Learning disabilities term in content usable and glossary

Hello everyone

Over the past few weeks Jennie, John K and I have been trying to find a workable solutions to the problems we have faced with defining "learning disabilities" in the Content Usable glossary. Note, we are only referring to the use of "learning disabilities" in isolation, not as part of the phrase "cognitive and learning disabilities". We have discussed this a number of times and each time it has raised more issues that we cannot resolve. The underlying problem with the term "learning disabilities" is that is as different meanings in North America and other countries such as UK, Europe and other English-speaking countries. These meanings do not necessarily overlap (see discussion from a UK perspective<http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/cipold/migrated/documents/learning-disability-criteria.pdf>) and it is unlikely that we will come to a consensus on an acceptable definition within the available time frame.

So we have taken a step back to look at the whole issue as, if we are struggling to agree a definition in the group, this could be an indication that we have not used it consistently with the Content Usable document during the collaborative writing process. We feel we should now focus on ensuring that we have used the term "learning disabilities" correctly and clearly within the document where we are unable to provide clear, unambiguous definitions.

Therefore, we would like to put forward proposals to review how "learning disabilities" is used in Content Usable during the next editing stages using based on the following proposals. We welcome comments on these proposals (also available in a Google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xdFPJ-71NitgcvvZed83vhqLsh3oR1DqkWId_VCJ8ws/edit?usp=sharing>) via the list, in the document and hope to discuss these on the call on 4th September. If we agree to this approach, we will raise a Github issue for tracking.

Proposal:
We should review how we have used the phrase "learning disability" in isolation in the Content Usable document to clarify what we mean which the intention of minimising it's use.
Proposed actions to undertake during editing process:

  1.  Remove learning disabilities in isolation from the glossary
Due to learning disabilities being a term that can cause confusion, our goal is to  minimise the use of the term "learning disabilities" on its own. We should therefore no longer require a separate entry for learning disability in the glossary. "Cognitive and learning disabilities" would still be included in the glossary.


  1.  Add example referring to learning disability/difficulties in  section 2.2<https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/#background>
In some sections we discuss ideas related to cognitive and learning disability/difficulties, but we do not have learning difficulties examples.
Include an additional example in section 2.2 that references learning difficulties. For example "People with cognitive disabilities that impact learning may need more support or time to complete a new process or an authentication task."

  1.  Replace learning disabilities with intellectual disabilities where appropriate
Where using "learning disability" to refer to general learning or intellectual disability, we use "intellectual disability"  for clarity.
This term is familiar to disability professionals (even if not the preferred term in the country) and  can be understood by a lay person.  We should include a definition of intellectual disability within the glossary. This is the term used in DSM-5 and is widely used internationally.

  1.  Use specific diagnosis term where possible
Where using "learning disability" to refer to a learning difficulty in a certain area then we should replace that term with a more specific diagnosis if it is localised to a specific skill.
In the following example, learning disability has been replaced with dyslexia: "As a user with a language impairment, dyslexia and/or a memory impairment, I want the language used to be clear and easy for me to understand so that I can understand the content."

  1.  Use Cognitive disabilities instead of learning disabilities
When using learning disabilities to cover a wider range of impairment, consider whether "cognitive disabilities" or "cognitive and learning disabilities" could be used.
Using "cognitive disabilities" would be more inclusive of users with age-related disabilities or impairments that involve memory, processing or executive function.  In the following example, learning disability has been replaced with cognitive disability: "Sometimes content is usable by people with one cognitive disability but not a different one. For example, content with fewer words and more numbers may be perfect for some users with dyslexia or autism spectrum disorder, but inaccessible for people with dyscalculia who struggle with numeric information."
After undertaking these actions, then including a definition of learning disabilities will be lower priority and may be covered by the information in the document describing cognitive and learning disabilities in section 2.2.
The Google doc for the full proposal<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xdFPJ-71NitgcvvZed83vhqLsh3oR1DqkWId_VCJ8ws/edit?usp=sharing> includes a list of the 15 occasions that "learning disability" is used in Content Usable in isolation along with some research notes on the terminology used in English speaking countries not directly represented on our calls.

Best wishes

Abi