jump to content

Assignments

Accessibility Assignment Rubrics

Accessibility Blog Entry

You'll keep a journal of your exploration of accessibility topics in your blog. Note: If you do not already have a blog, either sign up for a free blog on http://blogger.com or http://wordpress.com OR download WordPress from http://wordpress.org and install it on your server (you will need to create an account first at http://wordpress.com).

Use the markup strategies discussed in this course design your own blog template to make your content more accessible. Feel free to modify the design of your blog during the course as you increase your knowledge of accessibility. You should update the blog each week. Each post should be at least 200 words in length and must be in your own words. Be sure to cite all sources.

Below are topics you might explore on your blog:

  • Universal Design
  • Benefits of Universal Design
  • Who benefits from accessible web sites?
  • Web Accessibility Initiative recent activities
  • WCAG 2.0
  • Section 508
  • Reflection about the Simulation Lab
  • Accessibility assessment of a popular web site
  • (X)HTML coding techniques to provide for accessibility
  • CSS coding techniques to increase accessibility
  • Accessibility techniques for Adobe PDFs
  • Accessibility techniques for Adobe Flash and other multimedia
  • Scripting techniques to provide for accessibility
  • Legal issues related to accessibility
  • Accessibility and mobile devices
  • Related books, magazines, or podcasts

Recommended: Subscribe to your classmates' blog RSS feeds using Google Reader, Netvibes, Bloglines, or another RSS reader of your choice so you can learn from your peers.

Course Blog Assignment Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points
Blog Posts (evaluated weekly) Blog post was not published on time, is poorly written, does not contain content relevant to the course, or does not meet the post length requirement. Blog post was published on time, contains some spelling and/or grammatical errors, meets the post length requirement, but content is not very relevant to the course, or does not expand upon course topics. Blog post was published on time, contains no spelling and/or grammatical errors, meets the post length requirement, and the content expands upon course topics. Blog post is published on time, is very well written with no typos, grammar, or spelling errors, expands upon course topics, and exceeds the minimum post length. Post contains images where relevant to the content, and links to plenty of sources and resources.  

Awareness Lab

In your experience visiting web sites at one time or another you've probably encountered a web page that is difficult or frustrating to use. You also may have noticed web pages with accessibility issues. In this activity you will describe a web page that is either difficult to use of has one or more of the accessibility issues described in the World Wide Access: Accessible Web Design video. Write a one or two paragraphs that include the URL of the web page, the goal of the web site, the target audience of the web site, and three to five sentences about the accessibility and/or usability issues of the page.

Awareness Lab Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points
Content Description was of the website was incomplete or had inaccuracies, or there are three or more grammatical errors. Content is complete, accurate, and addresses relevant accessibilty/usuabilty issues encountered by the student. There are three or fewer grammatical errors. Content is complete, accurate and addresses relevant accessibilty/usability issues encountered by the student. There are no grammatical errors.  
Critical Thinking Lacking critical thinking or lacking relevance. Some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) evident. Clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation).  

Simulation Lab

Complete one of the simulations listed below. Take notes about your experiences during the simulation because you will be writing a few paragraphs about your experiences. Also identify ways that the design of the site could be improved to create a better experience for all users.

  • WebAim Screen Reader Simulation

    Can you complete the tasks using the screen reader? If you need a hint or two, "i" will give you a peek at the web page screen shot. Don't be surprised if you get a little frustrated during this simulation — think of how it would be to always access the Web in this manner!

    http://www.webaim.org/simulations/screenreader

    OR

  • Low Vision Simulation

    http://www.webaim.org/simulations/lowvis.html

    OR

  • Mobility Impairment Simulation

    In this simulation you will gain an understanding of limitations of computer use for people with limited use of their hands. Some people must rely on a mouthstick or a single finger for computer input.

    1. Choose a web site to try out.
    2. Place your mouse where you cannot reach it.
    3. Use one finger on the the keyboard to navigate a web site. Use the tab, page up, page down, and enter keys.

For all simulations:

Include the following information in your report.

  • List the simulation option you completed.
  • If you completed the Mobility Impairment Simulation, copy and paste the URL of the web site you visited.
  • Write a few paragraphs about your experiences using the simulation. Describe any surprises you encountered or frustrations that you felt.
  • Suggest three ways that the design of the web pages could be improved.
Simulation Lab Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 point 1 point 2 points
Content Description of the simulation was incomplete or had inaccuracies, or there are five or more grammatical errors. Content is complete, accurate, and addresses the surprises or frustrations encountered by the student. There are three or more grammatical errors. Content is complete, accurate and and addresses the surprises or frustrations encountered by the student. There are no grammatical errors.  
Critical Thinking Lacking critical thinking. Three relevant recommendations for improvement were not provided. Some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) evident. Three relevant recommendations for improvement were provided. Clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). Three relevant recommendations for improvement were provided.  

Accessible Content Design and Test Lab

Create a web page with accessible content and accessible navigation. Verify your skills when you test your page with an online accessibility testing tool.

Create a Web Page

Create a web page document about ONE of the following topics:

  • accessibility
  • web design
  • a hobby
  • a vacation destination
  • your resume

The page must include the following components:

  • a navigation area with five hyperlinks
  • at least one paragraph
  • one h1 element
  • at least one h2 element
  • an unordered list
  • at least one image
  • The CSS page layout should be centered with two columns and take up no more than 80% of the browser window.

Your document must use valid (X)HTML and CSS syntax. Publish your page to the Web.

Test for Accessibility

Choose ONE of the following accessibility testing tools to check your page:

Review the results and modify your page until you believe that you have satisfied the requirements. Add a reflection to your web page document that includes responses to the following questions:

  1. What is the name and URL of the testing tool you choose to use?
  2. What accessibility guidelines does the tool follow?
  3. Describe the modifications you needed to make to your page in order to pass the test.
  4. Would you recommend using this tool to verify compliance with accessibility guidelines? Why or why not?
Accessible Content Design and Test Lab Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points
Design Does not demonstrate a consistent design aesthetic, does not exhibit all princples of design, or has a poor information hierarchy. Demonstrates a basic but consistent aesthetic that exhibits principles of design and communicates information hierarchy. Demonstrates a unique, professional, consistent aesthetic that exhibits principles of design and clearly communicates information hierarchy.  
Required Components One or more required page components are missing. All required page components are included but are deficient in some way. All required page components are included in a manner that follows best practices.  
(X)HTML Markup is not semantic, fails W3C validation, is poorly organized, mixes presentation with structure, fails to meet Section 508 accessibility requirements, or fails to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A guidelines. Markup makes basic use of semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessiblity requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level A requirements, and is satisfactorily organized. Markup is exemplary in its semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessibility requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level AA requiremetns, is exceptionally well organized, and uses classes and IDs only as necessary.  
CSS CSS fails W3C validation, contains errata, is overly verbose, is poorly organized, is uncommented, renders inconsistently between target browsers, or is not kept eternally in a global style sheet. CSS passes W3C validation, uses some CSS shorthand to keep code brief, is some what organized, renders relatively consistently in all target browsers, and is kept external in a global style sheet separate from markup. CSS passes W3C validation, is exceptionally well organized, uses CSS shorthand to keep code brief, renders consistently or gracefully degrades in all target browsers, and is kept external and separate from markup, and CSS is used creatively to solve design problems.  
Assignment Requirements Lab exercises are incomplete and/or do not meet respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete but do not meet all respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete and meet respective requirements.  
URL & Testing Tool Missing URL or testing tool name The URL of the page tested and the name of the testing tool are listed. N/A  
Accessibility Guidelines followed by chosen tool The written description is missing or was copied and pasted into the assignment or there were inaccuracies in the report, or there are three or more grammatical errors in the written description. The written description (not just copy and paste) is somewhat unclear or contains slight inaccuracies or has fewer than three grammatical errors. The written description (not just copy and paste) is clear, concise, accurate, and free of grammatical errors.  
Modifications Needed The written description of the modifications needed is missing or is unclear or innacurate or incomplete or has three or more grammatical errors. The written description of the modifications needed is in some way is unclear, slightly inaccurate or incomplete, or has fewer than three grammatical errors. The written description of the modifications needed is detailed, accurate, complete, and free of grammatical errors.  
Recommendations Lacking critical thinking. Recommendations are not practical or not relevant. Accommodations for providing accessibility for only one type of disability is addressed. Some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) evident. Recommendations are for the most part practical and relevant. Accommodations for providing accessibility for vision, hearing, and motor disabilities are not all addressed. Clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). Recommendations are characterized by practicality and relevance to the accessibility issue. Accommodations for providing accessibility for vision, hearing, and motor disabilities are addressed.  

Accessible Data Table Lab Exercise

Create a web page that contains an accessible data table and a reflection about this assignment. Use Table 6a (page 10) in the PDF at http://www.nps.gov/romo/parkmgmt/upload/current_inventories_c.pdf as a guide for the content and layout of your (X)HTML table. Include attributes needed to meet W3C and Section 508 accessibility guidelines. Your document must use valid (X)HTML and CSS syntax. Your reflection should include a paragraph that describes the design/coding accessibility techniques you used, the purpose of the accessibility techniques used, and any challenges that you overcame as you completed this activity. Publish your page to the Web.

Accessible Form Lab Exercise

Create a web page that contains an accessible form and a reflection about this assignment. Use the form on http://www.grants.gov/section910/OutreachRequestForm.doc as the source for the type of information that the form should collect. Include attributes needed to meet W3C and Section 508 accessibility guidelines. Your document must use valid (X)HTML and CSS syntax. Your reflection should include a paragraph that describes the design/coding accessibility techniques you used, the purpose of the accessibility techniques used, and any challenges that you overcame as you completed this activity. Publish your page to the Web.

Lab Exercise Grading Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points
Design Lab exercises are not presented with a consistent aesthetic and have a poor information hierarchy. Lab exercises have a basic but consistent aesthetic that communicates information hierarchy. Lab exercises have a unique, professional, consistent aesthetic that clearly communicates information hierarchy.  
(X)HTML Markup is not semantic, fails W3C validation, is poorly organized, mixes presentation with structure, fails to meet Section 508 accessibility requirements, or fails to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A guidelines. Markup makes basic use of semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessiblity requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level A requirements, and is satisfactorily organized. Markup is exemplary in its semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessibility requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level AA requiremetns, is exceptionally well organized, and uses classes and IDs only as necessary.  
CSS CSS fails W3C validation, contains errata, is overly verbose, is poorly organized, is uncommented, renders inconsistently between target browsers, or is not kept eternally in a global style sheet. CSS passes W3C validation, uses some CSS shorthand to keep code brief, is some what organized, renders relatively consistently in all target browsers, and is kept external in a global style sheet separate from markup. CSS passes W3C validation, is exceptionally well organized, uses CSS shorthand to keep code brief, renders consistently or gracefully degrades in all target browsers, and is kept external and separate from markup, and CSS is used creatively to solve design problems.  
Assignment Requirements Lab exercises are incomplete and/or do not meet respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete but do not meet all respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete and meet respective requirements.  
Reflection Reflection is missing, unorganized, lacks critical thinking, or has three or more grammatical errors. Reflection demonstrates some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) and has fewer than three grammatical errors. Reflection demonstrates clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). No grammatical errors.  

Accessibility Test Lab

You will be assigned a web page to test. Use three of the accessibility testing tools listed in the resources area to test the page. Note any issues. Also note manual checks. Write a two-to-three page report that lists the following:

  • The URL of the web page you tested
  • The name of each accessibility testing tool you used along with a written description of issues or manual checks noted by the tool
  • The results of your manual checks
  • Recommendation for improvements to the page
Accessibility Test Lab Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points
Design Lab exercises are not presented with a consistent aesthetic and have a poor information hierarchy. Lab exercises have a basic but consistent aesthetic that communicates information hierarchy. Lab exercises have a unique, professional, consistent aesthetic that clearly communicates information hierarchy.  
(X)HTML Markup is not semantic, fails W3C validation, is poorly organized, mixes presentation with structure, fails to meet Section 508 accessibility requirements, or fails to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A guidelines. Markup makes basic use of semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessiblity requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level A requirements, and is satisfactorily organized. Markup is exemplary in its semantics, passes W3C validation, meets Section 508 accessibility requirements, meets WCAG 2.0 Level AA requiremetns, is exceptionally well organized, and uses classes and IDs only as necessary.  
CSS CSS fails W3C validation, contains errata, is overly verbose, is poorly organized, is uncommented, renders inconsistently between target browsers, or is not kept eternally in a global style sheet. CSS passes W3C validation, uses some CSS shorthand to keep code brief, is some what organized, renders relatively consistently in all target browsers, and is kept external in a global style sheet separate from markup. CSS passes W3C validation, is exceptionally well organized, uses CSS shorthand to keep code brief, renders consistently or gracefully degrades in all target browsers, and is kept external and separate from markup, and CSS is used creatively to solve design problems.  
Assignment Requirements Lab exercises are incomplete and/or do not meet respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete but do not meet all respective requirements. Lab exercises are complete and meet respective requirements.  

Accessibility Evaluation

The purpose of this activity is to evaluate a web site for compliance with accessibility guidelines. Choose a web site to use as a case study. You will focus on the home page and your choice of three content pages.

Syntax Validation

Conduct the tests listed below for EACH of the FOUR web pages you have chosen for your project and suggest improvements for the site. For each test listed below, write a report of the test results and your suggestions for improvement.

  1. Web Standards W3C XHTML Validation Report

    http://validator.w3.org

    Summarize and analyze the test results for each of the four pages. Describe and justify your recommendations for improvement.

  2. Web Standards W3C CSS Validation Report

    http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator

    Summarize and analyze the test results. Describe and justify your recommendations for improvement.

Accessibility Testing

Choose one or more accessibility testing tools to check the FOUR web pages you have chosen for your project for their compliance with the accessibility guidelines listed below. Follow the directions provided below.

  1. Evaluate Compliance with Section 508

    Conduct a test to verify compliance with Section 508 Guidelines. Write a one to two page report (double spaced) that includes the following: URL of each page

    • Name of each testing tool
    • Description of the testing procedure (include a description of any manual checks)
    • Description of the test results
    • Suggested improvements. Justify your suggestions.
  2. Evaluate Compliance with WCAG 1.0 Priority 1

    Conduct a test to verify compliance with WCAG 1.0 Priority 1 Guidelines. Write a one to two page report (doublespaced) that includes the following:

    • URL of each page
    • Name of each testing tool
    • Description of the testing procedure (include a description of any manual checks)
    • Description of the test results
    • Suggested improvements. Justify your suggestions.
    • Justify why WCAG 1.0 was used rather than WCAG 2.0.
  3. Evaluate Compliance with WCAG 2.0 Level A Success Criteria

    Conduct a test to verify compliance with WCAG 2.0 Level A Success Criteria Guidelines. Write a one to two page report (double spaced) that includes the following:

    • URL of each page
    • Name of each testing tool
    • Description of the testing procedure (include a description of any manual checks)
    • Description of the test results
    • Suggested improvements. Justify your suggestions.
  4. Evaluate Compliance with your choice of a regional or international accessibility guideline.

    For example, Conduct a test to verify compliance with IITAA Guidelines. Use the document at http://www.dhs.state.il.us/iitaa/iitaawebdevelopertestingchecklist.html as a starting point to write a one-to-two page (single-spaced) accessibility report each of your four web pages. Include your suggestions for improvement. Justify your suggestions.

Accessibility Evaluation Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points
Syntax Validation:
W3C XHTML Validation Report Results		 The written description is missing or was copied and pasted into the assignment or there were inaccuracies in the report, or there are five or more grammatical errors in the written description. The written description (not just copy and paste) of the issues found during automated testing is somewhat unclear or contains slight inaccuracies or has three or fewer grammatical errors. The written description (not just copy and paste) of the issues found during automated testing is clear, concise, accurate, and free of grammatical errors.  
Syntax Validation:
W3C CSS Validation Report Results		 The written description is missing or was copied and pasted into the assignment or there were inaccuracies in the report, or there are five or more grammatical errors in the written description. The written description (not just copy and paste) of the issues found during automated testing is somewhat unclear or contains slight inaccuracies or has three or fewer grammatical errors. The written description (not just copy and paste) of the issues found during automated testing is clear, concise, accurate, and free of grammatical errors.  
Accessibility Testing (for each tool assigned) The written description is missing or is unclear or innacurate or incomplete or has five or more grammatical errors. The written description includes the URL of each page, name of the testing tool, description of the testing procedure (including manual checks performed) and a description of the test results but is in some say unclear, slightly inaccurate or incomplete, or has three or feweror grammatical errors. The written description includes the URL of each page, name of the testing tool, description of the testing procedure (including manual checks performed) and a description of the test results is detailed, accurate, complete, and free of grammatical errors.  
Recommendations for Improvement Lacking critical thinking. Recommendations are not practical or not relevant. Accommodations for providing accessibility for only one type of disability is addressed. Some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) evident. Recommendations are for the most part practical and relevant. Accommodations for providing accessibility for vision, hearing, and motor disabilities are not all addressed. Clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). Recommendations are characterized by practicality and relevance to the accessibility issue. Accommodations for providing accessibility for vision, hearing, and motor disabilities are addressed.  

PDF Lab

Create a one-page accessible PDF document that uses a Microsoft Word document as a starting point. The contents of the document will be a resume — either your own resume or resume of a fictional person. The Word document should include the following objects:

  • heading
  • subheadings
  • bullet lists
  • one image
  • at least one hyperlink

Convert your Word document to a PDF. Review the PDF and verify accessibility features. Listen to the PDF and tab through the various parts. Adobe Reader versions 6 and higher will "read" a PDF out loud. Adobe Reader Keyboard shortcuts:

  • Ctrl+shift+b - to listen to the entire document
  • Ctrl+shift+v - to listen to the page
  • Ctrl+shift+c - to resume
  • Ctrl+shift+e - to stop

Modify your PDF as needed. Publish your PDF to the Web.

PDF Lab Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 point 1 point 2 points
PDF PDF was not created. PDF was created, includes appropriate headings and, when read aloud, the order is understandable. PDF was created, includes appropriate headings and, when read aloud, the order is understandable.  
Required Components Two or more required components are not present All required components are present but could be more accessible. All required components are present and contribute to the accessibility of the document.  

Discussion Questions

The Discussion Questions (DQs) are written in a format for an online course. However, they can be adapted to classroom discussion, group activities, and/or lab activities.

Discussion Question 1

Universal Design

Take a moment to view Universal Design for the Web. This suggests that while usability does not necessarily increase accessibility, increased accessibility tends to increase usability. Do you agree? Why or why not? Find at least one web resource that supports your opinion.

Reply to this message by MM/DD:

  1. Change the subject of your reply from "DQ 1 - Accessibility & Usability" to "your name" and "agree" or "disagree" (For example: "Sparky - disagree")
  2. State your opinion and write two or three sentences that justify your opinion - include the URL(s) of web resource(s) that support your opinion.

Read the replies of the other students and respond to at least two students by MM/DD with a substantial response that extends the discussion. For example, when you respond to the message either pose a specific question or comment on something that surprised/interested you when you visited the URL provided by the student.

Discussion Question 2

Accessible Technologies

Choose ONE of the following technologies:

  • HTML or XHTML
  • CSS
  • PDF
  • Scripting
  • Mobile access

Search the Web for a tutorial or article that provides two or more useful tips for improving the accessibility of the technology you chose to explore.

Reply to this message by MM/DD:

  1. Change the subject of your reply from "Accessible Technologies" to "your name -- Technology" (For example: "Maya - Flash")
  2. Include the following in your message:
    • A description of a tip or hint to help increase the accessibility of the technology
    • the exact URL of your resource
    • the reason why you believe this tip is useful

Read the other students' messages and reply to two students (by MM/DD) with a constructive comment or suggestion.

Discussion Question 3

Simulation Lab

Reflect on your experiences in the Simulation Lab. Was there something that surprised you, frustrated you, or inspired you? Reply to this message by MM/DD:

  1. Change the subject of your reply from "Simulation" to "your name" and the type of simulation you completed (either WebAim Screen Reader Simulation, Low Vision Simulation, or Mobility Impairment Simulation) (For example: "Karen - Low Vision Simulation")
  2. Write three to five sentences that describe your experience and something that surprised, frustrated, or inspired you.

Read the replies of the other students and respond to at least two students by MM/DD with a substantial response that extends the discussion.

Discussion Question 4

Apply Your New Accessibility Knowledge

This discussion question is different from the others. You are assigned to a small group to discuss ways to improve the accessibility of a specific web site. Look in the message in this thread with your name in the subject. This is your group. Read the message and view your assignment web site.

Reply to this message by MM/DD:

  1. Change the subject of your reply to "your name" and the accessibility issue you are addressing. (For example, "Jamal - Missing Alt Text")
  2. Write three to five sentences that describe at least one area where the accessibility of this site could be improved and your suggestions for improvement. Cite the URL or page number of a resource that supports your suggestion.

Read the replies of the other students in your group and respond to at least two students by MM/DD with a substantial response that extends the discussion.

Discussion Question 5

Exploring the Accessibility of CAPTCHAs

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jrgMlufa7w for an introduction to accessibility issues related to CAPTCHAs.

Learn more about CAPTCHAs at:

Reply to this message by MM/DD:

Change the subject of your reply from “CAPTCHAs” to “your name - For - Against - It Depends” (For example: “Ashita - Against”).

The message of your reply should contain the following:

  1. One or two sentences describing your opinion.
  2. Two or three sentences that provide justification for your opinion (include URLs of resources).
  3. Your recommendation for a web site that wants to use CAPTCHAs. Justify your recommendation (provide URLs of resources).

Read the replies of the other students and respond to at least two students by MM/DD with a substantial response that extends the discussion.

Discussion Question 6

Accessibility Testing Mini-Review

We are taking a very broad view of accessibility in this Discussion Question and considering a wide variety of testing tools/applications — not only applications that specifically test for Section 508 or W3C WCAG compliance. Choose ONE of the accessibility checkers, screen readers, text-browser simulators, reading level testers, or color blindness simulation tools introduced in the Accessibility Testing Module.

Reply to this message by MM/DD: Change the subject of your reply from “Accessibility Testing Application Mini-Review” to “your name — The Application Name” For example, “Poindexter - Hera 2.0”

Include the following in your message:

  1. The name of the application
  2. The purpose of the application
  3. Ease of download and installation (if applicable)
  4. Cost (if applicable)
  5. Ease of use
  6. Type of report provided. As a starting point, consider any of the following — only use those that are applicable: text-based, graphic-based, code errors highlighted, line numbers of errors listed, simulation, and so on.
  7. If applicable, indicate whether Section 508, WC3 WCAG 1.0 or W3C WCAG 2.0 standard compliance are reported on.
  8. State your recommendation and justify it.

NOTE: EACH STUDENT MUST REPORT ON A DIFFERENT TOOL — students who answer this Discussion Question earlier have more choices than students who answer this Discussion Question later.

Read the replies of the other students and respond by MM/DD with a comment that furthers the discussion by either making an observation and asking a question OR describing your own experiences with this application.

Discussion Question 7

Reflecting on your Accessibility Journey

You've jumped headfirst into web design accessibility topics in this course. Let's take a few moments in this DQ to reflect on your journey into accessibility. This DQ provides an opportunity for you to reflect and think about your exploration of web accessibility in this course.

Reply to this message MM/DD: Change the subject of your reply from “Reflecting on your Accessibility Journey” to “your name - your Aha! moment” (For example: “Beatrice - headings make a difference”)

Read the questions below. Spend a few minutes thinking about the questions and how you plan to answer the questions. In your message, answer EACH of the following questions with two to four sentences that provide examples/justification/etc. As you explored the topic of web accessibility…

  1. At what point did you feel most engaged with what was happening?
  2. At what point did you feel most distanced from what was happening?
  3. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took did you find most affirming and helpful?
  4. What action that anyone (teacher or student) took did you find most puzzling or confusing?
  5. What surprised you the most? (This could be something about your own reactions to what went on, or something that someone did, or anything else that occurs to you.)
  6. Any additional thoughts?

Read the other students' messages. Reply to at least two students with a constructive comment, suggestion, or question that furthers the discussion by MM/DD.

Sample Discussion Question Rubric

This rubric could be used in an online course to evaluate student discussion question participation. Note: this is a generic rubric that could be used for any discussion question — therefore it does not correspond to a specific course content competency.

Discussion Question Participation Tips:

A total of 12 points is available for each mandatory discussion question. It's a good idea to login to the course three times per week to keep up with the discussion.

  • Participate EARLIER in the WEEK rather than at the last possible moment.
  • Reply to others EARLIER in the WEEK rather than at the last possible moment.
  • Check in and participate in the discussion three separate days per week.

Your participation in the discussion question is assessed using the rubric shown below.

Discussion Question Rubric
Criteria Performance Quality Score
0 points 1 point 2 points 3 points
Content Response was not applicable to the discussion or did not follow Netiquette. Ideas were incomplete or had inaccuracies, or there are two or more opinions are presented without supporting facts. Content is complete and accurate, but lacking in new ideas, or there may be one areas an opinion is presented without supporting facts or references.

Content generally doesn't invite further discussion or investigation.		 Content is complete, accurate and offers new ideas. The discussion is well supported with details that explain the participant’s conclusions.

Content encourages further discussion on topic. 		 
Critical Thinking Lacking critical thinking. Postings tend to be inaccurate or unclear. Lacking critical thinking. Postings tend to address peripheral issues. Generally accurate, but with omissions or clear recitation. Some critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) evident, but posting may not directly address the issue. Clear evidence of critical thinking (application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). Postings are characterized by originality and relevance to the topic.  
Timeliness Did not participate in the discussion. Participant’s response and replies to others is after the due date. Initial response is after the due date. Replies to other students on or before the due date. Initial response is on or before the due date. Replies to other students on or before the due date.  
Involvement and Responsiveness Does not participate in the discussion during the week and/or fails to respond to others. Participates in discussion two or fewer days per week and/or fails to responds to others. Interaction is best described as "good idea ..." and of little substance to continue discussion. Participates in discussion at least three days per week and responds to other students. Some communication encourages further responses, raises questions or politely offers alternative perspectives but other interactions do not continue or add value to the discussion. Participates in discussion at least three days per week and responds to other students. Communication adds value to the discussion and encourages further responses, raises questions or politely offers alternative perspectives.