RSU Web Accessibility in Higher Education Committee

Meeting Agenda for October 31, 2017 – 10:00 a.m., Dr. Carolyn Taylor Center Conf. Executive Boardroom

 Attendance:

o Heidi Hokinson, Brian Reeves, Chris Ratcliff, Bruce McGowan (Phone), Sherry Alexander (phone), Richard Beck, Brent Marsh, Kelli Fields, Kaitlin Crotty, Rob Carr (phone); Elise Quiroz

o Started at 10:11 AM -- Marsh: spoke of commitment to a regular schedule; discussing that we will have 4 years left in this grant; minutes were commented on by Beck that spring convocation should have the option to be much more broad; Dotterer is working on insurance documents are in the works of becoming accessible. Washburn approval, Dotterer second, approved by the whole.

 Take-aways from the TechAccessOK conference:

o Dotterer reported on the workshop on how the first day was a good checklist on how to start the accessibility process for both PDF and Word. The first day of the conference gave the tools to know what to look for when making documents accessible and the process to correct completed documents.

o Washburn commented the conference was a good marketing tool, research material, and provided a good network for people in the area for someone like herself who is new to web accessibility.

o Carr noted that he will be possibly booking the same keynote speaker again for the conference. He was happy to hear that networking was an emphasis at the conference. He also commented that the new guidance for web standards are in the works and will take effect in the not too distant future.

 Progress reports:

o Washburn is working on policies and how to train and implementation on policies.

o Dotterer noted out of the seven policies, he has a concern of the modalities and the difference between the online and in-person classes and application of course offerings.

o Carr agreed that it made sense to have scoping and standard information available online. Our content should be available according to our accessibility policy. o Dotterer had concerns related to Quality Matters (QM).

o Carr replied that QM’s matrix is strong enough to adopt through all courses.

o Dotterer has put 15 courses through QM course review thus far.

o Washburn commented as long as we show progress in meeting standards we will pass, but we want to be more aggressive in our standards.

o Dotterer uses review matrices to make sure that all of the courses and their documents pass QM. Their department goal is passing 20 this year.

o Washburn reminded that all 3rd party software must have their web accessibility on file and it can be difficult to obtain.

o Marsh gave congratulations to Kelli on working on the website and her efforts thus far.

 New Business – Project Scope for Years 2-5:

o Marsh noted that all project/scope items seem to fall under the broad umbrella of training and awareness/education. Another item related to project scope is legacy documents and getting those up to date as well as using Google analytics to figure out how to update the most accessed content first.

o Regarding 3rd party platforms, the purchaser should be knowledgeable of the VPAT, and Brian’s office should not be the sole responsible one for VPATs. We should have a realistic scope.

o Carr agreed: Yes, make sure that you are reasonable and flexible in the process of your goals.

o Marsh added the goals of procurement, training and education.

o Dotterer wanted to add to the goals of having the tools for making the changes.

o Carr suggested that the goals include the use of the software Netcentric instead of Adobe. Netcentric only works with PowerPoint and Word right now, however.

o Dotterer questioned the Netcentric plugins learning curve and cost benefit.

o Carr encouraged use of a demo copy to see if it is appropriate for our university.

o Dotterer noted our biggest challenge for licenses was the cost.

o Hokinson emphasized the need to make sure that the people have the tools and knowledge how to use them with a respect to time. o Dotterer thinks that most of the accessible documents should be LMS and HTML.

 Goals:

o Marsh suggested to take a look at short term goals, especially for convocation typically before classes begin.

o Beck thinks that we should develop awareness before training, possibly putting this as an item on the president’s cabinet. Also, possibly bringing in two or three broad based topics at convocation. He suggested to break into small sub-committees that would be able to tackle their own respective areas. Through these we could push for important documents over review dates.

o Hokinson suggested that convocation would be a good time to raise awareness of the necessity of the work being done.

o Washburn thought that public knowledge of the needs that we are fulfilling is important.

o Carr talked about the importance of making the knowledge of what we are doing noticeable throughout all levels on campus.

o Marsh suggested that someone bring this public awareness up to the cabinet.

o Beck agreed to cabinet under convocation planning.

o Marsh noted that further internal considerations need to reviewed before setting firm goals and timelines.

 Meeting Schedule:

o Marsh suggested that meeting after Thanksgiving break the first week of December.

o Dotterer talked about having a November training on showing us what to look for and help us know exactly what we are pushing to change. He suggested a training rather than a formal meeting for the next meeting.

o Marsh replied that perhaps having people having a live demo of a screen reader so that people can have an example of the problem.

o Hokinson noted that convocation is a vehicle to raise awareness, but emphasized that this committee and leadership need to be fully committed. We have to be on board first before we roll it out. She suggested a training in addition to a meeting.

o Carr mentioned he will be on campus the morning of December 7th. o Marsh requested to push the meeting back and make it a longer timeframe to capitalize on Rob’s presence on campus.

o Beck will encourage cabinet to attend.

 Adjournment:

o Marsh entertained a motion to adjourn: 1-Washburn, 2-Hoskinson. Meeting adjourned at 11:12 AM.