Access Texts<\/h1>\r\nIn 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.\r\n\r\n\r\nCan anyone name an access text, either from your access report or everyday life?\r\n\r\nWhy are access texts important?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nThroughout 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\u2019s 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?\r\n\r\nOnce 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 \u201ctheatre productions for everyone\u201d 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?\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\nWhat are some other questions you could ask?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nDo 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 \u201cno,\u201d 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nOn 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\u2019t 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nIn 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\u2019t do everything). Oftentimes, the organization has commissioned an access audit that they just haven\u2019t 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\u2019t 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.\r\nAccessibility Commitment Statement - National Ballet of Canada<\/h1>\r\nLet\u2019s look at two different examples of accessibility commitment statements. These statements are meant to tell us how an organization is thinking about and \u201cdoing\u201d accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe first access text is from the National Ballet of Canada:\r\n\r\n\r\n\u201cThe National Ballet of Canada is committed to providing a barrier-free environment for all persons including patrons\/customers, employees, contractors, job applicants, volunteers, suppliers, and any visitors who may enter our premises, access our information, or use our services. As an organization, we will meet and support the needs of persons with disabilities in a timely manner, and as set forth in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2005) and all associated standards and regulations. The National Ballet of Canada will strive to ensure that all policies, practices, and procedures are consistent with the core principles outlined in the Act.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\nDiscussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge (we can think of these as \u201cruling relations\u201d - systems\u2014like laws, policies, and professional practices\u2014that organize and coordinate how people act and think across different settings, often without them realizing it.)<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nTip:<\/strong> You can use these questions as you are analyzing and re-writing access texts in your access activator work.\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nIn the National Ballet\u2019s access statement, we see the presence of the AODA and legal-compliance language in terms such as, \u201cbarrier-free\u201d and \u201cstandards and regulations\u201d 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 \u2018professional\u2019 and therefore impersonal. It uses words that have specific legal and professional connotations, and which aren\u2019t regularly used outside of those settings, such as \u201cpersons\u201d and \u201cthe Act.\u201d 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, (\u201ctimely manner\u201d seems like business hours \u2013 so what if you need something in that moment? Do you need to call ahead? Is there an access person present at the performance?)\r\nAccessibility Commitment Statement - Tangled Art+ Disability<\/h1>\r\nNow, let\u2019s look at part of Tangled Art + Disability\u2019s access statement:\r\n\r\n\r\n\u201cIt starts with love. For this planet and for each other. Access is love. Historically, Disability and Deafness are typically represented as a \u2018problem\u2019 in need of a cure, rehabilitation, or charity. From the historic harms of Outsider Art to the lack of representation in museums today, the common cultural narrative is that disability is a personal failing. Disability Arts, however, tells stories of a different flavour.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\nDiscussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nTangled Art + Disability\u2019s statement immediately feels different than the Ballet\u2019s. They use words that are familiar to us outside of a contractual, professional or legal context, and that call on relationality - like \u201clove for the planet and for each other.\u201d They situate the gallery\u2019s stance within a historical, socio-political context, drawing on the way disability and Deafness are represented and interacted with within the broader arts \u2018world\u2019 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 \u201ctells stories of a different flavour.\u201d 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nIt\u2019s also, in some ways, less concrete perhaps than the Ballet\u2019s statement - it doesn\u2019t specifically name each \u2018type\u2019 of person to whom the statement is relevant to, or describe what \u201cdoing access\u201d is. Not that \u201cresponding to the needs of persons with disabilities\u201d is particularly concrete either when you think about it - but Tangled doesn\u2019t 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.\r\nThinking with and between these statements<\/h1>\r\nIn 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\u2019s reflect on how these access statements made us feel - the effect they conjure - as we think about the differences between them.\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- How do these accessibility statements make you feel?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What sort of story do they introduce about disability and accessibility?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences struck you between the two? Did you feel anything was missing from either?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What practices do one (or both) propose about enacting access?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences (or similarities) do you notice between them?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What kinds of language or context would you want to read in an access text? What words might highlight a critical access or disability justice approach?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How do you think a textual analysis of access statements could support our project of creating new and improved access plans for arts and cultural organizations?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\nAs 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.\r\n
Interplay Between Access Texts and Access Practice<\/h1>\r\nAt the end of the day, whatever is written in the access text is only one part of the organization\u2019s 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\u2019t put that into writing, or what is in writing contrasts significantly from their in person practice. There is a chapter from Tangled\u2019s \u201cAccess Anthology\u201d called \u201cConsidering the Care Clause\u201d which speaks to one of these scenarios - text which does not reflect the org\u2019s actual practices - and reflects some of that impact and how to rework from that point.\r\n\r\nAuthor 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\u2019s work, that work will be completely ready on time for a specific immoveable opening date. That way the gallery doesn\u2019t have to cancel the opening or make significant changes that would cost them money and resources.\r\n\r\nBut 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 \u201clet the contract language scare them\u201d (Rozeboom, 2023, 32) - describing that the gallery really wanted to support artists however they needed, even if that wasn\u2019t 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 \u201cCare Clause\u201d 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.\r\nHow do you think access texts may create or foreclose possibilities for the people implicated in them? (artists, patrons, employees, etc.)<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nIn this research project, we've identified access texts as a site of importance to the access work that organizations do. But I think it's important to contextualize this - access texts are empowered by the structures that art organizations exist within, most significantly those of colonial human rights law (like the AODA) and workplace bureaucracy, which privilege written word - rules, guidelines, legislature, commitments, etc. They're not inherently powerful or superior to other ways of enacting and knowing access within an arts organization. Like many other typifications of institutionalized change-making work, access texts can become empty words which fail to be operationalized, or which erode the organization's motivation for transformational change.<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nI think a part of what draws the research team to these texts is as a point of potential for reflection - how does the organization communicate and understand access, internally and externally - that can animate transformation. Because of this context where text based policy is so important, and also because of the impact of the AODA (which we'll draw on further below), many organizations have some form of access text,\u00a0 and understand accessibility through the access texts of legislature. A lot of what orgs formally learn about access comes in the form of access texts - and frequently, these texts are built on concepts of disability and accessibility which we identify as constricting, deradicalizing, and foreclosing the potential for meaningful and transformational access work. So, considering access texts as these well-established sites, which hold some power or meaning within our current systems of power, we are curious how we can engage them, or leverage them, to create something different. And as you work with the participant organizations, you can explore how your work may repurpose and reimagine access texts, including enabling different methodologies that may not fit within the original conceptualization of what an access text is and can be.<\/div>\r\nAODA<\/h1>\r\nThe 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.\r\n\r\nThe AODA is part of Ontario\u2019s 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nKey Principles of the AODA<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Barrier-Free Ontario: The AODA's main goal is to eliminate barriers to accessibility across Ontario. This includes both physical and attitudinal barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating fully in society.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Universal Design: The AODA encourages a focus on universal design, which ensures that spaces, services, and systems are designed to be usable by all, regardless of ability. Universal design benefits everyone, including people with disabilities, seniors, and others who may face temporary challenges (e.g., parents with strollers or people carrying heavy bags). Pay attention to this language!<\/li>\r\n \t
- Inclusion: The AODA emphasizes inclusion over mere compliance. This means that accessibility is not just about meeting the minimum legal standards but creating opportunities for full participation, equal treatment, and the breaking down of systemic barriers. Again, pay attention to this language.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
Review of Accessibility Standards under the AODA<\/h1>\r\nAccessibility Standards for Customer Service<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard focuses on the delivery of accessible customer service. It mandates that organizations provide accessible service to people with disabilities, ensuring that communication is inclusive and that accommodations are made when needed.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Customer Service Standard requires staff to be trained in \u201cproviding accessible service and adapting to the needs of visitors with disabilities\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to public-facing organizations like galleries and museums.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nBuilt Environment Standards<\/span>\r\n\r\n
\r\n \t- This standard focuses on the physical infrastructure of public spaces, ensuring that buildings and public spaces are accessible to everyone. It ensures public buildings are accessible, with an emphasis on physical accessibility\u2014ramps, elevators, clear signage, accessible bathrooms, and emergency exits (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to galleries and museums that are located in older buildings, which may require retrofitting to meet the standards.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Information and Communications Standards:<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard focuses on accessible communication, including accessible formats (e.g., large print, captions, etc.), and staff training to \u201cprovide customer service that meets the needs of disabled individuals\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- It provides requirements for web accessibility and digital media including ensuring that websites and apps are navigable by assistive technologies, such as screen readers (AODA).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to how publicly available information is provided, including websites, brochures, and exhibition materials and that websites and website content must be compatible with assistive technology (e.g., screen readers).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard also covers telecommunication services to ensure accessibility for individuals with hearing impairments.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Design of Public Spaces Standards<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard ensures that outdoor public spaces, such as parks, recreational areas, patios, courtyards, parking spaces, and pathways are accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Includes guidelines for designing public spaces to be accessible to everyone, including parking spaces, pathways, entrances, and outdoor public spaces like patios or courtyards in cultural settings (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Galleries and museums can refer to this standard to ensure that exhibits and interactive elements are accessible to all people, including those with mobility, sensory, or cognitive disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Employment Standard<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- The Employment Standard ensures that people with disabilities can fully participate in the workforce by eliminating employment barriers and providing accommodations during the hiring process and employment (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must provide accessible recruitment, hiring, and training processes.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employees with disabilities must be provided with reasonable accommodations to perform their jobs.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must have policies in place to support employees with disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Transportation Standard<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- While outside the scope of cultural organizations, the Transportation Standard addresses the accessibility of public transportation in Ontario, ensuring that people with disabilities have equal access to transit services (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This impacts accessibility for people with disabilities when attending cultural events or exhibitions.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Auditing and compliance<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- Accessibility Audits: Cultural organizations may conduct internal audits to assess their compliance with the AODA. These audits evaluate the physical, digital, and procedural accessibility of the organization and provide recommendations for improvement.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Compliance system includes annual reporting by organizations to ensure that they are meeting the standards set by the legislation. Failure to comply with the AODA can result in fines and other penalties. However, the ultimate goal of the AODA is not only legal compliance but also fostering a cultural shift towards inclusive, accessible practices.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
The AODA and the Cultural Sector<\/h1>\r\nAs you can see, the cultural sector is significantly impacted by the AODA. Cultural organizations that receive public funding or are considered part of Ontario\u2019s public sector must comply with AODA standards, including accessibility in the following areas:\r\n\r\n \t- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.).<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n \r\n
Group Discussion\/Reflection<\/h1>\r\nIn 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.\r\n\r\nLegislation, like the AODA, is a great example of how text helps to shape practice. So, let\u2019s look at how concepts such as \u201cdisability,\u201d \u201caccessibility,\u201d \u201ccommunity,\u201d and even concepts like \u201cresponsibility,\u201d \u201cduty to accommodate,\u201d and \u201crequirement\u201d are represented (or not represented) in this text. Then, we will discuss the kinds of access practices this text dictates.\r\n\r\n\r\nWorking in pairs, look through the AODA legislation for particular passages that are relevant to this exercise. For example, the AODA defines \u201cdisability\u201d as:\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n\"disability\" means:<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n(a)any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation or disfigurement that is caused by bodily injury, birth defect or illness and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, a brain injury, any degree of paralysis, amputation, lack of physical co-ordination, blindness or visual impediment, deafness or hearing impediment, muteness or speech impediment, or physical reliance on a guide dog or other animal or on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device,\r\n\r\n(b) a condition of mental impairment or a developmental disability,\r\n\r\n(c)a learning disability, or a dysfunction in one or more of the processes involved in understanding or using symbols or spoken language,\r\n\r\n(d)a mental disorder, or\r\n\r\n(e)an injury or disability for which benefits were claimed or received under the insurance plan established under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997; (\u201chandicap\u201d)\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\nDiscuss how this represents the concept you were searching for - through what framework or logic? How does this discourse make meaning of this concept?\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThink outwards: if you were coming to the AODA for advice, how would this passage shape the way you practice accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nAs someone who this accessibility might be for - or someone who is working for a community that this accessibility might be for, how do you feel about this? What feels right and what doesn\u2019t? If you find yourself wanting a different type of accessibility practice, can you identify what you would like to change and how? How could this change be enacted through a different type of discourse?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/advancingculturalaccessibilitypractices\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/440\/2025\/05\/runners-300x76.png\")
","rendered":"<\/p>\n
Lecture Link, Slides, Transcripts<\/h1>\n
Access Texts Slides:\u00a0<\/strong>Access Texts Slides<\/a><\/p>\nRecording of Live Lecture:\u00a0Lecture Link<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\nTranscript of Lecture:\u00a0Transcript<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
\r\n\r\nWhat are some other questions you could ask?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nDo 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 \u201cno,\u201d 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nOn 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\u2019t 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nIn 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\u2019t do everything). Oftentimes, the organization has commissioned an access audit that they just haven\u2019t 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\u2019t 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.\r\nAccessibility Commitment Statement - National Ballet of Canada<\/h1>\r\nLet\u2019s look at two different examples of accessibility commitment statements. These statements are meant to tell us how an organization is thinking about and \u201cdoing\u201d accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe first access text is from the National Ballet of Canada:\r\n
Accessibility Commitment Statement - National Ballet of Canada<\/h1>\r\nLet\u2019s look at two different examples of accessibility commitment statements. These statements are meant to tell us how an organization is thinking about and \u201cdoing\u201d accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThe first access text is from the National Ballet of Canada:\r\n\r\n\r\n\u201cThe National Ballet of Canada is committed to providing a barrier-free environment for all persons including patrons\/customers, employees, contractors, job applicants, volunteers, suppliers, and any visitors who may enter our premises, access our information, or use our services. As an organization, we will meet and support the needs of persons with disabilities in a timely manner, and as set forth in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2005) and all associated standards and regulations. The National Ballet of Canada will strive to ensure that all policies, practices, and procedures are consistent with the core principles outlined in the Act.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\nDiscussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge (we can think of these as \u201cruling relations\u201d - systems\u2014like laws, policies, and professional practices\u2014that organize and coordinate how people act and think across different settings, often without them realizing it.)<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nTip:<\/strong> You can use these questions as you are analyzing and re-writing access texts in your access activator work.\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nIn the National Ballet\u2019s access statement, we see the presence of the AODA and legal-compliance language in terms such as, \u201cbarrier-free\u201d and \u201cstandards and regulations\u201d 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 \u2018professional\u2019 and therefore impersonal. It uses words that have specific legal and professional connotations, and which aren\u2019t regularly used outside of those settings, such as \u201cpersons\u201d and \u201cthe Act.\u201d 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, (\u201ctimely manner\u201d seems like business hours \u2013 so what if you need something in that moment? Do you need to call ahead? Is there an access person present at the performance?)\r\nAccessibility Commitment Statement - Tangled Art+ Disability<\/h1>\r\nNow, let\u2019s look at part of Tangled Art + Disability\u2019s access statement:\r\n\r\n\r\n\u201cIt starts with love. For this planet and for each other. Access is love. Historically, Disability and Deafness are typically represented as a \u2018problem\u2019 in need of a cure, rehabilitation, or charity. From the historic harms of Outsider Art to the lack of representation in museums today, the common cultural narrative is that disability is a personal failing. Disability Arts, however, tells stories of a different flavour.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\nDiscussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nTangled Art + Disability\u2019s statement immediately feels different than the Ballet\u2019s. They use words that are familiar to us outside of a contractual, professional or legal context, and that call on relationality - like \u201clove for the planet and for each other.\u201d They situate the gallery\u2019s stance within a historical, socio-political context, drawing on the way disability and Deafness are represented and interacted with within the broader arts \u2018world\u2019 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 \u201ctells stories of a different flavour.\u201d 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nIt\u2019s also, in some ways, less concrete perhaps than the Ballet\u2019s statement - it doesn\u2019t specifically name each \u2018type\u2019 of person to whom the statement is relevant to, or describe what \u201cdoing access\u201d is. Not that \u201cresponding to the needs of persons with disabilities\u201d is particularly concrete either when you think about it - but Tangled doesn\u2019t 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.\r\nThinking with and between these statements<\/h1>\r\nIn 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\u2019s reflect on how these access statements made us feel - the effect they conjure - as we think about the differences between them.\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- How do these accessibility statements make you feel?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What sort of story do they introduce about disability and accessibility?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences struck you between the two? Did you feel anything was missing from either?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What practices do one (or both) propose about enacting access?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences (or similarities) do you notice between them?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What kinds of language or context would you want to read in an access text? What words might highlight a critical access or disability justice approach?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How do you think a textual analysis of access statements could support our project of creating new and improved access plans for arts and cultural organizations?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\nAs 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.\r\n
Interplay Between Access Texts and Access Practice<\/h1>\r\nAt the end of the day, whatever is written in the access text is only one part of the organization\u2019s 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\u2019t put that into writing, or what is in writing contrasts significantly from their in person practice. There is a chapter from Tangled\u2019s \u201cAccess Anthology\u201d called \u201cConsidering the Care Clause\u201d which speaks to one of these scenarios - text which does not reflect the org\u2019s actual practices - and reflects some of that impact and how to rework from that point.\r\n\r\nAuthor 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\u2019s work, that work will be completely ready on time for a specific immoveable opening date. That way the gallery doesn\u2019t have to cancel the opening or make significant changes that would cost them money and resources.\r\n\r\nBut 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 \u201clet the contract language scare them\u201d (Rozeboom, 2023, 32) - describing that the gallery really wanted to support artists however they needed, even if that wasn\u2019t 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 \u201cCare Clause\u201d 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.\r\nHow do you think access texts may create or foreclose possibilities for the people implicated in them? (artists, patrons, employees, etc.)<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nIn this research project, we've identified access texts as a site of importance to the access work that organizations do. But I think it's important to contextualize this - access texts are empowered by the structures that art organizations exist within, most significantly those of colonial human rights law (like the AODA) and workplace bureaucracy, which privilege written word - rules, guidelines, legislature, commitments, etc. They're not inherently powerful or superior to other ways of enacting and knowing access within an arts organization. Like many other typifications of institutionalized change-making work, access texts can become empty words which fail to be operationalized, or which erode the organization's motivation for transformational change.<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nI think a part of what draws the research team to these texts is as a point of potential for reflection - how does the organization communicate and understand access, internally and externally - that can animate transformation. Because of this context where text based policy is so important, and also because of the impact of the AODA (which we'll draw on further below), many organizations have some form of access text,\u00a0 and understand accessibility through the access texts of legislature. A lot of what orgs formally learn about access comes in the form of access texts - and frequently, these texts are built on concepts of disability and accessibility which we identify as constricting, deradicalizing, and foreclosing the potential for meaningful and transformational access work. So, considering access texts as these well-established sites, which hold some power or meaning within our current systems of power, we are curious how we can engage them, or leverage them, to create something different. And as you work with the participant organizations, you can explore how your work may repurpose and reimagine access texts, including enabling different methodologies that may not fit within the original conceptualization of what an access text is and can be.<\/div>\r\nAODA<\/h1>\r\nThe 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.\r\n\r\nThe AODA is part of Ontario\u2019s 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nKey Principles of the AODA<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n \t- Barrier-Free Ontario: The AODA's main goal is to eliminate barriers to accessibility across Ontario. This includes both physical and attitudinal barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating fully in society.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Universal Design: The AODA encourages a focus on universal design, which ensures that spaces, services, and systems are designed to be usable by all, regardless of ability. Universal design benefits everyone, including people with disabilities, seniors, and others who may face temporary challenges (e.g., parents with strollers or people carrying heavy bags). Pay attention to this language!<\/li>\r\n \t
- Inclusion: The AODA emphasizes inclusion over mere compliance. This means that accessibility is not just about meeting the minimum legal standards but creating opportunities for full participation, equal treatment, and the breaking down of systemic barriers. Again, pay attention to this language.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
Review of Accessibility Standards under the AODA<\/h1>\r\nAccessibility Standards for Customer Service<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard focuses on the delivery of accessible customer service. It mandates that organizations provide accessible service to people with disabilities, ensuring that communication is inclusive and that accommodations are made when needed.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Customer Service Standard requires staff to be trained in \u201cproviding accessible service and adapting to the needs of visitors with disabilities\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to public-facing organizations like galleries and museums.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nBuilt Environment Standards<\/span>\r\n\r\n
\r\n \t- This standard focuses on the physical infrastructure of public spaces, ensuring that buildings and public spaces are accessible to everyone. It ensures public buildings are accessible, with an emphasis on physical accessibility\u2014ramps, elevators, clear signage, accessible bathrooms, and emergency exits (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to galleries and museums that are located in older buildings, which may require retrofitting to meet the standards.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Information and Communications Standards:<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard focuses on accessible communication, including accessible formats (e.g., large print, captions, etc.), and staff training to \u201cprovide customer service that meets the needs of disabled individuals\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- It provides requirements for web accessibility and digital media including ensuring that websites and apps are navigable by assistive technologies, such as screen readers (AODA).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to how publicly available information is provided, including websites, brochures, and exhibition materials and that websites and website content must be compatible with assistive technology (e.g., screen readers).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard also covers telecommunication services to ensure accessibility for individuals with hearing impairments.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Design of Public Spaces Standards<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- This standard ensures that outdoor public spaces, such as parks, recreational areas, patios, courtyards, parking spaces, and pathways are accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Includes guidelines for designing public spaces to be accessible to everyone, including parking spaces, pathways, entrances, and outdoor public spaces like patios or courtyards in cultural settings (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Galleries and museums can refer to this standard to ensure that exhibits and interactive elements are accessible to all people, including those with mobility, sensory, or cognitive disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Employment Standard<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- The Employment Standard ensures that people with disabilities can fully participate in the workforce by eliminating employment barriers and providing accommodations during the hiring process and employment (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must provide accessible recruitment, hiring, and training processes.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employees with disabilities must be provided with reasonable accommodations to perform their jobs.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must have policies in place to support employees with disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Transportation Standard<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- While outside the scope of cultural organizations, the Transportation Standard addresses the accessibility of public transportation in Ontario, ensuring that people with disabilities have equal access to transit services (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This impacts accessibility for people with disabilities when attending cultural events or exhibitions.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Auditing and compliance<\/h3>\r\n\r\n\r\n \t- Accessibility Audits: Cultural organizations may conduct internal audits to assess their compliance with the AODA. These audits evaluate the physical, digital, and procedural accessibility of the organization and provide recommendations for improvement.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Compliance system includes annual reporting by organizations to ensure that they are meeting the standards set by the legislation. Failure to comply with the AODA can result in fines and other penalties. However, the ultimate goal of the AODA is not only legal compliance but also fostering a cultural shift towards inclusive, accessible practices.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
The AODA and the Cultural Sector<\/h1>\r\nAs you can see, the cultural sector is significantly impacted by the AODA. Cultural organizations that receive public funding or are considered part of Ontario\u2019s public sector must comply with AODA standards, including accessibility in the following areas:\r\n\r\n \t- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.).<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n \r\n
Group Discussion\/Reflection<\/h1>\r\nIn 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.\r\n\r\nLegislation, like the AODA, is a great example of how text helps to shape practice. So, let\u2019s look at how concepts such as \u201cdisability,\u201d \u201caccessibility,\u201d \u201ccommunity,\u201d and even concepts like \u201cresponsibility,\u201d \u201cduty to accommodate,\u201d and \u201crequirement\u201d are represented (or not represented) in this text. Then, we will discuss the kinds of access practices this text dictates.\r\n\r\n\r\nWorking in pairs, look through the AODA legislation for particular passages that are relevant to this exercise. For example, the AODA defines \u201cdisability\u201d as:\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n\"disability\" means:<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n(a)any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation or disfigurement that is caused by bodily injury, birth defect or illness and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, a brain injury, any degree of paralysis, amputation, lack of physical co-ordination, blindness or visual impediment, deafness or hearing impediment, muteness or speech impediment, or physical reliance on a guide dog or other animal or on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device,\r\n\r\n(b) a condition of mental impairment or a developmental disability,\r\n\r\n(c)a learning disability, or a dysfunction in one or more of the processes involved in understanding or using symbols or spoken language,\r\n\r\n(d)a mental disorder, or\r\n\r\n(e)an injury or disability for which benefits were claimed or received under the insurance plan established under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997; (\u201chandicap\u201d)\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\nDiscuss how this represents the concept you were searching for - through what framework or logic? How does this discourse make meaning of this concept?\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThink outwards: if you were coming to the AODA for advice, how would this passage shape the way you practice accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nAs someone who this accessibility might be for - or someone who is working for a community that this accessibility might be for, how do you feel about this? What feels right and what doesn\u2019t? If you find yourself wanting a different type of accessibility practice, can you identify what you would like to change and how? How could this change be enacted through a different type of discourse?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n","rendered":"<\/p>\n
Lecture Link, Slides, Transcripts<\/h1>\n
Access Texts Slides:\u00a0<\/strong>Access Texts Slides<\/a><\/p>\nRecording of Live Lecture:\u00a0Lecture Link<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\nTranscript of Lecture:\u00a0Transcript<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
Discussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n
- \r\n \t
- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge (we can think of these as \u201cruling relations\u201d - systems\u2014like laws, policies, and professional practices\u2014that organize and coordinate how people act and think across different settings, often without them realizing it.)<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nTip:<\/strong> You can use these questions as you are analyzing and re-writing access texts in your access activator work.\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nIn the National Ballet\u2019s access statement, we see the presence of the AODA and legal-compliance language in terms such as, \u201cbarrier-free\u201d and \u201cstandards and regulations\u201d 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 \u2018professional\u2019 and therefore impersonal. It uses words that have specific legal and professional connotations, and which aren\u2019t regularly used outside of those settings, such as \u201cpersons\u201d and \u201cthe Act.\u201d 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, (\u201ctimely manner\u201d seems like business hours \u2013 so what if you need something in that moment? Do you need to call ahead? Is there an access person present at the performance?)\r\n
Accessibility Commitment Statement - Tangled Art+ Disability<\/h1>\r\nNow, let\u2019s look at part of Tangled Art + Disability\u2019s access statement:\r\n
\r\n\r\n\u201cIt starts with love. For this planet and for each other. Access is love. Historically, Disability and Deafness are typically represented as a \u2018problem\u2019 in need of a cure, rehabilitation, or charity. From the historic harms of Outsider Art to the lack of representation in museums today, the common cultural narrative is that disability is a personal failing. Disability Arts, however, tells stories of a different flavour.\u201d\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n Discussion<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- Do any keywords or passages stand out to you?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What connections are they making to other bodies of knowledge? How are they connected to these bodies of knowledge?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Where are they locating disability \u201cexpertise\u201d?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How is disability and accessibility described and through which knowledge framework? For example, the medical model, the individual model, as a problem to be addressed through legislation, as a vital intersectional identity?<\/li>\r\n \t
- Who is the imagined or intended audience?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What is the overall story of disability and access is this organization telling through this access text?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Close Reading<\/h1>\r\nTangled Art + Disability\u2019s statement immediately feels different than the Ballet\u2019s. They use words that are familiar to us outside of a contractual, professional or legal context, and that call on relationality - like \u201clove for the planet and for each other.\u201d They situate the gallery\u2019s stance within a historical, socio-political context, drawing on the way disability and Deafness are represented and interacted with within the broader arts \u2018world\u2019 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 \u201ctells stories of a different flavour.\u201d 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nIt\u2019s also, in some ways, less concrete perhaps than the Ballet\u2019s statement - it doesn\u2019t specifically name each \u2018type\u2019 of person to whom the statement is relevant to, or describe what \u201cdoing access\u201d is. Not that \u201cresponding to the needs of persons with disabilities\u201d is particularly concrete either when you think about it - but Tangled doesn\u2019t 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.\r\n
Thinking with and between these statements<\/h1>\r\nIn 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\u2019s reflect on how these access statements made us feel - the effect they conjure - as we think about the differences between them.\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- How do these accessibility statements make you feel?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What sort of story do they introduce about disability and accessibility?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences struck you between the two? Did you feel anything was missing from either?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What practices do one (or both) propose about enacting access?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What differences (or similarities) do you notice between them?<\/li>\r\n \t
- What kinds of language or context would you want to read in an access text? What words might highlight a critical access or disability justice approach?<\/li>\r\n \t
- How do you think a textual analysis of access statements could support our project of creating new and improved access plans for arts and cultural organizations?<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\nAs 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.\r\n
Interplay Between Access Texts and Access Practice<\/h1>\r\nAt the end of the day, whatever is written in the access text is only one part of the organization\u2019s 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\u2019t put that into writing, or what is in writing contrasts significantly from their in person practice. There is a chapter from Tangled\u2019s \u201cAccess Anthology\u201d called \u201cConsidering the Care Clause\u201d which speaks to one of these scenarios - text which does not reflect the org\u2019s actual practices - and reflects some of that impact and how to rework from that point.\r\n\r\nAuthor 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\u2019s work, that work will be completely ready on time for a specific immoveable opening date. That way the gallery doesn\u2019t have to cancel the opening or make significant changes that would cost them money and resources.\r\n\r\nBut 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 \u201clet the contract language scare them\u201d (Rozeboom, 2023, 32) - describing that the gallery really wanted to support artists however they needed, even if that wasn\u2019t 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 \u201cCare Clause\u201d 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.\r\n
How do you think access texts may create or foreclose possibilities for the people implicated in them? (artists, patrons, employees, etc.)<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nIn this research project, we've identified access texts as a site of importance to the access work that organizations do. But I think it's important to contextualize this - access texts are empowered by the structures that art organizations exist within, most significantly those of colonial human rights law (like the AODA) and workplace bureaucracy, which privilege written word - rules, guidelines, legislature, commitments, etc. They're not inherently powerful or superior to other ways of enacting and knowing access within an arts organization. Like many other typifications of institutionalized change-making work, access texts can become empty words which fail to be operationalized, or which erode the organization's motivation for transformational change.<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nI think a part of what draws the research team to these texts is as a point of potential for reflection - how does the organization communicate and understand access, internally and externally - that can animate transformation. Because of this context where text based policy is so important, and also because of the impact of the AODA (which we'll draw on further below), many organizations have some form of access text,\u00a0 and understand accessibility through the access texts of legislature. A lot of what orgs formally learn about access comes in the form of access texts - and frequently, these texts are built on concepts of disability and accessibility which we identify as constricting, deradicalizing, and foreclosing the potential for meaningful and transformational access work. So, considering access texts as these well-established sites, which hold some power or meaning within our current systems of power, we are curious how we can engage them, or leverage them, to create something different. And as you work with the participant organizations, you can explore how your work may repurpose and reimagine access texts, including enabling different methodologies that may not fit within the original conceptualization of what an access text is and can be.<\/div>\r\nAODA<\/h1>\r\nThe 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.\r\n\r\nThe AODA is part of Ontario\u2019s 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.\r\n\r\n \r\n
\r\n Key Principles of the AODA<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- Barrier-Free Ontario: The AODA's main goal is to eliminate barriers to accessibility across Ontario. This includes both physical and attitudinal barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating fully in society.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Universal Design: The AODA encourages a focus on universal design, which ensures that spaces, services, and systems are designed to be usable by all, regardless of ability. Universal design benefits everyone, including people with disabilities, seniors, and others who may face temporary challenges (e.g., parents with strollers or people carrying heavy bags). Pay attention to this language!<\/li>\r\n \t
- Inclusion: The AODA emphasizes inclusion over mere compliance. This means that accessibility is not just about meeting the minimum legal standards but creating opportunities for full participation, equal treatment, and the breaking down of systemic barriers. Again, pay attention to this language.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
Review of Accessibility Standards under the AODA<\/h1>\r\n
Accessibility Standards for Customer Service<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- This standard focuses on the delivery of accessible customer service. It mandates that organizations provide accessible service to people with disabilities, ensuring that communication is inclusive and that accommodations are made when needed.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Customer Service Standard requires staff to be trained in \u201cproviding accessible service and adapting to the needs of visitors with disabilities\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to public-facing organizations like galleries and museums.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\nBuilt Environment Standards<\/span>\r\n\r\n
- \r\n \t
- This standard focuses on the physical infrastructure of public spaces, ensuring that buildings and public spaces are accessible to everyone. It ensures public buildings are accessible, with an emphasis on physical accessibility\u2014ramps, elevators, clear signage, accessible bathrooms, and emergency exits (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to galleries and museums that are located in older buildings, which may require retrofitting to meet the standards.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Information and Communications Standards:<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- This standard focuses on accessible communication, including accessible formats (e.g., large print, captions, etc.), and staff training to \u201cprovide customer service that meets the needs of disabled individuals\u201d (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- It provides requirements for web accessibility and digital media including ensuring that websites and apps are navigable by assistive technologies, such as screen readers (AODA).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard applies to how publicly available information is provided, including websites, brochures, and exhibition materials and that websites and website content must be compatible with assistive technology (e.g., screen readers).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This standard also covers telecommunication services to ensure accessibility for individuals with hearing impairments.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Design of Public Spaces Standards<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- This standard ensures that outdoor public spaces, such as parks, recreational areas, patios, courtyards, parking spaces, and pathways are accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Includes guidelines for designing public spaces to be accessible to everyone, including parking spaces, pathways, entrances, and outdoor public spaces like patios or courtyards in cultural settings (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Galleries and museums can refer to this standard to ensure that exhibits and interactive elements are accessible to all people, including those with mobility, sensory, or cognitive disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Employment Standard<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- The Employment Standard ensures that people with disabilities can fully participate in the workforce by eliminating employment barriers and providing accommodations during the hiring process and employment (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must provide accessible recruitment, hiring, and training processes.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employees with disabilities must be provided with reasonable accommodations to perform their jobs.<\/li>\r\n \t
- Employers must have policies in place to support employees with disabilities.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Transportation Standard<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- While outside the scope of cultural organizations, the Transportation Standard addresses the accessibility of public transportation in Ontario, ensuring that people with disabilities have equal access to transit services (AODA, 2014).<\/li>\r\n \t
- This impacts accessibility for people with disabilities when attending cultural events or exhibitions.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
Auditing and compliance<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n- \r\n \t
- Accessibility Audits: Cultural organizations may conduct internal audits to assess their compliance with the AODA. These audits evaluate the physical, digital, and procedural accessibility of the organization and provide recommendations for improvement.<\/li>\r\n \t
- The AODA Compliance system includes annual reporting by organizations to ensure that they are meeting the standards set by the legislation. Failure to comply with the AODA can result in fines and other penalties. However, the ultimate goal of the AODA is not only legal compliance but also fostering a cultural shift towards inclusive, accessible practices.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n
The AODA and the Cultural Sector<\/h1>\r\nAs you can see, the cultural sector is significantly impacted by the AODA. Cultural organizations that receive public funding or are considered part of Ontario\u2019s public sector must comply with AODA standards, including accessibility in the following areas:\r\n
- \r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.<\/li>\r\n \t
- 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.).<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n \r\n
Group Discussion\/Reflection<\/h1>\r\nIn 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.\r\n\r\nLegislation, like the AODA, is a great example of how text helps to shape practice. So, let\u2019s look at how concepts such as \u201cdisability,\u201d \u201caccessibility,\u201d \u201ccommunity,\u201d and even concepts like \u201cresponsibility,\u201d \u201cduty to accommodate,\u201d and \u201crequirement\u201d are represented (or not represented) in this text. Then, we will discuss the kinds of access practices this text dictates.\r\n
\r\n\r\nWorking in pairs, look through the AODA legislation for particular passages that are relevant to this exercise. For example, the AODA defines \u201cdisability\u201d as:\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \"disability\" means:<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\n(a)any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation or disfigurement that is caused by bodily injury, birth defect or illness and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, a brain injury, any degree of paralysis, amputation, lack of physical co-ordination, blindness or visual impediment, deafness or hearing impediment, muteness or speech impediment, or physical reliance on a guide dog or other animal or on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device,\r\n\r\n(b) a condition of mental impairment or a developmental disability,\r\n\r\n(c)a learning disability, or a dysfunction in one or more of the processes involved in understanding or using symbols or spoken language,\r\n\r\n(d)a mental disorder, or\r\n\r\n(e)an injury or disability for which benefits were claimed or received under the insurance plan established under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997; (\u201chandicap\u201d)\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\nDiscuss how this represents the concept you were searching for - through what framework or logic? How does this discourse make meaning of this concept?\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThink outwards: if you were coming to the AODA for advice, how would this passage shape the way you practice accessibility.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nAs someone who this accessibility might be for - or someone who is working for a community that this accessibility might be for, how do you feel about this? What feels right and what doesn\u2019t? If you find yourself wanting a different type of accessibility practice, can you identify what you would like to change and how? How could this change be enacted through a different type of discourse?\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n","rendered":"<\/p>\nLecture Link, Slides, Transcripts<\/h1>\n
Access Texts Slides:\u00a0<\/strong>Access Texts Slides<\/a><\/p>\n
Recording of Live Lecture:\u00a0Lecture Link<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
Transcript of Lecture:\u00a0Transcript<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n