[Accessibility-testing] Fwd: Player Panel proposal document

[Austin Seraphin]

I agree. Blind and VI have unique challenges.


On 11/15/18 2:42 PM, Zachary Kline wrote:
> Hey Jason et al,
>
> Please find my takes on these questions below.
>
> 1. Yeah, we definitely want low-vision and motor disabilities as well
> as blind. If we could find some cognitively-disabled testers that
> would be ideal too, but might be harder to evaluate and deal with.
> 2. I’m in favor of 50-ish here, it seems a decent sample size for the
> audience.
> 3. Fluency in English is about all I can think of here :)
>
> Best,
> Zack.
>> On Nov 15, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Jason McIntosh <jmac at jmac.org
>> <mailto:jmac at jmac.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Here are some requests for clarification from Dr. Chris Power @
>> AbleGamers, who leads the Player Panel program there. (And thank you
>> again for setting up that connection, Mark!)
>>
>> I of course don’t wish to speak unilaterally for the team, so I’d
>> like to share the questions with y’all, along with my own
>> educated-guess answers, and give y’all a chance to correct or improve
>> them. (Or a chance to say my answers seem fine, if in fact they do.)
>>
>> Please respond no later than the evening of Monday, November 19.
>> Let’s plan to discuss this at our call then, as well, with an aim to
>> get our response back to Chris by the next day.
>>
>>> *From: *Christopher Power <christopher at ablegamers.com
>>> <mailto:christopher at ablegamers.com>>
>>> *Subject: **Re: Player Panel proposal document*
>>>
>>> Looking at this document it has most of what we need.  The players
>>> that you need, you say that you are looking for mobility and visual
>>> disabilities.  Just some clarifications on this and I will get this
>>> out early this week.
>>>
>>> 1) When you say mobility impairments I'm assuming upper limb
>>> mobility.  For visual impairments, are you looking for both blind
>>> and low-vision?
>>
>> Yes to upper-limb mobility impairments, since these are plain old
>> mouse-and-keyboard games, and yes to both blind and low-vision
>> players — right?
>>
>>> 2) Approximately how players are you looking for?  With this
>>> advertisment with the players above, it will go out to about 200
>>> players.  That might generate about 100 players for you.  You do not
>>> have to engage with all of them - but if you are only looking for a
>>> certain number, we might advertise to a smaller cohort and then
>>> snowball sample out for you.  
>>
>> This is an interesting question. If we let our available budget
>> dictate this, and we plan to spend the committee’s entire $500
>> discretionary fund on the $10 Amazon gift-card rewards, then that
>> sets an obvious upper limit of 50 players (assuming that all of them
>> complete their surveys, which I imagine is probably not realistic). I
>> am also mindful that our resources for handling questions from
>> testers is also limited, and I don’t want to overburden that resource
>> (since I reckon that I will personally help with that).
>>
>> Do we want to take Chris’s invitation and start with an initial cap
>> of 50 testers, snowballing in another round or two if needed? Or
>> should we stretch to include more testers? (Hoping to hear from
>> crowd-testing veterans on what a good target number is here, and
>> noting that we certainly can push beyond 50 if that would make a
>> significant better final report…)
>>
>> I suppose that we could also just accept the whole, no-limit list,
>> and then inform them all that we will proceed to randomly choose 50
>> as our initial testing group, and treat the remainder as a reserve
>> (to fill in any gaps from non-returned surveys), with a clearly
>> defined schedule so that nobody’s left surprised or confused. But I’m
>> not sure if that would be against the intended use-pattern of Player
>> Panels, somehow?
>>
>>> 3) Are you looking in a particular country?
>>
>> I reckon that we do not care about country, and require only that
>> testers are fluent with written English — right? (Granted, it’s a
>> good question, since I hadn’t considered that before now.)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accessibility-testing mailing list
>> Accessibility-testing at iftechfoundation.org
>> <mailto:Accessibility-testing at iftechfoundation.org>
>> https://iftechfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-testing
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-testing mailing list
> Accessibility-testing at iftechfoundation.org
> https://iftechfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-testing

-- 
Austin Seraphin: https://AustinSeraphin.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://iftechfoundation.org/pipermail/accessibility-testing/attachments/20181115/6ea6a56a/attachment.html>