Proposal to update Benefits for SC 3.1.1-3.1.5

Hello,

Some of the Last Call comments about cognitive issues raise concerns
about the accuracy of the benefits claimed for various success criteria,
especially under GL 3.1. Part of the problem has to do with the fact
that terms like "cognitive disabilities," "learning disabilities," and
even "reading disabilities" mean different things in different
countries. 

It might be possible to address some (not all) of these concerns by by
rewriting the Benefits sections for SC 3.1.1-3.1.5 in terms of
functional limitations instead of named disabilities.

This approach would be consistent with the SC, which describe functional
outcomes.

It would also be consistent with contemporary approaches to disability
itself-  in which disability comes about when specific functional
limitations (e.g., of memory or sight or movement, etc.) encounter
specific features within the (technological) environment.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has adopted this "environmental"
approach in its International Classification of Functioning, Disability
and Health (2001), also known as the ICF
(http://www3.who.int/icf/icftemplate.cfm). The proposals below are based
on the ICF.

There is a useful explanation of this approach on the WebAIM site:

<blockquote cite="http://www.webaim.org/articles/cognitive/">
There are at least two ways to classify cognitive disabilities: by
functional disability or by clinical disability. Clinical diagnoses of
cognitive disabilities
include autism, Down Syndrome, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and even
dementia. Less severe cognitive conditions include attention deficit
disorder (ADD),
dyslexia (difficulty reading), dyscalculia (difficulty with math), and
learning disabilities in general. Clinical diagnoses may be useful from
a medical
perspective for treatment, but for the purposes of web accessibility,
classifying cognitive disabilities by functional disability is more
useful. Functional
disabilities ignore the medical or behavioral causes of the disability
and instead focus on the resulting abilities and challenges. 
</blockquote>


Proposals follow.

SC 3.1.1
<current>
* people with reading disabilities and cognitive limitations that make
it difficult to recognize (decode) individual words and sentences;
</current>

<proposed>
people who find it difficult to read written material with fluency and
accuracy, such as recognizing characters and alphabets or  sounding out
words with correct pronunciation
</proposed>
(Based on: D140 Learning to read. 2001. International Classification of
Functioning, Disabilities, and Health. World Health Organization.
Available at
http://www3.who.int/icf/onlinebrowser/icf.cfm?parentlevel=3&childlevel=4
&itemslevel=4&ourdimension=d&ourchapter=1&ourblock=2&our2nd=40&our3rd=0&
our4th=0


SC 3.1.2
<current>
* people with reading disabilities and cognitive limitations that make
it difficult to recognize (decode) individual words and sentences;

</current>

<proposed>
people who find it difficult to read written material with fluency and
accuracy, such as recognizing characters and alphabets, sounding out
words with correct pronunciation, and understanding words and phrases


</proposed>
(Based on: D140 Learning to read. 2001. International Classification of
Functioning, Disabilities, and Health. World Health Organization.
Available at
http://www3.who.int/icf/onlinebrowser/icf.cfm?parentlevel=3&childlevel=4
&itemslevel=4&ourdimension=d&ourchapter=1&ourblock=2&our2nd=40&our3rd=0&
our4th=0

SC 3.1.3
<current>
* This success criterion helps people with disabilities that affect
their ability to use context to aid understanding. This includes people
with certain
learning disabilities and cognitive limitationss. In addition, people
with low vision often lose context when screen magnifiers zoom in on a
small area
of the screen. This success criterion also helps people who have
difficulty recognizing words (decoding) or remembering the meaning of
words by limiting
the number of dictionary entries they must read in order to find the
definition that fits the context.
</current>

<proposed>
This success criterion may help people who:

	*	Find it difficult to sound out words with correct
pronunciation
	*	Have difficulty understanding words and phrases
	*	Have difficulty using context to aid understanding
</proposed>

SC 3.1.4
<current>

This success criterion helps people whose disabilities make reading
difficult or impossible. These include:

list of 3 items
* People with learning disabilities or cognitive limitations that impair
the ability to read.

* People with low vision. Screen magnification may reduce contextual
cues.

* People with memory loss 

list end

This success criterion also helps people with disabilities that affect
their ability to recognize words as well as their ability to use context
to aid understanding.
Acronyms and abbreviations may confuse these readers in different ways:

list of 4 items
* Some abbreviations do not look like normal words and cannot be
pronounced according to the usual rules of the language. For example,
the English word
"room" is abbreviated as "rm," which does not correspond to any English
word or phoneme. The user has to know that "rm" is an abbreviation for
the word
"room" in order to say it correctly.

* Sometimes the same abbreviation means different things in different
contexts. For example, in the English sentence "Dr. Johnson lives on
Boswell Dr.,"
the first "Dr." is an abbreviation for "Doctor" and the second instance
is an abbreviation for the word "Drive" (a word that means "street").
Users must
be able to understand the context in order to know what the
abbreviations mean.

* Some acronyms spell common words but are used in different ways. For
example, "JAWS" is an acronym for a screen reader whose full name is
"Job Access
with Speech." It is also a common English word referring to the part of
the mouth that holds the teeth. The acronym is used differently than the
common
word.

* Some acronyms sound like common words but are spelled differently. For
example, the acronym for Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language, S
M I L,
is pronounced like the English word "smile." 

list end

</current>

JS note: I'll make several different proposals to modify this material.
	1.	Move the material beginning "Acronyms and abbreviations
may confuse these readers ..." to the end of the Intent section. Change
the word "these" to "some." 
	2.	Make the Benefits section read as follows:
	3.	<proposed>
This success criterion may help people who:

	*	have difficulty sounding out words with correct
pronunciation;
	*	rely on screen magnifiers (magnification may reduce
contextual cues);
	*	have limited memory; 
	*	have difficulty using context to aid understanding.
</proposed>

SC 3.1.5
<current>
list of 2 items
* This success criterion benefits people with reading disabilities who
can understand complex ideas and processes presented in highly readable
text or by other means such as images illustrating relationships and
processes or through the spoken word. 

* Reading and intellectual disabilities affect the ability to recognize
individual words. Decoding must be automatic in order for people to read
fluently.
The act of decoding text word by word consumes much of the mental energy
that most people are able to use for understanding what they read. 
List end
</current>

JS note: Another two-part proposal:
	1.	Insert the text below in the Intent section, immediately
following the sentence "This is called decoding the text.":
	2.	<begin add>
Decoding must be automatic in order for people to read fluently. The act
of decoding text word by word consumes much of the mental energy that
most people are able to use for understanding what they read. 
	3.	<end Add>

2. <proposed>
This success criterion may help people who:
	*	Have difficulty comprehending and interpreting written
language (e.g. articles, instructions, or newspapers in text or
Braille),for the purpose of obtaining general knowledge or specific
information.
	*	</proposed>
(Based on:  D166 Reading. 2001. International Classification of
Functioning, Disabilities, and Health. World Health Organization.
Available at
http://www3.who.int/icf/onlinebrowser/icf.cfm?parentlevel=3&childlevel=4
&itemslevel=4&ourdimension=d&ourchapter=1&ourblock=3&our2nd=66&our3rd=0&
our4th=0. See also B16701  Reception of written language: mental
functions of decoding written messages to obtain their meaning.
http://www3.who.int/icf/onlinebrowser/icf.cfm?parentlevel=5&childlevel=6
&itemslevel=6&ourdimension=b&ourchapter=1&ourblock=2&our2nd=67&our3rd=0&
our4th=1.) 



"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu
Web http://www.utexas.edu <http://www.ital.utexas.edu>
/research/accessibility