DGB 2: Accessibility and Usability
Digital technology is especially well designed when as many people as possible can use it independently, safely and understandably. Accessibility and usability are therefore relevant not only to people with permanent impairments but to all users in different situations.
Curriculum reference
[Bearbeiten]| Area | Classification |
|---|---|
| Competence area | Action |
| Perspectives | Societal and interaction perspectives (G, I) |
| Focus | Accessibility and usability of technology products |
| Competence | Evaluate technology products from different user perspectives, identify barriers and justify concrete improvements for participation and usability. |
Learning objectives
[Bearbeiten]Students can:
- distinguish accessibility, usability and barrier-free design in basic terms;
- describe different user needs;
- identify barriers in apps, websites, devices and software;
- name challenges for people with visual, hearing or motor impairments as well as learning or language difficulties;
- evaluate readability, clarity, comprehensibility, adaptability and feedback;
- classify captions, text-to-speech, zoom, high contrast, keyboard navigation and voice input as useful accessibility features;
- adapt interface settings to different needs;
- justify improvements from a user's perspective;
- explain why accessible design supports participation and independence;
- recognise that good accessibility often benefits everyone.
Learning content
[Bearbeiten]Accessibility, usability and barrier-free design
[Bearbeiten]Accessibility means that a product can in principle be reached and used by as many people as possible. Usability describes how clearly, safely and efficiently a task can be completed. Barrier-free design aims to remove avoidable obstacles. A service can be technically accessible but still difficult to use because of tiny text, unclear icons or confusing navigation.
Different users and different situations
[Bearbeiten]People have different abilities and needs. Children benefit from clear structure and understandable language. Older users may need larger text and well-separated controls. High contrast, zoom, keyboard navigation and screen readers can support people with visual impairments. Captions and visual cues support people with hearing impairments; larger controls or voice input can reduce motor barriers.
Visual accessibility
[Bearbeiten]Readable text needs appropriate size, contrast, spacing and structure. Colour alone should not carry essential meaning. Zoom should not destroy the layout. Images that convey important information may need an alternative description.
Hearing and audio accessibility
[Bearbeiten]Captions, transcripts and visual status information make audio content usable without sound. Important warnings should not rely only on tones. Clear speech and adjustable volume can also improve usability.
Motor accessibility
[Bearbeiten]Small targets, precise gestures and short time limits can create barriers. Keyboard access, voice input, larger buttons and adjustable timing can improve operation. A task should not depend on one unnecessarily precise movement.
Cognitive and language accessibility
[Bearbeiten]Simple structure, consistent navigation, clear labels, understandable language and helpful feedback support users who find complex interfaces difficult. Error messages should explain what happened and what can be done next.
Universal design
[Bearbeiten]Many accessibility improvements help everyone: captions are useful in noisy rooms, high contrast helps in bright light, keyboard navigation can speed up expert use, and clear language helps when a topic is unfamiliar. Designing for varied needs can therefore improve the product overall.
Classroom activities
[Bearbeiten]Check a product from different perspectives
[Bearbeiten]Evaluate a website, app or device from the viewpoint of several fictional users with different needs.
Expected outcome: A multi-perspective accessibility check.
Make barriers visible
[Bearbeiten]Use prepared examples with low contrast, tiny controls, missing captions or unclear labels and identify the barrier.
Expected outcome: A barrier list linked to users.
Compare good and poor examples
[Bearbeiten]Compare two interfaces and rate readability, navigation, feedback and adaptability.
Expected outcome: A justified comparison.
Develop and justify improvements
[Bearbeiten]Redesign a selected part of an interface and explain which users benefit and why.
Expected outcome: Concrete improvement proposals.
Discuss digital participation
[Bearbeiten]Discuss how inaccessible technology can limit learning, communication or participation.
Expected outcome: A link between design and inclusion.
Work in expert groups
[Bearbeiten]Groups focus on visual, hearing, motor or cognitive/language accessibility and then teach each other.
Expected outcome: A shared accessibility checklist.
Investigate the school environment
[Bearbeiten]Check selected school technologies for accessibility without collecting personal data.
Expected outcome: A practical school audit.
Reflect and evaluate
[Bearbeiten]Choose the three improvements that would have the greatest effect in a given example and justify the priorities.
Expected outcome: A reasoned evaluation.
Self-check
[Bearbeiten]- I can explain accessibility and usability in simple terms.
- I can identify barriers for different users.
- I know several assistive and accessibility features.
- I can suggest specific improvements.
- I can explain why accessibility supports participation.
- I recognise that accessible design can benefit everyone.