Creating an Online Scientific Art Exhibit Formatted for People with a Visual Impairment

Sorrell, Melanie; Norton, Derek R; McAdams, Jeff; Winterling, Rachael; Dipple, Kathleen M.

doi:10.1080/19322909.2017.1300788

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of those who did conduct accessibility/usability testing with individuals with disabilities, most worked with users with low or no vision (Dermody and Majekodunmi, 2011;Conway et al, 2012;Hunsucker, 2013;Ekwelem, 2013;Babu and Xie, 2017;Lazar and Briggs, 2015;Yoon et al, 2016aYoon et al, , 2016bSorrell et al, 2017). Only Pionke (2017b) went to significant lengths to include perspectives beyond print impairment including individuals with autism, motor impairment, and post-traumatic stress disorder in his research.…”

Section: Evaluating Accessibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there remains a heavy focus on library websites in the accessibility literature, other types of online resources have come into question as well, including research databases (Blechner, 2015); online exhibits and collections of digitized and born-digital materials (Walker and Keenan, 2015; Xie et al , 2015; Sorrell et al , 2017; Babu and Xie, 2017); instructional objects (Oud, 2011; Wakimoto and Soules, 2011; Wray, 2013; Clossen, 2014; Clossen and Proces, 2017); archival finding aids (Southwell and Slater, 2012, 2013); e-books and e-readers (Maatta and Bonnici, 2014; Mune and Agee, 2016; Dobson and McNaught, 2017; Kahler, 2017; McNaught et al , 2018); digital talking books (Lundh and Johnson, 2015); live instruction sessions (Pionke, 2017a); and the widely-used Springshare platform LibGuides (Pionke and Manson, 2018). While many of these studies are good starting points and will serve as useful references for library practitioners concerned with approaching specific technologies from an accessibility perspective, it is impossible in some cases not to notice a persistent lack of direct engagement with users with diverse abilities.…”

Section: Evaluating Accessibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defining, evaluating, and achieving accessible library resources

Kimura

2018

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review the library and information science literature related to the accessibility of digital resources by individuals with mental, physical or other impairments, to assess the state of research in the field and to explore new avenues for investigation. Design/methodology/approach There is an increasingly rich body of literature surrounding digital accessibility in libraries, ranging from practical guides for authors of Web content, to principles of universal design, to the ethical considerations of libraries subscribing to packages of digital content, to critical examinations of the accessibility guidelines themselves. This review is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive; less attention is given to studies of specific tools that will become quickly outdated, and more attention is given to underlying considerations and approaches that will remain relevant even as technologies change. Findings Many libraries and vendors have taken steps to provide equal access to websites and electronic resources in recent years. While the literature reflects an increasing level of critical engagement with concepts around disability and diversity, it also demonstrates methodological weaknesses in assessment projects that do not lead to meaningful accessibility. Originality/value This review offers theoretical and practical perspectives from recent work that can assist librarians in planning and decision-making, as they deal with an increasingly complex landscape of digital resources.

show abstract