State of the Science Conference
September 15-16, 2005

Conference Home

Assessment of Workplace Product Accessibility

Slides On This Page

1. Assessment of Workplace Product Accessibility
2. Overview
3. Accessibility Evaluation Facility
4. Accessibility Evaluation Facility
5. Accessibility Evaluation Facility
6. Uses of Product Assessment
7. Evaluation Techniques: Major Steps
8. Evaluation Techniques: Define evaluation goals
9. Evaluation Techniques: Perform task analysis
10. Evaluation Techniques: Perform task analysis
11. Evaluation Techniques
12. Evaluation Techniques: Functional Assessments
13. Evaluation Techniques: Checklist Evaluations
14. Evaluation Techniques: User Testing
15. Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively
16. Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively
17. Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively
18. ITTATC Website
19. Brad Fain, Ph.D.

Slide 1 of 19

Assessment of Workplace Product Accessibility

September, 2005

Electronic Systems Laboratory
Logo: Georgia Tech. Research Institute

Graphic: Man operates a copier while seated in a scooter. A assistance dog is nearby.

Slide 2 of 19

Overview

• Background of the Accessibility Evaluation Facility
• Uses of Product Assessment
• Evaluation Techniques
• Functional Assessments
• Checklist Evaluations
• User Testing
• Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively
• 508 Assistant

Slide 3 of 19

Accessibility Evaluation Facility

The Accessibility Evaluation Facility supports industry and government through the measurement of the accessibility of devices and services, the development of design solutions targeted at improving accessibility for all users, and research into the application of emerging technologies to accessible design.

Slide 4 of 19

Accessibility Evaluation Facility

• The Accessibility Evaluation Facility was developed to support industry and government by:
• Developing test methodologies designed to measure accessibility
• Measuring accessibility and comparing the accessibility of related products
• Defining requirements for new product development
• Providing accessibility training to managers, designers, and federal procurement officials
• Working with design teams to develop more accessible products
• Prototyping accessible technologies
• Conducting research into emerging technologies, universal design practices, and government policy

Slide 5 of 19

Accessibility Evaluation Facility

• ATMs
• Self-checkout lanes
• Printers
• Fax machines
• Scanners
• Copiers
• Mailing stations
• PDAs
• Cell phones
• Televisions

Design Experience

• Web site development
• IVR Interface development
• Accessible documentation
• Copier design support
• Voice interface design support

Slide 6 of 19

Uses of Product Assessment

• Designers
• Baseline measurements of existing equipment
• Compare accessibility of two or more similar devices
• Evaluation of new prototypes as part of iterative design
• Procurement Officials
• Market research
• Verification of claims of manufacturers
• Policy Makers
• Understanding where interventions are effective
• Identifying when new interventions are required
• Rehabilitation Specialists
• Understand abilities required to use equipment
• Consumers
• Assistance with purchase decisions

Slide 7 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Major Steps

• Define evaluation goals
• Perform task analysis
• Define Method of Test
• Perform evaluations
• Functional assessment
• Checklist evaluations
• User testing
• Integrate results

Slide 8 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Define evaluation goals

• Measure conformance?
• Understand required capabilities?
• Provide design feedback?
• Market research comparing two or more products?

Slide 9 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Perform task analysis

• Identify all user actions
• Prioritize tasks
• Priority 1 tasks must be able to be successfully completed irrespective of impairment in order for the product to be usable for all users.
• Priority 2 tasks are secondary tasks that may be performed on an occasional basis to access advanced functionality.
• Priority 3 tasks are tertiary tasks that are not necessarily performed by all users of the device, but must be performable by some operator on occasion.
• Maintenance tasks may be associated with any priority level. Some simple maintenance tasks, such as loading paper, are judged to be priority level 1. Most maintenance tasks, however, are judged to be priority level 3.

Slide 10 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Perform task analysis

• Coordination document outlining
• Evaluation methods
• Evaluation criteria
• Resources required
• Data reduction/analysis techniques

Slide 11 of 19

Evaluation Techniques

Graphic: Example analysis of fine motor control functional performance requirements and user capabilities. The range of Functional Capabilities is represented by a bi-directional arrow. An arrow labeled Required Capabilities marks a point on this range of functional capabilities. Other arrows representing User Capabilities mark other points on this range. These user capabilities include: Young User, User Wearing Gloves, User in a Cold Environment, and User with Disability.

Slide 12 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Functional Assessments

• Measure the functional capabilities required to use a device
• 20/70 vision or better 10 inches from the display surface
• Ability to apply 6.5 pounds of linear pulling force with arm extended
• Ability to apply 17 lb-inches or rotational force to a 1 inch diameter knob
• Compare to the functional abilities of potential users
• Vision, hearing, strength, manual dexterity, contrast sensitivity, color vision, etc.

Slide 13 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: Checklist Evaluations

• 420+ items derived from accessibility literature, technical standards, and sound human factors design principles
• Tag checklist items by disability type, situation, and test item applicability
• Select checklist items based on applicability to test item and target audience

Slide 14 of 19

Evaluation Techniques: User Testing

• Number and type of participants depends on the evaluation goals
• Small test group to identify major problems or supplement checklist results
• Large test group to validate design or develop guidelines

Slide 15 of 19

Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively

Organizing the results

• By component?
• By functional limitation?
• By priority level?

Reporting the results

• The force required to lift the document assembly cover was 9.5 pounds which exceeds the recommended maximum force of 5.0 pounds. Seven out of eight users with upper mobility limitations could not lift the cover.

Slide 16 of 19

Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively

Issue: Users in a seated position may not be able to lower the platen glass cover once in a raised position.

Graphic: Person in a wheelchair stretches to lift / lower the glass cover on a copier. Image is marked: Not designed for accessibility.

Slide 17 of 19

Communicating Evaluation Results Effectively

Issue: Routine maintenance tasks, such as replenishment of toner or the clearance of paper jams, are inhibited by maintenance panels that open downward thus blocking a direct approach by wheelchair users.

Graphic: Person in a wheelchair leans forward to reaches over a downward-opening maintenance panel on a copier. Image is marked: Not designed for accessibility.

Slide 18 of 19

ITTATC Website

Graphic: Screen shot of ITTATC’s 508 Assistant website. “The 508 Assistant is an online tool that supports the design and procurement of accessible electronic and information technology…. The 508 Assistant offers detailed background information about the Section 508 law and its technical standards, and organizes mission critical information by user role and by type of product.”

Slide 19 of 19

Brad Fain, Ph.D.
Senior Research Scientist, GTRI
404-894-7261
brad.fain@gtri.gatech.edu

Top of Page