MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732451113 · doi:10.1145/3058555.3058563

Teaching Accessibility to the Masses

2017· article· en· W2732451113 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsWeb accessibilityWeb Accessibility InitiativeWeb standardsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebCurriculumWeb developmentWeb designProcess (computing)Web 2.0AuditKey (lock)Web applicationMultimediaThe InternetWeb application securityPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web developers are a key element in creating an accessible web, but few have received formal training on inclusive web design. In this paper, we discuss the challenges of teaching web accessibility online, and the process of creating a public Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) aimed at teaching web accessibility auditing practices to web developers. The outcomes from the Professional Web Accessibility Auditing Made Easy [10] course delivered to two cohorts is presented. The lessons learned from the experience are added to the discussion around the pedagogical culture and the need to better integrate accessibility education into computer science curriculum.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.352 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesFrench-language works237,207