This blog page contains reflections from Unit 2 of the ED696-Critical Reflection of the Sebago Plan course.
January 19, 2019
Project Outcomes. Project outcomes were good overall. It was through the criticizing process of formative and summative assessment on the project’s needs that undoubtedly streamlined the processes and thinned the need for excessive amounts of resources. At the same time while providing only the necessary information and activities for participants to know and understand about the topic of disability and accessibility. Second, the greatest opportunity of providing the training was that it was being offered twice on two locations. This provided the facilitators and stakeholders with comparison groups and allowed adjustments to happen formatively and in real time to provide improvements to the program. Compared to the logic model task analysis, the outcomes were achieved.
Evaluation Data. To provide comparative data, a pre- and post-survey method was established to evaluate the program. However, the pre-survey assessments were not performed due to time restrictions for the administrators and stakeholders involved in the project’s development. Luckily, some of the quantitative data can still be extracted when looking at previous records and accounts while comparing changes from before and after the training. Additionally, a survey was not distributed for the training program performed due to organizational restrictions and inefficient timely reaction by the department. Overall, however, the in-person feedback was that the training was well received. With the resulting evaluative factors, it has shown some immediate improvement in a few areas after the training helped to create some advocates but is yet to be seen if the other areas will come up to par over time.
The organization and institution benefited from this needs assessment and accessibility audit data since compliance is legally mandated with the ADA and Rehabilitation Act; this can mitigate the risk of any potential lawsuits of noncompliance by providing a proactive approach to the issue. It was also in the company’s best interest to conduct such a needs assessment and accessibility audit for the cultural benefits of including students with disabilities in the diversity spectrum since disability is equal to diversity within higher education and beyond.
Measured Reactions. Implementing the “Understanding Accessibility to Learning” training plan was not only informative for all participants and stakeholders involved in the planning an implementation process but was thoroughly enjoyable for all involved as well. The delivery methods chosen and employed were appropriate and well received by participants and stakeholders. The results of the session overall were positive, and after the sessions concluded, many requested subsequent sessions be planned in the near future. The same sessions were offered twice and in two different locations which allowed us to compare strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in planning more advanced sessions. Again, evaluation surveys should be created and completed to compare data.
Employee Behavior Changes & Learning. There were observed behavior changes in the staff’s approach to creating and editing online materials; more specifically how they were displayed in the learning management system to make them more accessible. However, obtaining buy-in from the faculty has been difficult. There were very few faculty members in attendance at the training session, and compared to others, those were not the faculty who needed the training the most.
After following up of the training, the faculty and course assistants that were in attendance improved their knowledge of web page accessibility, mostly in providing accessible links to pages. Additionally, although it will take much more practice and training, the culture changed slightly for some who took the advocacy more seriously and understood the importance of maintaining compliance. They also recognized what it meant to communicate effectively with students with disabilities, and where to point them in terms of disclosing their disability to obtain accommodations. It will also take time to see if faculty and staff are more in tune with the requirements and importance of correctly implementing accommodations.
Attendance. Overall, the size of the training group in attendance was large enough to maintain and control, but small enough to warrant active participation and networking opportunities for individuals to interact with one another. Additionally, the setup promoted interaction within small groups. There was also enough time built into the training before, during, and after for participants to mingle. However, as most unassigned seating goes, many familiar colleagues sat together so they had the most interactions with each other which has its pros and cons. Pro in that they felt more comfortable discussing with colleagues they knew, and con in that they may have had the same purviews as their colleagues which may have limited the breadth of their discussions. Conversely, due to the lunch provided, the hands-on approach, and introductions at the beginning of the training, others were able to blend during these breaks and have contact with partners more closely during some of the exercises.
Finances & Schedule. Keeping up with an appropriate timeline on budget was a challenge, but it was maintained. The overall costs involved were mostly administrative time, with a few resources used to hold the venue and print materials. However, compared to the cost of a potential lawsuit from noncompliance, these training was a bargain. The training was completed by the given date and since this training was not required, there was no mandate set forth by the organization. Using the objectives of the training program and the gaps identified in the needs assessment, these goals were definitely achieved.
Feasibility. As hypothesized, the entirety of the robust and thorough plan for the needs assessment was not completely feasible in the organization. The focus groups and interviews reported for qualitative data in the needs assessment were not seen as an important use of company time and was therefore not performed. However, the literature review, needs assessment, and audit seemed to be enough to address given the time commitment needed. It seemed to cover the gamut enough to identify the gaps and needs in the organization without overextending those involved.
Efficiency. When it came to efficiency of creating the training program, the balance was equal in terms of the amount of time to create the training program when compared to the amount of learning and planning involved. As for the participants, it appears that the amount of hands-on active learning outweighed the amount of effort, which represents a highly efficient and hopefully effective training program.