Search Website
Review Process
A fulsome review process was created to ensure that the toolkit could reflect and serve multiple perspectives and purposes, contributing to its breadth of knowledge.
| Review perspective | Primary contribution |
|---|---|
| Students and reviewers with lived experience of disability | Identify barriers that may have been missed; assess whether the language respects dignity and agency; and review the resource’s clarity, relevance and usefulness. |
| Faculty, librarians, archivists and staff | Test feasibility across disciplines, class sizes and teaching formats; consider implications for learning outcomes and academic integrity; and identify the supports educators need to apply the practices. |
| Academic leaders | Review evidence, policy and service information; verify connections to institutional resources; assess implementation and sustainability; and identify areas requiring clearer ownership or coordination. |
Review pathways included but were not limited to senior academic leaders and strategic partners, the Accessibility Advisory Committee, the Accessible Western Working Group, and the Undergraduate Academic Forum and an open invitation to the Western Community to provide ongoing feedback. Feedback is gathered through structured questions, committee and forum discussions, asynchronous review and practical testing.
Themes were consolidated across groups so the project team can determine what must change before launching, what requires further discussion, and what should inform future updates. This approach recognizes that the first version of the toolkit is a strong foundation - not a final statement on accessibility.