Year 2 Instructional Materials Accessibility Report
California State University, Sacramento
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Section 508 of the 1973
Rehabilitation Act (as amended in 1998), the California State University Coded Memorandum AA-200704 requires annual reporting of the implementation of the Accessible Technology Initiative by all CSU
campuses. This report focuses Priority Two: Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan (IMAP), due
August 15, 2008.
The topics identified in this report address our original plan from 2007 and provide a narrative
description of our progress as well as obstacles in achieving our goals. The sub-bullets for each question
serve as prompts for areas that may be missing or need to be expanded upon in our plan. An appendix
is provided that shows a mapping from the January 2008 IMAP main topics to this Year 2 IMAP Report.
D:\612934285.doc
Table of Contents
1. TIMELY ADOPTION – SPECIFICALLY FOCUSING ON SCOPE OF MATERIALS AND LATE-HIRE STRATEGY ..............................................3
2. PROCESS – DETAILS/ PERSONNEL/ CALENDAR FOR INITIATIVE ............................................................................................7
3. IDENTIFICATION RESOURCES AND ALLOCATION COMMITMENTS ........................................................................................ 10
4. INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES & PROCEDURES THAT SUPPORT THE ATI THROUGH CURRICULUM AND PERSONNEL REVIEWS .................. 13
5. COMMITMENTS FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS .................................................................................................................... 15
6. SHARED RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 17
7. MIGRATION FROM ACCOMMODATION TO ACCESSIBILITY .................................................................................................. 19
8. EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES .................................................................................................. 20
9. PROCESS FOR THE ELECTRONIC CAPTURE OF COURSE MATERIALS ....................................................................................... 26
10. MULTIMEDIA ......................................................................................................................................................... 29
11. INCENTIVES ........................................................................................................................................................... 30
12. TRAINING ............................................................................................................................................................. 32
13. OUTREACH, COMMUNICATION, AWARENESS, MARKETING ............................................................................................ 35
14. ASSESSMENT OF FACULTY MATERIALS TO BE MADE ACCESSIBLE....................................................................................... 37
15. TOOLS FOR DOCUMENT AND MEDIA CONVERSION ........................................................................................................ 38
16. SYSTEMWIDE SHARED RESOURCES (CAM ETC.) ........................................................................................................... 40
17. SYSTEM INTEGRATION ............................................................................................................................................. 41
18. THINGS NOT ADDRESSED BY THE PRECEDING: ............................................................................................................... 43
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................................................... 44
Cross reference from Year 2 IMAP Report to IMAP Requirements...................................................................... 44
Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan (IMAP) Main Topics (Coded Memo AA-2007-04): ............................. 44
Memo on Accessible Technology Initiative, September 24, 2007 ....................................................................... 45
Memoranda on Timely Identification of Instructional Materials ........................................................................ 48
Memo to Department Chairs on Late-Hire Faculty and Timely Adoption of Textbooks ...................................... 50
State Hornet Article: Late books affect student learning .................................................................................... 51
Announcement to Students about Accessible Technology: ................................................................................. 52
Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan: IMAP Deliverables for 07-08 & 08-09 . Error! Bookmark not defined.
Draft New Course Instructional Materials Accessibility Checklist ....................................................................... 63
IMAP Report Template 2008
2
1. Timely Adoption – Specifically focusing on scope of materials and late-hire strategy
 In addition to textbooks, how will your campus ensure timely adoption of all print based
instructional material: Syllabi, Course packets, online notes, texts, assignments, e-Reserves,
and media?
 What are ALL the print based instructional materials used in your classes?
 How do you handle print based instructional materials that are produced just-in-time for
class?
 How are late hired lecturers included in your process?
 Are hiring policies interfering with timely adoption of materials?
1a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
In addition to textbooks, how will your campus ensure timely adoption of all print based instructional
material: Syllabi, Course packets, online notes, texts, assignments, e-Reserves, and media?
Bookstore Deadlines and Incentives: The Bookstore sets deadlines for timely adoption of textbooks and
other instructional materials, such as course readers. Faculty are asked to order all textbooks and other
course materials by the deadline established by the Bookstore (for 2007/2008, no later than late April
for Fall 2008, and no later than late October for Spring 2008), to ensure that students with print-related
disabilities receive alternative instructional materials at the same time as their peers. The Bookstore
Textbook Manager works with faculty and departmental administrative staff to coordinate timely
adoption of instructional materials. To submit textbook orders, faculty are given a variety of options:
they can complete a course adoption form on the Bookstore faculty web page, call the Bookstore
textbook department, e-mail the textbook department, or visit the Textbook department at the
Bookstore. In addition, the Bookstore conducts meetings with departments, sends advanced reminder
letters to all faculty, and provides a small shared gift to department faculty as an incentive for timely
textbook adoption. In addition, faculty are encouraged to attend an appreciation day and submit orders
then. An accomplishment for 2007/2008 is that the Bookstore's adoption rate for Spring 2008 textbooks
increased to an all-time high of 75.8%, as of December 19, 2007. This was an increase of 5.8%, compared
to the adoption rate for Spring 2007 (which was 70% as of December 18, 2006).
Increase Awareness of Need for Materials to be Provided in Advance: Faculty are alerted by Services to
Students with Disabilities if they have a student with a print disability (identity not disclosed) enrolled in
their class, and are asked to provide materials in advance in electronic format whenever possible During
a Chairs’ Meeting in fall 2007, it was also recommended that SSWD alert not only faculty, but also
Department Chairs, in case there are classes without assigned faculty, so that they are aware of the
requirements and the advance notice needed. In October 2007, the campus held an ATI forum attended
by over 150 members of the campus community, to discuss the many facets of the ATI implementation.
A large focus of the forum was the need to submit materials in a timely manner for conversion.
Syllabus Statement: The Center for Teaching and Learning provides a sample syllabus statement faculty
can use to encourage students with disabilities to seek assistance (see
IMAP Report Template 2008
3
http://www.ctl.csus.edu/syllabus.htm) : “If you have a disability and require accommodations, you need
to provide disability documentation to SSWD, Lassen Hall 1008, (916) 278-6955. Please discuss your
accommodation needs with me after class or during my office hours early in the semester." Students
with disabilities are encouraged to meet with faculty early to discuss their accessibility needs (including
the need for advanced materials, preferably in electronic format, to facilitate conversion from printbased to alternative formats)
What are ALL the print based instructional materials used in your classes?
Print-based instructional materials might include: syllabi, textbooks, course packs, assignments,
handouts, exams, notes, Library reserve materials, and other course materials. A draft New Course
Accessibility checklist (see Appendix) has been developed to provide faculty with guidance on how to
incorporate accessibility into the design of course materials, and includes a list of instructional materials
that might be used in classes which need to be made accessible; this checklist will be pilot tested in the
fall 2008.
How do you handle print based instructional materials that are produced just-in-time for class?
Requests for Conversion of Materials: Enrolled students with approved alternative media needs are
referred to the Services to Students with Disabilities (SSWD) High Tech Center where SSWD staff request
an electronic version of the instructional materials from faculty, scan and convert the materials
manually, proceeding until finished. If students receive print handouts, assignments and other printbased materials that are produced “just in time” for class and that still need to be converted into
alternative formats, students are informed that late requests may cause delays due to the processing
time. Regarding print handouts, turn-a-round time for alternative format requests takes at least 3 days,
and is determined on a case-by-case basis by SSWD staff. In addition, students may scan the print
materials into an alternative format in the High Tech Center lab or in campus computing labs using the
assistive technology that is available to them. In some cases, alternative reasonable accommodations,
e.g. Reader services, must be arranged if immediate turnaround time is not possible. Faculty, SSWD staff
and the print disabled student, need to use an interactive process to develop the strategies to
reasonably accommodate the student. SSWD will work collaboratively with faculty and student to
ensure that the appropriate accommodation is provided. In some cases, if faculty need to provide print
materials while a class is in progress, they need to develop a method of providing access at the same
time to a student who may not be able to access the print materials such as a student who has low
vision or is blind (print-related disability). For example, if an instructor prints out a handout just before
class and his students will need to use this handout for that day’s lesson, the instructor can provide the
low vision or blind student access to this material by reading the handout aloud for the student with a
disability. This ensures that all students in his/her class have access to the information. If a
disagreement arises regarding an accommodation or access to materials, the student may initiate the
"Conflict Resolution" process (see University policy on Academic Program Access for Students with
Disabilities http://www.csus.edu/umanual/acad/UMA00215.htm) to address complaints.
Communication on Timely Identification of Instructional Materials: The Office of the Provost, the Vice
President of Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Senate ask for direct assistance from
Department Chairs, Deans, and Faculty to implement procedures of timely adoption of textbooks and
course materials. Memorandums on Timely Identification of Instructional Materials were sent to all
faculty and staff in May 2007 (in preparation for Fall 2007), December 2007 (in preparation for Spring
2008), and April 2008 (in preparation for Fall 2008). See Appendix for an example of such a memo. There
IMAP Report Template 2008
4
were other opportunities where the ATI executive team communicated the need for timely adoption of
instructional materials, namely the ATI forum and at the Chairs’ meeting.
Department Chairs’ Meeting: The Director of the Bookstore, the Co-Director of Services to Students
with Disabilities, and the Director of Academic Technology and Creative Services presented to the
Department Chairs in Fall 2007 and Spring 2008 on the timely adoption process for instructional
materials as well. During the presentations there were also opportunities to engage Chairs and Deans on
various facets of the ATI.
Library e-Reserves: The Reserve Book Room requires faculty to place materials on electronic reserve at
least 2 weeks in advance of when they will be used, and states on their procedures web page
(http://library.csus.edu/content2.asp?pageID=162) that whenever possible, faculty choose materials
from publishers and journals that provide accessible electronic content.
Communications on Instructional Materials Identification: The Office of the Provost sent targeted
Memorandums to all faculty and staff on May 22, 2007, December 5, 2007, and April 3, 2008 regarding
the procedures and established deadlines for textbook and instructional materials adoption. For an
example of a Memo on Timely Identification of Instructional Materials, see the Appendix. Letters from
the Bookstore were also sent to all faculty and instructional staff each semester. In addition, a student
Hornet Newspaper article about timely textbook adoption was published in October 2007, which helped
to get the word out about the ATI forum and the issue of timely textbook adoption. See article entitled
“Late books affect student learning” in the Appendix.
The textbook adoption data from the Bookstore, as well as feedback from faculty, indicate that
communications and procedures to encourage early adoption of instructional materials have had an
impact on timely adoption of textbooks on campus:
According to textbook adoption data obtained from the Hornet Bookstore on February 28, 2008:
a) For Spring 2008, 75.8% of faculty ordered textbooks by December 18, 2006
b) For Spring 2007, 70% of faculty ordered textbooks by December 19, 2007
How are late hired lecturers included in your process?
Strategy for Late Hired Faculty: The Provost sent a memo to all department chairs encouraging early
adoption procedures for late hired lecturers. To ensure that textbooks are available for conversion prior
to the start of the semester, departments are encouraged to either order the textbook in advance or to
allow the late hired faculty to choose from books that are already available in an accessible format. A
Memorandum to Department Chairs on Late-Hire Faculty and Timely Adoption of Textbooks explaining
this process can be found in the Appendix.
Based on course enrollment data generated from the campus Student Administration database for
students who disclosed alternate format needs as of May 2008, 40% (36 course sections out of 90
course sections total) did not have an instructor identified (listed “Staff”) for Fall 2008 semester courses
(data obtained May 2008).
Are hiring policies interfering with timely adoption of materials?
IMAP Report Template 2008
5
The ATI team will need to work with the Provost and/or Human Resources to discuss whether any hiring
policies might be interfering with timely adoption of materials, and to address any issues or
workarounds. The current state of the budget is impacting the ability of departments to define their
part-time hiring early enough to meet the ATI deadline. It is not uncommon for late hires to find out
their teaching responsibilities a few days before classes start. Over the past year, the Provost has
consistently encouraged Department Chairs to order textbooks early for courses scheduled to be taught
by late hires, or to develop a list of accessible textbooks that late hires can choose from.
1b. Plans for 2008/2009
The ATI Team will continue to refine policies and procedures to encourage early adoption of
instructional materials, in coordination with the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs. For example, the New Course Proposal Policy, including a New Course Accessibility Checklist
which addresses timely adoption of textbook and print-based materials, will be discussed with the
Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee in early Fall 2008. In addition, the CSU systemwide Faculty Senate
policy on Providing Equal Access to Programs and Services for Individuals with Disabilities AS-280107/AA/FA - May 10-11, 2007 will be reviewed. The Office of the Provost and Faculty Senate Chair will
also continue to send communications to faculty/staff about timely instructional materials and textbook
adoption. This year, the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) institute selected universal design as its
theme. The participants will serve as ambassadors to their respective departments for the conversion of
instructional materials.The Bookstore will continue to track which departments are not submitting
textbooks in a timely manner, so that these departments can be followed up by the the Chairs, Deans,
Faculty Senate representatives and others as appropriate. The Instructional Materials Accessibility
workgroup will continue to develop and recommend strategies to encourage timely adoption by
departments.
1c. Barriers to completion
Decentralized Instructional Materials: Not all faculty are placing orders through the Bookstore. This
decentralized approach to textbook and course materials ordering makes it difficult to track all
instructional materials. Each department has its own way of tracking the information (e.g. the
department’s office manager might be charged with keeping track of this information). Luckily, the
Bookstore readily provides data on textbook adoption information. However, since not all courses place
materials at the Bookstore, further data will be needed to help measure what the instructional
materials adoption rates for all instructional materials holdings are.
According to SSWD data generated from Bookstore textbook data and Admissions and Records course
enrollment data, as of May 2008, 57% of courses (51 out of 90 course sections) with students with printrelated disabilities listed “No Textbooks Required.” Some of these courses indeed do not require a
textbook. Others students must purchase a coursepack through a source other than the Bookstore (e.g.
University Readers www.universityreaders.com/students/instructions.php) or they place materials on reserve
through the Library. Further exploration on sources of texts and departmental instructional materials
adoption data is needed, and an analysis through Academic Affairs is currently in development.
In Fall 2007, we explored the possibility of a Textbook adoption tool similar to the one used by Fullerton,
however due to the Bookstore’s corporate constraints, it was determined that this solution was not
possible.
IMAP Report Template 2008
6
Book Publisher Related Constraints
The proliferation of new editions of texbooks with rather insignificant improvements over the previous
editions is another barrier. Publishers are putting out new editions of textbooks, and faculty are forced
to adopt them. This significantly impacts the book buy-back programs, the cost of textbooks, and the
ability of the university SSWD to keep up with the conversion process. Faculty need to be made aware
of the ATI and cost effects of the casual adoption of a new edition of textbook.
Enforcement of Early Adoption: In addition, the decentralization in the textbook ordering process
makes it is difficult to "enforce" timely textbook adoption; The Department Chairs and Deans will need
to gain “buy-in” from their faculty in order to enforce the timely textbook and instructional materials
adoption process.
Syllabi: Another barrier is obtaining the syllabi for determining reading lists and schedules and
facilitating conversion. SSWD staff and students themselves will contact faculty and/or department
chairs (if no faculty identified) requesting this information; however, not all faculty respond in a timely
fashion; in many instances, faculty are on vacation during the summer or winter intersessions.
Late Student Requests: Some students do not submit requests for alternative formats until the first day
of class; the reasons for this vary; some students do not register until late due to financial reasons;
others change their schedules at the last minute. Some students may have difficulty navigating the
textbook ordering process, and some students may have poor time management skills.
Inventory: The Bookstore does not always carry the inventory of textbooks until several days before the
semester; however, for students with a need for specialized formats, the course materials can be
requested through a Pre-Order service.
Lack of access to accessible media repositories: Currently the CSU Center for Accessible Media (CAM)
database is available for CSU alternate media and assistive technology staff only, to check for availability
of textbooks in alternate formats (e.g. Braille, electronic text, etc.) for students with disabilities.
Unfortunately there is a limited number of titles available and the database is not organized by subject.
It is not available for faculty to access at this point. In addition, although there are other accessible
media repositories (e.g. Louis database), these are limited in scope and few titles are available. Limited
access to accessible media repositories can frustrate faculty, staff, and students wishing to be proactive
by searching for listings of textbooks already in accessible format.
1d. Observations/discoveries
The university community is slowly becoming sensitive to the need to order instructional materials early
for conversion. Sacramento State has had a long tradition of providing educational access to students,
regardless of ethnicity, class, gender, and now disability. This initiative fits well in the University
mission, which makes it easier to promote its requirements to faculty. There are a small number of
examples of faculty whose creative responses to the ATI are being used in the Retention, Tenure and
Promotion (RTP) process. We hope that trend continues and expands, and that ATI-related scholarly
activities will soon be recognized in the service and teaching areas of the RTP process.
2. Process – Details/ Personnel/ Calendar for Initiative
 Who, what, where, when and how?

What people / positions will implement the pieces: administrators, Senate and Council
chairs, department chairs?
IMAP Report Template 2008
7

What responsibilities are assigned to governance bodies and departments?

Which revenue centers are involved: divisions, units, colleges?

What is the integrated timeline? Accomplished at regularly scheduled meetings, special
events, retreats, internal deadlines?

How are individual tasks being done?

What is your global strategy in detail?
2a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
See Appendix for listing of IMAP deliverables (details, personnel, timelines, and milestones), and
activities from 2007-2008. Highlights from 2007-2008 include:












The Teaching Using Technology (TuT) summer institute on Universal Design and Accessibility
provided training and support for twenty-eight faculty in May 2008.
The President asked for support in making the campus more accessible during his fall 2007
Address (http://www.csus.edu/president/address/falladdress083007.stm).
Publications & Design, in coordination with Interim ATI Project Coordinator, designed an
Accessible Technology Initiative graphic which symbolizes universal design (of instruction)
for all: http://www.csus.edu/accessibility/atilogo.jpg
The Provost and Faculty Senate Chair sent a memorandum to all University faculty and staff
in September 2007 (see Memo on Accessible Technology Initiative, September 24, 2007 in
Appendix) on the importance of the Accessible Technology Initiative, including instructional
materials accessibility.
The Office of Academic Affairs and Faculty Senate co-sponsored an ATI Forum, in October
2007, attended by over 150 faculty, staff, students, administrators, and members of the
public. A captioned video was produced of the ATI Forum, which included participation by
the Provost, Faculty Senate Chair, CIO, students, staff and faculty.
The Directors of the Bookstore, Services to Students with Disabilities, and Academic
Technology & Creative Services co-presented at an Academic Department Chairs’ meeting
on the importance of timely textbook adoption in November 2007 and April 2008, prior to
the Bookstore deadlines.
The Bookstore’s textbook adoption rate for spring 2008 textbooks increased to 75.8%, an
all-time high.
An article about the Accessible Technology Initiative was published in the Sacramento State
Bulletin: www.csus.edu/bulletin/bulletin100807/bulletin100807accessible.stm
Academic Technology & Creative Services offered workshops (see section 12 on Training
below for details) on how to create accessible word documents, PowerPoint presentations,
documents in PDF format, and web pages.
A web-based tutorial on Introduction to Web Accessibility was designed and is being piloted.
In the article "Living the Wired Life" in Sac State Winter 2007 magazine, accessible
technology was mentioned as an educational technology that has been truly life-changing
among students with disabilities
The Sac State ATI "Fast Facts for Accessibility" Newsletter was distributed to all campus staff
and faculty and included immediate actions for instructors to take for accessibility.
IMAP Report Template 2008
8


ATCS and IRT coordinated efforts to offer the first Express Help hands-on workshops to
assist faculty in creating an accessible syllabus, PowerPoint presentations and PDF
documents. These sessions will be offered throughout the semester.
An Accessible Technology Initiative Instructional Materials Specialist was recruited and
hired, appointment effective May 2008.
2b. Plans for 2008/2009
See Appendix for listing of IMAP deliverables (details, personnel, timelines, and milestones), activities
from 2007-2008 and suggested plans for 2008-2009. This needs to be further developed in coordination
with the Instructional Materials Specialist, who began her position in May 2008. Highlights include:

A process to identify faculty liaisons (including Teaching Using Technology (TuT) and other
faculty) in each college who are aware of accessibility requirements and procedures so that they
can disseminate information to colleagues, and help train (similar to San Jose’s Accessibility
faculty in residence program)

A process to identify key instructional materials that need to be retrofitted to make accessible.
The process should be maintained at the Department level. This process should be adopted
campus wide.

An evaluation process to determine if instructional materials made available to students via
faculty websites, the course management system (WebCT , now SacCT), and LOCUS (online
access to course materials and library resources) are made accessible.
2c. Barriers to completion
Staffing/Hiring: Although funding for an instructional materials specialist was identified to assist faculty
to plan, develop, create, and implement accessible instructional materials, the hiring of the position was
not possible until May 2008. The instructional materials specialist may not be sufficiently able to handle
all of the need for support. Obviously, one position to assist several thousand faculty member is limited;
we are going to have to depend on work getting done by departments, which may not have enough
available resources for faculty/staff to meet the need.
Perceptions of Workload: There is a perception that accessibility is very difficult, and that the mandate
has to be done in one fell swoop. There is also faculty concern about impact on workload, and the sheer
amount of time needed to create accessible instructional materials, etc. This perception is based on two
factors: 1. The current state of the technology that does not automatically offer materials in accessible
formats, or allow the seamless retrofitting of inaccessible materials to accessible ones; and 2. The need
for faculty to plan ahead in order to allow for appropriate time to convert instructional materials. The
latter has some connotation that seems to conflict with some aspects of academic freedom. In both
cases, time is on the ATI side as tools are continuously improving, but we need to continue our efforts to
educate/sensitize the faculty on the timing issue. Likely, faculty have expressed their concern about the
support and resources that are and will be available to them in order to meet accessibility requirements.
Their concerns are being partially addressed through the hiring of an instructional materials specialist
that will work closely with faculty to assist them in the development and maintenance of accessible
instructional materials. An identification of current services available to faculty in terms of instructional
materials is being undertaken in order to provide faculty with information on their options for resources
and to maximize support.
IMAP Report Template 2008
9
Limited Time for Coordination: In addition to the instructional materials specialist, an interim ATI
project coordinator with expertise in accessible technology was identified in August 2007 to help
coordinate the ATI project on campus, including all three priorities. This appointment was in addition to
her full time position as program director of Student Support Services for Students with Disabilities, so
limited time was available to manage the ATI project.
Interdepartmental collaborations: Strong synchronization of staffing and resources will be needed for
successful implementation of the Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan. Information Resources and
Technology, Academic Technology and Creative Services, Services to Students with Disabilities, Center
for Teaching and Learning, Library, and others need to collaborate on projects in unprecedented ways,
and this may have an impact on other projects and resources.
Individual and Departmental Buy-in: Although campus-wide communication efforts on ATI and
instructional materials accessibility were ramped up this year, outreach to individuals and departments
was limited due to limited time and staffing. Because we are such a large campus, it is difficult to reach
so many faculty; The hope is that Teaching Using Technology (TuT) participants from 2007 and 2008 will,
as part of their professional development process, continue to reach out to their own departments as
advocates of accessibility and universal design of instruction. We will need to continue to work with the
ATI Steering Committee and Instructional Materials workgroup, the departments, the Provost, Faculty
Senate, and others to encourage further buy-in at all levels
Cultural/Paradigm Shift: The ambitious timelines set by the Accessible Technology Initiative effort may
be unrealistic in terms of the cultural shift required by the entire body of faculty members in order to
change the culture of how they approach instructional design. The shift in thinking about designing for
accessibility proactively will take a lot of time, but the campus has already made strides.
2d. Observations/discoveries
A new Project Manager was recently hired in the Information Resources and Technology division to
assist the campus with IT related projects and her project management expertise will be valuable for
helping the ATI Steering Team, including the interim ATI coordinator and Instructional Materials
Specialist, to move the ATI project and Instructional Materials Accessibility plan forward.
3. Identification Resources and Allocation Commitments
 What resources are currently dedicated to the provision of alternative instructional
materials for students with disabilities?

What additional resources are committed to make all instructional materials accessible?

What budget allocations for the implementation of your IMAP were allocated in 07-08?

What allocations are committed for fiscal years 08-09 and 09-10?

Please, include captioning, multimedia costs and faculty training.

If budget for the ATI is not part of the 08-09 and 09-10 budget commitment, why?

How is the ATI budget managed on your campus?
IMAP Report Template 2008
10
3a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
What resources are currently dedicated to the provision of alternative instructional materials for
students with disabilities?
Currently, the Services to Students with Disabilities SSWD department has a designated line item of
$99,550 for alternative instructional materials (AB 422 account). The majority of this budget goes
towards staffing, including a full time certified Braille transcriptionist/alternative media specialist,
and 3-5 alternative media editing student assistants and temporary staff who assist in the
production of alternative formatted course materials such as Braille and electronic text, for eligible
students with disabilities. The SSWD department also employs an Academic Year High Tech Center
Coordinator/Instructor to supervise the alternative media and assistive technology services, and to
provide direct instruction and support to the students.
What additional resources are committed to make all instructional materials accessible?
a) An ATI Steering Committee (University Committee on Information Technology
Accessibility) continued to discuss Instructional Materials Accessibility.
b) An ATI Project Coordinator was identified to provide part time project coordination
including the Instructional Materials Accessibility priority;
c) A specific ATI position dedicated to help faculty make materials accessible was hired. In
addition to a dedicated instructional materials specialist position, student assistants may
be hired to assist with the efforts, especially related to converting materials and
captioning multimedia.
d) Software, hardware, and training to support instructional materials accessibility were
purchased. See section for further information on tools for document conversion.
e) In addition, the division of Academic Technology and Creative Services is committed to
assist faculty by integrating accessibility principles into the process; The staff have redesigned their training materials to include accessibility, and are offering several
training and material conversion sessions.
f)
Center for Teaching and Learning, Academic Technology and Creative Services, Services
to Students with Disabilities, Information Resources and Technology and others jointly
supported the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) Institute on Accessibility and Universal
Design. This institute has helped over 60 faculty in 2007 and 2008 convert some
materials into accessible formats.
g)
An Accessibility Help e-mail address was established as a “one stop” email location for
questions related to ATI: ati@csus.edu
h) Faculty & Staff workshops on accessible information, including Accessible Word, PDF,
PowerPoint, and Web Accessibility were delivered: www.csus.edu/training
IMAP Report Template 2008
11
What budget allocations for the implementation of your IMAP were allocated in 07-08?
Approximately $ 300,000 was allocated for the ATI project overall in 07-08, which included allocations
for all three priorities of the project: Web Accessibility, Instructional Materials Accessibility, and
Procurement. Approximately $60,000 specifically allocated for staffing of the IMAP in 07-08. The budget
for the Accessible Technology Initiative Project is considered an All University Expense (AUE) budget,
which are set up to allow for the budget to be expanded if unexpected increases or demands occur.
What allocations are committed for fiscal years 08-09 and 09-10?
Allocations for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 have not been announced, but a 10% reduction from the
2007-2008 overall ATI project allocation is expected in 2008-2009 due to expected campus budget
reductions.
Please, include captioning, multimedia costs and faculty training.
a) Captioning/multimedia: in 07-08, approximately $1,000 was spent for captioning high
profile videos or events anticipated to be attended by students with disabilities;
Another $2,000 are expected to be spent to caption custom academic videos
developed by ATCS for teaching and learning. The CSU’s Automatic Sync Technologies
systemwide discount was used this year; Docsoft systems and training ($28,000) were
purchased to assist with transcription and captioning of streaming videos; the sheer
volume of multimedia holdings needs to be further assessed in 2008-2009 to best
utilize resources;
b) Training costs: $40,000 Memorandum of Understanding was implemented with
Chancellor’s Office to develop training and to share costs in training systemwide;
Training was also provided through the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) institute,
through the Pacific ADA Center, for approximately $3,000. Additionally, onsite training
in specific applications to assist with implementation was provided as part of the
Docsoft, $2,700, and Commonlook software $2,000, and will be scheduled in July
2008.
If budget for the ATI is not part of the 08-09 and 09-10 budget commitment, why?
N/A
How is the ATI budget managed on your campus?
a) The ATI project’s Executive Sponsor works with the Interim ATI Project Coordinator and
ATI Steering Committee to establish budget; Signature authority for Executive
Sponsor, Executive Assistant to CIO, and ATI Project Coordinator; Budget analysis:
Budget Analyst and ATI Project Coordinator;
b) Administration/Budget analysis: Initially, the ATI budget was part of overall Information
Resources and Technology Division budget; In Spring 2008 a separate department
account was established for the ATI project to make it more efficient to track ATI
IMAP Report Template 2008
12
project expenses; In September 2007, an Administrative Analyst was assigned to assist
with ATI project administrative tasks; Unfortunately, this person went on disability
leave; The overall IRT Administrative Support Coordinator went on leave for the
majority of the year, so other staff, who were already impacted by office staff
shortages, provided some back up help with administrative, paperwork, purchasing
logistics;
3b. Plans for 2008/2009
ATI Budget will include items for part time Project Coordinator, Instructional Materials Accessibility
specialist, and student assistants (to be hired). In addition, training/travel, software, equipment, and
communications/outreach will be needed.
ATI will need to share captioning costs as there will be a limited captioning fund ($2,000) for priority
videos to be sent to be captioned and transcribed by agencies. In addition, student assistants could be
utilized to help clean up the Docsoft generated transcripts and synchronize the files with videos.
3c. Barriers to completion
Staffing: Lack of dedicated administrative support for the ATI project has caused some delays and
impacted project recordkeeping and support. Also, multiple ATI project-funded staff positions report to
different supervisors, making the management of the ATI budget more complicated.
For Captioning/Multimedia: The sheer amount of multimedia and the high cost of captioning. The
current state (accuracy level) of the captioning technology is another barrier.
3d. Observations/discoveries
Need to link ATI budget to legal requirement as well as overall campus priorities, e.g. retention and
graduation of students, access, and academic excellence.
4. Institutional Policies & Procedures that support the ATI through curriculum and personnel reviews
 What policies and procedures were adopted for Textbook and other Print Based
Instructional Materials?

Is a Pre-registration Process in policy?

Is your campus planning an accessibility assessment in the Periodic Review of Academic
Programs?

Is accessibility assessment part of General Education Certification and Recertification?
Is production of accessible content an element faculty satisfaction of roles and
responsibilities?

Does inclusion of students with disabilities currently have a place in retention, tenure and
promotion evaluations?

Is production of accessible materials part of the faculty evaluation relating to instructionally
related activities, service or scholarship?
IMAP Report Template 2008
13

Have you provided reassigned time to encourage the implementation of accessible
instructional materials?
4a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
What policies and procedures were adopted for Textbook and other Print Based Instructional
Materials?
The University administration elected to not go the route of establishing a formal policy via the Faculty
Senate, given that the textbook adoption policy is the law and any debate on the merit of the issue
would be gratuitous. Instead, the ATI Executive Team focused on preparing guidelines for textbook
adoption, using the power of the Provost Office to advertise for the new guidelines, and changing the
campus culture in a way that facilitate the adoption of those guidelines.
1. Faculty Senate: Timely Textbook Adoption Memos from Faculty Senate Chair and Provost in
Fall 2007 describing process
2. Drafting of New Course Proposal with New Course Accessibility Checklist, including
description of timely textbook and reader list adoption, to be reviewed by Faculty Senate
Curriculum Committee in fall 2008.
3.
Consideration of Accessibility in Self-Study, other Academic policies.
Is a Pre-registration Process in policy?
According to the class schedule for 2007-2008,
http://www.csus.edu/schedule/Fall2007Spring2008/Registration.stm “University priority policy is in this
order: disabled students, retention programs, graduating seniors, seniors, classified graduates, juniors,
sophomores, freshmen, and unclassified graduates. “ All Priority Registration requests are reviewed and
approved by the designated SSWD Disability Management Counselor or Learning Disabilities Specialist.
Priority Registration is based on current documented functional limitations related to a disability which
substantially affect class scheduling at the present time. Eligibility for priority registration will be
periodically re-evaluated.
4b. Plans for 2008/2009
a) The New Course Proposal Policy, including a New Course Accessibility Checklist which addresses
timely adoption of textbook and print-based materials, will be discussed with the Faculty Senate
Curriculum Policies Committee in early Fall 2008. In addition, the CSU systemwide Faculty
Senate policy on Providing Equal Access to Programs and Services for Individuals with Disabilities
AS-2801-07/AA/FA - May 10-11, 2007 will be reviewed. Additional policies that include
Accessibility in Self-Study Guidelines, Training requirements (e.g. must take training about
accessibility in Word, PDF, Web, PowerPoint ) once a year?
b) Goals for 08-09: need to revisit the steps and the results of our early adoption of textbook and
instructional materials procedure? Pre-registration policy? Accessibility assessment in GE
certification? Faculty roles and responsibilities, inclusion of students with disabilities, production
of accessible content as part of instructionally related activities, service, or scholarship;
reassigned time for those implementing accessible instructional materials (e.g. faculty in
IMAP Report Template 2008
14
residence)? We will begin discussing the inclusion of ATI-based scholarly efforts into the
university ARTP document. We believe that ATI scholarship has a place in both the service to
the campus, and in the teaching area of the ARTP.
4c. Barriers to completion
Procedures to support ATI may be constrained by HR policies related to RTP, evaluations, position
descriptions, etc.; Also, in order to promulgate policies, we need to increase awareness, develop
checklists/tools to evaluate course materials to determine if they are accessible before expecting to
assess faculty; Policy writing can take time to develop and to promote;
4d. Observations/discoveries
This area deals with fundamental policies that reside in the university ARTP document, University
Appointment, Retention, Tenure and Promotion Policy
(http://www.csus.edu/umanual/hr/UMU180501.htm) and will require broad consultation and
discussion with many committees and the faculty senate. The approval of the new course check list has
shown to be a time-consuming process, and we anticipate ATI changes to the UARTP to be even more
laborious.
The university has not allocated assigned time, per se, to encourage faculty to convert their instructional
materials to accessible formats. The Teaching Using Technology (TuT) program has however been a
funded university initiative wherein the participants are provided incentives (laptops or stipends) to
convert their instructional materials, and serve as mentors and points of contact for their colleagues in
their departments. The other area of support worth noting is the inclusion of accessibility requirements
into the only assigned time (3-6 units can be requested per year) internal grant program for faculty
engaging in the scholarship of teaching (Pedagogy Enhancement Award).
5. Commitments from All Stakeholders
 How do stake holders participate in the ATI planning process?


How have you extended the ATI from planning groups within the administration and
governance bodies of faculty & students to the broader community of faculty, staff members
& administrators?
How are these grassroots stakeholders participating in the ATI?
5a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
How do stake holders participate in the ATI planning process?
ATI stakeholders may include, but are not limited to:
ATI Steering Committee: ATI steering committee meets several times over the course of the year to
plan and execute the project; Subcommittees, or workgroups also met periodically; the ATI IMAP
workgroup met once per month; Also other planning groups became involved, e.g. Curriculum Policies
committee, Academic IT committee, etc.
Students with Disabilities: The students are the stakeholders using or expected to use the accessible
technology
IMAP Report Template 2008
15
Faculty: Faculty developing and implementing instructional materials are also major stakeholders and
include individual faculty, and those more involved in the process, e.g. by attending ATI IMAP meetings,
participating in the ATI Steering Team, participating in Teaching Using Technology (TuT) institute on
accessibility, etc. serving on the interview committee for the instructional materials specialist;
Bookstore: The Bookstore and ATI team collaborated to promote timely adoption of textbooks, which
ensures better textbook buyback pricing.
Provost and Academic Affairs: Works to ensure quality academic programs for ALL students and
support well qualified faculty to provide excellent teaching and learning. The Provost also serves as an
effective top-level champion for the ATI.
ATCS Staff: The Academic Technology & Creative Services Staff are the main providers of technology
training and support for faculty. Such support includes material development, and the campus learning
management system that is expected to play a major role in the delivery of accessible materials to
students.
Center for Teaching and Learning: Provides services that help individuals, departments, and programs
to identify and achieve their desired level of teaching excellence. The center also has many mentoring
activities that can serve as launch pads for the ATI.
Information Resources and Technology: Provide services to support seamless integration of information
technology into all appropriate campus functions.
Services to Students with Disabilities: Provides support services and accommodations to students with
disabilities in order to ensure students with disabilities equal access and opportunity to pursue their
educational goals. Students need to take responsibility for requesting accommodations in a timely
manner.
College ITCs: Support technology needs of faculty in their colleges. They are the first level of technical
support for most college faculty.
Library: Library staff and faculty, including Reserve Book Room, Library Media Center, etc. are closely
involved in making sure library holdings and e-reserves are accessible
5b. Plans for 2008/2009
The theme of the ATI will be “Take the Initiative” – highlight faculty success stories and best practices,
etc. One recommendation that would require the Provost’s approval is the establishment of an
Outstanding ATI Instructional Materials Accessibility Award for innovative use of universally accessible
instructional material by faculty; this may help to garner buy-in from Deans, Chairs, faculty, etc. Another
potential way to get stakeholders involved is to encourage faculty to participate in conferences by
authoring papers on designing accessible instruction, which can be used towards Retention, Tenure, and
Promotion, and to fund faculty travel to relevant conferences in order to present the papers, e.g. the
CSU Northridge conference on Technology and Persons with Disabilities.
College ITCs could act as the first point of contact for faculty who have questions about how to use a
certain feature in MS Word, Adobe Acrobat or another computer application in the process of creating
or retrofitting instructional materials so that they are accessible. This would require training College ITCs
on how to use features in applications such as Word, PowerPoint, and PDF that enable accessibility in
the creation of documents, presentations and other instructional materials. College ITC’s should also be
IMAP Report Template 2008
16
trained on tools such as Adobe Acrobat PDF plug-in CommonLook, DocSoft audio mining software and
other tools/applications that enable accessibility.
Recommend that faculty participate in current training about making their instructional materials
accessible. Faculty who have a student with a disability enrolled in their course should plan to take
accessibility training during the semester at their earliest convenience?
5c. Barriers to completion
Other competing priorities on campus, including budget, retention and graduation – need to link ATI to
these priorities.
Need to connect the ATI to the RTP process, thus building institutional incentives for faculty by way of
the reward structure.
“It’s not my problem.” - Need to get others to take ownership of the initiative, which will benefit
everyone.
The faculty perception is that the ATI is and will be a significant increase in their workload, as well as an
unfunded mandate. This perception finds roots whenever faculty begin to think that they need to meet
all aspects of the ATI in one fell swoop.
Difficulty understanding and applying the concept of universal design and accessibility (cultural shift in
thinking) – need for further training in universal design of instruction.
Budgetary factors which limit the level of incentives the University can offer faculty to facilitate this
change process.
5d. Observations/discoveries
Need for more faculty, staff, and student champions. The Communities of Practice may be good
sources of strategies on how to build capacity.
6. Shared Responsibilities
 How are the responsibilities divided between the divisions of Student Affairs (particularly
the disabled student services unit) and Academic Affairs and Administration?



Since Academic Affairs is responsible for delivering accessible materials to students, how do
they assist with creation of accessible materials production?
How are the other divisions contributing to the ATI?
Do you consider this balance of responsibility to be healthy and sufficient to achieve
success?
6a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008

How are the responsibilities divided between the divisions of Student Affairs (particularly the
disabled student services unit) and Academic Affairs and Administration?
IMAP Report Template 2008
17
a) Services to Students with Disabilities (SSWD) including the High Tech Center provided
assistive technology training and services and SSWD provided real-time captioning and
other accommodations for students with disabilities who require alternate formats.
b)
Academic Technology and Creative Services (ATCS), and Information Resources and
Technology provided training and consultation to Faculty and Staff on Accessibility.
c) Information Resources and Technology: Staff support faculty in using classroom, labs
and media technology. Also the relationship of the ATI with the CIO and Vice President
of Information Technology (also Executive Sponsor), provides a strong framework for
the institution to address academic IT issues related to access which cross the campus.
d) Center for Teaching and Learning: The Center has collaborated with SSWD and ATCS to
deliver “brownbags” on universal design, and the Teaching Using Technology (TuT)
summer institute. The Bookstore, also a major stakeholder, has co-presented on the
importance of timely textbook adoption. The bookstore also provides the ATI team the
data needed to evaluate progress on textbook adoption.
e) The Library is a major partner, and had begun considering processes to make their
reserve book process more accessible.
Since Academic Affairs is responsible for delivering accessible materials to students, how do they
assist with creation of accessible materials production?
f)
Academic Affairs is assisting with creating accessible materials through staff in Services
to Students with Disabilities, Academic Technology and Creative Services; both units
are organizationally under Academic Affairs. In addition the ATI Team is working
closely with the Provost, Faculty Senate, and the Center for Teaching and Learning.
g) The ATI Project Coordinator is also Co-Director of SSWD, and currently reports to the
Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs; this provides the project with a close
channel to the Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs and facilitates a closer
working relationship with faculty and the ability to influence the University
environment.
Other divisions contribute to ATI Instructional Materials as follows:
h) Human Resources: commitment to include ATI in Compliance training for managers;
working with Equal Opp/Affirmative Action/ADA Compliance and complaints about
inaccessible materials
i)
Faculty Senate: involved in developing and promulgating policies and procedures
related to instructional materials accessibility.
j)
Administration: Associate Vice President of Academic Affairs and Dean for Academic
Programs has requested a short presentation about accessibility for Department
Chairs.
6b. Plans for 2008/2009
Work with others to increase advocacy of accessibility issues: Meet with Faculty Senate Curriculum
Committee, Academic IT subcommittee, Accessible Technology Initiative Steering Committee, Center for
IMAP Report Template 2008
18
Teaching and Learning, and other campus stakeholders to continue the dialogues and work related to
the shared responsibility for accessibility plans and to formulate recommendations to address
accessibility issues
6c. Barriers to completion
Sharing across divisions is becoming more balanced, but this initiative is still perceived to be a
“disability” issue to many; the new placement of the Accessible Technology Initiative in the Chancellor’s
Office will promote a more integrated approach, because the project reports to both Academic Affairs
and Information Technology.
Delineating who does what to support faculty in their development of accessible instructional materials
given the complicated and distributed nature of IT on campus. Faculty may need to navigate many
resources in order to create accessible materials.
6d. Observations/discoveries
Shared responsibility and accountability for student success, is a new priority for the campus; Per the
University’s Strategic Plan http://www.csus.edu/acaf/2007CSUS_StrategicPlan.pdf, one major goal is to
“Foster an academic and campus-life culture whereby recruitment, retention, graduation, and student
success in all its forms are embraced and pursued as the responsibility of the entire campus
community—faculty, staff, students, and alumni.” How can this strategic priority be leveraged to
encourage shared responsibility for instructional materials accessibility for students with disabilities who
may be struggling to keep up with the classes due to lack of timely access?
7. Migration from Accommodation to Accessibility
 How have you planned the migration from making individual accommodations to making
courses fully accessible?

What is your plan to move from just-in-time production of alternative materials to universal
production of accessible materials?

Who is taking the lead?

What processes have been established?

Are there improvements?
7a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Teaching Using Technology (TuT) Institutes: Universal Design of Instruction and Accessibility which
helped faculty learn about the importance of accessibility in the design of instruction and create
accessible materials.
Express Help for Instructional Materials sessions: Provided faculty with information about the ATI and
the importance of implementing accessibility into instructional materials at inception and provided oneon-one consultation for the creation of accessible syllabi, and other instructional materials.
Accessible Syllabus templates have been developed and placed on the Instructional Materials Webpage
for faculty to download and use..
IMAP Report Template 2008
19
The shift in thinking about accommodations reactively to designing for accessibility proactively will take
time, but the campus has already made strides.
7b. Plans for 2008/2009
Plans include meeting with TUT group in fall to revisit their plan to provide universal production of
accessible materials; IMAP specialist beginning to work with faculty; for the first time, “Express Help for
Instructional Materials” sessions to convert instructional materials in PowerPoint, PDF and Microsoft
Word to accessible formats are offered this summer and will be offered throughout the semester, new
faculty orientation session is planned with a focus on universal design as an important construct for
good teaching, etc. The role of the learning management system in the delivery of accessible materials
needs to be revisited. Also in our plans this year is a process to establish metrics that will determine our
success level in the area of faculty development of accessible syllabi for their courses.
Leads: IMAP co-chairs (CTL/ATCS), Instructional Materials Specialist – Accessible Technology, ATI Project
Coordinator
Processes: will consider New Course Proposal policy and accompanying New Course Accessibility
checklist in fall (see Appendix).
7c. Barriers to completion
Culture change takes time: Still perception that this is a disability services issue since it benefits those
with disabilities; that being said, there’s still a lack of awareness of faculty of the time and efforts
required to convert materials into an alternate format; perhaps more awareness of the need for
accessibility is needed too; also a lack of understanding of roles and responsibilities of everyone
enhancing accessibility. There have been improvements in terms of faculty identifying instructional
materials earlier, working in close coordination with SSWD staff;
7d. Observations/discoveries
The ability of this initiative to open and expand the dialogue across campus of the importance of equal
access, has been extraordinary. In general the initiative has been well received, although there are
serious concerns about increased workload and allocation of resources.
8. Early Identification of Students with Disabilities
 Have you identified, through your planning, any assumptions, passivity or lack of activity
that discourages students' access to the disabled students programs?

What percentage of courses has instructional materials been provided, that are appropriate
to the students' needs?

Is there a difference between the numbers of course materials that are assigned to students
with a declared need and the quantity of accessible materials produced to meet these needs?
If so what is this difference? (To estimate you might take 1.5 assigned instructional materials
per class as an average.)

Have you checked to see if your early notification is perceivable by the student with
perceptual impairments?
IMAP Report Template 2008
20



Have you located accessibility roadblocks in the programs that deliver these notifications
like the CMS portal or other inaccessible web sites?
What enhancements will you make to the remove these barriers?
How will you ensure that all students with a declared need and a desire to take advantage of
access programs can do it?
8a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Have you identified, through your planning, any assumptions, passivity or lack of activity that
discourages students' access to the disabled students programs?
The Services to Students with Disabilities’ main office reception, which lacks a seating area inside for
students, may be perceived by some students to be unwelcoming. Some staff offices will be
reconfigured in summer 2008 and chairs will be made into an ad hoc seating area to help address this
issue, but lack of space is still an issue. Minor Capital Outlay and other potential renovation options will
also be explored in the next year.
The process for requesting services through Services to Students with Disabilities in order to use the
High Tech Center lab (assistive technology and alternate media services) was perceived as difficult to
navigate, according to one student. The High Tech Center lab and alternative media policies and
procedures were recently simplified based on this feedback.
Other ways that the campus encouraged students to use SSWD and other resources included
collaborating with Student Affairs programs to help disseminate information to all students about access
to services for students with disabilities (SSWD); For example, communications to students were done
via Associated Students, Student Activities, etc., and this was facilitated via the Vice President of Student
Affairs in Fall 2007 (see announcement in Appendix); The Freshmen and Transfer Orientation program
was also used as a channel of communication about SSWD services.
In addition, an article entitled “Living the Wired Life” in Sac State magazine was published about
technology on campus, and included a reference to SSWD’s assistive technology services and where to
get help. http://www.csus.edu/sacstatemagazine/winter2007/wired.html
“One area where education technology has been truly life-changing is among students with disabilities.
Software programs that can “read” to blind students and closed captioning technology that can translate
for the deaf, are among the capabilities that open doors… Services to Students with Disabilities offers
training to any disabled student on all the software programs.”
Also SSWD provided information on services at all New Student Orientations, and New Faculty
Orientations, and faculty were encouraged to make referrals to SSWD to help identify students with
disabilities in need of services.
What percentage of courses has instructional materials provided, that are appropriate to the
students' needs?
IMAP Report Template 2008
21
The data on percentage of courses that have all types of instructional materials provided appropriate to
students’ needs is not available. More analysis is needed to determine other means for ordering
instructional materials besides the Bookstore. However, data on the number of print based instructional
materials from the Bookstore shows that the textbook adoption for Fall 2008 semester was 15.4% by
the deadline of April 4, 2008 , 18.7% adoption by April 9th 2008, and 67% adoption on July 7th, 2008. As
we approach the beginning of the fall 2008 semester we will be able to obtain more data for the
percentage of instructional materials that have been adopted 8 weeks prior to the semester. Also, in
terms of supporting students’ needs, according to a 2007 Campus Climate Report organized by the
Office of Institutional Research, a majority of students surveyed “agree” that professors are equally
supportive of all students (80%) in terms of gender, ethnicity, age and disability. However, in response
to the question “In general, all my professors are equally encouraging and responsive toward nondisabled and disabled students,” 73.3% of students surveyed “agree”. Although this data does not
clearly show the percentage of courses with materials appropriate to students’ needs, it does show the
general campus climate.
In the future, additional surveys and assessment to assess student satisfaction with timely access to
instructional materials could be done to provide data. For example, we could send out surveys to
students that requested services through SSWD. Survey could be sent to their Saclink accounts.
Information Technology & Resources has done surveys for faculty, staff and students for their views on
Information Technology on campus, and we could adopt a model like that of IRT for this.
Is there a difference between the numbers of course materials that are assigned to students with a
declared need and the quantity of accessible materials produced to meet these needs? If so what is
this difference?
In terms of students who request alternate formatted materials, the following shows more students
were eligible for the formats, compared to students who actually requested and received the alternate
formats:
Baseline
Measure
The number
of students
with a
declared
need for
alternate
format
instructional
materials in
the last year
Number of
eligible
students
who
received
eText
(e.g.
MS
Word,
PDF)
60
Audio
(e.g.
readers)
Braille
Large
Print
Tactile
Graphics
Captioned
Videos
(Deaf/HOH)
Total
18
3
N/A
4
15
100
32
16
2
N/A
2
15
(Transcripts
only)
67
IMAP Report Template 2008
22
alternate
formats in
the last year
Of 100 students who were eligible for alternate formats, 67 followed through and requested and
received alternate formats. Of those who did not follow up and request the services, the following may
be reasons, according to SSWD program staff:

Student did not follow up with High Tech Center staff after referral to request eText.

Students’ preference for scanning own texts into alternate formats using assistive
technology

Students ordering texts through other repositories (e.g. Recordings for Blind)

Lack of availability of alternate formats from publishers

Students not wanting to remove spine from book in order to receive in-house scanned etext (possible solution is to request desktop copy if available from faculty);

Some students preferred arranging their own accommodations; The University, however, is
not required to provide accommodations to students who have not provided appropriate
documentation or who have not requested accommodations

Some students did not take classes after all or withdrew their requests for audio readers or
other formats.
In addition, some students who use alternative formats are not included here, because they used other
accommodations, used their own assistive technology or alternative textbook memberships (e.g. books
on tape), or chose not to request these formats. If materials are in accessible electronic formats, or
available in a timely manner, students would be better equipped to do some of their scanning and
reading on their own if they so choose.
Have you checked to see if your early notification is perceivable by the student with perceptual
impairments?
a) The email notifications SSWD sent to students to alert them of their need to complete
priority registration was in the body of the email as electronic text; receipt of messages
could potentially be tracked.
b) The Vice President of Student Affairs suggested a more targeted approach by using the short
paragraph as a way of getting the word out to students at large. The student newspaper,
the Hornet, covered the topic, as well. (see Appendix)
IMAP Report Template 2008
23
c) Students can request notifications and other materials in alternate formats upon request.
For example, one student prefers hard copy handouts which can also be scanned and read
aloud using his system of preference.
d) In addition to email, instructions for requesting services are posted on the SSWD web page,
which uses the campus-provided web templates, tested for accessibility.
e) Currently there is a link to Accessibility information and the SSWD web page on the Student
portal view through the new MySacState 2.0 U Portal.
f)
In the future, alternative channels of communications could be explored, including the
student newspaper again.
Have you located accessibility roadblocks in the programs that deliver these notifications like the CMS
portal or other inaccessible web sites?
Inflexibility to make changes to CMS: CMS portal could be used to streamline early notification of
students as well as collect information on early identification of students with disabilities, link
instructional materials listings with faculty, etc.; however, requests for data reports are difficult to
navigate; one must go through multiple channels, and the data is sometimes degraded in quality, or
difficult to understand.
What enhancements will you make to the remove these barriers?

The campus has recently purchased a data warehouse; this might help address the issue of
access to data; we are all learning the new CMS system, so this is expected to improve.

A customized database table is being considered for development for SSWD to better link
disability services, alternative media needs and early registration;
How will you ensure that all students with a declared need and a desire to take advantage of access
programs can do it?

Outreach to community colleges and area feeder schools about access services; an
Accessible Technology Initiative booth at the College Making it Happen event, attended by
over 500 area middle school students and their families.

Publicity at Faculty Orientation and New Student Orientation about support services for
students, and support for faculty.

A satisfaction survey could be distributed to SSWD students. SSWD already assesses student
satisfaction with support services on an ongoing basis; For example, a Spring 2008 survey of
students using assistive technology and alternative media services showed that 93 % of
students surveyed felt that what they learned from using the High Tech Center’s services will
benefit them in the future.
IMAP Report Template 2008
24
8b. Plans for 2008/2009
To encourage students with disabilities to identify early, we will continue a targeted approach, as well as
encourage students to submit requests for alternative formatted instructional materials as soon as they
learn of their need. In order to make the process easier and more seamless for students, the campus will
continue to explore strategies for embedding the process in the regular registration procedure, through
CMS. Procedures to associate course enrollment with instructional materials listings will need to be
further developed, and resources identified to automate the business process of providing data to
alternative media producers so that they can convert instructional materials for students who need
them, in coordination with Admissions and Records and other data staff; SSWD will continue to send an
email communication to faculty in the meantime alerting them that a student with a print impairment
may be registered. To facilitate students making early contact and requesting accommodations,
including alternate formats instructors should continue to include the a statement on their syllabus
inviting the student to discuss individual learning needs in private. The Center for teaching and
Learning’s What did you put in your syllabus (step 14) webpage (http://www.ctl.csus.edu/syllabus.htm)
provides an example of the statement to use in a syllabus.
Develop a measure to track the volume of non-university published instructional materials. This could
take the form of a mid-semester or end-of-semester survey where faculty could provide a numeric
representation of the types of instructional materials (handouts, books, course readers) that they order
from outside sources.
Finally, the Instructional Materials Specialist will assist faculty with locating accessible versions or
alternatives for their texts, online materials, etc. and even producing some digital course materials
themselves; focusing first on students with disabilities who are enrolled and specifically need alternate
formats.
8c. Barriers to completion
Student Administration/CMS System: The campus student administration portal could be leveraged to
include some kind of connection to textbook, faculty contact, etc.; however, requests to modify the
system were met with suggestions that ATI related changes be made by implementing a CSU systemwide baseline change.
Lab Hours: Some students don’t take advantage of assistive technology lab to access alternative
formats. This may lead to attrition in use of alternative media. The current lab hours of Monday through
Friday from 8am to 5pm are not convenient for all students. After-hours access to the assistive
technology lab is provided as an accommodation on a case by case basis, with no staff support. The
Computing Labs on campus have some of the assistive technology available, but limited access to
scan/read stations, and support.
Response to Mail: Some students may not respond to letters or emails from SSWD staff with
instructions for requesting alternative media. Other channels of communication need to be explored
(e.g. Sac State messaging, newspaper, etc.)
Referral Process for Alternative Media: The process of requesting Alternative media through the
Services to Students with Disabilities High Tech Center should be easy to navigate. Students are referred
by their SSWD Counselor to the High Tech Center for training in assistive technology and alternate
IMAP Report Template 2008
25
formats, alternative media production, and other accommodations and services, and on a semester
basis must submit their requests either online (via a web form) or in person.
The physical layout of the SSWD main office is a barrier, due to lack of reception area; for 08-09, the
department has a plan to provide a small welcoming reception area with chairs, tables and a “talking
photocopier” scan/read appliance for students who need to quickly convert a print page to speech (this
will in turn impact other staff workstations – need for more space);
8d. Observations/discoveries
With the increase in requests for alternate media, and increase in demand for accessibility information,
early dissemination of information to all students about access to services for students with disabilities
(SSWD) should be a continued effort by Academic Affairs, SSWD , faculty and other key groups. Early
notification to students about these services will allow time for students to enroll with SSWD and learn
about the assistive technologies they may need to use and other accommodations and services. Early
notification about services to students and identification of students will facilitate the process for faculty
as well, allowing them time to plan and retrofit and create their instructional materials in an accessible
way for the student with a disability that is enrolled in their course.
9. Process for the Electronic Capture of course materials
 How are the faculty who assign instructional materials going to make those materials
usable?

Is the capability of scanning documents available to faculty?

How have you addressed large volumes of paper documents?


Is there a standard being set on your campus that an “acceptable” print quality of
documents requiring scanning?
Is there an efficient process for capturing electronic documents that are posted online?
9a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
How are the faculty who assign instructional materials going to make those materials usable?
The first step for faculty to make their materials usable is to figure out what materials they are using.
The New Course Accessibility Checklist (see Appendix) can help them to get started. Further resources
and contact information is listed for faculty to get extra help with developing accessible electronic
documents. Also, if faculty use print-based materials, they can be proactive and assist students with
print-related disabilities by scanning assignments using Optical character recognition software to
convert them into electronic formats. This can make the documents usable by many students, and in
some cases it saves a lot of time for alternative format production (e.g. translation into Braille). Faculty
can deliver electronic materials using different strategies for capturing electronic media, including
WebCT (now SacCT) or web pages. Either way, the electronic version removes the burden from
students, and the more faculty materials that can be made available then the fewer students have to
experience delays in receiving their materials.
Is the capability of scanning documents available to faculty?
IMAP Report Template 2008
26
Several scanners are available in the Faculty Staff Resource Center and project room for scanning
purposes. Currently the optical character recognition software installed in the lab includes TextBridge,
and, Adobe Acrobat Professional’s OCR engine can also be used. However, there are other more robust
software packages available, including OmniPage; this is the same tool used by the High Tech Center
staff in converting materials into electronic format. It is planned to aquire the OmniPage Pro OCR
software before the beginning of the Fall 2008 semester and install it in the Faculty Staff Resource
Center.
How have you addressed large volumes of paper documents?
The High Tech Center has a high speed scanner to address the large volumes of paper documents that
need to be scanned and converted to digital format. The Faculty Staff Resource Center has high quality
flat bed scanners, but these are a bit slower in speed than the high speed ones. The Reserve Book Room
in the Library uses a sheet fed scanner (FUJITSU fi-5120Cdj scanner) where they scan one document at a
time but have the ability to place multiple pages in the feeder at once. Library reserve staff scan
documents using the Adobe Acrobat software except when creating links to word, PowerPoint, or
websites that do not require scanning course material. Most faculty provide Reserve Bookroom staff
with printed course materials and only a few send course materials in electronic format via email. In the
future, a higher speed scanner may be more efficient if the volume of e-reserve requests continues.
Additionally, the purchase of more specialized OCR software such as OmniPage Pro would be of benefit
for the conversion process.
Is there a standard being set on your campus that an “acceptable” print quality of documents
requiring scanning?
Items to be scanned by the Library must meet the following criteria for quality electronically produced
copies:
-
Clean copies of material with as little black margin as possible
-
Material must be crisp and clean so that it can be scanned using optical character
recognition software (OCR) and made accessible
-
8 1/2 x 11 inch paper with at least 1/2 inch margins on all four sides
-
Single sided copies only
-
Text preferable
Is there an efficient process for capturing electronic documents that are posted online?
The campus has not yet dealt with a process for faculty to make documents available online. Earlier, it
was mentioned that the learning management system could be such a vessel. In such a case, documents
uploaded to the learning management system or to another online location would largely be in text,
PDF, HTML, or Word formats. Sacramento State offers faculty the option of creating their faculty
website and/or WebCT (now SacCT) course where they have the option and ability to upload electronic
versions of their instructional materials in various formats such as Word, PowerPoint, and PDFs. Faculty
IMAP Report Template 2008
27
may also create instructional web pages (part of their faculty website) that may not be downloaded but
that could be accessed via an internet connection and browser. For instructional materials that are
uploaded to websites and to the course management system WebCT (now SacCT), students have the
option to download files in their native formats (if these are posted in a native format) and save them
onto a media of their choice or they may simply open these instructional material files and view them
via a computer.
9b. Plans for 2008/2009

Training on how to convert print materials such as articles, flyers, etc. into digital and
accessible formats is needed, including how to use TextBridge and Omnipage or other optical
character recognition software. The Faculty Staff Resource Center currently has TextBridge
installed on all of its scanner/computer stations there are quick reference guides located in
strategic locations (next to a computer with specialized flat bed scanner) that provides users
with how to begin using the software. Training on the particular software would be beneficial
for faculty in general and other groups that may use the software for specialized purposes
such as Library reserve bookroom (RBR) staff or SSWD staff.

RBR will continue to work with the SSWD High Tech Center, and IMAP position to ensure a
consistent approach.

For large volumes of paper documents - Need to work with Student Affairs, others who
digitize materials to ensure that scanned documents have underlying electronic text.

Acceptable print quality - see RBR, Alt Media description of acceptable; may need to infuse
into Logo/Identity?

A campus-wide “acceptable” print quality of documents that will need to be scanned, is
necessary to cover other scanned documents posted on faculty webpages, on WebCT (now
SacCT), on LOCUS, and that are made available to SSWD and the High Tech Center for alternate
media conversion.

Plans to try to adopt a process to get faculty materials into electronic formats (e.g. syllabi,
assignments, handouts, class notes, video, Powerpoint) to make it available for everyone
students? to access.
9c. Barriers to completion

Process for capturing electronic documents not posted online; Issues related to copyright.
Need to ensure that this information is readily available and clear.

Time vs. Quality: The amount of time it takes to scan, OCR, and clean up/edit documents for
accuracy can be prohibitive. Need to sensitize faculty about best practices, while still
considering the issue of faculty/staff available time.
9d. Observations/discoveries
The campus seems to be moving towards digital formats and at the same time increasing sustainability.
Best practices about digitizing and scanning techniques will benefit the movement towards reducing
paper waste.
IMAP Report Template 2008
28
10. Multimedia

Have you determined the scope and size of the amount of multimedia involved in your plan:
library, online media, RSS feeds, rich media and internet applications?

Have you found resources, created a budget around your needs, or determined promising
practices for any aspect of multimedia accessibility?

Please include names of resources you have found, amounts budgeted or needing to be
budgeted and best practices.
10a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Have you determined the scope and size of the amount of multimedia involved in your plan: library,
online media, RSS feeds, rich media and internet applications?
The scope and size of just the multimedia involved in Distance and Distributed Education is significant.
The university produces nearly 120 hours of videos per week that are delivered through cable television,
and streaming video technology.
Further data on other campus media is needed, and prioritizing will be needed to identify which media
should be addressed for accessibility first (e.g. when students are enrolled in the class who need the
captioning or other accessible media features, due to functional limitations).
Have you found resources, created a budget around your needs, or determined promising practices
for any aspect of multimedia accessibility?
A promising tool that the campus has found is DocSoft, an audio-mining system which provides
transcripts and time synchronized captions. Training will be scheduled this summer, and pilot testing to
begin in the fall, led by the instructional materials specialist in coordination with other IT staff. The tool
is being used along with several other CSU campuses, so there are hopes that it will be part of a
captioning solution.
Several meetings were set up with various stakeholders involved with Classroom Captioning issues,
including SSWD staff, IRT staff, ATCS staff, to engage in discussion of how to help students get the access
they need, and also how to help faculty who need assistance in digitizing and captioning videos both to
show in the class or use online. Roles and responsibilities were assigned, but resource allocation and
prioritizing needs to be further discussed. By bringing a group of experts in different areas related to
video, classrooms and captioning, we were able to delineate roles and responsibilities, and to begin to
discuss Classroom Captioning strategies.
Please include names of resources you have found, amounts budgeted or needing to be budgeted and
best practices.

DocSoft: this system was purchased in 2007-2008 for audio/video search and automated
closed captioning. Currently training is being set up for summer 2008, and the product is to be
utilized starting in the Fall 2008. The search capabilities will give faculty and staff the added
benefit of being able to search digital audio and video files. The cost was $28,000 for two
systems, on site configuration, and support.
IMAP Report Template 2008
29

Automatic Sync Technologies: this agency provides captioning, audio synchronization, and
transcripts for webcasting, DVD, and broadcasting applications. The cost varies, but averages
approximately $160 for both transcripts and caption files for one hour of video.
10b. Plans for 2008/2009

Need to share multimedia accessibility responsibilities, plan DocSoft Train The Trainer, set
up Faculty Staff Resource Center workstations for Docsoft captioning, work with ad hoc
Classroom Captioning group and start to clarify the process to faculty/staff, through Help Desk.

Need to develop quick guide/tutorial for use of DocSoft. Tutorial would be designed for
faculty and for trainer/consultants.

In the short term, multimedia/video production for classes in which students with
disabilities are enrolled, needs to be made accessible; Prioritizing which videos should be
captioned/made accessible will help the long term goals in providing accessible multimedia.

Continue to develop roles and responsibilities for departments and people, in terms of both
classroom captioning and for purchasing of multimedia/captioning.

Put together a pilot faculty group (1-3 faculty members who have a student in their class
that requires the use of captioned video) that can test DocSoft and provide feedback on the
process to upload video and caption. A focus group or survey would be optimal to gather their
experience with DocSoft and this would guide us on how to approach use of DocSoft by
faculty.
In the coming semester gather data on requests for transcripts and captioning, work volume in terms of
time for uploading video files, transcription generation and editing and captioning process. This data will
help us determine the amount of support (e.g. student assistants) needed for this purpose.
10c. Barriers to completion
Captioning and dealing with Multimedia and Video can be both complex and expensive; Also, though
technologies such as the DocSoft audio mining software, are helpful and represent part of the solution,
further editing and technical skills may be required; Staff and student assistants may be needed to assist
faculty and staff who are inexperienced with these technologies. Simple “Do it yourself” options, lower
cost alternatives need to be developed. Also, the current accuracy level of the captioning technology is
another barrier, and may not meet the access needs of students.
10d. Observations/discoveries
As indicated in an IMAP communication from the Office of the Chancellor to the Instructional Materials
Priority Team at Sacramento, “multimedia is a system-wide problem.” It will help Sacramento to work
together with other campuses to work towards solutions.
11. Incentives
 What has been identified as incentives in your plan?


What incentives have proven successful?
What incentives do you believe need to be abandoned? What are the reactions to
incentives?
IMAP Report Template 2008
30

Do you think incentives a waste of resources?
11a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
What has been identified as incentives in your plan?
Teaching Using Technology (TuT) participants were given a laptop (or stipend if they already had a
laptop), for participating in the summer institute on accessibility and universal design.
Letters from Executive Sponsor were sent to the Instructional Material Accessibility work group
members thanking them for their service. Such a letter is expected to be used in the faculty RTP
portfolio, thus making connection with the faculty reward structure.
11b. Plans for 2008/2009
Student assistants assigned to help with creating accessible materials, in coordination with IMAP
position and college ITCs.
With approval, faculty awards might include an ATI award for faculty who best demonstrate how they
make their courses accessible and universally designed. Students could nominate faculty, as could peers.
What incentives have proven successful?
The Teaching Using Technology (TuT) TuT program has been very successful, but it affects a
relatively small number of faculty each year. As compared to an assigned time program, The
TuT incentive does not deal with the issue of increased workload that is perceived by faculty as a
part of the ATI compliance.
What incentives do you believe need to be abandoned? What are the reactions to incentives?
None.
Do you think incentives a waste of resources?
Incentives are crucial to the success of any change process, particularly one of this magnitude. Other
campuses have established a stipend for faculty accessibility trainers (like Faculty in Residence programs
at another CSU), also look at IMAP workgroup suggestions. This might be counterproductive, if faculty
are creating accessible materials for their courses for intrinsic reasons.
11c. Barriers to completion
Funding, particularly in this budget climate - The ATI is perceived largely as an unfunded mandate, with
huge workload implications for faculty. The Elephant in the room as spoken by some faculty: The CSU
is an interesting position, having somewhat successfully implemented PeopleSoft, an elective change
process, at significant costs to the institutions. Now comes the ATI mandate, and the CSU wants faculty
to shoulder the cost (in workload increase) of this change. That faculty perspective is difficult to
overcome.
11d. Observations/discoveries
Other campuses may have some best practices for incentives that will benefit faculty
IMAP Report Template 2008
31
12. Training
 What are the specific plans to educate faculty and staff on accessibility?

What are the names and dates of the workshops and online training offered?

What has been the response?

Is there a plan to provide faculty and staff support in the context of a “Help Desk”?

What has proven successful and what is be abandoned?

What is planned in this area and what is the timeline?

Are resources defined, training in place, and plans set for 08-09?
12a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
What are the names and dates of the workshops and online training offered?
Training
The emphasis of training has been to teach faculty and staff how to create new accessible materials. In
general the participation in accessibility workshops is low; however, there are no plans to discontinue
this offering.
An ATI forum held in the fall 2007, was co-sponsored by the Faculty Senate and Provost and as both
well-attended and well-received. The forum included a brief presentation on the Accessible Technology
Initiative, and recommendations for what faculty, staff, and students could do to participate and meet
the requirements.
ATCS made a deliberate effort during 07/08 to integrate quick accessibility tips into all training, including
WebCT (now SacCT), Word, PowerPoint... In addition, all workshops generally provide accessibility
bookmarks to all participants to begin the accessibility education process for faculty and staff.
ATCS initiated a new effort to retrofit inaccessible material started in the summer 2008 with new
“Express Help” workshops. The Express Help sessions provide the faculty an opportunity to have some
of their material converted to an accessible format by a consultant. This service is limited to the
duration of the workshop, since it would likely overwhelm ATCS resources.
Training Offered in Faculty Staff Resource Center:
Provided by
Title
Date
Participants
IRT
Introduction to Web Accessibility
Wednesday, July 18
11
ATCS
Creating Accessible Word Documents
Wednesday, October 10
7
ATCS
PowerPoint for ALL: Create Accessible
Presentations
Monday, October 22
7
IMAP Report Template 2008
32
ATCS
Creating Accessible Word Documents
Tuesday, January 08
8
ATCS
Adobe Acrobat: Creating Accessible
PDFs
Thursday, January 10
5
ATCS
PowerPoint for ALL: Create Accessible
Presentations
Wednesday, January 16
1
ATCS
PowerPoint for ALL: Create Accessible
Thursday, March 27
1
IRT
Introduction to Web Accessibility
Thursday, March 27
2
ATCS
Creating Accessible Word Documents
Tuesday, April 29
6
ATCS
Adobe Acrobat: Creating Accessible
PDFs
Thursday, June 19
0
ATCS
Creating Accessible Word Documents
Friday, June 20
0
ATCS
PowerPoint for ALL: Create Accessible
Presentations
Thursday, June 26
0
ATCS
Syllabus Bootcamp (now Express Help)
Monday, July 07, 2008
7
ATCS
PowerPoint Bootcamp (now Express
Help)
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
8
ATCS
Adobe PDF Bootcamp (now Express
Help)
Wednesday, July 09,
2008
7
ATCS
Introduction to Web Accessibility
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
14
Documentation
Guides were developed to provide another avenue to educate faculty and staff on how to make
accessible material or how to ensure that courses are accessible for students with disabilities.
Provided by
Title
IRT
Introduction to Web Accessibility
ATCS
Making a Web Site Accessible
ATCS
MS Word 2003: Creating Accessible Word Documents
ATCS
MS Word 2007: Creating Accessible Word Documents
ATCS
PDF Accessibility: How to Create Accessible PDFs Using Adobe Acrobat
ATCS
PowerPoint for ALL: Outline View and Alternative Text
IMAP Report Template 2008
33
ATCS
QuikRef: PDF Accessibility
ATCS
QuikRef: Web Accessibility
IRT, ATCS, SSWD, etc.
ATI Newsletter
Provost & Faculty Senate
Textbook adoption Memo to Department Chairs, Faculty, Staff
Procurement
Procurement of EIT checklist
SSWD
Instructions for Students Ordering Materials in Alternative Formats
SSWD
Instructions for Faculty for Provision of Student Exams in Alternative
Formats
Templates
ATCS created three new accessible templates that enable faculty to cut and paste their existing syllabus
or create a new syllabus. IRT and ATCS continue to offer accessible web templates that are generally
used to distribute online instructional material.
Provided by
Title
ATCS
Syllabus for a Traditional Course
ATCS
Syllabus for an Online Course
ATCS
Course Schedule
IRT
Web Site Template
ATCS
Faculty Web Template
Web Resources
A new faculty resource, “Creating Instructional Materials” was created to provide teaching and easy to
learn accessibility tips. http://www.csus.edu/atcs/tools/accessible/index.htm
In addition the Sac State Accessibility Web page has some strategies for Instructors.
http://www.csus.edu/accessibility/instructors.stm
Do you have a strategy for the development of faculty champion trainers?
Train the trainers – encourage faculty participants from the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) institute to
become ATI champions and go back to their departments and do a professional development; plan to
meet again with the group in the fall to revisit any questions, concerns, etc. We can try to identify
several pilot testers who can help to evaluate the processes, etc.
IMAP Report Template 2008
34
12b. Plans for 2008/2009
Is there a plan to provide faculty and staff support in the context of a “Help Desk”?
Information Resources & Technology staff are working to identify key resources and services already in
place to aid faculty in the development and maintenance of accessible instructional materials. In order
to disseminate information to faculty about these key resources and services, University Help Desk staff
will need to be trained on the key resources and services available to faculty e.g. Faculty Staff Resource
Center, Instructional Materials Specialist, Student Technology Center, Video Services (captioning,
recording) and other services in order to route and refer faculty calls and faculty visits to the appropriate
support staff in the event that faculty require assistance beyond that provided by help desk assistants.
Marketing of such resources is currently taking place through the development of flyers, postings and
other marketing materials that will be available in key locations such as the University Help Desk, Faculty
Staff Resource Center, at main campus events (e.g. New Faculty Orientation) and other appropriate
locations.
Are resources defined, training in place, and plans set for 08-09?
The new Instructional Materials Specialist will be working on a training plan for 2008-2008 in
coordination with other campus departments, including ATCS, SSWD, and IRT.
Training, accessible templates, and handouts will continue to be part of the training plan. Workshop
titles will include those listed for 2007-2008. There are also plans to incorporate a section on best
practices for scanning print materials into electronic formats into one of the current workshops about
accessible instructional materials (e.g. Accessible PDF documents) or create a new workshop that
addresses the best approach.
12c. Barriers to completion
How to get more faculty to attend (consider online, other deliver models); need for consistent,
systemwide training, definitions of “what is accessible” in terms of instructional materials.
We are already exploring integrating the ATI instructional materials accessibility requirements into the
HR Compliance series highly recommended for Managers, Chairs, Deans, and Supervisors. This
Compliance training has traditionally been face to face, but might include an online option in the future.
In addition, we could create a WebCT (now SacCT) course for all incoming (new) faculty on how to
create accessible instructional materials e.g. syllabi (show accessible templates here), e.g. of
PowerPoint, PDF and Word? Eventually this type of training could be a “requirement” for all new faculty
to review, with Human Resources, Academic Affairs’ approval.
12d. Observations/discoveries
Training is a key element to the success of this plan; besides the technical training, awareness training
on general accessibility concepts and why the initiative is important. Section 508 requirements are
difficult to understand – need to break down technical requirements into easier chunks
13. Outreach, Communication, Awareness, Marketing
 Does your campus have an ATI Outreach / Marketing sub-committee?

What presentations have been delivered and are planned?

Have all major governance bodies been addressed?
IMAP Report Template 2008
35

Has the material gotten to the unit and department level?

Has ATI gotten on the agenda of major governance, retreats and training events?
13a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Does your campus have an ATI Outreach / Marketing sub-committee?
\No separate marking subcommittee, but the ATI Steering Team and each individual workgroup (e.g.
Instructional Materials Accessibility workgroup) does discuss marketing as part of its plans. Also the ATI
project coordinator met with the Director of Public Affairs and Strategic Communications to discuss a
marketing strategy for ATI, including a logo, web icon, newsletter, flyer, and articles.
What presentations have been delivered and are planned?
Presentations: Forum (in coordination with Provost, Senate Chair), Department Chairs, Faculty
Orientation (planned), HR Compliance (planned); College ITCs (planned); See IMAP Deliverables for list.
Have all major governance bodies been addressed?
Faculty Senate, Administrative Council will need to be more involved with awareness, especially as then
next year’s focus pertains to new courses and new accessibility requirements;
13b. Plans for 2008/2009
Has the material gotten to the unit and department level?
a) An ATI flyer was sent to everyone for the campus wide ATI forum (full house); The
first ATI newsletter was distributed to everyone on campus (all faculty and staff), in
January 2008. Another ATI newsletter will go out in the fall with additional training
events, news, etc.
Has ATI gotten on the agenda of major governance, retreats and training events?
a) ATI will be on the agenda of some major upcoming training events – training for Faculty
Orientation, training for College ITCs planned for fall; also ATI regional meeting to be
held at Sacramento State; ATI and accessibility will be incorporated into technology
fair as well; Plan to request time at Chairs’ Meetings in the fall and spring to remind
faculty about timely textbook adoption as well as instructional materials accessibility
features; Will work with the Provost to assess other opportunities for training. For
example, a request to include ATI in the Fall Address.
b) Campus ATI newsletter will be distributed again in the fall, and could include offer to
present on ATI issues at these events, upon request.
13c. Barriers to completion
Time and staffing constraints to attend major events, do outreach, etc.
Insufficient administrative support for arranging Marketing/Community Event Participation (e.g. ATI
Forum, Faculty Orientation; Room Rental, Catering, etc.) and assisting with other publications (e.g.
posters, flyers, newsletter, etc.) .
IMAP Report Template 2008
36
13d. Observations/discoveries
This is a huge project, and I think there needs to be some positive marketing about the benefits of this
initiative; making the initiative personal, and helping faculty understand how it’s the right thing to do;
14. Assessment of Faculty Materials to be made accessible
What is the estimated volume of faculty generated instructional materials involved in the
implementation of the IMAP?
Based on number of courses offered in Fall 2007 and Spring 2008, a total of about 4,200 courses each
semester, there would be an estimated number of 63,000 instructional materials (to estimate, I took 1.5
assigned instructional materials per section as an average.)
Have you identified continuing faculty members that need training?
Fall 2008 courses in which students with disabilities who use alternative formats are enrolled have been
identified; also, faculty who attended the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) institute and will serve as
advocates to their colleges, have contacts for additional training;
How identified the new faculty members including lecturers as well as their accessibility needs?
New Faculty Orientation will be an opportunity to meet new faculty members and give them resources
for accessibility needs.
How is their training different than other faculty?
This will be discussed in preparation for the new faculty training; the hope is that system-wide training
will also address these differences.
How faculty members including new faculty and lecturers have identified and contacted regarding
creation of accessible instructional materials?
Faculty members with students enrolled have been identified in coordination with Services to Students
with Disabilities and Admissions and Records focus reports; they have been contacted by SSWD
regarding need to provide materials in advance, if requested; they will also be contacted by the
instructional materials specialist for additional support;
How are faculty informed of accommodation needs for students with disabilities?
SSWD sends a general alert to faculty, but students must disclose their accommodation needs; faculty
are encouraged to include a syllabus statement about accommodations, available through the Center
for Teaching and Learning.
Does that training emphasize the need to create accessible conversions as quickly as possible?
The training does emphasize the timeline of the initiative, but approaches it in more incremental steps,
rather than “one fell swoop”; a staff person will be available to help faculty with conversions, and
student assistants may be hired and assigned to help departments and the instructional materials
specialist; this will be explored in 2008-2009; it will be difficult to emphasize how quickly things need to
IMAP Report Template 2008
37
be converted, as many faculty lack the skills and time. A group of trained student assistants could be
hired exclusively for retrofitting and creating accessible instructional materials from faculty who lack the
skill and/or the time to do it themselves. The ITCs from each college could also develop expertise in
testing and repairing and document-producing software tools that could help to meet the accessibility
requirements.
Does faculty learn the concept of equally effective access in their training?
This concept of equally effective access was discussed at length in the Teaching Using Technology (TuT)
trainings on universal design; because it is often referred to in describing reasonable accommodation,
this concept is covered in SSWD training to faculty as well, and will need to be incorporated into some
more ATCS, IRT ATI instructional materials accessibility trainings, as it is an important component; when
instructional materials cannot be made accessible, then a plan to provide equally effective access must
be provided. ATI newsletter planned for the fall could include information on creating accessible
conversions, and equally effective access;
14a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
In 2007-2008, assessment was done via data collection and reporting of textbook adoption data through
Bookstore, general support service satisfaction surveys with students, and feedback through SSWD.
14b. Plans for 2008/2009
The new Instructional Materials Specialist will be a point person for future surveys of both students and
faculty as well; increased data collection is needed on faculty development of instructional materials,
and the new Assessment office on campus may be consulted with to assist with development of an
outside assessment or self-study, in coordination with campus assessment efforts.
In terms of assessing faculty who need accessibility training – instructional materials specialist position
will advertise services, in Bulletin, via survey, etc?
Assessment of accessibility of materials is an area that will need to be further developed.
A New Course Accessibility Checklist will be available as a self-assessment of accessibility as well (see
draft in Appendix).
14c. Barriers to completion
Limited automated data collection processes for students and faculty; survey overload;
In terms of assessing faculty development of materials, limited knowledge of assessment strategies;
need assistance with analyzing data;
14d. Observations/discoveries
Applicable issues covered above.
15. Tools for Document and Media conversion
 What products were identified to assist document conversion?

What was purchased and put in to use during the 07-08 year?
IMAP Report Template 2008
38

What contribution did they make to success with your ATI plan?

What other products have been identified that you plan to use or purchase next year?

What rating do you give the products that you have used?
15a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
What products were identified to assist document conversion?
The products and tools that were identified which will help faculty/staff deal with new and existing
course materials accessibility include the Styles and Formatting built into Microsoft Word; the
Accessibility checker built into Adobe Acrobat; the campus- developed accessible and downloadable
templates for faculty and course web pages. Docsoft software to assist with audio transcription and
captioning automation; Commonlook PDF accessibility plug in (to augment Adobe’s built in tool and test
and repair PDFs for accessibility), HiSoftware AccVerify/AccMonitor was identified as a web accessibility
repair and evaluation tool, and the University of Illinois Accessible Web Publishing Wizard for Microsoft®
Office (The Accessible Web Publishing Wizard for Microsoft Office does not currently work with Office
2007, which is the version deployed on campus; however an Office 2007 compatible product is in
development.)
What was purchased and put in to use during the 07-08 year?
DocSoft was reviewed and purchased to assist with transcript production and captioning videos and
audio files. In addition, Commonlook PDF accessibility plug in was evaluated and purchased to assist
with creating accessible PDFs. Commonlook will be available for faculty/staff to download from the
software download page starting in July. Docsoft will be available in the Origination video studio and
Faculty Staff Resource Center project room after further testing, training, and documentation. In
addition, the CSU purchased systemwide licenses for HiSoftware AccVerify/AccMonitor, web
accessibility validation software programs that allow testing and possibly repairing of inaccessible web
content.
What contribution did they make to success with your ATI plan?
These products will help contribute towards document accessibility by making several complicated areas
(multimedia, PDFs, web) easier to convert and test documents and web pages into accessible format
What rating do you give the products that you have used?
Training has been arranged in July 2008 for both Docsoft and CommonLook, so ratings and evaluation of
effectiveness cannot be given at this time. In the upcoming fall 2008 semester, we plan to use the
CommonLook tool when assisting faculty with PDF accessibility so we may obtain feedback about the
tool at the end of the semester. This will help us work towards the development of a rating or
evaluation system for CommonLook for future semesters. In terms of DocSoft, we plan on doing most
testing and evaluation of the tool within the IRT and SSWD group which will allow us to determine not
only a rating and evalutaion system for DocSoft but also allow us to determine best practices and
process to follow for faculty who will potentially use DocSoft to upload their video or audio media.
IMAP Report Template 2008
39
15b. Plans for 2008/2009
What other products have been identified that you plan to use or purchase next year?
After further evaluation, OmniPage optical character recognition software may be considered for future
use by faculty/staff, especially if it is found that it is easier for faculty to navigate and to scan and digitize
materials into accessible formats. SSWD Alternative media production staff have given it a high rating
due to its accuracy and intuitive user interface.
Plans to purchase other tools to help faculty with document conversion need to be further developed;
the new instructional materials specialist will assist in these efforts; collaboration with other CSU
campuses will also help the campus identify some innovative tools.
15c. Barriers to completion
Train the Trainer sessions, documentation, and testing will be needed before these tools can be fully
implemented. Training was delayed until the web accessibility specialist was hired.
Training has been arranged in July 2008 for both Docsoft and Commonlook, so ratings and evaluation of
effectiveness cannot be given at this time.
15d. Observations/discoveries
Quick tips and guides for using the tools that assist with conversion of materials is needed; some faculty
also prefer hands-on support;
16. Systemwide Shared Resources (CAM etc.)
 Is your campus using the CAM? If not, what method is used?

Is the CAM used to document all textbook and printed materials?

What are your expectations of the CAM?

What other ways has your campus shared resources with other campuses?

What system accessibility alliances / consortia include your campus?
16a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Is your campus using the CAM? If not, what method is used?
Yes, the campus is using the Center for Accessible Media (CAM) E-text database. The Alternative Media
Specialist who handles requests for alternative media materials for students, is the Power User. Other
SSWD staff are also users, and the Instructional Materials Accessibility Specialist is also a user. SSWD
also uses other repositories such as Bookshare and Recordings for the Blind and Dyslexic.
Is the CAM used to document all textbook and printed materials?
The CAM is only used to document textbooks requested for alternative media production. Other
textbook holdings are not being documented; most of these are documented in the Bookstore, however
some faculty choose to send students to other locations for their instructional materials, e.g. course
packs at Copygraphics, etc.
IMAP Report Template 2008
40
What are your expectations of the CAM?
Faculty have expressed an interest in searching the CAM holdings to check to see if the book was
available in accessible format s or not. However, when told that they had to receive training in order to
use the system, they were frustrated. The CAM should be simple for Faculty to use to simply search for
books the CSU has in accessible formats. Perhaps a “Read Only” version could be developed for nonproduction staff. It is inefficient for staff to have to manually look up and follow up individually with all
of the publishers. There should be an automated process, and CAM or Digital Marketplace might be able
to help.
What other ways has your campus shared resources with other campuses?
Recognizing that the campus must meet the requirements of the ATI and CSU Executive Order 926 to
ensure that information technology is fully accessible to all students faculty and staff, including those
with disabilities, the Campus has agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding to contribute towards the
cost of developing system-wide training resources for the ATI that can be used by CSU faculty and staff.
Materials have been shared with Communities of Practice listserv s as well (e.g. Procure ATI Newsletter).
What system accessibility alliances / consortia include your campus?
The Interim ATI Project Coordinator is involved with the system-wide ATI Training Task Force, charged
with development of system-wide training for the Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI). Individuals from
Sacramento State were also involved with the system-wide Information Technology Access Professionals
group (formerly CSU – AT group), which shares best practices in technology access for students with
disabilities. In addition, Sacramento agreed to be one of the sites of the ATI Regional Meetings in the
fall.
16b. Plans for 2008/2009
Plans for 2008-2009 include continuing with the ATI Training Task Force, participating actively in the ATI
Communities of Practice, LMS accessibility discussions, and other accessibility communities and alliances
system-wide.
16c. Barriers to completion
System-wide projects have implications on staff time, and in these budgetary times, staff may already be
stretched thin.
16d. Observations/discoveries
Staff/faculty have to get designated manager approval to participate in system-wide alliances and
projects. Given other competing priorities, it may be difficult to get some participation in important
system-wide collaboratives.
17. System integration
 Have automated systems been identified that help in the delivery of instructional
materials?

Have those systems been tested for accessibility?
IMAP Report Template 2008
41

Is there a method in place to ensure accessibility of instructional materials that are placed
within a system (LMS, web sites, etc.)?

Has a system been established that identifies students alternative media needs during
registration?

Please describe best practices here.

How is the system moving toward accessible material production that does not require
conversion?

What automated systems do you have in place to facilitate any of the ATI functions and how
do these interface with each other?
17a. Accomplishments in 2007/2008
Have automated systems been identified that help in the delivery of instructional materials?
WebCT (now SacCT), the campus’s main learning management system, has been used to provide a place
for faculty to upload documents. On a case by case basis, SSWD alternative media staff can be given
access to the WebCT (now SacCT) materials, upon instructor permission, in order to help deliver
alternative formats to students. To establish a WebCT (now SacCT) course, faculty simply submit a webbased form.
Have those systems been tested for accessibility?
WebCT (now SacCT) has been tested for accessibility by the CSU Chancellor’s Office, and is being tested
currently by both the Instructional Materials (Accessible Technology) Specialist and ATCS Online Course
Developers . The campus is working with Blackboard to make the LMS more accessible, and to
strategize workarounds and ways to better accommodate students now.
Is there a method in place to ensure accessibility of instructional materials that are placed within a
system (LMS, web sites, etc.)?
We will need to consider processes to help ensure accessibility of instructional materials that are placed
within a system (LMS, web sites, etc.)? If the campus used a content management tool that has built in
accessibility features this would also help ensure accessibility of materials placed in the system.
Has a system been established that identifies students alternative media needs during registration?
Students who need alternative media are eligible for early registration and highly encouraged to register
as early as possible, so that they can begin the process of requesting alternative media. SSWD created
an online form on SSWD website to make process of requesting alternate media easier. Also, SSWD staff
have access to the Bookstore’s list of required readings (not all faculty identify required books, and not
all courses identify instructors). This is a manual process, so the Alternative Media Specialist sifts
through all of the courses listed, in order to anticipate books needed by students, should they submit a
request for alternative formats.
IMAP Report Template 2008
42
How is the system moving toward accessible material production that does not require conversion?
The focus in 2007-2008 was on early identification of textbooks, including encouraging faculty to select
books with accessible electronic versions if possible. Incorporating accessibility into new course
development, including building accessibility into new courses and new course proposals (see current
policy at http://www.csus.edu/umanual/AcadAff/FSC00060.htm), will be the focus of 2008-2009; the
campus has taken major steps in the direction toward accessible materials production by offering for the
second year in a row, the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) Institute for faculty entirely focused on
universal design and accessible materials.
17b. Plans for 2008/2009
See IMAP Deliverables in Appendix. We will be investigating systems that can help provide more timely
delivery of materials (e.g. using CMS). We plan to continue testing WebCT (now SacCT) for accessibility,
working with Blackboard/WebCT (now SacCT), and coming up with some ways to better deliver
electronic materials, while also addressing access issues. In addition, a process to survey faculty and
students on satisfaction with WebCT (now SacCT) will be developed.
What automated systems do you have in place to facilitate any of the ATI functions and how do these
interface with each other?
Few systems are developed. Plan to explore automated system to help identify alternative media
needs, book information during registration (link SSWD, Bookstore and Admissions and Records); also
we alert faculty that a student with disability (identity not disclosed) may be enrolled in the class;
Data on textbook adoptions, to assist the campus with monitoring, is needed. The campus reviewed the
possible use of the Fullerton textbook adoption tool to enhance the existing procedures, however
discussions with the Bookstore revealed that Follett’s proprietary corporate bookstore database
information cannot be readily integrated with CMS or other tool like the Fullerton tool.
17c. Barriers to completion
More convenient access to data and instructional materials listings for students with priority registration
and for SSWD staff who need to make conversions is needed. Other campuses (e.g. Cal Poly San Luis
Obispo) have developed CMS customizations where students can register and then automatically
request books in alternate formats linked to the courses, instead of having to go through separate
processes with many steps. Information Resources and Technology technical and database assistance
and institutional prioritization of the project would be needed in order to move forward on such
automations in CMS. 17d. Observations/discoveries
17d. Observations/discoveries
Since many CSUs are using CMS and having to address timely access to instructional materials, it may be
better if system automations to CMS were developed systemwide, especially if other campuses are
already developing such automated systems or facing similar issues. In addition, the CMS manager
noted that there needs to be a systemwide “baseline” change to CMS to automate certain ATI-related
functions to CMS (e.g. linking instructional materials listings to registration).
18. Things not addressed by the preceding:
 Please describe any challenges, findings, trends, problems, recommendations and
conclusions that you would like to share. If needed please include an appendix.
IMAP Report Template 2008
43
Appendix
Cross reference from Year 2 IMAP Report to IMAP Requirements
Year 2 IMAP Report Topics
1. Timely Adoption - Specifically, scope of materials and late hire strategy.
2. Process – Details/ Personnel/ Calendar for Initiative
3. Identification Resources and Allocation Commitments
4. Institutional Policies & Procedures that support the ATI through curriculum and
personnel reviews
5. Commitments from All Stakeholders
6. Share Responsibilities
7. Migration from Accommodation to Accessibility
8. Early Identification of Students with Disabilities
9. Process for the Electronic Capture of course materials
10. Multimedia
11. Incentives
12. Training
13. Outreach, Communication, Awareness, Marketing
14. Assessment of Faculty Materials to be made accessible.
15. Tools for Document and Media conversion
16. Systemwide Shared Resources (CAM etc.)
17. System integration
18. Things not addressed by the preceding: challenges, findings, trends, problems,
recommendations and conclusions
IMAP – per Coded
Memo AA-2007-04
1, 2
9-11
1-8
6, 7
1-8
1-8
1, 2, 4, 5, 7
3
1, 2, 4, 7
5, 7
1-8
7, 8
8
1, 2, 4, 5, 7
1, 4, 7
1-8
1-8
1-11
Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan (IMAP) Main Topics (Coded Memo AA-2007-04):
1.
A process for timely adoption of textbooks by faculty.
2.
A process for identification of textbooks for late-hire faculty.
3.
A process for early identification of students with disabilities who require instructional materials
to be provided in an alternate format.
4.
A strategy to increase use of the campus LMS for delivering technology-enabled courses, and for
posting syllabi and instructional materials online for traditional face-to-face and hybrid and
blended courses.
5.
A process to incorporate accessibility requirements in the purchase of digital or multimedia
instructional materials (captions on videos, for example).
6.
A method to incorporate accessibility (where required) in the educational policy addressing course
development and delivery
7.
A plan to support faculty in the creation of accessible course content.
8.
A communication process and training plan to educate students, staff, and faculty about the
campus Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan.
9.
An evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the campus IMAP.
10. Identification of all campus personnel involved in implementing or overseeing the campus IMAP
11. Chronological listing of all IMAP deliverables (policies, timelines, milestones.
IMAP Report Template 2008
44
Memo on Accessible Technology Initiative, September 24, 2007
TO: University Faculty and Staff Members
FROM: Joseph F. Sheley, Provost, and Bruce Bikle, Chair, Faculty Senate
SUBJECT: Accessible Technology Initiative
You likely have heard reference to "ATI" recently at Sacramento State. We are writing now to give you a
sense of what "ATI" means and how it will affect us over the next few years.
We very much value educational equity and access to a high quality educational experience at
Sacramento State. We also recognize our legal responsibilities in the area of equity and educational
opportunity. Thus, the University recognizes the importance of meeting the goals of the CSU system's
Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) to ensure that campus information technology and resources are
accessible to all individuals, regardless of disability. In launching the initiative in 2006, the Chancellor
issued Coded Memo AA 2007-04: "Access to Electronic and Information Technology for Persons with
Disabilities" defining specific, mandatory objectives to be met by all 23 campuses in the California State
University system over the next five years. They address the following three areas:
Web Accessibility
Initial Focus: departments must ensure that new and significantly updated administrative web sites and
content incorporate accessibility standards into the website development process (Fall 2007).
Instructional Materials Accessibility
Initial Focus: faculty and departments must adopt textbooks and post syllabi, including reading lists,
early enough so that they can be provided in alternate formats (such as Braille and electronic formats
that can be read by assistive technologies) at the same time as materials are provided to all other
students (to impact Spring 2008).
Accessible Electronic & Information Technology Procurement
Initial Focus: departments must ensure that technology purchases e.g. web applications, hardware,
software, telecommunications, multimedia, etc., exceeding certain dollar thresholds conform to
accessibility standards or provide equally effective alternative forms of access (phased in through Fall
2008).
Meeting the ambitious ATI timelines will be a challenge, and the initiative will affect us all. We must
work together to further our long-standing commitment to provide educational access to all while
complying with
IMAP Report Template 2008
45
federal and state laws. As the Fall 2007 semester begins, we would like to apprise you of the campus’s
plans to support faculty and staff efforts in support of the ATI:
• The Office of Academic Affairs and the Faculty Senate will co-sponsor a campus-wide Forum on
October 22, 2007, from 9:00am to 10:30am in Ballroom II of the University Union, to discuss
the Accessible Technology Initiative. This is an important opportunity to brief faculty, staff, and
other members of the University community on the details and impact of the ATI.
• Sacramento State has established an ATI Steering Committee (University Committee on
Information Technology Accessibility), led by Chief Information Officer, Larry Gilbert.
• Melissa Repa, Co-Director of the Office of Services to Students with Disabilities has been
appointed interim Accessible Technology Initiative Coordinator. She will work with Larry Gilbert
to identify resources and help guide implementation of the ATI across campus.
• This past summer, we piloted a successful program via the Teaching Using Technology (TuT) (TuT)
summer institute helping 27 faculty members convert some of their course materials to
accessible formats.
• The Faculty Senate will soon consider a resolution on accessible instructional and electronic
materials that was adopted by the CSU systemwide Academic Senate.
We will provide training and support to faculty, staff, and students as we move forward to achieve ATI
objectives. In the meantime, please consider the following steps as you seek to learn more about
accessible technology:
• View the resources of the California State University Accessible Technology Initiative posted at this
website: http://www.calstate.edu/accessibility/.
• Visit the campus Accessibility website: http://www.csus.edu/accessibility/ for more information
about Sacramento State accessibility, plans, and activities.
• Watch videos of CSU students with disabilities sharing their experiences to appreciate how
accessible information technology and universal design can remove barriers for students with
disabilities and improve all students’ learning:
http://www.calstate.edu/accessibility/resources/videos.shtml.
• Attend a Faculty and Staff workshop on how to create accessible documents and how to use
WebCT (now SacCT): http://www.csus.edu/training/.
• Order all textbooks and other course materials by the deadline established by the Bookstore (e.g.,
no later than late October for Spring 2008), to ensure that students with print-related
disabilities receive alternative instructional materials at the same time as their peers.
• Send an e-mail to ati@csus.edu if you have questions or comments about the Accessible
Technology Initiative.
IMAP Report Template 2008
46
We look forward to your active participation in the ATI Forum this fall and, over the next few years, to
working with the faculty and other members of the University community to ensure that the campus
provides information technology and resources in a manner that is accessible to all.
IMAP Report Template 2008
47
Memoranda on Timely Identification of Instructional Materials
From: The Office of the Provost and VP for Academic Affairs
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 11:46 AM
To: csus-faculty-everyone; csus-staff-everyone
Subject: Timely Identification of Instructional Materials
On Behalf of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
We are asking for your assistance in assuring that all students receive instructional materials in time for
the start of the Fall 2008 semester. In order to be in compliance with CSU Executive Order 926 and the
requirements of the Accessible Technology Initiative, all textbooks and course materials should be
ordered early enough to allow time for conversion into accessible formats (e.g., Braille, audio, electronic
text), should students with disabilities need them converted. Timely textbook adoption also allows the
Bookstore to buy back books to assure the best priced textbooks for the upcoming semester.
Please complete all textbook orders for Fall 2008 semester prior to April 15, 2008 (deadline established
for selection of textbooks). To submit textbook orders, please complete a course adoption form on the
Bookstore faculty web page, call the Bookstore textbook department ext. 8-6448, e-mail
Textbooks@fndmail.csus.edu, or visit the Textbook department at the Hornet Bookstore.
Whenever possible, choose textbooks and instructional materials that have electronic versions available,
to facilitate conversion to accessible formats. Should students with disabilities enroll in your class, you
may be asked to provide clean and clear copies of syllabus and instructional materials in advance (in
electronic text whenever possible) to facilitate conversions. If you are placing materials on electronic
reserve in the Library's Reserve Book Room, please provide clean and clear copies of instructional
materials at least two weeks in advance of when the materials will be needed.
Accessible Technology Initiative:
http://www.csus.edu/accessibility/
CSU Executive Order 926:
http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-926.html
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Joseph F. Sheley
Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
IMAP Report Template 2008
48
-----Original Message----From: The Office of the Provost and VP for Academic Affairs
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:12 PM
To: csus-faculty-everyone; csus-staff-everyone
Subject: Spring Textbook Orders
Deans, Chairs, Faculty, and Staff:
The Spring semester is quickly approaching, and the Bookstore has received only 51 percent of its
textbook orders for Spring. In September, we sent a memo about the Accessible Technology Initiative
(link below), asking for assistance in assuring timely access to instructional materials for all students,
including students with disabilities. In order to be in compliance with CSU Executive Order 926 and the
goals of the Accessible Technology Initiative, all textbooks and course materials should be ordered early
enough to allow time for conversion into accessible formats (e.g. Braille, audio versions), should
students with print-related disabilities need them. Converting textbooks into accessible formats can take
six (6) weeks or more to complete. We need to ensure that all students receive instructional materials
in time for the start of the Spring semester, so we are asking you each to please complete all textbook
orders for Spring 2008 semester prior to December 10, 2007.
To submit textbook orders, please call ext. 8-6448, e-mail Textbooks@fndmail.csus.edu or visit the
Textbook department at the Hornet Bookstore. Please note that the Hornet Bookstore will be hosting a
Faculty/Staff Appreciation Day on December 7, and you are encouraged to submit your textbook orders
at the event.
Accessible Technology Initiative link:
http://www.csus.edu/accessibility/MessageFromProvost_2007_09_24.pdf
CSU Executive Order 926:
http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-926.html
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Joseph F. Sheley
Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
Bruce Bikle
Chair, Faculty Senate
--This message was sent by an automated distribution system. Direct replies will not reach the sender.
IMAP Report Template 2008
49
Memo to Department Chairs on Late-Hire Faculty and Timely Adoption of Textbooks
From: owner-DEPTCHAIRS-L@CSUS.EDU [mailto:owner-DEPTCHAIRS-L@CSUS.EDU] On Behalf
Of Evangelista, Leo
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:03 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Memo from Provost Sheley re Late-Hire Faculty & Timely Adoption of Textbooks
May 21, 2007
TO:
Department Chairs
FROM:
Joseph F. Sheley
Provost and Vice President
for Academic Affairs
SUBJECT:
Late-Hire Faculty and Timely Adoption of Textbooks
I’ve sent a memo to you and to your faculty colleagues asking for assistance in assuring universal
accessibility of instructional materials for all students, including those with disabilities. CSU
policy defines the “timely adoption” of textbooks as the first scheduled milestone for all
campuses. Specifically, “timely adoption” means that textbooks must be “accessible to students
with disabilities at the same time they are available to any other student enrolled in that
program.” In practical terms, this means textbooks must be ordered early enough to allow time
for converting them into needed accessible formats after they arrive at the Bookstore.
As we form Sacramento State’s plan for achieving universal accessibility, I seek your direct
assistance with the early identification of textbooks for late-hire faculty for the coming fall
semester. For current faculty members, we seek to have all textbooks ordered no later than
June 15th, in order to ensure adequate time for conversion of those textbooks into needed
accessible formats for the fall semester. Needless to say, it is not possible for faculty members
hired after that due date to order materials that meet the timely adoption standard.
In this vein, each of you can make a significant contribution to improving the accessibility of our
instructional materials by assuring that your department either orders textbooks in advance for
all late-hire faculty, or identifies a list of accessible textbooks from which late-hire faculty may
choose. This will guarantee that, should students with disabilities need accommodation in
classes taught by late-hire faculty, textbooks will be available for conversion to accessible
formats prior to the start of fall semester.
I appreciate your commitment to both improving access to our courses and making instructional
materials available to all students.
Thank you for your attention.
c. Deans
IMAP Report Template 2008
50
State Hornet Article: Late books affect student learning
Michael Spitler
Issue date: 10/3/07 Section: News
For most students, waiting in long lines to buy overpriced textbooks has become part of the Sacramento
State experience. While many students were able to survive this semester's lines and get out with what
they needed, others weren't so lucky.
Senior psychology major Russel Hamilton considers himself and his fellow psychology classmates to be
just a few of the unlucky ones.
"Over half of our class doesn't have books," he said.
Hamilton said many of his classmates have struggled with their exams because of this. He said no one
knows where the books are and his professor is losing patience.
Nicholas Ewing, chair of the biological sciences department, said there were many reasons why
textbooks didn't arrive on time for the fall 2007 semester. Ewing said the most common reason
textbook deliveries are late is because the publisher hasn't finished working on his or her latest edition.
He said late textbook orders can be troublesome for both professors and students.
Ewing said late orders sometimes occur because many classes are taught by part-time faculty members
who are assigned classes after the deadline has passed. He said that due to lengthy recruitment
processes, part-time faculty members are sometimes not assigned classes until "the last months or even
weeks before school starts," making it "difficult to have books shipped to the store on time."
He also said part of the reason biology classes are sometimes added at the last minute is because of the
department's inability to provide enough classes to meet student demand. If the department can show
that student demand for a class is high enough, then it will receive more funding from the dean, he said.
It is only with this additional funding that more sections can be added. Though there were some late
orders because of this, Ewing said the bookstore and publishers were able to provide this semester's
course materials on time.
Shelly Olson, textbook manager of the bookstore, said sometimes books don't arrive because they are
"in the process of being printed or are on back order." She said that 93 percent of this semester's
textbooks arrived on time and were available by the first day of class, if not earlier.
Olson said professors are not penalized for late orders because many have justifiable reasons for being
late. While late orders are stressful for everyone, they can be extremely difficult for students with
disabilities who need their textbooks converted into a format they can use.
Jackie R. Donath, chair of the humanities and religious studies department, said textbook orders have to
be turned in early so students with disabilities have time to obtain them in an accessible format.
Services to Students with Disabilities is responsible for helping students with disabilities get their
textbooks.
IMAP Report Template 2008
51
According to the SSWD website, the program "helps disabled students obtain or convert textbooks to a
format they can use." The two major formats used by students with disabilities are Braille and electronic
text combined with text-to-speech software. According to the website, students should place orders for
these texts at least three weeks before class starts in order for SSWD to get them on time.
Melissa J. Repa, co-director of SSWD, said that if the publisher cannot provide the textbook, then SSWD
is required to make it itself. She said this can be very time consuming, as some textbooks take up to 12
weeks to be converted to Braille.
Jean-Pierre Bayard, director of Academic Technology and Creative Services, and professor of electrical
and electronic engineering, said that if at least 70 to 80 percent of textbook orders for converted
textbooks were placed on time, SSWD would be able to handle the rest, even if they are late.
Repa said students and faculty members are invited to a Technology Initiative Forum, which will be held
on Oct. 22 at 9 a.m. in the University Union Ballroom. Timeliness of textbook orders is one of many
issues set to be discussed.
Michael Spitler can be reached at mspitler@statehornet.com.
Retrieved from:
http://media.www.statehornet.com/media/storage/paper1146/news/2007/10/03/News/LateBooks.Affect.Student.Learning-3006332.shtml
Announcement to Students about Accessible Technology:
Dear Students:
The University is committed to fostering a campus that supports the access and success of all
Sacramento State students. The CSU Accessible Technology Initiative will help to ensure that campus
information, technology and resources are accessible to all students, regardless of disability. A campuswide forum is scheduled on Monday, October 22nd from 9:00am to 10:30 am in Ballroom II of the
University Union to discuss the Accessible Technology Initiative, and students are welcome to
participate in this important discussion.
A REMINDER TO STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
 It is the responsibility of students with disabilities to self-identify and request needed
disability-related accommodations in a timely manner by contacting Services to Students with
Disabilities (SSWD), Lassen Hall Room 1008, 916-278-6955/916-278-7239 (TTY). All matters
related to students with disabilities are treated as CONFIDENTIAL.
 Students are strongly encouraged to request accommodations as early as possible since it
can take several weeks or more to facilitate requests (e.g. ordering alternative format
textbooks can take 6 weeks or more),
 Communicate with your professors regarding your approved accommodations early in the
semester to help contribute to your success in their courses.
Please contact SSWD if you have any questions or concerns about your accommodations.
IMAP Report Template 2008
52
MILESTONE: November 1, 2007: Final submission of the campus Instructional Materials Accessibility Plan (IMAP)
Tasks
Submit IMAP report to
Chancellor’s Office
Update IMAP based
on Chancellor's Office
comments, and 20072008 activities
Resources
Draft report;
data from
Bookstore,
Coded memo AA
2007-04 for main
topics
IMAP letter from
CO, IMAP draft,
Person(s)
Responsible
Jean-Pierre Bayard,
Melissa Repa, Larry
Gilbert,
Instructional
Materials (IMAP)
workgroup
Melissa, Larry, JP,
IMAP workgroup
Project Due
11/1/2007
IMAP report
due 8/15/2008
Project Status
completed
In progress
Notes/ Comments
This report was submitted based on draft
IMAP submitted in June 2007; additional
editing work is still needed to reflect
additional tasks and plans completed;
A final draft IMAP was sent in November,
but the campus is revising the report
based on IMAP letter received in Feb. 2008
and based on updated activities.
MILESTONE: Campuses will implement the IMAP provisions related to timeliness of alternate formats for print-based instructional materials. These
provisions should impact the timeliness of materials for the first academic term of Calendar Year, 2008.
1. A process for timely
adoption of textbooks
by faculty.
Passage of procedures
and request for
support for timely
adoption of printbased instructional
materials
Consideration of
incentives for early
textbook adoption
IMAP Report Template 2008
Provost’s memo
(Spring 07, Fall
07, Spring 08);
Bookstore
announcements
Provost Sheley, ATI
Team, Melissa
Repa, Jean-Pierre
Bayard, Larry
Gilbert, Bob
Buckley, Bruce Bikle
Pam Parsons
(Bookstore),
Melissa Repa, JeanPierre Bayard, IMAP
Memoranda seeking support sent by Office
of Provost, and Faculty Senate Chair
Spring 2008
Fall 2007
ongoing
ongoing
Executive Sponsor met with Bookstore
Director and discussed potential incentives
for early adopters. Bookstore currently
provides a shared gift for departments that
53
subcommittee
Raise awareness
among faculty:
Schedule ATI Forum to
discuss impact of the
Accessible Technology
Initiative including
need for timely
adoption of textbooks
PowerPoint,
handouts, web
page; feedback
from forum.
Establishment and
announcement of
deadlines to adopt
print based
instructional materials
Bookstore helps
establish
deadlines;
Memoranda sent
to faculty
describes
deadlines per
semester;
Department
Chairs’ meeting
Discuss data
requirements with
CMS - instructional
materials to promote
early access to
materials listings upon
registration
2. A process for
identification of
textbooks for lateIMAP Report Template 2008
Melissa Repa, JeanPierre Bayard, Larry
Gilbert, Bob
Buckley, Bruce
Bikle, student,
faculty reps
Pam Parsons
(Bookstore),
Department Chairs
adopt on time. They also offered discounts
for faculty and encouraged adoption on
certain days
Introductions by Provost and Faculty Senate
Chair; FAQ 'briefing' portion and panel
questions; plan for additional smaller
forums targeted at specific groups
10/22/2007
November 15
for Spring
courses, April
15 for Fall
courses
Admissions &
Records Focus
Reports for
instructional
materials listings
Melissa Repa,
Admissions &
Records Focus
group, Jeanette
Norton,
Administrative
Computing Services
Fall 2007
Provost memo
(Spring 07);
Bookstore
Provost,
Department Chairs,
Melissa Repa, JP
Starting spring
2007
To be
reviewed
annually
ongoing
ongoing
Bookstore Director, SSWD Co-Director, and
ATCS Director attended Department Chair’s
meeting to announce deadlines;
Meeting with Bookstore Director to discuss
textbook adoption and development of plan
to get faculty to adopt materials earlier
Requested listing linking enrollment with
instructional materials and students getting
priority registration based on alternative
formats; need to continue discussion;
ACSmanager suggested that I seek
Chancellor's Office support for any baseline
changes
This was also discussed during Chairs
meeting; this issue needs to be further
discussed, tracked, and clarified;
54
hire faculty.
announcements
Bayard, Pam
Parsons, Faculty
Senate Chair
3. A process for early
identification of
students with
disabilities who
require instructional
materials to be
provided in an
alternate format.
Implementation of
Bookstore meeting in Pomona to discuss
plan to encourage
Emails, Hornet
bookstore partnership to get materials
Melissa Repa,
alternate media
Newspaper
earlier (training cancelled). SSWD priority
Allison Ehresman,
eligible students to
articles
Starting Fall
registration procedures have been in place
Carol Houston
Ongoing
utilize early
Orientation,
2007
for many years; we have been discussing
(SSWD), IMAP
registration and
Student Affairs
the topic of how to encourage students in
workgroup,
submit requests in
alerts;
IMAP workgroup
timely manner
Considering incentive
SSWD would need to be able to track when
Plan to explore
to students for using
TBA
SSWD
TBA
students actually register among those who
in fall 2008
priority registration;
get early priority registration.
Obtaining listing of
This process is manual, and requires
courses with students
SSWD database,
alternate media staff to look up contact
with alternate format
Admissions &
SSWD, Bookstore,
Starting Spring
information, and search through hundreds
Ongoing
needs enrolled, and
Records Focus
Admissions data
2007
of pages
instructional materials
Reports
lists
MILESTONE: Fall Term, 2008: New courses and new course content, including instructional materials and instructional websites, will be designed
and authored in a manner that incorporates accessibility. If incorporating accessibility is not possible or would constitute an undue burden, then a
plan to provide an equally effective alternate form of access must be developed, documented, and communicated. Existing course content will be
made accessible at the point of course redesign or when a student with a disability enrolls in the course.
IMAP Report Template 2008
55
4. A strategy to
increase faculty use of
the campus learning
management system
(LMS) for delivering
technology-enabled
courses, and for
posting syllabi and
instructional
materials online for
traditional face-toface and hybrid or
blended courses.
Offer training in
WebCT (now SacCT)
including how to
upload (accessible)
documents
Identify accessibility
features in the
campus LMS (WebCT
(now SacCT)).
A process to survey
faculty and students
regarding WebCT
(now SacCT)
accessibility.
An evaluation process
to determine if
IMAP Report Template 2008
WebCT (now
SacCT)
ATCS, IRT, SSWD
Fall 2008
In progress
Training
handouts online;
syllabus
templates
ATCS
Starting Fall
2007
ongoing
WebCT (now
SacCT)
accessibility
documentation
from
Chancellor’s
office; internal
testing
documentation
Cryssel Vera IRT,
ATCS, SSWD
Fall 2008
In progress
survey of
students &
faculty (TBA)
Cryssel Vera IRT,
ATCS, SSWD
Fall 2008
In progress
To be developed
Cryssel Vera IRT,
ATCS, SSWD
Spring 2009
Not yet started
Test accessibility of WebCT (now SacCT) and
develop potential workarounds to ensure
accessibility; ATCS online course
developers, new IRT instructional materials
specialist (accessible tech) and others are
involved in testing, etc.
56
instructional materials
made available to
students via faculty
websites and the
course management
system (WebCT (now
SacCT)) are made
accessible.
5. A process to
incorporate
accessibility
requirements in the
purchase of digital or
multimedia
instructional
materials (captions on
videos, for example)
Raise awareness and
delineate roles and
responsibilities related
to classroom
multimedia
accessibility
6. A method to
incorporate
accessibility (where
required) in the
educational policy
addressing course
development and
delivery
Meet with Faculty
Senate Chair to
IMAP Report Template 2008
E&IT
Procurement
procedures were
piloted in 20072008
David Shannon
(Director of
Procurement),
Melisa Repa,
Procurement
workgroup,
Tips for faculty
regarding
captioning;
Classroom
Captioning draft
guidelines
SSWD, IRT, ATCS
Spring 2008
In progress
This process is found in the Accessible E&IT
procurement plan; currently, procurement
processes apply to purchases above
$50,000; applies to purchases above
$15,000 in fall 2008; prioritizing and
assessment of impact on campus of
procurements is in development; faculty
are asked to purchase videos that are
captioned, to meet instructional materials
accessibility requirements
http://www.csus.edu/sswd/deaftips.html
Captioning guidelines draft:
www.csus.edu/sswd/
CaptioningClassroomGuidlinesDraft6.08.doc
This will be further developed in 2008-2009;
includes new course proposals
University Policy
manual
Faculty Senate
Chair, Melissa Repa,
Spring2008
Completed
Discussed with Faculty Senate Chair what
should go through Senate and what does
57
discuss policy
implications, future
communications
Draft new course
proposal
documentation and
integrate accessibility
into new course policy
Draft or revise other
policies and
procedures affected
by the IMAP
JP Bayard, Bob
Buckley
New Course
Accessibility
Checklist
IMAP workgroup
Spring 2008
In progress
TBA
IMAP workgroup
Fall 2008
Not yet
completed
Center for Teaching
and Learning, ATCS,
IRT, SSWD,
Academic
Departments (Arts
& Letters, Math &
Science, Social
Sciences, Health &
Human Services,
Education,
Engineering,
Library, etc.)
7. A plan to support
faculty in the creation
of accessible course
content
Training provided on
accessible course
content – both face to
face and online
references
Develop online
tutorials to assist
IMAP Report Template 2008
not need to. Once this is determined, we
will work to send the issues directly to the
appropriate committee chairs. Further
development of policies and procedures is
needed
Additional student assistants, technical
resources, and business resources might
need to be identified in order to support
faculty;
Fall 2008 for all
new courses
and courses
with students
with
disabilities
enrolled
This training has been in place throughout
the 2007-2008 year.
Online handouts;
training schedule
ATCS, SSWD, IRT
Starting Fall
2007
Lynda.com
ATCS, IRT,
Chancellor’s Office
Fall 2008
ongoing
In progress
Development of online tutorials may be
deferred if Chancellor’s Office develops
58
faculty on how to
make commonly-used
document formats
(web sites, PDF’s and
PPT’s) accessible.
Hire Instructional
Materials Specialist to
support faculty
Teaching Using
Technology (TuT)
Institute 2008
focusing on
accessibility and
universal design of
instruction, planned
and implemented
Announce services
available from
Instructional Materials
Specialist (Accessible
Tech) to and other
program center
Information
Technology
Consultants (ITCs), or
other appropriate
program center
designees
Develop an incentive
program to encourage
faculty to redesign
their course materials
in order to meet the
accessibility
IMAP Report Template 2008
these
ITC Campus
forums; New
Faculty
Orientation
(scheduled); A
Training sessions
Teaching Using
Technology (TuT)
Summer institute
– laptops or
stipend
Appointment date May 12
Melissa Repa, Doug
Jackson (AVP, IRT)
Spring 2008
Completed
Center for Teaching
and Learning
Faculty Mentors
and TuT Planning
Committee; IRT,
ATCS,
May 27-30,
2008
Completed
Doug Jackson,
Cryssel Vera (IRT),
Raymond Pina
(ATCS), others
Center for Teaching
and Learning -
Inform College ITCs and other appropriate
program center designees of both training
and software tools designed to test and
repair electronic content based on their
level of accessibility.
Starting spring
2008
Ongoing
ongoing
ongoing
The TuT program targets ~30 faculty each
year and provides them with a one-time
stipend or laptop for learning the methods
and tools for producing accessible
documents and for converting their course
materials to accessible formats, and for
59
requirements.
providing follow up training to their
colleagues.
Encourage faculty to
complete tutorials on
meeting accessibility
prior to enabling them
to post online
materials on the
learning management
system.
The Lynda.com tutorials are focused on
web accessibility, but could be used by
faculty who upload materials; a pilot
WebCT (now SacCT) based course on web
accessibility is also developed for those
faculty with web page accounts.
8. Development of
communication plan
to inform campus
about responsibilities
regarding
instructional
materials access, and
ATI
Disseminate
responsibilities
regarding instructional
materials access, and
ATI to faculty and staff
Provide information
on accessibility and
universal design at
New Faculty
Orientation
IMAP Report Template 2008
Lynda.com, other
online tutorials
to be developed
ATCS, IRT, HR?
Fall 2008
ATI forum flyer,
logo design,
news article, ATI
newsletter,
website, email
address
Melissa Repa, Public
Affairs staff, IT
Project Manager
Fall 2007
Provost’s Memo
Provost, Faculty
Senate Chair
Starting Fall
2007
CTL, ATCS, SSWD
August 2008
Deferred
Completed;
Ongoing
Scheduled
The online staff/faculty general campus
newsletter included announcements about
ATI events; a plan for strategic
communications was coordinated with
Public Affairs. A plan for communications
included Bulletin announcement, email
campaign, design logo, distribute flyers;
web announcements; design ATI
newsletter; will need to continue working
with Public Affairs and IT Project Manager
to ensure communications plan is effective
Provost Office communicated the new
guidelines and information on changing the
campus culture in a way that facilitate the
adoption of those guidelines.
This is one way to increase awareness
about course materials, and to train new
faculty of the accessibility plan.
60
Training and plan for
equally effective
alternative access
needs to be developed
and publicized.
9. An evaluation of
the overall
effectiveness of the
campus IMAP.
Further development
of an assessment plan
for ATI IMAP
SSWD Building a
Team
presentations
IMAP report
template, IMAP
letter from CO,
SSWD, TBA
Ongoing
ATI Steering
Committee, IMAP
subcommittee,
Assessment office?
IMAP
subcommittee
SSWD workshops to department faculty
feature information on best practices for
reasonable accommodation, roles and
responsibilities, etc.,
In progress
Fall 2008
ongoing
Progress reports are submitted to the
Executive Sponsor annually, using the
format specified by the Chancellor’s Office.
This priority was not fully addressed in
2007-2008, and the IMAP subcommittee is
still identifying processes, budgetary, and
other considerations necessary to
implement the evaluation process in the
future. Data collected for this Year 2 report
(e.g. data collection of textbook data;
Institutional data on campus climate; data
collection of students with disabilities using
alternative media, etc.) was compiled by
members of the IMAP and submitted to
Executive Sponsor for review.
A meeting with the newly established
Assessment Office is recommended to
discuss qualitative and quantitative data
needed;
Data collection on faculty development of
instructional materials and student and
faculty satisfaction could be developed
A process to identify
key instructional
materials that need to
be retrofitted to make
accessible. Process
maintained at Dept
level. Process should
IMAP Report Template 2008
61
be the same for all.
10. Identification of
all campus personnel
involved in
implementing or
overseeing the
campus IMAP
List of
subcommittee
members and
campus
personnel
involved in
implementing
IMAP
A process to identify
faculty liaisons
To be developed
(including Teaching
Using Technology
(TuT) and other
faculty) in each college
who are aware of
accessibility
requirements and
procedures so that
they can disseminate
information to
colleagues, and help
train (like San Jose’s
Accessibility faculty in
residence program?)
IMAP Report Template 2008
Co-Chairs: JP
Bayard, Mark
Stoner (CTL)
Ongoing
Ongoing
Cryssel Vera IRT,
CTL,
Ongoing
ongoing
ATI IMAP subcommittee will continue to
meet to ensure that each university
department is doing its part; relationships
and work practices still need to be built.
The campus needs to improve accessibility
of instructional materials, and requires a
great deal of motivation from both high
level administrators, and faculty at large.
62
Draft New Course Instructional Materials Accessibility Checklist
INSTRUCTIONS: Please mark an “X” next to the item if you use the material type in your course. Leave the response blank
if you do not use this type of instructional material. If you need help to fulfill the accessibility requirement, please contact
ati@csus.edu or the Help Desk at (916)278-7337 for support.
Note: Instructional materials (e.g. textbooks, course readers, course web pages, library reserves), to the extent possible, must be
accessible to students with disabilities at the same time as they are available to other students enrolled in that program, as required by
Executive Order 926, the CSU Board of Trustees Policy on Disability Support and Accommodations, Sections 504 and 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and other applicable federal and state laws. If it is not possible to obtain an accessible version
of the instructional material and the material is essential to the teaching of your course, you must document a plan to provide an
alternative means of access to allow individuals with disabilities to obtain access to the information.
Paper-Based Print Materials:
1. Textbook(s) are ordered 8 weeks prior to the first day of class to allow adequate time for potential students to
arrange alternate formats such as books on tape or Braille.
2. If I use a recommended list of reading materials, it will be clean, readable, and available for potential
conversion into alternate formats 8 weeks prior to using it in class, or it will be available in accessible electronic
format (e.g. see http://www.aph.org/louis.htm for database of accessible formats).
3. My Class Handouts and Tests are available for conversion into alternate formats at least 1 week prior to their
use, or are available in accessible electronic formats. (e.g.: myclassnotes.doc)
4. If I use Library Reserve Materials, they will be available for conversion into alternate formats for potential
students at least 2 weeks prior to using them in class, or they will be available in electronic text format
5. My syllabus is available in electronic text format and is posted on the WebCT (now SacCT) learning
management system or on another web server
Electronic Instructional Materials:
6. If I use PDF documents, they will be made accessible by using “tags” and verified using the accessibility
checker in Adobe Acrobat, per Section 508 standards (e.g.: see
http://www.csus.edu/training/handouts/workshops/creating_accessible_pdfs.pdf).
7. If I use a class web site, it will be designed for accessibility [recommend using web templates to meet the web
accessibility standards of Section 508 standards] (e.g.: see www.csus.edu/web/gettingstarted.html).
8. If I use PowerPoint presentations, they will have an electronic text document of the outline, the graphics will
be described in alternate text, and the audio will include a transcript (e.g.: see
http://www.calstate.edu/accessibility/tutorials/powerpoint.shtml).
Multimedia Materials:
9. If I use recorded Lectures, Pod Casts, and other audio, they will have a text transcript, per Section 508
standards (e.g.: see http://www.webaim.org/techniques/captions/#transcripts).
10. If I use Images/Slide Show/Overheads, they will have alternate text described versions, per Section 508
standards (e.g.: see http://www.webaim.org/techniques/images/).
11. If I use videos or DVDs, including web-based videos, they will be captioned, per Section 508 standards (e.g.:
see http://www.webaim.org/techniques/captions).
12. There are other elements of my instructional materials not on this list that I would like more information
about. Please list (e.g. software)
Submitted by (Name)
Department/College
Phone
Date
Distribution: This Checklist attachment should be forwarded to your Dean's office along with the Course Change Proposal
Form A. Please email an electronic copy of this form to ati@csus.edu by the Dean's office after it is approved at that level.
IMAP Report Template 2008
63