You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
do we need this, or is it covered by outcomes and improvments?
Example: Communications sheet row B, no effort.
then B6 also says, no accessibility effort around communications
it seemed duplicative and confused them
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This connects with a discussion here about whether K&S should be its own section, or a proof point for every section
… Example, ICT section clearly needs K&S. So we decided to incorporate it in the ICT section
Sheri_B-H: ... our approach was to do both. The specific K&S goes in the proper section, and global K&S has its own section.
<Sheri_B-H> So the answer we ended up for in the draft is both: general K&S goes in K&S, specific knowledge for a dimension goes in the dimension
<Sheri_B-H> so an example would be ARIA - only ICT folx need training in that, so it goes in ICT
While this dimension includes proof points to be implemented at the organization level, knowledge and skills specific to each of the other dimensions should be included within their respective proof points, as appropriate. For example, knowledge of ARIA is specific to ICT, so it is included as an ICT proof point. Basic information on disability inclusion is generic and would be included in knowledge and skills.
do we need this, or is it covered by outcomes and improvments?
Example: Communications sheet row B, no effort.
then B6 also says, no accessibility effort around communications
it seemed duplicative and confused them
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: