Skip to content
Accessibility at the UW

Images Accessibility Report

April 28, 2025

Images Accessibility Subject Matter Expert Work Group

  • Nasrin Nazemi, Senior Learning Designer, Continuum College (Chair)
  • Joanne Woiak, Associate Teaching Professor, Disability Studies
  • Dave Coffey, Instructional Designer, Learning Technologies, Academic & Student Affairs
  • Sarah Coppola, Assistant Teaching Professor, Human Centered Design & Engineering
  • Yanko Michea, Director of Information Technology, College of Education
  • Andrea Carroll, Teaching Professor, Chemistry
  • Afroditi Psarra, Associate Professor, Digital Arts & Experimental Media
  • Matt Huston, Associate Director of Course Development, Instructional Services, Foster School of Business

Special thanks to Marcus Hirsch and Priya Keefe for their guidance, insight, and support throughout our journey.

Table of Contents

Purpose of the Report

  • Validate and Develop the Current State: Assess the current state of digital accessibility at UW, including existing resources, workflows, and identified issues.
  • Brainstorm Future State Options: Explore potential strategies and solutions to improve digital accessibility, leveraging both existing and new resources.
  • Identify Levers for Change: Highlight specific actions and policies that can be implemented to drive meaningful improvements in accessibility.
  • Provide Recommendations: Offer concrete recommendations for central support, training, technology, and policy changes to ensure sustained progress.

Key Areas Covered

  • Current State: An analysis of the current resources, workflows, and issues related to digital accessibility at UW.
  • Future State Options: A brainstorming of potential solutions and strategies to enhance accessibility, including staffing, tools, training, and policies.
  • Central Support: Recommendations for central support mechanisms to assist departments and instructors in achieving accessibility goals.
  • Training and Education: Options for training programs and educational resources to equip instructors and staff with the necessary skills and knowledge.
  • Technology and Tools: Evaluation of existing and potential tools to aid accessibility efforts.
  • Policies and Incentives: Suggestions for policy changes and incentives to encourage compliance and continuous improvement.
  • Data and Analytics: Methods for collecting and analyzing data to track progress and prioritize efforts.
  • Third-Party Involvement: Opportunities for collaboration with external vendors and service providers to enhance accessibility.
  • Approaches to Remediation Process: Implementing a phased approach to address and improve the accessibility of images systematically.

Summary of Recommendations

  • Require 2-3 hours of accessibility training for all instructors.
  • Centralize self-service accessibility tools and training.
  • Establish universal and department-specific workflows for remediation and support.
  • Assign knowledgeable and dedicated accessibility support staff to each unit.
  • Implement a phased approach to remediation efforts.
  • Invest in long-term, scalable solutions for ongoing accessibility improvements.

Current State

The University of Washington (UW) is dedicated to ensuring digital accessibility for all students, including those with disabilities. This section of the report examines the current state of digital accessibility at UW, highlighting key issues and proposing solutions. The Disability Resources for Students (DRS) was allocated a $2 million budget for the 2023–2024 academic year to support accommodation services. A significant portion of accommodation requests are related to the inaccessibility of printed material (95%), with a smaller percentage related to visual conditions (5%). Issues with image accessibility on Canvas and other platforms were prevalent, with nearly five hundred thousand occurrences reported in the autumn and spring quarters of 2024. These issues range from severe (inducing seizures) to major (missing alternative descriptions and contrast problems). This section of the report also addresses the limitations of automated accessibility checkers, the challenges instructors face due to a lack of skills and time, and the need for proper training and resource allocation.

Data on Accessibility Issues

Budget Allocation

In the 2023–2024 academic year, Disability Resources for Students (DRS) was given a budget of $2 million for the accommodation services provided.

Accommodation Requests

  • 95% of accommodation requests to DRS are for print disabilities.
  • 5% of accommodation requests to DRS are for visual conditions.
    • Implication: Missing alt-text is a barrier for approximately 5% of students who use screen readers.
    • Implication: 95% of students with accommodation can see accessible complex images.

Canvas Ally Reports on Images

The total occurrence of issues with images on Canvas pages, Microsoft Word files, Microsoft PowerPoint files, and Adobe Acrobat PDFs for the autumn and spring quarters in 2024 was nearly five hundred thousand. Note that one file could have multiple issues; these numbers do not represent individual files.

Term File Total
Occurance
of Issues		 # of
Severe
Issues		 Occurances
of Severe
Issues		 # of
Major
Issues		 Occurances
of Major
Issues		 # of
Minor
Issues		 Occurances
of Minor
Issues		 Notes
Autumn 2023 images 249,634 1 40 2 249,594 0 0
Spring 2024 images 239,088 1 67 2 239,021 0 0
Aut23 & Spr24 Totals images 488,722 1 107 2 488,615 0 0 Top severe issue: Image can induce seizures
  • Less than 1% of these issues are severe.
  • 99% are major.
  • 0% are minor.

Severity of Image-Related Issues Checked by Ally

  • Severe Issue: The image can induce seizures.
  • Major Issue: The image does not have an alternative description.
  • Major Issue: The image has contrast issues.
  • Minor Issue: The image has text that is not part of the alternative description.

Explanation of Issues

Image Accessibility Issues

Seizure-Inducing Content: Content that flashes or flickers can trigger seizures in susceptible individuals and should be avoided.

Alternative Text (alt text): Users who are unable to see images depend on alt text, which is a short description of the image. Without meaningful alt text, assistive technology cannot convey information about images. Alt text is limited to 120 characters*.

*The 120-character limit for alt text in Canvas is not a universal standard but rather a guideline set by Canvas’s accessibility checker tool. This limit is based on outdated screen reader guidelines, which suggested shorter alt text for better readability. However, modern screen readers can handle longer descriptions without issues. The recommendation to keep alt text concise is to ensure it remains useful and to avoid overwhelming users with excessive detail.

As of Spring of 2025, five percent (5%) of UW students with accommodations use screen readers.

Decorative Images: If decorative images are not hidden from screen readers, they are presented as informational images, which can be confusing.

Complex Images: Complex images, such as graphs, charts, and diagrams, may contain too much information to be effectively described using alt text. The information must be communicated using another medium for students who are unable to see the images.

Color Contrast: Some users have difficulty perceiving content if there is too little color contrast between the foreground and background. Additionally, some users cannot perceive color differences or may not perceive color the same way. The issue arises when color alone is used to communicate information.

Limitations of Automated Accessibility Checkers

Built-in accessibility checkers are helpful but may miss issues and do not replace human knowledge and intervention.

Limitations of Instructor Skills, Time, and Ability

Some instructors do not address identified accessibility issues in their content because they believe they lack the skills or time.

Training: Departments do not have financial resources, and instructors do not have time to engage in digital accessibility training. Instructors are exhausted and view accessibility requirements as another unfunded mandate.

Communication: Most accessibility-related updates, training, webinars, etc., are shared through emails, which are not the best way to communicate with instructors; they tend to be ignored.

Availability of Resources: Departments may face challenges in allocating resources effectively, including budget allocations, staff availability, and logistical support. Instructors cannot make space for extra work. Doing additional work requires either taking something else off their plates or extending their contract periods, neither of which happens.

Accessibility Expertise and Utilization: It may not be the best use of instructor time and expertise to be trained to become expert users of accessibility tools. Instructors without sufficient accessibility knowledge can inadvertently create additional issues when attempting to mitigate barriers. This isn’t a criticism of instructors but rather an indicator of the need for accessibility expertise when it comes to remediating inaccessible files.

Instructor Disabilities: Some instructors may have disabilities that prevent them from independently performing remediation tasks. In such cases, these instructors need to collaborate with the Disability Services Office (DSO) or their respective units to develop effective solutions. This collaboration ensures that accessibility needs are met without placing an undue burden on the instructors, fostering a supportive and inclusive educational environment.

Current Resources and Workflows

Resources

Below are examples of resources available to all instructors and staff at the University of Washington (UW) to tackle accessibility, including the accessibility of images:

Workflows

The University of Washington’s most significant challenge in the area of accessibility lies in the establishment and implementation of standardized workflows. The Images Accessibility Work Group could not locate established, consistent, standardized workflows for accessibility remediation, accommodation, and the design and creation of accessible content across all departments at the University of Washington, except for one workflow related to Disability Resources for Students (DRS). This absence of uniform procedures results in varied approaches to accessibility, depending on individual departmental resources, training, and awareness. Consequently, the effectiveness and efficiency of accessibility practices can differ significantly, leading to inconsistencies in the support provided to students with disabilities.

Current Self-Service (by Units)

Accessibility tools and resources are essential for identifying and addressing barriers that students with disabilities face. The current built-in accessibility checkers and online tools offer valuable support, but they often require human intervention to address complex accessibility issues. Departments and instructors are currently trying to utilize available resources and training to create accessible content or remediate inaccessible material. Some departments use innovative solutions, such as leveraging student workers, to overcome resource constraints and ensure timely remediation of course materials. The following information outlines some of the current tools, resources, and strategies employed at UW to enhance digital accessibility.

Canvas Accessibility Checkers (including Ally and RCE): Instructors/units can use the built-in accessibility checkers in Canvas to identify issues and apply fixes. However, these accessibility checkers have flaws and do not replace human knowledge and intervention. Besides, not all the instructors are aware of how to use Ally.

UDOIT Tool (limited to departments with access to CidiLabs): Instructors can scan the Canvas site using UDOIT to flag issues with images and resolve them.

Remediation Information on Images in Documents page by UW Accessible Technology informs instructors/units of several actions they can take to make images accessible:

  • Add alt-text for simple images.
  • Use an additional medium for complex images.
  • Select the field that indicates the image is decorative in image options in Canvas Rich Editor (CRE).

Free Online Tools: Instructors/units can use a variety of free online tools. For example,

  • TPGI Color Contrast Analyzer to check color combinations for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) compliance.
  • Image Remediation Information on WAI’s Image Tutorial website helps instructors design and develop accessible images, both simple and complex.

Self-Service Workflows

University-wide and departmental detailed self-service workflows are not available for identifying and remediating inaccessible images. Workflows should streamline the processes of archiving, accessibility checking, and remediation, ensuring that course materials are both organized and accessible to all students.

The self-service tools and guidelines are not easily accessible, so not every instructor is consistently using them. Following are some tools available with their limitations:

Preserving Canvas Content: Instructors are encouraged to utilize self-service resources to manage their Canvas course content effectively. Removing content from Canvas that is no longer used may improve a course’s accessibility score in Ally. To assist instructors in Preserving Canvas Course Content, UW-IT has provided some instructions on archiving course content. It is important to note that archiving inaccessible elements within Canvas will not improve an accessibility score, as the Ally tool captures these elements as well. Unfortunately, there are not enough guidelines on how to identify unused elements, completely remove them from the Canvas shell, and archive them elsewhere.

Using the Accessibility Checklist: Instructors are advised to use the UW IT Accessibility Checklist when adding images to their Canvas site. This checklist helps ensure that all images meet accessibility standards. The checklist, however, is not consistently used across the UW departments due to multiple reasons, including a lack of awareness, time, and training.

Using the Ally Accessibility Tool: The Ally Accessibility Tool within Canvas allows instructors to view accessibility issues and follow the provided instructions to fix them. The tool provides instructions on how to fix these issues. However, not all the issues can be fixed, and some still need human intervention.

Using the UDOIT Tool: Departments that have access to the UDOIT tool (a CidiLabs product) can scan the Canvas site using this tool. UDOIT flags issues with images and other elements, allowing instructors to resolve them promptly. However, it should be noted that not all departments have access to this tool.

Other Initiatives by Departments: In the Human Centered Design & Engineering (HCDE) department, a situation arose where a sighted screen-reader user in the MS program faced difficulties accessing course materials each quarter. To address this issue, the department approached DRS to discuss the possibility of remediating the entire two-year program from a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) perspective. However, DRS could only process requests for materials once the student had registered for the class. As a solution, the department trained student workers to assist in remediating the classes, ensuring that the necessary materials were accessible on time. It is worth noting that not every department would be able to fund such a solution.

Current Central Support

The Accessibility at the UW website is currently serving as a central hub providing information, training, tools, and support on digital accessibility to staff and instructors.

Nevertheless, the UW community members can also benefit from multiple other resources. The following presents some other methods instructors and staff use to receive information, training, and consultation:

Consultation with Disability Resources for Students (DRS): Instructors and units can consult with Disability Resources for Students (DRS) regarding file remediation to accommodate documented individual student needs.

Free File Conversion Service: Instructors and units can utilize a free Document Conversion Service to convert files into more accessible formats as a quick, temporary solution. This service is particularly useful for text-based documents and may be less applicable to images than PDFs.

Remediation by Accessible Technology Services (ATS): Accessible Technology Services (ATS) will remediate a limited number of highly visible, high-impact, multiple-use, and/or strategic content.

Help from Digital Accessibility Liaisons: Digital Accessibility Liaisons are available for consultation. However, it has been noted that their primary role is to disseminate the latest updates, resources, and information to their respective units – not assist instructors in making content accessible. Specific questions can be addressed during their quarterly meetings or via listserv, where experts in the group can provide detailed responses. Not all the departments or units may have representatives in this group.

Disability Services Office: Matriculated and non-matriculated students can contact the Disability Services Office (DSO) to request accommodation to access course materials. In some cases, a representative is responsible for creating alternative materials to satisfy the official accommodation requirements. However, the alternative materials are not shared with the instructors for future use in similar cases.

Consultation and Training Services by UW Learning Technologies: UW Learning Technologies currently offers consultation and training services for using Ally and the Canvas Accessibility Checker. These services include ongoing consultations in some cases, providing continuous support for instructors to enhance accessibility in their courses.

Help from Teaching@UW Network: The Teaching@UW Network is a tri-campus collaboration among the UW Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL), UW Bothell Learning & Teaching Collaborative, and UW Tacoma Office of Digital Learning to support instructors through collaborative programs and resources. Among many of its services, Teaching@UW offers workshops and webinars on accessible teaching.

UW DO-IT AccessCollege: The AccessCollege Faculty Room provides information to make courses and the campus inclusive.

Central Support Workflows

As previously mentioned, central support is available through the Disability Services Office (DSO), Disability Resources for Students (DRS), Accessible Technology Services (ATS), and a few other entities across the UW campuses. However, workflows for receiving support from these entities are not consistently clear and known to all members of the UW community.

The most important issues with the current workflows include:

Instructor Involvement: For complicated or technical classes, the instructor must be actively involved in the accessibility process. However, this is not happening. Several factors contribute to this issue, including a lack of training and awareness about accessibility standards, time constraints due to demanding schedules, and insufficient access to remediation tools that facilitate the implementation of accessibility practices. IT and accessibility personnel may lack the subject matter expertise required to accurately understand and translate complex images.

Coordination Documentation: It is important to document the current workflows for coordination between instructors, Disability Resources for Students (DRS), and IT when remediating images and obtaining accessible resources from publishers or third parties. This documentation can help streamline the process and ensure that all parties are aware of their roles and responsibilities. Limited documentation does not exist.

  • UW-IT ATS does limited remediation for high-impact, highly visible content. Most of their current requests come from staff. A draft of their workflow is attached to this report.
  • DRS is downstream from ATS and does all remediations for documented accommodation, including contacting publishers for their files. The volume of remediation work DRS does is much higher than ATS. One pain point identified is that when DRS processes student requests each quarter, ~60% of courses are missing information on required readings in the current system of record (the schedule). A copy of DRS’s workflow is attached to this report.
  • Libraries help source accessible articles and texts, but we did not locate any documentation on their workflows.

Perception of Accommodations Process: The following two scenarios illustrate the inefficiency of the current workflow, based on instructor experience:

Best Case Scenario (UW Seattle):
  • The student reaches out to the instructor and DRS when registering for classes to discuss adaptations and accommodations.
  • The instructor sends materials to the accessible text group for remediation.
  • The instructor selects new materials based on accessibility or sends existing materials for remediation.
  • The instructor adds alt-text to instructor-generated images.
  • The instructor consults with Accessible Technology Services (ATS) and DRS for major mismatches.
The More Typical Scenario (UW Seattle):
  • The instructor receives a notice from DRS 1-2 weeks before the start of class.
  • The instructor reaches out to DRS for clarification, often receiving no response due to high demand.
  • The instructor seeks support from the department and network.
  • The instructor meets with the student to understand their needs.
  • The instructor sends materials to the accessible text group.
  • The instructor delays releasing course content until remediation is complete, which can lead to complaints.
  • Materials may not be remediated until six weeks into the quarter.
  • The instructor requires student-generated content to include alt-text, which is difficult to audit.
  • A combination of the instructor, student, and department leadership meets with DRS, often with no follow-through.

Current Training/Education, Policy, and Technology

Training/Education

Numerous accessibility training resources are available across the University of Washington campuses. However, there is a significant gap in the communication of these training and education opportunities to departments and instructors. This lack of communication often results in instructors being unaware of the available resources.

Additionally, adjunct instructors, who constitute a substantial portion of the teaching staff at UW, frequently miss out on these training opportunities. This is primarily because they may not be present on campus when these opportunities arise. Ensuring that all instructors, including adjuncts, are informed and paid to participate in accessibility training is crucial for fostering an inclusive educational environment.

Following are examples of the training and education opportunities that are currently available to instructors and staff:

Accessibility at the UW: This website offers extensive accessibility information with a strong focus on inclusion. A recent addition to the site, What You Can Do Now, provides detailed information about the new Title II Rule. It includes a variety of resources, such as guidelines, advice, tools, and training aimed at the immediate remediation of inaccessible digital course content. These resources are designed to help instructors prepare for compliance by April 2025.

UW IT Accessible Technology:
  • General Information: Accessible Technology provides accessibility information and resources, from policy to best practices.
  • Training Opportunities: The Training Opportunities page includes a comprehensive list of asynchronous and synchronous training options for UW instructors and staff.
  • Webinar Series: Accessible Technology Webinar Series offers live presentations (recording available) on a variety of accessibility topics.
  • Expert Consultations: Mary-Colleen Jenkins, the Instruction Accessibility Specialist, is available for consultation on accessibility matters.

Making Content Accessible: This is a module in the 2020 Teaching with UW Technologies Canvas course. It provides guidelines on creating accessible content for students.

Designing Accessible Syllabi: Designing an Accessible Syllabus 2024 is a page available in Canvas. It offers instructions on designing syllabi that are accessible to all students. This resource is outdated but is currently being reviewed and updated by UW Information Technology.

Deque University Enterprise Subscription: UW has a Deque University enterprise subscription. All members of the UW community can benefit from this subscription, which provides extensive training and resources on digital accessibility.

Best Practices in Learning Design: This is a module in UW Continuum College Learning Experience’s Canvas Resources course, which provides information, tutorials, tools, and examples of creating accessible content.

UW Accessibility Resources Web Page: This list of resources, managed by Mary Colleen Jenkins, Instruction Accessibility Specialist, provides a list of accessibility resources available to instructors. This page is a simple collection of all UW accessibility resources in one place.

Example External Resources: The effectiveness of these resources is limited by the availability of time and training for instructors and staff to fully engage with and implement the guidelines.

Policy

The Images Accessibility Work Group was able to locate the following policies concerning accessibility. This list may not be inclusive of all existing university or departmental policies:

UW IT Accessibility Policy: “The University of Washington (UW) strives to ensure that people with disabilities have access to the same services and content that are available to people without disabilities, including services and content made available through the use of information technology (IT). IT procured, developed, maintained, and used by the UW should provide substantially similar functionality, experience, and information access to people with disabilities as it provides to others. Examples of IT covered by this policy include websites, software systems, electronic documents, videos, and electronic equipment such as information kiosks, telephones, and digital signs.”

The IT Accessibility Standards web page covers more details on this policy and standards.

Office of the ADA Coordinator: “In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as amended, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and relevant local, state, and federal law, the University provides individuals with disabilities equal access to programs, services and/or activities.”

The Office of the ADA Coordinator website provides more information on UW-specific policies.

UW Accessibility Hub: “At the University of Washington, diversity is one of our core values and our campus is strengthened and enriched by people with disabilities. Accessibility is an approach to communication and engagement that recognizes the intersectional identities, experiences, and needs of our entire campus community. It goes beyond legal accommodations for students, staff and faculty with disabilities.

Accessibility creates a community where everyone can bring their whole self to campus and have the opportunity to thrive. has added a policy section to the online Accessibility hub.”

The Accessibility at the UW website provides more details on policies and standards.

Student Governance and Policies: Chapter 208 covers the reasonable accommodation of students with disabilities.

Inclusive Campus Model: The UW DO-IT Inclusive Campus Model, underpinned by the Universal Design for Higher Education (UDHE) Framework, was proposed when UW implemented Washington State’s Policy #188.

Technology/Tools

The UW Information Technology Access Technology Center (ATC) provides software and hardware for accessible computing. In addition, it offers Braille embossing services, ensuring that visual content is accessible to students with visual impairments.

Besides this service, instructors and staff utilize various tools and technologies to achieve their accessibility objectives. Following is a list of tools and technologies currently used by various departments, instructors, and staff to create accessible artifacts or remediate existing ones with accessibility issues. It is important to note that these tools and technologies are not universally available to all departments and individuals due to budget constraints and limitations in training.

Canvas Accessibility Checker (RCE)*: While the Canvas Accessibility Checker, integrated within the Rich Content Editor (RCE), provides real-time feedback and suggestions to ensure digital materials are accessible, its effectiveness is limited by the availability of training for instructors. Without proper training, instructors may not fully utilize the tool’s capabilities, leading to incomplete remediation of accessibility issues.

Ally Accessibility Checker*: Ally Accessibility Checker offers detailed reports and alternative formats for students, helping instructors improve the accessibility of their materials. However, the tool may not always be effective. Instructors need adequate training to interpret and act on the reports provided by Ally.

*Note that the built-in accessibility checkers may indicate that there is alternative text for an image, but do not evaluate the quality of the alt-text. They help with compliance but not necessarily with true accessibility.

Adobe Acrobat Professional: Adobe Acrobat Professional is essential for creating, editing, and remediating PDF documents to meet accessibility standards. However, the limited number of licenses available restricts access to this tool, and without sufficient training, users may struggle to utilize its advanced features effectively.

Microsoft Suite: Images in Microsoft products like Word and PowerPoint need to be accessible by adding descriptive alt text.

  • Microsoft Word: Microsoft Word includes built-in accessibility features that allow users to create accessible documents. Despite its widespread availability, the lack of training on how to use these features can hinder the creation of fully accessible documents.
  • Microsoft PowerPoint: Microsoft PowerPoint provides tools to create accessible presentations, but similar to Microsoft Word, the effectiveness of these tools is dependent on the user’s knowledge and training. Instructors who are not trained may not fully leverage the accessibility features.

Adobe Creative Suite and Microsoft Paint: Content creators often use Adobe Creative Suite and Microsoft Paint to create images. Adobe Creative Suite offers professional tools for designing accessible visual content, but its high cost and the need for specialized training limit its accessibility. Microsoft Paint provides basic image creation capabilities, but it lacks advanced features for ensuring accessibility.

Google Suite: Google Suite includes tools such as Google Docs, Sheets, and Slides, which offer built-in accessibility features. Images in Google Suite products like Docs and Slides need to be accessible by adding descriptive alt text. However, the accessibility features in Google Suite are not as comprehensive and effective as those in Microsoft products. While these tools support collaboration and the creation of accessible content, the lack of training on how to use these features effectively can be a barrier.

CidiLabs DesignPlus Side Bar: This group of tools enhances the design and accessibility of online courses within learning management systems. It identifies inaccessible elements during the design and build stages and suggests ways to fix them. However, not all the departments and units have this tool available to them. The budget constraints may limit access to this suite of tools, and without proper training, instructors may not fully utilize its capabilities.

CidiLabs UDOIT Tool: This Tool helps instructors and content creators identify and resolve accessibility issues within their online courses. It provides comprehensive reports and actionable insights to ensure that digital course content meets accessibility standards. However, the effectiveness of the UDOIT Tool is limited by budget constraints, which may restrict access to this tool for some departments. Additionally, the tool requires adequate training for users to understand and implement the recommendations.

CidiLabs CidiScape: This tool helps designers and instructors develop accessible and engaging online learning environments. However, not all the departments and units have this tool available to them. The tool’s effectiveness is limited by budget and training constraints, which may prevent widespread adoption and proper use.

Deque axe: Deque axe is a powerful web accessibility testing tool that helps developers identify and fix accessibility issues on web pages. Its effectiveness is constrained by the need for specialized training to interpret and act on the detailed reports provided by the tool.

Current Approach

The University of Washington’s current approach to digital accessibility in courses is primarily individual and retroactive, addressing accessibility issues as they arise rather than implementing proactive measures. This method often results in delayed accommodations and inconsistent accessibility standards across courses. Despite the wealth of information available on UW’s websites regarding making digital content accessible, the assumption that instructors have the time to thoroughly read and apply these practices can lead to information overload and underutilization of the resources. Furthermore, different departments within the university may employ varying accessibility tools and training programs, influenced by factors such as budget constraints and levels of awareness. These departmental variations can result in uneven accessibility practices and support across the university, highlighting the need for a more unified and proactive approach to digital accessibility.

Future State

The future approach to digital accessibility at the University of Washington (UW) should be multi-pronged and avoid placing the onus solely on individual instructors. This section identifies various levers UW could pull to address the issues and barriers previously described. The options include both existing and new resources or structures, with rough cost estimates for new investments, where known. Additionally, a series of recommendations is presented to help the University of Washington achieve its accessibility goals. These recommendations include the utilization of various tools and strategies to enhance the accessibility of course materials and ensure compliance with established standards.

Options for Self-Service by Units

To achieve our accessibility goals, it is essential to make self-service accessibility tools readily available to all instructors, staff, and students across various departments. These tools will enable users to independently enhance the accessibility of their course materials, ensuring compliance with established standards and improving the overall educational experience. The following list outlines specific options and examples of tools that can be utilized to support these efforts.

Staffing and Workstreams

Assign Accessibility Staff: One option is to designate at least one staff member knowledgeable in accessibility to each unit (or group of small units). This person will advocate accessibility, consult with instructors, provide training, help with remediation, and share information on image remediation and creation.

  • Cost/Feasibility: This approach is feasible for units with 2-3 staff members, each dedicating approximately 25-50% of their time to accessibility work, totaling 1-1.5 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) for some units. An implementation team would need to research the details and estimate the number of people based on department size and expected workload.
  • Example: The Foster School employs this strategy, managing around 300-400 Canvas courses per quarter, with fewer courses in the summer.

Utilize Instructional Services Staff: Units with existing or newly hired instructional services staff can offer just-in-time materials and learning opportunities for both staff and instructors.

Assign Instructional Staff: Anecdotally, a minority of departments have dedicated instructional staff. Hiring or reallocating existing staff for this role will provide the necessary expertise and resources to support ongoing accessibility efforts, ensuring that all course materials meet the required standards without overloading instructors. Instructional staff can advocate for best practices, consult with instructors, and provide training on image remediation and creation. An implementation team could survey departments to learn more about the number of instructors, how many courses are hosted per quarter, how many instructional staff work there, and the ratio of instructional staff to instructor or course.

Generate Accessibility Reports: Instructional services staff should use accessibility-focused software to generate comprehensive unit-wide reports. These reports will identify areas needing immediate attention and enable staff to address HTML and accessibility issues directly. While the ability to run unit-level accessibility reports for Canvas sub-accounts is already available using the Ally integration, investing in or utilizing additional software designed for accessibility in Canvas builds or remediation, such as CidiLabs DesignPLUS, TidyUp, and ReadyGO, can streamline the process of making course materials accessible.

Communicate Course Cleanup Strategy: Inform instructors and key staff to initiate or continue their accessibility efforts by reviewing active Winter/Spring 2025 courses and deleting old or unused images. This strategy involves:

  • Notification: Communicating the importance of this task to all relevant personnel.
  • Guidelines: Providing detailed guidelines on how to identify and remove outdated or unused images that may affect accessibility scores.
  • Support: Offering support and resources to assist instructors in this process, ensuring they have the necessary tools and knowledge to clean up their course materials effectively.
  • Monitoring: Implementing a system to monitor progress and provide feedback, ensuring that the cleanup efforts are thorough and effective.

Tools/Technology

Several tools and technologies are currently available and being used by the instructors and staff across the UW. Following are a few more options that can help facilitate the remediation process.

Self-Service Accessibility Tools: Make self-service accessibility tools widely available to all instructors, staff, and students in different departments. Examples include:

Color Contrast Analyzers:

Free Options: Multiple options are provided. To summarize, the most user-friendly option is Colour Contrast Analyser (CCA) by TPGi, the most reliable options are WebAIM Contrast Checker and Adobe Color Contrast Checker, and the most accessible ones are WebAIM Contrast Checker, Adobe Color Contrast Checker, and Coolors Contrast Checker.

  • Colour Contrast Analyser (CCA) by TPGi: This tool helps optimize content for individuals with color blindness or low vision impairments. It supports WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 standards.
    • User-Friendliness: CCA is known for its intuitive interface and comprehensive features. It provides visual feedback and supports multiple WCAG standards, making it very user-friendly for instructors who need to ensure accessibility.
    • Reliability: Highly reliable as it is developed by TPGi, a well-known accessibility consulting firm. It adheres to WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 standards.
    • Ease of Access: Requires download and installation, which might be a slight barrier compared to web-based tools.
  • WebAIM Contrast Checker: This tool allows you to enter foreground and background colors to check their contrast ratio.
    • User-Friendliness: Simple interface. Users can easily input foreground and background colors to get immediate feedback on contrast ratios.
    • Reliability: WebAIM is a reputable organization in the field of web accessibility, ensuring the tool’s reliability.
    • Ease of Access: Web-based tool, easily accessible from any browser without the need for installation.
  • Adobe Color Contrast Checker: This tool helps ensure your color choices meet accessibility standards by checking the contrast ratio of text and background colors.
    • User-Friendliness: Part of Adobe’s suite of tools, it offers a polished and professional interface. It integrates well with other Adobe products, which can be beneficial for users already in the Adobe ecosystem.
    • Reliability: Adobe is a trusted name in design and accessibility, ensuring high reliability.
    • Ease of Access: Web-based, making it easily accessible without installation.
  • Coolors Contrast Checker: An online tool that checks color contrast to ensure accessibility.
    • User-Friendliness: Coolors is known for its user-friendly design and ease of use. It provides a visually appealing interface that is easy to navigate.
    • Reliability: While not as established as WebAIM or Adobe, Coolors is a popular tool among designers and has a good reputation for reliability.
    • Ease of Access: Web-based, making it very accessible.

Paid Options:

  • Axe Accessibility Checker: A comprehensive tool that includes color contrast analysis as part of its broader accessibility testing features. It offers free and paid versions with advanced features in the paid plans. All UW members have free access to this tool through Deque University.
  • Color Contrast Checker by Creatosaurus: This tool ensures readability on designs for people with visual impairments by providing contrast ratio data between foreground and background colors. For pricing and a demo, check their website.
Alt-Text and Image Description Generators:

Several free options are available, and the University of Washington has the potential to develop its AI-powered agent, similar to the tool provided by Arizona State University.

*AI-powered tools must undergo thorough research to prevent the inadvertent reuse of our intellectual property, including images, data, charts, and graphs.

Free Options:

Accessibility Checkers: Several accessibility checkers are available through Canvas RCE, Ally, UDOIT, and MS built-in checkers. Another one that is available to the public for free is WAI’s Image Alt Text – Easy Checks.

Automated Accessibility Tools (AI Agents): AI-powered tools can be employed to scan and remediate image accessibility issues in digital content. All members of the University of Washington already have access to tools such as Axe Accessibility Checker and Ally (Canvas). Additionally, the university can collaborate with external vendors that offer more advanced and specialized AI solutions. Examples include:

  • Microsoft Azure Cognitive Services: This suite includes the Computer Vision API, which can generate descriptive alt text for images and analyze visual content to ensure accessibility. It can be integrated into websites and digital platforms to provide alt text for images automatically.
    • Pricing: Azure Cognitive Services, including the Computer Vision API, operates on a pay-as-you-go model. For example, the Computer Vision API costs $1.50 per 1,000 transactions for image analysis features. We can find more detailed pricing on the Azure pricing page.
  • Google Cloud Vision AI: This tool offers powerful image analysis capabilities, including generating alt text and identifying objects within images. It can help ensure that all images on university websites and course materials are accessible.
    • Pricing: Google Cloud Vision AI also uses a pay-as-you-go model. The first 1,000 units per month are free, and beyond that, prices start at $1.50 per 1,000 units for most features. Detailed pricing information is available on the Cloud Vision pricing page.
  • Adobe Sensei: Adobe’s AI and machine learning platform can be used to enhance image accessibility by automatically generating alt text and improving image descriptions. It integrates with Adobe’s suite of creative tools, making it easier for content creators to produce accessible images.
    • Pricing: Adobe Sensei is integrated into Adobe’s suite of products, and its cost is typically included in the subscription plans for Adobe Creative Cloud or Adobe Experience Cloud. The exact pricing depends on the specific products and services you choose. For detailed pricing, we would need to contact Adobe directly.

Hiring and Training Instructors

Hiring and training instructors to conduct remediation is another option. The amount of training required for an instructor to effectively remediate images in their online courses can vary based on the complexity of the content and the instructor’s familiarity with accessibility standards. However, a general guideline suggests that approximately 20 hours of focused training should be sufficient. This training should cover key areas such as understanding accessibility standards, using remediation tools, and applying best practices for image accessibility. Following are a few options that the Images Accessibility Work Group suggests:

Extend Hiring Period: Hire and train 9-month instructors/faculty over the summer to audit all the courses in their department. Instructors are likely to understand the material well enough to remediate effectively.

  • Rationale:
    • There is no time during the academic year for remediation due to contract periods (9/15-6/15) and the intense transition periods between quarters.
    • Students and staff, while helpful, often lack the subject matter knowledge to remediate everything and require significant back-and-forth with instructors.
    • Many classes are taught by adjuncts or PhD students who may not be in a position to undertake large-scale remediation.

Offer Early Contract Start for Training: Pay instructors to come on contract earlier than 9/15 for half-day training on accessible documents and allocate time for auditing and making changes.

  • Rationale: This would provide dedicated time for instructors to focus on accessibility training and remediation before the academic year begins.

Train instructors in Archiving Materials: Information about preserving Canvas course content already exists on the UW IT Preserve Canvas Course Content web page. Instructors should be trained on the best best practices to remove old, unused, inaccessible materials from Canvas, so they do not affect the accessibility score.

  • Rationale: Proper archiving practices can help maintain accessibility standards and prevent old, non-compliant materials from impacting current accessibility scores.

Self-Service Portals

Improve existing websites or develop new Self-Service Portals.

The University of Washington (UW) maintains several websites, many of which are listed in this report, that offer training, guidelines, and webinar recordings, among other services. To enhance the efficiency of these resources, we can consolidate them into a single, centralized hub. The examples of university central portals demonstrate various features that could be integrated into this central hub, creating a comprehensive and streamlined resource for all users, including students, instructors, and staff. An implementation team could research this and provide recommendations.

Examples of self-service options currently available to the UW community are Accessibility at UW, the UW Accessible Technology website, Teaching@UW, and the UW Document Conversion Service.

Self-service portals usually include self-training materials and offer a wide range of services. They provide an environment where students can customize their accessibility settings, such as adjusting color contrast and other non-image-related accessibility features, and request accommodation when needed. In addition, instructors can access the training and tools they need to design and build accessible artifacts, audit their courses, remediate inaccessible elements, such as images, and request support.

Examples of Self-Service Portals from Other Universities:
  • University of California, Berkeley: UC Berkeley has an Accessibility Portal that provides resources and tools for students, instructors, and staff to ensure digital content is accessible. This includes guidelines for creating accessible images, such as using proper alt text and ensuring color contrast.
  • Stanford University: Stanford’s Office of Accessible Education offers a self-service portal where students can request accommodation, access resources, and find information on making digital content accessible, including images.
  • Ohio State University: Ohio State’s Digital Accessibility Center provides a comprehensive portal with tools and resources for creating accessible digital content. This includes training materials on image accessibility and tools for checking color contrast and alt text.

Cost Estimate: The cost to build a self-service accessibility portal can vary widely depending on the complexity and features required. Overall, the total cost to build a self-service accessibility portal can range from $50,000 to $200,000 or more, depending on the specific requirements and scale of the project. Generally, this cost estimate includes the following:

  • Staffing: This covers the salaries of developers, designers, project managers, and accessibility experts who will work on the portal.
  • Technology: Costs associated with software development tools, platforms, and any necessary licenses or subscriptions.
  • Services: This includes consulting fees for accessibility audits, compliance checks, and ongoing support.
  • Training: Expenses for training staff and users on how to use the portal effectively.
  • Maintenance: Ongoing costs for updating and maintaining the portal to ensure it remains compliant with accessibility standards.

Here are some factors that influence the cost:

  • Pre-Implementation Analysis: Conducting a thorough analysis to define requirements and functionalities. This stage can cost between $5,000 and $15,000.
  • Design and Development: Creating the user interface and developing the portal. Costs can range from $20,000 to $100,000, depending on the complexity and customization needed.
  • Integration with Existing Systems: Ensuring the portal integrates seamlessly with existing university systems, such as learning management systems (LMS) and student information systems (SIS). This can add $10,000 to $50,000 to the overall cost.
  • User Testing and Feedback: Conducting user testing to ensure the portal meets accessibility standards and gathering feedback for improvements. This can cost between $5,000 and $20,000.
  • Maintenance and Updates: Ongoing maintenance and updates to keep the portal functional and up to date with the latest accessibility standards. Annual costs can range from $10,000 to $30,000.

Options for Central Support

Centralized support provides a consistent and coordinated approach to accessibility, which helps in maintaining high standards across the university. It allows instructors and staff to have access to the necessary tools, training, and resources to create and maintain accessible content. This approach also facilitates the sharing of best practices and compliance with legal standards such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). The advantages of central support include consistency in accessibility practices, efficiency in resource utilization, specialized expertise, comprehensive training and resources, compliance with legal requirements, and enhanced collaboration between departments. Following are several options to address instructors’ needs in making their course content accessible. Timely communication of the best practices is a major part of central support.

Workstreams and Staffing

Provide Support for Accessibility Tools: Learning Technologies (LT) should provide clear guidelines or training on how to remediate issues flagged by Ally in Canvas. Ally guidelines are not enough for fixing all image-related accessibility issues. Not all instructors may be aware that this support exists.

Create a Temporary Team: Create a team of temporary contract FTEs with expertise in accessibility and Universal Design Learning (UDL) to provide course/materials review and assistance with remediation. Ideally, this team would include Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) associated with specific colleges like engineering, biological sciences, or the arts.

Strengthening Collaboration: Strengthen collaboration between UW-IT’s Accessible Technology Services team, Teaching & Learning Services, and Learning Technologies to develop processes for review, assistance, and training.

*This is challenging due to existing workloads and siloed management/supervisory conditions. To ensure effective management and oversight of this collaboration, the alliance should be led by an accessibility champion who would work with the supervisors responsible for various websites (operations). By integrating these resources and appointing a dedicated leader, UW can enhance coordination, reduce redundancy, and provide a more cohesive and supportive environment for accessibility initiatives. In the long run, the creation of a UW Central Hub would resolve this issue as the central hub can be managed by an accessibility champion who is also in a position to supervise the leaders in charge of different services available through the Hub.

Centrally Funded Tools: Utilize centrally funded (and thus supported) tools like UDOIT for accessibility checks. Review the Tools and Technology Sub-Section for more details.

Increase Staff Training: Increase staff in UW IT for Canvas issues with specific training on Ally and using accessibility features.

Reuse Remediated Content: Make it easier to reuse content that’s already been remediated by DRS or other accessibility experts. This includes opening archived DRS content to instructors of record.

Promote Best Practices for Image Accessibility:
  • Alt Text: Provide concise and descriptive alternative text (alt text) for all images. Alt text should convey the purpose and content of the image, not just describe it.
  • Captions and Descriptions: Use captions for images that contain complex information. Detailed descriptions can be provided in the surrounding text or linked to a separate page.
  • Contextual Relevance: Ensure that the alt text and descriptions are relevant to the context in which the image is used. This helps users understand the image’s role in the content.
Provide Access to Available Tools for Checking Image Accessibility:
  • Accessibility Software: Tools like WebAIM’s Contrast Checker to test and ensure images meet accessibility standards. More tools are listed under the Tools/Technology Section.
  • Automated Testing: Use automated accessibility testing tools to regularly check course websites and digital content for compliance with accessibility guidelines.
Provide Guidelines and Emphasize Compliance:
  • WCAG 2.1 AA Standards: Follow the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 AA standards, which include specific criteria for image accessibility.
  • ADA Compliance: Ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by meeting the required digital accessibility standards.
Consider Implementation Strategies:
  • Training and Resources: Provide training for staff and instructors on creating accessible content. Offer resources and guidelines on best practices for image accessibility.
  • Centralized Support Team: Establish a dedicated team or appoint a leader to oversee accessibility compliance across the university.

Tools and Technology

Creating a centralized hub or portal to streamline resources, provide consistent guidance, and foster an accessibility culture is essential. This hub would ensure uniform standards and practices across the university, reducing the risk of non-compliance and providing a consistent user experience for all students. By centralizing resources and expertise, processes can be streamlined, duplication of efforts reduced, and support provided more efficiently to instructors and staff. A dedicated team within this hub would develop specialized knowledge and skills in accessibility, offering high-quality assistance and guidance. Comprehensive training programs and resources would help instructors and staff stay updated on the latest accessibility standards and practices. Ensuring all digital content meets legal and regulatory standards would protect the institution from potential legal challenges and enhance its reputation. Additionally, promoting collaboration between departments and teams would foster a culture of inclusiveness and shared responsibility for accessibility.

Centralized Accessibility Hub:
  • Dedicated Portal: Develop a dedicated accessibility portal that serves as a one-stop resource for all accessibility-related information, tools, and support. This portal can include guidelines, training, best practices, and resources for creating accessible images.
  • Training and Resources: Offer training modules, webinars, and workshops through the portal to educate instructors, staff, and students on accessibility best practices. Include specific sessions on image accessibility.
  • Accessibility Tools: Provide access to tools and software that assist in creating and testing accessible content. This can include alt text generators, contrast checkers, and automated accessibility testing tools.
  • Consultation Services: Establish a team of accessibility experts who can offer consultations and support to departments and individuals. This team can help with specific accessibility challenges and provide tailored advice.
  • Compliance and Monitoring: Use the portal to track and report on accessibility compliance across the university. Implement regular audits and provide feedback to ensure ongoing adherence to accessibility standards.
  • Community and Collaboration: Create forums or discussion boards within the portal where users can share experiences, ask questions, and collaborate on accessibility projects. This fosters a community of practice and continuous improvement.
Implementation Strategies:
  • Leadership and Governance: One option is to appoint a central accessibility coordinator dedicated to overseeing the implementation and maintenance of the portal. This team should collaborate closely with IT, academic departments, and student services to ensure seamless integration and functionality. Creating this position as a new role will strengthen collaboration and provide focused leadership. Alternatively, the responsibilities could be distributed among several existing staff members, ensuring that the workload is manageable and that the initiative benefits from diverse expertise. User-Friendly Design: Ensure the portal itself is fully accessible and user-friendly. Use clear navigation, consistent layout, and accessible design principles.
  • Feedback Mechanism: Include a feedback mechanism for users to report issues, suggest improvements, and share success stories. This helps keep the portal relevant and responsive to user needs.
Examples of Image Accessibility Support:
  • California State University, Northridge: They provide detailed guidelines on best practices for accessible images, including alt text and captions.
  • Harvard University: Harvard offers comprehensive guidelines on writing helpful alt text for images, with examples and best practices.
  • UDL On Campus: This resource provides ideas on how to use images effectively to support comprehension and ensure accessibility.
  • Guide to Image Descriptions: This article by AccessiblePublishing.ca provides detailed guidelines and examples of different types of images and how to fix their accessibility issues.
Examples of Centralized Accessibility Hubs/Portals:
  • Accessing Higher Ground: This site discusses what makes a great institutional accessibility website and provides real-world examples of effective accessibility hubs.
  • Purdue University: Purdue has built an accessible and centralized learning hub using D2L Brightspace, which streamlines access to resources and support.
  • University of Colorado Boulder: Their Buff Portal combines various functions into one central hub, making it easier for students to navigate the digital environment.
  • North Carolina State University: They have their content tagged in a way to get a list of any support article with the “accessibility” tag, so you can get a list of all support articles on the topic.

Options for Training/Education

Creating accessible educational environments is paramount to fostering an inclusive and equitable learning experience for all students. One of the critical components in achieving this goal is the effective training and education of instructors and staff on accessibility principles and practices. This involves equipping them with the necessary knowledge, skills, and tools to identify and address accessibility barriers. However, it is important to clarify that the training provided to instructors will be focused and limited to what they specifically need to remediate their images, rather than a comprehensive understanding of all accessibility needs. This approach ensures that the additional workload remains manageable and does not become a full-time job for the instructors. By focusing on practical and relevant skills, instructors can efficiently integrate accessible practices into their existing teaching methodologies without being overwhelmed. The Images Accessibility Work Group recommends requiring training sessions for instructors and staff to ensure that they are well prepared to participate and invest in the UW’s collective efforts to improve accessibility knowledge and skills.

This section outlines various options and recommendations to enhance accessibility training and education for instructors and staff.

Workshops

Conducting workshops is a crucial strategy for enhancing accessibility training. These workshops can be structured in various ways to address instructors’ diverse needs and support their remediation efforts. Following are methods to achieve this goal:

Deep-Dive Workshops: To address instructors’ needs and support their remediation efforts, we can develop deep-dive workshops on various accessibility topics, including images, tables, and captioning. This will require expertise, time, and resources, such as additional funding to support expert trainers and materials.

For example, last spring, Learning Technologies (LT) and the Center for Teaching & Learning (CTL) designed and presented a workshop on creating an accessible syllabus in Canvas utilizing Ally and the Canvas accessibility checkers. The primary focus was on formatting text using proper heading structure and bullet lists. However, the workshop only scratched the surface of images and tables and did not tackle captioning. LT and CTL are currently revamping this workshop to narrow its scope. They are offering a more direct “how-to” session for creating an accessible syllabus in Canvas on Friday, May 2, 2025. Attendees will come away with a “minimum viable product” syllabus that meets accessibility standards and can apply the principles learned to other Canvas components.

LT is also considering the development of workshops to provide broader Canvas-specific accessibility training.

Train-the-Trainer Programs: Instructional services staff can lead groups of trainers, with one trainer per department or program within the unit. These departmental trainers will then work with instructors and staff within their respective departments or programs. Depending on the scope and scale, UW Learning Technologies can provide training to staff and instructors in departments with smaller budgets or resources for accessibility within the core teaching and learning tools that are centrally supported, such as Canvas, Panopto, Poll Everywhere, and Zoom.

Hands-On Training: Workshops can also be directly offered to instructors and staff, covering topics such as “What are the WCAG 2.1 A and AA criteria – and how will we meet them?” and “Hands-On: Make Your Canvas Images Accessible.” These sessions can provide practical, hands-on experience and ensure that participants understand and can apply accessibility standards in their work.

Specific-Issue Support Videos: Creating short videos on key accessibility elements, such as image accessibility, can provide targeted support for instructors and staff. These videos can be socialized via email, departmental meetings, one-on-one sessions with program directors, and workshops. For example, a video titled “Make Your Images Accessible in a Few Steps” can offer concise, practical guidance on improving image accessibility.

Education

It is essential to empower instructors with accessibility knowledge and the tools they need to create inclusive learning environments. This will enhance the students’ learning experience and the instructors’ confidence. Here are several ways UW can offer this education:

Form a Team of UDL/Accessibility Experts: A group of dedicated Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and accessibility experts can help develop and deliver accessibility learning materials, including workshops. This team will create in-depth training sessions and provide ongoing support. Recruitment and training of experts will be a significant undertaking, and salaries for team members, training materials, and logistics will need to be considered.

To clarify the structure and deployment of the proposed team of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and accessibility experts, a feasible approach would be to centralize the team within the existing framework of the Digital Learning Alliance. This centralized team would be responsible for developing and delivering accessibility learning materials, including workshops, and providing ongoing support across the university.

By expanding the Digital Learning Alliance staff, we can ensure that the team has the necessary resources and coordination to effectively manage and implement accessibility initiatives. This centralized model allows for consistent training standards, streamlined communication, and efficient use of resources. Additionally, the team can collaborate closely with various units and departments to address specific needs and provide tailored support, ensuring that accessibility practices are integrated seamlessly into all aspects of digital learning.

Utilize Open Resources as a Model to Create Training: The UW can use existing training courses, such as the Washington State Board of Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC)’s Library of Accessibility Resources, as a model to create subject-specific workshops and training courses. Adapting these resources to fit specific institutional needs will require time and effort, but the cost will be minimal.

Promote and Support Cross-Functional Collaborations: To save on resources, foster collaboration between the UW’s various departments or units, each with distinct functions or expertise. This approach leverages diverse perspectives and skills to achieve a common goal, enhancing efficiency and innovation. One example is collaborating with Continuum College Learning Experience. Inviting colleagues from Continuum College to demo tools, workflows, and processes they are currently using to design and build accessible courses, videos, and other artifacts can provide valuable insights. This type of collaboration will require coordination and scheduling, but the cost will be minimal.

Outsource Training: Engaging external organizations like the Washington State Department of Enterprise Services for training can ensure that instructors and staff receive high-quality education on accessibility. Outsourcing training services will incur fees, but this solution can be cost-effective when internal resources are limited.

Centralize Accessibility Training Resources: Creating central “Learn Accessibility Skills” pages or “Digital Foundations” courses similar to those offered by the University of Minnesota can provide a centralized hub for accessibility training. Development and maintenance of this resource hub will require initial investment and ongoing support. For more details about creating a central hub, review the Options for the Central Support Section.

Create and Promote the Use of Accessibly Designed Canvas Templates: To streamline the process of creating accessible course materials, the work group recommends developing and distributing Canvas templates with built-in accessibility notes. Currently, Seattle Campus courses generated via the UW Time Schedule have a template applied to them that contains some minimal accessibility and UDL guidance. More thorough accessibility guidance could be added to this template and applied to the entire institution. Additionally, templates can be emailed to staff and instructors and offered through workshops. The whole course, Canvas page-based templates will include guidance for course owners, such as instructions for adding alt text to images. For example, a note might read, “For the Home Page image of the instructor you will place below, be sure to include basic short alt text. Example: ‘Headshot of Professor Smith.'” Additionally, we can use Canvas Commons to deliver entire course templates or individual page content to all users, ensuring widespread access to these resources.

For example, the Foster School of Business has developed a public “Accessible Template” course that is shared with instructors to help them understand and decide if they would like to adopt it. This course will be available for wider distribution later in Winter 2025, following some necessary cleanup. This resource provides a practical example of accessible course design and can serve as a valuable tool for instructors looking to improve their course accessibility.

Other examples include Canvas templates that the Continuum College has designed and created, with accessibility in mind, for synchronous and asynchronous online courses. These templates include accessible code and CSS, and examples of UDL designs. Continuum College is currently working on improving its Canvas templates using CidiLabs design tools.

Create Explainers and Support Materials: Creating and storing documents and short videos on the Unit Intranet can provide ongoing support for instructors and staff. These materials, such as “Best Practices for Accessible Images,” can be used as the basis for workshops and training sessions. Communicating these resources to instructors and key staff, UW can encourage accessibility best practices and consistently reinforce them.

Create Visual Aids for Remediation: Using simple graphics to break down the remediation process into manageable pieces can significantly aid understanding and implementation. A flowchart illustrating this process can be an effective tool for visual learners and can simplify complex tasks.

Options for Policy

By implementing the following policy options, the UW can facilitate the path toward ADA compliance, foster a culture of accessibility, and ensure that all students have equitable access to educational resources and opportunities.

Departmental Review of Course Content: As we approach the April 2026 due date for accessibility compliance, each department should review their course content thoroughly to identify and address any outstanding accessibility issues. This review process can be significantly enhanced if Ally sub-account access is available to all departments. Currently, not all departments have their own sub-accounts. Having departmental sub-account admins for Canvas can significantly enhance the monitoring and improvement of course accessibility within different departments. These sub-account admins can oversee the implementation of accessibility standards, ensuring that all courses comply with institutional guidelines. By having dedicated personnel within each department, there is a more focused and tailored approach to addressing specific accessibility needs and challenges. This decentralized model allows for quicker identification and remediation of accessibility issues, as sub-account admins can work closely with instructors to provide immediate support and resources. Additionally, it fosters a culture of accountability and continuous improvement, as departments can track their progress and make data-driven decisions to enhance the overall accessibility of their courses.

Incentives for Compliance: To encourage adherence to accessibility standards, we should implement incentives for compliance that can be highly effective. These incentives could include recognition programs, grants, or other rewards that motivate departments and instructors to prioritize accessibility in their course design and delivery.

Achievement Badges for Completing Training: To encourage instructors to improve their accessibility skills and knowledge, we can offer them the opportunity to take existing or newly developed accessibility specialized courses. Upon completion, they would receive an achievement badge recognizing their efforts and commitment to creating inclusive learning environments. This badge can be displayed on their professional profiles, serving as an incentive by highlighting their expertise and dedication to accessibility.

Mandatory ADA Training: Like the mandatory hazing training, we propose that ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) training be required for all instructors and staff. This training will ensure that everyone is equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to create and maintain accessible learning environments.

Generally, ADA training for instructors can range from 2 to 3 hours. The training should cover essential topics such as understanding ADA Title II standards, applying ADA compliance principles to course design, utilizing accessibility tools, creating accessible multimedia and documents, and proactive accessibility practices. The training should be focused on and limited to what instructors need to remediate their images and other course materials, rather than a comprehensive overview of all accessibility needs. This approach keeps the training manageable and avoids overwhelming instructors with excessive workload. Therefore, the recommended limit for ADA training within a department should be set at a maximum of 3 hours, ensuring that instructors gain the necessary skills without significant disruption to their existing responsibilities.

Add Accessibility to New Hire Onboarding: Including accessibility training in the onboarding process for newly hired instructors is essential for fostering an inclusive learning environment. Last year, 5,000 instructors joined us without any accessibility training, resulting in Canvas courses with varying levels of accessibility. By incorporating this training, departments can ensure that all instructors are equipped with the knowledge and skills to create accessible course materials and utilize inclusive teaching practices. This not only supports compliance with accessibility standards but also demonstrates the university’s commitment to providing an equitable educational experience for all students.

Department-Specific Workflows and Policies: Individual departments should be empowered to create their workflows and compliance policies, including setting deadlines and possibly incorporating a grace period. These policies should be developed with support from larger UW entities to ensure consistency and effectiveness across the university. This approach allows departments to tailor their processes to their specific needs while maintaining overall compliance with accessibility standards.

UW Continuum College Learning Experience has created several workflows for designing and building accessible, student-centered learning experiences and multimedia that can be used as a model.

Options for Technology/Tools

Upon review, the Images Accessibility Work Group concluded that the following tools and technologies can enhance the accessibility of our educational resources:

Adopt UDOIT and Other CidiLabs Software: We should use CidiLabs UDOIT, a tool specifically designed to identify and address accessibility issues within Canvas courses. Additionally, other CidiLabs software, such as DesignPLUS, TidyUp, and ReadyGO can be utilized to streamline course creation and maintenance, ensuring that accessibility standards are consistently met. Currently, a handful of departments, including Continuum College, have access to these tools.

Leverage Existing Vendors: Collaborate with existing vendors, such as Instructure (Canvas), to prioritize development and integration of accessibility tools over other new features on their roadmaps. By advocating for accessibility enhancements, we can ensure that these tools are robust and effective in meeting the needs of all users.

Use Existing External Sources:
  • Panorama: Yale University’s Panorama is a valuable tool that can be integrated into our accessibility strategy. It provides comprehensive insights into the accessibility of course materials, helping instructors identify and remediate issues efficiently.
  • Contrast Checker by WebAIM: The Contrast Checker by WebAIM checks whether the text and background color combinations meet accessibility standards. We can use this tool to verify that course materials are readable and accessible to all students, including those with visual impairments.
  • ASU Image Accessibility Generator: The ASU Image Accessibility Generator is a powerful tool that can automate the generation of alt text for images. This tool can significantly reduce the time and effort required to make images accessible, ensuring that all visual content is appropriately described for students with visual impairments*.

*Automated Alt Text Generation: Recently, UW-IT migrated all content from their support documents on UW-IT Connect (WordPress) to a knowledge base on UW Connect (Service Now). During this migration, it was observed that many images had alt text automatically generated based on the text within the image. Although some images had incorrect alt text, this process demonstrates the potential for automation in accessibility efforts. Implementing tools or scripts that can automate alt text generation, while still requiring verification, can streamline the process and improve overall accessibility.

Collaborate with Other Universities: We can collaborate with other universities to push the LMS provider (Canvas) to design a more user-friendly interface for checking images. By advocating for a user interface (UI) that supports keyboard and voice commands, we can reduce the risk of repetitive strain injuries (RSI) and save time for instructors, making the accessibility review process more efficient and inclusive.

Options for Data/Analytics

Effective use of data and analytics is crucial for enhancing the accessibility of our courses. By leveraging various tools and methodologies, we can gain valuable insights into accessibility issues and implement targeted improvements. The following recommendations outline strategies for utilizing data and analytics to support accessibility efforts.

Centralize Data Collection and Reporting: To provide a comprehensive overview of accessibility training and awareness, it is recommended to add a dedicated page or section to the UW-wide Accessibility pages. This section, titled “Data on UW Awareness, Skills, and Knowledge Training around Accessibility,” should list training opportunities, outcomes, and the instructors and staff who attended. Additionally, it should include training documents and videos provided, along with the number of times they were accessed. Making these items visible to all visitors will promote transparency and encourage participation in accessibility initiatives.

Collect Image Accessibility Data: Understanding the complexity and quantity of images in courses is vital for addressing accessibility issues. Collecting data on the number of simple and complex images in a course or set of courses can help prioritize remediation efforts. Program managers, directors, instructors, Disability Services Office (DSO), and Disability Resource Services (DRS) should have a clear understanding of the accessibility issues reported by learners.

Collect Data for Short-Term Goals (Remediation of Existing Images): To remediate existing image accessibility issues, identify current problems using data and feedback from users with disabilities. Tools such as Canvas Ally reports, DSO and DRS reports, student surveys, and program manager reports can provide valuable insights. Collecting data using the Canvas Data Portal to monitor students’ interactions with Canvas elements, or using Qualtrics to learn about students’ specific needs, can further inform remediation efforts. Effective analysis tools like MS Power BI and WebAIM’s WAVE tool can quickly identify and address common issues. Prioritizing remediation efforts based on data analytics will ensure that the most impactful areas are addressed first, utilizing tools such as Canvas Analytics and Tableau.

Collect Data for Long-Term Goals (Accessibility-Minded Design): For long-term goals, focusing on the accessible design of images is crucial. Understanding diverse needs through data on disabilities and learning methods is essential. Tools like Canvas Analytics and Qualtrics can provide valuable insights. Ensuring inclusive design by collecting data that informs design decisions and following guidelines from the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework will enhance accessibility. Advanced tools like WebAIM’s WAVE tool can be used to test and refine new image designs for accessibility. Leveraging data analytics to continuously improve design elements based on feedback will ensure that accessibility standards are consistently met. MS Power BI and Tableau tools can be used for this purpose.

Options for Third-Party Involvement

Involving third parties can significantly enhance our accessibility efforts. By leveraging external expertise and resources, we can make our accessibility initiatives comprehensive and effective. The following options outline various ways third-party involvement can be integrated into accessibility strategies.

Collaborate with Publishers: One effective approach is to push publishers to create accessible materials. For example, advocating for publishers like MIT Press to prioritize accessibility in their publications can ensure that educational resources are inclusive and meet the needs of all students. This collaboration can lead to the development of textbooks, research papers, and other academic materials that adhere to accessibility standards, thereby improving the learning experience for students with disabilities.

Utilize Paid Image Remediation Services: For high-impact courses (those with a high number of students and multiple sections offered several times a year), utilizing paid image remediation services can be highly beneficial. These services play a crucial role in reducing the workload for instructors by handling the complex and time-consuming task of ensuring that images meet accessibility standards. By outsourcing this work, instructors can avoid being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of content that needs to be reviewed and remediated. This allows them to focus more on teaching and engaging with students while ensuring that course materials are accessible to all learners. This can be implemented in two ways: funded centrally by the university through a central hub or by individual departments with sufficient resources. Both approaches ensure the necessary support is provided to maintain high accessibility standards without overburdening instructors.

These services generally specialize in fixing accessibility issues in images, text, tables, forms, and links, ensuring that course materials are accessible to all students. Examples of such services include:

  • Accessible.org: Provides comprehensive remediation for images, text, tables, forms, and links, ensuring that all elements of course content meet accessibility standards.
  • Deque Systems: Focuses on fixing accessibility issues directly in the source code, providing a robust solution for ensuring that digital content is accessible from the ground up.
  • DigitalA11y: Offers a range of services, including remediation, quality assurance, and testing for images and other artifacts, ensuring that all visual and textual content is accessible.
  • Equidox: Provides software that identifies and remediates accessibility issues in text, images, and links, offering a streamlined approach to improving course content.
  • Scribely: Conducts audits of images and videos based on the latest accessibility standards, ensuring that multimedia content is accessible to all students.

Options for Approach (Phasing, Prioritization, Implementation)

The following options outline various methods and strategies to implement accessibility improvements, leveraging central support and department-specific initiatives.

Adopt Phased Approaches:

Approach for Central UW: Central UW should provide consulting services to support instructors and staff in making complex images accessible. They should have access to tools, best practices across UW and other universities, and subject matter experts in high-impact fields and units, such as the School of Medicine. To accomplish this goal, we recommend considering the following:

Phasing Strategy: Implementing a phased strategy involves several steps:

  • Initial Assessment: Utilize tools like the Canvas accessibility checker, DSO or DRS data, and student surveys to identify accessibility issues.
  • Remediation: Conduct training, workshops, and manual or automatic remediation efforts.
  • Implementation: Integrate advanced tools, such as Generative AI, Google’s NotebookLM, or Panorama, to further address issues and provide alternative formats. Continuous monitoring using tools like MS Power BI is essential.

Prioritization of Efforts: Prioritize remediation efforts based on impact on learners and effort required to remediate. This approach ensures that the most critical accessibility issues are addressed first, maximizing the benefit for students with visual conditions while efficiently utilizing resources.

  • High Impact, Low Effort Fixes: Basic alt text for images.
  • High Impact, High Effort Fixes: Complex image descriptions and captions.
  • Low Impact, Low Effort Fixes: Decorative images.
  • Low Impact, High Effort Fixes: Other complex issues requiring significant effort.

*Based on the statistics previously mentioned (that 5% of accommodation requests are for visual conditions), the number of students requiring image remediation is relatively small, however, the impact on these students can be significant. Measuring the impact on learners should consider both the number of learners affected and the severity of the impact to ensure a balanced approach to accessibility. Therefore, prioritization should focus on the severity of the impact and the effort required to remediate. *

Implementation Tools and Resources: Plan effective implementation:

  • Tools and Resources: Utilize Canvas accessibility checkers and other external tools.
  • Training and Support: Offer instructors workshops and accessibility office hours.
  • Continuous Improvement: Conduct regular audits and maintain a feedback loop to ensure ongoing enhancement of accessibility practices.

Approach within the Units: A strategic and organized approach adopted by individual departments/units can help enhance accessibility. We concluded that a phased approach within units can be highly effective if staff support is available. To effectively implement this approach within units, we recommend the following phases:

Preparation
  • Gather Information: Collect relevant data and insights.
  • Create Training and Support Mechanisms: Develop resources and support systems.
  • Leverage Central UW Tools: Utilize the existing tools and resources Central UW provides.
  • Share Efforts and Resources Across Units: Promote collaboration and resource sharing.
Implementation
  • Implement Training and Support: Roll out the developed training and support mechanisms.
  • Gather Data on Effectiveness: Collect feedback and data on the effectiveness of the training and support.
Continuous Improvement
  • Revise Training and Support: Make necessary adjustments based on the data collected.
  • Ensure Continuous Improvement: Repeat the process to maintain and enhance the quality of training and support.

Dedicate Accessibility Days: For global accessibility awareness day (GAAD) on May 15th, consider canceling all classes and meetings so that full-time instructors, staff, and TAs can focus on remediating courses. Additionally, starting contracts one day earlier in the fall for a UW-wide audit and remediation day can provide dedicated time for accessibility efforts.

Collaborate with Alliances: Individual departments should form alliances with units involved in accessibility, such as ATS, DOIT, and CREATE. This collaboration can facilitate timely training, sharing of tools, and exchange of experiences. Accessibility compliance should be a continuous collaboration rather than a solitary effort.

Assign Departmental Champions: Assigning champions within departments to advocate immediate and longer-term accessibility needs can play a significant role. These champions can support staff, extend contract time, and allow instructors to focus on accessibility improvements.

Adopt Structured Guidelines: To ensure a consistent and effective approach to image accessibility in digital content, create structured guidelines. The Image Accessibility Workflow attached to this report is an example tool, guiding users through decision-making steps to determine the necessity of images, how to mark decorative images, and how to write appropriate ALT texts and detailed descriptions for simple and complex images. This workflow exemplifies best practices by promoting consistency, compliance with accessibility standards, and enhancing user experience.

Recommended Links