Contributions from the Accessibility for Children CG

[milessea]

Please find the contribution of the Accessibility for Children Community Group.
Here is the document we will continue to review in our next sessions (it is a work in progress).
Do not hesitate to contact our chairs if you have any questions.

Thank you, Shira and Maud for the Accessibility for Children Community Group
1.Review of Specific Guidelines

Error notification

Error notifications are provided when an error occurs that describe the error and either provide instructions to fix the error or state that the system is at fault.
Error notifications are accompanied by child appropriate psychological support if needed.

AI editable

Auto generated text descriptions are editable by content creator. Use of text: augmentative alternative communication to be proposed as choice instead of text(or together with text to foster learning) whenever applicable for children or people with different literacy levels.

Images-of-Text alternatives

Equivalent text alternatives (or augmentative alternative communication for children) are available for images of text.

Algorithm bias

Algorithms (including AI) used are not biased against people with disabilities. (or mitigation strategies are clearly defined).

More research is needed in order to evaluate impact and uphold mitigation strategies for children with special needs.

Exploitive behaviors

Task completion does not include exploitive behaviors or psychological harm.

Single idea

Each segment of text [such as sentence, paragraph, bullet] presents one concept.

Presenting a single idea can help some children but be confusing for others. In order to respect Universal design for learning other options should be presented. It is also important that parents/ carers can have an overview of a multistep process when needed. Children with short term or memory loss are not always able to follow a multistep process broken down but could be able to grasp a more synthesized approach with linked issues if they can go back to a quickly processable document, even if complex. Several situations are possible this is why we gave a few use cases with personas in our / WAI Adapt document

AT control

Content can be controlled using assistive and adaptive technology.
This includes testing with children and children specific tools.

Triggers

Triggering content is indicated and the content and trigger warnings can be hidden.
There is no clear evidence stating that trigger warnings are efficient and could in some cases increase anxiety: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21677026231186625

For children, it might be advisable to hide triggers and sensitive content by default and rely on - age appropriate standards instead allowing better age range appropriate content and appropriate language use according to literacy needs.

2.What is missing

Some quick references for low resource environments or emergency contexts would be useful (use with internet access, older tools, low bandwidth or electricity).

3.Generic comment:

How can the review clearly indicate criteria with great value for children?

List of accessibility indicators for children based on their needs and the development of their digital accessibility literacy (by the W3C accessibility for Children Community Group)

1. Social considerations
2. Balance Safety-agency (in all environments)
3. Impact on children (statistical relevance, scalability …)
4. Awareness assessment (what does the child need to know, how, why)
5. Assistive technology: knowledge present, learning readiness or staged capacity building
6. Complex/ intersectional / evolving needs
7. Transposable (in different contexts)
8. Participation (codesign, feedback, monitoring)
9. Accessibility and learning analytics for children
10. Universal design principles & Accessibility success criteria, usability models referenced