The third pillar of the eText/IPM initiative is accessibility. The use of the word accessibility is somewhat confusing because of the dual connotation the term carries. The eText/IPM sense of the word accessibility refers to access to resources, specifically that students should have access to their required resources by the first day of class and that all students should be able to access their required resources “on-line or off-line at anytime of day” (The Future of Course Materials [PowerPoint Presentation], 2017). The additional meaning of accessibility—and perhaps more common use of the word—refers to accessible learning, i.e. providing access, resources, and formats in such a way that learners with disabilities are able to participate fully. Themes in this category refer to both senses of the word, though primarily to issues related to student access of required resources.

Convenience, portability, and usability

Both students and faculty members reported liking the convenience of being able to access their eText resources on a variety of devices. As well, the portable nature of digital resources meant that the resources delivered through the IPM did not need physical storage space and could be used while commuting or traveling. Due to the functionality of the digital resource, eTexts could be challenging to use in a classroom setting. One faculty member described how since students were using their laptop to solve problems in class, needing to use the resource at the same time as other programs on their laptop created issues either with using the resource split-screen, or with flipping between the problem in the resource and their solution to it; some students solved the issue by accessing the resource on another device, thereby freeing up their laptop. Other faculty members raised usability issues of students having to flip back and forth in a digital textbook, to, for example, find the answer to sample questions or consult reference tables. One noted that with a physical textbook, bookmarking, either by putting a tab or post-it note or slip of paper, is a natural interaction, whereas with an eText, navigation and bookmarking is less intuitive.

Perpetual access is not a priority

As noted above, the perpetual access feature of the eText/IPM initiative is more a product of regulatory conditions than of student or other demand. Indeed, students are skeptical of the necessity of widespread perpetual access to their course materials. Faculty members noted that for some professions, especially ones that have regular licensing exams, perpetual access to some course resources can be helpful; in the general case, though, use of course materials beyond the end of the course is thought to be limited. Institutional leadership stakeholders cite the perpetual access requirement as a reason for the costs of digital resources remaining high; were a subscription or rental model to be adopted for course resources, prices could be lowered by 25 to 75%. Students, for their part, seem to be open to alternatives to the current state perpetual access IPM model.

Improved access to accessible learning

In discussing the eText/IPM initiative with the College’s Centre for Accessible Learning, there is a strong belief that the IPM has improved learning accessibility for learners with disabilities. For one, the relationship that was created between the institution and the publishers is credited with giving the institution the clout to negotiate for improved resource accessibility. Indeed, the provision of accessible course materials was part of the agreements between the College and publishers included in the IPM. The Centre for Accessible Learning was invited to, and did participate, in the creation of those agreements.

One of the main challenges related to the creation of accessible course materials was the lead time required for the conversion of the resource to an appropriate format. Students could end up waiting months for accessible learning materials. With the increasing popularity of digital resources, some of the lead time associated with conversion was shortened; digital resources were not inherently accessible, however, due to their format or the inclusion of digital rights management (DRM) software on the part of the publisher. With the IPM, however, the Centre for Accessible Learning had reliable access to the publishers and was able to more quickly resolve issues such as DRM, leading to faster turnaround times for accessible resources. Also, the creation of more accessible learning resources leads to an overall improvement in access to accessible learning materials as the materials are shared with the provincial repository, Alternative Education Resources for Ontario (AERO).