Website Accessibility Compliance at Research Institutions

Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Master's Theses Master's Theses Spring 2016 Website Accessibility Compliance at Research Institutions Jonathan D McGough Central Washington University, mcgoughj@cwu.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd Part of the Accessibility Commons, Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons, and the Higher Education Commons Recommended Citation McGough, Jonathan D., "Website Accessibility Compliance at Research Institutions" (2016) All Master's Theses 361 https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/361 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses at ScholarWorks@CWU It has been accepted for inclusion in All Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU For more information, please contact scholarworks@cwu.edu Website Accessibility Compliance at Research Institutions A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty Central Washington University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Education Higher Education by Jonathan Daniel McGough June 2016 CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Graduate Studies We hereby approve the thesis of Jonathan Daniel McGough Candidate for the degree of Master of Education APPROVED FOR THE GRADUATE FACULTY _ _ Dr Henry Williams, Committee Chair _ _ Dr Heidi Henschel Pellett _ _ Dr Donald K Wattam _ _ Dean of Graduate Studies ii ABSTRACT Three websites from 34 research institutions were evaluated on six measures of website accessibility All but one institution had at least one website fail the accessibility assessment, and the single institution that performed well had recently been investigated by the Department of Justice regarding the accessibility of its website This study concludes that while disability service offices perform better than institutional homepages and admissions websites on measures of accessibility, many websites are plagued by perennial accessibility concerns such as images that lack alternate descriptions and content inaccessible to individuals using keyboard navigation or screen reader software iii Table of Contents List of Tables vii   List of Figures viii   Chapter 1: Background of Study   Introduction   Purpose   Significance of the Study Limitations   Legal Definition of Disability   Barriers to Website Access for Students with Disabilities   Definition of Accessibility   Prevalence of Website Inaccessibility   Conclusion   Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature   Introduction   Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973   The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 10   The Americans with Disabilities Act, Amendments Act of 2008 11   Increase in the Number of College Students with Disabilities 12   Section 508 13   WCAG 2.0 14   Similar Studies 16   Assessment Instruments 17   iv Website Accessibility Assessments in Higher Education 18   Legal Settlements 23   Conclusion 29   Chapter 3: Procedures of Study 30   Introduction 30   Sample 31   Assessment 31   Conclusion 34   Chapter 4: Results of Study 36   Introduction 36   Webpage Scoring Results 36 Common Barriers to Website Accessibility 39 Conclusion 41   Chapter 5: Conclusion 44   Persistent Barriers to Website Accessibility 44   The Current State of Website Accessibility 45   Areas for Future Study 46   Appendix A - Section 508 Standards 55   Appendix B: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Perceivable Principle 56   Appendix C: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Operable Principle 58   v Appendix D: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Understandable Principle 60   Appendix E: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Robust Principle 62   Appendix F: List of Institutions 63   Appendix G: Assessment Results Form Template 64   Appendix H: Homepage Aggregate Scoring Data 65   Appendix I: Disability Webpage Aggregate Scoring 66   Appendix J: Admission Webpage Aggregate Scoring 67   Appendix K: Institutional Aggregate Scoring 68   Appendix L: Homepage Image and Video Aggregate Data 69   Appendix M: Disability Webpage Image and Video Aggregate Data 70   Appendix N: Admissions Webpage Image and Video Aggregate Data 71   Appendix O: Institutional Image and Video Aggregate Data 72   vi List of Tables Table Summary of Literature on Website Accessibility in Higher Education 22   Table OCR and DOJ Cases Referencing Web Accessibility 26   Table Mean and Median Scores by Website Type 38   Table Image and Alternate Description Usage 41   vii List of Figures Figure Percentage of accessible webpages by website type 37   Figure Score Frequency by Webpage Type 38   Figure Frequency of Errors by Webpage Type 40   Figure Number of Accessible Websites by Population and Webpage Type 42   viii Chapter Background of Study Introduction The Internet has become an integral aspect of education, research, recruitment and information sharing However, there is no law that codifies the specific responsibilities of higher education institutions to make their websites accessible to individuals with disabilities (Solovieva & Bock, 2014) Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (hereafter referred to as Section 508) is a piece of legislation that codified the responsibilities of federal agencies to make their websites accessible to people with disabilities, but it does not apply to institutions of higher education, except for a limited number of states that have adopted it as a standard for their public institutions (Olalere, & Lazar, 2011) Beginning in 1996, investigations by the United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (hereafter referred to as OCR), which has the responsibility of enforcing Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), have continued to clarify the obligation of institutions in providing accessible digital content for individuals with disabilities (Forgione-Barkas, 2012) Still, research studies have continued to find problems with website accessibility at colleges and universities of every size and type—from community colleges to the most prestigious universities in the country (Schmetzke, 1999; Schmetzke, 2001a; Guitierrez & Long, 2001; Schmetzke, 2001b; Spindler, 2002; Hackett & Parmanto, 2005; Zaphiris & Ellis, 2001; Krach, 2007; Thompson, Burgstahler, & Moore, 2010; Erickson, Trerise, Lee, VanLooy, Knowlton, & Bruyère, 2013; Thompson, Comden, Ferguson, Burghstahler & Moore, 2013; ForgioneBarkas, 2014; Solovieva & Bock, 2014) 58 Appendix C: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Operable Principle Guideline Success Criteria 2.1 Keyboard Accessible: Make all functionality available from a keyboard Level A 2.1.1 Keyboard: All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes, except where the underlying function requires input that depends on the path of the user's movement and not just the endpoints 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap: If keyboard focus can be moved to a component of the page using a keyboard interface, then focus can be moved away from that component using only a keyboard interface, and, if it requires more than unmodified arrow or tab keys or other standard exit methods, the user is advised of the method for moving focus away 2.2 Enough Time: Provide users enough time to read and use content Level A 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable: For each time limit that is set by the content, at least one of the following is true: The user can turn off, adjust or extend the time limit (see complete regulations for more information) Note there are exceptions during a live event, if time is essential to the task, or after 20 hours 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide: For moving, blinking, scrolling, or auto-updating information, all of the following are true: Moving, blinking, scrolling: For any moving, blinking or scrolling information that (1) starts automatically, (2) lasts more than five seconds, and (3) is presented in parallel with other content, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop, or hide it unless the movement, blinking, or scrolling is part of an activity where it is essential; and Auto-updating: For any auto-updating information that (1) starts automatically and (2) is presented in parallel with other content, there is a mechanism for the user to pause, stop, or hide it or to control the frequency of the update unless the auto-updating is part of an activity where it is essential Level AAA 2.2.3 No Timing: Timing is not an essential part of the event or activity presented by the content, except for non-interactive synchronized media and real-time events 2.2.4 Interruptions: Interruptions can be postponed or suppressed by the user, except interruptions involving an emergency 2.2.5 Re-authenticating: When an authenticated session expires, the user can continue the activity without loss of data after re-authenticating 2.3 Seizures: Do not design content in a way that is known to cause seizures Level A 2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold: Web pages not contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period, or the flash is below the general flash and red flash thresholds Level AAA 2.3.2 Three Flashes: Web pages not contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period 2.4 Navigable: Provide ways to help Level A 59 users navigate, find content, and determine where they are 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks: A mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple Web pages 2.4.2 Page Titled: Web pages have titles that describe topic or purpose 2.4.3 Focus Order: If a Web page can be navigated sequentially and the navigation sequences affect meaning or operation, focusable components receive focus in an order that preserves meaning and operability 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context): The purpose of each link can be determined from the link text alone or from the link text together with its programmatically determined link context, except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in general Level AA 2.4.5 Multiple Ways: More than one way is available to locate a Web page within a set of Web pages except where the Web Page is the result of, or a step in, a process 2.4.6 Headings and Labels: Headings and labels describe topic or purpose 2.4.7 Focus Visible: Any keyboard operable user interface has a mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator is visible Level AAA 2.4.8 Location: Information about the user's location within a set of Web pages is available 2.4.9 Link Purpose (Link Only): A mechanism is available to allow the purpose of each link to be identified from link text alone, except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in general 2.4.10 Section Headings: Section headings are used to organize the content Source: World Wide Web Consortium (2008, December 11) Web content accessibility guidelines 2.0 Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ 60 Appendix D: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Understandable Principle Guideline Success Criteria 3.1 Readable: Make text content readable and understandable Level A 3.1.1 Language of Page: The default human language of each Web page can be programmatically determined Level AA 3.1.2 Language of Parts: The human language of each passage or phrase in the content can be programmatically determined except for proper names, technical terms, words of indeterminate language, and words or phrases that have become part of the vernacular of the immediately surrounding text Level AAA 3.1.3 Unusual Words: A mechanism is available for identifying specific definitions of words or phrases used in an unusual or restricted way, including idioms and jargon 3.1.4 Abbreviations: A mechanism for identifying the expanded form or meaning of abbreviations is available 3.1.5 Reading Level: When text requires reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level after removal of proper names and titles, supplemental content, or a version that does not require reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level, is available 3.1.6 Pronunciation: A mechanism is available for identifying specific pronunciation of words where meaning of the words, in context, is ambiguous without knowing the pronunciation 3.2 Predictable: Make Web pages appear and operate in predictable ways Level A 3.2.1 On Focus: When any component receives focus, it does not initiate a change of context 3.2.2 On Input: Changing the setting of any user interface component does not automatically cause a change of context unless the user has been advised of the behavior before using the component Level AA 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation: Navigational mechanisms that are repeated on multiple Web pages within a set of Web pages occur in the same relative order each time they are repeated, unless a change is initiated by the user 3.2.4 Consistent Identification: Components that have the same functionality within a set of Web pages are identified consistently Level AAA 3.2.5 Change on Request: Changes of context are initiated only by user request or a mechanism is available to turn off such changes (Level AAA) 3.3 Input Assistance: Help users avoid and correct mistakes Level A 3.3.1 Error Identification: If an input error is automatically detected, the item that is in error is identified and the error is described to the user in text 61 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions: Labels or instructions are provided when content requires user input Level AA 3.3.3 Error Suggestion: If an input error is automatically detected and suggestions for correction are known, then the suggestions are provided to the user, unless it would jeopardize the security or purpose of the content 3.3.4 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data): For Web pages that cause legal commitments or financial transactions for the user to occur, that modify or delete user-controllable data in data storage systems, or that submit user test responses, at least one of the following is true: Reversible: Submissions are reversible Checked: Data entered by the user is checked for input errors and the user is provided an opportunity to correct them Confirmed: A mechanism is available for reviewing, confirming, and correcting information before finalizing the submission Level AAA 3.3.5 Help: Context-sensitive help is available 3.3.6 Error Prevention (All): For Web pages that require the user to submit information, at least one of the following is true: Reversible: Submissions are reversible Checked: Data entered by the user is checked for input errors and the user is provided an opportunity to correct them Confirmed: A mechanism is available for reviewing, confirming, and correcting information before finalizing the submission Source: World Wide Web Consortium (2008, December 11) Web content accessibility guidelines 2.0 Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ 62 Appendix E: WCAG 2.0 Guidelines and Success Criteria for the Robust Principle Guideline Success Criteria 4.1 Compatible: Maximize compatibility with current and future user agents, including assistive technologies Level A 4.1.1 Parsing: In content implemented using markup languages, elements have complete start and end tags, elements are nested according to their specifications, elements not contain duplicate attributes, and any IDs are unique, except where the specifications allow these features 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value: For all user interface components (including but not limited to: form elements, links and components generated by scripts), the name and role can be programmatically determined; states, properties, and values that can be set by the user can be programmatically set; and notification of changes to these items is available to user agents, including assistive technologies Source: World Wide Web Consortium (2008, December 11) Web content accessibility guidelines 2.0 Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ 63 Appendix F: List of Institutions School Michigan State University Ohio State University Rutgers University Texas A&M University, College Station University of Arizona University of California, Berkeley University of California, Davis University of California, Irvine University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of Cincinnati University of Colorado, Boulder University of Colorado, Denver University of Connecticut University of Florida University of Hawaii University of Illinois, Chicago University of Illinois, Urbana/Champaign University of Iowa University of Kentucky University of Maryland, Baltimore University of Maryland, College Park University of Massachusetts, Amherst University of Michigan, Ann Arbor University of Minnesota, Twin Cities University of Missouri, Columbia University of New Mexico University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of Oregon University of Pittsburgh University of Utah University of Virginia University of Washington University of Wisconsin, Madison 64 Appendix G: Assessment Results Form Template School: Date: Homepage url: Test Keyboard Navigability: Focus Indicator for all elements: Images with Text: Embedded Videos With Captions: Embedded Videos with Audio Descriptions: Result Test Skip Navigation: Focus Indicator Consistent Images without Text: Without captions: Embedded Videos without Audio Descriptions: Result Result Test Skip Navigation: Focus Indicator Consistent Images without Text: Without captions: Embedded Videos without Audio Descriptions: Result Result Test Skip Navigation: Focus Indicator Consistent Images without Text: Without captions: Embedded Videos without Audio Descriptions: Result Notes: Disability Services url: Test Keyboard Navigability: Focus Indicator for all elements: Images with Text: Embedded Videos With Captions: Embedded Videos with Audio Descriptions: Notes: Admissions url: Test Keyboard Navigability: Focus Indicator for all elements: Images with Text: Embedded Videos With Captions: Embedded Videos with Audio Descriptions: Notes: Might this school be in compliance with WCAG 2.0 AA: 65 Appendix H: Homepage Aggregate Scoring Data School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median Keyboard Nav -1 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 0 0 -9 -0.26 0.00 Skip Nav -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -12 -0.35 0.00 Focus Indicator -1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -16 -0.47 0.00 Captions -1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 -6 -0.18 0.00 Visual Descriptions -1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 -6 -0.18 0.00 Images -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -21 -0.62 -1.00 Total Score -5 -3 -3 -1 -1 -1 -3 -4 -1 -1 -3 -3 -1 -4 -2 -1 -1 -2 -3 -2 -3 -3 -1 -2 -6 -1 -4 -1 -2 -1 -1 -70 -2.06 -2.00 66 Appendix I: Disability Webpage Aggregate Scoring School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median Keyboard Nav 0 0 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 0 -1 0 0 0 -7 -0.21 0.00 Skip Nav 0 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 -1 -1 0 Focus Indicator -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 Captions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Visual Descriptions -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -1 0 0 Images -1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 0 0 -1 -1 -12 -0.35 0.00 -17 -0.50 -0.50 0.00 0.00 -3 -0.09 0.00 -11 -0.32 0.00 Total Score -3 -1 -2 -1 -2 -1 -4 -1 0 -2 -1 -4 -1 -2 -2 -1 -2 -4 -1 -3 -2 -3 -3 -1 -2 -1 -50 -1.47 -1.00 67 Appendix J: Admission Webpage Aggregate Scoring School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median Keyboard Nav -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -19 -0.56 -1.00 Skip Nav -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -21 -0.62 -1.00 Focus Indicator -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -22 -0.65 -1.00 Captions 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 -3 -0.09 0.00 Visual Descriptions 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -5 -0.15 0.00 Images -1 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -23 -0.68 -1.00 Total Score -2 -4 -4 -3 -3 -3 -2 -5 -2 -3 -4 -2 -4 -1 -2 -3 -4 -2 -4 -1 -4 -4 -1 -4 -4 -2 -4 -2 -3 -6 -1 93 -2.74 -3.00 68 Appendix K: Institutional Aggregate Scoring School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median Keyboard Nav -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -2 0 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 -2 -3 -2 -1 -1 -35 -1.03 -1.00 Skip Nav -2 -1 -2 0 -2 -1 -3 -3 0 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 -3 -3 -1 -2 -1 -3 -3 -1 -1 -2 -45 -1.32 -1.00 Focus Indicator -3 -2 -3 -1 -2 -2 -1 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -2 -2 -1 -2 -1 -3 -3 -1 -1 -3 -3 -3 -3 -2 -2 -55 -1.62 -2.00 Captions -1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 -1 -9 -0.26 0.00 Visual Descriptions -2 -1 -1 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -14 -0.41 0.00 Images -1 -2 -1 -2 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 -2 -1 -2 -3 -2 -2 -2 -2 -3 -2 -3 -1 -2 -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 -3 -1 -55 -1.62 -2.00 Total Score -10 -8 -9 -1 -5 -5 -5 -5 -13 -4 -4 -9 -6 -9 -6 -6 -1 -6 -7 -7 -10 -5 -4 -10 -2 -8 -13 -3 -11 -3 -6 -9 -3 -213 -6.26 -6.00 69 Appendix L: Homepage Image and Video Aggregate Data School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median img w/ text 40 24 18 22 14 29 16 11 20 11 14 29 13 20 22 31 73 51 22 10 17 32 11 15 621 18.26 14.50 img total 40 28 18 22 14 31 12 17 11 21 11 14 30 22 14 20 23 57 73 52 22 11 17 11 12 33 14 15 704 20.71 16.00 img text % 100.00% 85.71% 100.00% 100.00% 14.29% 100.00% 93.55% 16.67% 94.12% 100.00% 95.24% 100.00% 100.00% 96.67% 36.36% 92.86% 100.00% 100.00% 95.65% 83.33% 54.39% 100.00% 98.08% 100.00% 90.91% 85.71% 100.00% 81.82% 66.67% 96.97% 75.00% 78.57% 87.50% 100.00% 85.88% 95.45% Videos CC Videos total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC % 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 70 Appendix M: Disability Webpage Image and Video Aggregate Data School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median img w/ text 19 12 11 11 2 10 13 12 17 13 14 5 250 7.35 8.00 img total 10 19 12 11 11 16 13 13 17 13 14 5 11 269 7.91 8.00 img text % 90.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 40.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 62.50% 50.00% 80.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 92.31% 50.00% 75.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 88.89% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 81.82% 90.02% 100.00% Videos CC Videos total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC % 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 71 Appendix N: Admissions Webpage Image and Video Aggregate Data School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median img w/ text 19 15 22 20 10 13 13 3 94 6 42 17 18 16 16 37 10 20 481 14.15 9.00 img total 19 19 19 22 11 26 10 13 13 22 10 95 11 43 51 10 40 13 14 16 20 41 12 20 14 633 18.62 13.00 img text % 100.00% 78.95% 47.37% 100.00% 54.55% 76.92% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 85.71% 40.91% 100.00% 30.00% 98.95% 63.64% 100.00% 62.50% 100.00% 97.67% 33.33% 90.00% 45.00% 61.54% 7.14% 100.00% 100.00% 80.00% 90.24% 85.71% 83.33% 100.00% 42.86% 0.00% 100.00% 75.19% 85.71% Videos CC Videos total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 CC % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 72 Appendix O: Institutional Image and Video Aggregate Data School 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Sum Average Median img w/ text 68 41 46 56 18 43 40 26 31 18 31 20 25 132 25 20 16 39 72 31 52 92 62 31 29 35 41 60 19 47 28 18 31 1352 39.76 31.00 img total 69 49 56 56 29 49 43 36 35 19 45 20 32 134 49 22 20 39 74 66 80 115 69 44 30 36 46 66 24 50 29 29 13 33 1606 47.24 43.50 img text % 98.55% 83.67% 82.14% 100.00% 62.07% 87.76% 93.02% 72.22% 88.57% 94.74% 68.89% 100.00% 78.13% 98.51% 51.02% 90.91% 80.00% 100.00% 97.30% 46.97% 65.00% 80.00% 89.86% 70.45% 96.67% 97.22% 89.13% 90.91% 79.17% 94.00% 96.55% 62.07% 69.23% 93.94% 83.78% 88.85% Videos CC 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 14 Videos total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 27 CC % 50.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 50.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% ... study to date has evaluated accessibility among these specific webpages Variation in website accessibility performance among webpages within the same website would demonstrate whether variations... of the evaluation were (a) identifying alternate text for images, (b) evaluating keyboard only navigational accessibility and (c) skip navigation Skip navigation is the feature that would allow... the literature related to website accessibility at colleges and universities in the United States First, this chapter reviews similar studies that have assessed college and university compliance