Category: Accessibility

In honor of Global Accessibility Awareness Day (GAAD) on May 15, we sat down with Dr. Jennifer Mankoff, a professor in the Information School and the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering at the University of Washington, to discuss the intersection of computing, accessibility, and disability studies. She shared personal reflections, insights on culture change, and her hopes for a more inclusive future in tech and beyond.

Dr. Mankoff is also a founding co-director of UW’s Center for Research and Education on Accessible Technology and Experiences (CREATE). She will be speaking at UW’s GAAD mid-day program on Thursday, May 15; find out more and register on the UW GAAD 2025 page.

What initially drew you to the intersection of computing, accessibility, and disability studies? 

I was a computer scientist first—and then I became disabled. That personal shift made me start thinking about how technology could better meet my needs. My first faculty position was at UC Berkeley, which was at the heart of the movement to provide people with disabilities with access to higher education and the birthplace of the independent living movement. They already had a disability studies department when I started there in 2001.

Being there, I met so many people who introduced me to disability studies and the principles of the disability rights movement. It really spoke to me and shaped how I think about accessibility work. Over time, I’ve expanded that view to include the importance of disability justice as well.

Given that context, is it frustrating to see disability rights as they are threatened or regressing in some ways? 

The disability community has always been incredibly effective in establishing groups that understand advocacy, that do policy work, and that do the groundwork to support disabled people. They’re ready to stand up for the continued rights of people with disabilities. While there may be threats, there’s also a large group of people engaged in pushing back.

How has mentorship played a role in your accessibility work? 

For much of my career, I didn’t have disabled mentors in technology or STEM fields. I was often one of the only senior faculty members who was out about being disabled. One exception: I did have the privilege of being mentored by Devva Kasnitz, who was a remarkable leader in the field before she passed away recently.  Also, I had non-disabled mentors who supported me. Today, it’s a real privilege to mentor each new generation of disabled students and faculty, many of whom are truly changing the world.

There seems to be stronger mentorship happening now, especially at UW. Could universities be doing more in this space? 

Absolutely. Higher education still has a long way to go in how it supports disabled undergrads, grad students, faculty, and staff. UW is doing good work—particularly through programs like AccessComputing and DO-IT—but I don’t know of a university that doesn’t still have room to improve.

Support needs to go beyond the university, too. Conferences, publishers, research environments—they all need better accessibility practices. The change requires advocacy at every level, and collaboration between people who understand these needs and can educate others.

How can staff at UW better support professors and students when it comes to accessibility? 

It starts with a cultural shift—expecting that materials and platforms are “born accessible” from the start. That means documents, websites, tools—everything—should be accessible the moment they go live. This aligns with what the new DOJ rule and our own Digital Accessibility Initiative are encouraging.

Once that’s the norm, it becomes natural to teach accessibility in any class where people create content. We’ll graduate students who expect and understand accessibility, and we’ll hire people trained to value it. Until then, we need to keep pointing out opportunities for improvement and keep working together.

That makes so much sense—it’s like cybersecurity in that it becomes easier when it’s integrated from the beginning. 

Exactly. And it’s not just about digital tools. It’s also about how we treat each other. For instance, if someone needs to work remotely, that is an accommodation that allows excellence and commitment to being a successful part of the team. It’s not about trying to “get out of work.”

We need to shift our mindset to see accommodations not as exceptions, but as part of building better teams and communities. That that kind of attitude shift is as much a part of the culture change that we need as the focus on the way we produce documents and digital content.

What about long-term support? How do we build sustainable systems for accessibility at UW? 

One thing Devva taught me is that accessibility isn’t just about the person receiving support—it’s about all of us. If someone uses ASL and I don’t understand it, the interpreter is there for me, not for them. I’m the one who needs the translation.

If we all saw accessibility as a shared responsibility, we’d make more progress. When we stop forcing square pegs into round holes, we make space for everyone to contribute in ways that work for them. That’s where we want to end up.

That’s such a powerful perspective. Is there anything you wish people would ask you more often about accessibility? 

I wish more people asked disabled people what they actually want. We need to focus on increasing autonomy, agency, and creativity. We need to really consider that access work is not just here to fill a gap. Too much work is based on a deficit model.

It’s important to recognize that being disabled is a joyful experience of community as much as it is anything else. We’re not just here to be “accommodated”—we’re here to contribute and innovate. Tools should reflect that. If we build tools that only fill gaps in a constrained space, we’re not really providing support for each other.

And finally, we need to recognize that many barriers are structural. Don’t assume that technology alone can address every issue; technology needs to be part of a broader system of support. Maybe you need to go in and actually change how technology is disseminated or what information is available in order to solve the problem and not just build a tool.

Are you hopeful (or not) about how emerging technologies like AI might help (or hinder) accessibility? 

On the one hand, people with disabilities are already using AI in powerful, creative ways—often to solve problems no one had tried to address before. But AI also reflects the biases of the people and data behind it. For instance, automated captions might fail multilingual speakers. Resume screeners may down-rank applicants who mention disability—even if they have prestigious qualifications. And these harms often happen without the affected person even knowing. So yes, AI has potential, but we must remain critical and intentional about how it’s used.

If there’s one thing you want the community to know this Global Accessibility Awareness Day, what would it be? 

As a technologist, I’ll say this: people with disabilities are everywhere. We use all the technology out there. Don’t just think about the technology for people with disabilities as being the stuff that’s solving access problems; think about it as being all the technology, and make all of it accessible. Accessibility shouldn’t just be about “assistive tools”—it should be baked into everything. Whether it’s a creative design tool or a grading system, assume disabled people are going to use it—because we are.

Building technology this way doesn’t just make things better for people with disabilities; it makes things better for everyone.

Thank you for speaking with us!

Interview by Melissa Albin (UW-IT Communications) for Global Accessibility Awareness Day