Updated content for week 3 and week 4 (week 4 still needs work)

- small updates to week 3
- include in week 4: finding accessibility assignment & presenting accessibly slides

schedule.md

@@ -129,7 +129,8 @@ Try to find something you didn't find with an automated tool. ([Post a UAR on Ed
 - Watch: [Google Video on Practical Web Accessibility](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x18vEEfpK3g) — this video provides a great overview of the Web and how to make web content accessible. Highly recommended as a supplement to what we will cover in class.
 - Watch: [Latte: Use-Case and Assistive-Service Driven Automated Accessibility Testing Framework for Android](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z84jeO0UZFE) and read [Lies, Damned Lies, Overlays, and Widgets](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lies-damned-overlays-widgets-timothy-springer/)
 - Read: [Semantics for Eye tracking](https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3338844)
-- Watch: [Rescribe: Authoring and Automatically Editing Audio Descriptions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmyPmT5T0PY)) 
+- Watch: [Rescribe: Authoring and Automatically Editing Audio Descriptions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmyPmT5T0PY)
+- Read: [Is your web page accessible? A comparative study of methods for assessing web page accessibility for the blind](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1054972.1054979)
 
 {% enddetails %}
 
@@ -166,9 +167,6 @@ Try to find something you didn't find with an automated tool. ([Post a UAR on Ed
 {: .break} 7:40-7:50
 : Break 
 
-{: .topic}  7:50-8:20 Best Practices for Improving Accessibility Part 2
-: **Slides** {% include slide.html title="Best Practices: Improving Accessibility" loc="best-practices.html#40" %}
-
 {: .activity} In Class Work Time
 : Finish your video description and post it. If done early, work on your website writeup.
 
@@ -192,7 +190,8 @@ Try to find something you didn't find with an automated tool. ([Post a UAR on Ed
 
 {: .week}
 # Week 4 (1/24): Accessible Needfinding and Evaluation
-**Learning Goals** How to assess whether a technology is accessible; and whether an accessibility technology is useful and usable, in an inclusive fashion.
+{% details Learning Goals %} 
+How to assess whether a technology is accessible; and whether an accessibility technology is useful and usable, in an inclusive fashion.
 - How do you make sure your *product is accessible* to people with disabilities
    1. Data Equity and implicit bias
    2. Beyond automated assessment: Accessible Summative Studies
@@ -201,6 +200,7 @@ Try to find something you didn't find with an automated tool. ([Post a UAR on Ed
    - What are potential data sources for assessing value
    - Collaboration Versus Paternalism
    - Overly narrow views of disability: Multiple disabled people & multiply disabled people
+{% enddetails %}
 
 {% details Class Plan %} 
 

slides/assessment2.html

@@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ How do you get a system to the point where user testing is worth doing?
 ---
 # Study to answer these questions
 
+[Is your web page accessible? A comparative study...](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1054972.1054979)
+
 Gather baseline problem data on 4 sites
 - Usability study
 
@@ -219,8 +221,7 @@ Asked to email problems back to us
 
 Coded problems: WCAG & Empirical (baseline)
 
-Hypothesis 1: No technique will be more effective than any other
-
+Hypothesis 1: No technique will be more effective than any other, where effectiveness is a combination of: 
 - Thoroughness (portion of actual problems)
 - Validity (false positives)
 
@@ -237,26 +238,13 @@ No correlation between developer severity and WCAG priority or empirical severit
 
 5 of 9 remote participants failed to complete 1 of the 4 tasks
 
----
-# Thoroughness, Validity and Number
-
-.left-column[
-Thoroughness: portion of actual problems
-
-Validity: false positives
-]
-.right-column[
-![:img Graph showing mean problems found as box plots for remote; expert review; and screen reader groups. One box plot per website. Following slides will highlight results in this chart,70%, width](img/assessment/graph1.png) ]
-
-???
-
-Note high variance
-
 ---
 # H1: Methods Don't Differ 
-.left-column[FALSE for Number:]
-.right-column[
-![:img same graph highlighting that the average reviewer only found less than 20% of problems,70%, width](img/assessment/graph2.png) 
+.left-column50[
+- Screen reader and Expert Review found more problems
+]
+.right-column50[
+![:img same graph highlighting that the average reviewer only found less than 20% of problems,100%, width](img/assessment/graph2.png) 
 ]
 ???
 
@@ -266,16 +254,18 @@ Difference between remote and screen reader group is significant
 
 ---
 # H1: Methods Don't Differ 
-
-.left-column[Few false positives]
-.right-column[
-
-![:img same graph highlighting that the average validity is 60% for remote BLV users; 20% for expert reviewers; and 40% for non-BLV screen reader users,60%, width](img/assessment/validity.png) 
+.left-column50[
+- Screen reader and Expert Review found more problems
+- Screen reader and Expert Review most valid
+]
+.right-column50[
+![:img same graph highlighting that the average validity is 60% for remote BLV users; 20% for expert reviewers; and 40% for non-BLV screen reader users,100%, width](img/assessment/validity.png) 
 ]
 ???
 
-Note that these differences are significant across groups
-But there is no effect for individual evaluators
+Note small differences between individual developers in finding problems
+
+Difference between remote and screen reader group is significant
 
 ---
 # H2: Techniques find Different Problems
@@ -345,7 +335,8 @@ Many (perhaps all) of these are part of guidelines now
 ---
 # H2: Techniques find Different Types of Problems
 
-Screen reader novices did best at both major types of problems
+- High variance among individual reviewers
+- Screen reader novices did best at both major types of problems
 
 ![:img Four bar charts each showing the cumulative benefit in terms of percentage of known problems found of adding evaluators. The first bar chart shows expert reviewers; who reach 30% of WCAG problems and 60% of empirical problems by the third evaluator. The second bar chart shows novice screen reader users who reach 60% of both empirical and WCAG problems by the fifth evaluator. The third bar chart shows remote BLV participants who reach 25% of WCAG and just under 20% of empirical problems by the fifth evaluator. The fourth bar chart shows an automated tool which finds about 25% of WCAG and 5% of empirical problems,100%, width](img/assessment/cumulative.png) 
 

slides/designing.html

@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ class:
 - Picking a direction that the disability community cares about
 - How to get a first person perspective without burdening the disability community
 - Running an inclusive need finding study to prove that something is (or is not) a disability dongle :) 
+- Presenting Accessibly
 
 ---
 # Disability Dongle
@@ -245,4 +246,189 @@ Solutions include wide range of physical and software solutions
 
 Work with users!
 
+
+---
+[//]: # (Outline Slide)
+# Learning Goals for Today
+- Picking a direction that the disability community cares about
+- How to get a first person perspective without burdening the disability community
+- Running an inclusive need finding study to prove that something is (or is not) a disability dongle :) 
+- Presenting Accessibly
+
+---
+# Presenting Accessibly
+
+- First, make your slides accessible (and share them ahead of time)
+      
+---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (1 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+--
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+   - makes navigation easier
+   - put (x of y) in the title if repeating
+]
+
+---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (2 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+- avoid clutter
+]
+
+---
+# What is clutter?
+
+Please, for the love of all that is good on this fine planet we call home, do not do this to your poor audience members
+
+They don’t deserve this! What did they do to you? They probably flew hundreds of miles and of all talks and things to do in this new place came to YOUR presentation. And what do you do? You greet them with this GIANT wall of text! How rude. It’s ugly to look at. It’s hard to read. It’s annoying as he
+ck for me to type out this thing just to make a point!
+
+So please, don’t do this to your audience members. Be a responsible presenter. Practice your talks so you don’t have to read off the slide (or use speaker notes! also okay!). Break up your content so looking at your slides isn’t like getting smacked in the face with a wall of text.
+
+**But there are exceptions! (e.g., if you have a thick accent)**
+
+
 ---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (3 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+- avoid clutter
+- don't use color to convey meaning
+]
+
+---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (4 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+- avoid clutter
+- don't use color to convey meaning
+- 9/10, you don’t need sound effects
+
+]
+
+---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (5 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+- avoid clutter
+- don't use color to convey meaning
+- 9/10, you don’t need sound effects
+- you rarely ever NEED that movement-based slide transition
+]
+
+---
+# Slideshow Rules of Thumb (6 of 6)
+
+.left-column50[
+- image descriptions
+- use headers & styles
+- color contrast
+- san serif fonts
+- plain language
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+- unique slide titles
+- avoid clutter
+- don't use color to convey meaning
+- 9/10, you don’t need sound effects
+- you rarely ever NEED that movement-based slide transition
+- check slide order (like DOM order)
+]
+
+---
+# If you have a video in your slides
+- Make sure it is captioned
+- Make sure it has audio descriptions if non-verbal content is important
+
+---
+# Next Assignment: [AT Around Us](../assignments/finding-accessibility.html) (1 of 2)
+
+.left-column50[
+- Practice presenting accessibly
+- Exposure to a range of accessiblity technologies
+- Experience finding first person accounts
+]
+
+---
+# Next Assignment: [AT Around Us](../assignments/finding-accessibility.html) (2 of 2)
+
+.left-column50[
+- Practice presenting accessibly
+- Exposure to a range of accessiblity technologies
+- Experience finding first person accounts
+]
+
+.right-column50[
+Find one computer access technology
+
+Find one about "the world"
+
+Key points
+- Try not to pick the same things as your classmates
+- Should include a first person video
+- Should be able to try it out yourself
+]
+
+--- 
+---
+# Handin requirements
+.left-column40[
+- Two accessible slides per AT (see Canvas for slide deck)
+- Present one of them next week (accessibly) in 3-4 minutes (will take about half of class)
+]
+.right-column60[
+Slide includes: 
+- A summary of the AT you researched
+- Information about its audience
+- A picture of the AT
+- A link to the first person account you found
+- Something you learned from the video and/or by trying it about its strengths and weaknesses
+
+]