COM 610 8-2 Journal
I haven’t found a reliable source to back me up, but it seems to be that, anecdotally speaking, at least, the majority of the typically abled population may not understand what constitutes a disability, or what specific traits or issues may require accommodation. Take color blindness, for example. When I asked my neighbor this morning whether or not she considered color blindness an actual disability, I received a bemused look in response.
“Well… no,” she said to me. “It’s not as if someone who is color-blind is actually blind. I mean, they can still see things.”
Now, in part she isn’t incorrect: neither the ADA nor the Social Security Administration consider color blindness—or Color Vision Deficiency, to give it its proper name—an actual disability (Social Security Administration, n.d.). However, given that color blindness often results in the inability to distinguish between red and green at a traffic light, or not being able to tell if a steak or other meat is adequately cooked and therefore safe to consume, color blindness is very much a real concern. In fact, consider that it affects approximately 4.5% of population (Colour Blind Awareness, n.d.) with some estimates as high as 10% (Color Blindness, n.d.); with the U.S. population currently at over 326,000,000 (World Population Review, 2018), the conservative estimate of the color blind population is over 14,670,000. Since Red Green Color Blind is the most common form of color blindness (Colour Blind Awareness, n.d.)… well, that is a very, very large number of people unable to distinguish colors at a traffic light, or of children who are unable to distinguish colors in a classroom setting and thus require special accommodations.
This was just one example, and incidentally, one that is covered by Section508.gov: “302.3 Without Perception of Color. Where a visual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one visual mode of operation that does not require user perception of color” (United States Access Board, n.d.). How many other such “non-disabilities” form a significant part of many people’s daily lives but remain virtually invisible to the rest of the population? This is exactly why Section508.gov accessibility guidelines are so critical to the dessimination of information.
The United States Access Board (redirecting and clicking through from Section508.gov) lists a number of guidelines to adhere to for websites and other electronic resources. They include accommodations for compromised vision, hearing, speech, manipulation, reach and strength, and language, cognitive and learning disabilities (United States Access Board, n.d.). WCAG 2.0 lists very detailed and thorough guidelines and measures of sufficiency and failure for each of these on their website, along with techniques and examples for said sufficiency (Web Accessibility Initiative, n.d.). In order that my organization’s websites and mobile devices comply with all Section 508 requirements, I would have the IT and web design teams use WCAG 2.0 line by line to evaluate and code electronic resources. Then, I would implement a rigorous testing procedure to accertain that the websites and mobile applications will actually work in the real world: I would contact the ADA and the local branches of various disability organizations in the area, and ask for paid “volunteers” to come on premises and test the websites and mobile applications that have been modified to comply with Section 508. I would not allow testing off site, as numerous variables would then not be controlled (a blind person may access help, intentionally or otherwise, from a sighted person in the same room); also, recording of success and failures would be much more comprehensive when testing is done on site and in a well controlled environment.
Examples of such volunteers include an ABA therapist or an autistic individual from the local Autism Speaks chapter to evaluate usability and accessibility from a cognitive and learning standpoint, and individuals with sight and hearing impairements from the (in my area) North Carolina Deaf-Blind Associates) to perform similar evaluations from the perspectives of individuals who are blind or deaf. The feedback from these individuals would be invaluable to ensuring that websites and mobile applications go beyond simply adhering to Section 508 to providing as pleasurable an experience as possible.
It is not simply the disabled population that will benefit from adherence to Section 508 guidelines; I believe that much of the general population would, as well. I personally was considered legally blind without corrective lenses before I took advantage of LASIK, and often tired of wearing heavy spectacles. While I love to read, after a full day of wearing glasses—which often led to sore temples—or contact lenses that dried my eyes out, I would often take advantage of my computer’s voice-over capabilities designed for the visually impaired to give my eyes a rest but still consume content. When my babies were born, without the benefit of the multiple arms of most Hindu goddesses, I often found myself incapable of chatting with friends and family, most of whom were not local to the area, and most of whom who used—and still use!—messaging services such as WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger to communicate. I’d often use voice-to-text feature—which I imagine adheres to the multiple input device stipulation from WCAG 2.0 (Web Accessibility Initiative) as well as the manipulation (of a mouse or keyboard, perhaps) and the reach and strength stipulations from Section 508 (United States Access Board))—to “chat” while nursing the baby, changing the baby, or simple holding both babies. My husband often uses voice-to-text on his smartphone to compose long, detailed emails at the end of his day when he simply doesn’t want to face his computer after being glued to it all day (he works very long hours). These are three, very personal examples of how the general population—or at least, the perceived general population, as many of my peers had no idea I was visually inpaired, and as we don’t commonly think of parenthood or fatigue from long working hours as disabilities!—would benefit from solutions and accommodations geared toward the disabled community.
References
Color Blindness. (n.d.). Color Blindness. Retrieved from Color Blindness: http://www.colour-blindness.com/
Colour Blind Awareness. (n.d.). Colour Blindness. Retrieved from Colour Blind Awareness: http://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/
Social Security Administration. (n.d.). Disability Evaluation Under Social Security. Retrieved from Medical/Professional Relations: https://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/2.00-SpecialSensesandSpeech-Adult.htm
United States Access Board. (n.d.). Text of the Standards and Guidelines. Retrieved from United States Access Board: https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/final-rule/text-of-the-standards-and-guidelines
Web Accessibility Initiative. (n.d.). A customizable quick reference to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 requirements (success criteria) and techniques. Retrieved from How to Meet WCAG 2.0: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#navigation-mechanisms
World Population Review. (2018, February 9). United States Population 2018. Retrieved from World Population Review: http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/united-states-population/