Testing for accessibility ensures that learning solutions comply with guidelines like the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), making them usable by people with disabilities. Inclusivity testing ensures that learning solutions are accessible to diverse learners, taking into account factors such as cultural relevance, language barriers, and varied learning styles.
From the Learning Engineering Toolkit
The Toolkit does not cast this topic as accessibility testing measured against standards like WCAG; instead it roots accessibility and inclusion in universal design for learning, in designing for the variation among learners, in design justice, and in the habit of testing designs with a truly varied group of end users. Universal design for learning works to keep learners with disabilities and other kinds of variation in view throughout the design process, having originated as a framework for producing curriculum materials and learning technologies that people with disabilities can use readily and well. [LET-03] It concentrates on two things: offering flexibility in how material is presented and how learners take part, and lowering barriers by supplying appropriate supports, all while holding high expectations for every learner whether or not they have a disability. [LET-03] Importantly, as with other human-centered methods, it depends on bringing the relevant end users—here, people with the disabilities in question—into the design process. [LET-03]
Testing is the point where inclusion gets confirmed. Don Norman cautioned that no one design can satisfy every user, and that when a design is not tried out with a sufficiently diverse set of end users, its slant toward the group that made it only deepens over successive iterations. [LET-03] Design justice answers this by pressing teams to name the ethnic, racial, class, gender, disability, and other differences at play, to test designs repeatedly with members of those varied groups, and to make a deliberate, systematic effort to invite people from disadvantaged groups to use and critique the work. [LET-03]
The companion tools chapter drives the same point home, urging engineers to grasp the entire spread of diversity in a population instead of aiming only at its midpoint or a supposed typical member, surfacing both common variations and edge cases across dominant and non-dominant subgroups so designs can be adapted widely. [LET-12]
Sources from the Learning Engineering Toolkit
- [LET-03]Khanh-Phuong Thai, Scotty D. Craig, Jim Goodell, Jodi Lis, Jordan Richard Schoenherr & Janet Kolodner (2023). Chapter 3: Learning Engineering is Human-Centered. In Jim Goodell & Janet Kolodner, Learning Engineering Toolkit (pp. 83–124). Routledge / Taylor & Francis. doi:10.4324/9781003276579
- [LET-12]Sae Schatz, Khanh-Phuong Thai, Scotty D. Craig, Jordan Richard Schoenherr, Jodi Lis & Janet Kolodner (2023). Chapter 12: Human-Centered Design Tools. In Jim Goodell & Janet Kolodner, Learning Engineering Toolkit (pp. 279–301). Routledge / Taylor & Francis. doi:10.4324/9781003276579
Further Reading
Source: wrgr/lecommons — curated by the learning engineering community. Confidence:
medium— lecommons-curated; not yet independently expert-validated in this context. To validate or challenge any item: use the Edit button on this page. Upgrading confidence frommedium→highrequires expert sign-off.
Landmark Academic Papers
-
Design principles for virtual humans in educational technology environments — Scotty D. Craig, Nicolaus L. Schroeder (2018). International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-017-0148-y · ~150 citations · tier: contemporary
Synthesized human-factors engineering principles for designing pedagogical agents. Showed that voice, appearance, and persona of virtual instructors systematically affect learner cognitive load and perceived credibility — establishing that LE must integrate psychological design alongside algorithmic design. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/papers.json · ID: LE-LS-AP-009 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
The voice quality of pedagogical agent impacts learning and agent perceptions — Ryan F. Siegle, Scotty D. Craig (2024). Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12997 · ~20 citations · tier: contemporary
Empirically demonstrated that voice quality (prosody, naturalness, warmth) of a pedagogical agent significantly affects both learning outcomes and learner perception. Illustrates the meticulous human factors engineering required in modern AI-driven learning systems. Source: lecommons/landscape/data/papers.json · ID: LE-LS-AP-010 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
Key People
- Scotty D. Craig (profile), Arizona State University (active 2000s–present) — Human factors researcher; virtual humans and pedagogical agents specialist
Systematically investigated design principles for virtual humans and pedagogical agents in learning environments Source: lecommons/landscape/data/people.json · ID: LE-LS-PP-014 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
Organizations, Conferences & Journals
- International Journal of STEM Education (journal) · link
Source: lecommons/landscape/data/organizations.json · ID: LE-LS-JO-007 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
Programs & Initiatives
-
LENS @ JHU — Learning Engineering for Next-Generation Systems (PC) · link
Concentration within JHU MEd in Learning Design & Technology. Targets practitioners in complex organizations: defense, healthcare, large-scale education. Grounded in human systems integration and learning engineering expertise. Capstone produces evidence dashboard, reproducible report, and governance/ethics plan. Unique JHU ecosystem: APL + Medicine + IEEE/ICICLE partnership. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-001 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
Learning Engineering Fellowship (CMU OLI) (PC) · link
Nine-week intensive for educators and designers to apply learning science and data-informed methods to real educational products and contexts; part of OLI professional learning. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-075 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
ASU Learning Engineering Institute & Graduate Certificate (PC) · link
Graduate certificate and research network fusing human systems engineering, design, and evidence to improve educational systems; connects students with Learning Engineering Research Network partners. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-079 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
Purdue School of Engineering Education (ENE) (PC) · link
First-in-the-nation school of engineering education; graduate offerings include the online M.S. in Engineering Education, Ph.D. in engineering education research, and the stackable Teaching and Learning in Engineering graduate certificate—explicit “learning engineering” language appears in certificate and course titles. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-089 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
International Journal of STEM Education (CO) · link
Discipline-based education research (DBER): problem-based learning, flipped classrooms, educational robotics, STEM learning outcomes at scale. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-130 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
-
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (CO) · link
Professional society for human factors and ergonomics. Publishes Human Factors journal and organizes the annual HFES conference. The Training Systems technical group directly addresses LE-relevant human factors in instructional systems. Source: lecommons/site/src/data/programs_people_registry.json · ID: LE-PP-133 · confidence: medium · expert-validated: false
Lecommons enrichment applied 2026-04-17. All items pending expert validation. See wrgr/lecommons for source data and curation methodology.