Accessibility is a key dimension of design for both physical and digital environments. Legislation relevant to accessibility has historically focused on standards and guidelines applicable to physical spaces. In recent years, however, there has been an increase in legislation pertinent to ensuring the accessibility of digital content. Namely, in 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a final rule updating regulations for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This final rule has significant implications for many institutions of higher education and involves the application of complex, technical guidelines to digital content.
This piece is the first in a series focused on Title II final rule compliance considerations for online learning programs. While online learning programs constitute one of many categories of digital content to which the Title II final rule applies, online courses are often robust and multifaceted, necessitating extensive review and remediation efforts. The purpose of this piece is to provide a foundational overview of the final rule and general approaches to attaining compliance.
What Is the Title II Final Rule?
Title II of the ADA requires state and local governments—including public schools, community colleges, and public universities—to ensure their services, programs, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities. In 2024, the DOJ issued a final rule updating regulations for Title II of the ADA. A rule is a set of requirements issued by a federal agency for laws passed by Congress. The final rule issued by the DOJ for Title II set a specific technical standard that state and local governments must follow to meet their existing obligations under Title II of the ADA for web and mobile app accessibility. That technical standard is conformance with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Version 2.1, Level A and AA success criteria for all web content and mobile apps.
The Title II final rule also includes compliance deadlines, differentiated by the size of the population state and local governments serve, as well as a list of exceptions for specific types of content. For complete information about the compliance deadlines and exceptions, review the official ADA Title II final rule fact sheet.
Attaining Compliance
Given the provisions of the Title II final rule, what do institutions subject to Title II need to do to attain compliance in their online learning programs? The following sections provide high-level recommendations for compliance initiatives; subsequent pieces in this series will explore specific WCAG 2.1 success criteria in greater detail.
Support understanding of the WCAG 2.1 Level A/AA success criteria across the institution.
As described previously, WCAG 2.1 Level A/AA success criteria comprise the technical standard set forth in the Title II final rule. Accordingly, it is essential for individuals involved in developing and delivering digital content to understand what the WCAG 2.1 Level A/AA success criteria are, how to navigate the associated WCAG documentation, and how the criteria apply to the myriad forms of digital content an online course may include.
Existing accessibility initiatives within your institution may provide a firm foundation for fostering a robust understanding of WCAG 2.1 Level A/AA success criteria, given the authoritative role of WCAG in the realm of digital accessibility. However, it is essential to recognize that accessibility best practices and guidelines are not synonymous with WCAG. There are other authoritative sources in digital accessibility, and some widely used accessibility practices do not have corresponding Level A or AA success criteria. Additionally, you may find that some practices that aren’t familiar or widely used within your institution do have corresponding success criteria. Accordingly, knowledge of specific success criteria is an essential element of attaining compliance.
Regarding WCAG documentation, the following considerations can support successful navigation and use:
- Each success criterion has corresponding documentation that provides a detailed description, key considerations, and associated techniques. Some success criteria may appear to be simple and straightforward based on their titles, but their corresponding documentation can reveal important nuance. For example, at a glance, one might assume Success Criterion 1.4.2 Audio Control establishes broad requirements for audio functionality in multimedia. However, this success criterion actually targets audio that automatically plays on webpages for more than 3 seconds. In many other cases, one might find the scope of a given success criterion is more expansive than the title might suggest.
- WCAG was designed for web content broadly. While this consideration may seem obvious, it is valuable to keep this in mind when engaging with WCAG documentation for several reasons. First, examples provided within the documentation may not always map well to specific types of content commonly featured in online courses. Second, many inclusions within WCAG documentation pertain to website coding practices. While such documentation is incredibly valuable for website developers, in the realm of online courses, individuals are often adding content to an existing website (e.g., populating a course space in a learning management system with materials) rather than coding a course website from scratch. Accordingly, scope considerations (e.g., whether compliance with a given success criterion hinges on the learning management system, the materials added to the learning management system, or both) are key to effective use of and navigation through WCAG documentation. With respect to learning management systems, Voluntary Product Accessibility Templates (VPATs) play a key role, as they provide detailed information about conformance with accessibility standards.
Inventory existing online courses and identify future course needs.
Online learning programs often include an enormous amount of digital content. Accordingly, taking stock of content is a key element of compliance efforts. Thinking about online courses and course content specifically, you’ll likely want to begin by determining the status of courses in your catalog. For example, you might have courses that are running in the current term and will run again in the future, courses that run infrequently and will be in need of revisions before their next launch, and courses that have been retired and will not run again, among many other possibilities. Categorizing courses in such a way will help ensure review and remediation efforts can be scheduled and prioritized appropriately.
Beyond course status, it can also be incredibly valuable to inventory the different types of materials within online courses. For example, PDFs, publisher tools, and multimedia, including videos, images, and podcasts, commonly feature in online courses and can present complex accessibility issues. An inventory of course materials can not only help you develop a more precise estimate of the scope of review and remediation efforts but can also ensure you execute review and remediation initiatives more strategically.
Clarify roles and responsibilities for review and remediation efforts.
Given the volume of digital content included in online learning programs, review and remediation efforts often require the involvement of many individuals across departments. Accordingly, strategic management of roles and responsibilities is often necessary to attain compliance goals. For online courses, associated faculty will likely take primary responsibility for course updates. However, given the scope and complexity of WCAG Level A/AA success criteria and the wide range of materials that might be incorporated into courses, faculty will likely benefit from significant support. Clarifying who faculty should go to for specific kinds of questions and support needs (e.g., adding captions to lecture videos, updating images) can reduce frustration and expedite remediation efforts.
A related element to consider is how associated resources and tools will be integrated into review and remediation efforts. Having a centralized hub for reference materials like answers to frequently asked questions, contact information for individuals supporting specific aspects of remediation efforts, and any documentation to guide course reviews and updates can help streamline remediation efforts and prevent key team members from feeling overwhelmed.
Conclusion
While accessibility has long been recognized as an essential element of learning experiences, recent legislation has sharpened the focus on adherence to accessibility guidelines in online course development and delivery. In order to comply with legislation like the ADA Title II final rule, many institutions will need to establish large-scale review and remediation efforts. The high-level recommendations included in this piece can help augment such efforts. Subsequent pieces in this series will explore WCAG 2.1 Level A/AA success criteria and associated review and remediation considerations on a more granular level.