Comparative Analysis of Online Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools

In many countries, it is mandatory that Web information systems are accessible so that people with disabilities can use them. The developers of web information systems must ensure that their systems are accessible, and for this it can help the use of automatic evaluation tools. This paper presents the results of a comparative analysis of the performance of online accessibility evaluation tools. This analysis can be useful for developers of information systems, as it provides information that can be taken into account when deciding the tool or tools of this type that they will use in their projects. The paper also includes a proposal for classification of different types of tools that evaluate software accessibility, considering two dimensions: its usage and functionality

Accessibility of websites of the European national tourism boards

Purpose: The aim is to find out the current state of accessibility of the websites of European national tourism boards. Furthermore, the identification of the most common errors in terms of accessibility as well as recommendations leading to their correction is aimed for. Design/methodology/approach: The study is based on methods of testing the availability of web systems. The testing included automated tools, namely AChecker and Accessibility Evaluation Tool, as well as the WCAG 2.1 checklist developed by WebAIM initiative. Findings: The research has shown a relatively high accessibility of those websites. Nevertheless, some accessibility violations have been identified that can significantly complicate the accessibility of those websites for users using various assistive devices or other alternative hardware or software means. The most commonly identified errors include: failure to use alternative text for content-relevant images, the absence of text or audio transcripts for videos shared via Youtube, missing descriptions for text form elements and missing label for search form. Practical implications: The results of the research can be used in the evaluation of web presentations at the level of tourism boards and destination management. Originality/Value: The main output of this article is the application of web testing methodology on a comprehensive set of national tourist boards.peer-reviewe

Proceso metodológico para el análisis comparativo de validadores automáticos de accesibilidad Web

Web accessibility is that feature that allows anyone, regardless of their conditions, to access the contents of websites. The use of automatic validators allows a first analysis to be made about the level of accessibility of a website. However, the selection of these tools tends not to be trivial due to the technical differences presented by each validator. The objective of this work was to carry out a comparative analysis between automatic accessibility validators, seeking to establish selection criteria when choosing a validator to carry out an accessibility evaluation. A methodology was proposed based on three stages that allowed the selection of 14 validators that were analyzed under different criteria. In addition, it allowed to conclude that none of the analyzed validators fulfills all the characteristics, reason why it would not be enough to select only one to carry out an accessibility evaluation process. Therefore, this methodological process constitutes a very useful tool for the selection of accessibility validators.La accesibilidad web es aquella característica que permite que cualquier persona sin importar sus condiciones pueda acceder a los contenidos de los sitios web. El uso de validadores automáticos permite realizar un primer análisis acerca del nivel de accesibilidad de un sitio web. Sin embargo, la selección de estas herramientas tiende a no ser trivial, debido a las diferencias técnicas que presenta cada validador. El objetivo de este trabajo fue realizar un análisis comparativo entre validadores automáticos de accesibilidad, buscando establecer criterios de selección a la hora de elegir un validador para realizar una evaluación de accesibilidad. Se propuso una metodología basada en tres etapas que permitieron seleccionar 14 validadores que fueron analizados bajo diferentes criterios. Además, permitió concluir que ninguno de los validadores analizados cumple con todas las características, por lo que no sería suficiente seleccionar solo uno para realizar un proceso de evaluación de accesibilidad. Por lo tanto,  este proceso metodológico se constituye como una herramienta de gran utilidad para la selección de validadores de accesibilidad

Auditing the accessibility of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

The outcome from the research being reported in this paper is the design of an accessibility audit to evaluate Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) for accessibility and to arrive at solutions and adaptations that can meet user needs. This accessibility audit includes expert-based heuristic evaluations and user-based evaluations of the MOOC platforms and individual courses

An investigation into the perspectives of providers and learners on MOOC accessibility

An effective open eLearning environment should consider the target learner’s abilities, learning goals, where learning takes place, and which specific device(s) the learner uses. MOOC platforms struggle to take these factors into account and typically are not accessible, inhibiting access to environments that are intended to be open to all. A series of research initiatives are described that are intended to benefit MOOC providers in achieving greater accessibility and disabled learners to improve their lifelong learning and re-skilling. In this paper, we first outline the rationale, the research questions, and the methodology. The research approach includes interviews, online surveys and a MOOC accessibility audit; we also include factors such the risk management of the research programme and ethical considerations when conducting research with vulnerable learners. Preliminary results are presented from interviews with providers and experts and from analysis of surveys of learners. Finally, we outline the future research opportunities. This paper is framed within the context of the Doctoral Consortium organised at the TEEM'17 conference

Can user recommendations be useful for improving MOOCs accessibility? A project for inclusive design and profitable feedback

At present there are no applications which include accessibility revisions for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), neither in the context of MOOCs provider institutions nor from the point of view of any Open Educational Resource (OER) initiative. In this paper an approximation to this problem is presented, in the form of a specific web portal which will offer the possibility for any user to freely judge the accessibility of a certain course and advice about the missing means of meeting user needs or required adaptations. This kind of user feedback can be of great value for the future development of MOOC platforms, courses and the educational resources. The development of this web tool will gather valuable information directly from the users themselves to improve the educational quality and accessibility of these learning environments

Measuring and comparing the reliability of the structured walkthrough evaluation method with novices and experts

Effective evaluation of websites for accessibility remains problematic. Automated evaluation tools still require a significant manual element. There is also a significant expertise and evaluator effect. The Structured Walkthrough method is the translation of a manual, expert accessibility evaluation process adapted for use by novices. The method is embedded in the Accessibility Evaluation Assistant (AEA), a web accessibility knowledge management tool. Previous trials examined the pedagogical potential of the tool when incorporated into an undergraduate computing curriculum. The results of the evaluations carried out by novices yielded promising, consistent levels of validity and reliability. This paper presents the results of an empirical study that compares the reliability of accessibility evaluations produced by two groups (novices and experts). The main results of this study indicate that overall reliability of expert evaluations was 76% compared to 65% for evaluations produced by novices. The potential of the Structured Walkthrough method as a useful and viable tool for expert evaluators is also examined. Copyright 2014 ACM

A survey of UK university web management: staffing, systems and issues

Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to summarize the findings of a survey of UK universities about how their web site is managed and resourced, which technologies are in use and what are seen as the main issues and priorities. Methodology/approach: The paper is based on a web based questionnaire distributed in summer 2006, and which received 104 usable responses from 87 insitutions. Findings: The survey showed that some web teams were based in IT and some in external relations, yet in both cases the site typically served internal and external audiences. The role of web manager is partly management of resources, time and people, partly about marketing and liaison and partly also concerned with more technical aspects including interface design and HTML. But it is a diverse role with a wide spread of responsibilities. On the whole web teams were relatively small. Three quarters of responding institutions had a CMS, but specific systems in use were diverse. 60% had a portal. There was evidence of increasing use of blogs and wikis. The key driver for the web site is student recruitment, with instituitional reputation and information to stakeholders also being important. The biggest perceived weaknesses were maintaining consistency with devolved content creation and currency of content; lack of resourcing a key threat while comprehensiveness was a key strength. Current and wished for projects pointed again to the diversity of the sector. Research implications/limitations: The lack of comparative data and difficulties of interpreting responses to closed questions where respondents could have quite different status (partly reflecting divergent patterns of governance of the web across the sector) create issues with the reliability of the research. Practical implications: Data about resourcing of web management, technology in use etc at comparable institutions is invaluable for practitioners in their efforts to gain resource in their own context. Originality/value of paper: The paper adds more systematic, current data to our limited knowledge about how university web sites are managed