Section 2
The 21 resources in this area
Each entry states what the resource contributes, what grounds it, whether a live page exists, the resources most like it within this area, and the connections that run beyond it.
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.
Grounding. Inclusive design and one-size-fits-one; the duty to accommodate; construct validity
Sources
- Reference 1: 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 2: 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 3: 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 4: 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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
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.
Grounding. Meiorin and the BFOR test; Accessible Canada Act; BC Human Rights Code; Accessible British Columbia Act; ADA and Sections 504/508
Sources
- Reference 3: 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 6: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
- Reference 7: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
- Reference 8: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
- Reference 9: 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 theory and theme
Connected contributions
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.
Grounding. Construct validity; constructive alignment; bona fide academic and technical standards
Sources
- Reference 4: 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 10: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
- Reference 3: 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 theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
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.
Grounding. Social model (Oliver); academic ableism (Dolmage); Titchkosky; Kafer
Sources
- Reference 11: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
- Reference 12: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
- Reference 13: Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
- Reference 14: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
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.
Grounding. Stigma and concealment (Goffman); academic ableism; BC information-governance requirements
Sources
- Reference 15: Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
- Reference 12: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
- Reference 16: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
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.
Grounding. Nothing about us without us (Charlton); inclusive design; TCPS 2 research ethics
Sources
- Reference 17: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
- Reference 1: 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 18: 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 theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Accessibility Triage for Existing Course Inventories
A defensible order of work when everything cannot be fixed at once
In development
Most institutions hold thousands of documents, modules, videos, and pages built before anyone was checking, with no realistic path to full conformance. This resource offers a tiered protocol — what is remediated now, what is rebuilt at next revision, what is retired, and which standard applies to each tier — using high-volume mandatory and compliance training as the worked example.
Grounding. WCAG 2.2; EN 301 549; remediation prioritisation
Sources
- Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
- Reference 20: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Designing for the Assistive Technology People Actually Use
Why conformant content can still fail in practice
In development
Conformance and assistive-technology fluency are not the same thing, and the difference shows quickly in real use. This resource covers testing with actual assistive technology rather than automated checking alone, and the reasons technically conformant material can still obstruct — while leaving assessment, tool matching, and training to the assistive technology specialists and advisors whose professional work that is.
Grounding. SETT framework (Zabala); HAAT model (Cook & Polgar); WCAG 2.2
Sources
- Reference 21: 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 22: 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 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Accessible Procurement and Vendor Accountability
The decisions made before anything is built
In development
An inaccessible platform, once purchased, sets the ceiling on everything designed inside it. This resource covers reading an accessibility conformance report critically rather than accepting it at face value, using recognised standards as procurement criteria, writing remediation commitments into agreements, and piloting with disabled users before signature.
Grounding. EN 301 549; WCAG 2.2; VPAT and accessibility conformance reports
Sources
- Reference 20: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.
- Reference 23: Information Technology Industry Council. Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Reports.
- Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
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.
Grounding. Episodic disability framework (O’Brien et al.); disability studies
Sources
- Reference 24: 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 14: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Access in Clinical and Placement Education
Holding patient safety and access seriously at once
In development
Placement, simulation, precepting, and competency assessment are where essential requirements are most contested and where safety arguments can close conversations that deserve to stay open. This resource works through the design and assessment architecture that allows a program to protect genuine safety requirements while examining the ones it has never had reason to question.
Grounding. Technical standards in health professions education (Meeks & Jain); construct validity; duty to accommodate
Sources
- Reference 25: Meeks, L. M., & Jain, N. R. (2018). Accessibility, Inclusion, and Action in Medical Education: Lived Experiences of Learners and Physicians with Disabilities. Association of American Medical Colleges.
- Reference 4: 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 3: 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 theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Faculty Development That Changes Accessible Practice
From awareness to what instructors actually do
In development
Institutions have offered accessibility and inclusive design workshops for years, often with limited change in daily teaching practice. This resource diagnoses whether the gap is capability, opportunity, or motivation, then designs accordingly — point-of-need supports, discipline-specific exemplars, and department-embedded work — with any content on legal obligation delivered alongside the accommodation office rather than independently of it.
Grounding. COM-B and the Behaviour Change Wheel (Michie et al.); adult learning; UDL
Sources
- Reference 26: Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). “The Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change Interventions.” Implementation Science, 6:42.
- Reference 27: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
- Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Institutional Accessibility Planning as a Change Program
From a published plan to demonstrable change
In development
Statutory obligation produces an accessibility plan, a committee, and a feedback mechanism; it does not by itself produce sequencing, ownership, or capability. This resource brings systems design and change management to accessibility governance, and is written for a contributing role on an institutional plan rather than for authorship of an institution’s accessibility position.
Grounding. Accessible Canada Act; Accessible British Columbia Act; change management; systems thinking
Sources
- Reference 6: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
- Reference 8: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
- Reference 28: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
- Reference 29: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Accessible Health and Patient Education
Access beyond the learner, to the person receiving care
In development
Health literacy, plain language, communication access, and accessible patient education and informed consent, set against the documented health disparities disabled people experience. It is the point at which accessible learning design reaches materials intended for patients and the public rather than for students and staff.
Grounding. Health literacy (Nutbeam); disability health disparities (Krahn et al.); social determinants of health
Sources
- Reference 30: Nutbeam, D. (2000). “Health Literacy as a Public Health Goal: A Challenge for Contemporary Health Education and Communication Strategies into the 21st Century.” Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.
- Reference 31: Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). “Persons with Disabilities as an Unrecognized Health Disparity Population.” American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198–S206.
- Reference 32: WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2008). Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. World Health Organization.
- Reference 33: Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Accessible Research Participation and Knowledge Products
Who can take part, and who can read the findings
In development
Consent materials, participant-facing instruments, plain-language summaries, and accessible dissemination — increasingly expected by research ethics boards and funders, and rarely designed for. It sits at the junction of knowledge mobilization and accessibility, where a study’s reach is set as much by its materials as by its recruitment.
Grounding. TCPS 2 (2022); knowledge mobilization; WCAG 2.2
Sources
- Reference 18: 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).
- Reference 34: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
- Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Accessibility Review
Service · Accessible Learning Labs
Published resource
A rigorous review of learning environments that holds four interconnected bodies of knowledge in view at once, producing findings a surface-level compliance check cannot. It is offered as a specific, scoped service.
Grounding. WCAG; UDL; disability studies; systems knowledge
Read the Accessibility Review resource
Sources
- Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
- Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Inclusive Course & Curriculum Design
Service · Accessible Learning Labs
Published resource
Inclusive design of courses and curricula for faculty, designers, and curriculum committees — integrating design frameworks, pedagogy, and the systems knowledge that makes change endure. It is offered as a specific service.
Grounding. UDL; backward design; assessment equity; systems knowledge
Read the Inclusive Course & Curriculum Design resource
Sources
- Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
- Reference 10: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building
Service · Accessible Learning Labs
Published resource
Facilitation understood as a professional stance shaped by how power, identity, and legitimate knowledge are held — and the building of others' capacity to facilitate inclusively. It is offered as a specific service.
Grounding. Power-aware facilitation; adult learning; equity
Read the Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building resource
Sources
- Reference 27: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
- Reference 35: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Making Accessibility More Than Compliance
Access as design quality, not a checklist
In development
Treating accessibility as a dimension of good design rather than a minimum legal standard met at the end. It is the conceptual bridge from inclusive learning design to the accessibility, disability and accommodation area, and to the service line offered alongside it.
A resource in two areas. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.
Grounding. WCAG; UDL; inclusive design
Sources
- Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
- Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
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.
A resource in two areas. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.
Grounding. Construct validity; UDL action & expression
Read the Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment resource
Sources
- Reference 4: 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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads
Evaluating Whether Design Reduced Barriers
Closing the UDL cycle with evidence
In development
Measuring whether an inclusive design actually lowered barriers, rather than assuming that it did — ending on rigor rather than aspiration. It belongs to the shared evaluation family that runs across the practice.
A resource in two areas. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.
Grounding. Evaluation design; Universal Design for Learning
Sources
- Reference 36: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
- Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
Most related, by shared theory and theme
Connected contributions
Where this work leads