Lecture Link, Slides, Transcripts

Access Texts Slides: Access Texts Slides

Recording of Live Lecture: Lecture Link

Transcript of Lecture: Transcript

Chat Log from Lecture: Chat

Access Texts

In this course, we are focused on access texts – that is, any document that reflects how an organization understands access, shapes how they practice access, and communicates how they understand and practice access to staff and the public.

Throughout this project, we are looking at access texts within arts and cultural organizations with the goal of reviewing, supporting and guiding their institutional practices towards a critical access framework. We are interested in how they articulate an organization’s approach and commitment to access. This gives us useful information. Does an organization think of accessibility (and, therefore, disabled people) through a rights-based framework? Through a justice-based framework? How do access texts position disabled people and our relationship to and within the organization? Does the organization understand disabled people as valuable? As communities they want to engage? Or do they position accessibility as something they are required to address through legislation and then move on from?

Once we have gathered this information and analyzed it through the critical framework we are developing in class, we can explore how the organization enacts the way they articulate their commitment to accessibility in practice. If an organization commits to creating “theatre productions for everyone” in an access text, then it is our job as access activators to map this commitment onto their practices. Are their theatre productions for everyone? Do they have ASL interpreters?

Do they have clean air and masked performances? Do they have relaxed performances? Are there different seating options in the performances? Are their performances free? Do they practice fragrance freedom? If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” or if the access reports you are working with shares that disabled people feel unwelcome in these spaces for any reason, then the performances are not actually for everyone. This information guides or Access Activation work as the plans we create should facilitate the organization to meet its commitment to access as articulated in its access text, and / or facilitate the most generous interpretation of access possible.

On the other side, you might be working with an organization that has tremendous access knowledge among their team and really effective and radical access practices that aren’t captured or articulated in their access texts. In this case, your job would be to create access texts and other communication devices (access guides, etc) for the organization that allows them to communicate their great access practices to community.

In other cases, an organization might have a very rigid description of access in their access practices which do, in fact, line up with their limited access practices. Or an organization might not talk about access at all and not have any effective access practices in place. In this case, you are working with a clean slate! This might feel exciting or it might feel overwhelming. In this case, you should draw on the access reports to find your focus (the access plan you create can’t do everything). Oftentimes, the organization has commissioned an access audit that they just haven’t gotten around to implementing. Or there is one person in the organization who is full of great ideas for access practices and they just aren’t listened to. Or, community members who participated in focus groups might have tons of great ideas on how they could make practices accessible, or important narratives of how they feel excluded at the organization. Any and all of these points of knowledge can give you your starting point and eventual focus.

Accessibility Commitment Statement – National Ballet of Canada

Let’s look at two different examples of accessibility commitment statements. These statements are meant to tell us how an organization is thinking about and “doing” accessibility.

The first access text is from the National Ballet of Canada:

Tip: You can use these questions as you are analyzing and re-writing access texts in your access activator work.

Close Reading

In the National Ballet’s access statement, we see the presence of the AODA and legal-compliance language in terms such as, “barrier-free” and “standards and regulations” It is operating within a legal contractual or compliance-punishment framework. The statement positions the National Ballet as the provider of access and disabled people as the receivers of access. The statement language feels cold or ‘professional’ and therefore impersonal. It uses words that have specific legal and professional connotations, and which aren’t regularly used outside of those settings, such as “persons” and “the Act.” Some ways that this text might inform and govern access practices include a strict adherence to the AODA and only what is written in the AODA, (“timely manner” seems like business hours – so what if you need something in that moment? Do you need to call ahead? Is there an access person present at the performance?)

Accessibility Commitment Statement – Tangled Art+ Disability

Now, let’s look at part of Tangled Art + Disability’s access statement:

Close Reading

Tangled Art + Disability’s statement immediately feels different than the Ballet’s. They use words that are familiar to us outside of a contractual, professional or legal context, and that call on relationality – like “love for the planet and for each other.” They situate the gallery’s stance within a historical, socio-political context, drawing on the way disability and Deafness are represented and interacted with within the broader arts ‘world’ and dominant discourse. And they define the work of the gallery and of Disability arts as diverting from these dominant, pathologizing views of disability – stating disability arts “tells stories of a different flavour.” This statement might guide access practices which strive for relationality and access intimacy, where both the gallery and patrons are active participants in access practices. It signals a conceptualization that allows for thinking and doing access in ways that incorporate disability culture, creativity, and access that connects to land and non-human beings.

It’s also, in some ways, less concrete perhaps than the Ballet’s statement – it doesn’t specifically name each ‘type’ of person to whom the statement is relevant to, or describe what “doing access” is. Not that “responding to the needs of persons with disabilities” is particularly concrete either when you think about it – but Tangled doesn’t necessarily say what they are doing in this statement per se. What might that mean? I think it can also point to the intention and imagination tied to the statement. For Tangled, accessibility is infused all throughout their practices and policy – as outsiders, we can experience this in the way they set things up, digitally, in person, in communication. Whereas, for the Ballet and I think many orgs like this, the accessibility statement may be one of the only places accessibility and disability comes up. It speaks to a legal requirement to do so – and it seems to answer as many things as possible in the one small space marked out for disability.

Thinking with and between these statements

In the work we do together, we think about access texts as fundamentally important to how organizations think about, practice, and communicate access. Access texts, we argue, can structure the way we – disabled, Deaf, mad, neurodivergent people feel in relation to an organization. So, let’s reflect on how these access statements made us feel – the effect they conjure – as we think about the differences between them.

As we can learn from these two examples, access texts present the opportunity to go beyond what is mandated (ie: the AODA). They set the stage, so to speak, by drawing boundaries around what is possible within a given space.

Interplay Between Access Texts and Access Practice

At the end of the day, whatever is written in the access text is only one part of the organization’s access practices. As we discussed earlier, sometimes access texts can present a really comprehensive approach to access which in reality is not actually happening, or maybe an org is doing something quite effective but hasn’t put that into writing, or what is in writing contrasts significantly from their in person practice. There is a chapter from Tangled’s “Access Anthology” called “Considering the Care Clause” which speaks to one of these scenarios – text which does not reflect the org’s actual practices – and reflects some of that impact and how to rework from that point.

Author and executive director Cyn Rozeboom explains a disconnect between their old artist contract and their actual orientation towards relationships with artists. The contract was designed following typical contract guidelines – it includes what you (legally) need to include to protect the rights of artists, but mostly it focuses on protecting the organization (which is the done thing). So for example, an artist contract might impose hard boundaries for timelines and deliverables, which make sure that if a gallery is showing someone’s work, that work will be completely ready on time for a specific immoveable opening date. That way the gallery doesn’t have to cancel the opening or make significant changes that would cost them money and resources.

But an essential core value of Tangled is disability justice – and grounding our practices in disability justice means operating on crip time, means disrupting constrictive expectations for productivity, honouring the ways our bodies and creative processes unfurl outside of neoliberal time and process. So Rozeboom describes this disconnect where Tangled staff would frequently tell artists not to “let the contract language scare them” (Rozeboom, 2023, 32) – describing that the gallery really wanted to support artists however they needed, even if that wasn’t explicit in the contract. The access text as it was at that time imposed a framework onto artists that could constrict their understanding of the relationship with the gallery – and that can in turn, inform how they operated – what they felt was acceptable to ask, how they worked in order to fit within the established framework. So the gallery decided to add the “Care Clause” to their contracts – putting into words the practices they had already developed in person, that centres their intention to care for each other according to the dimensions, needs and wants of artists and their body/minds.

AODA

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) was passed in 2005 by the Government of Ontario with the goal of achieving a fully accessible Ontario by 2025 (this year!). The AODA is a landmark piece of legislation designed to remove barriers to full participation in society for people with disabilities, ensuring they can access services, employment, and public spaces on an equal footing with non-disabled people.

The AODA is part of Ontario’s commitment to achieving a barrier-free society by focusing on the creation of standards that apply to public, private, and non-profit sectors across Ontario. It emphasizes the importance of creating an inclusive environment where individuals with disabilities are able to fully participate in their communities.

Review of Accessibility Standards under the AODA

Accessibility Standards for Customer Service

Built Environment Standards

Information and Communications Standards:

Design of Public Spaces Standards

Employment Standard

Transportation Standard

Auditing and compliance

The AODA and the Cultural Sector

As you can see, the cultural sector is significantly impacted by the AODA. Cultural organizations that receive public funding or are considered part of Ontario’s public sector must comply with AODA standards, including accessibility in the following areas:

• Customer Service and Engagement: Cultural organizations must ensure that their staff are trained to provide accessible customer service to all patrons, including those with disabilities. This includes offering alternative formats for brochures, programs, and signage, and ensuring that events and exhibitions are accessible to all.
• Physical Accessibility: Museums and galleries must ensure their facilities meet accessibility standards, including ramps, elevators, accessible restrooms, and wide aisles for mobility devices. These changes may require retrofitting older buildings to meet modern accessibility requirements.
• Digital Accessibility: With increasing reliance on digital content (e.g., virtual exhibitions, websites, online programs), cultural organizations must ensure their digital platforms are accessible. This includes compliance with WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), which ensures that websites are navigable by screen readers and other assistive technologies.
• Inclusive Programming and Exhibits: Cultural institutions must provide exhibits and programming that reflect the diversity of their audiences, including disabled, Deaf, mad, and neurodivergent people. This might include offering relaxed performances, sensory-friendly activities, and making sure that exhibit materials are available in accessible formats (large print, audio descriptions, etc.).

Group Discussion/Reflection

In the work we are doing together, we are thinking about the relationship between access text – or how access is discursively represented – and access practice. We are rewriting access texts for organizations so that they direct better access practices.

Legislation, like the AODA, is a great example of how text helps to shape practice. So, let’s look at how concepts such as “disability,” “accessibility,” “community,” and even concepts like “responsibility,” “duty to accommodate,” and “requirement” are represented (or not represented) in this text. Then, we will discuss the kinds of access practices this text dictates.