Remote Learning Accessibility for Students with Disabilities

Introduction

Considering the numerous systematic and technological changes today, online learning is increasing in importance as educational institutions strive to adapt to technological and societal changes. The domain is particularly important given the recent disruptions that compelled institutions to shift to remote learning and teaching. Technology is a vital component in the higher education sector and its value is expected to increase as institutions continue embracing various innovations. Nevertheless, the use of technology in higher education imposes additional challenges for teachers and learners. Studies define online learning as a formal process of education in which teachers and students are in different places. In turn, this transforms the remote settings into an academic meeting platform for teachers and students (Singh & Thurman, 2019). While online learning has existed for several years, significant changes occurred in 2020 as nearly all universities and colleges shifted to remote learning. Additionally, in 2018 alone nearly 7 million students learned remotely as undergraduates in the United States (NCES, 2020). Studies predict that the online learning market will be nearly $25 billion by 2025 (Marinova, 2020). The meaning of this is that the remote learning domain will continue to be integrated into the education sector until the point where it will be part of the sector.

The increasing adoption of online education offer opportunities to different students due to the availability of the necessary tools such as mobile devices and different internet technologies such as Wi-Fi. Online students can also be considered diverse with different learning needs. They include all types of learners such as global students, returning or older students, nontraditional students, and students with disabilities (Verdinelli & Kutner, 2016). Therefore, institutions are required to consider different course designs to reach more students with diverse needs. Online course, however, is not reaching specific students with unique learning needs. For instance, given the diversity of online students, online course designers mostly forget to consider students with disabilities (Verdinelli & Kutner, 2016). Research shows that about 14% of all students have disabilities (NCES, 2020), which means that online learning programs exclude a significant number of students by not considering their needs when developing courses. Even though technology eliminates the numerous interactional issues that students with disabilities experience in in-person environments, it creates new challenges by excluding the students from using technology (WWW Consortium, n.d.). While more higher education institutions are increasing accessibility features in online learning, they have not met the needs of diverse students.

The present paper examines the issue of accessibility in remote learning for students with disabilities by investigating the history of the issue and relevant information from the research literature. The paper will also explore various legal concepts related to the topic such as public and private education institutions and the “state action” concept, the role of the judiciary in post-secondary school administration, and the legal liability of post-secondary school administrators. Moreover, the paper will examine how the issue affects higher education stakeholders and suggest potential solutions.

Background

History

The distance education concept is an old idea that has existed since the19th century. The concept has evolved over the years until the age of online learning. Higher education institutions developed online courses initially to address the issue of geographic limitation in the provision of educational opportunities to students. The introduction of remote courses offered flexibility besides providing opportunities for many students to attain education from any location. The course is beneficial because it allows teachers to deal with more controversial subjects, reach diverse student population, reduce bias, enhance equality during discussions, enhance the anonymity of students, and ensure effective communication (Gillingham & Molinari, 2012). As more higher education institutions adopt remote learning programs, the need for online learning also increases, which also influences the way the institutions teach courses. The diverse student population have different learning styles and modalities.

Based on recent reports, online learning is becoming a vital part of the education sector in which over 6 million undergraduate students are currently enrolled in remote courses (Marinova, 2020). The number of faculty teaching online courses also increased from 39% in 2016 to 46% in 2019. The online students also include students with disabilities. The most recent data shows that 19% of male and 20% of female undergraduate students in the period 2015-2016 had disabilities (NCES, 2020). The percentage represents over 7 million students. Nearly 700,000 of them enrolled in higher education institutions in 2011 alone (NCES, 2020). The dominant types of disabilities include orthopedic, mental issues, attention deficit disorder, health impairment issues, specific learning issues, hearing issues, speech problems, and visual problems (NCES, 2020). The shift to online learning places unique challenges for students with disabilities. For example, studies show that people with disabilities aged 18 and above are uncomfortable when using technology (Schaeffer, 2020). Most adults with disabilities also do not visit the internet regularly compared to adults without disabilities (Schaeffer, 2020). Since more learners with disabilities may continue enrolling in online learning courses, ensuring accessibility of the courses should be considered. 

Various theoretical debates have shaped the accessibility issues in higher education. The dominant views concern medical explanations and social explanations of disability. The medical explanation focuses on dealing with the different accommodations and deficiencies for students with a disability while the social explanation considers disability as a difference and attempts to correct systematic exclusions in the education sector through prejudicing or discriminating against students with disabilities (Titchkosky, 2011). However, recent explanations use cultural descriptions by considering disability as a valuable human diversity (Hamraie, 2016). The different views regarding disability inform the way institutions approach the issue of access in online educational settings. Most institutions of higher learning base their solutions on the medical explanation of disability. They do this by including specific accommodations or supplying specific assistive technology to students who prove that they have a diagnosed disability. Nevertheless, these solutions consider disability as a deficiency. In contrast, institutions that adopt cultural or social views on disability focus on increasing accessibility for diverse student populations regardless of their disability (Hamraie, 2016). These institutions focus on designing courses to account for human diversity.

Laws Issues and Accessibility

Post-Secondary School Administrators

Post-secondary school administrators have different legal obligations regarding the accessibility of online learning. These obligations arise mainly through federal action, the courts, and judicial opinions and aim to ensure that all students access education without discrimination. The administrators need to be aware of these obligations because higher education institutions are legally responsible for providing accessible materials and platforms. Besides, accessibility ensures that all student populations engage in and gain from different learning opportunities (Hamraie, 2016). Given the different barriers to accessibility experienced by students with disabilities in the online learning domain, post-secondary school administrators must be careful in choosing online learning materials and platforms. Numerous complaints have been filed in courts about the accessibility of online courses. Therefore, the administrators need to understand their legal responsibilities to ensure the participation of all students in online learning. Even though the federal government does not manage education directly, it plays several roles. From the beginning of the United States, the federal government encouraged and funded education through federal action. 

Federal Action and Courts, and Judicial Opinions

The involvement of the federal government occurs through different laws and regulations. These regulations allow the federal government to initiate educational activities and participate with other stakeholders such as agencies, states, and people in those activities. The federal government has continued its involvement in education matters through different state actions such as the passage of several acts to support and sustain both private and public educational institutions. The value of education for the common good is now under national and state control. Congress regularly passes laws that prohibit discrimination and ensure equal access to education. 

Courts and Judicial opinions also affect the administration of higher education institutions. The 10th Amendment, for instance, mandates states to play a role in the education sector (Monk & Ginsburg, 2018). The 14th Amendment also guarantees rights to all citizens of the United States (Monk & Ginsburg, 2018). Several court cases and judicial opinions in addition to federal government regulations affect public education by ensuring equity for citizens. The legal obligations of post-secondary school administrators arise from three sets of regulations that manage disability rights in universities and college environments. They are section 504 and section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II and III (Kelly, 2018). The 1973 Rehabilitation Act under section 504 prohibits discrimination based on disability in activities or programs funded by the federal government (Kelly, 2018). Section 508 of the act requires that Federal agencies ensure people with disabilities can access and use information just as other people can when developing, procuring, maintaining, or using digital and information technology. The only exception is when the compliances impose an undue burden on the organization. The section also necessitates people with disabilities seeking services or information from Federal agencies to access and use information just as other people without disabilities with a similar exception (Kelly, 2018). Courts have, over time, revised and interpreted laws, rules, and policies, which led to the publication of the final rule that became operational in 2018. The rule changed the specificity and scope of section 508 by updating regulations on ICT. 

Since the Federal government funds most higher education institutions, they are subject to accessibility rules that section 508 offers. The ADA under Title II and III also prohibit public-private entities from discriminating based on disability whether or not the federal government funds them (Kelly, 2018). These regulations do not compel institutions to modify essential academic requirements but establish minimum expectations. For instance, the laws require universities or colleges to offer access to all facilities such as classrooms, dining halls, and student unions among others. 

The institutions must also offer meaningful access to the learning experience besides establishing a uniform system to meet the needs of students consistently (Hamraie, 2016). It should be noted that meaningful access does not ensure optimal access for students with disabilities. For instance, an institution can ensure meaningful access to visually impaired students in science classes by including a readable version of texts. The level of science subjects, however, depends on visual representations, which may require the institution to ensure optimal access by including 3-D or tactile versions of the representations. However, these versions may not be readily available (Hamraie, 2016). Besides, institutions vary regarding the strategies they use to meet the needs of diverse students due to different resources and priorities concerning accessibility. Therefore, it is important to find ways of ensuring meaningful access to online learning. 

The Federal government mandates Universities and University administrators to accommodate students with disabilities. Higher education institutions must enhance accessibility for students with disabilities in each course rather than compelling the students to seek external support or retrofitting the remote learning environment. Failure to act can result in several legal issues because the constitution also protects students with disabilities through the aforementioned laws. Courts and Judicial opinions also offer policy guidelines regarding the accessibility topic. For instance, a 2010 opinion by the Department of Justice regarding accessibility issues argued that any use of technology in education should comply with the ADA and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by ensuring that all students access courses equally (OCR, 2020). Given the requirements of post-secondary school administrators regarding accessibility matters and court cases and judicial opinions in the area, administrators are required to ensure that online courses are accessible to students with disabilities. The administrators have specific legal obligations regarding the accessibility of online courses for learners with disabilities. The numerous policy developments about the accessibility domain emphasize that the administrators must prioritize these accessibility matters. 

The Issue of Accommodation

Students with disabilities should access remote courses because they must learn through both in-person courses and remote courses just as are learners without disabilities. If the faculty institute collaboration events, students with disabilities should also participate. Developing accessible and sufficient collaboration and communication means when creating courses will ensure that all learners have equal opportunities of participating in the course (Verdinelli & Kutner, 2016). Most higher education administrators and their institutions fail to take the required steps to enhance the accessibility of courses to diverse student populations. They usually address accommodations based on individual cases and through implementing customized support for students who self-disclose their impairment. However, the subject of accessibility is important because it differs from the accommodation idea. Most programs for special students usually modify course content to accommodate students with disabilities. Nevertheless, this differs from accessibility since accommodation concerns inaccessible settings and advocacy that are adapted when required (Hamraie, 2016). Based on the ADA, accommodation is the state or act of adaptation. 

Accommodation can lead to inequality by singling students with disabilities when modifying the course. Converting text to Braille can be considered as an accommodation because it occurs after the beginning of the course. While the law mandates educational administrators to accommodate students with disabilities, it is possible to ensure accessibility when developing the course without the need to create accommodations after the beginning of the course (Hamraie, 2016). Regarding accessibility, studies demonstrate that accessibility in a specific context ensures equality for all students. For instance, creating ramps in a building ensures that all people can access the building. Asynchronous online discussions can also be considered as ensuring equality because they establish accessible communication means for all. Therefore, higher education institutions should strive to ensure accessibility for all students in the online learning domain by integrating accessibility in their courses to benefit all students.

Universities and colleges have core values that guide their operations. These values reflect their beliefs, goals, and environment and enhance responsibility among administrators, faculty, and learners to meet the established standards. Ensuring accessibility entails appreciating and accepting individuals with diverse backgrounds and capacities. While core values are vital, many institutions still have impaired students or stigmas (Marquis et al., 2016). Besides, while there are dominant disabilities such as visual impairment, immobility, and hearing impairments, less dominant disabilities also exist. Studies show that people can be diagnosed with impairments in different ways such as people with difficulties using computers and others with issues that interfere with online learning (Titchkosky, 2011). Other learning problems such as computer illiteracy, general illiteracy, visual and auditory processing issues, and dyslexia are important concerning universities and colleges. Nevertheless, these less dominant issues mostly vary significantly among people and are undisclosed and undiagnosed. Accommodating students with diverse issues by adapting in-person courses and existing remote learning courses can be very challenging for administrators. Federal mandates through section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act means that administrators must comply with accessibility regulations or risk facing litigation and loss of federal financial support.

How the Issue affects the Institution

Administrators

Besides the aforementioned regulations, laws such as the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the E-government Act, and the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act also hinder higher education institutions and administrators from discriminating against people with different impairments (Holness, 2014). Most administrators, however, initiate changes during the enforcement of these regulations to avoid losing federal funding, expensive litigations, and the included consequences (Singh & Thurman, 2019). Administrators who implement accessibility approaches early benefit significantly compared to those that initiate accommodations after the development of the system (Singh & Thurman, 2019). Thus, higher education administrators should create policies to offer strategies, guidelines, and support for diverse student populations as this ensures equity and consistency across platforms. 

Teachers 

Instructors also find it challenging to develop accessible remote courses because of the involved time, resources, and effort during the development and design phases. Regular monitoring is also required, which deters instructors and course designers from integrating accessible components into online courses (Marquis et al., 2016). Other barriers such as inadequate compensation and increased workloads impede a thorough and consistent inclusion of accessibility elements by instructors. Administrators can contribute to addressing these issues by offering an incentive to instructors who convert in-person courses to remote or hybrid courses as a way of promoting accessibility in their institutions (Moorefield-Lang et al., 2016). Support can also be in the form of work teams bringing instructors from various units together to discuss ways of meeting accessibility standards (Slater et al., 2015). Administrators can also offer routine professional development programs besides monitoring the progress of the courses to ensure consistency in the application of accessibility elements.

Students

Online courses affect diverse student populations because they are the intended recipients. Students with disabilities benefit from these courses through the elimination of physical barriers that they face when required to travel regularly to attend in-person courses. Thus, institutions should implement effective ICT based measures to enhance the accessibility of the courses.

Solutions

Legal Solution to the Issue

One potential legal solution concerning ensuring accessibility entails complying with established standards and guidelines that help institutions develop accessible online course content. For instance, the Rehabilitation Act establishes a foundation under section 508 that institutions can follow to create accessible online courses (Kelly, 2018). Besides, the World Wide Web Consortium introduced the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines that institutions can use to facilitate accessibility. Based on these guidelines, institutions should focus on ensuring that all students can perceive the content by presenting the content and user interface in a way that all users can perceive. All users should also be able to operate besides understanding the interface. Moreover, the course must be robust to ensure its continued accessibility even with technological changes (WWW Consortium, n.d.). All the suggested principles have guidelines to enhance the accessibility of online content to diverse students.

Other Solutions

The major concern regarding the accessibility subject in online learning concerns the provision of accessible course materials. For example, most textbook publishers do not provide accessible electronic formats of course material and textbooks. Institutions are usually compelled to remediate the issue, which can be costly and time-consuming. Most institutions are still establishing strong procedures for enhancing the accessibility of online learning and course content. One way of facilitating accessibility in online learning entails integrating accessibility functions and features from the beginning instead of acting retrospectively. For instance, higher education institutions can establish a team comprising of staff/faculty, accessibility experts, and IT experts when considering purchasing or launching new educational products (Lederman, 2015). The team should reach informed decisions regarding the functionality of the selected tools for the diverse student population. 

While the accessibility subject often comes with legal compliance, higher education stakeholders can use the universal design model to enhance accessibility. The universal design approach focuses on developing educational environments and course content that meet the needs of all students. The approach considers different principles to assist course designers to create accessible online learning settings (Rice, 2018). The principles include equitability use, flexibility, intuitiveness and simplicity, information perceptibility, tolerance, low physical effort, and space and size (Rice, 2018). Regarding equitability, the course must be designed to address the diverse abilities of learners. 

Institutions must create accessible environments through developing organized and clear course content and offering the necessary alternatives (Hitt, 2018). Students with diverse needs must be able to access the course content. Institutions can ensure equitable use by eliminating clutter in course sites and using various assessment techniques. Regarding flexibility, institutions should consider all types of disabilities when creating remote courses to meet the needs of a diverse student population. They can do this by, for example, offering course content in both audio and text versions with different study options for students (Hitt, 2018). Flexibility implies providing the necessary solutions to meet the needs of different disabilities without relying on a single technique for all students (WWW Consortium, n.d.). 

The principle of intuitive use concerns the use of consistent course designs that is clear to all students regardless of their level, skills, knowledge, or experience. For instance, instructors can underline hyperlinked words or use a magnifying glass to demonstrate search and allow all students to familiarize themselves with course navigation (Hitt, 2018). The principle of perceptible information requires institutions to ensure course designs use effective communication techniques to relay information to students regardless of the abilities of students. Techniques such as using color, enlarging text, and video captioning can be useful (Hitt, 2018). Institutions can also use different course delivery formats such as interpreting audio content using sign language, using braille book, using screen magnifiers, using adequate contrast between text and webpages and using screen readers.

Regarding tolerance, instructors must ensure that they minimize the outcomes of unintended actions among students. For instance, they can include an undo feature in computer programs to enable a student to correct errors without consequences (Hitt, 2018). They can also offer extra instructions and ample time for students to complete tests to limit mistakes (Hitt, 2018). The course should also involve a low physical effort by reducing fatigue in the course design. They can achieve this by offering hyperlinks to valuable course contents and ensuring that they locate chapter activities closely to ensure students find information easily. Additionally, institutions should offer adequate space and size for approach, manipulation, reach, and utilization regardless of the mobility, posture, or body size of the user. Audio and video controls should be easily available for students while other fields and controls should be sizeable enough and accessible (Hitt, 2018). Institutions should use the aforementioned principles as guidelines when developing remote courses to benefit all students.

References

Gillingham, M., & Molinari, C. (2012). Online Courses: Student Preferences Survey. Internet Learning . https://doi.org/10.18278/il.1.1.4

Hamraie, A. (2016). Beyond Accommodation: Disability, Feminist Philosophy, and the Design of Everyday Academic Life. PhiloSOPHIA , 6 (2), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1353/phi.2016.0022

Hitt, A. (2018). Foregrounding Accessibility through (Inclusive) Universal Design in Professional Communication Curricula. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly , 81 (1), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490617739884

Holness, W. (2014). Equal Recognition and Legal Capacity for Persons with Disabilities: Incorporating the Principle of Proportionality. South African Journal on Human Rights , 30 (2), 313–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/19962126.2014.11865111

Kelly, C. (2018, January 30). Why Accessibility Matters in Online Learning . ELearning Learning. https://www.elearninglearning.com/edition/weekly-microlearning-learning-technologies-2018-01-27?open-article-id=7784708&article-title=why-accessibility-matters-in-online-learning&blog-domain=coursearc.com&blog-title=coursearc

Lederman, D. (2015, March 15). Understanding the Faculty Role in Digital Accessibility . Www.insidehighered.com. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2017/03/15/digital-accessibility-experts-discuss-how-they-approach-faculty

Marinova, I. (2020, November 19). 20 Fascinating Online Education Statistics 2020 . Review42. https://review42.com/resources/online-education-statistics/

Marquis, E., Jung, B., Fudge Schormans, A., Lukmanji, S., Wilton, R., & Baptiste, S. (2016). Developing inclusive educators: enhancing the accessibility of teaching and learning in higher education. International Journal for Academic Development , 21 (4), 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2016.1181071

Monk, L. R., & Ginsburg, R. B. (2018). The Bill of Rights: a user’s guide . Hachett Books.

Moorefield-Lang, H., Copeland, C. A., & Haynes, A. (2016). Accessing abilities: Creating innovative accessible online learning environments and putting quality into practice. Education for Information , 32 (1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.3233/efi-150966

NCES. (2020, September). The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers to many education questions (National Center for Education Statistics) . Nces.ed.gov. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60#:~:text=How%20many%20students%20in%20postsecondary

OCR. (2020, January 10). Joint - Dear Colleague Letter: Electronic Book Readers . Www2.Ed.gov. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100629.html

Rice, M. F. (2018). Accessibility that Supports Literacy: Virtual School Course Design Teams’ Instructional Planning for Students with Disabilities. Online Learning , 22 (4). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i4.1508

Schaeffer, K. (2020, April 23). As schools shift to online learning amid pandemic, here’s what we know about disabled students in the U.S. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/23/as-schools-shift-to-online-learning-amid-pandemic-heres-what-we-know-about-disabled-students-in-the-u-s/

Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How Many Ways Can We Define Online Learning? A Systematic Literature Review of Definitions of Online Learning (1988-2018). American Journal of Distance Education , 33 (4), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082

Slater, R., Pearson, V. K., Warren, J. P., & Forbes, T. (2015). Institutional change for improving accessibility in the design and delivery of distance learning – the role of faculty accessibility specialists at The Open University. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning , 30 (1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2015.1013528

Titchkosky, T. (2011). The question of access: disability, space, meaning . University Of Toronto Press.

Verdinelli, S., & Kutner, D. (2016). Persistence factors among online graduate students with disabilities. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education , 9 (4), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039791

WWW Consortium. (n.d.). Understanding Conformance | Understanding WCAG 2.0 . Www.w3.org. Retrieved March 21, 2021, from http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-levels-head