![\"Staircase](\"http:\/\/listheory.prattsils.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/Staircase-1024x676.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\u201cThe world is disabling to people in a wheelchair only if the people building it are filling it with stairs.\u201d \u2013 Marc Castellini, Pratt Institute student<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The way we design our physical and digital worlds can promote social inclusion if done well, or social exclusion if done poorly. It may not always be a designer\u2019s intent to purposefully exclude certain people, but even ignorance is a choice. If a designer doesn\u2019t consider accessibility or universality to be a part of their approach, more often than not, the resultant products restrict people in unanticipated ways.<\/p>\n On Tuesday, November 7, the ASIS&T student organization at Pratt Institute sponsored a speakeasy on Assistive Learning Technologies. Three students in the Information Technologies core curriculum class \u2013Marc Castellini, Arushi Jaiswal, and Hanyu Zhang\u2014 presented a research-based web guide<\/a> on assistive learning technologies, geared towards universities. I think that much of what they discussed can be applied more broadly to libraries, and to UX design principles for any product.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Why LIS professionals need to care<\/strong><\/p>\n First, let\u2019s highlight the problem in more detail. As Library and Information Science students, we have a responsibility to promote equity and inclusion. Social exclusion, after all, is just another form of powerlessness. (Gehner 41) Compound this with the ALA\u2019s official position: in December 2006, the ALA implemented the \u201cLibrary Services for People with Disabilities Policy,\u201d a policy that recognized that \u201cmany people with disabilities face economic inequity, illiteracy, cultural isolation, and discrimination in employment and the broad range of societal activities\u201d (ALA 2006). As part of the policy, it recommends proactive integration of assistive technology in libraries. A wonderful sentiment, only, there are two issues afoot here:<\/p>\n It all begs the question: as a profession, how serious are we about providing services to people of all<\/em> ages with all kinds of disabilities? How serious can we be when our own flagship organization offers this level of service?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n How big is this problem, anyway?<\/strong><\/p>\n I know, I know, in principle, it shouldn\u2019t matter how many people this issue impacts, but it seems to matter nonetheless. ADA-PARC (ADA Participatory Action Research Consortium) made 2014 American Community Survey data available in interactive format.\u00a0 (ADA-PARC 2014) It shows us that 12.3% of the total U.S. population self-declares as having a disability of some kind. That equates to approximately 43.5 million people. I don\u2019t know about you, but it\u2019s hard for me to conceptualize a picture of how many people that figure truly represents. What if I told you that 43.5 million people is the number of people living in the entire country of Canada\u2026. if it had 10 million more <\/em>people! The level of social exclusion here is huge by any means \u2013 whether you\u2019re measuring by numbers or principle.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Equalizing power through assistive technology tools<\/strong><\/p>\n Our responsibility as LIS professionals escalates when you consider that, \u201cSocial exclusion is not simply a result of \u2018bad luck\u2019 or personal inadequacies, but rather a product of flaws in the system that create disadvantages for certain segments of the population.\u201d (Gehner 2010) So what can we do? What Castellini, Jaiswal, and Zhang have created is a great start. The web toolkit provides a wide overview of cognitive and physical impairments and maps them to the specific LT (low-tech) and HT (high-tech) assistive technologies that can help. Low-tech can include things that are low-cost, and low-barrier of entry: highlighters, pencil grips, raised line paper. High-tech is the cool stuff we read about in Wired<\/em>: speech-to-text programs or voice recognition are good examples, both of which limit the need for a keyboard. For dyslexic students, it\u2019s even possible to use symbol-based learning, such as Widget symbols on SymbolWorld, or Makaton symbols, to improve understanding and absorption. Last but not least, web accessibility is another area that incurs massive reward without incurring massive expense. Simple changes can include: using the W3C\u2019s HTML tag best practices to assist with read-aloud services, avoiding dropdown menus, and eliminating Javascript use. There are many, many ways to get started, and I encourage you to view their site<\/a> to learn more.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Looking ahead<\/strong><\/p>\n So, how can we escalate this issue to more LIS professionals\u2019 attention? Here are a few things I\u2019ve done so far, and a few thoughts of what else we might do:<\/p>\n Last but not least, look at the world around you with a critical eye. Sometimes all it takes to start moving things in the right direction is the different point of view.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n ADA-PARC. (2014). \u201cPercentage of Total Population with Disabilities.\u201d Retrieved from http:\/\/centerondisability.org\/ada_parc\/utils\/indicators.php?id=43&palette=3<\/a><\/p>\n American Library Association. (2006 December 4). “Library Services for People with Disabilities Policy.\u201d Retrieved on November 8, 2017 from\u00a0http:\/\/www.ala.org\/ascla\/resources\/libraryservices<\/a><\/p>\n American Library Association. (2007 March 29). \u201cOutreach Resources for Services to People with Disabilities.\u201d Retrieved from http:\/\/www.ala.org\/advocacy\/diversity\/outreachtounderservedpopulations\/servicespeopledisabilities<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n