W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire List of Accessibility Courses Monkey Review

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: lspereira@fc.ul.pt,caduarte@campus.ul.pt

This questionnaire was open from 2022-04-22 to 2022-05-06.

9 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Introduction and Purpose
  2. Review level
  3. List of Accessibility Courses
  4. Filtering Courses
  5. Submission Form
  6. Submitting a course
  7. Additional Comments

1. Introduction and Purpose

The following is a monkey review survey for the

Please review carefully the following pages:

For background on the purpose and scope of this work, please check the List of Courses Requirements analysis.

Remember: This is the first release of the List of Accessibility Courses. New resources, such as editing entries, advanced filtering, and pagination, will be further discussed in the second version of this resource.

What you're reviewing is everything in the final draft.

  • This is EOWG's pre-publication review, our internal "last call".
  • Review and comment on anything and everything, including copy-editing as needed.
  • Go through the whole resource (regardless of the order in which you choose to review it), and provide as much feedback as you can now.
  • After this review, we hope there will not be any more new comments.

Please comment in the below boxes or open a GitHub issue

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen
Kevin White
Kris Anne Kinney
Brent Bakken
Andrew Arch Apologies for not commenting sooner on some stuff.
Jade Matos Carew Just one comment and one question from me, see below.
Sharron Rush
Mark Palmer
Howard Kramer

2. Review level

summary | by responder | by choice

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I reviewed it thoroughly. 7
I skimmed it. 2
I need more time and will review by the date provided below.
I didn't get to it and will not in the near future. I abstain from providing comments, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. (Reminder: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.)

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Review levelComments
Laura Keen
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Kevin White
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Kris Anne Kinney
  • I skimmed it.
Brent Bakken
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Andrew Arch
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
 This will be great as a discovery tool when populated :)
Jade Matos Carew
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Sharron Rush
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.
Mark Palmer
  • I skimmed it.
Howard Kramer
  • I reviewed it thoroughly.

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
I reviewed it thoroughly.
  • Laura Keen
  • Kevin White
  • Brent Bakken
  • Andrew Arch
  • Jade Matos Carew
  • Sharron Rush
  • Howard Kramer
I skimmed it.
  • Kris Anne Kinney
  • Mark Palmer
I need more time and will review by the date provided below.
I didn't get to it and will not in the near future. I abstain from providing comments, and accept the decisions of the Working Group. (Reminder: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.)

3. List of Accessibility Courses

Please focus on the List of Accessibility Courses in detail and share your comments.

Do you feel there are:

  • information missing that should be included in the first release?
  • existing information that should be modified or removed?
  • problems in the UI as it exists now?

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen My main concern that I raised in this week's EOWG meeting was for courses that have a finite end time. I think there should be a way to have these courses removed from the list so users will not waste time sifting through outdated courses. I am a bit concerned about turnaround time for course submission to the list. 1 month feels a long time to wait if a course has a start/end date.
Kevin White Some issues in Github
Kris Anne Kinney
Brent Bakken
Andrew Arch Wonder if we need a 'glossary' to explain the types of resource - mostly clear, but was is a 'training'? Does it include workshops? webinars? etc
If not a glossary, then maybe a .popup for 'training'?
Jade Matos Carew
Sharron Rush In the intro should "web accessibility" be revised to say "web and digital accessibility" since it also seems to include course on documents like PDF? As well, one of the courses is described as applying "to all digital technology, including websites, software, electronic devices, and mobile apps."
Mark Palmer I think the only thing that jumps out is the order of the courses displayed. I'd expect the introductory courses to be nearer the top of the list before filters are applied and the alphabetical approach works against this a little bit. I understand the reason for doing it alphabetically and appreciate that there are pros and cons to every possible ordering though.
Howard Kramer It looks good to me.
See 4 for one area I think could be added.

4. Filtering Courses

If you’re able, please use the filters to find a course through the List of Accessibility Courses. Please note in the comment section if this worked, how it worked. Or, if not, what went wrong or what was confusing.

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen The filtering options worked well for me.
Kevin White Work well other than one peculiarity with the select options - issue raised.

I like the good positioning of the clear buttons and the presentation of currently applied filters.
Kris Anne Kinney Filtering worked for me, the numbers left in each category was helpful.
Brent Bakken I thought the filtering looked a lot cleaner in this version. Not so cumbersome to use. No additional recommendations from me at the moment on filtering.
Andrew Arch Filters worked just as expected :)
Jade Matos Carew For the 'show info' section in 'format' I think the definitions for blended and hybrid should be the other way round. That would need to be changed on the submit a course page as well.
For the audience part, what if a course is for a general/mixed audience? Should that be a filter? (In addition to general?)
I like the filters and the format of the tips.
Sharron Rush The filters surprise me by filtering without any user actions. Once I understood that was happening, it's fine. I am sure it was SR tested and announced to users, yes?
Mark Palmer I think the filters work well.
Howard Kramer It worked fine. One through that occurred to me was help on the Audience filter. It might be nice to have an explanation of what types of courses are associated with each role.

5. Submission Form

Please focus on the submission form in detail and share your comments.

Do you feel they are:

  • information missing that should be included in the first release?
  • existing informaiton that should be modified or removed?
  • problems in the UI as it exists now?

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen The form is long but well written. There is ample spacing between form fields and the descriptions and labels are written in plain language and easy to understand.
Kevin White Some issues in Github
Kris Anne Kinney Submission form was thorough. I went through as a keyboard user and I was able to access all of the content.
Brent Bakken - Under the Country section it says "Indicate by which country or countries this resource is provided." To me this is a little confusing. If I was working for company XYZ and the company was based in Canada, I would think to myself, the course is provided by "XYZ" not by "Canada." Maybe it should read, "Indicate the country or countries the Provider is located in."

- Under the Format section, "Blended" is still confusing to me. I don't think I even understand the difference between Blended and Face-to-face and online.

- Under the Availability section, would it be possible to also add a choice of "Continuously Available" or something similar for courses that can be started at any time.
Andrew Arch Name- do we want full name, or is a first / last / common name acceptable?

Should the country list allow for "anywhere' for trainings that that can be undertaken anytime/anyplace due to being online and having no instructor component? (eg the WAI edX one?

Should audience have 'General' for a training that isn't for any specific role?

Platform - Intopia delivers training via Zoom in most cases, but can accommodate Teams. Should additional platforms be allowed?

Availability - what happens in the case where a training does have a specific start ( or end) date but can be delivered to a group 'on demand' or 'on request'?
Jade Matos Carew
Sharron Rush The submission form is keyboard accessible and instructions seem clear. Isn't a month a long time for the review considering that some of the courses may be time limited? Can that process be accelerated?
Mark Palmer No comments.
Howard Kramer I would add an audience option of "all audiences".
The scheduling choices could use another category. Something like "weekly schedule" or "weekly deadlines." For example, my online course is asynchronous but students must submit their work for each week by certain deadlines. I didn't feel either category fit this type of schedule.

6. Submitting a course

If you’re able, please submit a new course through the submission form.,

Please note in the comment section if this worked, how it worked. Or, if not, what went wrong or what was confusing.

Note: Submissions are subject to further review and approval, so entries will not be available on the listing immediately after submission. This process is managed through GitHub PRs (https://github.com/w3c/wai-course-list/pulls) - new submissions should appear on this page, if you wish to verify the information you have provided.

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen I submitted the form. When I tried to save the preview as a pdf it repeated the first page of fields 9 times. So the pdf had the same information repeated and cutoff the remaining fields. The process was easy. If the preview issue can be fixed that will be a good feature for submitters to know what they sent while they wait for their course to show up on the list.
Kevin White Some issues in Github
Kris Anne Kinney Submission worked, i did a complete fake course, so please don't appove that. :)
Brent Bakken I did not have any issues submitting the my test course in the submission page. One question... At the end of the submission I was presented with a page showing me my information. At the top there was a button that said something like "close information" (I can't remember exactly what it said), but at the bottom there was another button that said "Send Information." I wanted to click the top button to see what the page would do, but I was not sure if I would loose my information before I sent it in. There needs to be a little more information around what that top button does so submitters do not worry about loosing their data before it is submitted.
Andrew Arch Form worked well - but see previous comments/suggestions
Jade Matos Carew
Sharron Rush Submission seemed to work well, form was clear and keyboard accessible. Agree with Kevin's suggestion in GitHub for providing more info about what the process will be upon submission.
Mark Palmer Seems very straightforward.
Howard Kramer I submitted one of my courses. It worked fine. Suggested changes are listed in 5 above.

7. Additional Comments

Use the space below or open a GitHub issue to include any additional observations or concerns you would like to see addressed.

Remember: This is the last review before the approval to publish survey.

Details

Responder Comments
Laura Keen Great work on this form submission!
Kevin White This is really impressive. Loving the clean design.
Kris Anne Kinney Just wanted to thank you for your work on this. I hope its going to be so helpful to people learn more about accessibility.
Brent Bakken Great job so far. Looking really good!
Andrew Arch
Jade Matos Carew I can't wait for this to be released, I've mentioned it to a few people and it'll be a much used resource!
Sharron Rush This is not relevant to the structure of the form itself but I am unclear about how/when courses are removed from the list. If they are date limited, is the removal a manual or automatic process?
Mark Palmer
Howard Kramer Looks great. Should be a very valuable resource.

More details on responses

  • Laura Keen: last responded on 22, April 2022 at 18:55 (UTC)
  • Kevin White: last responded on 25, April 2022 at 10:38 (UTC)
  • Kris Anne Kinney: last responded on 26, April 2022 at 19:40 (UTC)
  • Brent Bakken: last responded on 28, April 2022 at 22:01 (UTC)
  • Andrew Arch: last responded on 29, April 2022 at 04:12 (UTC)
  • Jade Matos Carew: last responded on 29, April 2022 at 09:12 (UTC)
  • Sharron Rush: last responded on 2, May 2022 at 14:24 (UTC)
  • Mark Palmer: last responded on 4, May 2022 at 14:58 (UTC)
  • Howard Kramer: last responded on 4, May 2022 at 21:43 (UTC)

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Eric Velleman
  2. Shawn Lawton Henry
  3. Shadi Abou-Zahra
  4. Sylvie Duchateau
  5. Kazuhito Kidachi
  6. Jedi Lin
  7. David Sloan
  8. Mary Jo Mueller
  9. Vicki Menezes Miller
  10. Reinaldo Ferraz
  11. Bill Kasdorf
  12. Cristina Mussinelli
  13. Kevin White
  14. Kevin Rydberg
  15. Ahmath Bamba MBACKE
  16. Adina Halter
  17. Denis Boudreau
  18. Sarah Pulis
  19. Bill Tyler
  20. Gregorio Pellegrino
  21. Ruoxi Ran
  22. Jennifer Chadwick
  23. Sean Kelly
  24. Muhammad Saleem
  25. Sarah Lewthwaite
  26. Daniel Montalvo
  27. Sonsoles López Pernas
  28. Greta Krafsig
  29. Jason McKee
  30. Jayne Schurick
  31. Billie Johnston
  32. Michele Williams
  33. Shikha Nikhil Dwivedi
  34. Brian Elton
  35. Julianna Rowsell
  36. Tabitha Mahoney
  37. Fred Edora
  38. Rabab Gomaa
  39. Marcelo Paiva
  40. Eloisa Guerrero
  41. Leonard Beasley
  42. Frankie Wolf
  43. Supriya Makude
  44. Aleksandar Cindrikj
  45. Angela Young

Send an email to all the non-responders.

Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire

Report issues on GitHub project w3c/wbs-design or by mail to sysreq.