top of page

ADA/508 Compliance in Online Education at XYZ University

Overview and Scenario
Overview and Scenario

Video Transcript

Summary of ADA, Section 508, and WCAG 2.0 Requirements

ADA

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination based on disability. “Prohibition of discrimination. No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation…”  (U.S. Department of Justice, § 36.201 General.)  Title II of ADA covers public colleges and universities, while Title III applies to private colleges and universities.

 

One provision of ADA is the “effective communication rule” requiring any institution covered by ADA to ensure communication with people with disabilities “is equally effective as communication with people without disabilities.” (U.S. Department of Justice, 2014). This rule refers to all communications, which can be interpreted as guaranteeing students have equal access to educational materials, opportunities, and services, including those found in online and blended courses in higher education.

I say “interpreted”, because currently there are no specific regulations found in the ADA about what constitutes accessible websites, online content, or other types of information technology and communication, in terms of complying with Titles II and III (Burke, 2016, p. 141). The U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division issued a Supplemental Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking called Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities in 2016 with the purpose of soliciting public feedback about its rules on web accessibility.

For specific standards and requirements impacting online learning, accessibility advocates turn to Section 508 for guidance. (McLawhorn, 2001, p. 77).

Section 508

“Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires federal agencies to make electronic and information technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the federal government accessible to people with disabilities” (Burke, 2016, p. 155). What does this mean for higher education?  

While XYZ University isn’t a federal agency, Missouri receives funds from the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, and as such, must comply with Section 508 standards. Additionally, Missouri state law requires public four-year and two-year universities to meet Section 508 standards, meaning they must “develop and procure accessible information technology” (Missouri Assistive Technology). Technologies and learning materials used in online and blended courses must be accessible and usable by students with disabilities, comparable to the access and use by students without disabilities.

Section 508 standards recently underwent an update and “refresh”, announced in January 2017. The updated standards focus on functionality instead of product type, and are broken into categories: access to functionality; functional performance criteria; electronic content; hardware; software; and support documentation and services. Examples of functional performance criteria include:

  • 302.1 Without Vision. Where a visual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require user vision.

  • 302.6 Without Speech. Where speech is used for input, control, or operation, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require user speech.

  • 410.1 General. Where provided, color coding shall not be used as the only means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element.

  • 503.2 User Preferences. Applications shall permit user preferences from platform settings for color, contrast, font type, font size, and focus cursor. (United States Access Board, 2017).

 

Another major change to the standards as part of the refresh was the incorporation of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 and their Success Criteria for Conformance Requirements.  (United States Access Board, 2017).)

Compliance with the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) refresh of Section 508 standards is required beginning January 18, 2018.

WCAG 2.0

WCAG 2.0, or Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, were developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) as a way to make web content more accessible to people with disabilities. These best practice standards are organized around four principles of web content accessibility: perceivable; operable; understandable; and robust. W3C defines the principles this way:

  1. Perceivable - Information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive.

    • This means that users must be able to perceive the information being presented (it can't be invisible to all of their senses)

  2. Operable - User interface components and navigation must be operable.

    • This means that users must be able to operate the interface (the interface cannot require interaction that a user cannot perform)

  3. Understandable - Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable.

    • This means that users must be able to understand the information as well as the operation of the user interface (the content or operation cannot be beyond their understanding)

  4. Robust - Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies.

    • This means that users must be able to access the content as technologies advance (as technologies and user agents evolve, the content should remain accessible)(2016).

 

Under the four principles are twelve guidelines and related success criteria which are testable and provide a standard for whether a site or other web content complies with the guidelines.

There are three levels of success criteria conformance: Level A (minimum level of conformance), Level AA, and Level AAA (highest level of conformance). A quick reference to the Guidelines, requirements (success criteria and their levels) and techniques for meeting them is provided to help people apply the WCAG 2.0.

As mentioned earlier, the updated Section 508 standards are now aligned with WCAG 2.0 Level A and Level AA success criteria and conformance requirements.

Summary of Requirements
ADA disabilities
Section 508 logo
Solution
Solution
E-learning icon

A multi-pronged approach will be used to ensure all online and blended courses at XYZ University comply with ADA and Section 508 requirements.

Current online courses and practices will be evaluated for their electronic and information technology accessibility, and compared to ADA and 508 requirements to see if they are compliant. Classes found to be non-compliant will be redesigned/redeveloped. A required template for online and blended courses will be created, incorporating Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles. All new courses and any courses not already meeting accessibility standards will be developed or redeveloped using the template.

In conjunction with the peer review system already in place to ensure the quality of courses, a prescriptive checklist of the WCAG 2.0 guidelines and success criteria will be used to judge if every course meets the WCAG 2.0 (and Section 508) standards before “going live”. As incentive to willingly participate in the redevelopment of a course to meet Section 508 requirements, faculty will receive a financial “redesign award” once the course has met compliancy standards.

An online accessibility policy will be written, outlining the University’s practices and procedures in support of accessibility of its online resources including online courses and websites; the policy will be posted on both the Office of Disability Services and Online Education Department websites. The Vice President of Academic Affairs will be asked to continue advocating for online course accessibility at the University, in order to get added buy-in from the rest of institutional administration. Additionally, the Vice President will ask for a separate budget for video captioning and more staff positions to support the University’s accessibility efforts.

Ongoing coaching about UDL for faculty will take place. Technical training for faculty and staff on Section 508/WCAG 2.0 standards will occur monthly, and a repository of cheat sheets and checklists with step-by-step instructions about how to create accessible content will be made available to all faculty, staff, and students.

Lastly, the Online Education Department will ask technology vendors to provide a Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) for any technology it’s considering purchasing. A VPAT explains how well a vendor’s product or service meets 508 standards. Faculty will also be encouraged to request VPATs for any technology they use in their online courses.

Research

I researched what the ADA says about online accessibility, the recently updated Section 508 requirements, and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, attempting to get most of my information from .edu and .gov sites. I also searched for recommendations or best practices for universities to ensure online accessibility and compliance. When searching library databases for scholarly articles, I looked for articles with key words such as: ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 508, online accessibility, universal design, online learning, e-learning, distance learning, and compliance.

Many of the articles and websites I found recommended that universities with questions about their online accessibility should begin by evaluating the current state of their websites and online courses. “Organizations must begin the compliance process by evaluating their electronic and information technology…” (McLawhorn, 2001, p. 89).  “Conduct an internal accessibility review of electronic and information technology, including web sites, digital content, online delivery and learning management systems, classroom technology, and library databases and resources” (CAST, UDL on Campus).

Not surprisingly, my research also showed that using UDL when designing courses is highly recommended as a good way to make classes more accessible for everyone right from the start. “By incorporating UDL principles into course design a number of accommodations may well be met…embedding principles of UDL within a course design process can help make the online learning environment more accessible for all while also providing a clear set of steps for faculty members...” (Linder, 2015, p. 31).

Different sites said using existing guidelines such as WCAG 2.0 or writing standards for your university (based on 508 requirements) was a way to ensure compliance. “QM [Quality Matters] does state that online courses should be developed in a way that is in conformance with the WCAG 2.0. Therefore, WCAG 2.0 is the source for the most concrete direction on making a course accessible.” (Burke, 2016, p. 170). “Having standards with which to engage for accessible course design is key” (Moorefield-Lang, 2016, p. 30).

A couple articles touched on getting buy-in from university administration on the importance of accessibility, and the related importance of having a budget to support online accessibility activities. “Awareness, allocation of resources, and formally communicated expectations can increase institutional, departmental, and individual compliance” (Glazatov, 2012, p. 17).  “…institutions must identify resources in personnel, time and financial support to ensure that accessibility is always considered when an online environment is used… The institution also needs to identify financial resources to assist with the purchase of software and hardware needed to ensure accessibility. This might include purchasing an appropriate LMS, a captioning budget…” (Linder, 2015, p. 30).

Getting feedback from students with disabilities on the accessibility of materials was another recommendation, as was requiring vendors to provide VPATs. “Require vendors to submit a product Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and be adamant about the need for VPAT accuracy” (CAST, UDL on Campus). “…feedback from students and faculty on accessible interfaces is invaluable as they work with these systems daily” (Murphy, 2013).  

Research

The WCAG 2.0 guidelines and testable success criteria will be the main way to evaluate if all online courses are ADA and 508 compliant, i.e., if the project solution is effective.

 

Additionally, students, faculty, and staff with disabilities will be asked to help test the courses in the pilot group to provide feedback and confirm if they find the courses to be accessible.

 

Lastly, the number of complaints brought by the U.S Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights about inaccessibility of online materials at universities has been growing. Another way to judge if this solution is effective will be to see if any complaints are brought against XYZ University for its online and blended courses for being non-compliant with its electronic and information technology.

Assessment
Assessment
Project Documents
Project Documents

Project Charter

Project Management Plan (includes Work Breakdown Structure)

Project Schedule

First Project Status Report

Second Project Status Report

Post Project Review

Author's Background

Michelle Ehlert, MLIS (and soon to be MSIDT). I'm a Performance Support Analyst in IT at Washington University in St. Louis; I’ve been in the role for almost a year. I work with subject matter experts and project managers to design and develop trainings for IT and other University staff. Previously, I was a librarian, working in academic libraries for over thirteen years.

Author's Background
photo of author
Bibliography
Bibliography

Burke, D. D., Clapper, D., & McRae, D. (2016). Accessible online instruction for students with disabilities: Federal imperatives and the challenge of compliance. Journal of Law & Education, 45(2), 135-180. Retrieved from  http://gatekeeper.fontbonne.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=115042327&site=ehost-live&scope=site

 

CAST, (n.d.). UDL on campus: Legal obligations for accessibility. Retrieved from      

http://udloncampus.cast.org/page/policy_legal#.WWQMYojyuM_

 

Glazatov, T. R. (2012). Inclusiveness in online programs: Disability issues and implications for higher education administrators. Journal of Applied Learning Technology, 2(1), 14-18. Retrieved from  http://gatekeeper.fontbonne.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=74697761&site=ehost-live&scope=site

 

Linder, K. E., Fontaine-Rainen, D. L., & Behling, K. (2015). Whose job is it? Key challenges and future directions for online accessibility in US institutions of higher education. Open Learning, 30 (1), 21-34. doi:10.1080/02680513.2015.1007859

 

McLawhorn, Latresa. (2001). Recent development: Leveling the accessibility playing field: Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology, 3 (1), Fall 2001, 63-100. Retrieved from 

https://home.heinonline.org/titles/Law-Journal-Library/North-Carolina-Journal-of-Law--Technology/?letter=N

 

Missouri Assistive Technology. (n.d.). Information technology access: Questions and answers for state and local entities. Retrieved from http://at.mo.gov/it-access/info-tech-access.html

 

Moorefield-Lang, H., Copeland, C. A., & Haynes, A. (2016). Accessing abilities: Creating innovative accessible online learning environments and putting quality into practice. Education for Information, 32(1), 27-33. doi:10.3233/EFI-150966

 

Murphy, S.K. (2013, March 21). Distance learning & online accessibility: What faculty with disabilities want institutions to know. [Web log comment]. Retrieved from

http://www.3playmedia.com/2013/03/21/distance-learning-online-accessibility-what-faculty-disabilities-want-institutions-know/

 

United States Access Board. (2017). About the Update of the Section 508 Standards and Section 255 Guidelines for Information and Communication Technology. Retrieved from  https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/overview-of-the-final-rule

 

United States Access Board. (2017). Text of the standards and guidelines. Retrieved from

https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/final-rule/text-of-the-standards-and-guidelines

 

United States Department of Justice. (2010). Title III § 36.201 General. Retrieved from

https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleIII_2010/titleIII_2010_regulations.htm#a201

 

United States Department of Justice. (2014). Effective communication. Retrieved from

https://www.ada.gov/effective-comm.htm

 

United States Department of Justice. (2016). Statement regarding rulemaking on accessibility of web information and services of state and local government entities. Retrieved from https://www.ada.gov/regs2016/sanprm_statement.html

 

World Wide Web Consortium. (2016). Understanding the four principles of accessibility. Retrieved from

https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html#introduction-fourprincs-head

bottom of page