ACCESS

Accessibility Review Process

The Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning & Assessment (CETLA) currently offers an accessibility review for all courses taught at USF. Our accessibility review is typically conducted for newly developed courses but is also carried out for existing courses that must be updated. Steps in the accessibility review process are based on Level A of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and are described below. Click the links below to view descriptions of each step in the review process.

1. Ensure media (i.e., audio, video, graphics, images, and animations) content is presented clearly.

A CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that the media content is presented clearly. A minor issue with media clarity is acceptable, but a transcript of the content the media addresses should be provided. The CETLA reviewer will document all issues with media clarity in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form.

2. Ensure media (i.e., audio, video, graphics, images, and animations) content is operable.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that the media content is operable. All issues with media operability will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

3. Ensure that the course contains a text alternative (i.e., alt tags and transcripts) for media (i.e., audio, video, graphics, images, and animations).

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that all images, graphics, and animations contain alt tags and confirm that a transcript is provided for all video and audio content. All issues with respect to the absence of text alternatives will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

4. Ensure consistent formatting in text documents and webpages.

The CETA reviewer will review the course to ensure that all text documents and webpages contain consistent formatting for headings, subheadings, and paragraphs. Consistency will be determined by font size, font color, and text emphases (i.e., bold, italics, and underline). All issues with formatting will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

5. Ensure a black-and-white alternative is provided for all text content presented in color.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that a black-and-white alternative is provided for all text documents presented in color. Issues related to the lack of black-and-white alternatives will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

6. Ensure a nontext alternative is provided for all text content.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that a nontext alternative is provided for all text documents. Issues related to the lack of nontext alternatives will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

7. Ensure sufficient contrast between the font color and background of text.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure sufficient contrast between the font color and the background on which the font appears. Insufficient contrast discrepancies will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

8. Ensure all text documents and webpages can be accessed with a screen reader.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure that all text documents and webpages can be accessed with a screen reader. All text documents and webpages will be examined for inaccessible features such as tabbed spacing and tabular content. Screen reader accessibility issues will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

9. Ensure the text structure of documents and webpages make the instructional message clear.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure the text structure of documents and webpages make the instructional message clear. Text structure discrepancies will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

10. Ensure file sizes are less than 25 MB.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure the file sizes of documents are less than 25 MB. Issues related to file sizes larger than 25 MB will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

11. Ensure Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) guidelines and instructions are provided for third-party tools/applications.

The CETLA reviewer will review the course to ensure VPAT guidelines and instructions are provided for third-party tools/applications. Issues related to the absence of VPAT guidelines and instructions will be documented in the Course Accessibility Feedback Form by the reviewer.

Requests for Accessibility Review

We recognize that course accessibility raises a number of uncertainties for most higher education faculty. These uncertainties range from the communicative requirements that must be satisfied when a course is taught to the extent to which the implementation of such requirements are acceptable. If you would like to request an accessibility review for your course, please contact the Accessibility Committee at accessibility@stfrancis.edu. Upon receipt of your request, we will inspect your course for communicative patterns that might render your course inaccessible to some of your students. We will provide you feedback on the accessibility of your course within an established timeframe.

Accessibility Analysis & Reporting

The accessibility review process is not limited to the reviewer’s inspection of a given course. We also report accessibility discrepancies to the parties responsible for the course. Click the links below to learn about the accessibility reporting processes.

1. Provide the course owner a written analysis of the accessibility review results.

The CETLA reviewer will provide the course owner or parties responsible for the course a written analysis of the accessibility review results. All accessibility discrepancies identified will be included in the review, along with recommendations for accessibility improvements.

2. Upload written analysis of the course accessibility review.

The CETLA reviewer will upload the written analysis of the course accessibility review to the shared DAT workspace. This workspace will allow subsequent reviewers to access review documentation for subsequent reviews.

 

Accessibility Considerations for Content Selection

There are a number of questions that course developers and instructors should consider when selecting instructional content for their courses. Click the link below to view questions to consider for the different types of instructional content.

Text

  • Is there sufficient contrast between the font color and the color of the background on which the font appears?
  • Can the font size of the text be resized?
  • Is the default font size 12 pt. or greater?
  • Are tables excluded from text documents?
  • Does the formatting of text documents exclude excessive or unusual tabbing?
  • Do document headings, subheadings, and paragraph text contain distinct and consistent formatting?
  • Are text emphases (e.g., italic, bold, and underline) clearly distinguished from linked content?
Images

  • Are alt tags used to describe images?
  • Do the images clearly convey their content?
  • Do alt tags describe textual information in images?
  • Can images be viewed without a specialized tool?
  • Are free, specialized tools readily available when images can only be viewed with specialized tools?
Audio

  • Is the audio free of significant background noise?
  • Does background noise interfere with the intended message presented via audio?
  • Can the audio be accessed without a specialized tool?
  • Are free, specialized tools readily available when the audio can only be viewed with specialized tools?
Video

  • Is the video free of significant background noise?
  • Are visual elements of the video clearly represented?
  • Does background noise interfere with the intended message presented via video?
  • Can the video be accessed without a specialized tool?
  • Are free, specialized tools readily available when the video can only be viewed with specialized tools?
Animation

  • Is the animation free of significant background noise when the animation includes audio?
  • Are visual elements of the animation clearly represented?
  • Does background noise interfere with the intended message presented via animation?
  • Can the animation be accessed without a specialized tool?
  • Are free, specialized tools readily available when the animation can only be viewed with specialized tools?

Accessibility Review Checklist

Download the Accessibility Review Checklist below to review your course. The number of items to which you answer yes should give you an indication of how accessible your course is.