Product News

July 31, 2026

"That's Not My Job"

# Accessibility

# Ally

# BbT26

Navigating Instructor Pushback on Accessibility

Katie Grennell, PhD.

"That's Not My Job": Navigating Instructor Pushback on Accessibility

At this year's Building Blackboard Together (BbT) conference, I presented a session titled "That's Not My Job": Navigating Instructor Pushback on Accessibility. The session explored a challenge many institutions face: helping instructors move beyond resistance and toward meaningful accessibility practices. Based on that presentation, this blog post examines common forms of accessibility pushback, what they reveal about institutional culture and perceptions of responsibility, and practical strategies for responding in ways that encourage progress rather than resistance.

Rather than treating pushback as something to overcome, I invite readers to view it as a lens through which we can better understand the assumptions, systems, and beliefs that influence how accessibility and disability are perceived across higher education.

The Familiar Refrain

If you've worked in accessibility long enough, you've likely heard some version of the following:

"That's not my job."

"I don't have time."

"Disability services can handle that."

"I don't have any disabled students in my class."

"What does accessibility have to do with pedagogy?"

While these statements can certainly reflect resistance, they often reveal deeper concerns, misconceptions, and systemic barriers that deserve closer examination.

Translating the Pushback

One of the most useful shifts we can make is learning to translate the pushback. When instructors express concerns about accessibility, they're often communicating something deeper than their initial statement suggests. The table below highlights several common forms of pushback and the perspectives they may reveal.

Pushback Statement	Potential Translation
“That’s not my job.”	“I don’t see accessibility as part of my role or responsibility.”
“I don’t have time.”	“I see accessibility as extra work rather than part of good course design.”
“Disability services can handle that.”	“I view accessibility as a specialized support function.”
“I don’t have any disabled students in my class.”	“I’m only thinking about students with disclosed disabilities and shared accommodations.”
"What does accessibility have to do with pedagogy?”	“I haven’t connected accessibility with effective teaching and learning.”

What the Pushback Reveals

While these statements may reflect genuine resistance, they often reveal deeper histories of systemic ableism, institutional approaches to disability, and persistent misconceptions about accessibility, responsibility, and inclusion within higher education. Viewed through this broader lens, instructor pushback becomes more than an individual response; it provides insight into the cultural, structural, and institutional forces that influence how accessibility is perceived and prioritized.

To better understand what lies beneath the pushback, it's important to consider some of the forces that have historically influenced how accessibility and disability are viewed in higher education:

Academic freedom: concerns about autonomy and course design.

Accessibility labor is devalued: accessibility is viewed as extra work rather than part of teaching.

Systemic ableism: cultural and institutional assumptions about disability often influence can shape policies, practices, and attitudes toward accessibility.

Normative pedagogy: traditional teaching models assume students learn in similar ways.

Lack of accountability: accessibility responsibilities are unclear or inconsistently enforced.

Accommodation model: accessibility is viewed as reactive rather than proactive.

Legacy teaching identity: established teaching practices can make change difficult.

Technology barriers: tools and workflows can make accessibility feel overwhelming.

Decentralized governance: ownership and expectations are often fragmented.

Instructor pushback often reflects deeper systemic and institutional factors rather than a lack of concern for students. Recognizing this helps us move beyond blame and focus on understanding concerns, addressing barriers, and helping instructors move forward.

That's where the three-step approach of Acknowledge, Reframe, and Redirect becomes especially valuable

Step 1: Acknowledge

The first step is to acknowledge the concern. Acknowledgment isn't agreement; it's recognizing that the concern feels real to the instructor. By acknowledging competing priorities, time constraints, and uncertainty, we demonstrate empathy and establish trust.

Responses such as the following can help instructors feel heard and open the door to a more constructive conversation:

"I can see why that feels overwhelming."

"You're right that accessibility work can take time."

"I know you're already juggling a lot."

Step 2: Reframe

After acknowledging the concern, the next step is to reframe the conversation. Too often, accessibility is framed as a compliance requirement, an accommodation issue, or an additional task that instructors must add to an already full workload. These perspectives can obscure the critical role accessibility plays in creating effective and inclusive learning environments. Reframing helps shift the focus from what accessibility requires to the value it creates for both instructors and students. This often means moving the conversation:

From individual accommodations to inclusive course design

From reactive fixes to proactive planning

From student deficits to course barriers

From compliance to student success

The key to effective reframing is finding the right hook. Accessibility intersects with many of the priorities that matter most to instructors, and the most effective conversations connect accessibility to something the instructor already values.

Common hooks include:

Student Success & Course Quality: accessible courses support engagement and effective learning.

Equity & Inclusion: accessibility helps ensure all students can participate equitably.

Practicality & Efficiency: proactive design reduces future work.

Universal Design: accessibility is necessary for some, but beneficial for all.

Continuous Improvement: progress matters more than perfection.

Access & Compliance: accessibility supports participation and fulfills institutional responsibilities.

The Ally Hook

Many instructors worry that accessibility requires specialized expertise. Tools like Ally help lower that barrier by providing guidance, identifying issues, and helping faculty prioritize improvements.

Ally helps by:

Identifying accessibility issues

Explaining how to fix them

Providing course accessibility insights

Delivering context guidance at the point of need

When instructors realize they are not expected to navigate accessibility alone, the conversation often shifts from frustration to possibility. Ally becomes another hook, one rooted in support, practicality, and progress.

Step 3: Redirect

After acknowledging concerns and reframing the conversation, it is time to redirect the discussion toward action. The goal is not to win the conversation, but to help faculty identify a realistic and achievable next step. The following examples illustrate practical ways to redirect the conversation, along with any relevant Ally resources that can help support each approach.

Identify one manageable improvement: using the first guided remediation approach in the Course Accessibility Report, faculty to focus on the easiest issues to fix first, building momentum and confidence through early successes.

Resource: Video: Getting Started with Accessibility using Ally's Course Accessibility Report (Microlearning Video Series for Instructors)

Break a large task into smaller pieces: rather than tackling an entire course, focus on one content type at a time, such as PDFs, images, or Word documents.

Resource: Video: Strategically Prioritizing Accessibility using the Course Accessibility Report

Prioritize high-impact changes: start by addressing severe accessibility issues that create the greatest barriers for students, such as scanned PDFs

Resource: Ally's PDF Remediation Options

Create an action plan: use accessibility data and reporting to identify priorities and establish a roadmap for improvement.

Resource: Video: Strategically Prioritizing Accessibility using the Course Accessibility Report

Connect instructors to resources and support services: provide practical guidance that instructors can apply immediately.

Resources:

Ally for Instructors Help Center

Ally Communication and Adoption Toolkit

Ally Office Hours Registration Page

Ally in Practice Enablement Series

Invite participation in training opportunities: encourage instructors to continue building their accessibility knowledge and skills. Use available Ally resources to supplement institutional resources.

Resources:

Ally for Instructors Help Center

Ally Communication and Adoption Toolkit

Offer one-on-one consultations: personalized support can help instructors overcome specific challenges and build confidence.

Encourage progress over perfection: Remind instructors that accessibility is an ongoing journey and that small improvements can have a meaningful impact.

Resource: How to Position Ally

Ultimately, when someone says, "That's not my job," they're often telling us much more than that. Beneath the statement may be questions about responsibility, capacity, support, disability, or the role accessibility plays in teaching and learning. By taking the time to understand what those concerns reveal, we can move beyond resistance and create more productive conversations about access, inclusion, and student success. After all, creating accessible learning environments isn't one person's job. It's a shared responsibility.

Comments (0)

Popular