Category Archives: Accessible Engagement

by | May 20, 2016 · 5:30 am

Let’s fix the process

If you need New Zealand public sector websites to be accessible to use them satisfactorily then the “2014 Web Standards Self-Assessments Report” published in November 2015 won’t give you much comfort.

The good news, such that it is, is that the report’s authors appear to be circling in on the root causes of the problem.

“…NZ Government websites are designed and developed in a manner that tends to overlook the range of ways that people access and interact with web content.”

One has to wonder what goes through the minds of website owners, designers, developers and content creators if they “overlook the range of ways that people access and interact with web content”. Isn’t that the very meat and potatoes of the whole web development process? Accessing and interacting with content is the point of a website – and from a range of people. Quickly exposing desired content to an audience and protecting them from overload or unnecessary navigation is the nub of web design. It’s not primarily about creating a pleasing graphic and balanced palette (although that doesn’t hurt). And, it’s most definitely not about slavishly adhering to egregious visual excesses in the name of “branding”.

There is another puzzle here. Commercial (private sector) websites in general have some sort of sales intent. Their purpose is to in some way persuade the user of the value of their business or more specifically to try and sell the user some products or services. The public sector doesn’t have that sales drive: its purpose is to provide service and enable access and interaction using the convenience of the internet. In short, for public sector websites, it’s all about engaging with web content as part of providing a service to the public at large.

So what or where does the deficiency lie? The deficiency is in overlooking “the range of ways”.

In web design, the responsibility to cater for the range of ways that people access or interact with web content is within the scope of the user experience (UX) designer. A usual technique is to create personas. Personas are fictitious composites that are created to represent broad classes of the types of people who are expected to access the website. For example, the Ministry of Justice might expect lawyers, jury members, media representatives, litigants and judges to access its website. A persona could be created for each of these and through the design process the needs of each persona is factored in. The design can be subsequently validated by matching how well it is expected to deliver against the stated needs of each of the personas.

So far so good, but this is the point where I believe that the process fails. Why? Because in the development of the personas it is unlikely that consideration is made of potential impairments. Hence, the potential access (accessibility) needs aren’t embedded into the design process. In the development of some sites, some sort of accessibility review may take place but it is generally too late to make changes. The design signoff processes in the public sector can be so involved that the idea of repeating that process just looks too difficult, let alone having to make the explanations of why it wasn’t right the first time. (As an aside, in the time I’ve been consulting for AccEase I’ve never been asked to review the personas. I’ve checked wireframes, checking off against a range of ways the site will be accessed but pretty much always in the certainty that the range of ways of accessing a site hasn’t been designed in and certainly not included in the personas.)

The notion of developing personas including people with disabilities isn’t new. Shawn Lawton Henry, a renowned web accessibility expert,  has even provided example personas.

The “2014 Web Standards Self-Assessments Report” identified three types of people (personas?) that are not properly considered:

  • people who don’t use a mouse and instead rely on a keyboard or other input device and software to interact with web content
  • people with impaired vision
  • people who use special software to help them interpret and understand the structure and relationships between different bits of content on a web page (e.g. what’s a heading, what’s a list item, etc.)

It is up to User Experience designers to ensure that the full range of users are properly catered for.

Where else in the web development lifecycle would it make sense for accessibility to be addressed? Any time later is at severe risk of missing out a design consideration for a range of users. The classic approach is to “test it in” by doing an accessibility assessment once the build is complete and then apply the recommended changes. As noted above, this approach fails as designers are often unwilling to make changes and signoff procedures too cumbersome to achieve meaningful change. This approach also consigns “accessibility” to being an inconvenient afterthought, an encumbrance.

Process vs Technical change

Generally, the resolution to achieving a better state of web accessibility is considered to be the application of the technical elements that afford accessibility. However, I contend that it is a process change that will lead to a better state of web accessibility in our public sector websites. The technical elements do, of course, need to be applied but at present that fails to happen as there are often no explicit requirements generated in the user experience design.

In simple terms, let’s first think of the user (the ends) and then of the standards (the means).

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Information Accessibility, Web Accessibility

by | February 15, 2016 · 3:53 pm

A personal perspective on arts access

I spend a lot of time advocating for various forms of arts access for disabled people. For once I thought I would share some of my own personal views of things I dislike most about museums, galleries and theatres, and a few things I like too. Don’t get me wrong, I love GLAM, (galleries, libraries, archives and museums,) theatre and music performances; I have done so all my life. But as a vision-impaired person, as distinct from blind, I often feel frustrated by the simple changes that could be made that would be helpful for many arts patrons, especially in an ageing community. As a lifelong arts patron I think I, and others like me, deserve better. Currently we often pay the same price as everyone else for a lesser experience.

Here are some of my pet peeves, and likes, starting from the beginning of the process, which can stop me in my tracks.

Advertising is often unreadable. Accessibility options are buried on web sites and difficult to find. Its fine to have aesthetic design but communication with an audience is paramount. Web sites and other advertising are often designed with art rather than access in mind. The two aren’t incompatible. The New Zealand Festival is making progress this year with an easily found accessibility section on the web site, (although an access link would be even better on the home page.) The Fringe, not so much. A shame as Fringe events may be within the budgets of more disabled people.

Booking is often difficult and expensive and plain inaccessible in many cases. I love Circa Theatre for their friendly and direct regular booking process. Chamber Music NZ  and New Zealand Opera also have user-friendly ticketing for audio described performances. The booking process should be easy, with accessible alternatives if necessary.

Lighting can be very poor in places where I most need it, such as reading my programme or catalogue, often difficult to read anyway, or on labels on exhibits. Carefully targeted lighting is possible. Transitions from light to dark, in particular are often inadequately managed and a bit scary.

Clutter and wayfinding. Museums often leave me exhausted with sensory overload and a struggle to find one thing to focus on, with so much sound and vision all together all at once. I realised how much I miss when I get a little taste of audio description. Poor lighting can contribute to this confusion.

Print materials are generally designed to look good rather than for readability. A downloadable more readable and accessible version would help. Labelling in galleries and museums could be easier to read, with larger, clearer print, or again downloadable so I can read them on my chosen device in comfort.

Libraries.  As a passionate reader, I am a regular user of our precious public libraries. Here there has been a real change. I use an online catalogue to find my chosen reading matter, but best of all, public librarians will, without question, help me find things on the shelves. In the past I found librarians rather intimidating and unhelpful. I don’t use the Blind Foundation library as I can read some print, often on my iPad. If the government ratifies the Marrakesh Treaty there should be more large print books available too.

Disability experience reflected in art, culture and heritage.  Last but not least we, disabled people, and our stories on our terms are largely absent. So-called “outsider” art is fashionable and collectable, but often not seen alongside “real” artists’ work in mainstream galleries in New Zealand yet. Theatre is slowly beginning to explore our stories, and disabled performing artists are appearing. But we still have a long way to go. Our heritage and history on our terms are not included in museums, and literary writing by disabled people is invisible. I have found few books on disability subjects I can relate to in our libraries by New Zealanders. Popular media stories are not the answer as they reflect unrealistic stereotypes. I want to see and hear and read “real” stories like mine.

What can we do? I am a practical person who tries to find solutions to the problems I encounter. In the research I have done over the years I know there is a lot of help available, and some wonderful stories to be told, and I’m not talking about sob stories, super crips or inspiration porn either, but human nuanced stories well presented. Our history, sometimes uncomfortable, unsafe and shameful, is largely untold in heritage institutions.

There are also opportunities missed. For example the wonderful Shapeshifter sculpture exhibition at the last NZ Festival would have been an audio describer’s dream as most exhibits in the outdoor exhibition were touchable. Perhaps this year? Cultural festivals such as the Chinese New Year, Cuba Dupa and Diwali, have possibility too. We have terrific trained audio describers in Wellington who are really keen to work.

Making change is not always easy. The disabled audience is diverse, and has to be cultivated and developed.  But talk to us, engage with us on social media and in person. Often the people factor is the most important. There are Arts Access Advocates who are knowledgeable and enthusiastic, often arts practitioners ourselves. The skilled and helpful people at Arts Access Aotearoa, have a wealth of resources available, some of which I helped create. These resources include a much wider range of arts access ideas, tools and advice than I have covered in this personal account. Most are free.

But don’t take the expertise of individual disabled people for granted. We are experts just like curators and other staff. That needs recognition in the same way.

We are an ageing population. Arts institutions need to retain us as audience. The arts are a critical part of my life. I desperately want to keep it that way.  We, disabled people are 24% of the population, and growing. Ignoring and excluding us as patrons and participants is not an option.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Disability Issues, Disability Rights, Inclusion, Information Accessibility, Media, The Arts, Web Accessibility

by | October 6, 2015 · 8:32 am

Raising the bar on “awareness.”

This week, 5 -11 October, is Mental Health Awareness Week, (MHAW).  Surely we are all reasonably aware of the state of our mental well-being? It is, after all, difficult to avoid our state of mind, even if we don’t all have the insight we might have about it. But perhaps not. Don’t get me wrong, I think our individual mental health, and that of the nation are of critical importance, and I have no problems with this particular campaign or other campaigns that set out to advance particular issues or conditions. It is just that word awareness, with its lack of solid intention that bothers me.

For many years I have observed countless awareness campaigns and training programmes focused on disability generally, or on particular impairment types. With the disability population reaching twenty four percent it’s time to seize the high ground and do something different, be more ambitious. If people aren’t aware now they should be, or we haven’t been doing it right.

“Awareness” is a passive, anodyne and boring word. So you are aware, so what? It’s what you are going to do with that awareness that really counts. I’m much more concerned with taking action and making positive social change. Constructive actions with progress markers are elements awareness campaigns and training seem to miss.

It’s nearly thirty years since a group of disabled people working in the public service launched the concept of disability pride into the world with some dissension. Not everyone thought then that taking pride in a disability identity was A Good Thing – the essential liberating meaning of the social model of disability has been slow to catch on here. But at least let us explore some proactive possibilities.

Fifteen years into the twenty first century is time to stop bleating about awareness and show some muscle. Pride in identity could be one way, or creatively claiming disability rights and our place to stand in the sunshine might be another. I would love to see people younger than me with the energy and chutzpah to confront and challenge the tired old awareness trope wherever they find it.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Disability Issues, Disability Rights

by | July 6, 2015 · 3:37 pm

Audio description at Te Papa

The delights of audio description have come relatively late in life for me. Theatre, an important part of my life since I was a small child has acquired added depth, richness and meaning with audio description.  Although I have listened to opera, apart from a long-ago visit to Covent Garden during my OE and one or two films, I have only recently attended and been enchanted by audio described live performances.

Of course each of these has sound, often very familiar sound, in the case of Shakespeare or Puccini for example. But the world of fine art is very different. Vision is usually the sole means of access. I have spent many hours in galleries around the world, but the opportunity for an audio described tour of some of Nga Toi, our national collection on show at Te Papa, with a group of blind and vision impaired people could not be missed. I have some useful vision so I looked forward to new possibilities. The visit revealed interesting detail I never suspected existed. But I was also surprised by sadness. How many great art works I have looked at, yet not really seen?

It’s a bit like books. I used to think that I found some books boring because I failed to appreciate their literary merit, frustrating to an English literature graduate, a book lover and compulsive reader. That was until I discovered eBooks. Holding a large and heavy classic with small poor quality print close to my eyes is physically tiring and requires a high level of effort, which is a challenge to concentration, but on an electronic reader it would suddenly became absorbing. The problem was the medium, not my mind.

When visiting galleries a similar problem arises. I can quickly become sensorily overloaded, frustrated and bored, because I can’t see enough detail to connect at the meaningful and satisfying depth I want. At Te Papa the well- audio described works revealed intriguing hidden detail and depth that hooked and stimulated my imagination. Without audio description I must wade through tiring, confusing and seemingly meaningless visual clutter and I can’t read the guiding printed labels and information on gallery walls. Audio description means I can focus and connect at a deeper, more satisfying level and begin to have a similar experience to that of fully-sighted people.

A member of the group is guided to explore by touch a large piece of ornate gilded picture framing.

A member of the group is guided to explore by touch a large piece of ornate gilded picture framing.
Photo by Norm Heke © Te Papa

Touchable textured examples of paint on canvas enabled us to explore technique and materials. Learning about the art of framing by an encounter with an elaborate touchable example was fascinating and enlightening.

A 3D-printed copy of a fragile and precious object gave a real sense of its shape and texture, a successful experiment with a powerful new tool for access.

I have always loved textile and texture, so being invited to touch sensuous and colourful Cook Islands tivaevae Out of the Glory Box (quilts) was something my fingers have itched to do. Our group sat around the spread quilt, much as the makers would have. We shared intimately the colour, texture and embroidery of a deeply personal treasure stitched with love by a group of women. I could imagine them singing, laughing, gossiping and sharing knowledge as they worked. I discovered that these are not quilts in the usual sense, but appliqué, sensible in a warm climate.

While advance reading about the artist or craft person and their work is helpful, it is the audio description of the work that brings it to life. It should not simply describe the item; good audio description breathes life into the work, communicating story and context, historical or modern, which would be available to a sighted gallery patron. The description of a portrait as “looking out at us” immediately established a personal sense of connection, an authentic relationship between the artwork, the subject and the viewer.

Blind and vision-impaired people rely heavily on spoken word for communication so the quality and tone of voice is important to establish rapport in audio description. Description should be narration, like storytelling, not simply read aloud. Our audio describer was professional, warm and engaging, obviously enjoying the work she described. We felt welcome and that we were valued visitors to Te Papa.

As this art tour was something new we were treated to hospitality, and over cups of tea we gave positive and constructive responses to our tour. Of the many visits I have made to Te Papa this will be one of the most memorable.

The question of cost was raised. An audio described tour does require a lot of work. However you could say the same about education at Te Papa. The guidance we gave was that if the experience is similar or roughly the same as that enjoyed for free by others then there should be no cost.

Disabled people have for generations been systematically, if not intentionally, deprived of our cultural heritage, as well as our own unique disability stories and history. New and interesting means of inclusion and equality, many of them mainstream technology, such as iPads, smart phones and 3D printers, are now much more readily available. Sometimes though, it is simply a willingness to do things differently.

Because the disabled arts, heritage and culture audience has traditionally been under-served and undeveloped there is much ground to make up. As an audience we are among the poorest and face barriers of cost, ease of travel, various kinds of access and even feeling unwelcome, or stigmatised as a “special” audience rather than part of the richness of human diversity visiting and represented in cultural institutions.

Children and young disabled people need opportunities to develop skills and appreciation or they may miss out for the rest of their lives. Older people should be able to rediscover what they may think they have lost. Including everyone is critical. Access to our culture and heritage is a human right. Without it we are the poorer as individuals and as a nation.

Arts Access Aotearoa, which helped set up the tour, is a national treasure, but cultural and heritage institutions have to wholeheartedly join in. A start has been made and well done Te Papa for taking access seriously and for engaging with the community as well as searching out international best practice. Expect expectations to rise.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Disability Issues, Disability Rights, Inclusion, Information Accessibility, The Arts