Exploration on Integrating Accessibility into an AI Course
Abstract
Understanding accessibility and how it relates to artificial intelligence (AI)-based technology is an imperative skill for computing students from both an ethical and employment standpoint. Unfortunately, AI courses do not typically cover accessibility. When teaching ethics in AI, discussions on bias and fairness cover user diversity in terms of gender and race, but not disability. To address the lack of teaching accessibility in AI courses, we conducted a pilot study to explore what and how accessibility topics can be integrated into an AI course, titled Natural Language Processing (NLP). We added to the NLP course some general and quick accessibility topics through means such as a short guest lecture, a programming assignment and a final project that connect accessibility and AI. We gathered student feedback through a pre-survey, a post-survey and interviews with five students. The course we looked at took place synchronously in an online setting using Zoom. In this context, we observed how implementing accessibility topics remotely into the course affected students in their knowledge of accessibility and disability.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Accessibility is still underrepresented in many curricula, and even when it is addressed, it is rarely taught in an applied, example-based way.
“Accessibility is still underrepresented in many curricula, and even when it is addressed, it is rarely taught in an applied, example-based way [17, 38, 40, 42, 48, 52, 56].”
From Proceedings of the 37th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (2025) · cites this paper as [52]
Accessibility is often underrepresented in design education.
“Regarding students' prior knowledge, our findings support research showing that accessibility is often underrepresented in design education [17, 36, 38, 40, 42, 48, 52, 56].”
From Proceedings of the 37th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (2025) · cites this paper as [52]
Cites
The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8 · Cited by 1,911 · cited 2× · see citing works
“However, AI courses did not receive such an attention on incorporating accessibility into their curriculum despite the extensive research on teaching ethics in AI courses [17].”
BackgroundA Systematic Analysis of Accessibility in Computing Education Research
Baker, C. M., El-Glaly, Y. N., & Shinohara, K. (2020) · Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3328778.3366843 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Self-citationAlonzo, O., Seita, M., Glasser, A., & Huenerfauth, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376563 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Integrating Accessibility in a Mobile App Development Course
Bhatia, J. S., P D, P., Tiwari, S., Nagpal, D., & Joshi, S. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569825 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Building “Design Empathy” for People with Disabilities: an Unsolved Challenge in HCI Education
Motahar, T., Brown, N., Wiese, E. S., & Wiese, J. (2023) · Proceedings of the 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education · doi:10.1145/3587399.3587409 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Kubullek, A.-K., Zimmer, L., Ly, T. T. M., & Dogangün, A. (2025) · Proceedings of the 37th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3764687.3764711 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tseng, C.-E., Jung, S. H., Elglaly, Y. N., Liu, Y., & Ludi, S.
- Affiliations
- Western Washington University (US)
- University of North Texas (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2022-02-22
- Pages
- 864-870
- OpenAlex
- W4293227387
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 8
- FWCI
- 9.78
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Systems Education and Curriculum Development
- Keywords
- accessibility, artificial intelligence in education, disability, AI ethics, online learning, student feedback, remote teaching
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
