Generative AI tools allow anyone without web-design experience to have a business website created when the user provides a few specifications about the business, such as its name, type, and location. But the resulting websites not only fall short of the business's basic needs but they also raise major concerns about their accessibility for disabled users. This study specifically examines whether these AI generated websites are accessible to screen-reader users with visual disabilities. It presents data about the usability and accessibility of the products of three generative AI website builders, highlights the specific problems found by an expert screen reader test along with an automated machine scan of these sites, and discusses some causes of and recommendations for solving these problems.

The authors present the results of a study of a three-way international collaboration project among one Hungarian class and two classes from Michigan and Washington, respectively. This multifaceted study focused on business planning, web design, and accessibility with the aim of investigating the effect of accessibility instruction on the production of business plans and websites. The distinguishing feature of this study was its emphasis to orient the three student groups on disability and accessibility issues from the perspective of the critical social model of disability advanced by disability studies theorists. The researchers collected quantitative and qualitative pre/postproject survey data from their three classes. They combined this data with the text of student emails sent among the project teams and instructor notes about their teaching to arrive at conclusions about the effectiveness of the collaboration using a mixed-methods approach. The results from the data analyses revealed significant benefit of the client–provider relationships among the three classes and the accessibility instruction provided by the Washington class to the other two classes on the business plans and websites.

This article employs cross-cultural communication approaches to teaching instructional design in the times of COVID-19 pandemic. Focusing on instructions from France, India, Spain, and the United States for making protective masks, the authors highlight how the writers and designers of these four documents from each culture approach their audiences, organize their DIY instructions, make language choices, employ images and other illustration devices, and culturally persuade users. While acknowledging cultural differences, the authors urge students to identify and adopt design strengths from diverse cultures in their own ideas about composing instructions.

research-article Share on A conversation on usability and accessibility with Janice (Ginny) Redish Author: Sushil K. Oswal University of Washington University of WashingtonView Profile Authors Info & Claims Communication Design QuarterlyVolume 3Issue 2February 2015 pp 63–92https://doi.org/10.1145/2752853.2752861Published:27 March 2015Publication History 3citation54DownloadsMetricsTotal Citations3Total Downloads54Last 12 Months15Last 6 weeks2 Get Citation AlertsNew Citation Alert added!This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my Alerts New Citation Alert!Please log in to your account Save to BinderSave to BinderCreate a New BinderNameCancelCreateExport CitationPublisher SiteGet Access

Roughly 1 out of 10 students in our classrooms has some form of disability, and now that a growing number of technical and professional communication (TPC) courses and programs are offered online, scholars need to adequately address accessibility in online course design. Calling on the field to “pay attention” to this issue, the authors report the results of a national survey of online writing instructors and use Selfe’s landmark essay as a way to theoretically frame the results. They conclude by offering strategies for TPC instructors to design more accessible online courses.

Scholars conducting analytical research in multimodal interaction design have not paid enough attention to the use of disabled participants in their work. In this column I argue that participatory action research with these users is overdue for the sake of building a culture of accessible designs. Working on a larger project on participatory design for a book, this commentary records my initial thoughts on how participation by disabled users needs to be central to the overall production cycle. I begin with the premise that each disabled user participates in this multimodal discourse from an entirely different vantage point shaped by their social, physical, and artistic experiences. It also emphasizes that each user interacts with multimodality differently depending upon the body they have, the adaptive technology they employ, and the uses they have for multimodality.

This position paper proposes the undertaking of a systematic research agenda on the tangled questions of accessibility, technology, and disability from the perspective of Technical Communication field. O'Hara (2004), Oswal and Hewett (2013), Palmeri (2006), Porter (1997), Ray and Ray (1999), Salvo (2005), Slatin and Rush (2003), Theofanos and Redish (2003 and 2005), and Walters (2010), have approached accessibility issues in various Technical Communication contexts and have emphasized the need for more attention to accessibility in our research, teaching, and practice. Likewise, the major journals in our field-- Technical Communication, Technical Communication Quarterly and the IEEE Transactions in Professional Communication ---have also published at least one special issue EACH on the topic of accessibility. While all this sporadic research has appeared on accessibility-related topics in different venues, this research has not yet gained the type of traction one would generally expect from an area with such a growth potential. As a user-centered discipline, we also ought to remember that presently 57.8 million Americans have one or more disabilities. Among the U.S. veteran population alone, 5.5 million are disabled. And, if we consider the reach of our Technical Communication work via the World Wide Web, this planet has 1 billion people with disabilities who can be affected by our accessibility research (National Center for Disability, 2013).

Traversing public and private spaces inevitably means finding a way to access those spaces. This simple fact is thrown into relief for those who experience barriers to access, and often unnoticed by those whose bodies, minds, abilities, and resources allow them to occupy the role of default user. Multimodality has been discussed at length as a means to enhance access to the public and private spaces through which we and our writing move. However, we argue that multimodality as it is commonly used implies an ableist understanding of the human composer. Our webtext seeks to redress this problem.