Techno Brief
 

Mid-Atlantic Regional Technology in Education Consortium  
1301 Cecil B. Moore Ave.
Ritter Annex 9th Floor
Temple University - CRHDE
Philadelphia, PA 19122

800-892-5550
215-204-5130 (fax)

General Inquires:
Laurence Peters
Johann Sarmiento
Judith Stull  
Technical Assistance:
Barry Mansfield  
Professional Development:
Joan Pasternak

Temple University Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and Education

Accessible Educational Technology: Minimum Standards for Computer Software                                                                                       114
by

Kathy Rupert
Temple University

As schools work to integrate content-specific software into the classroom, acquiring accessible technology for disabled students is a growing concern for educators. These professionals will find it necessary to plan for and purchase software that meets the needs of a wide variety of students, some of whom have physical disabilities. As previously discussed in the techno-brief, Accessible Technology: Minimum Standards for Computer Hardware, the Section 508 standards for electronic technology were developed by the Architectural and Transportation Compliance Board (Access Board) for federal agencies but are increasingly being used by school districts when procuring technology-based educational materials. Locally, Section 508 has been incorporated into Maryland's Code of Regulations.

These standards not only make software more accessible to students who have disabilities, but also add to the overall effectiveness of the product for all students. By offering redundant forms of onscreen information (e.g., narration, text), reading skills can be reinforced and options in color and shading can relieve eyestrain and physical fatigue. 

 

Standards for Software
Twelve basic areas of software performance are covered in Section 508 and should be considered when purchasing software for an educational setting:

  1. All functions of the software should be accessible and operable through the use of a keyboard, and the outcome of those functions should be textually discernable. Students who have diminished dexterity or vision may be unable to accurately place or use input devices such as a mouse and therefore require keyboard-activated functions. Assistive technology can be used with a keyboard without posing an undue burden on the school district. Common devices used with keyboards include Braille templates, keyboards with tactile cues, or keys conducive to headpointers. The product of the student's efforts should be in text form so that screen readers or Braille displays can relay the onscreen information in an accessible form for visually impaired students.
  2. Software should not override personal preferences established by the student. Because operating systems allow students to establish their own personal settings, which can mitigate a student's disability (with enlarged icons, contrast and color settings, alarms, and keyboard shortcuts), these settings should remain functional when using a software program. The animation used in many applications renders personal preferences useless by superseding color and shading selections.
  3. Caret location, active screens, and the user's focus should be intelligible to devices that can interpret onscreen activity for students who could not otherwise access the information. The position on the screen where an action takes place is called the "focus" and should be accessible to a screen reader or Braille output device.
  4. Onscreen images and icons should be accompanied by an alternative method of communication that is discernable to assistive technology. Alternatives to icons such as text or narration can provide accessibility to visually impaired students. An added benefit of having equipment that provides an alternative method of conveying information is that it can also be beneficial in reinforcing the reading and pronunciation skills of the general student population.
  5. If bitmap images are used to identify controls and status indicators or are used to identify an action on screen or an action taken by the user, the meaning of that image should remain consistent throughout the program. Often these indicators are icons that consist of bits of memory (bitmaps) and are accompanied by text labels that can be distinguished by screen readers. If a bitmap image is not consistent in its meaning throughout the application, a student can miss the intended message or cue and render the program useless.

Page 1 2 3     Next


Copyright 2001 © MARTEC