E-mail List Archives
Thread: Accessibility user testing
Number of posts in this thread: 20 (In chronological order)
From: Zack McCartney
Date: Fri, Jul 15 2016 1:09PM
Subject: Accessibility user testing
No previous message | Next message →
Hi there!
First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning more
about web accessibility.
Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch of
updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with Disabilities
Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using a
screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I have an
ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the basics
of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
Specifically:
- Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
accessibility features?
- What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
usability test setup?
- The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm hoping
over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if this'll
work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
app (Google
Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
- Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in the
dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
- For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to know
as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn how
people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I don't know
if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
accessibility work
â would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I want them
to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's still
tricky to use on screenreader.
Thanks!
Zack McCartney
PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to get
up to speed. :)
From: Lucy Greco
Date: Fri, Jul 15 2016 1:16PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is easyer
for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
clients find this method works well lucy
Lucia Greco
Web Accessibility Evangelist
IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
University of California, Berkeley
(510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
Follow me on twitter @accessaces
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning more
> about web accessibility.
>
> Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
> running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
> participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch of
> updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with Disabilities
> Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
> improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
>
> The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using a
> screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I have an
> ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the basics
> of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
>
> Specifically:
>
> - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
> accessibility features?
>
>
> - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
> usability test setup?
> - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm hoping
> over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
> this'll
> work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
> app (Google
> Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
>
>
> - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
> typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in the
> dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
> - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to know
> as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
> how
> people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I don't
> know
> if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
> accessibility work
> â would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I want
> them
> to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's
> still
> tricky to use on screenreader.
>
>
> Thanks!
> Zack McCartney
>
> PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
> anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to get
> up to speed. :)
> > > > >
From: Maxability Accessibility for all
Date: Sat, Jul 16 2016 7:34AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hello Zack,
I was participating in usability studies as a screen reader user for some
time now. I ask to provide me the details on a word document or any
accessible format to understand the task to be performed on the website.
Eg: Find a department head email address on a government website providing
the url. Usually I take 3 to 5 tasks on a single test. At the time of the
test both o us get on hangout. I share my screen on a video call. I am
asked to say aloud what I want to do or what I am doing similar to a
cricket commentary. At the end of each task I was asked how easy/difficult
the task is and any possible points of improvement.
For any further questions you may can feel free to reach off-list.
Best Regards
Rakesh
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Lucy Greco < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
> test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is easyer
> for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
> run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
> clients find this method works well lucy
>
> Lucia Greco
> Web Accessibility Evangelist
> IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
> University of California, Berkeley
> (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
> http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> Follow me on twitter @accessaces
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi there!
> >
> > First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
> more
> > about web accessibility.
> >
> > Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
> > running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
> > participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch
> of
> > updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with Disabilities
> > Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
> > improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
> >
> > The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using
> a
> > screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I have
> an
> > ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the
> basics
> > of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
> >
> > Specifically:
> >
> > - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
> > accessibility features?
> >
> >
> > - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
> > usability test setup?
> > - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
> hoping
> > over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
> > this'll
> > work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
> > app (Google
> > Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
> >
> >
> > - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
> > typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
> the
> > dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
> > - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to know
> > as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
> > how
> > people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I
> don't
> > know
> > if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
> > accessibility work
> > â would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I
> want
> > them
> > to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's
> > still
> > tricky to use on screenreader.
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Zack McCartney
> >
> > PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
> > anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
> get
> > up to speed. :)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >
From: Chaals McCathie Nevile
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 3:44AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 21:16:49 +0200, Lucy Greco < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
> test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is
> easyer
> for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
> run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
> clients find this method works well lucy
The main idea is that I agree with Lucy - run the task exactly as you
would with any other user, and see what happens. Some more below…
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney
>> First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
>> more about web accessibility.
(Welcome to the adventure of making the Web really work :) ).
>> Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
>> running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
>> participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a
>> bunch of updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with
>> Disabilities Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first
>> pass actually improved the site's accessibility and what work still
>> needs to be done.
Hopefully it got closer. There is almost certainly room for improvement,
because this is reality :)
One thing to consider is the difference between "we complied with some
legal requirement, whose *goal* is to ensure that people with disabilities
can participate like anyone else", and another is "we're trying to make
sure that the site works for people with disabilities".
At a high level they are the same, but down in the details are important
but subtle differences. I think your *goal* should be the second one, but
understanding what happens when you aim strictly for the first will help
you learn a lot about accessibility, which often has both a "compliance"
or "legal" aspect, and a technical aspect of "actually solving the
problem".
>> The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant
>> using a screenreader. I have basic experience running usability
>> tests, so I have an ok handle on how to moderate a test session,
>> but I want to learn the basics of testing the user-friendliness of
>> web accessibility features.
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
>> accessibility features?
Check it with users who have disabilities - especially the ones you think
you targeted with some change you made.
Be aware that difference users have different skill levels, and different
tools - there is a recent thread on testing and what setups to use,
because different ones also behave differently. It's worth reading.
So when you've tested with one screenreader user, you know about one
screenreader user. If you're thinking of this as a professional
development exercise you need to consider questions like
"Does this user have a screenreader to support low vision, or because they
cannot see anything, or because they are dyslexic and the support of a
spoken version helps them, or for some other reason?"
"Does this person make a lot of effort, or rely on knowing their tools
very well, or does she just hope it works out and settle for whatever
result she got first?"
"Did I guide this user in a way I wouldn't normally do in a test? What
does that mean for the results?"
More along the lines of developing your expertise with regards to the web
in general, consider the improvements you tried to make and whether they
are applicable in general, or could you have changed something else to
make a general improvement that happened to help both a screenreader user
and everyone else.
And more generally for accessibility, learning a bit about the different
ways people with disabilities work to resolve problems will help you
design better tests as well as better solutions for end products. But you
need to remember whatever you did in this…
>> - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
>> usability test setup?
As few as possible. Ideally nothing, but you may be relying on tools that
your tester cannot actually use properly. If that happens you need to
carefully identify those problems to figure out their impact on your data.
>> - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
>> hoping over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
>> this'll work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
>> app (Google Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
It depends on the user - in different setups, the environment has
different influence. Overall you probably need to learn this by
experiment, because I don't know of anyone who has published work that
explains this stuff.
If anyone has done so, or has material they *could* publish, it will help
a lot of people, so please speak up!
>> - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
>> typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
>> the dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
>> - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to
>> know as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to
>> learn how people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But,
>> I don't know if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
>> accessibility work â would prevent the user from even interacting with
>> the site. I want them to at the very least to be able to access the
>> site, even if it's still tricky to use on screenreader.
Start by keeping the information to describe the task at hand. This will
give the clearest information on what the user can do.
If you run into a complete block it might be more useful to help the user
over it to get more data - but you need to note what you did and how that
influenced the test. Which is nothing special to accessibility, of course.
>> Thanks!
>> Zack McCartney
>>
>> PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
>> anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
>> get up to speed. :)
"There are no foolish questions, it is foolish not to ask questions"
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
From: Caitlin Geier
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 6:51AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
A few pieces of advice, from my own experience running usability tests with
screen reader users:
- Hangouts or Skype. They're the most accessible tools allowing screen
sharing that I've found. I also use Snagit to record sessions, since it can
be used with a variety of communication tools.
- If the user you work with has trouble sharing his/her screen, have a
backup plan! A few times when this has happened, I've asked the user to
tell me where they are on the page as they're going through it so I can
follow along on my own screen. It's actually helpful in general to ask a
screen reader user to tell you what their screen reader is saying so that
you know where they are on the page. Since most screen reader users don't
use a mouse, there's no cursor or pointer to follow. Most screen reader
users also don't travel linearly through a page.
- It's helpful to ask which OS, browser, and screen reader they're using
up front. Screen readers, like browsers, all have their quirks.
- Plan extra time, or plan to skip a task or two if you want to keep to
a time limit, especially if the site you're testing is very content-heavy.
Also, if you ever do any semi-automated usability testing (i.e. where you
set up the test and volunteers go through it at their leisure - think
UserTesting.com), AccessWorks
<http://www.access-works.knowbility.org/index.php>; is a good service
specifically for testing with users with disabilities. You can set up a
test via Loop11 and they will recruit users with whatever disabilities you
specify for you to test with.
-Caitlin
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chaals McCathie Nevile <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 21:16:49 +0200, Lucy Greco < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
>> test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is easyer
>> for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
>> run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
>> clients find this method works well lucy
>>
>
> The main idea is that I agree with Lucy - run the task exactly as you
> would with any other user, and see what happens. Some more below…
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney
>>
>>> First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
>>> more about web accessibility.
>>>
>>
> (Welcome to the adventure of making the Web really work :) ).
>
> Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
>>> running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
>>> participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch
>>> of updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with
>>> Disabilities Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first
>>> pass actually improved the site's accessibility and what work still
>>> needs to be done.
>>>
>>
> Hopefully it got closer. There is almost certainly room for improvement,
> because this is reality :)
>
> One thing to consider is the difference between "we complied with some
> legal requirement, whose *goal* is to ensure that people with disabilities
> can participate like anyone else", and another is "we're trying to make
> sure that the site works for people with disabilities".
>
> At a high level they are the same, but down in the details are important
> but subtle differences. I think your *goal* should be the second one, but
> understanding what happens when you aim strictly for the first will help
> you learn a lot about accessibility, which often has both a "compliance" or
> "legal" aspect, and a technical aspect of "actually solving the problem".
>
> The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using a
>>> screenreader. I have basic experience running usability
>>> tests, so I have an ok handle on how to moderate a test session,
>>> but I want to learn the basics of testing the user-friendliness of
>>> web accessibility features.
>>>
>>> Specifically:
>>>
>>> - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
>>> accessibility features?
>>>
>>
> Check it with users who have disabilities - especially the ones you think
> you targeted with some change you made.
>
> Be aware that difference users have different skill levels, and different
> tools - there is a recent thread on testing and what setups to use, because
> different ones also behave differently. It's worth reading.
>
> So when you've tested with one screenreader user, you know about one
> screenreader user. If you're thinking of this as a professional development
> exercise you need to consider questions like
>
> "Does this user have a screenreader to support low vision, or because they
> cannot see anything, or because they are dyslexic and the support of a
> spoken version helps them, or for some other reason?"
>
> "Does this person make a lot of effort, or rely on knowing their tools
> very well, or does she just hope it works out and settle for whatever
> result she got first?"
>
> "Did I guide this user in a way I wouldn't normally do in a test? What
> does that mean for the results?"
>
> More along the lines of developing your expertise with regards to the web
> in general, consider the improvements you tried to make and whether they
> are applicable in general, or could you have changed something else to make
> a general improvement that happened to help both a screenreader user and
> everyone else.
>
> And more generally for accessibility, learning a bit about the different
> ways people with disabilities work to resolve problems will help you design
> better tests as well as better solutions for end products. But you need to
> remember whatever you did in this…
>
> - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
>>> usability test setup?
>>>
>>
> As few as possible. Ideally nothing, but you may be relying on tools that
> your tester cannot actually use properly. If that happens you need to
> carefully identify those problems to figure out their impact on your data.
>
> - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
>>> hoping over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
>>> this'll work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
>>> app (Google Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
>>>
>>
> It depends on the user - in different setups, the environment has
> different influence. Overall you probably need to learn this by experiment,
> because I don't know of anyone who has published work that explains this
> stuff.
>
> If anyone has done so, or has material they *could* publish, it will help
> a lot of people, so please speak up!
>
> - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
>>> typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
>>> the dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
>>> - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to
>>> know as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
>>> how people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But,
>>> I don't know if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
>>> accessibility work â would prevent the user from even interacting with
>>> the site. I want them to at the very least to be able to access the
>>> site, even if it's still tricky to use on screenreader.
>>>
>>
> Start by keeping the information to describe the task at hand. This will
> give the clearest information on what the user can do.
>
> If you run into a complete block it might be more useful to help the user
> over it to get more data - but you need to note what you did and how that
> influenced the test. Which is nothing special to accessibility, of course.
>
> Thanks!
>>> Zack McCartney
>>>
>>> PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
>>> anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
>>> get up to speed. :)
>>>
>>
> "There are no foolish questions, it is foolish not to ask questions"
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
> > > > >
--
Caitlin Geier
User Experience Designer
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: David Sloan
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 8:44AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
To add to the excellent advice already shared on usability testing in this thread, something that might seem stating the obvious but is still worth emphasising: don't waste the time of people with disabilities in finding barriers that you could find through manual or automated inspection.
In other words, you have a responsibility to your organisation and to your participants to make best use of the time you have to gather data on task flow and other, rich, user experience aspects, from the perspective of people with disabilities. This might include understanding the cumulative effect of apparently minor issues on successful task completion.
If there are known issues, design the tasks so that you're not unnecessarily exposing participants to these issues, by helping them bypass themâin the words of David Hamill, "give participants a punty over the wall" [1]
Dave
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMGA4CQUPKU (video of a talk on general tips on running usability studies; unfortunately this video doesn't yet have captions and the auto captions are not helpful at all)
> On 18 Jul 2016, at 13:51, Caitlin Geier < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> A few pieces of advice, from my own experience running usability tests with
> screen reader users:
>
> - Hangouts or Skype. They're the most accessible tools allowing screen
> sharing that I've found. I also use Snagit to record sessions, since it can
> be used with a variety of communication tools.
> - If the user you work with has trouble sharing his/her screen, have a
> backup plan! A few times when this has happened, I've asked the user to
> tell me where they are on the page as they're going through it so I can
> follow along on my own screen. It's actually helpful in general to ask a
> screen reader user to tell you what their screen reader is saying so that
> you know where they are on the page. Since most screen reader users don't
> use a mouse, there's no cursor or pointer to follow. Most screen reader
> users also don't travel linearly through a page.
> - It's helpful to ask which OS, browser, and screen reader they're using
> up front. Screen readers, like browsers, all have their quirks.
> - Plan extra time, or plan to skip a task or two if you want to keep to
> a time limit, especially if the site you're testing is very content-heavy.
>
> Also, if you ever do any semi-automated usability testing (i.e. where you
> set up the test and volunteers go through it at their leisure - think
> UserTesting.com), AccessWorks
> <http://www.access-works.knowbility.org/index.php>; is a good service
> specifically for testing with users with disabilities. You can set up a
> test via Loop11 and they will recruit users with whatever disabilities you
> specify for you to test with.
>
> -Caitlin
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chaals McCathie Nevile <
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 21:16:49 +0200, Lucy Greco < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>> wrote:
>>
>> there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
>>> test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is easyer
>>> for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
>>> run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
>>> clients find this method works well lucy
>>>
>>
>> The main idea is that I agree with Lucy - run the task exactly as you
>> would with any other user, and see what happens. Some more below…
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney
>>>
>>>> First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
>>>> more about web accessibility.
>>>>
>>>
>> (Welcome to the adventure of making the Web really work :) ).
>>
>> Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
>>>> running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
>>>> participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch
>>>> of updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with
>>>> Disabilities Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first
>>>> pass actually improved the site's accessibility and what work still
>>>> needs to be done.
>>>>
>>>
>> Hopefully it got closer. There is almost certainly room for improvement,
>> because this is reality :)
>>
>> One thing to consider is the difference between "we complied with some
>> legal requirement, whose *goal* is to ensure that people with disabilities
>> can participate like anyone else", and another is "we're trying to make
>> sure that the site works for people with disabilities".
>>
>> At a high level they are the same, but down in the details are important
>> but subtle differences. I think your *goal* should be the second one, but
>> understanding what happens when you aim strictly for the first will help
>> you learn a lot about accessibility, which often has both a "compliance" or
>> "legal" aspect, and a technical aspect of "actually solving the problem".
>>
>> The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using a
>>>> screenreader. I have basic experience running usability
>>>> tests, so I have an ok handle on how to moderate a test session,
>>>> but I want to learn the basics of testing the user-friendliness of
>>>> web accessibility features.
>>>>
>>>> Specifically:
>>>>
>>>> - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
>>>> accessibility features?
>>>>
>>>
>> Check it with users who have disabilities - especially the ones you think
>> you targeted with some change you made.
>>
>> Be aware that difference users have different skill levels, and different
>> tools - there is a recent thread on testing and what setups to use, because
>> different ones also behave differently. It's worth reading.
>>
>> So when you've tested with one screenreader user, you know about one
>> screenreader user. If you're thinking of this as a professional development
>> exercise you need to consider questions like
>>
>> "Does this user have a screenreader to support low vision, or because they
>> cannot see anything, or because they are dyslexic and the support of a
>> spoken version helps them, or for some other reason?"
>>
>> "Does this person make a lot of effort, or rely on knowing their tools
>> very well, or does she just hope it works out and settle for whatever
>> result she got first?"
>>
>> "Did I guide this user in a way I wouldn't normally do in a test? What
>> does that mean for the results?"
>>
>> More along the lines of developing your expertise with regards to the web
>> in general, consider the improvements you tried to make and whether they
>> are applicable in general, or could you have changed something else to make
>> a general improvement that happened to help both a screenreader user and
>> everyone else.
>>
>> And more generally for accessibility, learning a bit about the different
>> ways people with disabilities work to resolve problems will help you design
>> better tests as well as better solutions for end products. But you need to
>> remember whatever you did in this…
>>
>> - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
>>>> usability test setup?
>>>>
>>>
>> As few as possible. Ideally nothing, but you may be relying on tools that
>> your tester cannot actually use properly. If that happens you need to
>> carefully identify those problems to figure out their impact on your data.
>>
>> - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
>>>> hoping over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
>>>> this'll work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
>>>> app (Google Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
>>>>
>>>
>> It depends on the user - in different setups, the environment has
>> different influence. Overall you probably need to learn this by experiment,
>> because I don't know of anyone who has published work that explains this
>> stuff.
>>
>> If anyone has done so, or has material they *could* publish, it will help
>> a lot of people, so please speak up!
>>
>> - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
>>>> typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
>>>> the dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
>>>> - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to
>>>> know as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
>>>> how people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But,
>>>> I don't know if omitting usage instructions â part of our dev team's
>>>> accessibility work â would prevent the user from even interacting with
>>>> the site. I want them to at the very least to be able to access the
>>>> site, even if it's still tricky to use on screenreader.
>>>>
>>>
>> Start by keeping the information to describe the task at hand. This will
>> give the clearest information on what the user can do.
>>
>> If you run into a complete block it might be more useful to help the user
>> over it to get more data - but you need to note what you did and how that
>> influenced the test. Which is nothing special to accessibility, of course.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>>> Zack McCartney
>>>>
>>>> PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
>>>> anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
>>>> get up to speed. :)
>>>>
>>>
>> "There are no foolish questions, it is foolish not to ask questions"
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Chaals
>>
>> --
>> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>>
>> >> >> >> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Caitlin Geier
> User Experience Designer
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > > > David Sloan
UX Research Lead
The Paciello Group
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of any portion of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you think you have received this message in error, please notify the sender at the above e-mail address, and delete this e-mail along with any attachments. Thank you.
From: Dana Douglas
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 9:06AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Zack,
Welcome! Including people with disabilities in a usability test is a great way to evaluate a site's accessibility. Here are a few resources you may find helpful (there are certainly others as well) :
Slides from my 2015 UXPA presentation on the topic: http://www.slideshare.net/UXPA/uxpa-2015-why-how-to-include-people-with-disabilities-pw-ds-in-your-usability-testsdouglas-and-davis-6252015-49918852
A UXPA Magazine article by Mary Hunter Utt on the topic: http://uxpamagazine.org/guerilla_tactics/
An article from Deque Systems on the topic: http://www.deque.com/blog/incorporate-users-disabilities-ux-testing/
In general, the test can be virutally the same as any other usability test (same tasks, methodology, etc.). You will want to make sure the web conference tool you're using is accessible for screen reader users (and other assistive technologies). Skype may be the best bet - participants can share their screen through Skype. The test should be as realistic as possible. If users would not have any outside instructions or information in the real world, you should not provide that information during the usabilty test either. However, if that presents a significant barrier (first of all, you know you have an accessibility issue to fix!), but then you can provide assistance to move on and gather additional feedback on other aspects of the site.
Good luck!
Dana Douglas
From: Zack McCartney
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 3:40PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Dana,
First off, thanks so much for your detailed reply and all the advice. And
for the resources, too. This sort of test is totally outside my comfort
zone, so I really appreciate the starting points :)
I wanted to follow up on your point about providing assistance to the
participant: do you have any advice for how to assist and instruct
participants when the encounter barriers?
I'm unsure about doing this well in usability testing in general, even more
so with participants using a screenreader.
Thanks again for all your help and welcoming me to the forum!
Zack
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:06 AM Dana Douglas < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Zack,
>
> Welcome! Including people with disabilities in a usability test is a great
> way to evaluate a site's accessibility. Here are a few resources you may
> find helpful (there are certainly others as well) :
>
> Slides from my 2015 UXPA presentation on the topic:
> http://www.slideshare.net/UXPA/uxpa-2015-why-how-to-include-people-with-disabilities-pw-ds-in-your-usability-testsdouglas-and-davis-6252015-49918852
> A UXPA Magazine article by Mary Hunter Utt on the topic:
> http://uxpamagazine.org/guerilla_tactics/
> An article from Deque Systems on the topic:
> http://www.deque.com/blog/incorporate-users-disabilities-ux-testing/
>
> In general, the test can be virutally the same as any other usability test
> (same tasks, methodology, etc.). You will want to make sure the web
> conference tool you're using is accessible for screen reader users (and
> other assistive technologies). Skype may be the best bet - participants can
> share their screen through Skype. The test should be as realistic as
> possible. If users would not have any outside instructions or information
> in the real world, you should not provide that information during the
> usabilty test either. However, if that presents a significant barrier
> (first of all, you know you have an accessibility issue to fix!), but then
> you can provide assistance to move on and gather additional feedback on
> other aspects of the site.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Dana Douglas
>
>
From: L Snider
Date: Mon, Jul 18 2016 4:28PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Zack,
For your question about advice on barriers...I never provided advice to
testers, because in the real world the user would maybe try a couple of
things that they had done before as workarounds, but if they failed they
couldn't use the site, and would need to go away from it. For my user
testing and research study, I only gave tasks to testers, and recording
what happened. I didn't want my biases or knowledge to get in the way. For
me, I did it this way because it was then done the same way for every
tester and I had no 'bias' in the process. I felt this was important in
terms of the end results, so that they were 'real world', albeit in a
testing realm.
I just wanted to add one thing that happened when I did a research study
that involved user testing by people using different AT. I ran into a case
where a screen reader user could not get on to the page due to a
problematic search box that was at the top of the code and it meant the
user could not keyboard anywhere on the page to complete the task. It was a
mess, because that search box kept them out of the website as a whole (I
used that site a lot to show people what not to do). So that person could
not complete the task. You may encounter this, and it is a powerful weapon
to show why inaccessible websites should not be in the world in 2016!
Cheers
Lisa
Lisa Snider
Accessibility Consultant
Everything Accessibility
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Zack McCartney < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Hi Dana,
>
> First off, thanks so much for your detailed reply and all the advice. And
> for the resources, too. This sort of test is totally outside my comfort
> zone, so I really appreciate the starting points :)
>
> I wanted to follow up on your point about providing assistance to the
> participant: do you have any advice for how to assist and instruct
> participants when the encounter barriers?
>
> I'm unsure about doing this well in usability testing in general, even more
> so with participants using a screenreader.
>
> Thanks again for all your help and welcoming me to the forum!
> Zack
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:06 AM Dana Douglas < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> > Zack,
> >
> > Welcome! Including people with disabilities in a usability test is a
> great
> > way to evaluate a site's accessibility. Here are a few resources you may
> > find helpful (there are certainly others as well) :
> >
> > Slides from my 2015 UXPA presentation on the topic:
> >
> http://www.slideshare.net/UXPA/uxpa-2015-why-how-to-include-people-with-disabilities-pw-ds-in-your-usability-testsdouglas-and-davis-6252015-49918852
> > A UXPA Magazine article by Mary Hunter Utt on the topic:
> > http://uxpamagazine.org/guerilla_tactics/
> > An article from Deque Systems on the topic:
> > http://www.deque.com/blog/incorporate-users-disabilities-ux-testing/
> >
> > In general, the test can be virutally the same as any other usability
> test
> > (same tasks, methodology, etc.). You will want to make sure the web
> > conference tool you're using is accessible for screen reader users (and
> > other assistive technologies). Skype may be the best bet - participants
> can
> > share their screen through Skype. The test should be as realistic as
> > possible. If users would not have any outside instructions or information
> > in the real world, you should not provide that information during the
> > usabilty test either. However, if that presents a significant barrier
> > (first of all, you know you have an accessibility issue to fix!), but
> then
> > you can provide assistance to move on and gather additional feedback on
> > other aspects of the site.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Dana Douglas
> >
> >
From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 7:33AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Your example also shows why a small problem can create a really big barrier. I could see a development manager commenting on the report. Well 99% of the site is accessible. It's just the search box that is the problem and Google indexes our site so fixing the search is a low priority" Meanwhile because of the problem with the search people using screen readers can't get to the "accessible" part of the site.
Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)
From: Tim Harshbarger
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 7:47AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
This is one reason why the usability test should focus on tasks and not just single components.
Ultimately, everyone who uses an interface is trying to complete some kind of task or achieve some kind of goal. Some components of the interface might be accessible and others might be inaccessible. But what matters to the user is whether or not they can complete the task.
So, in the example, the search box evidently was an accessibility disaster while other parts of the site were fine. However, if the search box prevents users from completing any other task, then the amazing accessibility of the rest of the interface does not matter--at least not until the search box is fixed.
So, you probably want to talk about the results of a usability test in relation to how those accessibility barriers impacted user tasks--rather than talk about each accessibility problem as though it were a separate self-contained thing.
From: Dana Douglas
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 8:26AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Zack,
If a user encounters an issue during a usability test, of course you want to observe how they attempt to overcome that issue, but once you have learned what you need to learn, it is often best to move on to the next task so can continue evaluating other aspects of the site. For example, If you observe a screen reader user struggling with a form field that was not labeled properly, you can wait to see how they would attempt to overcome that issue, but there is no need to let them struggle for an extended period of time. By that point, you know what the issue is and that you need to fix it, so you can then move on to the next task. (Also, as Dave said, hopefully these types of issues have been uncovered through automated or manual inspection before the usability test.) Either way, in that scenario, I might help the user by confirming the information they should enter in a form field or directing them to a button or link on the page they could not find. At the same time, I would ask for feedback on what the user expected and how they typically deal with such issues. The bottom line is that you want to make the most of your time with the participant.
Dana
From: Zack McCartney [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 5:40 PM
To: Dana Douglas < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Accessibility user testing
Hi Dana,
First off, thanks so much for your detailed reply and all the advice. And for the resources, too. This sort of test is totally outside my comfort zone, so I really appreciate the starting points :)
I wanted to follow up on your point about providing assistance to the participant: do you have any advice for how to assist and instruct participants when the encounter barriers?
I'm unsure about doing this well in usability testing in general, even more so with participants using a screenreader.
Thanks again for all your help and welcoming me to the forum!
Zack
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:06 AM Dana Douglas < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >> wrote:
Zack,
Welcome! Including people with disabilities in a usability test is a great way to evaluate a site's accessibility. Here are a few resources you may find helpful (there are certainly others as well) :
Slides from my 2015 UXPA presentation on the topic: http://www.slideshare.net/UXPA/uxpa-2015-why-how-to-include-people-with-disabilities-pw-ds-in-your-usability-testsdouglas-and-davis-6252015-49918852
A UXPA Magazine article by Mary Hunter Utt on the topic: http://uxpamagazine.org/guerilla_tactics/
An article from Deque Systems on the topic: http://www.deque.com/blog/incorporate-users-disabilities-ux-testing/
In general, the test can be virutally the same as any other usability test (same tasks, methodology, etc.). You will want to make sure the web conference tool you're using is accessible for screen reader users (and other assistive technologies). Skype may be the best bet - participants can share their screen through Skype. The test should be as realistic as possible. If users would not have any outside instructions or information in the real world, you should not provide that information during the usabilty test either. However, if that presents a significant barrier (first of all, you know you have an accessibility issue to fix!), but then you can provide assistance to move on and gather additional feedback on other aspects of the site.
Good luck!
Dana Douglas
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 8:29AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Just one more thought. If you are not familiar with screen reading,
you might want to try and find an expert screen reader user, even an
accessibility person, in your area and do a pilot test with that
person face to face.
I think it may help you set expectations and get a little bit of a
feel for the task.
You can be successful without it, but I often find that, as a screen
reader user, sitting down with usability testers and going through the
tasks informally helps them feel more comfortable.
Cheers
On 7/19/16, Tim Harshbarger < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> This is one reason why the usability test should focus on tasks and not just
> single components.
>
> Ultimately, everyone who uses an interface is trying to complete some kind
> of task or achieve some kind of goal. Some components of the interface might
> be accessible and others might be inaccessible. But what matters to the user
> is whether or not they can complete the task.
>
> So, in the example, the search box evidently was an accessibility disaster
> while other parts of the site were fine. However, if the search box prevents
> users from completing any other task, then the amazing accessibility of the
> rest of the interface does not matter--at least not until the search box is
> fixed.
>
> So, you probably want to talk about the results of a usability test in
> relation to how those accessibility barriers impacted user tasks--rather
> than talk about each accessibility problem as though it were a separate
> self-contained thing.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
From: Steve Green
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 12:30PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Some people have mentioned running remote sessions using screen sharing. I'm not at all keen on that. I like to see what keystrokes participants are using and what they are doing with the mouse. I also like to see their expression and body language - it tells you so much more than their words alone. Because of this, we used to do all our user testing in people's homes although we now do quite a lot in our in-house UX lab.
Whilst I agree that the focus should generally be on whether people are successful in completing the scenarios you give them, bear in mind that it only shows that the scenario *can* be completed successfully. It does not mean that all users with the identical disability *will* be able to complete it. So much depends on their preferred strategies for navigating websites and individual pages. Many times I have seen people complete tasks on websites that we considered to have poor accessibility, just because the accessible parts of the website matched their preferred strategies.
For this reason I recommend supplementing user testing with an expert review with assistive technologies that methodically goes through all the content. Neither is a complete solution but together they are about as good as you can get (assuming you have already done WCAG compliance testing to achieve a good level of technical accessibility).
Steve Green
Test Partners Ltd
From: Jennifer Sutton
Date: Tue, Jul 19 2016 12:37PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
For those who may be interested in screen sharing, here's a recent
accessible Webinar software roundup. Though you may find this slightly
off-topic, I believe some of the findings may apply to this thread. See:
http://www.accessiq.org/news/w3c-column/2016/07/webinar-software-round-up-are-there-any-accessible-options-out-there
Best,
Jennifer
From: L Snider
Date: Wed, Jul 20 2016 8:00AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Yep, I can see that happening too and it is frustrating! In this case the
screen reader user couldn't get into the page at all, it was not good. I
would think that the Google spider would have issues too. Maybe the SEO
argument could be made (which is sad that one has to go there, but whatever
gets the job done in the end!).
Cheers
Lisa
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC) <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Your example also shows why a small problem can create a really big
> barrier. I could see a development manager commenting on the report. Well
> 99% of the site is accessible. It's just the search box that is the problem
> and Google indexes our site so fixing the search is a low priority"
> Meanwhile because of the problem with the search people using screen
> readers can't get to the "accessible" part of the site.
>
> Mike Moore
> Accessibility Coordinator
> Texas Health and Human Services Commission
> Civil Rights Office
> (512) 438-3431 (Office)
>
>
From: L Snider
Date: Wed, Jul 20 2016 8:02AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Jennifer,
Thanks so much! I was just looking for an up to date listing and this looks
perfect!
Cheers
Lisa
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Jennifer Sutton < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> For those who may be interested in screen sharing, here's a recent
> accessible Webinar software roundup. Though you may find this slightly
> off-topic, I believe some of the findings may apply to this thread. See:
>
>
> http://www.accessiq.org/news/w3c-column/2016/07/webinar-software-round-up-are-there-any-accessible-options-out-there
>
> Best,
> Jennifer
>
> > > > >
From: Zack McCartney
Date: Tue, Jul 26 2016 1:19PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi all!
*TLDR: What are you all's thoughts on using a guided tutorial / usability
hybrid to test a highly dynamic, customizable web application to answer the
question: **how do people first learn how to use this site? *
First off, thank you to everyone that replied. I really appreciate all the
help and advice. Definitely wasn't expecting so many and such in-depth
responses. And sorry for not replying sooner; work's been a little mad
lately :)
Anyway, I'd like to pick this topic back up because I conducted the test
about which I originally asked and have the fortune of being permitted to
run another round of accessibility user tests next week.
At the end of the first test, the participant offered to assist my company
and I in further improving our site's accessibility features. He suggested
maybe setting up a sort of guided tutorial, where I'd sit down with him and
we'd walk through acquainting him with the site, showing him how to set it
up, how to complete key tasks, etc.
I wouldn't normally re-test a site with the same participant from a
previous round of testing. However, I'm tempted to do so because it became
unclear in the first test that the site under test â a dashboard of office
organization and content tools for lawyers, basically, a heavily
customizable, content-rich, super interactive site â doesn't seem to have a
clear path to onboarding. It's not clear where people should start using
it, let alone learning how to use it. My conclusion could be way off here,
but I guess I'm thinking that without clearer context, as i'd provide in
this sort of guided tutorial, the original test's tasks (although they did
lead to some helpful insights) didn't make too much sense, given the site's
highly custom nature.
I'm envisioning this approach as a sort of exploratory usability test,
prompting the participant to do things, but asking lots of questions along
the way, having a conversation basically to uncover what they're thinking,
what info they need to setup the site, what they hope and expect to be able
to do with the site. I'm hoping that by talking the participant through
what they need to know to setup the site, this tutorial format would help
to answer: *how do people first learn how to use this site? what
information do they need to even get started using this thing?*
What are you all's thoughts on this sort of approach?
Thanks!
Zack
From: Caitlin Geier
Date: Tue, Jul 26 2016 2:01PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | Next message →
I often do exactly what you've described. Basically, I set it up like a
standard usability test, except the tasks are specific to what a user would
need to learn in order to use the application successfully. For example, my
script for a task will briefly explain the terminology used for a
particularly feature, and what that feature was meant to be for. Then the
task script will go on to ask the user to accomplish a specific thing with
that feature ("now, create a new thing with this feature"). I ask them
questions about what they expect as they're performing tasks, and also take
time to answer their questions about what the expected functionality is
rather than letting them struggle to figure it out themselves. I do it this
way in part so that I can prime users with knowledge about the application
so I can come back to them later with more targeted questions about
specific functionality. Later sessions end up being a lot shorter when I
don't have to spend the time introducing them to the application first.
So yes, if the application is complex enough and specialized enough, it's
totally cool to use the same users more than once. Having a variety of
different people on tap to ask questions of - and who already know enough
about the application to be able to answer questions effectively - is
incredibly useful. The disadvantage is if you test with the same people
over and over, you cease to get the new user's perspective. Make sure you
continue to bring new users in for testing on a regular basis, even if it
does take longer to get them up to speed on the product. If you end up
building out an onboarding process, you'll definitely need to keep bringing
on new users to help test it out.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Zack McCartney < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> *TLDR: What are you all's thoughts on using a guided tutorial / usability
> hybrid to test a highly dynamic, customizable web application to answer the
> question: **how do people first learn how to use this site? *
>
> First off, thank you to everyone that replied. I really appreciate all the
> help and advice. Definitely wasn't expecting so many and such in-depth
> responses. And sorry for not replying sooner; work's been a little mad
> lately :)
>
> Anyway, I'd like to pick this topic back up because I conducted the test
> about which I originally asked and have the fortune of being permitted to
> run another round of accessibility user tests next week.
>
> At the end of the first test, the participant offered to assist my company
> and I in further improving our site's accessibility features. He suggested
> maybe setting up a sort of guided tutorial, where I'd sit down with him and
> we'd walk through acquainting him with the site, showing him how to set it
> up, how to complete key tasks, etc.
>
> I wouldn't normally re-test a site with the same participant from a
> previous round of testing. However, I'm tempted to do so because it became
> unclear in the first test that the site under test â a dashboard of office
> organization and content tools for lawyers, basically, a heavily
> customizable, content-rich, super interactive site â doesn't seem to have a
> clear path to onboarding. It's not clear where people should start using
> it, let alone learning how to use it. My conclusion could be way off here,
> but I guess I'm thinking that without clearer context, as i'd provide in
> this sort of guided tutorial, the original test's tasks (although they did
> lead to some helpful insights) didn't make too much sense, given the site's
> highly custom nature.
>
> I'm envisioning this approach as a sort of exploratory usability test,
> prompting the participant to do things, but asking lots of questions along
> the way, having a conversation basically to uncover what they're thinking,
> what info they need to setup the site, what they hope and expect to be able
> to do with the site. I'm hoping that by talking the participant through
> what they need to know to setup the site, this tutorial format would help
> to answer: *how do people first learn how to use this site? what
> information do they need to even get started using this thing?*
>
> What are you all's thoughts on this sort of approach?
>
> Thanks!
> Zack
> > > > >
--
Caitlin Geier
User Experience Designer
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: Zack McCartney
Date: Wed, Jul 27 2016 2:06PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility user testing
← Previous message | No next message
Ok, cool. That's all really helpful.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Caitlin!