[Year 12 IT Apps] ITA exam - B2 - accessibility

[ken price]

While this doesn't address your concern, I think the way some terms are
used in the wider world contributes to the problem. Those committed to
improving the situation for people with disabilities sometimes use common
terms in a shorthand way, and the end result is confusion.

"Accessibility" is a prime culprit.

For example people working with vision disorders and websites will refer to
"accessibility" in those terms. Those helping wheelchair-dependent students
will refer to "accessibility" when talking about ramps, width of
access-ways, height of light switches etc.

I am intrigued by the doors at airports that say "Accessible Toilet". Does
that mean that this toilet has been designed so it can be used easily by a
person with a vision disorder? Or by a person using a text-only web browser
or an early version of Firefox? Or by a person in a wheelchair or with
other mobility aids? Or does it just mean the door to the other toilet is
jammed, making that an Inaccessible Toilet?

If we're looking for a definition in website terms, WCAG compliance is a
well-accepted starting point. http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag

It is based on the 4 principles of


   1.

   *Perceivable *- Information and user interface components must be
   presentable to users in ways they can perceive.
   -

      This means that users must be able to perceive the information being
      presented (it can't be invisible to all of their senses)
      2.

   *Operable *- User interface components and navigation must be operable.
   -

      This means that users must be able to operate the interface (the
      interface cannot require interaction that a user cannot perform)
      3.

   *Understandable *- Information and the operation of user interface must
   be understandable.
   -

      This means that users must be able to understand the information as
      well as the operation of the user interface (the content or operation
      cannot be beyond their understanding)
      4.

   *Robust* - Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted
   reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies.
   -

      This means that users must be able to access the content as
      technologies advance (as technologies and user agents evolve, the content
      should remain accessible)


And while disability itself is never a joking matter, some of the
legislation that results from it can be.  I recall being rather confused
with a drive-thru ATM in Illinois that had a braille keypad (as required by
law) on the driver's side.

kp

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Mark <mark at vceit.com> wrote:

> Does anyone else have a sneaking fear that this second question in section
> B is misinterpreting the word "accessibility"?
>
> We in VCE IT have (AFAIK) always understood 'accessibility' as referring
> to catering for special needs or disabilities.
>
> This question smells to me as if it's referring to "ease of
> loading/finding". Try answering it with a "special needs" view of
> accessibility, and see how far you get.
>
> Frustratingly, the current study design does not define accessibility, and
> it even muddies the water by including this in the glossary's definition of
> 'design elements'...
>
> *"In this study the elements related to functionality are structure,
> usability and accessibility, including navigation and load time,
> appropriateness and relevance."*
>
> This makes it sound like accessibility includes navigation and load time
> (curse their ambiguous punctuation) which is definitely not related to
> disabilities.
>
> Yet the Nelson/Potts textbooks seems to agree that 'accessibility' relates
> to factors like colour blindness, reduced language skills etc.
>
> The problem is that I can't find a VCE IT source for this 'accessibility'
> convention.
> Does anyone remember where this interpretation of accessibility came from
> years ago?
>
> Or have I slipped several cogs and is question B2 quite appropriate and
> right? Has the exam question writer read the study design and made a quite
> valid (but wrong) interpretation of the word?
>
> --
>
> Mark Kelly
> mark AT vceit DOT com
> http://vceit.com
>
> *I love the sound of people's voices after they stop talking.*
>
> I, Mark Kelly, am entirely responsible for the offensive verbiage I spew
> forth.
> Have I offended anyone with this post?  I would not be surprised.
> If offended, please whinge to me at the email address above.
> Please leave poor Kevork alone.  It is not his fault.
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> IT Applications Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/itapplications3-4.html -
> Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority <br>
> http://www.vitta.org.au  - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers Association Inc <br>
> http://www.swinburne.edu.au/ict/schools - Swinburne University
>



-- 
-- 
Dr Ken Price MACS CP ACCE Professional Associate.
President, TASITE http://www.tasite.tas.edu.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/itapps/attachments/20141110/5dc2f890/attachment-0001.html