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 eight 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 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.
Grounding
How disability is understood, and what follows from the understanding. These resources supply the frame every later decision is made inside.
Disability Studies for Learning Designers
The grounding that changes what a designer sees
In development
Social, medical, and interactional models of disability; ableism as institutional structure rather than individual attitude; disability as identity, culture, and political community. It is the grounding that allows a barrier to be named as a design failure rather than a learner’s deficit, and it is what distinguishes accessibility practice from compliance administration.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. Social model (Oliver); academic ableism (Dolmage); Titchkosky; Kafer
Themes. Disability studies, Equity, Access
Sources
- Reference 5: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
- Reference 6: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
- Reference 7: Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
- Reference 8: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Partnering with Disabled People in Learning Design
Co-design without extraction
In development
Structuring lived-experience partnership so that it is compensated, early enough to shape decisions rather than ratify them, and accessible in its own conduct. It attends to the pattern in which technical expertise quietly eclipses lived experience, and favours partnership with disability-led organizations already doing this work over convening participants anew.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. Disability justice (Sins Invalid; Berne); nothing about us without us (Charlton); inclusive design; TCPS 2 research ethics
Themes. Disability studies, Community, Equity
Sources
- Reference 9: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
- 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 11: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Models of Disability as Design Decisions
The frame chosen before any design decision is made
In development
Medical, social, biopsychosocial, economic, functional solutions, social identity or cultural affiliation, and charity — seven models in active circulation, each of which settles in advance what counts as the problem and who is obliged to act on it. This resource sets them beside one another with their strengths and their costs, and treats the choice of model as a design decision rather than a philosophical preference, because the model implicit in a project brief is usually the model that shapes what gets built.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. ICF (WHO, 2001); social model (Oliver); Retief & Letšosa; Shakespeare
Themes. Disability studies, Access, Equity
Sources
- Reference 12: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
- Reference 5: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
- Reference 13: Retief, M., & Letšosa, R. (2018). “Models of Disability: A Brief Overview.” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 74(1).
- Reference 14: Shakespeare, T. (2013). Disability Rights and Wrongs Revisited (2nd ed.). Routledge — a critical reassessment of the strong social model.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Disability Categories and the Barriers People Meet
The reference layer, written barrier-first
In development
Visual, auditory, deafblind, speech, mobility and body structure, cognitive and learning, seizure, and psychological disabilities, each set against the barriers people actually encounter in digital and physical environments. It is written barrier-first rather than diagnosis-first, so that a designer reaches for the environmental change rather than the label — and it is the reference layer that the more argumentative resources on this branch quietly assume a reader already holds.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. ICF (WHO, 2001); WCAG 2.2; disability studies
Themes. Disability studies, Access, Variability
Sources
- Reference 12: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
- Reference 15: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
- Reference 5: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Assistive Technology and Adaptive Strategies
What exists, and what it does for a person
In development
Screen readers, magnification, speech input, alternative pointing, augmentative and alternative communication, hearing technologies, and the low-technology and adaptive strategies used at least as often — described by what they accomplish for a person rather than by product name, and paired with the frameworks that structure a selection decision. It is the survey that has to precede the harder question of why conformant content still fails against the technology people actually use.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. HAAT model (Cook & Polgar); SETT framework (Zabala); WHO assistive technology guidance
Themes. Disability studies, Access, Standards
Sources
- Reference 16: Cook, A. M., & Polgar, J. M. (2015). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice (4th ed.). Elsevier — the source of the Human Activity Assistive Technology (HAAT) model.
- Reference 17: Zabala, J. S. (2005). Ready, SETT, Go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework — the Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools framework for assistive technology decision-making.
- Reference 18: World Health Organization & UNICEF (2022). Global Report on Assistive Technology. World Health Organization.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Disability Data and the Limits of Prevalence Figures
Why the numbers disagree, and how to use one honestly
In development
Measurement by diagnosis, by function, or by self-identification produces materially different populations, which is why global and national prevalence figures diverge so widely and why the choice of instrument is never neutral. This resource covers the major global and Canadian sources and their known undercounts, and how to carry a number into a business case or a funding application without asking it to bear more weight than it can.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. WHO World Report on Disability; WHO Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities; Canadian Survey on Disability; ICF
Themes. Research, Disability studies, Equity
Sources
- Reference 19: World Health Organization & World Bank (2011). World Report on Disability. World Health Organization.
- Reference 20: World Health Organization (2022). Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities. World Health Organization.
- Reference 21: Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability — the national source for disability prevalence in Canada.
- Reference 12: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Disability Etiquette and Communication in Learning Environments
Professional practice, not a list of prohibitions
In development
Person-first and identity-first language and why the choice belongs to the person rather than the institution; addressing someone directly rather than their interpreter or support worker; offering assistance without presuming it is wanted or acting before it is accepted. It is written for facilitators and instructors as professional communication practice, on the understanding that the failures that matter in a learning room are rarely failures of intention and almost always failures of default behaviour under time pressure.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. Disability etiquette guidance (United Spinal Association); CRPD; disability studies
Themes. Community, Disability studies, Capacity
Sources
- Reference 22: United Spinal Association. Disability Etiquette: Tips on Interacting with People with Disabilities.
- Reference 23: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
- Reference 9: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Disability Justice and Where It Came From
A framework with named authors, and where to read them
In development
Disability justice was created in 2005 and 2006 by the Disability Justice Collective, a group of disabled activists, primarily queer and trans disabled people of colour, working in the San Francisco Bay Area. Patty Berne, Stacey Park Milbern, Mia Mingus, Leroy F. Moore Jr., Eli Clare and Sebastian Margaret are among its architects, and the ten principles were set out by Berne and Sins Invalid. It is a distinct framework rather than a further stage of disability rights: it holds that single-issue organising leaves the most marginalised behind, and it originates in performance, mutual aid and community organising rather than in the academy. This resource states that history and sends the reader to the primary texts. The framework is not summarised here in place of its authors, and the sources below are theirs.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Accessibility · Well established
Grounding. Sins Invalid; the ten principles of disability justice (Berne); Black disability studies
Themes. Disability studies, Community, Equity
Sources
- Reference 62: Sins Invalid (2019). Skin, Tooth, and Bone: The Basis of Movement is Our People — A Disability Justice Primer (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: Sins Invalid. ISBN 9781647133658 — the source text of the ten principles, based in the work of Patty Berne.
- Reference 63: Berne, P., & Sins Invalid. 10 Principles of Disability Justice (2nd ed.). Design by Nomy Lamm. Sins Invalid.
- Reference 64: Mingus, M. (2011). “Access Intimacy: The Missing Link.” Leaving Evidence, 5 May 2011 — where access intimacy is named.
- Reference 65: Milbern, S. P. (2019). “On the Ancestral Plane: Crip Hand Me Downs and the Legacy of Our Movements.” Disability Visibility Project, 10 March 2019. Reprinted in A. Wong (Ed.), Disability Visibility: First-Person Stories from the Twenty-First Century (Vintage Books, 2020).
- Reference 66: Clare, E. (2015). Exile and Pride: Disability, Queerness, and Liberation. Duke University Press. Originally published 1999.
- Reference 67: Moore, L. F., Jr., McClung, N. A., & Nusbaum, E. A. (2017). Black Disabled Art History 101. Xóchitl Justice Press. ISBN 9781942001577.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
Equity-Centered Learning Design
The social and cultural layer over everything
In development
Attending to power, culture, and whose knowledge is treated as legitimate across the whole design, rather than as a separate module. It connects directly to equity evaluation and to equity-centred knowledge mobilization.
Group. Grounding
Home branch. Universal Design for Learning · Well established
Grounding. Equity-centred and culturally responsive design
Themes. Equity
Sources
- Reference 24: Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
Most related, by shared source and theme
Connected resources
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.