Enhancing Online Course Accessibility Through Simulation-Based Learning

Elizabeth Rivera

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment.

of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Instructional Technology
Stockton University

Written under the direction of

Jung Lee

And approved by:

____________________________________
Jung Lee, Ph.D.
Professor of Instructional Technology
Advisor

4/28/2024
 2

Abstract

Inaccessible online courses that do not comply with standards such as the Americans with

Disabilities Act (ADA) pose significant academic, legal, and financial risks for higher education

institutions. This project aimed to enhance the knowledge and attitudes of higher education

faculty about online course accessibility. By utilizing Adobe Captivate and SurveyMonkey, I

developed simulation-based e-learning intervention. It had 5 different versions, each focusing on

a specific disability-type umbrella: (1) Learning, (2) Psychiatric (mental illness), (3) Chronic

(chronic illness), (4) Communication (speech and language disorders), and (5) Sensory

Disabilities (hypo sensory, hypersensory, and mixed sensory disabilities). All versions began

with interactive elements exhibiting the research-supported and ethical importance of online

course accessibility. Then, these versions displayed their unique multimedia simulations

surrounding the e-learning challenges of a fictional student with a disability. Finally, all

versions’ interactive sections described how their e-learning challenges overlapped and how

these interventions benefitted non-disabled learners. Sixteen faculty members participated in this

online instructional module and evaluations. Despite technical, test error, and volunteering

issues, results showed simulation-based learning’s enhancement and reinforcement of faculty

members’ knowledge as well as attitudes towards online course accessibility. This encourages

more simulation-based learning projects in nonscientific realms and growing conversations of

creating inclusive higher-education environments.

 3

Acknowledgements

Thank you, Dr. Lee, and Dr. Ackerman, for shining your light of wisdom, motivation,

and guidance, helping me through the dark doubts and trials of the capstone research process as

well as MAIT in general. Additionally, thank you, fellow classMAITS, for the advice, laughs,

and warmth that you have given me over the past few years as I have grown as a student.

Without you as well as the MAIT faculty, I wouldn’t have been confident, nor worldly or skilled

enough to take on such an ambitious research topic! Moreover, thank you, Mom, and Dad, for

helping me test out some technical and content-based aspects of my project before it got

released, as well as your great moral support! Furthermore, thank you, Stockton University, for

all the amazing learning, friendship, mentorship, and experience-based opportunities that you

have given me because you are taking the time to choose accessibility as a priority!

And finally, thank you, dear reader, for taking the time to listen to my project’s story. By

doing so, you are making a HUGE step towards helping not just students with disabilities like

me, but also helping the edtech landscape become more intuitive, multipurpose, more well-

known, and most importantly fun for everyone!

 4

Table Of Contents
Abstract............................................................................................................................................2
Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................3
Table Of Contents............................................................................................................................4
List of Figures..................................................................................................................................8
List of Appendices.........................................................................................................................10
Chapter 1: Introduction..................................................................................................................11
1.1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................11
1.1.1. ADA Noncompliance: An Instructional Problem........................................................11
1.1.2. The Intervention Fostering Accessibility.....................................................................12
1.1.3. Research Questions......................................................................................................12
1.2.0. Needs Analysis.................................................................................................................13
1.2.1. Needs Assessment Purpose..........................................................................................13
1.2.2. Methods & Key Stakeholders.......................................................................................14
1.2.2.1. Interview Questions...............................................................................................14
1.2.2.2. Participant’s Representation..................................................................................15
1.2.3. Results..........................................................................................................................15
1.2.3.1. Student Complaints................................................................................................15
1.2.3.2. Faculty Complaints................................................................................................17
1.2.3.3. Misconceptions Hindering the Creation of Accessible Online Courses................18
1.2.3.4. Intervention Suggestions.......................................................................................19
1.2.3.5. Interactive Content versus Textual Content’s Effectiveness.................................21
1.2.3.6. Making The Intervention Itself Navigable and Accessible...................................21
1.2.3.7. Additional Suggestions..........................................................................................23
1.2.4. Discussion of Focus Group Results..............................................................................23
1.3.0. Goals and Objectives of the Capstone Project.............................................................24
Goals...................................................................................................................................24
Objectives...........................................................................................................................24
Research Questions.............................................................................................................24
Chapter 2: Literature Review.........................................................................................................26
Prelude to Introduction...............................................................................................................26
 5

2.1.0. Introduction......................................................................................................................26
2.2.0. The Importance of ADA Compliant Web Accessibility..................................................28
2.2.1. Effects on Higher-Education Institutions.....................................................................28
2.2.1.1. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects an Institution’s Reputation...............28
2.2.1.2. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects an Institution’s Course Legality......31
2.2.1.3. How Web Course Resource Inaccessibility Affects a Higher-Education
Institution’s Finances..........................................................................................................32
2.2.2. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects Students..................................................33
2.3.0. Behind the Decision of Using Simulation-Based Learning.............................................35
2.3.1. Characteristics of Simulation-Based Learning.............................................................35
2.4.0. Benefits of Simulation-Based Learning...........................................................................36
2.4.1. Simulation-Based Learning and Satisfaction...............................................................36
2.4.2. Simulation-Based Learning and Knowledge Acquisition............................................37
2.4.3. Simulation-Based Learning and Skill-Based Acquisition............................................38
2.4.4. Simulation-Based Learning and Confidence................................................................38
2.5.0. Literature Review Conclusion.........................................................................................39
Chapter 3: Methods and Procedure Plan.......................................................................................41
Prelude to Introduction...............................................................................................................41
3.1.0. The Implementation of Simulation-Based Learning.................................................42
3.1.1. Simulation Section 1: Disability Types and Web Course Accessibility......................42
3.1.2. Simulation-Based Learning Section 2: Online Course Accessibility Intervention
Design.....................................................................................................................................49
3.1.3. Simulation-Based Learning Assisted Guidance for Both Sections..............................54
3.1.4 Simulation-Based Learning Reflection Components....................................................61
3.2.0. Product Description: Simulation-Based Learning Module Series Flow..........................63
3.2.1. Navigation Instructions................................................................................................63
3.2.2 Attitudinal Pretest and Posttests....................................................................................63
3.2.3. Course Flow Introduction.............................................................................................66
3.2.4. Competency Pretests and Posttests...............................................................................70
3.2.5. The Importance of Online Course Accessibility: An Introduction Module.................72
3.2.6 Disability Umbrella Simulation.....................................................................................79
 6

3.2.7. Disability Simulation Conclusion: A Conclusion Module...........................................81

3.2.8. Module Evaluation.......................................................................................................88
3.3.0. Original Intended Course Flow........................................................................................90
3.4.0. The Feasibility Timeline..................................................................................................92
Chapter 4: Implementation and Evaluation...................................................................................94
4.1.0. Introduction................................................................................................................94
4.2.0. Implementation Methodology..........................................................................................94
4.2.1. The Project’s When and How......................................................................................94
4.2.2. About the Participants..................................................................................................94
4.3.0. Evaluation Methodology..................................................................................................95
4.3.1. Purpose of the Evaluation.............................................................................................95
4.3.2. Evaluation Methods Used............................................................................................95
4.3.2.1. Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest..............................................................................95
4.3.2.2. Competency Pretest and Posttests.........................................................................96
4.3.2.3. Module Evaluation.................................................................................................96
4.3.2.4. Spontaneous Email Feedback................................................................................97
4.4.0. Evaluation Results............................................................................................................97
4.4.1. Results: Points to Keep in Mind...................................................................................97
4.4.2. Generalized Results......................................................................................................97
4.4.3. Specific Results............................................................................................................98
4.4.3.1. Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest Results.................................................................98
4.4.3.2. Competency Tests Specific Results.....................................................................100
4.4.3.3. Module Evaluation Test Results..........................................................................101
4.4.0. Summary of Evaluation...........................................................................................102
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Discussion........................................................................................104
5.1.0. Study Summary..............................................................................................................104
5.2.0. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................105
5.3.0 Reflections and Limitations............................................................................................106
5.3.1. Reflection...................................................................................................................106
5.3.2. Limitations..................................................................................................................107
5.4.0. Future Plans and Recommendations..............................................................................107
 7

References....................................................................................................................................109
 8

List of Figures

Figure 1..........................................................................................................................................43
Figure 2..........................................................................................................................................43
Figure 3..........................................................................................................................................44
Figure 4..........................................................................................................................................45
Figure 5..........................................................................................................................................47
Figure 6..........................................................................................................................................48
Figure 7..........................................................................................................................................50
Figure 8..........................................................................................................................................51
Figure 9..........................................................................................................................................52
Figure 10........................................................................................................................................53
Figure 11........................................................................................................................................53
Figure 12........................................................................................................................................55
Figure 13........................................................................................................................................56
Figure 14........................................................................................................................................57
Figure 15........................................................................................................................................59
Figure 16........................................................................................................................................60
Figure 17........................................................................................................................................61
Figure 18........................................................................................................................................62
Figure 19........................................................................................................................................64
Figure 20........................................................................................................................................67
Figure 21........................................................................................................................................68
Figure 22........................................................................................................................................69
Figure 23........................................................................................................................................70
Figure 24........................................................................................................................................73
Figure 25........................................................................................................................................74
Figure 26........................................................................................................................................75
Figure 27........................................................................................................................................76
Figure 28........................................................................................................................................77
Figure 29........................................................................................................................................78
 9

Figure 30........................................................................................................................................78
Figure 31........................................................................................................................................82
Figure 32........................................................................................................................................83
Figure 33........................................................................................................................................84
Figure 34........................................................................................................................................85
Figure 35........................................................................................................................................86
Figure 36........................................................................................................................................87
Figure 37........................................................................................................................................89
Table 1.........................................................................................................................................100
 10

List of Appendices

Appendix A. Needs Tool: Focus Group Interview Questions.....................................................125

Appendix B. Evaluation Tool 1: Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest Questions..............................127
Appendix C. Evaluation Tools: Competency Test Questions.....................................................131
Appendix D. Evaluation Tools: Module Evaluation Questions..................................................143
Appendix E. Intervention Tools: Consent Document for Participants........................................148
Appendix F. Evaluation Tools: Document with Project Link for Participants............................151
 11

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1.0 Introduction

1.1.1. ADA Noncompliance: An Instructional Problem

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance has grown in significance as the

popularity of online learning continues to intensify in the post-pandemic era. The ADA, a 33-

year-old act, prohibits disability discrimination in public, academic and corporate environments

like Stockton University, as well as governmental services. For this study, compliance was

defined as adhering to the ADA guidelines pertaining to accommodating online students.

Over the past five years, noncompliance has been illustrated to contribute to accessibility

issues in both online academic courses and related resources (Bielefield et al., 2021; AAAtraq,

2022). Furthermore, noncompliance often decreases the appeal of higher-education institutions

by reducing their readability-based searchability scores, as shown by King Saud University’s

study (2021). As the university’s Ismail et al. explained, readability was diminished if learners

struggled with comprehending the content and grammatical structure of a web resource.

Subsequently, this led to reduced user engagement and resource recommendations, which, in

turn, caused search engines to rank the web resource lower. As a result, this reduced

searchability caused users to struggle to access it.

Moreover, inaccessible online courses weaken academic performance, as indicated in The

Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability’s study (2021). In it, Beaulieu et al. found

that accessible courses increased disabled and abled (also known as non-disabled) students’

performance by 1.7-3.05%.

Regarding these findings, it was concerning that 91% (Bielefield et al., 2020) and 96%

(AAAtraq, 2022) of higher-education institutions’ academic resource websites were

 12

noncompliant with the ADA. In addition, it was also worrying that Inside Higher Ed (2020)

reported that 75% of higher-education teachers across over 20 institutions lacked ADA

compliance training.

1.1.2. The Intervention Fostering Accessibility

To address these issues, this study sought to develop an online instructional intervention

aimed at tackling a major point of improvement for Stockton University: awareness.

Awareness, as mentioned by the Cambridge English Dictionary, is “knowledge that

something exists, or understanding of a situation or subject at the present time based on

information or experience” (Cambridge English Dictionary, n.d.).

Regarding awareness, there was a significant opportunity to expand instructional

resources concentrated on ADA compliance and ongoing improvement, particularly through

faculty and student evaluations. Potential focus areas included the benefits of online course

accessibility and ADA compliance as well as enhancing awareness of assistive technology,

campus resources, and procedures that could be utilized to resolve online course accessibility

issues.

1.1.3. Research Questions

This research aimed to answer the following questions:

1. To what extent will the online simulation-based learning modules improve knowledge related to

discerning the types of disabilities that learners have?

2. To what extent will the online simulation-based, ADA-compliant learning modules improve

Stockton faculty’s competence in choosing the optimal intervention for online course

inaccessibility issues?
 13

3. To what extent will the online simulation-based, ADA-compliant learning modules improve

Stockton faculty members’ attitudes related to making online courses ADA compliant?

To explore and define the optimal intervention, interviews and a comprehensive

literature review were conducted. The proposed solution that emerged from both

procedures was a series of simulation-based online modules to be constructed on Adobe

Captivate. These modules were planned to educate Stockton faculty on the significance,

responsibilities, and best practices associated with online course accessibility. The best

practices for helping e-learners under 5 main disability umbrellas taught in the

simulation-based sections were lodged in between two interactive learning sections.

These interactive learning sections described the responsibilities, and most crucially, the

significance of ensuring online courses were accessible for all learners. The modules

adhered to the ADA and other online course accessibility standards to be a prime

example of what learners should follow.

1.2.0. Needs Analysis

1.2.1. Needs Assessment Purpose

The purpose of this capstone needs assessment was to gain a comprehensive

understanding of the accessibility challenges encountered by Stockton students participating in

online courses as well as the faculty members facilitating them. This inquiry aimed to identify

the accessibility challenges as well as knowledge and skill gaps related to provisioning ADA

compliant online courses. Additionally, the interviews sought to uncover misconceptions and

biases that hindered the full adoption of online course accessibility standards, thus impeding

equitable access for all students. These interviews’ insights gained aided in fostering a systematic
 14

intervention meant to address and eliminate accessibility barriers in a manner that resonated with

all stakeholders.

1.2.2. Methods & Key Stakeholders

Textual and online video conference interviews were conducted with key Stockton

stakeholders who were vital in ensuring accessibility and quality education. These key

stakeholders included:

1. Members of Stockton’s Learning Access Program (LAP) who facilitated equal access

to academic (Learning Access Program, n.d.-a, n.d.-b; Stockton University, 2023) and

extracurricular activities (Learning Access Program, n.d.-c) for learners with disabilities.

2. Members of the Center of Teaching and Learning Design (CTLD) who were

dedicated to enhancing pedagogical approaches (CTLD, n.d.-d, n.d.-e) and providing

professional development as well as resources for faculty (CTLD, n.d.-f, n.d.-g). These

included resources related to ADA compliance and accessibility standards (CTLD, n.d-h,

n.d-I, n.d.-j, n.d-k, n.d-l; Stockton University, 2022).

3. Members of Stockton’s School of Education, specialized in teaching best practices for

various education levels, including K-12 (Stockton’s School of Education, n.d.-m, n.d.-

n), higher-education, corporate training, (Stockton’s School of Education, n.d-o), and

youth programs (Stockton’s School of Education, n.d.-p; Stockton University, 2023).

1.2.2.1. Interview Questions.

The interviews explored various aspects related to accessibility and ADA compliance at Stockton

University. Their questions covered topics such as accessibility complaints from students and

faculty (Questions One and Two), faculty’s misconceptions about ADA-compliant online

courses (Question Three), and suggestions for educating faculty members about ADA
 15

compliance (Questions Four-Seven). The complete list of questions can be found in Appendix A.

Interviewees were encouraged to respond to questions at their discretion, which ensured an open

and candid discussion.

1.2.2.2. Participant’s Representation.

Participants included the following:

1. Linda Knowles (pseudonym) from CTLD, who represented a leadership perspective on

enhancing teaching practices and accessible learning.

2. LAP was the most represented group, with Max Johnson, who was its director, Janet

Smith, who was a program assistant, and Zinnia Tucker as well as Bertha Eich, who

were program coordinators for two different groups of LAP’s programs.

3. Stockton’s School of Education was represented by Deborah Alston, who was the

school’s director, and Alisha Sen¸who was a School of Education faculty member.

These participants offered a comprehensive exploration of accessibility and ADA compliance

across multiple Stockton departments.

1.2.3. Results

Participants’ responses varied among the represented groups. Linda and Alisha provided

full responses for all questions. Deborah responded to faculty misconceptions and part of the

instructional intervention questions, but not to student and faculty complaints. LAP’s

representatives responded to questions about student complaints and faculty misconceptions, but

not all instructional intervention questions. Therefore, this diverse range of responses provided a

comprehensive view of the issues under investigation.

1.2.3.1. Student Complaints.

 16

Responses to the question about students’ common accessibility complaints varied among the

represented groups.

1. Deborah’s Perspective: Deborah noted that Stockton students often reported

accessibility complaints to LAP as well as the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, which

addressed discrimination cases (Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2023), developed

inclusive campus policies, offered educational programs (Office of Diversity and

Inclusion, 2023), maintained an inclusivity newsletter (Office of Diversity and Inclusion,

2023), and conducted annual diversity and inclusion surveys (Office of Diversity and

Inclusion, 2023).

2. Linda’s Input: Linda cited several common accessibility complaints from students,

including issues with text-based course materials, inaccessible published materials,

course navigation difficulties, and problems with inaccessible course media. She also

highlighted the psychological impact on learners, as they were nervous and self-

conscious about standing out as a struggling student after discussing their accessibility

needs.

3. Alisha’s Insights: Alisha identified additional student complaints related to accessibility,

including a lack of closed-captioned videos and audio, font issues that made textual

course materials illegible, accessibility challenges for students with low vision, and the

need for comprehensive alt-text descriptions. Moreover, she noticed challenges in

connecting with faculty members about their needs, underutilized note-taking features,

and audio problems during course meetings.

 17

4. LAP Representatives’ Thoughts: LAP’s representatives mentioned common student

accessibility complaints, such as difficulties with multiple platforms, poorly organized

learning management systems, and unreadable materials for screen readers.

In summary, the key student accessibility complaints centered on issues with course materials,

navigation, media, and communication. Students reported struggling with text legibility,

accessing videos/audio content, navigating complex course platforms, and connecting with

faculty about their needs. Other challenges noted the need for alt-text descriptions, closed

captioning, and assistive technology compatibility.

1.2.3.2. Faculty Complaints.

1. Focus group members provided diverse perspectives on faculty members’ complaints and

concerns regarding online course accessibility:

2. Deborah’s Perspective: Deborah noted that faculty members often prioritized

accommodating students over complaining about accessibility challenges. She

emphasized that CTLD’s successful collaboration with LAP helped faculty members stay

up to date with online course accessibility standards. Notably, she highlighted

Blackboard Ally’s positive role in improving online course accessibility.

3. Alisha’s Viewpoint: Alisha suggested that some faculty members may have found

creating accessible materials time-consuming and challenging. This was since it affected

their technical skill sets as well as schedules, as CTLD’s professional development

opportunities often conflicted with said schedules.

4. LAP Representatives: LAP representatives echoed Deborah’s perspective, directing

faculty complaints to CTLD for resolution. They also emphasized CTLD’s key role in

ensuring online courses’ accessibility through resources like Blackboard Ally.

 18

Overall, the key consensus on faculty members’ concerns regarding online course

accessibility was that faculty’s concerns were currently being mitigated by Stockton’s

departments as well as accessibility tools. Only Alisha mentioned that faculty members were

struggling with the process of creating accessible materials to be time-and-resource consuming.

1.2.3.3. Misconceptions Hindering the Creation of Accessible Online Courses.

Focus group member responses revealed key themes related to misconceptions that hindered

faculty members from fully engaging in creating accessible online courses.

1. Responsibility Misconceptions: Both LAP’s representatives and Linda highlighted the

misconception that faculty members did not view themselves as primarily responsible for

creating accessible online courses. Linda noted that faculty members often assumed that

Stockton’s departments like LAP, CTLD, and Information Technology Services (ITS)

were responsible for accessibility. She also mentioned that others believed that they were

only responsible for accessibility if a formally documented, disabled student from LAP

enrolled in their course. LAP’s representatives emphasized faculty members’

unawareness of their responsibility for accessibility.

2. Content Concerns: Another theme emerged between Alisha and Linda. Both mentioned

faculty members’ fears that prioritizing accessibility might “water down the content”,

limiting learning opportunities in their courses. Alisha also highlighted that faculty’s

focus on their course content’s inclusion within the course’ timeframe, not their course’s

transmissibility and comprehensibility, hampered the creation of accessible courses.

3. Other Mentioned Misconceptions: Linda presented various misconceptions that

influenced faculty members, including the belief that creating accessible courses was

time-consuming, and that quickly implementing an accessibility checker, or a “modern

 19

tool” ensured automatic accessibility. She also described how some assumed that if

course materials worked with accessibility tools like screen readers, no further

adjustments were needed. Finally, she noted that many faculty members were unaware of

the legal and ethical reasons for accessibility.

4. Deborah’s View: Deborah asserted that faculty members complied with accessibility

standards when given the proper support by Stockton’s departments.

To summarize, the main misconceptions that hindered faculty members from fully engaging

in accessible online course creation related to two concepts: responsibility and time.

Responsibility wise, faculty members felt that they either were not primarily responsible for

making online courses accessible at all or unless formally documented learners with disabilities

were in their courses, and some faculty members even did not know their responsibilities at all.

Regarding time, faculty members either felt that online course accessibility was time-consuming

to implement or was not necessary to take time for after accessibility checkers approved their

course materials.

1.2.3.4. Intervention Suggestions.

Focus group members shared several important concepts for the instructional intervention, which

covered diverse perspectives and key themes:

1. Faculty Responsibilities and First-Person Narrative: LAP’s representatives

highlighted the significance of faculty members understanding their role in making online

courses accessible. Alisha recommended conveying these responsibilities using a first-

person narrative. She suggested that faculty members should experience the challenges

faced by their disabled students via simulation-based learning and engage with students’

testimonies to gain a deeper understanding of inaccessibility’s impact on learning.

 20

2. Accessible Course Materials: Both LAP’s representatives and Alisha agreed that the

intervention should focus on creating accessible course materials. Alisha suggested

providing concrete activities and resources to help faculty members clearly understand

the steps required to make materials accessible.

3. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Principles: Representatives from Stockton’s

School of Education stressed the importance of implementing Universal Design for

Learning (UDL) principles. Deborah referenced CAST as an organization that could offer

valuable resources, expertise, and guidance for implementing these learning principles

(CAST, 2022). Alisha highlighted the benefits of combining accessibility with universal

design for all learners, using an example of elevators, which benefited those in

wheelchairs and those who preferred not to climb numerous flights of stairs.

4. Stockton Resources: LAP’s representatives and Deborah suggested discussing how

resources from departments like CTLD and LAP could help faculty members ensure their

online courses’ structures, materials, accommodations, and other facilities were

accessible.

5. Collaboration and Awareness: Alisha encouraged collaborative efforts to enhance

course accessibility and discussed the historical context of accessibility standards like

ADA, WCAG, and Section 508. They also suggested infusing humor into the

intervention to raise awareness about course inaccessibility’s detrimental effects on

learners.

Overall, three key themes emerged from the focus group's suggestions for the instructional

intervention. There was consensus on focusing on faculty responsibilities and accessible course

materials, conveying information through first-hand narratives and simulations. Additionally,

 21

incorporating UDL principles, leveraging Stockton resources, raising awareness, and taking a

collaborative approach were highlighted as important components. The overarching goal was to

build faculty capabilities and motivation for ensuring accessible online course design through an

engaging and interactive intervention.

1.2.3.5. Interactive Content versus Textual Content’s Effectiveness.

All focus group participants preferred interactive content over fully textual materials for its

engagement and inclusivity.

1. Interactivity for Engagement: LAP’s representatives and Deborah emphasized the

value of creating an interactive intervention to capture individuals’ attention more

effectively than text-based instruction.

2. Inclusivity and Learning Styles: Both School of Education representatives noted that an

interactive intervention conveyed the message that online course accessibility benefits all

learners and catered to a wider variety of learning styles more, as Alisha stated, “no one’s

consuming pure information, even without a disability.”

3. Empirical Evidence: Linda pointed out, with the support of empirical evidence, that

interactive instruction with hands-on, well-structured, and practical experiences alongside

feedback has been scientifically proven to be the most effective method.

Overall, all focus group members noted that interactive instruction with hands-on learning

was a scientifically and experience-based better method to discuss online course accessibility

than pure text.

1.2.3.6. Making The Intervention Itself Navigable and Accessible.

Various suggestions were made to enhance the intervention’s navigability and accessibility for

faculty members:
 22

1. Teaching Approach: LAP’s representatives suggested that CTLD should teach the

instruction. Alisha suggested to have clear, step-by-step instructions for completing the

intervention’s activities, address faculty members’ specific challenges when creating

accessible courses, encourage faculty to actively work on making their online courses

accessible, and promote the usage of accessible materials within the intervention itself.

2. Alignment with Accessibility Standards: Linda recommended aligning the intervention

with online accessibility standards, such as the ADA, Section 508, and the Web Content

Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). Specifically, she suggested focusing on the

intervention’s multimedia as well as interactive elements for readability on devices,

course materials (especially PDF’s), assessments, and user-friendliness on all

technological devices. Reviewing accessibility checker scores, keyboard navigability, and

captions was also mentioned.

3. Feedback and Collaboration: Linda and Deborah recommended consulting LAP and

CTLD, as well as colleagues, subject-matter-experts, and faculty members to gain

feedback and insights during the development process. This, as Deborah explained,

would ensure the intervention was effective and addressed faculty members’ needs.

Overall, focus group members provided valuable input on ensuring accessibility within the

intervention itself. Having CTLD teach the instruction as well as aligning it with ADA and

WCAG standards were advised. Additionally, weaving in step-by-step guidance, addressing

specific faculty challenges, promoting active learning, and using accessible materials were

suggested to help increase engagement. Finally, gathering ongoing feedback from stakeholders

and subject matter experts was noted as crucial for creating an effective intervention that truly

met faculty needs.

 23

1.2.3.7. Additional Suggestions.

Linda and Alisha shared additional suggestions, addressing faculty’s negative attitudes

and biases regarding accessible online courses. Alisha explained that real-life narratives and

contextual examples made of interviews could help challenge these biases. Moreover, she

restated the importance of conveying that accessible, online courses benefit all learners, as they

enhance content engagement and insights while facilitating equal learning opportunities.

1.2.4. Discussion of Focus Group Results

The interviews with LAP, CTLD, and the School of Education representatives provided

valuable insights into Stockton University’s multifaceted challenges regarding online course

accessibility. Primarily, the findings revealed a wide range of accessibility barriers, faculty

misconceptions, and the need for training. However, the interviews also highlighted

opportunities for constructive solutions. All three groups emphasized the value of creating an

engaging, interactive intervention over a textual one. Moreover, they underscored the importance

of having the intervention focused on building faculty skills as well as knowledge in accessible

course design. The suggested topics included legal and ethical accessibility responsibilities,

creating accessible materials by leveraging universal design principles, and fostering an

accessibility-focused college culture.

Based on identified areas for improvement in ADA compliance and online course

accessibility among Stockton faculty, an experiential, simulation-based online intervention was

developed. This intervention provided step-by-step instructions and immersive simulations

portraying challenges faced by students under five disability umbrellas: learning, psychiatric,

chronic, communication, and sensory disabilities. Following each simulation, participants

 24

selected optimal interventions and engaged in reflection. Finally, the intervention encouraged

both individualized and collaborative approaches to address accessibility challenges effectively.

1.3.0. Goals and Objectives of the Capstone Project

Goals.

The goals of my capstone project were that (1) Stockton faculty’s competence in creating

ADA compliant content would increase due to the implementation of digital learning modules,

with simulations of students with disabilities navigating their courses as well as actually

choosing what interventions will be best for these simulated students, and (2) faculty members’

attitudes towards creating ADA compliant content would improve due to an increased level of

motivation and relatability to the cause created by the first-person narratives woven into the

modules.

Objectives.

Through the implementation of the instructional interventions, faculty members will be

able to:

1. Demonstrate the ability to discern their ethical as well as legal responsibilities to make their

online courses ADA compliant.

2. Differentiate between the characteristics, learning challenges, and impacts of major disability

categories.

3. Demonstrate the ability to choose the most optimal interventions for students with disabilities’

online course struggles.

Research Questions.
 25

1. To what extent will the online simulation-based, ADA-compliant learning modules improve

Stockton faculty’s competence in choosing the optimal intervention for online course

inaccessibility issues?

2. To what extent will the online simulation-based, ADA-compliant learning modules improve

Stockton faculty members’ attitudes related to making online courses ADA compliant?

3. To what extent will the online simulation-based learning modules improve knowledge

related to discerning the types of disabilities that learners have?

 26

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Prelude to Introduction

To summarize, Chapter 1 introduced the crucial concern of ADA noncompliance and

inaccessibility within online courses in higher education. Through a comprehensive needs

analysis, key points of improvement were identified regarding Stockton faculty’s knowledge,

skills, and attitudes for designing accessible online content. This analysis also revealed

opportunities to address these gaps via an engaging, simulation-based online learning

intervention.

Chapter 2 further establishes the previously discussed detrimental impacts of inaccessible

online learning environments on faculty and students, as well as the legal and financial status of

the institutions they represent. Furthermore, it analyzes the unique benefits of utilizing

simulations to foster engaging, inclusive, and accessible learning opportunities. Therefore, this

literature review’s insights helped me validate the reasonings as well as methods behind devising

the intervention described in Chapter 1.

2.1.0. Introduction

Over the past decade, the topic of web accessibility has grown in importance and

discussion. Web accessibility, as described by the Web Accessibility Initiative, is making

websites easier to “perceive, understand, navigate…interact…(and) contribute to the web.” (Web

Accessibility Initiative [WAI], March 2022). Accessibility should be considered for online

courses because, as discussed in this literature review, it fosters detrimental academic and other

types of effects on all higher-education members, not just their disabled students. Sadly, despite

this, it is still not widely used by the public.

 27

This may be because many of the accessibility standards are uncommon knowledge. The

ADA, or the Americans with Disabilities Act, prohibits discrimination against those with

disabilities in “employers, state and local governments, businesses that are open to the public,

commercial facilities, transportation providers, and telecommunication companies” (ADA.gov,

n.d.). Surprisingly, few studies cover ADA compliance with web courses. As Smith et.al in

Insider Higher Ed (2020) alluded, this can be because 75% of American and Canadian higher-

education teachers have not received ADA training, and accessibility is not a prioritized issue for

them. This prioritization deficit affecting educators’ training and practice may be affecting K-12

institutions, as displayed by Microsoft’s 2022 survey. 70% of the 1000, surveyed K-12 teachers

felt the resource gap was too large to accommodate disabled learners. Unfortunately, even

though 84% feel accessibility is essential for education equity and 70% of participants’ schools

are implementing more post-COVID (Microsoft EDU, May 2022), this issue is still prevalent.

LaRon A. Scott’s focus group, observation, and interview study of 9 special education teachers’

attitudes with accessibility-fostering universal design for learning (UDL) frameworks also

echoed this concern. Scott (2018) argued that educators’ abilities to design accessible online

courses are too strong by other educators and administrators not prioritizing it, an absence of

training, and a lack of UDL knowledge from both new and current educators.

Additionally, higher-education institutions’ relationship with Section 508 is also not well

documented in research. Section 508 is an act that prohibits discrimination of disabled students

in institutions that are federally funded by the Department of Education, such as public-school

districts, higher-education institutions, and more (Department of Education,2023). Only

Bielefield et al.’s evaluation of almost 100 higher-education institutions’ library homepage

accessibility was found. In their paper, they described how with their web-accessibility checker,
 28

WAVE, they discovered that over 75% of these websites are Section 508 noncompliant

(Bielefield,2021). Thus, this proves the importance of this topic needing to be more well-

researched.

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, or WCAG, a web-specific accessibility

standard focusing on how to make website content, structure, presentation, and accessibility

evaluation tools more accessible (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, 2023), is more studied

in higher-education research regarding online accessibility. However, it still falls short. This is

since there are more articles that explain how accessibility standards related to WCAG are

followed or not on higher-education institutions’ websites (Wilkens et al, 2021) support services

(Edwards et al., 2022), course tools (Koob et al., 2022, Ronghuai et al., 2020, and Spyridonis &

Daylamani-Zad, 2021). However, it was much more difficult, both on Google Scholar and in my

university’s library to uncover studies describing how WCAG’s accessibility standards affect

how the institutions’ online courses function as a whole. Iniesto et al.’s A Case Study to Explore

a UDL Evaluation Framework Based on MOOCs as well as Ferati & Bathijar’s Accessibility in

Web Development Courses: A Case Study are examples of those I discovered.

This literature review will not only provide a justification for why web accessibility is

important, but also why the methods of scenario and simulation-based learning are being utilized

as the frameworks that my online module will be centered around.

2.2.0. The Importance of ADA Compliant Web Accessibility

2.2.1. Effects on Higher-Education Institutions

2.2.1.1. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects an Institution’s Reputation.

As previously mentioned, web inaccessibility in higher education institutions’ course

resources creates far-reaching consequences for the entire higher education system.
 29

Firstly, it damages these institution’s courses’ reputation in various ways.

To begin with, inaccessible web course resources erode learners’ confidence in their

teachers. Sofianidis et al.’s (2021) online survey, which involved over 320 secondary education

students in Cyprus, highlighted their emerging concerns about COVID-19’s enforced shift to e-

learning. The survey revealed that learners struggled with web resources that did not account for

disparities in software, internet, or digital resource access that impacted students from all

backgrounds (Sofianidis et al., 2021). Moreover, it unveiled that teachers’ general absence of

preparedness as well as lack of understanding of how to make their courses transmissible and

accessible for all online learners greatly affected learners’ perceptions on teachers. This is since

the general lack of preparedness as well as understanding hindered their ability to be flexible,

experienced, interactive, engaging and, as some students put it, “cooperative” and “humane”

(Sofianidis et al., 2021). Therefore, to maintain a competitive edge in the current, saturated

learning market, it is essential that teachers can address resource and knowledge inequities that

affect accessibility.

Moreover, web course resource inaccessibility diminishes learners’ enthusiasm for

enrolling in online courses. As evidenced in the Sofianidis et al.’s survey (2021), by January

2021, 75% of students grew to prefer in-person courses over online courses, highlighting their

dissatisfaction with e-learning’s perceived ineffectiveness (Sofianidis et al., 2021). Butnaru et

al.’s survey of over 780, randomly selected, Romanian higher-education and high school

students added weight to this point. Firstly, students who benefitted from web accessibility were

more likely to believe online learning was effective compared to learners who were negatively

affected by internet and web resource inequity (Butnaru et al., 2021). Secondly, the study

revealed that the level of knowledge teachers possessed regarding e-learning tools and methods
 30

directly impacted students’ perceived value of e-learning (Butnaru et al., 2021). Lastly, the study

demonstrated that the learners who preferred in-person learning were more likely to perceive

online learning as ineffective. Therefore, their desire to take in-person courses was increased

compared to other learners that did not (Butnaru et al., 2021). Consequently, for higher-

education institutions interested in implementing online courses, ensuring that their teachers are

well-prepared is crucial to overcoming the stigma e-learning has.

Similarly, Bazan-Ramirez et al.’s (2023) questionnaire study, Perception of Peruvian

Students Studying in Biological Sciences about the Advantages of Virtual Classes during the

COVID-19 Pandemic, also underscores the impact of accessibility on reputation. In this study,

over 330 Peruvian university students expressed their agreement with statements across four

categories, including how well their teachers utilized web resources, the accessibility of these

web resources, their experiences with practicing concepts virtually, and their feelings about

online course formats overall. They discovered that while accessibility did not inhibit students’

positive perceptions of online learning, teachers’ ability to use technology in a way that

accounted students’ inequitable digital tool access as well as their knowledge of said tools

significantly affected learners’ views of the e-learning course they took (Bazan-Ramirez et al.,

2023). Interestingly, teachers’ competence in implementing digital tools into their courses was

also linked to students perceiving their online courses as inaccessible. Thus, balancing both

digital knowledge extremes is essential to ensure course accessibility and, more importantly,

student engagement.

Furthermore, web inaccessibility also erodes learners’ comfort when engaging in online

courses. This is exhibited by Dhingra et al.’s (2021) questionnaire study, which aimed to

understand how the motivations of almost 500 Indian medical undergraduates were influenced
 31

by March to November 2020’s transition to online learning. Their study revealed several factors

that influenced motivation to take courses. They included inaccessible web resources (21.9%),

not considering digital resource inequity’s effect on submitting assignments (29.5%), and a lack

of engagement in online lectures (68.1% found them poor, and 58.1% thought these lectures

were easy to skip) (Dhingra et al., 2021). Subsequently, 36.2% of students thought they were

uncomfortable taking online classes at home and 43.9% believed that online courses should not

be implemented into regular classrooms (Dhingra et al., 2021). Therefore, this study highlighted

the importance of addressing web accessibility of all types, including internet access influenced

by a region’s socioeconomic status and the ability to utilize web resources effectively. If not

dealt with, it will negatively impact students’ willingness to enroll in online courses as well as

impede public desire to integrate online learning into broader academic infrastructures.

2.2.1.2. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects an Institution’s Course Legality.

Web inaccessibility’s repercussions extend beyond reputation, posing a significant threat

to the legal standing of the academic web resources being offered. As shown by the following

articles, these challenges have the potential to culminate in lawsuits against higher-education

institutions.

Sayfarth Shaw LLP’s article titled Plaintiffs Set a New Record for Website Accessibility

Lawsuit Filings in 2022 exemplified this. In this article, the authors analyzed keywords from

Courthouse News Services’ data pertaining to federal web inaccessibility cases in 2022 (Launey

& Vu, 2023). Their analysis revealed an astonishing 21% increase in litigations from 2021 to

2022, marking an astounding almost 300% increase over the past five years (Launey & Vu,

2023). Consequently, this report served as a stark reminder of the augmented legal risk
 32

associated with ADA noncompliance, particularly when states like New York equip plaintiffs

with legal tools for enforcement.

AAAtraq’s Higher Education Report on ADA compliance (digital inclusion), reinforced

this growing concern. Their study encompassed over 2000 American higher-education website

homepages from 2018-2022, assessing the risk of attracting ADA noncompliance lawsuits

(AAAtraq,2022). Assessing the factors of form labels, link text, and alt text for website sections

aimed to help disabled users’ navigation, websites were classified categories of low to very-high

risk. Shockingly, the results disclosed that a considerable 96% of websites were noncompliant

with ADA guidelines (AAAtraq,2022). The majority fell under the high-risk (48%) and medium-

risk (35%) categories (AAAtraq, 2022). This article, therefore, emphasized the great need for

upholding online ADA compliance standards for both legal and procedural reasons.

Finally, Accessibility.com’s 2022 Website Accessibility Lawsuit Recap added to the

evidence of web inaccessibility’s effect on litigation risk. Based on their review of over 1,100

court documents, they predicted a 200% surge in companies receiving multiple web-

accessibility-related lawsuits in the next few years (Accessibility.com, 2022). Hence, this was

indicative of what will occur if higher-education institutions do not grow their urgency to address

web inaccessibility in all infrastructural facets comprehensively as well as efficiently.

2.2.1.3. How Web Course Resource Inaccessibility Affects a Higher-Education

Institution’s Finances.

Moreover, web resource inaccessibility covers the financial domain as well. According to

Accenture’s study titled Getting to Equal: The Disability Inclusion Advantage, institutions with

inaccessible web resources were more likely to have financial setbacks. This study scrutinized

140 American companies that were focused on their efforts to incorporate best practices for
 33

disability inclusion from 2015-2018 by using the Disability Equity Index (DEI). They discovered

that the companies with DEI scores between 80-100 had 28% more revenue, doubled their

income, doubled their shareholder count, and registered 30% more profits when compared to

other companies in their sectors (Accenture, 2022). Moreover, companies that had the highest

DEI score improvements observed a fourfold increase in shareholder count (Accenture,2022).

Consequently, this underscored the positive correlation between accessible infrastructures,

including online resources, and financial prosperity that can draw new consumers as well as

investors to companies.

Zendesk’s 2021 Customer Experience Trends Report supported these economic

advantages associated with accessible web resources. Their team divulged that around 55% of

consumers actively sought diversity, equity, and inclusion within companies they chose to invest,

and 63% were eager to invest in companies that committed to, as Zendesk put it, “social

responsibility” (Zendesk, 2021). These consumer preferences indicated that companies adhering

to accessible web resources and inclusive practices attract and retain consumers, fostering

consumer loyalty that positively influences their financial standing.

2.2.2. How Web Resource Inaccessibility Affects Students

Finally, inaccessibility in online courses significantly hampers learners’ academic

performance via various channels.

Fabian et.al reinforced this in their online survey study that involved nearly 180

undergraduate computing students. Their survey investigated how perceived learning style

differences and the ability to interact with teachers and peers impacted their engagement and

study skills. Its results emphasized the importance of social accessibility in fostering

engagement, as easier access to faculty members and peers produced reduced transactional
 34

distance and increased engagement (Fabian et al., 2022). Moreover, they also discovered that the

more adapt learners were at e-learning, the more likely their study skills would improve for the

course (Fabian et al., 2022). Additionally, learners adept at e-learning tended to improve their

study skills. In addition, reduced transactional distance was shown to enhance students’

perceptions of online learning, which generated more of their participation in learning activities

(Fabian et al., 2022). As a result, this study proved the importance of ensuring that online course

interactivity is accessible for all learners to maintain engagement and participation.

Lastly, this is further upheld by Kumar et al.’s questionnaire study that involved 690

freshmen medical and dental students. It delved into students’ experiences of both e-learning’s

blended and self-directed forms by examining what did they observe the strengths, opposites,

aspirations, and barriers associated with online learning to be (Kumar et al., 2023). Accessibility,

along with ease of knowledge transmission, emerged as the two most frequently mentioned

benefits (Kumar et al., 2023). Learners expressed aspirations to remove barriers to engagement

and learning overall that comes with e-learning (Kumar et. Al., 2023). They also aspired to

enhance the opportunities as well as strengths that online learning offered, with accessibility

playing a pivotal role in this context. Finally, the study further highlighted accessibility’s crucial

role as it mentioned how learners discussed how e-learning physically strained them, and, in the

case of internet inequity, hindered them from fully engaging (Kumar et al., 2023).

Web resource inaccessibility in online courses also effects learners’ sense of belonging

and social connections, as exhibited by Luan et al.’s structural equation modeling study of 615

Chinese English-foreign-language (EFL) university students during COVID-19. This research

emphasized the role of accessibility in nurturing relationships between learners and teachers as
 35

well as learners and peers. This is since as social accessibility increased, students’ academic and

mental engagement levels were enhanced (Luan et al., 2020).

Additionally, web inaccessibility directly impacts academic performance, as

demonstrated by Catherine Beaulieu et al.'s Does Inclusive Teaching Impact College Adjustment

and Performance for Students with or Without Disabilities? This online questionnaire study

involved over 1,400 students, with 40% identifying as disabled, during their first terms in

Quebec’s colleges (Beaulieu et al, 2022). Participants were asked to evaluate teachers’ inclusive

practices regarding course materials, modifications, lectures, assessments, and classrooms

(Beaulieu et al, 2022). The results supported by statistical analysis revealed that regardless of

disability status, both disabled and abled students’ academic performance rose between 1.7-

3.5%, contingent upon the intervention’s nature (Beaulieu et al, 2022). Thus, this underscored

accessibility’s critical role in generating a learning environment that enhances academic

achievements for all students.

2.3.0. Behind the Decision of Using Simulation-Based Learning

2.3.1. Characteristics of Simulation-Based Learning

Simulation Based Learning as defined by Queen’s University’s Simulation-based

Experiential Learning Faculty Toolkit, is “...a form of experiential learning that provides learners

with a real-worldlike opportunity to develop and practice their knowledge and skills but in a

simulated environment” (Queen’s University, 2021). As the definition alluded, this pedagogical

approach aligns with experiential learning According to the same guide, experiential learning is

“...an interdisciplinary educational philosophy and practice that promotes academic learning

outcomes, student career development, connections within/to workplace settings, and critical

thinking.” (Queen’s University, 2021).

 36

According to Roy (2022) and Chernikova et al. (2020), there are many characteristics of

simulation-based learning. Firstly, simulation-based learning requires creating a setting that is

either 100% or somewhat realistic, depending on the topic (Chernikova et al., 2020). Secondly,

simulation-based learning either has fully or a mix of virtual and physical elements (Chernikova

et al., 2020). Thirdly, simulation-based learning includes scenarios implemented into the

simulation that are related to the tasks being taught (Chernikova et al., 2020 and Roy, 2022).

They require problem solving, critical thinking, communication, technical, and, in some cases,

collaboration-based skills in order to be resolved with the resources and time given (Chernikova

et al., 2020). Moreover, these scenarios can be simplified versions of the actual situation or not

(Chernikova et.al, 2020 and Roy, 2022). In addition, simulation-learning includes having

learners play a particular role(s) related to the topic being taught (Roy, 2022 and Chernikova et

al., 2020). Moreover, simulation-based learning includes the progress that learners make while

doing the simulation being guided as well as open-ended (Roy, 2022). Finally, it includes periods

of written, verbal or other types of reflection on the topics being taught (Roy, 2022).

2.4.0. Benefits of Simulation-Based Learning

2.4.1. Simulation-Based Learning and Satisfaction

Simulation-based learning has been proven to positively impact learners via numerous,

significant ways, such as their satisfaction. Widiasih et al.’s study that involved 70 and 69

nursing students divided into two groups: a control group that received traditional nursing

instruction, and an intervention group that learned nursing skills via a simulation lab called

VNursLab, expressed this (Widiasih et al., 2022). The study’s results revealed that the

intervention group that experienced simulation-based learning reported higher satisfaction levels

than the control group (Widiasih et al., 2022). In addition, the intervention group exhibited
 37

higher confidence levels (Widiasih et al., 2022). Therefore, this study’s results linked simulation-

based learning’s ability to produce satisfied learners engaged in learning to their ability to

become more confident in their skills, which effectively proves simulation-based learning aids

crucial aspects of academic achievement.

2.4.2. Simulation-Based Learning and Knowledge Acquisition

Furthermore, simulation-based learning has been exhibited by various studies to enhance

learners’ knowledge acquisition abilities, especially when complex concepts are being

considered. Afthinos et al.’s serious game study evaluated how their invented serious-learning

game that incorporated simulation-based learning, “Top Eleven,” impacted students’ academic

trajectories after it was played (Afthinos et al., 2022). Amazingly, 98% of the participants agreed

that the serious game furthered their understanding of the sports management concepts integrated

into the game. Moreover, two-thirds of the students reported gaining a “great” to “very great”

amount of knowledge about soccer team sports management via the game (Afthinos et al., 2022).

Additionally, the game inspired almost 60% of participants to consider becoming a team

manager themselves (Afthinos et al., 2022). Previous studies demonstrated that simulation-based

learning improved knowledge acquisition of complex subjects like sports management, a benefit

which I hoped my use of simulation-based learning for my capstone project did corroborate.

Herron et al.’s (2019) study that compared the outcomes of two groups of nursing students

learning the same nursing knowledge in two different forms, one being a written case study and

the other being a visual-video simulation, displayed this also. The study aimed to measure how

engagement, knowledge, and confidence growth rates differed between the two groups (Herron

et al.,2019). Surprisingly, both groups reported an equal engagement and confidence level boost

after their lessons (Herron et al.,2019). Despite this, the visual-video simulation group displayed
 38

greater knowledge acquisition than the other group, as they answered questions correctly at a rate

of 0.19%-5.09% higher than them (Herron et al.,2019). These findings, therefore, underscored

the visual-video simulations’ value in promoting knowledge acquisition of complex concepts,

which helps enhance academic performance overall.

2.4.3. Simulation-Based Learning and Skill-Based Acquisition

In addition, simulation-based learning has also been exhibited to positively influence

skill-acquisition. Bohmann et al. (2022) had medical leaders participate in and then give their

own simulation-based stroke training. It focused on the insertion of medication via syringes and

catheter pipes to prevent stroke-causing blood clots. The study’s findings revealed that treatment

time of both types-needle insertion (5 minutes) and catheter pipe insertion (21 minutes)-reduced

significantly (Bohmann et al., 2022). Consequently, this study emphasized the effectiveness of

simulation-based training via an immersive, realistic, and engaging learning experience that

provided learners with the confidence and competence needed to prevent the complex health

issue of strokes more efficiently.

2.4.4. Simulation-Based Learning and Confidence

Finally, simulation-based learning has been shown to improve learners’ confidence, as

supported by Davitaze et al.’s (2022) pre and post instant messaging simulation learning study.

This assessed medical students’ confidence levels for aiding patients with adrenal conditions.

The analysis revealed a 36.4% confidence boost to complete cases that were simulated and

almost 30% confidence boost to complete unsimulated cases for the medical students that

learned via the simulation (Davitadze et al., 2022). Therefore, this showed simulation-based

learning’s strength in not just growing confidence, but skill-transfer as well. Thus, this proved

that simulation-based learning provides a safe environment that allows learners to make the
 39

mistakes they wish not to make once they encounter the concept’s related problems in the real-

world (Davitadze et al., 2022).

2.5.0. Literature Review Conclusion

Overall, this literature review underscored the critical importance of web accessibility in

higher education. It focused on the detrimental effects on institutions, students, and faculty when

online courses were not designed with accessibility in mind. This review has discussed the

limited coverage of ADA compliance, Section 508, and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

(WCAG). Furthermore, the review covered challenges faced by educators in prioritizing

accessibility.

This discussion also analyzed the far-reaching consequences of web inaccessibility on an

institution’s reputation, legal standing, and financial well-being. It also emphasized how web

inaccessibility directly impacted students’ academic performance, sense of belonging, and social

connections. Furthermore, the current escalating lawsuit risk further underlined the urgency for

higher-education institutions to address web accessibility comprehensively and efficiently.

To address these challenges, the review introduced simulation-based learning and how it

can be utilized as a framework for designing an accessible, online learning module. Simulation-

based learning, which is characterized by its virtual and physical elements, problem-solving

scenarios, role-playing, guided progression, and reflection woven into a realistic setting, emerged

as a pedagogical approach aligned with experiential learning principles. Simulation-based

learning’s benefits included increased satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, enhanced skill

development, and confidence for learners.

By integrating the benefits of simulation-based learning, the proposed framework aimed

to not only address accessibility issues, but also provide a positive and engaging learning
 40

experience. In addition, it did so while aligning with the goal to foster inclusive and accessible e-

learning environments for all students by ensuring the module’s design considered their diverse

needs and abilities.

 41

Chapter 3: Methods and Procedure Plan

Prelude to Introduction

Overall, Chapter 1 introduced the imperative issue of online courses in higher education

institutions not being ADA compliant as well as accessible. It was discovered that, via a

thorough focus group analysis, Stockton’s faculty members had various vital vulnerabilities in

knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to design accessible online content effectively. Moreover,

this analysis also uncovered potential prospects to combat these vulnerabilities via an engaging,

simulation-based, online learning intervention.

Chapter 2 corroborated Chapter 1’s examination of inaccessible online course creation

practices’ effects on Stockton’s faculty, students, and the institutions that they support’s financial

as well as legal statuses. Additionally, it reviewed simulation-based learning’s unique advantages

regarding the creation of engaging, equitable and inclusive learning environments. As a result,

this literature review’s insights validated my underlying motives and methods that led me to

designing the intervention described in Chapter 1.

Regarding Chapter 3, this section illustrates the learning, structural, and temporal design

mechanics of my simulation-based learning intervention. Regarding the learning design, several

queries about it will be fulfilled during this section. Primarily, they are the following: What

subjects were chosen to be mainly concentrated on? How were these subjects’ complexities

elaborated and emphasized upon? In terms of the structural design, how and why various aspects

of Adobe Captivate and SurveyMonkey-my primary instructional design tools-were utilized to

support as well as evaluate my research objectives is illustrated in this chapter. Finally, before

the chapter’s conclusion, chapter 3 shows the temporal guidelines that I, the capstone researcher,
 42

gave myself to ensure that the instructional project would be completed to the best of my ability.

In general, this chapter gifts readers with the last of the broad, methodical context needed to

comfortably transition to the more narrowly focused Chapters 4-Implementation and Evaluation-

and 5-Discussion and Conclusion.

3.1.0. The Implementation of Simulation-Based Learning

As stated in Chapter 2, the approach used for this section was simulation-based learning.

Simulation-based learning is, as described previously, "a form of experiential learning that

provides learners a real-world like opportunity to develop and practice their knowledge and

skills, but in a simulated environment" (Queen’s University, 2021). Its characteristics include a

partial to 100% realistic setting, implementation of some or all virtual elements, scenarios that

relate to subjects being taught, reflection sections, guided assistance, and role-play (Roy, 2022 &

Chernikova et al., 2020).

Particularly, I was thinking of utilizing Adobe Captivate’s template as well as simulation

tools to implement this approach into two sections. One section was focused on disability types’

caused challenges on online learning and the other concentrated on designing interventions for

students with each disability type.

3.1.1. Simulation Section 1: Disability Types and Web Course Accessibility

Each of the 5 Adobe Captivate simulations started with a description of the focused,

disability umbrella’s definition, potential challenges it could create for e-learners, examples of

disabilities under its umbrella, and crucial points to remember about approaching the act of

understanding learners with each disability type umbrella. Examples of each of these aspects

were elaborated upon in Figures 1,2,3, and 4 below.

 43

Figure 1

Example of Focused Disability Umbrella Definition on Adobe Captivate

Note: On slides like this one, learners viewed an evocative picture that represented a

student with each disability umbrella and scrolled to review the disability definitions. The slide

reads the following: “Chronic Disabilities, also known as chronic illnesses, are long-lasting

physical disabilities and health issues that persist over time, typically lasting months, to years, to

even lifetimes. They can affect students in several ways.”

Figure 2

Example of Potential E-Learning Challenges Slide on Adobe Captivate

 44

Note: On slides like this one, learners reviewed short, yet comprehensive descriptions of

each disability type umbrella’s e-learning challenges by scrolling. This example discusses, as the

title notes, “What are some ways disabilities affect e-learning?” by having text regarding the

following effects on e-learning: continuous/severe pain, cycles of flares and remissions, lack of

routines and schedules, increased probability of psychiatric illness, cognitive impairments, and

fatigue. Learners could review the information by, as mentioned in the instructions: “Scroll page

to see the content”.

Figure 3

Example of Potential E-Learning Challenges Slide on Adobe Captivate

 45

Note: On segments like these, learners scrolled as well as, if they were interested,

reviewed a series of links that described in detail examples of conditions that fell under each

disability umbrella.

Figure 4

Example of Crucial Point to Remember Slide on Adobe Captivate

 46

Note: During sections like these, learners scrolled to review a series of short sentences to

grasp important points about how to help students with conditions within each disability

umbrella. The text on this slide reads: “Chronic disabilities come with a wide range of effects

that include those outside the ones mentioned in this module. However, a crucial step for learners

with all chronic disabilities is to believe them when they talk about their condition because many

face dismissal of their symptoms as just “tiredness” or temporary pain that can be cured easily.”

Regarding the decision-making process of which umbrellas would be established, and

what conditions would fall under them, the types of disabilities were based on two factors: The

web accessibility standards’ discussion of disabilities and various sources on the topic of

disability types themselves (see References).

The disability types I established were:

 Learning Disabilities, which included conditions that affected an individual's ability to

acquire, process, and use information effectively to succeed academically, like dyslexia,

non-verbal learning disorder, and dyscalculia.

 Psychiatric Disabilities, which affected students’ mental and emotional health such as

anxiety, depression, PTSD, OCD, Bipolar Disorder, eating disorders, etc.;

 Chronic Disabilities, which were long-lasting, persistent, and last a long time, such as

Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain, and COPD;

 Communication Disabilities, like Stuttering, Aphasia, and Traumatic Brain Injury,

which included conditions that affected a person’s ability to understand information from

or express information to others through speaking, listening, reading, writing, sign

language, or body language; and

 47

 Sensory Disabilities that affected the brain's ability to process sensory inputs-sight,

touch, taste, smell, hearing, interoception (knowing what is happening inside the body),

proprioception (knowing where the body is and how it is being balanced in a space), and

kinanesthesia (knowing where the body is moving in a space), like Deafness, Sensory

Processing Disorder, Autism, Blindness, Asthma, etc.

Course navigation as well as content readability and usability were taken into

consideration when creating the simulation. Information about how these disability type

umbrellas’ challenges overlapped with each other was not discussed in the simulations

themselves, but in the Disability Simulation Conclusion Section that will be discussed in the

Product Description section. Review Figure 5 to view the main Venn Diagram layout that

showed these overlaps.

Figure 5

Disability Umbrella Overlap Diagram on Adobe Captivate

 48

Note: This Venn Diagram design was the foundation for learners to interact with the

circular, archery-target-like, hotspots in certain, overlapping areas to learn more about how

disability umbrella-based challenges overlapped. Figure 5’s example had a singular archery

target on the All 5 section. This was since when learners interacted with the hotspot, learners

reviewed e-learning challenges common to all discussed disability type umbrellas.

Regarding the technical structure of the simulations themselves, they were made via

Captivate’s simulation feature that allowed integration of interactive elements, screencasts, text,

and audio. Each simulation described a story of a student with disabilities from their respective

focused disability umbrella increasingly strained physically as well as emotionally with

completing learning tasks for a sample course since its materials were inaccessible. An example

of a simulation segment was depicted in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6

Example of Simulation Slide on Adobe Captivate

 49

Note: This screenshot displayed a section of the Chronic Disability Simulation. The white

arrow represented the movement of the pale circle that signified the character’s-Colton’s-mouse

movements. The audio that played during this section had Colton blurt his confidence in his

ability to focus on completing the assignment ahead of him. The audio that Colton says during

this section of the simulation is captioned, like the other parts of Colton’s simulation. The yellow

text box further clarified the story as well as gave guided navigational assistance to help learners

move to the next simulation story section. It read: “Colton starts reading his assignment with 12

ENERGY POINTS. He has no pain or stress-perfect for focusing! Click on the mouse circle to

continue.”

3.1.2. Simulation-Based Learning Section 2: Online Course Accessibility Intervention Design

The second simulation-based section was based on medical and community

organizations’ best practices about what the process of designing and tweaking online course

accessibility interventions looked like. During this second section, learners had to first read the

simulated student’s full email, such as one shown in Figure 7, about their learning challenges just

displayed in the simulation. Then, different intervention types that aligned with each disability

category were taught via a Click to Reveal slide like Figure 8. After reviewing, learners then

chose via a multiple-choice question like Figure 9 the correct intervention that best fit their

needs. After reviewing their feedback on if they choose the correct intervention or not, they

review the simulated student’s reply email like Figure 10 that describes how the correct

intervention positively impacted them. Finally, the simulation ends with resources learners can

access to learn more about the disability umbrella’s created e-learning challenges and strategies

to overcome them. Figure 11, shown below, is an example of this.

 50

Figure 7

Example of Simulated Student’s Email on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot revealed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s simulated student’s

full email slide. Utilizing a Single Person Scenario template, the email segment summarized, via

the character’s personal writing style, the disability-based e-learning challenges they had during

the simulation. At the email’s conclusion, the simulated student encouraged the learner to help

them through a plea for help before learners moved on to the next slide. To review the email,

learners scrolled or used a screen reader. The email read: “Hey Professor, I hope you are doing

well! I have had the Knowles' Adult Learning Principles Summary assignment on my mind

lately-I have been wrestling with it for a bit, thanks to my chronic fatigue syndrome and

fibromyalgia. I was thinking a quick chat could help me untangle this mess? Here's what's

happened: The summary instructions made me scratch my head, which helped make my planning

a real puzzle. Just saying "analysis" made me stressed out-messed with my focus, you know?

Then, connecting the dots of the assignment to the instructional design really scrambled my
 51

brain. Figuring out where to drop my final assignment after that did not feel groovy at all. The

PDF navigation only added to my headaches, which was not my kind of thing! Making examples

and taking notes after that drained me big time, and totally busted my neck! Next thing you

know, I ended up snoozing. And now, I am playing catch-up, struggling to wrangle my thoughts

for that perfect summary! I'm all about acing this assignment. Your understanding means the

world to me, so.... mind giving me a hand? Thanks, Colton”.

Figure 8

Example of Intervention Types Slide on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot revealed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s intervention types

slide. The way that these segments, which were made via Captivate’s Click to Reveal templates,

were interactive could be viewed by the directions behind the main figure-a white rectangle with

text. This white rectangle was noted in the directions. They read: “Click on the rectangle, which

will each open in a separate tab. Come back to this Page tab with all four rectangles to move on.

Use your screen reader to review the info if you are using a keyboard. If, at any point, you are
 52

ready to move on to the next section, click the right arrow located on the navigational toolbar.”

The white rectangle was the tab that appeared for when learners wanted to view more info about

the intervention “Rapid Private Communication Platforms”.

Figure 9

Example of Resource Page on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot displayed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s additional resources

page, where learners can view the citations that led to the creation of the entire simulation. This

page also appears with slightly different wording as well as a Google Doc with resources for the

specific disability umbrella covered. This page reads as follows: “If you want to learn more

about chronic disabilities with additional resources, feel free to click or tap on the blue button

below. If you do not, feel free to press the right move forward arrow button or the right arrow on

the navigation toolbar to choose the optimal intervention for Colton’s e-learning challenges.”

The blue button with the link to the additional resources Google Document reads: “Chronic

Simulation Additional Resources” in all capital letters.

 53

Figure 10

Example of Intervention Multiple Choice Question Slide

Note: This screenshot displayed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s intervention

multiple-choice question segment. Learners pressed one of the circular buttons next to each

answer and then pressed the oval, blue “SUBMIT” button on the bottom right corner to answer

the question. If learners wanted to move back to the interventions slide, they pressed the white,

bottom left, “BACK” button. The question read: “Which of the interventions described are going

to best help Colton?”, and the answers read: “Using time management tools to make the

assignment easier to complete, putting breaks into the assignment, and using rapid, private

communication tools”, “Putting breaks into the assignment and making the assignment more

flexible to plan with more guidelines”-the correct answer-and “Using rapid, private

communication tools, and using implementing breaks in assignments”.

Figure 11

Example of Simulated Student Thank You on Adobe Captivate

 54

Note: This screenshot displayed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s simulated student’s

thank you email. Learners scrolled through the email to review the many praises that the

simulated student, Colton, gave the learner for choosing (or, if they did not choose, the email was

used to exhibit) the most optimal intervention for his e-learning challenges. The email read:

“Hey Professor, I hope you are doing awesome! I just wanted to give you a quick thanks for

giving me tips for how to handle the summary assignment and sorting out my questions about

breaks. Putting your advice back into the assignment is making life easier for not just me, but for

the whole gang. Everyone I know from this class is now making better plans, keeping their

energy in check, and smashing this assignment like champs! Thanks for boosting my chances of

acing this! Best, Colton.” When learners were done with the thank you email, they moved

forward by either pressing the bottom, blue button that read, “After taking a break, click here to

move to the conclusion module” or clicking on the black navigational bar’s right arrow.

3.1.3. Simulation-Based Learning Assisted Guidance for Both Sections

 55

The assisted guidance started with the “How do I navigate the modules?” section that

occurred before the Attitudinal Pretest. This guidance included a picture with alt-text that

described how to navigate Captivate’s main navigation toolbar. Figure 11 below displays the

segment.

Figure 12

Example of Non-Simulation-Based Navigation Toolbar Directions on Captivate

Note: This screenshot exhibited the general navigation directions in the Chronic

Disability Simulation. On this segment, the picture read: “How do I navigate the modules? You

can with this toolbar. This play button helps play and pause the simulator sections when you

want. These back-and-forth buttons help you move between sections. This speaker button helps

you turn on and off the simulations’ volume. This hamburger button helps you access the

section’s table of contents. This arrow button helps you close the toolbar to see a section fully.

This closed caption button helps you access the simulation’s audio captions.” On the left of each
 56

direction are white arrows with each of the directions’ corresponding icons. Under the picture,

there is the following text: “This toolbar can help you navigate this module's simulations easily.

Feel free to read the photo here or use a screen reader to read the alt-text. Once you are ready,

click on the toolbar's arrows or the black buttons with arrows below to continue.”

During these simulations, there were points of assisted guidance. This guidance differed

between the two sections.

During the first section’s prelude before the story-based simulation sections, there were

textual directions, when needed, in parentheses at the top of each interactive segment, which

directed learners to be able to review and navigate their taught content. For an example of these

directions, review Figure 13.

Figure 13

Example of Interactive Section Directions on Adobe Captivate

 57

Note: This screenshot displayed the simulation navigation directions in the Chronic

Disability Simulation. On this section, the picture read: “How do I follow the simulations?

Follow this toolbar and… Click the mouse circle button to follow the simulated characters’ story.

Use these textboxes to follow the simulation’s story. Use the closed captions button to better

understand the audio.” On the left of each direction are white arrows with each of the directions’

corresponding icons. Under the picture, there was the following text: “This toolbar can help you

navigate the simulation’s pieces easily. Feel free to read the photo here or use a screen reader to

read the alt-text. Once you are ready, click on the toolbar's arrows or the black buttons with

arrows below to continue.”

Then, before the actual story-based simulation began, there were two types of instructions

that described how to navigate the simulated student’s story-based simulation. The first that

appeared was a slide with a picture with alt-text that explained the various symbols on

Captivate’s black navigation toolbar for simulations (see Figure 14 below). The second set of

instructions that appeared summarized some of these directions as well as some tips to best learn

from the specific, story-based simulation. These instructions were given by the simulated student

themself with their unique, written voice. Figure 14 below demonstrates an example of these

instructions.

Figure 14

Simulation Navigation Slide on Adobe Captivate

 58

Note: This screenshot displayed a picture of the simulated student, Colton, describing the

direction. On this segment, the directions read: “Hey there! I am Colton! I am here to walk you

through the Knowles' Adult Learning Principles Summary assignment simulation. Ready to get

grooving? Cool! Keep your eyes peeled for those yellow instructions - they are your go-to for

knowing how to push forward. Click where they point, and we will move on with the next part of

my story! Oh, and here is a heads up: give me a sec to finish talking. That way, you can really

vibe with what I am feeling and ace this simulation! Hey, why the serious face, man? No need to

stress about getting everything done at once, you know? I will be right here, ready to tackle this

thing as a team! So, breathe easy and let's get going!” The black, right arrow on the slide’s

bottom led to the start of the simulation.

Finally, during the simulation itself, yellow text boxes had multiple, assisted guidance

functions. Firstly, they further clarified to learners the simulation’s story being told via the

visuals and audio. Secondly, they pointed out how the simulated student was worsening

physically and/or emotionally because of specific, inaccessibility issues in the sample course

resource they navigated. This was done in two ways, with a few sentences dedicated to

describing the story segment in more detail, and a few other sentences using numerical points to
 59

count up or down to a specific number to display how much worse the student’s emotions were

affected by an inaccessibility challenge. For instance, the simulation for Chronic Disabilities had

a character with Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue named Colton. Colton, as the story continued

forward, continued to become increasingly stressed, confused and frustrated with his summary

assignment, which consequently caused him to be in more physical pain and have less energy.

The story concluded with his “Energy Points” fully depleted at 0 points from his allowed 12, and

his body being in so much physical and mental stress that he fell asleep. The ending’s

corresponding yellow text box communicated this in the following manner:

“Colton...COLTON?! Oh no, he fell asleep since LOST his LAST ENERGY POINT, and now

has 0 ENERGY POINTS! If only he had the chance to plan out his breaks without worrying

about the project deadline!” Lastly, the yellow text boxes communicated navigational directions

that helped learners proceed to the next simulation segment, such as “Click on the mouse circle

to continue.” Figure 15 below has the discussed example of the text box directions.

Figure 15

Simulation Text Guidance on Adobe Captivate

 60

Note: This screenshot exhibited a picture of the simulation’s text-box guidance on the last

section of the chronic disability simulation. On this slide, the directions read:

“Colton...COLTON?! Oh no, he fell asleep since he LOST his LAST ENERGY POINT, and

now has 0 ENERGY POINTS! If only he had the chance to plan out his breaks without worrying

about the project deadline! Click on the mouse circle to move to the intervention section.”

Assisted guidance for the second half of the simulation, the section after the interactive

story-based simulation, had the exact same layout of the directions in the first section’s prelude.

Figure 8 has an example of these directions. The only main difference between them and the

previous section’s prelude was that there were some text-based buttons that explain how to

transition to the next segment. This was due to, during the instructional intervention development

process, Captivate’s constraints on changing certain templates’ navigational buttons from these

text-based buttons to more accessible, visual-based buttons. Figures 16 and 17 presented

examples of text-based and visual-based buttons respectively.

Figure 16

Text-Based Button Example on Adobe Captivate

 61

Note: This screenshot posed an example of a text-based button on Adobe Captivate. The

button was on what was previously depicted in Figure 10-the thank you email. The circled, blue

text button, in this case, led learners to the conclusion module. It read: “After taking a break,

click here to move to the conclusion module.”

Figure 17

Visual-Based Button Example on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot presents a picture of two visual-based buttons on Adobe Captivate.

These two buttons were the main visual buttons. The left arrow took learners back to a module

segment, and the right side’s arrow took learners forward to the next module segment.

3.1.4 Simulation-Based Learning Reflection Components

During the first section’s simulation, there are sometimes points of reflection asking

learners what they would do when in the simulated student’s shoes, as well as continually

encourage learners to emphasize with the simulated student via the yellow text boxes’ emotional

comments such as “Oh no!” when the student’s emotional state worsened. Figure 18 below had

an instance of these types of reflections.

Figure 18

Reflection-Based Text Example on Adobe Captivate

 62

Note: This screenshot depicted an example of reflection in the Adobe Captivate Chronic

Disability Simulation. The text asked the reader what learners would do if they were as tired and

in pain as Colton, but really had to complete their assignment. It read: “With 2 ENERGY LEFT,

Colton is almost done reading. Should he stop, raising his risk of forgetting to organize his notes

after his break in time to complete the summary by the deadline? Or should he push forward,

raising his risk of having too much pain and fatigue to focus? What would you do? Click on the

mouse circle to see his decision!”

Before the second half of the simulation ended, learners would answer a question on

which disability-type umbrella based interventions would best help the simulated student,

encouraging them to reflect upon what was seen and heard during the first section’s interactive

simulation as well as read in the simulation of the first section’s yellow-text boxes and in the

interactive intervention learning section that appeared after the simulation to choose the correct

intervention. Figure 10 exhibited an example of this form of reflection.

3.2.0. Product Description: Simulation-Based Learning Module Series Flow

 63

In this section, I discuss my plan to create 5 module series flows, one for each disability

umbrella simulated, to ensure a smaller sampling of my course’s comprehensive body of work

and make participant feedback more manageable. The full course flow, including all competency

as well as attitudinal tests, is discussed in the Original Intended Course Flow section.

Each module series flow consisted of 8 major components to facilitate effective learning

and understanding of online course accessibility. The module was designed to provide learners

(Stockton faculty members) with the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure web course

accessibility. These components, in the order that they appeared, were as follows:

3.2.1. Navigation Instructions

 After the title of the entire module flow appeared, a segment with instructions on how to

navigate Adobe Captivate’s black toolbar was shown. The instructions were on a picture

with text next to each toolbar symbol.

 The instructions on the picture could be read directly or be read via a screen reader.

Figure 12 explained these instructions.

3.2.2 Attitudinal Pretest and Posttests

 These 9 question SurveyMonkey tests were placed after the previous section since the

attitudinal pretest showed afterwards.

 The Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest utilized mix of mostly Likert Scale, but also open-

answer and multiple-choice formats to gauge learners' attitudes regarding web course

accessibility.

 If learners wanted to elaborate on why they chose certain answers in the attitudinal tests,

they could have chosen the Other answer in their respective questions.
 64

 The formatting of the questions changed to reflect the timing of the test being taken.

 The pretest was given out before each entire module series was completed and the

posttests were given out after each entire module series was completed.

 They inquired about learners’ confidence in fulfilling accessibility requirements and their

experiences with students using accessible course techniques.

 This part will be discussed in full-length during Chapter 4.

 An example of these questions was mentioned in Figure 19, which is below.

Figure 19

Attitudinal Test Example on Adobe Captivate

 65

Note: This screenshot exhibited a picture of a Likert Scale, multiple choice, and short answer

question from the Attitudinal Posttest. The Likert Scale question was “My feelings on

making online courses as well as online course materials accessible has changed: 1: Very

negatively, 2: Negatively, 3: Stayed the same, 4: Positively, 5: Very Positively”. The

multiple-choice question was the following: “Are there any accessibility tips or tricks that

you plan to use in your online course material now that you have taken the course? Yes, no,

Maybe, Other (please choose this answer if you want to discuss these tips or tricks as well as

if you want to discuss your answer)”. Finally, the short open-answer question was the
 66

following: “What percentage of your course development time do you now want to put into

making online courses or online course materials accessible from 01%-100%?”.

3.2.3. Course Flow Introduction

 The Course Flow Introduction was introduced after the attitudinal pretest for each series

flow.

 Via a mix of interactive and non-interactive sections, the course’s intended flow,

sections, objectives, how each course section was meant to achieve said objectives, and

how reminders to take breaks functioned were discussed.

 Captivate’s Single-Person template was utilized to explain the entire course’s intended

flow for the participants that were only viewing one series flow. Figure 20 depicted this

segment.

 A graphic-based segment briefly noted the course’s objectives. Figure 21 illustrates this

segment.

 An interactive timeline section discussed how the module series flow’s various aspects

were meant to help learners achieve the learning objectives as well as help myself test the

effectiveness of the module series. Figure 22 showed an instance of this segment.

 Two slides with a singular picture and text were used to discuss and demonstrate the

importance of taking breaks while learning with the module series flow.

Figure 20

Course Series Flow Slide on Adobe Captivate

 67

Note: This screenshot exhibited Captivate’s Single-Person template that discussed the overall

course-flow of the entire course, which gave learners a preview of what they were about to

commence. On the segment’s left side, a picture of the module creator, myself, smiling

while wearing a suit. The slide’s text then read on its right side: “HELLO! My name is

Elizabeth Rivera, the creator of the ADA Compliance and Web Course Accessibility

training! This course was created as my instructional intervention to address points of

improvement regarding Stockton's ability to create accessible e-learning experiences for all

students. There are 7 main modules that each have their own sets of pretests and posttests:

The Importance of Online Course Accessibility, an interactive introduction to the world of

online course accessibility. Five simulations of five disability types that create common e-

learning challenges, one of which you will be seeing today to see a smaller sampling of this

complete body of work and make your feedback more manageable. Disability Simulation

Conclusion, an interactive presentation that wraps the 5 simulations up and describes how the

mentioned interventions benefit all students. This course structure is meant to tackle 3 goals,

which you will mostly see on the next slide. I say mostly see because I already explained the
 68

goal behind the conclusion here. When you are ready to learn these goals, click on the arrow

button below!”

Figure 21

Course Objectives Slide on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot presented the section that discussed the course’s overall objectives. At

the segment’s top, title text read, “What are the course’s goals? The course’s goals are to

address the following points of improvement:”, there were three pictures. One was someone

turning on a tablet button with “IMPORTANT” inscribed on it. Its caption mentioned the

first objective: “Increase awareness of the historical and scientific importance of online

course accessibility.” The second picture, which was in the middle of the segment, was of a

person that typed on a computer to complete their e-learning endeavors. Its accompanying

caption read: “Raise awareness of the most common disability-types that creates online

learning challenges for students.” The last picture, on the slide’s far right, was of three

people. One stood up and used a computer while two other people sat down in a regular chair

as well as a wheelchair respectively. The picture’s caption read the following objective:
 69

“Increase awareness of interventions that can help overcome challenges related to the most

common disability types.”

Figure 22

Course Structure Slide on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot presented the section that discussed the course’s overall sections and

their functions. Firstly, there was some title text that read, “How will the structure of each

course section address these goals? (Click on the blue dots to proceed.). Secondly, there were

6 headings with interactive, blue dots. When clicked, these blue dots opened up tabs that

explained the various segments of the course- “Competency and Attitudinal Pretests”, “The

Importance of Online Course Accessibility”, “Disability Simulations: Accessibility”,

“Disability Simulations: Interventions”, “Competency and Attitudinal Posttests”, and

“Module Evaluation”. Each tab came with a picture as well as a sub header and regular,

paragraph text about the meaning behind each segment.

3.2.4. Competency Pretests and Posttests

 70

 The Competency Pretests and Posttests are discussed here since on each module series

flow, they were implemented after the Course Flow Introduction section and before the

first, actual module section-The Importance of Online Course Accessibility.

 The Competency Pretests and Posttests both included multiple choice and select all that

apply questions.

 The pretests were given out before each module segment’s completion and the posttests

were given out after each module segment’s completion. The module segments included

The Importance of Online Course Accessibility, one of the 5 disability umbrella

simulations, and Disability Simulation Conclusion.

 Each pair of tests shared the same questions. The only difference between them was that

their formatting slightly changed to reflect the placement of each pair partner.

 Both types of questions challenged learners to choose the optimal intervention to help

students with various types of disabilities and discern the accuracy of certain

misconceptions, facts, and characteristics about disability online law as well as

accommodations.

 Chapter 4-Evaluation-discusses this in detail.

 Figure 23 below communicates examples of these competency test questions.

Figure 23

Examples of Competency Questions on Adobe Captivate

 71

Note: This screenshot demonstrated an example of competency questions from the Chronic

Disabilities Pretest Assessment. The first multiple-choice question read, “Which of the

following is an example of a chronic disability?” The select-all-that-apply question read,

“Which are common symptoms experienced by learners with chronic disabilities during flare

cycles?: Select all that apply.”. The third multiple choice question read: “You notice that a

learner in your class who has chronic migraines is struggling to hand in assignments on time.

What strategy can best help them overcome this challenge?”. The last question, a select-all-
 72

that-apply-question, read: “How can instructors facilitate breaks for learners with chronic

disabilities during assessments? Select all answers that apply.”

3.2.5. The Importance of Online Course Accessibility: An Introduction Module

 This section encompassed several mini-sections aimed at enhancing learners'

understanding of web-accessibility standards and their significance.

 The first segment featured an interactive carousel like Figure 24 that discussed all crucial

vocabulary terms referred to in the ADA, such as reasonable accommodations,

disabilities, major life activities, etc.

 The second segment, like Figure 25 featured a series of interactive tabs with graphics that

briefly defined as well as gave examples of the ADA’s major life activities.

 The third segment featured a series of hotspot widgets, such as those in Figure 26, that

explained the main points of the ADA’s titles (Title 1, Title 2, Section 1, etc.) with

graphics as well as text embedded into each widget.

 The fourth segment featured a series of interactive flip cards and graphics, such as those

shown in Figure 27, that explained 3 other online course accessibility standards: Section

504, Section 508, WCAG, and Universal Design for Learning.

 The fifth segment featured a brief, interactive timeline template like Figure 28 that

offered insights into the history of how the treatment of disabled Americans, American

disability civil rights laws like Section 508, and web-accessibility standards like WCAG

have evolved.

 The sixth segment featured another interactive carousel that discussed scientifically and

research-supported benefits of making online courses accessible, many of which mirrored

this literature review’s.

 73

 The seventh segment featured two interactive elements, which both focused on the goal

of combating some of the main misconceptions that, according to this project’s focus

group, Stockton’s faculty members had about online course accessibility. A drag and

drop feature, shown in Figure 29, was first utilized for learners to guess which

misconception-related statements were true or false. Then, a carousel discussed the

validity of the mentioned claims utilizing scientific and actualized evidence.

 The final section before the posttest was a hotspot/widget area that described students’ as

well as LAP members’ responsibilities regarding following online course accessibility

standards. Figure 30, which is below, is an example of this.

Figure 24

Interactive Carousel Example About ADA Vocabulary Terms

Note: This screenshot revealed an example of an interactive carousel that this introduction

template utilized on 3 occasions. One was the pictured carousel, which illustrated the main
 74

terminology regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act. The terms described were the

ADA itself, as well as reasonable accommodations, disabilities, examples of disabilities

under the ADA, major life activities, and equal opportunity. The other two occasions were

telling the scientifically proven benefits of online courses accessibility for faculty members,

students and higher-education institutions, as well as clarifying misconceptions about

designing accessible online courses for faculty members. The instructions on all 3 were the

same- “Click on the small, blue arrows to see the carousel content. If, at any point, you are

ready to move on to the next section, click the right arrow located on the navigation toolbar.”

Figure 25

Interactive Tab Example About ADA Major Life Activities

Note: This screenshot showed the interactive tab template that examined the Americans with

Disabilities Act’s major life activities categories. Learners had to click and read or listen via

a screen reader for each tab two topics before they were able to move forward. They were
 75

what the major life activity categories were as well as the categories’ examples. The

categories reviewed were Action, Cognitive, Movement, Sensory, Tasks, and Bodily

Functions. There were also pictures of an example of each major life activity category, which

aided learners in visually processing each one. Action’s tab, for example, defined Action

activities as the following: “These are essential actions that people need to survive, such as:

Eating, Sleeping Drinking, Breaking, Speaking, Relaxing”, and the picture on the tab’s left

presented a group of people who chatted while eating a meal together.

Figure 26

ADA Titles Hotspot on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot displayed the hotspot widget that briefly summarized the Americans

with Disabilities Act’s titles. Learners learned about the titles by clicking on the circular, blue

archery targets that were on top of the picture (in this case, a person using a wheelchair), and

then scrolled to review the act’s info that was in a separate tab. The example shown in the

picture was for the ADA’s Title 2, Section B. This tab’s text read: “Public transits cannot
 76

deny disabled people equal opportunities to use their services.” Once learners explored all the

hotspots, they pressed on to the next section.

Figure 27

Interactive Flip Card on Adobe Captivate

Note: This screenshot displayed the flip card template that briefly summarized other crucial

online course accessibility guidelines, which included Section 504, Section 508, WCAG, and

Universal Design for Learning. Learners clicked on each flip card and reviewed each side to

grasp these acts. One side was a graphic related to the specific guideline and its main idea.

The other side illustrated the guideline’s main goal as well as how its aspects helped with

accomplishing that. In the picture, Section 504’s card was flipped to the back. It read:

“Section 504's Goal: Ensure fairness for learners with disabilities without making significant

changes that would impact the core of school programs or these programs too hard for

faculty members to manage. It does this by requiring schools to give disabled learners the

following to help them succeed: Physical and virtual learning aids, Academic
 77

accommodations, Counseling, tutoring, and other services.” The other flip card below it,

Section 508, was flipped to its front side.

Figure 28

Interactive Timeline Template on Captivate

Note: This screenshot illustrated an instance of the timeline template that summarized a brief

history of America’s disability rights, laws and online course accessibility guidelines.

Learners learned about each point in history as they followed the directions, which read:

“Click on the blue dots to proceed. If, at any point, you are ready to move on to the next

section, click on the right arrow located on the navigation toolbar.” The timeline went from

1776-America’s founding-to the 2020s. The timeline’s years were above the blue dots, and

below these dots were a picture, a subheading, and paragraph-based info about the significant

event that occurred during each noted year.

Figure 29

Interactive Drag and Drop on Adobe Captivate

 78

Note: This screenshot presented the drag and drop template that tested learners’ beliefs about

online course accessibility’s misconceptions and truths. The questions included: “Making

accessible content is not meant to be time consuming”, “Accessibility enhances content, not

waters it down”, “Making accessible content is not my responsibility,” and “Accessibility

course checkers are the only guide I should use for accessibility.” Learners chose their

answers as they dragged the photos of thumbs up and thumbs down into the boxes each

statement corresponded with.

Figure 30

Student and LAP Members’ Responsibilities on Captivate

 79

Note: This screenshot illustrated the hotspot widget template that allowed learners to

understand what students’ and LAP’s responsibilities were to ensure online course

accessibility. They worked in the same manner as Figure 25, except the info being revealed

in the separate tabs were about students’ accessibility responsibilities (the hotspot on the

young, female student glancing at her electronic device) and LAP’s responsibilities (on the

older, bearded teacher with a disability tag that aided the female student).

3.2.6 Disability Umbrella Simulation

 Depending on the module series flow given, participants completed one of 5 major

disability umbrellas. They included Learning Disabilities, Psychiatric Disabilities,

Communication Disabilities, Chronic Disabilities, and Sensory Disabilities.

 Therefore, all disability umbrella simulations differed in content, but they were similar in

terms of idea structure.

 Firstly, all disability umbrella simulations, as discussed previously, began by giving

backgrounds on each disability umbrella via interactive and non-interactive sections.

Each disability umbrella had its definition, effects on e-learners with its respective
 80

disabilities under its umbrella, examples of disabilities that were under this umbrella, and

crucial points to remember regarding caring for students under each umbrella be defined.

Figures 1-4 displayed examples of this format.

 Secondly, all disability umbrella simulations each displayed, with their own immersive,

textual elements and Captivate’s visual-audio simulation tools, as shown in Figure 6, a

fictional story that starred a simulated student with disabilities that fell under each

umbrella. After introducing the student and what type of disabilities they had with a

cutoff version of the email like Figure 7’s, they exhibited how these students’ increasing

inaccessibility problems while working on a sample learning task contributed to their

worsened outlook on their academic career as well as emotional health. The learning

tasks for each simulation as well as the personalities and emotional journeys of each

simulated student, were unique. This would help ensure that when one completes the

original course flow as intended, with all of them together, the simulations would not

start to feel repetitive and, as a result, unengaging for learners.

 Finally, built upon the knowledge gained from the disability umbrella simulation, the

final section focused on teaching different interventions that aligned with various

disabilities’ e-learning challenges within each umbrella. This section, like the previously

exhibited Figure 8, was a click to reveal slide template. Like the simulations, the main

interventions discussed between the 5 different disability umbrella sections, while they

shared some specific recommendations due to their adaptability, were also unique.

Additionally, like the simulations themselves, this was done to ensure that if learners ever

had the opportunity to traverse through the entire course structure as intended, learners

would not lose engagement from too many interventions sounding similar to others.
 81

Learners then had the opportunity to review additional resources about the interventions

and e-learning challenges related to the disability umbrella discussed (Figure 9, displayed

previously). After reviewing the click to reveal slides, learners then chose what the

proper intervention or interventions for the simulated student should be via a low-stakes,

multiple choice question (Figure 10, shown previously). After choosing their answer, the

correct answer was revealed in a thank you email segment from the simulated student

(Figure 11, illustrated previously). These thank you segments discussed how the right

intervention(s) not only benefited them, but also other students.

3.2.7. Disability Simulation Conclusion: A Conclusion Module

 This section in every module series flow encompassed several mini-sections aimed at

displaying how disability e-learning challenges and intervention benefits overlapped

between the discussed umbrellas as well as emphasizing the impact all 5 simulations’

interventions have on the wider, online student body.

 The first segment featured a noninteractive slide that recapped the main points meant to

be gathered from the introduction module and the 5 disability umbrella simulations.

 The second segment featured a series of interactive hotspots with widgets. Each hotspot

section included a Venn Diagram of all 5 disability umbrellas super-imposed on each

other. Each hotspot slide in the segment’s sequence had widgets focus on a higher

number of disabilities overlapping. The hotspots noted an overlap of 2, 3, 4, and finally

all 5 disability umbrellas. Figure 5 showed the Venn Diagram, but Figure 31 below

explained how the hotspots’ separate tabs appeared.

 82

 The third segment featured two noninteractive sections that discussed how the main

interventions mentioned in the disability simulations benefitted all 5 disability types.

Figure 32 below depicts an example of this.

 The fourth segment featured a click to reveal slide that discussed how various discussed

interventions as well as intervention-based suggestions positively affected groups of

learners without disabilities. The groups discussed were learners completing tasks in

distracting environments, learners with mobile devices, learners with low Wi-Fi

bandwidths or older technology, learners inexperienced with the internet, learners who

are ESL or multilingual, or have low literacy levels, and older/elderly learners. Figure 33

portrayed this section below.

 The fifth segment featured 2 noninteractive segments that briefly mentioned the topic of

temporary disabilities and how they enhance the importance of making online courses

accessible. Figure 34 showed this segment below.

 The sixth segment featured two noninteractive slides that discussed how the main

interventions mentioned in the disability simulations benefitted all learners. The layout of

these segments was incredibly similar to Figure 32’s, which was previously displayed,

except the benefitting group was different.

 The final segment featured a series of main takeaways from the entire module series with

various links to more resources to help achieve the various takeaways. Figure 35

illustrates this section.

Figure 31

Venn Diagram Tabs Example on Captivate

 83

Note: This screenshot displayed the hotspot widget Venn Diagram template that allowed

learners to understand how three disability umbrella types’ e-learning challenges discussed in

the course overlapped. On this full diagram, there were five archery target like dots that

represented each of the five unique overlaps possible between the disability-type umbrellas in

groups of 3. Learners interacted with the dots as they clicked on them and scrolled to learn

the info. The tab that was open in this picture was Learning, Chronic and Sensory

Disabilities. The e-learning challenges that overlapped were “Handling sensory input” and

“Limited energy to use learned info”.

Figure 32

Disability Umbrella Intervention Overlaps

 84

Note: This screenshot revealed one of two slides that explained how all disability umbrellas’

interventions mentioned in the course benefitted all five types of disabilities. Learners

scrolled the page to review the content, which also had accompanying headings and pictures

that helped visualize each intervention. The interventions mentioned on this page included

“Subject-Based Learning Tools”(mainly mentioned in the Learning Disability simulation, but

also mentioned within interventions for other umbrellas), “Concrete and Visual Learning

Tools”(mainly discussed in the Learning Disability simulation, but also within other main

interventions for other umbrellas), “E-Learning Transition Tools”(discussed in the Learning

Disability simulation), “Reduce Sensory Distractions”(focused on in the Sensory Disability

Simulation), “Clear, Repeated Assignment Instructions and Objectives” (mentioned in

multiple disability umbrellas’ simulations, but not centered as a main category), and “Closed

Captions, Screen readers and Alt-Text”(discussing in the Sensory Disability simulation).

Figure 33

Benefits for Abled Groups of Learners Segment

 85

Note: This screenshot exhibited another Click to Reveal slide, which focused on how various

mentioned disability interventions benefitted various groups of abled groups of learners. The

groups covered included “Learners Completing Tasks in Distracting Environments”,

“Learners with Mobile Devices”, “Learners with Low Wi-Fi Bandwidths or Older

Technology”, “Learners Inexperienced with the Internet”, “Learners who are ESL or

Multilingual, or Have Low Literacy Levels”, and “Older/Elderly Learners”. Like all Click to

Reveal segments, learners reviewed these benefits as they clicked on one of the rectangles

and viewed their separate tabs with more info about each abled learner group. The separated

tab shown in the figure was “Learners who are ESL or Multilingual or Have Low Literacy

Levels”.

Figure 34

Benefits for Temporarily Disabled Learners Slide

 86

Note: This screenshot was from one of two segments that described what temporary

disabilities were and how the course’s discussed e-learning interventions benefitted those

with them as well. A provocative, memorable picture with some text under it was the

template of these segments. In this figure’s case, the photo was of a temporarily disabled

Kermit the Frog. Its accompanying text defined temporary disabilities as the following:

“Interventions also cater to people with temporary disabilities. A temporary disability may

include wearing a cast or using crutches, experiencing fatigue due to illnesses like the flu or

COVID, or having concussions, broken bones, or multiple injuries that you are healing

from.”

Figure 35

Main Course Takeaways Slide on Adobe Captivate

 87

Note: This screenshot was of the final educational segment of the course-the conclusion

module’s conclusion. The segment described various, general takeaways related to skills,

attitudes and knowledge needed for fostering accessible e-learning environments. Many of

these takeaways had links that led to even more sources on top of the cite list in a slide that

followed the Module Evaluation segments (see Figure 36 for more info) to ensure that

learners have as many tools as possible to create accessible e-learning experiences. The text

on the slide reads, in bullet points: “As this simulation ends, remember: Don't stereotype.

Embrace diversity, not a one-size-fits-all approach. Listen to student's stories, interests and

needs. Promote inclusivity in course materials, meetings, assessments, assignments, and

more with diverse interventions. If you are struggling to help your learners, you can also

contact CTLD, the Wellness Center, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, and the Learning

Access Program to help guide you! Use accessibility tools, and everyone, including yourself,

will have a more fun learning experience!”

Figure 36

Module Cites Page on Adobe Captivate

 88

Note: This screenshot displayed the Chronic Disability Simulation’s Cites page, where

learners can view the citations that led to the creation of all five versions of the intervention. This

page also has a button that leads to a Google Doc with all citations for all five simulations as

well as the citations for The Importance of Online Course Accessibility as well as the Disability

Simulation Conclusion sections. All versions of the intervention have this page. It reads as

follows: “To see all of the disability modules’ cites, click or tap on the blue button below.” On

the page, a blue button with the link to the additional resources Google Document reads:

“Module Cites” in all capital letters.

3.2.8. Module Evaluation

 This section was after the Disability Simulation Conclusion posttest as well as the

Attitudinal Posttest.

 This 10 question SurveyMonkey survey included a series of mostly Likert Scale and two

multiple choice questions to understand learners’ thoughts on the course’s design,

accessibility, navigability, strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement. If

learners wanted to give more detail on any of their answers throughout the entire

evaluation process, they could evaluate by choosing the other answers available in the

last 2 questions. These last two questions discussed the highlights as well as points of

improvement that the module series flow had.

 The specifics of this test will be discussed fully in the next chapter-Evaluation. Figure 37,

which was implemented below, displayed what the Module Evaluation questions look

like.
 89

Figure 37

Module Evaluation Questions Example

Note: This screenshot showed an example of the two types of module evaluation questions

available: Likert and Select All That Apply. The first Likert Question read: “Rate your

satisfaction with the module’s ability to achieve the following objective-to increase learner’s

motivation for ensuring their online course materials or courses are accessible-on a scale

from lowest to highest (1 to 5).” The Select All That Apply question read: “What were the

highlight or highlights of the module? Select all answers that apply.” Finally, the second

Select All That Apply Question read: “What were the point or points of improvement for the

module? Select all answers that apply.”

3.3.0. Original Intended Course Flow

 90

Listed below is the original course flow that, if this capstone becomes successful, is how

I would put the module segments together.

 Navigation Instructions

 Attitudinal Pretest

 Course Flow Introduction

 The Importance of Online Accessibility Competency Pretest

 Module 1: The Importance of Online Accessibility

 The Importance of Online Accessibility Competency Posttest

 A Brief Introduction to All Disability Simulation Sections

 Lara's Learning Letdowns-A Learning Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Pretest

 Module 2: Lara's Learning Letdowns-A Learning Disability E-Learning Simulation

 Lara's Learning Letdowns-A Learning Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Posttest

 Mahaskah's Mental Health Matter-A Psychiatric Disability E-Learning Simulation

Competency Pretest

 Module 3: Mahaskah's Mental Health Matter-A Psychiatric Disability E-Learning

Simulation

 Mahaskah's Mental Health Matter-A Psychiatric Disability E-Learning Simulation

Competency Posttest

 Colton's Chronic Catastrophe-A Chronic Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Pretest
 91

 Module 4: Colton's Chronic Catastrophe-A Chronic Disability E-Learning Simulation

 Colton's Chronic Catastrophe-A Chronic Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Posttest

 Carlos's Communication Conundrum-A Communications Disability E-Learning

Simulation Competency Pretest

 Module 5: Carlos's Communication Conundrum-A Communications Disability E-

Learning Simulation

 Carlos's Communication Conundrum-A Communications Disability E-Learning

Simulation Competency Posttest

 Suzume's Sensory Setbacks-A Sensory Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Pretest

 Module 6: Suzume's Sensory Setbacks-A Sensory Disability E-Learning Simulation

 Suzume's Sensory Setbacks-A Sensory Disability E-Learning Simulation Competency

Posttest

 Disability Simulation Conclusion Competency Pretest

 Module 7: Disability Simulation Conclusion

 Disability Simulation Conclusion Posttest

 Attitudinal Posttest

 Module Evaluation

 Thank You

 Credits

 Cites

 End of Course!
 92

3.4.0. The Feasibility Timeline

To ensure that project milestones were established as well as met, a feasible project

timeline was established:

 November 31st-January 30th: First Draft of Course Completed

 January 31st-February 5th: Evaluation Tools Section of Course Completed

 February 6th-February 13th: Chapters 1,2,3 Revisions Completed

 February 14th-22nd: Final, Revised Version of Course Completed

 February 23rd-March 15th: Distribute Course and Await Feedback

 March 16th-March 19th: Completed Writing Results

 March 20th-March 22nd: Completed Abstract Without Conclusion and Discussion

 March 20th-March 29th: Completed Conclusion and Discussion

 March 30th-April 9th: First Draft of Presentation Poster Completed

 March 30th-April 11th: Creation of First Draft of Paper Completed

 April 12-24th: Finalize Planning and Implementation of MAIT Capstone Project

Showcase and Celebration

 April 25th-30th: Complete Final Draft of Paper

This timeline outlined the progression of the project and ensured its successful

completion within the stipulated time limit.

 93

Chapter 4: Implementation and Evaluation

4.1.0. Introduction

Chapter 1 introduced the crucial challenge of online courses in higher education

institutions not being accessible as well as following online course accessibility guidelines like

the ADA. In Chapter 2, I investigated inaccessible online course creation practices’

consequences on students, faculty, and their higher-education institutions’ legal as well as

financial standings. Moreover, it examined how simulation-based learning benefits the design of

equitable, inclusive and engaging learning environments. Chapter 3 displayed my simulation-

based learning intervention’s learning, operational, and time-based design mechanics. This

chapter relates the intervention's implementation procedures to its outcomes.

4.2.0. Implementation Methodology

4.2.1. The Project’s When and How

There were 5 versions of the Adobe Captivate intervention, which represented the 5 major

types of disabilities-(1) Learning, (2) Psychiatric (also known as mental illness), (3) Chronic, (4)

Communication (also known as speech and language disorders), and (5) Sensory (also known as

Hyper sensory, Hypo sensory, and Mixed Sensory disabilities). These modules were sent to 16

volunteer participants on February 23rd and 24th, 2024. After signing a consent form like in

Appendix E, these participants were split into groups of 2 to 4. Each group randomly received a

different version of the intervention’s link in a PDF document, like the one shown in Appendix

F. The difference among groups was in simulation focus, each emphasizing a major disability

type. The introduction and conclusion sections stayed the same in terms of content and

evaluation material.

4.2.2. About the Participants

 94

The participants mostly included Stockton faculty members from various schools of majors

and different departments of Stockton, such as its Center of Technology and Learning Design,

SRI +ETTC, and Academic Affairs. Two participants were from outside of Stockton University.

Regarding teaching experience, participants ranged from 8 years to 25 years. All participants

were conveniently selected based on my experience and recruited via email. Participants

completed the feedback from February 23rd, 2024, to March 24th, 2024.

4.3.0. Evaluation Methodology

4.3.1. Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation was to investigate how learners’ attitudes on making online

courses accessible as well as learners’ abilities to discern the optimal solution to help e-learners

with specific disability-based issues changed between pre- and post-intervention.

4.3.2. Evaluation Methods Used

Several methods of evaluation were utilized for this project.

4.3.2.1. Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest.

Firstly, there was the SurveyMonkey attitudinal pretest and posttest, shown in Appendix B.

These two tests consisted of 9 questions that were a combination of Likert Scale, short answer,

and multiple-choice content. The questions covered topics such as what participants’ conceptions

related to online course accessibility were pre and post intervention, how their feelings were

regarding making online courses accessible overall pre and post intervention, what percentage of

time did participants put/plan to put into making online courses accessible, and if they have

used/plan to use more certain accessibility best practices. The attitudinal pretest was found at the

beginning of every version of the intervention. The attitudinal posttest was found near the end of

all intervention versions, right before the module evaluation.

 95

4.3.2.2. Competency Pretest and Posttests.

Secondly, there were the Survey Monkey competency pretests and posttests. These tests were

found right before and right after the following simulation sections: The Importance of Online

Course Accessibility, one of the five disability type simulations, and Disability Simulation

Conclusion. These sets of pretests and posttests were all four questions long, with two questions

each being multiple choice and select all that apply. The questions were specifically made so

most of the content discussed in each section had a question relating to it. For example, the

intervention-based pretests and posttests each had a question for their disability type definition,

e-learning challenge examples, crucial points to remember, and intervention recommendation

sections to test that participants reviewed the majority of the content. I randomized what content

from each section would be utilized for each question by copying and pasting all of the content

into ChatGPT and asking it what content I should cover for each of the four questions, then re-

tweaked its suggestions to ensure that the types of question prompts or answer ideas it came up

with did not match the other questions, had a balanced difficulty level and were easy-to-

understand. It is crucial to note that regarding these tests, they were not graded, but they did have

correct and incorrect answers. The reason why I did this was because that would help decrease

the overall pressure that participants had to give feedback for their learning journey and therefore

make the overall learning experience more accessible and comfortable for them. Appendix C has

all questions that were used listed.

4.3.2.3. Module Evaluation.

Thirdly, there was the module evaluation shown in Appendix D, a ten question

SurveyMonkey test that included Likert scale questions, select-all-that-apply questions, and short

answer questions. It asked participants to rate their satisfaction with several of the intervention’s
 96

aspects, such as the simulations and assessments, the intervention’s ability to achieve learning

objectives, and the highlights as well as points of improvement for the intervention. The module

evaluation was found right at the end of all five intervention versions after the Attitudinal

Posttest.

4.3.2.4. Spontaneous Email Feedback.

The final form of evaluation was impromptu email comments from the participants during as

well as after the completion of feedback. Nothing was asked for this feedback. To collect the

feedback, since I had the free version of SurveyMonkey, I could not download my created tests’

data and review it on a platform such as Excel. Instead, I reviewed screenshots from each test,

compared the correct and incorrect answers for the intervention’s competency pretest and

posttests of the intervention’s sections as well as the changes between the attitudinal pretests and

posttests to conglomerate the information. For the written feedback, I copied the feedback and

reviewed it on my computer.

4.4.0. Evaluation Results

4.4.1. Results: Points to Keep in Mind

Out of the 16 participants, only nine officially made it to the end of their interventions by

completing the module evaluation by the date that this evaluation is being written—March 26,

2024.

4.4.2. Generalized Results

Across all tests, participants generally showed improvement and reinforcement of concepts

related to the five discussed disability types. When reviewing all competency questions’ results,

including improved, reinforced (same correct answers chosen between both sets), a mix of more

and less correct answers chosen by the posttest, more incorrect posttest than pretest and testing
 97

tool error-based questions, improved and reinforced question results ranked prominently

reviewing all competency questions’ results, collectively totaling 19 out of 28 questions,

reflecting participants' enhanced understanding and retention of key concepts. While there were

areas for improvement, such as 2 out of 28 questions categorized as 'More incorrect than not' in

the Sensory Disability section, overall, participants demonstrated a positive trend in their grasp

of the material. Moreover, learners increased their competency levels of online course

accessibility knowledge by 7% between the pretest and posttest. This was calculated by

reviewing averages received by each question, combining them to discover the testing’s

averages, and then grouping those averages to find the overall pretest and posttest average.

Additionally, attitudes towards making online courses accessible and following online course

accessibility guidelines, in general, all questions (9/9) showed a shift towards more positive

attitudes. Regarding the module evaluation and separate email comments from participants,

participant satisfaction with the module was mostly high and deemed effective for reinforcing

knowledge about disabilities, accessibility, and interventions.

Considering points of improvement for the module overall, indicated by all test results, a

need for clearer examples of disability types and interventions to reduce confusion, navigability

accessibility, assessment, content, and technical upgrades, improving learning goal clarity, and

consulting advocacy groups for sensitive language and framing appeared as potential

enhancement areas for the future.

4.4.3. Specific Results

4.4.3.1. Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest Results.

Regarding the attitudinal pretest and posttest, there were 13 respondents and 10 respondents

respectively. Therefore, what I decided to look at was not how many people chose each answer,
 98

but where in terms of the highest and lowest ranking answers did the answers move between the

pretest and posttest. All 9 questions showed a positive change in attitudes regarding online

course accessibility.

Questions 1-3 indicated statements against online course accessibility decreasing in

agreement, while Questions 4-5 showed that participants’ strengthened motivation to make

online courses compliant with accessibility guidelines and believed in their benefits.

Additionally, Questions 6 and 7 indicated a positive change in attitude towards making online

courses accessible, and most respondents wished to continue to use accessibility tips and tricks.

Question 8, a text-based question, also indicated a 26.84% change of participants’

commitment to making a larger percentage of their time online course-accessibility-based post-

intervention by doing the following process: All the non-text-based answers were first taken and

added up. The attitudinal pretest percentages given by participants were 20%, 10%, 5%, 5%,

10%, 10%, 0%, 50%, 65%, 0%, 1%, and 10%, creating a total of 186. The attitudinal posttest

percentages from participants were 40%, 10%, 90%, 50%, 25%, 100%, 75%, 0%, 20%, and

27.5% as an average from one participant’s answer of 25-30%, adding up to a total of 437.5.

These percentages were then divided by the number of responses for each test in the attitudinal

test set. Therefore, 186 was divided by the attitudinal pretest’s 11 responses (not counting an

unquantifiable answer), and 437.5 was divided by the attitudinal pretest’s 10 respondents.

Finally, the final averages found from this process, the attitudinal pretest’s 16.91 and the

attitudinal posttest’s 43.75 were subtracted. 43.75 minus 16.91 equaled 26.84%, the result

previously noted.

Regarding Question 9, the answers that indicated the opinion of content being enhanced

when being made accessible increased to solely first place when comparing the pretest and
 99

posttest. This result occurred since respondents no longer felt compelled to choose any other

answer but enhanced by the posttest. As a result, this indicates participants’ growing certainty

about online course accessibility’s ability to help, not harm online courses. Overall, this means

that attitudes regarding online course accessibility have increased positively.

4.4.3.2. Competency Tests Specific Results.

To test how learners did with the competency tests, I combined the average scores of each of

the five intervention-specific competency tests along with the introductory and concluding

sections present in all versions. This is because each intervention-specific competency test had a

small number of participants-typically two to three-except for the introductory and concluding

sections, which had nine to twelve participants. Additionally, this was also since all test sets had

an equal difficulty level.

Then, I calculated the overall pretest and post-test means and compared them to each other. It

is crucial to note that some posttest’s averages are lower than their version’s respective pretest

averages because I incorporated partially correct answers in my scoring of select-all-that-apply

questions. By adding the test sets’ means together and dividing them by the total number of tests-

seven-the pretest mean was calculated as 80.1 and the posttest mean with 85.7. The calculated

difference and percent change between the two means showed that competency test averages

increased by approximately 7%. Consequently, despite technical and testing errors, this shows

that learners’ competency levels increased. Figure 37 below shows the means calculated for each

of the intervention’s test sets.

Table 1

Pretest and Posttest Averages Overall

Ty Lear Chr Psych Sens Commun Int Concl

 100

pe ning onic iatric ory ication ro usion

of Disa Disa Disab Disa Disabilit Sec Sectio

Tes bilit bilit ility bilit y tio n

t y y y n

Pre 137. 110. 107.7 75% 83.5% 21 25%

test 5% 7 % % %

Pos 162. 78.8 118.7 62% 121% 23. 33.4%

ttes 5% % % 8

Note: This graph shows the calculated pretest and posttest means of each of the competency

test sets. I calculated these averages by implementing partial credit for participants’ nuanced

answers for each select all that apply question. This partial grading system, alongside testing and

technical errors to be discussed in Chapter 5, is why some of the posttest averages are lower than

the pretest’s. However, despite these errors and partial credit being counted, learners’

competency in knowledge and skills related to online course accessibility grew from 80.1 to

85.7, a 7% increase.

4.4.3.3. Module Evaluation Test Results.

Out of 17 individuals, 9 completed the evaluation. The assessment focused on participants’

overall satisfaction with various components of the intervention, including simulations, sections
 101

on the importance of online course accessibility, conclusion sections, assessments, accessibility,

and navigability, as well as the achievement of the module’s overarching objectives.

Most respondents rated their satisfaction highly, with scores predominantly at 4/5 and 5/5.

However, over half of the questions, while having the majority be 4/5 and 5/5, had responses

below this range at varying degrees, mostly at the score of 3/5. Three rated the assessments as

3/5, two found the module’s accessibility to be 3/5, and two others rated navigability as 2/5 and

3/5, respectively.

Questions 2, 6, and 7, which did not receive any ratings below 4/5, mentioned satisfaction

with specific sections and objectives related to discerning disability types and interventions for

online learners.

Participants also provided feedback on the intervention’s highlights and areas for

improvement. The simulation, explanations of interventions and disability types, and the

module’s effectiveness in enhancing motivation for accessibility were stated as significant

strengths. Suggested improvements included enhancing navigability, providing direct access to

answers within assessments, converting lengthy content into videos, and remedying technical

issues to improve learner’s experiences. Some participants used the “Other” option to praise the

overall quality of the module’s presentation.

In summary, while there are areas of improvement, the module’s presentation and

components received mostly positive evaluations from the participants.

4.4.0. Summary of Evaluation

Overall, 4 forms of evaluation were used to record Stockton faculty volunteers’ progress

with online course accessibility skills, knowledge and attitudes as well as evaluate the

intervention’s quality. They were the SurveyMonkey attitudinal and competency test sets, the
 102

SurveyMonkey module evaluation, and spontaneous email feedback. By reviewing how rankings

of answers chosen changed between test sets and why, as well as the overall score averages

between the test sets’ assessments learners showed that they generally improved as well as

reinforced their knowledge about online course accessibility. Their attitudes regarding online

course accessibility also positively shifted pre- and post-intervention. However, the evaluation

process’s efficacy of the was somewhat compromised by technical issues encountered with

SurveyMonkey, voluntary participation resulting in incomplete test sets for certain faculty

members, and a singular testing error. Despite these challenges, the result’s validity remains

intact.
 103

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Discussion

5.1.0. Study Summary

This simulation-based research project aimed to improve Stockton faculty knowledge and

attitudes about online course accessibility. According to focus group analysis, online course

accessibility fosters challenges for instructors because instructors ignore and do not fulfill the

responsibilities that it requires due to the misconceptions. Countless studies have proved that this

is a problem, describing how e-learning inaccessibility harms students’ academic performance

(Fabian et al., 2022, Kumar et al., 2023, Luan et al., 2020, Beaulieu et al., 2022), perceptions of

faculty (Sofianidis et al., 2021, Butnaru et al., 2021, Bazan-Ramirez et al., 2023, Dhingra et al.,

2021) as well as higher-education institutions’ legal and financial standing (Launey & Vu, 2023,

Accessibility.com, 2022, AAAtraq,2022, Accenture,2022, Zendesk, 2021). The intervention was

a self-paced, interactive, e-learning simulation module. It included interactive, visual, and textual

elements alongside a story-based, multimedia simulation. 12 liberal arts faculty from a variety of

majors who were in their midcareer (8 years to 25 years teaching) were provided this

intervention. SurveyMonkey pre and post attitudinal and competency assessments, as well as a

Likert-scale-based module evaluation, analyzed the intervention’s ability to foster competency

and attitudes required to make online courses accessible via effective methods. The research had

largely positive outcomes. Post-intervention tests displayed improved understanding, problem-

solving skills, and attitudinal shifts regarding online course accessibility. Learner feedback

highlighted satisfaction with the intervention’s various aspects while simultaneously suggesting

enhancements in navigation, accessibility, and evaluation features for future iterations. Despite

technical issues encountered with SurveyMonkey and test sets due to the participants’ voluntary

nature, this intervention’s successes are still valid. This intervention’s success can therefore
 104

increase simulation-based learning’s buy-in from instructors since it shows simulation-based

learning’s ability to make complex topics outside of the sciences interactive and engaging for

learners. It can also benefit online course accessibility’s buy-in from instructors as well as

benefiting faculty in the experiential-based extremes and in similar academic environments.

5.2.0. Conclusion

To summarize, the study’s objectives were for faculty members to be able to (1)

demonstrate the ability to discern their ethical as well as legal responsibilities regarding ADA

online course accessibility, (2) differentiate between major disability categories’ characteristics,

learning challenges, and impacts, and (3), demonstrate the ability to choose the most optimal

interventions for students with disabilities’ online course struggles.

By completing these objectives, faculty members would increase their overall competence in and

attitudes towards creating ADA compliant e-learning content.

Based on these objectives and goals, I can safely conclude that the intervention achieved

these objectives in general. This is since when reviewing all competency questions’ results,

improved and reinforced question results ranked prominently, collectively totaling 19 out of 28

questions, reflecting participants' enhanced understanding and retention of key concepts. Mixed

answers were also notable in several categories, comprising 6 out of 28 questions, indicating

areas where participants experienced some confusion or difficulty. Additionally, while there

were areas for improvement, such as 2 out of 28 questions categorized as 'More incorrect than

not' in the Sensory Disability section, overall, participants demonstrated a positive trend in their

grasp of the material despite encountering challenges with closely related disability types.

Moreover, as shown by Chapter 4, learners’ overall score averages between the pretest and

posttest increased from 80.1 to 85.7, which also showed this positive trend. Additionally, as
 105

mostly indicated by the attitudinal pretest and posttest, attitudes towards making online courses

accessible and following online course accessibility guidelines, in general, all questions (9/9)

showed a shift towards more positive attitudes. Regarding the module evaluation and separate

email comments from participants, participant satisfaction with the module was mostly high and

deemed effective for reinforcing knowledge about disabilities, accessibility, and interventions.)

5.3.0 Reflections and Limitations

5.3.1. Reflection

Overall, I believe this project’s objectives and goals were achieved. In general, learner

knowledge increased, shown by higher competency rankings for questions related to disability

umbrellas’ characteristics, the e-learning challenges they create for students, interventions to

address these challenges and these interventions’ potential benefits for all learners. Learners also

displayed significantly higher levels of motivation towards following online courses accessibility

guidelines post-intervention and gave high module evaluation scores. Therefore, this proved

simulation-based learning’s effectiveness with instructing higher-education faculty on online

course accessibility.

This is exciting for both the fields of simulation-based learning and online course accessibility.

For simulation-based learning, this project beckons research to look beyond the scope of medical

and business sciences as well as make more affordable, modern resources and tools based on

simulation-creation best practices for young adult students and older.

My intervention’s success also galvanized me to tell everyone I know to stop attributing

learner’s disability-based challenges to negative attributes, like lethargy and laziness, or to well-

known, surface-level e-learning challenges that learners with disabilities face. Rather, we should

pay more attention to these disabilities’ holistic and lesser-known effects on students’ physical,
 106

mental, and social health, as well as energy, processing, skill-implementation, time-management,

collaboration, and environmental-adjustment levels. Additionally, I learned that when doing so,

going step-by-step with UDL and advocacy groups as a guide instead of rushing all accessibility

adjustments is the key.

5.3.2. Limitations

Regarding limitations, there are several to consider. Firstly, small sample size limited

external validity. Some technical issues that limited internal validity regarding a few participants

from the Chronic and Sensory Disabilities groups being expelled from certain assessments.

Participants contacted were professors I originally knew from being a student as an

undergraduate/graduate, and while their very honest feedback showed their biases at a minimum,

that could still affect the validity. Across all tests, less than a seventh of the questions and their

answers were affected by unintendedly correct, too similar, and too off worded stems, which also

affect internal validity. Finally, repetitive assessment structures and potential skimming by

participants may have also influenced post-test results.

5.4.0. Future Plans and Recommendations

Regarding future plans, I wish to streamline the intervention's content, enhance

interactive elements with moving visuals and increased focus on lesser-known aspects of

disability knowledge, and address SurveyMonkey’s as well as Captivate’s technical issues to

improve overall user experience. For future assessments, I plan to add more distinctions between

different answers, as well as what new, learned material will be implemented into their course.

This is to improve participants’ testing behavior and tracking of said behavior. Resources

regarding the topics discussed in my intervention will also become more prominent by putting

them at the end of the info’s pertaining sections to encourage learners to resolve questions with
 107

the material. Encouragement for learners to slowly enjoy the learning process via easier-to-see

reminders and a higher variety of interactive activities will increase in future versions.

Navigation tools where the buttons are in the same places, text elements and assessments being

automatically adjustable on all devices, accessibility tools testing availability, and more direct

assessment as well as reflection feedback will be given to increase accessibility.

For future research, I would enjoy seeing more interventions like mine being made for a

wider variety of faculty members to test the project’s validity and accessibility on all higher-

education demographics like the following: Student faculty, TA’s, 30+ year faculty, private

university, sparsely-populated university, largely-populated university, e-learning only faculty,

hybrid only faculty, non-New Jerseyan faculty, non-American faculty, disabled faculty, and trade

school faculty members.

Additionally, I would like for similar interventions to be assessed in the adult corporate

world with instructors of all backgrounds to test if my model can remedy their online

inaccessibility issues. Regarding the potential to combine the simulation with other training

methods, I can see this being combined with project-based learning. With this, I can see the

intervention being a months-long teaching tool, whose taught learnings can be accessed by

having students develop an intervention for fellow, disabled students based on their learnings. I

can also see service-based learning to be able to apply the intervention’s teaching tool to good

use, having learners move between their institution’s departments related to the disability

umbrellas (i.e. counseling for psychiatric disabilities) or disability interventions (i.e. Disability

Services) to complete medium to large-scale accessibility initiatives for different disability

groups. These mixed instructional interventions would most likely last for several months to a
 108

year and a half long, depending on the target audience (instructional design students, faculty, or

professionals).

References

1. AAAtraq. (2022). Higher education report on ADA compliance (digital inclusion).

https://www.aaatraq.com/adacompliance

2. AAATraq. (2022). Higher Education-Report on ADA Compliance.

https://aaatraq.com/static/downloads/AAAtraq-higher-education.pdf

3. AAATraq. (2022). The growth of ADA website accessibility lawsuits in 2022.

https://aatraq.com/ada-website-accessibility-lawsuits/

4. Accenture. (2022). Getting to equal: The disability inclusion advantage.

https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/PDF-112/Accenture-Disability-Inclusion-

Research-Report.pdf

5. Accessibility.com. (2022). Complete report: 2022 website accessibility lawsuits.

https://accessibility.com/blogs/ultimate-guide-to-website-accessibility-lawsuits-wcag

a. ADA National Network. (2020, February 28). ADA Requirements: Effective

Communication. Retrieved from https://www.ada.gov/effective-comm.htm

b. AdmissionSight. (2023, May 2). Breaking Down Communication Barriers in

Student Life. Retrieved from https://admissionsight.com/breaking-down-

communication-barriers-in-student-life/

6. Afthinos, Y., Papadimitriou, K., Theodorakis, N. D., & Gargalianos, D. (2022). The

serious game “Top Eleven” is an educational simulation platform for acquiring

knowledge and skills in the management of sports clubs. Education Sciences, 12(4), 270.

https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040270
 109

a. American Foundation for the Blind. (n.d.). Vision loss resources. Retrieved from

https://www.afb.org/

b. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Disorders of Reading

and Writing. Retrieved from https://www.asha.org/practice-portal/clinical-

topics/written-language-disorders/disorders-of-reading-and-writing/

c. ARUMA. (n.d.). Types of sensory disabilities. Retrieved from

https://www.aruma.com.au/about-us/about-disability/types-of-disabilities/types-

of-sensory-disabilities/

7. Bazán-Ramírez, E., Orozco-Quijada, M., Vela-Ruiz, K., Tipacti-Flores, E., Zevallos-

Reyes, C. A., Núñez-Cárdenas, J. J., & Ríos-Ñique, W. (2023). Perception of Peruvian

students studying in biological sciences about the advantages of virtual classes during the

COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 13(1), 22.

https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010022

8. Beaulieu, C., Larose, S., Heilporn, G., Bureau, J. S., Cellard, C., Janosz, M., &

Châteauvert, G. B. (2022). Does inclusive teaching impact college adjustment and

performance for students with and without disabilities? Journal of Postsecondary

Education and Disability, 35(3), 229-246.

9. Beaulieu, C., Santos, J., & Dutil, J. (2022). Does inclusive teaching impact college

adjustment and performance for students with or without disabilities?. Journal of

Postsecondary Education and Disability, 35(3), 261-279.

https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped/archived-jped/jped-

volume-35
 110

10. Bielefield, A., & Cheeseman, J. (2021). Private post-secondary library websites and the

ADA: Compliancy and COVID-19. Information Technology and Libraries, 40(2), 1-15.

https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v40i2.13229

11. Bielefield, A., Liu, Y.Q., & Waimon, V. (2023). Private post-secondary library websites

and the ADA: Compliancy and COVID-19. Universal Access in the Information Society,

22(1), 251-266. https://doi-org.ezproxy.stockton.edu/10.1007/s10209-021-00831-1

12. Bohmann, F., Mono, M. L., Schlachetzki, F., Exner, C., Reinschlüssel, A., Opherk, C., ...

& Winkler, D. T. (2022). Simulation‐based training improves process times in acute

stroke care (STREAM). European Journal of Neurology, 29(5), 1258-1268.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15283

13. Bohmann, F., Mono, M. L., Schlachetzki, F., Exner, C., Reinschlüssel, A., Opherk, C., ...

& Winkler, D. T. (2022). Simulation‐based training improves process times in acute

stroke care (STREAM). European Journal of Neurology, 29(5), 1258-1268.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15283

14. Bray, S., Smith, M., Pineault, L., Dickson, M., & Tosch, K. (2020, September 2). Making

Accessibility a Priority in Online Teaching Even During a Pandemic [Opinion]. Inside

Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2020/09/02/making-accessibility-

priority-online-teaching-even-during-pandemic-opinion

15. Butnaru, G. I., Niță, V., Anichiti, A., & Brînză, G. (2021). The effectiveness of online

education during Covid 19 pandemic—A comparative analysis between the perceptions

of academic students and high school students from Romania. Sustainability, 13(7), 4140.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su13074140
 111

16. Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). AWARENESS. In Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved

October 23, 2023, from

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/awarenessLAP, n.d.-a:

Stockton University. (n.d.). Testing, note taking & alt text. The Wellness Center.

Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/wellness/accessibility/testing.html

17. CAST, 2022: CAST. (2022). About Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved from

https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl

a. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Disability impacts all of us.

https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/documents/disabilities_impacts_

all_of_us.pdf

18. Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F.

(2020). Simulation-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis. Review of

Educational Research, 90(4), 501-504.

a. Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., &

Fischer, F.(2020). Simulation-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Meta-

Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 90(4), 501-504.

19. Chronic Disability Definition Help: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

(2021). About chronic diseases. Retrieved from

https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/about/index.htmSensory Disability Definition

Sensory Disability Definition Help:

 112

a. Commonwealth Charter Academy. (n.d.). How Cyber School Supports Students

With Speech & Language Disorders. Retrieved from

https://ccaeducate.me/blog/accommodating-student-speech-language-disorders/

b. Communication Disabilities Access Canada. (n.d.). People who have

communication disabilities. Retrieved from

https://www.cdacanada.com/resources/communication-disabilities/statistics/

20. Communication Disability Definition Help:

a. Communication Hub. (n.d.). Causes of communication disability. Retrieved from

https://communicationhub.com.au/Communication_Hub/Communication_Disabili

ty/Causes_of_communication_disability.aspx

21. CTLD, n.d.-d: Stockton University. (n.d.). Upcoming events and opportunities. Center

for Teaching & Learning Design. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/ctld/events.html

22. CTLD, n.d.-e: Stockton University. (n.d.). Course design & teaching. Center for

Teaching & Learning Design. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/ctld/course-design.html

23. CTLD, n.d.-f: Stockton University. (n.d.). Our team. Center for Teaching & Learning

Design. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/ctld/team.html

24. CTLD, n.d.-g: Stockton University. (n.d.). Making instructional videos with closed

captioning [Video]. Google Drive. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K8sQ9UM2j8p8mfbM3nxJjT7Lyh32KoT9/view

25. CTLD, n.d.-h: Stockton University. (n.d.). Inclusive student success [PDF document].

Retrieved from https://stockton.edu/ctld/documents/inclusive-student-success.pdf

 113

26. CTLD, n.d.-i: Stockton University. (n.d.). Mobile devices in the classroom [PDF

document]. Retrieved from https://stockton.edu/ctld/documents/mobile-devices-in-

the-classroom.pdf

27. CTLD, n.d.-j: Stockton University. (n.d.). Search CTLD resources. Center for Teaching

& Learning Design. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/ctld

28. CTLD, n.d.-k: Stockton University. (n.d.). ADA compliance [PowerPoint slides].

Retrieved from https://stockton.edu/ctld/documents/ADA.pptx

29. Dhingra, R., Prakash, J., & Sethi, A. (2021). Assessing the role of internal motivation and

extrinsic factors on online undergraduate medical teaching in a resource-poor setting

during Covid-19 pandemic in north India: An observational study. BMC medical

education, 21(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02933-6

a. DO-IT. (n.d.). Augmentative & Alternative Communication. Retrieved from

https://sphsc.washington.edu/augmentative-alternative-

communication#:~:text=AAC%20is%20the%20use%20of%20strategies%20or

%20tools,and%20writing%20is%20insufficient%20to%20meet

%20communication%20needs

b. DO-IT. (n.d.). Effective Communication with Students Who Have

Communication Disorders. Retrieved from

https://www.washington.edu/doit/effective-communication-students-who-have-

communication-disorders

30. Edwards, C., & Gaved, M. (2022). Digital teaching, inclusion and students' needs:

Student perspectives on participation and access in higher education. Geography and

Environmental Studies Faculty Scholarship. https://libweb.stockton.edu/login?

 114

url=https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=stockton_main&id=GALE|

A706393937&v=2.1&it=r

31. Edwards, M., Poed, S., Al-Nawab, H., & Penna, O. (2022). Academic accommodations

for university students living with disability and the potential of universal design to

address their needs. Higher Education. Advance online publication.

https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/academic-accommodations-

university-students-with/docview/2751678674/se-2

a. eLearning Industry. (2020, November 11). eLearning, COVID-19, And Language

Difficulties. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/elearning-but-not-

equality-in-education-language-difficulties

b. Expressable. (2020, February 13). How Speech-Language Disorders Affect a

Child’s Classroom Performance. Retrieved from

https://www.expressable.com/learning-center/social-emotional-academic/how-

speech-language-disorders-affect-a-childs-classroom-performance

32. Fabian, K., Topping, K. J., & Barron, I. G. (2022). Identifying factors influencing study

skills engagement and participation for online learners in higher education during

COVID‐19. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 859-880.

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13167

33. Ferati, M., & Bathija, R. (2022). Accessibility in web development courses: A case study.

Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 37(6), 139-147.

34. First Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2023: Stockton University. (2023). Bias

Prevention Education & Review Team. Stockton University.

https://www.stockton.edu/diversity/bias-prevention.html
 115

35. First Stockton University, 2022: Stockton University. (2022). Accessibility statement.

Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/accessibility.html

36. First Stockton University, 2023: Stockton University. (2023). Parents/Guardians - The

Wellness Center. Stockton University.

https://www.stockton.edu/wellness-center/parents-guardians.html

37. Fourth Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2023: Stockton University. (2023). Diversity

& Inclusion. Stockton University. https://www.stockton.edu/diversity/index.html

38. Herron, E. K., Sudia, T., Kimble, L. P., & Davis, A. H. (2019). Effect of case study

versus video simulation on nursing students' satisfaction, self-confidence, and

knowledge: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse educator, 44(1), E1-E5.

https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000554

39. Huang, R., Tlili, A., Chang, T.W., Zhang, X., Nascimbeni, F., Burgos, D., ... & Zhuang,

R. (2020). Disrupted classes, undisrupted learning during COVID-19 outbreak in China:

Application of open educational practices and resources. Smart Learning Environments,

7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00125-8

40. Iniesto, F., Rodrigo, C., & Hillaire, G. (2023). A Case Study to Explore a UDL

Evaluation Framework Based on MOOCs. Applied Sciences; Basel, 13(1), 476. DOI:

10.3390/app13010476.

41. Ismail, A., Kuppusamy, K. S., Kumar, A., & Ojha, P. K. (2019). Connect the dots:

Accessibility, readability and site ranking – An investigation with reference to top ranked

websites of Government of India. Journal of King Saud University - Computer and

Information Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2017.05.007

 116

a. Johns Hopkins University. (n.d.). Types of disabilities. Student Affairs. Retrieved

from https://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/disabilities/about/types-of-disabilities/

42. Koob, A.R., Oliva, K.S.I., Williamson, M., Lamont-Manfre, M., Hugen, A., Stone, A.G.,

Lewis, S., & Luo, L. (2022). Tech tools in pandemic-transformed information literacy

instruction: Pushing for digital accessibility. Information Technology and Libraries,

41(4), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v41i4.15383

43. Kumar, S., Sharma, V., & Singh, S. (2023). E-learning and E-modules in medical

education—A SOAR analysis using perception of undergraduate students. Medical

Education Online, 28(1), 2078616. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2078616

44. LAP, n.d.-b: Stockton University. (n.d.). Accessibility toolbox. The Wellness Center.

Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/wellness/accessibility/toolbox.html

45. LAP, n.d.-c: Stockton University. (n.d.). Forms and information. The Wellness Center.

Retrieved Month Day, Year, from https://stockton.edu/wellness/accessibility/forms-

info.html

46. Launey, P., & Vu, K. (2023, January 10). Plaintiffs set a new record for website

accessibility lawsuit filings in 2022. ADA Title III.

https://www.adatitleiii.com/2023/01/plaintiffs-set-a-new-record-for-website-

accessibility-lawsuit-filings-in-2022/

47. Learning Disability Definition Help: Understood. (n.d.). Learning disabilities

information. Retrieved from https://www.understood.org/en

48. Luan, H., Zou, D., & Hu, X. (2020). Exploring the role of online EFL learners’ perceived

social support in their learning engagement: A structural equation model. Interactive

 117

Learning Environments, 31(3), 346-358.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1713731

a. Masters in Communications. (n.d.). Everything You Need to Know About

Communication Disorders. Retrieved from

https://www.mastersincommunications.org/everything-about-communication-

disorders/

49. Microsoft. (2022, May). Teachers surveyed say accessible tech is needed now more than

ever. Microsoft EDU. https://educationblog.microsoft.com/en-us/2022/05/teachers-

surveyed-say-accessible-tech-is-needed-now-more-than-ever/

a. National Federation of the Blind. (n.d.). Blindness resources. Retrieved from

https://www.nfb.org/

b. National Institutes of Health. (2023, February 20). Speech-language disorder

severity, academic success, and socioemotional functioning among multilingual

and English children in the United States: The National Survey of Children’s

Health. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9987562/

c. Northeastern University. (2021, September 22). Types of Communication

Disorders Treated by SLPs. Retrieved from

https://graduate.northeastern.edu/resources/types-of-communication-disorders/

d. Northern Arizona University. (n.d.). Literacy. Retrieved from

https://nau.edu/csd/literacy/

e. Psych Central. (2022, April 13). Expressive Language Disorder: Symptoms,

Causes, and Treatments. Retrieved from https://psychcentral.com/disorders/all-

about-expressive-language-disorder-symptoms#symptoms
 118

50. Psychiatric Disability Definition Help: National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.).

Mental health information. Retrieved from https://www.nimh.nih.gov/

51. Queen’s University. (2021). Simulation EL faculty toolkit.

https://www.queensu.ca/ctl/sites/webpublish.queensu.ca.ctlwww/files/files/

Publications/Simulation%20EL%20Faculty%20Toolkit%20Final%20Final

%20April%208.pdf

52. Roy, D. (2022, March 25). Simulation-based Learning: A Real-World Learning! Mindler.

https://www.mindler.com/blog/simulation-based-learning/

a. Roy, D. (2022, March 25). Simulation-based Learning: A Real-World Learning!

Mindler.https://www.mindler.com/blog/simulation-based-learning/

53. School of Education, n.d.-1: Stockton University. (n.d.). Academic programs. School of

Education. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/educ/programs.html

54. School of Education, n.d.-m: Stockton University. (n.d.). SRI&ETTC. SRI & ETTC.

Retrieved Month Day, Year, from https://stockton.edu/educ/srietc.html

55. School of Education, n.d.-n: Stockton University. (n.d.). The Center for Community

Engagement and Service-Learning. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/service-learning

56. School of Education, n.d.-o: Stockton University. (n.d.). Dr. Elizabeth Elmore Center

for Economic Development & Financial Literacy. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/elmore-center
 119

57. School of Education, n.d.-p: Stockton University. (n.d.). Youth programs. School of

Education. Retrieved October 21st, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/educ/youth-

programs.html

58. Scott, L. A. (2018). Barriers with implementing a universal design for learning

framework [Doctoral dissertation, Valdosta State University]. ODLIS.

http://hdl.handle.net/10428/2186

59. Second Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2023: Stockton University. (2023). Culture

of Respect. Stockton University. https://www.stockton.edu/diversity/culture-of-

respect.html

60. Second Stockton University, 2022: Stockton University. (2022). Blackboard ally.

Blackboard tutorials. Retrieved Month Day, Year, from

https://blogs.stockton.edu/blackboard/blackboard-ally/

61. Simulation-Based Learning Characteristics:

62. Simulation-Based Learning Definition: Queen’s University. (2021). Simulation EL

facultytoolkit.https://www.queensu.ca/ctl/sites/webpublish.queensu.ca.ctlwww/files/

files/Publications/Simulation%20EL%20Faculty%20Toolkit%20Final%20Final%20April

%208.pdf

63. Smith, S. J., Villegas, J., & Rubenfeld, S. (2020, September 2). Making accessibility a

priority in online teaching, even during a pandemic. Inside Higher Ed.

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2020/09/02/making-accessibility-priority-

online-teaching-even-during-pandemic-opinion

a. Social Sci LibreTexts. (n.d.). 6.1: Definitions of Communication Disorders.

Retrieved from
 120

https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Psychology/Developmental_Psycholo

gy/The_Psychology_of_Exceptional_Children_(Zaleski)/

06%3A_Students_with_Communication_Disorders/

6.01%3A_Definitions_of_Communication_Disorders

64. Sofianidis, P., Tzevelekos, N., Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., Agathangelou, S., Flourentzou,

F., & Prokopiadou, G. (2021). Let students talk about emergency remote teaching

experience: Secondary students’ perceptions on their experience during the COVID-19

pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(12), 805. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci111208

65. Sources that describe standards’ definitions of disabilities planned for use of my

simulation:

66. Sources that helped narrow down disability types I wanted to cover:

a. Speech Pathology Masters Programs. (2020, July 24). Most Common Speech

Disorders and Treatments. Retrieved from

https://speechpathologymastersprograms.com/resources/common-speech-

disorders-treatments/

67. Spyridonis, F., & Daylamani-Zad, D. (2019). A serious game to improve engagement

with web accessibility guidelines. School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences,

University of Greenwich, London, United Kingdom.

68. Stockton University Center for Teaching and Learning Design. (n.d.). Retrieved October

24, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/ctld

69. Stockton University Office of Diversity and Inclusion. (n.d.). Retrieved October 24,

2023, from https://stockton.edu/diversity

 121

70. Stockton University Wellness Center. (n.d.). Retrieved October 24, 2023, from

https://stockton.edu/wellness

71. Third Office of Diversity and Inclusion, 2023: Stockton University. (2023). Campus

Committee on Diversity & Inclusive Excellence Digest - Diversity & Inclusion. Stockton

University. https://www.stockton.edu/diversity/diversity-digest.html

72. Third Stockton University, 2022: Stockton University. (2022). Faculty information on

the Americans with Disabilities Act. Center for Teaching & Learning Design. Retrieved

October 21st, 2023, from https://stockton.edu/ctld/ada

a. U.S. Access Board. (2022). Guide to the Section 508 Standards.

https://www.access-board.gov/ict/guide/

73. U.S. Department of Education. (2023, January 9). Protecting students with disabilities.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html

74. U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section. (2022).

ADA update: A primer for state and local governments. ADA.gov.

https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleII_2010/title_ii_primer.html

75. U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section. (n.d.).

Introduction to the Americans with Disabilities Act. ADA.gov.

https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm

a. U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Americans with Disabilities Act: Title III

regulations.

https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleIII_2010/titleIII_2010_regulations.htm

b. Understood. (2024, January 12). What is written expression disorder? Retrieved

from https://www.understood.org/en/articles/what-is-written-expression-disorder
 122

c. Understood. (n.d.). Conditions covered under IDEA. Retrieved from

https://www.understood.org/en/articles/conditions-covered-under-idea

d. Understood. (n.d.). What’s the Difference Between Speech Disorders and

Language-Based Learning Disabilities? Retrieved from

https://www.understood.org/en/articles/difference-between-speech-disorders-and-

language-based-learning-disabilities

e. University of Central Florida. (n.d.). Oral Language Disabilities. Retrieved from

https://healthprofessions.ucf.edu/cdclinic/oral-language-disabilities/

76. Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). (2022, March). Introduction to web accessibility.

https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/

77. WebFx. (2022). What is ADA compliance? (And what it means for your site).

https://www.webfx.com/web-design/what-is-ada-compliance.html

78. Widiasih, R. P., Utomo, T. W., & Suwanti, L. P. (2022). VNursLab 3D simulator: A

web-based nursing skills simulation of knowledge of nursing skill, satisfaction, and self-

confidence among nursing students. Nursing Reports, 12(3), 817-828.

https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep12030067

a. World Wide Web Consortium. (2018). Web content accessibility guidelines

(WCAG) overview. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/

b. World Wide Web Consortium. (2022). Accessibility fundamentals.

https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/

79. World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

W3C. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/
 123

80. Zendesk. (2021). 7 customer service trends to follow in 2023.

https://www.zendesk.com/blog/customer-service-trends/
 124

Appendix

Appendix A. Needs Tool: Focus Group Interview Questions

These questions were developed for organizations related to Stockton’s online course

accessibility guidelines to answer questions regarding online course accessibility issues,

misconceptions, and points of improvement that faculty members at Stockton had. The document

also had questions regarding what topics should be covered in my intervention and in what way.

These questions were sent as a Microsoft Word document to Stockton’s Center of Teaching and

Learning Design, School of Education, and Learning Access Program faculty and staff members,

alongside an email asking potential participants if they were interested in adding their feedback

to the focus group.

Focus Questions for Interviews Updated

1. Please list the top five accessibility complaints that you receive from Stockton students

taking online courses.

2. Please list the top five accessibility complaints that you receive from Stockton faculty

members about facilitating online courses.

3. Besides faculty complaints, do you see any assumptions or misconceptions that faculty

members may have about online course accessibility that blocks them from complying?

4. Suggest the three most important topics to teach Stockton faculty members about ADA

compliance.
 125

5. From my experience, ADA compliance instruction is text-based, long and boring. If the

instruction about ADA compliance is more engaging and interactive, do you think faculty

would learn more and use it more?

6. What do you think must be included in the ADA compliance instruction regarding

navigability and accessibility?

7. If you have any additional suggestions not related to navigability and accessibility of the

ADA compliance instruction, please put them here.

 126

Appendix B. Evaluation Tool 1: Attitudinal Pretest and Posttest Questions

These 9 Likert, multiple choice and short-answer questions were developed for Stockton

faculty member participants of my project. The SurveyMonkey Attitudinal Pretests and Posttests

had questions regarding how participants felt about online course accessibility’s misconceptions,

the amount of effort it takes to uphold it, and making online course materials accessible in

general.

1. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: Accessible online courses

are time consuming to make and update.

1: Strongly Disagree

2: Disagree

3: Neutral

4: Agree

5: Strongly Agree

2. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: Making online course

materials accessible for students is stressful to do.

1: Strongly Disagree

2: Disagree

3: Neutral

4: Agree
 127

5: Strongly Agree

3. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: Making online course

materials accessible is my responsibility.

1: Strongly Disagree

2: Disagree

3: Neutral

4: Agree

5: Strongly Agree

4. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: I am very motivated to

ensure my online course/course materials are compliant with accessibility guidelines, such

as those found in the ADA.

1: Strongly Disagree

2: Disagree

3: Neutral

4: Agree

5: Strongly Agree

5. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: I believe making online
 128

courses or online course material accessible is beneficial for at least two of the following

groups of people: myself, all of my students, and/or my higher-education institution.

1: Strongly Disagree

2: Disagree

3: Neutral

4: Agree

5: Strongly Agree

6. Likert Scale Question: Answer your agreement to the following statements with a scale from

1 to 5, with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree: My feelings on making

online courses as well as online course materials accessible have changed.

1: Very negatively

2: Negatively

3: Stayed the same

4: Positively

5: Very positively

7. Multiple Choice Question: Are there any accessibility tips or tricks that you plan to use in

your online course material now that you have taken the course?

Yes

No

Maybe
 129

Other (PLEASE CHOOSE THIS ANSWER IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THESE TIPS OR

TRICKS AS WELL AS IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWERS)

8. Short Answer Question: What percentage of your course development time do you now

want to put into making online courses or online course materials accessible from 01%-100%?

9. Multiple Choice Question: After completing the module, what do you now think happens to

content when online course materials become accessible?

It enhances the content.

It waters it down.

It does a bit of both.

Other (PLEASE CHOOSE THIS ANSWER IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THESE TIPS OR

TRICKS AS WELL AS IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWERS)

Button at the survey’s end: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this survey, please

return to the course in the browser.

Appendix C. Evaluation Tools: Competency Test Questions

Across all 5 versions of the intervention, there were seven versions. Each version had

four questions each, with two being multiple choice and two being select-all-that-apply. Out of
 130

the 7 competency test types, two were available in one section across all 5 versions. They are for

The Importance of Online Course Accessibility and Disability Simulation Conclusion sections, or

the intervention’s introduction and conclusion section. The other five were available in one of

the five versions since each intervention version covered a specific disability umbrella’s e-

learning challenges as well as strategies to overcome said challenges. These topics were

Learning Disabilities, Chronic Disabilities, Psychiatric Disabilities, Sensory Disabilities, and

Communication Disabilities. The questions’ topics varied depending on the test version, but I

made sure that all test questions covered subjects from different areas of the intervention and that

they repeated between the pretest and posttest. The questions are below with the correct answers

marked in green. The question with the testing error is marked in red.

The Importance of Online Course Accessibility Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1. Select All That Apply Question: Which of the following are reasons cited in the provided

information for making online courses accessible. Select all answers that apply.

Increasing litigation risks

Decreasing acceptance of online learning

Improving students' social skills

Increasing your and the institution's profit

Making students' learning experiences more challenging

2. Multiple Choice Question: What is the purpose of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act?

Enhancing online accessibility standards

 131

Prohibiting disability discrimination in public transit

Ensuring fairness for learners with disabilities

Mandating accommodations for disabled employees

3. Multiple Choice Question: What did the Supreme Court rule in Olmstead vs. LC in 1999?

Unjustified segregation of individuals with mental illness is acceptable

Private universities are exempt from ADA regulations

Unjustified segregation of individuals with mental illness violates the ADA

Public transit services are not covered by the ADA

4. Select All That Apply Question: Identify the responsibilities mentioned for instructors

regarding online course accessibility. Select all answers that apply.

Understanding and complying with the ADA and other accessibility standards

Providing no makeup assignments or extra credit when your learners need them

Obtaining your students' consent to publicly share the lecture recordings

Implementing accommodations set by your students, LAP as well as yourself

Making your course's attendance and participation standards accessible

Helping LAP to manage course recording practices to keep recordings private

Message at the survey’s end: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please return

to the course in the browser.

Disability Simulation Conclusion Pretest and Posttest Questions

 132

1. Which interventions can benefit learners without disabilities in distracting sensory

environments AND those using tablets or phones?

Positive Feedback

Clear, Repeated Assignments and Objectives

Making online course materials magnifier-friendly

Closed Captions Select All That Apply Question:

2. Multiple Choice Question: Which overlap involves challenges in discussing information in

class with peers and faculty, difficulty expressing emotions verbally or through writing, and

difficulty with public speaking and presenting?

Psychiatric, Learning, and Communication Disabilities

Learning, Sensory, and Chronic Disabilities

Sensory, Chronic, and Communication Disabilities

Chronic and Sensory Disabilities

Question Title

3. Select All That Apply Question: Select the following statements regarding the overlap of

sensory and communication disabilities that are TRUE.

Sensory difficulties may lead to challenges in understanding verbal communication.

Hypersensitivity contributes to better concentration during verbal communication.

Concentration issues due to hypersensitivity make it harder to understand written content.

Visual difficulties make it easier to understand written communication.

 133

4. Multiple Choice Question: A third of your learners are all getting sick with bad cases of the

flu, making them come to meetings yawning and handing in assignments late. What can best

help them overcome their fatigue?

Through the use of mental health coping mechanisms

By providing flexible schedules with breaks

Using assistive-tech friendly course materials

Repeating objectives and instructions clearly

End of the Survey’s Text: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please turn to the

course in the browser.

Learning Disabilities Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1.Multiple Choice Question: How might learning disabilities impact e-learners, especially in

online classes?

They help with enhancing students' reading skills as well as reading comprehension.

They help with enhancing students' skills needed to understand abstract concepts.

They create benefits for students regarding processing and utilizing info needed to achieve in

their courses.

They create challenges for students regarding understanding as well as processing complex

visuals.
 134

2.Select All That Apply Question: Identify common examples of learning disabilities.: Select

all that apply.

Dyspraxia

Epilepsy

Visual Processing Disorder

Apraxia

3. Multiple Choice Question: You have a group of learners with ADHD, Dyslexia, and other

learning disabilities in your class. What is a way that you can help them be more engaged in the

class?

Implement only text-based materials to help students combat their reading struggles.

Implement hands-on learning tools for learners' improved understanding of concepts.

Implement visual processing tools for students that have no alt-text options available.

Implement only one instructional format throughout the class to maintain consistency.

4. Select All That Apply: Which of the following statements accurately describe learning

disabilities?: Select all answers that apply.

Learning disabilities may impact executive functions, social skills, as well as coordination.

Learning disabilities are solely related to difficulties in reading, writing, as well as math.

Learning disabilities are solely related to difficulties in understanding a course's concrete

concepts.

Learning disabilities may not impact students' abilities to do ADA-based major life activities.

Learning disabilities may impact students' abilities to do cognition and information processing.
 135

Message At the Survey’s End: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please

return to the course in the browser.

Chronic Disabilities Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1. Multiple Choice Question: Which of the following is an example of a chronic disability?

Broken bones

Seasonal allergies

Arthritis

2. Select All That Apply Question: Which are common symptoms experienced by learners with

chronic disabilities during flare cycles?: Select all that apply.

Fatigue

Increased motivation

Cognitive impairments

Enhanced physical performance

Diminished appetite

3.Muliple Choice Question: You notice that a learner in your class who has chronic migraines

is struggling to hand in assignments on time. What strategy can best help them overcome this

challenge?

Telling learners to avoid setting goals

 136

Using tools like Flora, myHomework, and Remember the Milk

Not frequently reminding learners of approaching deadlines

4. Select All That Apply Question: How can instructors facilitate breaks for learners with

chronic disabilities during assessments? Select all answers that apply.

Incorporate breaks within assessments to allow learners to readjust medically

Have a strict no-break policy during class

Assign heavier tasks during certain weeks to balance class schedules

Have mindfulness exercises during class and resources for outside of class

Message At the Survey’s End: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please turn

to the course in the browser.

Psychiatric Disabilities Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1. Select All That Apply Question: Which of the following statements accurately describe

psychiatric disabilities?: Select all answers that apply.

Students with psychiatric disabilities find it easy to do their daily activities.

Students with psychiatric disabilities find it hard to maintain concentration.

Psychiatric disabilities can be accurately considered by academic evaluations.

Psychiatric disabilities can create challenges regarding regulating mood states.

 137

2. Multiple Choice Question: How do features of psychiatric disabilities impact sustaining

concentration?

Factors like increased meaning in stimuli make it easier for students to maintain focus.

Factors like varying motivation levels make it impossible for students to stay focused.

Factors like having intrusive thoughts make it harder for students to maintain their focus.

Factors like varying energy levels make no effects on students' ability to stay focused.

3. Select All That Apply Question: A group of your learners are struggling with their course-

related stresses as well as caring for their mental health. Which strategies would best help

them?: Select all that apply.

Alerting students about mental health events by organizations like Active Minds.

Offering fixed assignment due dates to help students with managing schoolwork.

Providing online materials early to give students more time to understand their schoolwork.

Encouraging students to have unhealthy sleep habits by having late-night deadlines.

Making a system where students can collaborate to complete the course's schoolwork.

4. Multiple Choice Question: Which of the following is a common example of a psychiatric

disability?

Anorexia

Alexia

Palilalia

Insomnia
 138

Message at the Survey’s End: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please return

to the course in the browser.

Sensory Disabilities Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1. Multiple Choice Question: Which of the following is an example of a hypersensitive

disability?

Ethers-Danlos Syndrome

Depression

Autism

Asthma

2. Select All That Apply Question: A few of your learners email you, worrying that your

course materials are not readable for screen readers. What strategies can best fix that?: Select all

answers that apply.

Structuring materials with clear headings

Structuring materials with mostly images

Embedding captions into multimedia content

Embedding vague terms into pictures' alt-text

3. Select All That Apply Question: Name the senses that help your body specifically with

moving and navigating through space.: Select all that apply.

Kinanesthesia
 139

Sight

Touch

Hearing

Proprioception

4. Multiple Choice Question: How does hyposensitivity affect learners with sensory

disabilities?

Increased motivation and happiness

Challenges in depth perception

Enhanced ability to process information

Improved tracking of noises

Message at the Survey’s End: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please

return to the course in the browser.

Communication Disabilities Competency Pretest and Posttest Questions

1. Multiple Choice Question: A learner with a traumatic brain injury in your class is struggling

to understand your online class lectures' main points. Which strategy can best help increase their

chances of success?

Implementing sip-and-puff online communication systems

Implementing sign language reading software systems

Using predictive AI text technology like Grammarly

Using SoundNote and WritePad for reflective learning

 140

2. Select All That Apply Question: Which of the following are examples of communication

disabilities?: Select all that apply.

Dyslexia

Stuttering

ADHD

Aphasia

Colorblindness

3.Multiple Choice Question: How does the lack of info and resources addressing

communication disabilities impact students in higher education?

It facilitates effective communication in group discussions.

It leads to discrimination from fellow students, faculty, and staff.

It prevents students from facing any challenges due to their disabilities.

It presents additional academic challenges for these students.

4.Select All That Apply: Choose the accurate statements about communication disabilities and

the recommended approach: Select all answers that apply.

Hyperlexia and social anxiety disorder fall under the category of communication disabilities.

Learners are often not aware of their communication challenges, saying they are their psychiatric

disability's fault.
 141

Only students' abilities needed for successful written communication are impacted by

communication disabilities.

Only students' abilities to speak and listen are impacted by communication disabilities.

Gently helping learners with overcoming their communication challenges is recommended.

Communication disabilities impact how students understand or convey info to others via many

methods.

Message at the Survey’s End: IMPORTANT!!! Once you are done with this test, please

return to the course in the browser.

Appendix D. Evaluation Tools: Module Evaluation Questions

Across all 5 versions of the intervention, there was a module evaluation at the end of the

intervention. It was found right after the attitudinal posttest. The module evaluation included 10

questions that were Likert Scale and select all that apply. These questions were made with the

goal to evaluate learners’ thoughts on the intervention’s various aspects, its ability to achieve

research objectives, and overall highlights as well as points of improvement. The questions are

noted below.
 142

Module Evaluation Questions

1. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the Simulation on a scale from lowest to

highest (1 to 5).

2. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the Interactive Presentation and

Conclusion sections on a scale from lowest to highest (1 to 5).

3. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the assessments on a scale from lowest to

highest (1 to 5).

3
 143

4. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the module's accessibility on a scale from

lowest to highest (1 to 5).

5. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the module's navigability (Was the course

easy to move around, easy to use its tools, etc.) on a scale from lowest to highest (1 to 5).

6. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the module's ability to achieve the

following objective-to increase learner's competence in discerning types of disabilities that affect

e-learning-on a scale from lowest to highest (1 to 5)

1
 144

7. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the module's ability to achieve the

following objective-to increase learner's competence in discerning the optimal interventions to

aid e-learning students with said types of disabilities-on a scale from lowest to highest (1 to 5)

8. Likert Scale Question: Rate your satisfaction with the module's ability to achieve the

following objective-to increase learner's motivation for ensuring their online course materials or

courses are accessible-on a scale from lowest to highest (1 to 5)

5
 145

9. Select All That Apply Question: What were the highlight or highlights of the module? Select

all answers that apply.

The simulation

The interventions and disability-type explanations

The benefits of following ADA online course accessibility guidelines

The navigability of the module overall

The accessibility of the module overall

The visual presentation of the module overall

The content presentation of the module overall

Other (please choose this answer if you want to mention a different highlight or elaborate on

certain high scores that you gave for the previous questions)

10. Select All That Apply Question: What were the point or points of improvement for the

module? Select all answers that apply.

The simulation

The interventions and disability-type explanations

The benefits of following ADA online course accessibility guidelines

The navigability of the module overall

The accessibility of the module overall

The visual presentation of the module overall

The content presentation of the module overall

Other (please choose this answer if you want to mention a different highlight or elaborate on

certain high scores that you gave for the previous questions)
 146

Appendix E. Intervention Tools: Consent Document for Participants

This was sent to all potential participants of my project and signed by all participants who

followed through. It includes information about how the project participation will work, benefits

and costs for participating, confidentiality, contacts, and withdrawal. The form is below:

Consent Form for Participation in a Simulation-Based Learning Research Project

Research Project: Teaching ADA Online Course Compliance

Location: Stockton University

Dates: February 23rd, 2024, to March 15th, 2024

Principal Researcher: Elizabeth Rivera

Introduction: Thank you for agreeing to help with this research! This study’s purpose is to

evaluate the effectiveness of simulation-based learning as a method to increase faculty

 147

understanding of and implementation of online course accessibility best practices within

guidelines like the Americans with Disabilities Act’s. Hopefully, my intervention can help assist

in making courses and their offered resources more navigable and user friendly for students with

as well as without disabilities.

Benefits: The most substantial benefits of the research are those gains made by the participants

in better understanding both the responsibilities and interventions required to solve various e-

learning accessibility challenges that students can have.

Risks, Inconveniences, Discomforts: There are no risks associated with this study. Your

responses are completely anonymous, and the questions themselves are not personally probing

ones.

Cost of Participation: The only cost to you is the time you take to participate. I am asking you

to take approximately 180 minutes out of your teaching time, so there is a minor inconvenience

involved.

Confidentiality of Records: I will treat your identity with professional standards of

confidentiality. The information we obtain will be analyzed statistically, and general findings

may be published in scientific journals, but individual participants' identities will not be known.

If names are needed for open answer sections, they will be pseudonyms.

Withdrawal: Participation is voluntary. I will answer any questions you may have about the

study. You are free to withdraw your consent and discontinue participation at any time with no

loss of credit.

Contact Information:

Principal Researcher: Elizabeth Rivera, MAIT. Master of Arts of Instructional Technology.

Phone number is 908-601-9476. Email is rivera93@go.stockton.edu

 148

Faculty Sponsor: Dr. Jung Lee, MAIT. Master of Arts of Instructional Technology. Office is

H202d. Phone number is 609-652-4949. Email is Jung.Lee@stockton.edu

Participant's Rights: If you have any questions concerning your rights as a research subject,

you may contact Stockton’s Institutional Review Board at irb@stockton.edu for information or

assistance.

Consent Statement:

“I have read the above statement, understand the nature of my participation in the research, and I

freely agree to participate. I recognize my right to withdraw my consent and discontinue

participation in the project without fear of any prejudice and recognize that my activities and

data generated by my participation will remain strictly confidential. I also understand that at the

conclusion of the study, I can choose to destroy any records of my participation, and that, if I

desire, I can request a copy of the final report describing the research's conclusions.”

(Print name) ____________ agreed to participate on__________ (date).

(Signature) ____________________
 149

Appendix F. Evaluation Tools: Document with Project Link for Participants

This was sent to all signed participants of my project, and included a little information

about what is included in the intervention version as well as how to download the intervention’s

Captivate file. The intervention is in a picture below: