Teleconference Details

• Update of on the letter to Blackboard
• Identifying key individuals in our colleges to sign the letter
• Update on the letter from CIOs to Blackboard
• Possibility of a QA member joining our discussion (Robert)
• Identify topics to be discussed with support team (all).
• Find out the status of IMS accessibility initiative (Saroj).

Blackboard/WebCT Accessibility teleconference minutes 04/19/2007
Scribe: Wayne Dick

Next Meeting

• Date: Monday May 7, 2007
• Time: 2:30 PM EDT; 1:30 PM CDT; 12:30 PM MDT; 11:30 AM PDT
• Phone: 217 265-8030
• Scribe: TBD

Attendees

• Hadi Rangin, Urbana/Champaign
• Konstantinos Yfantis, Urbana/Champaign
• Jon Gunderson, , University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
• Phil Kragnes, University of Minnesota
• Laurie Harrison, University of toronto
• Kevin Price, University of Illinois at Chicago
• Lisa Fiedor, North Carolina State University
• Don Amos, Pellissippi State Technical Community College
• David Schwarte, Purdue university
• Wayne Dick, California State University, Long Beach

Regrets

• Robert Dumas, Blackboard
• Saroj Primlani, North Carolina State University

Discussion

Progress on Letters

HR - We have 54 colleges in the consortium who will be contacted.

HR - Lanny suggested to send also to Peter Segall, President of United States higher Education

HR - 5 confirmed signatures

LF - VP of Distance Education

PK - Instructinal Media Coordinator

DS - Who will sign it?

DA - VP of Information Technology

LH - CIO

WD - Will contact Vice Chancellor of Academic IT

Possibility of a QA member joining our discussion

HR - Robert has not heard back from the QA manager as of yet concerning a member of that team join our discussion group. 

IMS

JG - IMS: Committee on Institutional Cooperation connected to IMS Corsortium.

Revisiting the Goals of this Group

Jon - Establishing a stronger connection with Blackboard. There has been movement. [So, we need to reconnect.] Need to expand customer support, QA to include accessibility.

HR - The connection will be closer.

JG - We may need to reconfigure to meet with different groups.

KP - Smaller groups QA, interface design but maybe quarterly we have an overall group update.  

Identify topics to be discussed with support team

PK - Technical Support Team need to understand the basics of AT (Assistive Technologies)

JG - Technical Support Team need to understand the basics of accessibility related problems such as extended quiz time (occomodation issues), customizing the display for visually impaired, etc.

HR - Setup an internal infrastructure that the accessibility related problems are directed to the right people in the company.

HR – Should we provide necessary learning materials for the Company?

PK - They must need to know what the from support staff.

JG - That individuals with assistive tecnology are taken seriously and that problems are routed to QA, developer or appropriate people.

JG - Try to support accomodation issues

LH - Ask for expert user support and what they publically provide. Public face or expert level; we are looking for connection; competerors have help for disabilities.

HR - At customer support they need to know accessibility proficiency.

JG - Training, materials in a Blackboard course to be used internally.

PK - Hire people with disabilities to as service providers

JG - Do you employ people with disabilities; first hand testers

PK - Have a CIC include Blackboard help.

Identifying topics to be discussed with QA

LF - Maybe we need to look at front end of the process

PK - Know the difference between standards compliance to functional accessibility.

JG - All back end, we need some assurance...

HR - Do we want to be part of the testing process.

JG - Group testing really needs to advise functional features.  

JG - What is accessibility criteri and how they are tested?

HR - Do we want to be their beta tesers? Consesus: Yes

HR - Access to an up-to-date server