Accessible Learning Labs

Rights, duty and accommodation

What is owed to a person, and what proactive design does and does not discharge. The legal and ethical architecture within which access decisions are made and defended.

Screen reader and keyboard optimised version. All content is presented in reading order, with no diagram, tabs, or scripting. An interactive map version presents the same content as a navigable diagram.

Section 1 of four

How this landscape is organized

This is the accessibility work of a learning design practice, gathered in one place. It draws on two branches: Accessibility, which concerns access at the level of an individual person and the obligation an institution holds toward them, and Universal Design for Learning, which concerns designing for the predictable range of learners before any individual request is made. The two are related but not the same, and the arrangement here keeps them distinct while showing where they meet.

Resources are arranged in seven groups by what they are for, rather than by which branch they grow on. A group therefore holds resources from both branches where the question they answer is shared. Each resource names its home branch so the distinction is never lost. Groups are given in alphabetical order.

Every resource states the bodies of knowledge it rests on and cites its sources by number to the reference list in Section 4. Where a resource is still in development, it is marked as such: the grounding and sources are settled, and the written resource is not yet published.

Two kinds of relationship are given for each resource. Most related is calculated from sources and themes held in common, and surfaces resources that answer similar questions from different groups. Connected resources are the direct relationships recorded on the map — the resources a reader is likely to need alongside this one.

Section 2 of four

What is here

8 resources in this group — 6 from Accessibility and 2 from Universal Design for Learning. Resources from other groups are named where they are closely related; the full landscape carries all thirty-five.

Visit the Rights, duty and accommodation page · All seven groups in one page

Section 3 of four

Every resource, in full

Sources are written out in full here as well as numbered, so that following a reference is never necessary to understand an entry.

Rights, duty and accommodation

What is owed to a person, and what proactive design does and does not discharge. The legal and ethical architecture within which access decisions are made and defended.

Why Universal Design Never Eliminates Individual Accommodation

The anchor · why both are permanent, and both are skilled

In development

Individual accommodation is not a residue left behind by imperfect design. Human variability has no outer edge, some barriers are the very thing an assessment is meant to measure, and the duty is owed to a person rather than discharged by a process — which is why proactive design and individual accommodation remain complementary, and why the accommodation encounter is skilled professional practice rather than an administrative step.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Long-settled practice

Grounding. Inclusive design and one-size-fits-one; the duty to accommodate; construct validity

Themes. Accommodation, Access, Variability

Sources

  • Reference 10: Inclusive Design Research Centre. The Inclusive Design Guide. OCAD University — the source of the one-size-fits-one principle and the inclusive design framework.
  • Reference 35: Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  • Reference 36: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
  • Reference 37: Messick, S. (1995). “Validity of Psychological Assessment: Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as Scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning.” American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
  • Reference 2: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

The Duty to Accommodate in Learning Design

The legal frame, written for those who build and teach

In development

The architecture within which access decisions are made and defended: the procedural and substantive duty, the unified bona fide requirement test, and accommodation to the point of undue hardship, set in the Canadian frame with the cross-border standards that vendor and partnership work require. It is offered as synthesis for designers, faculty, and institutions; determinations in individual cases rest with accessibility advisors and accommodation offices, and with legal counsel where a matter becomes contested.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Well established

Grounding. Meiorin and the BFOR test; Accessible Canada Act; BC Human Rights Code; Accessible British Columbia Act; ADA and Sections 504/508

Themes. Accommodation, Policy, Access

Sources

  • Reference 36: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
  • Reference 29: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 38: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 30: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 39: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Sections 504 and 508, as amended.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

Essential Requirements and the Limits of Flexibility

What a standard genuinely requires, articulated in advance

In development

The most demanding judgment in the field: when flexibility preserves what is being measured, and when it alters it. This resource supports programs in articulating their essential requirements before any dispute arises — separating what a standard genuinely requires from what it has inherited by convention — so that the reasoning is available to everyone who later needs it.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Well established

Grounding. Construct validity; constructive alignment; bona fide academic and technical standards

Themes. Accommodation, Assessment, Alignment

Sources

  • Reference 37: Messick, S. (1995). “Validity of Psychological Assessment: Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as Scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning.” American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
  • Reference 40: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • Reference 36: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

Designing Out the Disclosure Requirement

Disclosure burden as a design variable

In development

Access that is gated behind disclosure asks a person to name a private matter to someone holding authority over them, and the documented costs of that request are real: anticipated stigma, delay, and for some, a decision not to ask at all. This resource treats disclosure burden as something design can measure and reduce — why a flexible deadline requiring an email is a disclosure event and a built-in buffer is not — while leaving the accommodation record itself where it belongs, with the office that holds it.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Well established

Grounding. Stigma and concealment (Goffman); academic ableism; BC information-governance requirements

Themes. Disability studies, Access, Equity

Sources

  • Reference 41: Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  • Reference 6: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  • Reference 42: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

Designing for Episodic and Fluctuating Conditions

Program architecture for conditions that vary

In development

Attendance policy, deadline architecture, cohort progression, and leave-and-return pathways — the structural layer of a problem that individual accommodation handles with difficulty because most systems assume stable limitations. It is program and policy design, offered in the knowledge that disabled people and experienced advisors hold far more understanding of these conditions than the design literature yet reflects.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Well established

Grounding. Episodic disability framework (O’Brien et al.); disability studies

Themes. Accommodation, Wellbeing, Access

Sources

  • Reference 43: O’Brien, K. K., Bayoumi, A. M., Strike, C., Young, N. L., & Davis, A. M. (2008). “Exploring Disability from the Perspective of Adults Living with HIV/AIDS: Development of a Conceptual Framework.” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6:76.
  • Reference 8: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

International and Regional Disability Rights Instruments

The layer above domestic duty

In development

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its General Comments, and the Marrakesh Treaty, together with the regional instruments — the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the Inter-American Convention. It explains why accessibility obligations converge across jurisdictions rather than arising independently in each, and supplies the vocabulary required to work with partners outside Canada.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Accessibility · Well established

Grounding. UDHR (1948); CRPD (2006); Marrakesh Treaty (2013); regional human rights instruments

Themes. Policy, Standards, Access

Sources

  • Reference 44: United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Reference 23: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
  • Reference 45: World Intellectual Property Organization (2013). Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.
  • Reference 46: European Union (2012). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012/C 326/02.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

From Accommodation to Proactive Inclusive Design

The field's defining reframe

Published resource

Shifting from retrofitting access for individuals after the fact to designing inclusively from the start, so fewer barriers are ever built in. It states the paradigm shift the field rests on, plainly.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Universal Design for Learning · Well established

Grounding. Universal Design for Learning; inclusive design principles

Themes. Access, Variability

Sources

  • Reference 47: Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  • Reference 2: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment

Measuring capability, not obstacles

Published resource

Removing features of an assessment that get in the way of demonstrating mastery without being part of what is measured, so results reflect capability rather than incidental barriers. It works alongside assessment designed as experience.

Group. Rights, duty and accommodation

Home branch. Universal Design for Learning · Well established

Grounding. Construct validity; UDL action & expression

Themes. Assessment, Access

Sources

  • Reference 37: Messick, S. (1995). “Validity of Psychological Assessment: Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as Scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning.” American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
  • Reference 2: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared source and theme

Connected resources

Section 4 of four

References and resources

The theory, law, and standards these resources are rooted in, listed once and cited by number above. Peer-reviewed, statutory, and institutional sources link directly. Books, reports, and legislation are cited in full so they can be found in any library catalogue or official register.

  1. Universal Design for Learning2. CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
    https://udlguidelines.cast.org
  2. Disability studies6. Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  3. Disability studies8. Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
  4. Inclusive design10. Inclusive Design Research Centre. The Inclusive Design Guide. OCAD University — the source of the one-size-fits-one principle and the inclusive design framework.
    https://guide.inclusivedesign.ca/
  5. International instruments23. United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
    https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/crpd/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-crpd
  6. Accessibility law29. Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
    https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-0.6/
  7. Accessibility law30. Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  8. Universal design35. Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  9. Human rights law36. British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
    https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1999/1999canlii652/1999canlii652.html
  10. Assessment37. Messick, S. (1995). “Validity of Psychological Assessment: Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as Scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning.” American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.
  11. Human rights law38. Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  12. Accessibility law39. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Sections 504 and 508, as amended.
    https://www.ada.gov/
  13. Instructional design40. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  14. Disclosure and stigma41. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  15. Information governance42. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.
  16. Episodic disability43. O’Brien, K. K., Bayoumi, A. M., Strike, C., Young, N. L., & Davis, A. M. (2008). “Exploring Disability from the Perspective of Adults Living with HIV/AIDS: Development of a Conceptual Framework.” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6:76.
  17. International instruments44. United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
    https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
  18. International instruments45. World Intellectual Property Organization (2013). Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.
  19. Regional instruments46. European Union (2012). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012/C 326/02.
  20. Universal Design for Learning47. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.

Back to contents

Every resource on this page reflects applied work carried out with learners, design teams, and partner organizations, and is grounded in the scholarship listed above. An interactive version of this map presents the same content as a navigable diagram.