Comments on: CSU Picks Moodle and ANGEL http://mfeldstein.com/csu-picks-moodle-and-angel/ What We Are Learning About Online Learning...Online Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:31:53 +0000 hourly 1 By: Even More Anonymous http://mfeldstein.com/csu-picks-moodle-and-angel/#comment-1281 Even More Anonymous Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:57:18 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/?p=847#comment-1281 $10 says the first commenter works for Blackboard, which was taken by surprise by their severe drubbing over accessibility in the review... read the implications in: http://www.calstate.edu/acadaff/codedmemos/AA-2008-15.pdf. The real shame is that Blackboard's legal issues with Desire2Learn prevented D2L from showing the version of their LMS which is 508 compliant, so they were not awarded an enabling agreement. $10 says the first commenter works for Blackboard, which was taken by surprise by their severe drubbing over accessibility in the review… read the implications in: http://www.calstate.edu/acadaff/codedmemos/AA-2008-15.pdf.

The real shame is that Blackboard’s legal issues with Desire2Learn prevented D2L from showing the version of their LMS which is 508 compliant, so they were not awarded an enabling agreement.

]]> By: Michael Feldstein http://mfeldstein.com/csu-picks-moodle-and-angel/#comment-1280 Michael Feldstein Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:03:16 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/?p=847#comment-1280 I can only tell you what I've heard. You may well know more about the actual state of ANGEL's accessibility than I do. I can only tell you what I’ve heard. You may well know more about the actual state of ANGEL’s accessibility than I do.

]]> By: Anonyomous Reviewer http://mfeldstein.com/csu-picks-moodle-and-angel/#comment-1279 Anonyomous Reviewer Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:04:13 +0000 http://mfeldstein.com/?p=847#comment-1279 I struggle to understand how CSU could find Angel accessible. From what I understand of the process here are some of the facts: 1) CSU stated that Angel's “Normal Display” mode is not accessible and doesn’t meet 508-compliance (significant flaw). 2) CSU relied on the switch to PDA mode as the way to certify the accessibility and they admit that a sighted person is required to help someone switch the system into PDA mode (second flaw). 3) CSU testers stated that the PDA mode was fully functional, but that is not true. The PDA mode only offers a subset of features compared to the “Normal Display” and doesn’t even include basic update information or at-a-glance reports found on the homepage of a course (third main flaw). 4) CSU testers also stated that the PDA mode was accessible, Section 508 compliant and everything works with a screen reader, but that is not true. Even basic principles such as alternative text for icons is not supported for many icons (e.g. date pickers), and the interface can even block the ability to click or even see some links depending on your resolution and browser (fourth main flaw). I'm not sure they did a very thorough review of the system -- from someone that understands the process they followed it seems to differ greatly from the reality for users. I struggle to understand how CSU could find Angel accessible. From what I understand of the process here are some of the facts:

1) CSU stated that Angel’s “Normal Display” mode is not accessible and doesn’t meet 508-compliance (significant flaw).

2) CSU relied on the switch to PDA mode as the way to certify the accessibility and they admit that a sighted person is required to help someone switch the system into PDA mode (second flaw).

3) CSU testers stated that the PDA mode was fully functional, but that is not true. The PDA mode only offers a subset of features compared to the “Normal Display” and doesn’t even include basic update information or at-a-glance reports found on the homepage of a course (third main flaw).

4) CSU testers also stated that the PDA mode was accessible, Section 508 compliant and everything works with a screen reader, but that is not true. Even basic principles such as alternative text for icons is not supported for many icons (e.g. date pickers), and the interface can even block the ability to click or even see some links depending on your resolution and browser (fourth main flaw).

I’m not sure they did a very thorough review of the system — from someone that understands the process they followed it seems to differ greatly from the reality for users.

]]>