Accessible EDU Consulting
Educators, product developers, and institutions use Accessible EDU Consulting, a human-centered advisory practice founded by Jordyn Zimmerman, to build inclusive learning environments and services before launch.
ENABLE Model location
What it is
People working with Accessible EDU use the consultancy to frame accessibility as an integral part of educational-experience design. They draw on lived-experience expertise -- particularly around AAC (augmentative and alternative communication) and inclusive pedagogy -- to set requirements and design from the start for learners with diverse communication, sensory, and physical needs.
Why it matters
When accessibility is tacked on after the fact, learners get stranded, educators are forced into crisis mode, and digital materials risk being unusable for large groups of students. By inserting accessibility at the requirements and design phases, Accessible EDU helps prevent breakdowns in communication, exclusion in learning, and costly retrofit fixes. Setting inclusive design early means fewer learners are left behind, fewer “after-the-fact” workarounds, and a stronger foundation for equity in educational experiences.
Real-world example
Campus teams hire Accessible EDU Consulting to audit and improve learning-management systems, course sites, and communication workflows before a semester begins. For instance, in 2023 and 2024 Zimmerman worked with universities such as Kent State University and the University of Vermont to advise faculty on proactive syllabus accessibility and multimodal course communication -- efforts documented through campus accessibility-office reports and public speaking engagements. [Kent State University News, 2023]
This preventive intervention mirrors how other institutions, such as Beacon College, distribute accessibility checklists to faculty before term start so that syllabi and learning modules reach students barrier-free from day one.
What care sounds like (Builder-side)
These quotes reflect the commitment of builders (faculty, instructional designers, university IT teams) to proactive accessibility before content is launched:
- “We want to map the full learner journey, including students who use AAC, and build multiple communication pathways before we code anything.”
- “Let’s ask now what input methods our users will rely on and how classroom layout might affect access.”
- “We’re including faculty-training and student-onboarding materials with alternate-format versions (e.g., visuals + text + audio) so everyone starts on equal ground.”
- “Rather than waiting for barriers to emerge, we’ll build inclusive checkpoints at every milestone: requirements, design, prototype, test.”
What neglect sounds like (Builder-side)
These quotes reflect the systemic prioritization of speed or convenience over inclusion in the builder-side environment:
- “We’ll get the main interface done first and figure out accessibility later.”
- “Let’s assume everyone uses the same input device; we’ll handle exceptions if someone asks.”
- “We’ll focus on the core feature set now and leave accommodation for a later update.”
- “We’ll ship and then listen for complaints about access.”
What compensation sounds like (Navigator-side)
These quotes reflect the burden carried by users when content is inaccessible, along with the partial value those compensatory acts provide:
- “I used a text-to-speech app on the required reading, but it misread all the headers and bullet points. It still let me keep up with the class, but it took twice as long.”
- “I asked a peer to describe the chart in the online module because it had no alt text. Their help was the only way I could complete the quiz.”
- “I installed a browser extension to force higher contrast on the LMS so I could read the lecture notes. It fixed most pages and let me study late into the night.”
The need for such compensatory tools -- even when they succeed -- illustrates the asymmetric barriers and extra labor end-users must navigate when care is missing upstream.