Accessible Online Learning
Open accessAbstract
Interest in accessibility has grown recently. Despite this, we have found that most people focus too much on compliance and often on the fundamental elements of creating compliant online courses. Instructional designers and online educators often turn to popular quality assurance frameworks to help them design and develop quality online courses. However, questions remain about how well various quality assurance frameworks address accessible online learning. Given this, we analyzed how popular online quality assurance frameworks, specifically the standards they are based on, address accessibility. In the following article, we report the results of our inquiry and conclude with implications for the research and practice of online learning.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Over-reliance on standards may reduce the complex topics of accessible and inclusive online course design and create a problematic compliance mentality.
“Previous research also cautioned that over-reliance on standards may reduce the complex topics of accessible and inclusive online course design and create a problematic compliance mentality (Baldwin & Ching, 2021; Lowenthal et al., 2021).”
From Instructional Designers’ Perceptions of Accessible and Inclusive Online Course Design (2024) · cites this paper as Lowenthal et al., 2021
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A., & Gulliksen, J. (2014) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0358-z · Cited by 541 · see citing works
Stop propagating the learning styles myth
Kirschner, P. A. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.006 · Cited by 464 · see citing works
The Scientific Status of Learning Styles Theories
Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1177/0098628315589505 · Cited by 389 · see citing works
Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: A historical review
Lee, K. (2017) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.001 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Accessible by design: Applying UDL principles in a first year undergraduate course
Kumar, K. L., & Wideman, M. (2014) · Canadian Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v44i1.183704 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Roberts, J. B., Crittenden, L., & Crittenden, J. C. (2011) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.004 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
van Rooij, S. W., & Zirkle, K. (2015) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.001 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Applying Universal Design for Learning in Online Courses:Pedagogical and Practical Considerations
Dell, C. A., Dell, T. F., & Blackwell, T. (2015) · The Journal of Educators Online · doi:10.9743/jeo.2015.2.1 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Online Course Design in Higher Education: A Review of National and Statewide Evaluation Instruments
Baldwin, S., Ching, Y., & Hsu, Y. (2017) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0215-z · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Seok, S., DaCosta, B., & Hodges, R. (2018) · Open Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.4236/jss.2018.65014 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Nieminen, J., & Pesonen, H. (2019) · Education sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci10010012 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Evaluating Online Course Quality: A Study on Implementation of Course Quality Standards
Zimmerman, W. A., Altman, B. W., Simunich, B., Shattuck, K., & Burch, B. (2020) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v24i4.2325 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Linder, K. E., Fontaine-Rainen, D. L., & Behling, K. (2015) · Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning · doi:10.1080/02680513.2015.1007859 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Singleton, K. J., Evmenova, A., Kinas Jerome, M., & Clark, K. (2019) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v23i1.1407 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Adapting online learning resources for all: planning for professionalism in accessibility
McAndrew, P., Farrow, R., & Cooper, M. (2012) · Research in Learning Technology · doi:10.3402/rlt.v20i0.18699 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Shattuck, K., Zimmerman, W. A., & Adair, D. (2014) · Internet Learning · doi:10.18278/il.3.1.3 · Cited by 39
Creating Accessible and Inclusive Online Learning
Lowenthal, P. R., Humphrey, M., Conley, Q., Dunlap, J. C., Greear, K., Lowenthal, A., & Giacumo, L. A. (2021) · Quarterly review of distance education · doi:10.1108/qrde-02-2021-0001 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Self-citationMoorefield-Lang, H. M., Copeland, C. A., & Haynes, A. S. (2016) · Education for Information · doi:10.3233/efi-150966 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Whitney, M. (2020) · Information Systems Education Journal · doi:10.62273/wfsu6259 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
From barriers to bridges: approaching accessibility in course design
Varonis, E. M. (2015) · International Journal of Information and Learning Technology · doi:10.1108/ijilt-12-2014-0033 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Strategies Used to Evaluate Online Education
Lowenthal, P. R., & Davidson-Shivers, G. V. (2018) · Handbook of Distance Education · doi:10.4324/9781315296135-32
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Conklin, S., Morgan, Z., Easow, G., & Hanson, E. (2020). Impact of QM professional development on student evaluations. Journal of Educators Online, 17(2). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ1268924.pdf
- Dallas, B. K., Upton, T. D., & Sprong, M. E. (2014). Post-secondary faculty attitudes toward inclu- sive teaching strategies. Journal of Rehabilita- tion, 80(2), 12-20.
- Fitchen, C. S., Ferraro, V., Asuncion, J. V., Chwo- jka, C., Barile, M., Nguyen, M. N., Klomp, R., Wolforth, J. (2009). Disabilities and e-learning problems and solutions: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 241-56.
- Gladhart, M. A. (2010). Determining faculty needs for delivering accessible electronically delivered instruction in higher education. Journal of Post- secondary Education and Disability, 22(3), 185- 196.
- Hartsoe, J. K., & Barclay, S. R. (2017). Universal Design and disability: Assessing faculty beliefs, knowledge, and confidence in Universal Design for Instruction. Journal of Postsecondary Edu- cation and Disability, 30(3), 223-236.
- Izzo, M. V., Murray, A., & Novak, J. (2008). The faculty perspective on Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21(2), 60-72.
- Lomellini, A., & Lowenthal, P. R. (in press). Inclu- sive online courses: Universal Design for Learn- ing strategies that impact faculty buy-in. In J. Stefaniak & R. Reese (Eds.), The instructional design trainer's guide: Authentic practices and considerations for mentoring id and ed tech pro- fessionals. Routledge.
- Murphy, A., Malenczak, D., & Ghajar, M. (2019). Identifying challenges and benefits of online education for students with a psychiatric disabil- ity. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 32(4), 395-409.
- Rose, D. H., Harbour, W. S., Johnston, C. S., Daley, S. G., & Abarbanell, L. (2006). Universal Design for Learning in postsecondary education: reflections on principles and their application. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Dis- ability, 19(2), 135-151.
- Schelly, C. L., Davies, P. L., Spooner, C. L. (2011). Student perceptions of faculty implementation of Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1), 17-30. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 34 CFR Part 104. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 USC § 794d (1998).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Instructional Designers’ Perceptions of Accessible and Inclusive Online Course Design
Lomellini, A., Lowenthal, P. R., Trespalacios, J., & Snelson, C. (2024) · Online Learning · doi:10.24059/olj.v28i4.3719 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Lowenthal, P. R., Lomellini, A., Smith, C., & Greear, K.
- Affiliations
- Boise State University (US)
- North Carolina Virtual Public School (US)
- Molloy University (US)
- Blackboard (United States) (US)
- Venue
- Quarterly Review of Distance Education
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2021-12-10
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 15-29
- ISSN
- 1528-3518 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-1266
- OpenAlex
- W7138901718
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Quarterly review of distance education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Education and E-Learning
- Keywords
- accessibility, quality assurance framework, online course design, compliance, accessibility standards, instructional design, online learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
