Don’t Panic. Engage! Meeting New Title II Requirements for Accessibility of Digital Instructional Materials
There has been little notice in the K-12 world about the rule announced in April 2024. The Department of Justice (DoJ) published a rule for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Title II of the ADA applies to all state and local government agencies. That covers a lot of areas. Public K-12 education is covered as are public higher education institutions, including community colleges. Many higher education institutions have had someone responsible for digital accessibility for a while. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case for K=12.
Our concern is that K-12 institutions often lack someone dedicated to addressing ADA instructional issues. A number of K-12 institutions in the Coastal Bend area of Texas have corporations hosting their websites. Examining the websites of these companies, they claim to be making their school websites compliant with the Title II rule, which sets WCAG 2.1 AA as the standard. One problem I’m seeing is that the websites are not fully compliant, based on checking them with a few online web accessibility tools.
Another concern shared by both K-12 and higher education is that third-party web products and mobile apps may not be compliant, and some vendors have been unwilling to agree to contracts that require them to provide devices that meet the legal standard for accessibility.
On the positive side, most all the vendors present at the latest USDLA national conference in St Louis, MO claimed they knew about the WCAG 2.1 AA rule and were in the process of making sure their product meet the rule. But we are hearing from folks in both K-12 and higher ed institutions that vendors are saying, since the rule doesn’t apply to them, they are not concerned about it. That’s certain vendors saying they don’t care about students with disabilities.
Because the rule doesn’t apply to 3rd party suppliers, the responsibility for institutional compliance falls completely on the institution.
How does an academic institution protect itself?
- First, there needs to be someone in the institution who understands the scope of the digital accessibility rule. Ideally, there’s a team.
- Second, there is a need to train all the institution’s staff in digital accessibility, including an understanding of the WCAG 2.1 AA standard.
- Then there’s a need to review all digital products in use to ensure compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA. That should involve more than just asking the vendor if their product(s) comply with WCAG 2.1 AA. The review needs to be conducted by the institution. There are products that can help with a review, and there are other companies that will conduct digital accessibility reviews.
How to Review Third-Party Products for Digital Accessibility
Ensuring third-party products meet the legal standard is the institution’s responsibility. If someone encounters a digital accessibility issue with a their-party product, it’s the educational institution that gets sued, not the vendor. That puts a lot of pressure on the educational institution.
After conducting a digital accessibility review of the product and determining that the product meets WCAG 2.1 AA, language to that point should be included in the contract. If the product does not pass the accessibility review, does the vendor claim they are working on the product and will have it updated to comply with the standards sometime in the life of the contract?
Review of Title II and key ideas.
- WCAG 2.1 A/AA
- All programs and mobile apps
- Includes non-instructional items
- Public institutions *those receiving public monies
Why you should not hope for exceptions.
Most exceptions are focused on archived content
Exceptions protect media creators as they move out from the university community
What enforcement might look like.
Private enforcement
Summary, quick enforcement
Next three steps for moving forward with institutional efforts to ensure compliance with Title II requirements.
- Ensure that content creators can start to make materials accessible now!
- Review contracts with vendors and demand accessible materials.
- Determine the scope of existing materials that need to be remediated.
- What materials do individuals with disabilities most need? (e.g., emergency services)
- Which materials are required for everyone to use? (e.g., general ed courses)
- Which materials are needed imminently but not slated for refreshing? (e.g., course registration programs, application programs)
- Engage in large-scale planning for professional learning and policy making
- Organizing faculty and administrators
- Reviewing documents from other universities or enlisting consultants
- Determining asks for resources (e.g., new hires and other resources)
General planning
- Familiarize yourself with expectations
- Learn about WCAG
- Gather collaborators
- Make your plan
- Do your plan
There has been little notice in the K-12 world about the rule announced in April 2024. The Department of Justice (DoJ) published a rule for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Title II of the ADA applies to all state and local government agencies. That covers a lot of areas. Public K-12 education is covered as are public higher education institutions, including community colleges. Many higher education institutions have had someone responsible for digital accessibility for a while. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case for K=12.
Our concern is that K-12 institutions often lack someone dedicated to addressing ADA instructional issues. A number of K-12 institutions in the Coastal Bend area of Texas have corporations hosting their websites. Examining the websites of these companies, they claim to be making their school websites compliant with the Title II rule, which sets WCAG 2.1 AA as the standard. One problem I’m seeing is that the websites are not fully compliant, based on checking them with a few online web accessibility tools.
Another concern shared by both K-12 and higher education is that third-party web products and mobile apps may not be compliant, and some vendors have been unwilling to agree to contracts that require them to provide devices that meet the legal standard for accessibility.
On the positive side, most all the vendors present at the latest USDLA national conference in St Louis, MO claimed they knew about the WCAG 2.1 AA rule and were in the process of making sure their product meet the rule. But we are hearing from folks in both K-12 and higher ed institutions that vendors are saying, since the rule doesn’t apply to them, they are not concerned about it. That’s certain vendors saying they don’t care about students with disabilities.
Because the rule doesn’t apply to 3rd party suppliers, the responsibility for institutional compliance falls completely on the institution.
How does an academic institution protect itself?
- First, there needs to be someone in the institution who understands the scope of the digital accessibility rule. Ideally, there’s a team.
- Second, there is a need to train all the institution’s staff in digital accessibility, including an understanding of the WCAG 2.1 AA standard.
- Then there’s a need to review all digital products in use to ensure compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA. That should involve more than just asking the vendor if their product(s) comply with WCAG 2.1 AA. The review needs to be conducted by the institution. There are products that can help with a review, and there are other companies that will conduct digital accessibility reviews.
How to Review Third-Party Products for Digital Accessibility
Ensuring third-party products meet the legal standard is the institution’s responsibility. If someone encounters a digital accessibility issue with a their-party product, it’s the educational institution that gets sued, not the vendor. That puts a lot of pressure on the educational institution.
After conducting a digital accessibility review of the product and determining that the product meets WCAG 2.1 AA, language to that point should be included in the contract. If the product does not pass the accessibility review, does the vendor claim they are working on the product and will have it updated to comply with the standards sometime in the life of the contract?
Review of Title II and key ideas.
- WCAG 2.1 A/AA
- All programs and mobile apps
- Includes non-instructional items
- Public institutions *those receiving public monies
Why you should not hope for exceptions.
Most exceptions are focused on archived content
Exceptions protect media creators as they move out from the university community
What enforcement might look like.
Private enforcement
Summary, quick enforcement
Next three steps for moving forward with institutional efforts to ensure compliance with Title II requirements.
- Ensure that content creators can start to make materials accessible now!
- Review contracts with vendors and demand accessible materials.
- Determine the scope of existing materials that need to be remediated.
- What materials do individuals with disabilities most need? (e.g., emergency services)
- Which materials are required for everyone to use? (e.g., general ed courses)
- Which materials are needed imminently but not slated for refreshing? (e.g., course registration programs, application programs)
- Engage in large-scale planning for professional learning and policy making
- Organizing faculty and administrators
- Reviewing documents from other universities or enlisting consultants
- Determining asks for resources (e.g., new hires and other resources)
General planning
- Familiarize yourself with expectations
- Learn about WCAG
- Gather collaborators
- Make your plan
- Do your plan
