Exploring Blind and Low-Vision Youth's Digital Access Needs in School: Toward Accessible Instructional Technologies
Natalie L. Shaheen · 2024 · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3688805
Summary
This mixed methods study investigates how blind and low-vision (BLV) youth ages 13-22 experience technology-mediated learning in US K-12 schools. The author, herself congenitally blind and a former teacher of blind students, conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 BLV youth and analyzed survey data from 6 additional participants collected by the National Federation of the Blind. The research addresses a critical gap: while BLV youth have been systematically excluded from technology-mediated learning for two decades due to inaccessible instructional technologies, no youth-specific accessibility guidelines exist. WCAG and Section 508 focus on adults and do not address the developmental differences of young learners. The W3C established an Accessibility for Children Community Group in 2019 to address this shortcoming, but sufficient research data to write youth guidelines does not yet exist. The study employs a transformative paradigm that privileges BLV youth's own definitions and perspectives rather than evaluating technologies through adult-created accessibility criteria. Participants attended 15 schools across 11 US states, used various combinations of Braille and audio for schoolwork, and represented diverse experiences with access technologies including JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver, BrailleNote, and refreshable Braille displays.
Key findings
Three major findings emerged from the research: First, participants used a broader range of access technologies than youth in previous studies. 90% used a combination of AT, with all 22 using at least one screen reader and 77% having access to refreshable Braille. Mobile device and screen reader use has expanded dramatically—all qualitative participants used Apple devices with VoiceOver, and seven identified their mobile device paired with a refreshable Braille display as their primary technology stack. Second, most youth did not begin developing AT literacy until they were teenagers, and the majority learned AT outside of school. Only 2 of 16 interview participants learned AT exclusively from their teachers of blind students (TBS). Five were primarily self-taught, teaching themselves through user manuals, online resources, and experimentation. Others learned from blind mentors, peers, and family members in the blind community. Schools frequently failed to provide adequate AT instruction because TBSs themselves lacked knowledge of screen readers and Braille technology. Third, youth defined accessible instructional technologies through two dimensions: (1) easy to learn to use, and (2) easy to use to learn. They identified nine factors for evaluating accessibility, including interface complexity, whether navigation requires knowledge they haven't yet developed, button labeling, cross-platform compatibility, how "visual" the information presentation is, alternative access to spatial information, Braille support, and functional parity with sighted peers. STEM subjects were consistently identified as having the most inaccessible technologies.
Relevance
This research has significant implications for instructional technology developers, school administrators, and accessibility standards bodies. The author proposes six preliminary design guidelines: (1) conform with WCAG as a baseline, (2) provide scaffolding for novice AT users, (3) create simple uncluttered interfaces, (4) facilitate communication between BLV and sighted users, (5) help teachers produce accessible spatial information, and (6) develop for multiple operating systems. The finding that youth learn AT primarily outside school—often self-taught or through blind community connections—highlights a systemic failure in educational support. The paper documents over 2,000 Office for Civil Rights complaints filed against US school districts since 2016 for WCAG non-compliance, demonstrating the legal and ethical urgency of accessible instructional technology. For practitioners, the youth's two-dimensional accessibility framework (easy to learn to use AND easy to use to learn) offers a valuable evaluation lens beyond technical WCAG compliance. The emphasis on cross-platform compatibility, simple workflows, and Braille support reflects real usage patterns that should inform procurement decisions. The call for additional research with BLV youth is essential—standards bodies need robust data to develop youth-specific accessibility guidelines.
Tags: blind and low vision · K-12 education · instructional technology · access technology · screen readers · Braille · youth · design guidelines
Standards referenced: WCAG 2.1 · Section 508 · ATAG · UDL