators [28,33,46,47], and manual testing [45,48,50,53].…”

Section: Moocs and The Verification Of Accessibility Requirements Commentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, more research is needed about new methods, tools and techniques for verification of accessibility requirements compliance at platform level [34,47,48,50,51,53,56,58,61] and content level [47,53]. Also, it is important to research about accessibility testing in mobile contexts [44,46,54].…”

Section: Moocs and The Verification Of Accessibility Requirements Commentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research challenges in accessible MOOCs: a systematic literature review 2008–2016

Sánchez-Gordón

Luján-Mora

2017

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have a prominent role in achieving universal e-education, i.e. education offered via the internet to diverse learners around the world independently of their motivations, backgrounds, capacities, and limitations. Regrettably, current MOOCs platforms and contents are not accessible enough for all learners. This study presents the results of a systematic literature review on the combined field of accessible MOOCs that covers from the years 2008 to 2016. We followed a four-staged method than included a within-study and between-study literature analysis, and a descriptive synthesis. A total of 40 relevant studies was identified and mapped to eight research dimensions that form a lifecycle: problem characterization; needs identification; use of industry guidelines, specifications and standards; accessibility requirements specification; architectures; design strategies; verification of accessibility requirements compliance; and validation of user needs satisfaction. The results presented in this study give a head start to researchers interested in pursuing the combined field of accessible MOOCs, providers of MOOCs platforms and contents,

show abstract

Section: Moocs and The Identification Of Accessibility Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Moocs and The Verification Of Accessibility Requirements Commentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Moocs and The Verification Of Accessibility Requirements Commentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research challenges in accessible MOOCs: a systematic literature review 2008–2016

Sánchez-Gordón

Luján-Mora

2017

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other aspects that were uncovered in this study include the limited training that course teams have in MOOC development, also reported in previous research (e.g., Haavind & Sistek-Chandler, 2015;Papathoma, 2019). Sanchez-Gordon and Luján-Mora (2016) and Sanderson et al (2016) highlighted the use of authoring tools to create and edit accessible educational resources for MOOCs. For that purpose, adequate authoring tools need to be provided to course teams.…”

Section: Contributions Of This Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A qualitative study to understand the perspectives of MOOC providers on accessibility

Iniesto

McAndrew

Minocha

et al. 2021

AJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are widely available and have become a common option for learners. However, their full potential cannot be realised if they are not accessible to all learners, including those with disabilities. It is, therefore, important to understand the different stakeholders and their requirements and perspectives in designing accessible MOOCs. This research investigated the perspectives of MOOC providers on MOOC learners who have accessibility needs and the processes used to manage accessibility and MOOCs in their individual organisations. In this paper, we report the results of a study using thematic analysis, which involved 26 semi-structured interviews with MOOC providers and focused on MOOC accessibility. The results show that, while MOOC providers are aware of learners with accessibility needs who are participating in MOOCs, they prioritise legislation over learners’ accessibility preferences. MOOC providers consider the technology of the platform itself creates barriers and are aware of the limitations for learners in finding help, reporting accessibility barriers and obtaining feedback, when participating in MOOCs. Implications for policy and practice: Course providers should acknowledge MOOC design is being guided by legal requirements. That involves uncertainty to who is the responsible to deliver accessible MOOCs. Platform providers need to consider the lack of information about their learners makes it difficult to design educational resources that consider different target groups and provide personalisation. Learners can find MOOCs helpful for continuing professional development and lifelong learning. MOOCs are attractive due to their low-cost and self-regulated learning.

show abstract

“…The results revealed that it is necessary for providers to better understand the accessibility needs of potential learners with disabilities, and for developers to clearly understand legislative and organisational requirements. Furthermore, Sanderson, Chen, Bong, and Kessel (2016) emphasised the importance of the systematic study of MOOC accessibility from the perspective of instructors and evaluated the Canvas platform using a heuristic evaluation method with ATAG 2.0 by W3C. They recommended three ways to improve MOOCs accessibility: support for efficient keyboard navigation, support for screen readers, and options for avoiding or correcting mistakes.…”

Section: Research On Accessible Moocsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital equity and accessible MOOCs: Accessibility evaluations of mobile MOOCs for learners with visual impairments

Park

So²,

Cha³

2019

AJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the popular claim that massive open online courses (MOOCs) can democratise educational opportunities, this study suggests that current MOOC platforms are not designed to be accessible and inclusive for learners with disabilities. Our main goals in this study were to identify the needs and barriers that learners with visual impairments face when learning with mobile devices in MOOCs and to make recommendations for designing MOOCs that are more accessible and inclusive. We conducted this study in two phases: a user study (Phase I) and a heuristic walkthrough (Phase II). In Phase I, we conducted a user study with three university students with visual impairments to identify their needs and the barriers to learning that they encounter in mobile MOOC platforms. In Phase II, five evaluators conducted a heuristic walkthrough based on Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (World Wide Web Consortium, 2008) to examine the degree of accessibility of a MOOC platform. Overall, the results indicate that serious accessibility issues exist in MOOC platforms, preventing learners with visual impairments from fully participating in learning activities. We conclude this paper by recommending ways to design mobile MOOCs to make them more accessible for learners with visual impairments.

show abstract

The Accessibility of MOOC Platforms from Instructors’ Perspective

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Research challenges in accessible MOOCs: a systematic literature review 2008–2016

Research challenges in accessible MOOCs: a systematic literature review 2008–2016

A qualitative study to understand the perspectives of MOOC providers on accessibility

Digital equity and accessible MOOCs: Accessibility evaluations of mobile MOOCs for learners with visual impairments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About