Accessibility, equity and the ‘digital divide’

Introduction  

Issues of accessibility, equity and the digital divide have persisted despite innovations in technology and solutions to bridge the gap. COVID-19 has proved to be both inclusive and exclusionary with some aspects of accessibility improving, while others have become stark reminders of a deepening divide. Within the broader accessibility, equity and the digital divide literature there are some specific examples regarding disability and accessibility, as this has been well-outlined in the research. Here, assistive technology provides a range of benefits to students with disabilities and often benefits all students. However, there continue to be challenges associated with training, access to technology and accessibility being an ‘add on’, rather than considered from the outset. Accessibility is an ongoing challenge, but there also remains a range of solutions in the form of technologies and practices. Universal Design and other practices that educators can implement, such as using multiple media sources, can provide students with better access to learning. Future development is likely to continue to draw on newer technologies and the successes of accessibility during the pandemic to narrow the digital divide.  

Current trends  

Some researchers have argued that COVID-19 offered a shift to more accessibility through adaptability and flexibility (Bartholomay, 2022) and broader rates of digital inclusion in Australia suggest that the digital divide has improved (Thomas et al., 2021). However, there is a contention and some evidence that the divide has deepened throughout the pandemic (Correia, 2020; Aissaoui, 2020). This is particularly evident as the shift to online learning as an emergency response, rather than a well-thought-out and considered approach founded on accessibility, equity and narrowing the digital divide (Correia, 2020). Prior to the pandemic, there was a suggestion that as technology increased, so did the digital divide, suggesting that issues of equity are embedded and far-reaching (Lussier-Desrochers et al., 2017). However, recent years have seen further adoption of Universal Design practices, enhancing accessibility for students with disabilities in some respects (Fichten et al., 2020).  

Assistive technology allows students with disabilities the opportunity for fuller participation (Atanga et al., 2019; Lussier-Desrochers et al., 2017; McNicholl et al., 2019). Active learning, a reduction in isolation and improvement in learning outcomes are key benefits to accessibility and support (Chun and Williams, 2021). In addition, research suggests that improving accessibility benefits all students, rather than just those with disabilities. For example, Dinmore (2019) contends that same-language subtitles (SLS) can increase comprehension and engagement for all students, while also being inclusive. However, accessibility can be challenging to ensure equity. For example, while technology has increased, there continues to be concern about the ‘first-level’ digital divide, that is, basic access to technology (Aissaoui, 2020). Facilities, activities and software should be designed with accessibility in mind, rather than as an ‘add-on’ by putting the voices and experiences of students with disabilities at the forefront of design (Colquhoun et al., 2021). Ensuring that educators receive the appropriate training in assistive technology and making sure that it is made available to students are also key strategies to reducing these barriers (Chun and Williams, 2021; Atanga et al., 2019; McNicholl et al., 2019).  

  Technologies and practices  

Most technological considerations in terms of accessibility relate to assistive technology for students with disabilities. The ubiquity of mobile phones and tablets with a myriad of apps available has demonstrated the powerful impact of portable technology on accessibility (Fichten et al., 2020; Lussier-Desrochers et al., 2017). While the literature highlights a range of accessible options for specific students to meet their needs, such as screen readers, there are a range of strategies that educators can also implement. For example, providing image descriptions for screen readers or using multiple resources so that students can access one best for their learning. Martins’ et al. (2020) consideration of technology and practices for accessibility are outlined below:  

• Reading – Screen reader, smaller and simpler text, use auxiliary vocabulary, don’t use abbreviations  
• Writing – Typing text, spell checker  
• Calculating – Calculator, numeric ruler  
• Attention – Use more than one media resource (image, video, text, sound), use feedback frequently  
• Time planning – Don’t use time in the activities or give more time to do the activities  
• Long or short-term memory – Videos, images, links  
• Organization – Index of contents  
• Cognitive problems – Use of alternative text in images and links, use of simpler texts, use of videos and other multimedia resources to complement the understanding of texts, tips and glossary for less common words (Martins et al., 2020)  

Technology is increasingly seen as a key tool in achieving equity, while simultaneously potentially increasing the digital divide (Turner-Cmuchal, 2017). Technology is not always designed to be accessible or in line with Universal Design principles (outlined in further detail below) and similarly, is not always available to those that need it (Turner-Cmuchal, 2017; Lussier-Desrochers et al., 2017).  

Naffi et al. (2020) provide a range of suggestions for improving equity and accessibility, including those that can be implemented by educators:  

• Create accessible materials – documents that are easy to read, share, and print and are compatible with assistive technologies  
• Use digital technologies that are accessible – such as those with text-to-speech, high-contrast themes  
• Record lectures, and caption videos and audio content  
• Adopt inclusive and culturally responsive teaching – equity should be a key value and ensuring students are heard  
• Adopt flexible approaches to student participation, where possible  

Ideally, an approach implementing universal design is key. Universal Design consists of 7 principles to create flexible solutions from the beginning that anticipate accessibility needs. As Curry (2003) contends, because Universal Design is functional and seamless for most students, individual accommodations are minimal.  

  The 7 principles for Universal Design are:  

1. Equitable use   
2. Flexibility   
3. Simple and intuitive designs   
4. Perceptible information   
5. Tolerance for error   
6. Minimal physical effort   
7. Size and space for approach and use  

Further details on these principles can be found through the Australian Disability Clearinghouse on Education and Training (ADCET, 2022).  

Future developments  

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have called for careful consideration of a ‘return to normal’ in the future (Bartholomay, 2022). As Bartholomay (2022) argues, accessibility and equity lessons of the pandemic, such as flexible teaching and learning, should be retained moving forward. Similarly, it is important to consider the changing nature of the digital divide. While more people gained accessibility in Australia in 2020/21, Thomas et al. (2021) warn that such increases may not be long term. The pandemic similarly highlighted issues of ‘first-level digital divide’ (that is, access and equipment) that are still present and compound other issues of accessibility (Aissaoui, 2020). Likewise, while a hybrid model of online and face-to-face is expected to emerge in Higher Education, this has the potential to widen equality gaps (El Said, 2021). These considerations are supported by the call for more meaningful research to solve real-world issues like digital divides and accessibility (Kimmons, 2020).  

As new technology develops, it is expected that this will have an impact on accessibility. There is a possibility to create a further divide, however, other research suggests that new technology, including apps, can allow for more inclusivity, particularly in students with disabilities (Atanga et al., 2019). The integration of Augmented Reality (AR), Artificial Intelligence (AI) and smart learning environments are some possibilities offered by the advancement of technology (Jdaitawi and Kan’an, 2022; Fichten et al., 2020) and focusing on mainstream apps and devices in these fields can reduce stigma and facilitate further inclusion for students with disabilities (McNicholl et al., 2019).  

References

ADCET. (2022). Universal Design . Australian Government and University of Tasmania. Retrieved 28 January from https://www.adcet.edu.au/disability-practitioner/course-design-and-implementation/universal-design  

Aissaoui, N. (2020). The digital divide: a literature review and some directions for future research in light of COVID-19. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication , Published ahead of print . https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-06-2020-0075   

Atanga, C., Jones, B. A., Krueger, L. E., & Lu, S. (2019). Teachers of Students With Learning Disabilities: Assistive Technology Knowledge, Perceptions, Interests, and Barriers. Journal of Special Education Technology , 35 (4), 236-248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419864858   

Bartholomay, D. J. (2021). A Time to Adapt, Not “Return to Normal”: Lessons in Compassion and Accessibility from Teaching During COVID-19. Teaching Sociology , 50 (1), 62-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X211053376   

Chun, J., & Williams, T. O. (2021). A Community of Practice for Professional Development in Technology Integrations for Accessibility: A Case Study of a Faculty Inquiry Group. College Teaching , 69 (3), 126-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2020.1832435   

Colquhoun, C., Essmiller, K., & Reiter, H. (2021). Rethinking Accessibility Design Practices in Libraries. SHAREOK: advancing Oklahoma scholarship, research and institutional memory . https://hdl.handle.net/11244/331275   

Correia, A.-P. (2020). Healing the Digital Divide During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Quarterly Review of Distance Education , 21 (1), 13-22.   

Curry, C. (2003). Universal Design: Accessibility for All Learners. Educational Leadership , 61 (2), 55-60. https://inclusiveschoolcommunities.org.au/resources/toolkit/accessibility-and-universal-design#:~:text=UD%20is%20the%20design%20and,for%20adaptation%20or%20specialised%20design.   

Dinmore, S. (2019). Beyond lecture capture: Creating digital video content for online learning – a case study. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice , 16 (1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.14453/jutlp.v16i1.7   

El Said, G. R. (2021). How Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Higher Education Learning Experience? An Empirical Investigation of Learners’ Academic Performance at a University in a Developing Country. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction , 2021 , 6649524. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6649524   

Fichten, C., Olenik-Shemesh, D., Asuncion, J., Jorgensen, M., & Colwell, C. (2020). Higher Education, Information and Communication Technologies and Students with Disabilities: An Overview of the Current Situation. In S. J (Ed.), Improving Accessible Digital Practices in Higher Education . Palgrave Pivot. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37125-8_2   

Jdaitawi, M., & Kan’an, A. (2022). A Decade of Research on the Effectiveness of Augmented Reality on Students with Special Disability in Higher Education. Contemporary Educational Technology , 14 (1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11369   

Kimmons, R. (2020). Current Trends (and Missing Links) in Educational Technology Research and Practice. TechTrends , 64 (6), 803-809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00549-6   

Lussier-Desrochers, D., Normand, C., Romero-Torres, A., Lachapelle, Y., Godin-Tremblay, V., Dupont, M.-È., . . . Bilodeau, P. (2017). Bridging the digital divide for people with intellectual disability. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace , 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2017-1-1   

Martins, V., Amato, C., Tomczyk, Ł., Oyelere, S., Eliseo, M., & Silveira, I. (2020). Accessibility Recommendations for Open Educational Resources for People with Learning Disabilities. In Á. Rocha, H. Adeli, L. Reis, S. Costanzo, I. Orovic, & F. Moreira (Eds.), Trends and Innovations in Information Systems and Technologies . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45697-9_38   

McNicholl, A., Casey, H., Desmond, D., & Gallagher, P. (2021). The impact of assistive technology use for students with disabilities in higher education: a systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology , 16 (2), 130-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1642395   

Naffi, N., Davidson, A.-L., Patino, A., Beatty, B., Gbetoglo, E., & Duponsel, N. (2020). Online learning during COVID-19: 8 ways universities can improve equity and access. The Conversation . https://theconversation.com/online-learning-during-covid-19-8-ways-universities-can-improve-equity-and-access-145286  

Thomas, J., Barraket, J., Parkinson, S., Wilson, C., Holcombe-James, I., Kennedy, J., . . . Brydon, A. (2021). Australian Digital Inclusion Index: 2021 .   

Turner-Cmuchal, M. (2017). Foreword. In F. Dovigo & L. Casanova (Eds.), Good practices for equity and inclusion in Higher Education (pp. 6-11). Bergamo: Collana Educazione Inclusiva – Inclusive Education Series.