{"id":31310,"date":"2025-10-09T08:01:18","date_gmt":"2025-10-09T08:01:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/oes.com\/us\/?p=31310"},"modified":"2025-10-16T00:53:51","modified_gmt":"2025-10-16T00:53:51","slug":"accessibility-compliance-ada-title-ii-higher-ed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/oes.com\/us\/blog\/accessibility-compliance-ada-title-ii-higher-ed\/","title":{"rendered":"Countdown to Compliance: What Higher Ed Must Know About ADA Title II"},"content":{"rendered":"

In April 2024, the Department of Justice updated <\/span>ADA Title II, requiring all public colleges and universities to ensure that websites, mobile apps, digital course content, and third-party tools conform to <\/span>WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility standards. <\/span><\/p>\n

With compliance deadlines approaching in <\/span>April 2026 for large institutions and April 2027 for smaller ones, the stakes are high. Non-compliance risks lawsuits, federal investigations, reputational damage, and even loss of funding.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But as our recent webinar with experts <\/span>Dr. Tawnya Means<\/a> (Inspire Higher Ed), Dr. Becca Mason<\/a> (UC Berkeley), Dr. Rae Mancilla<\/a> (University of Pittsburgh), and Liesel Slingers<\/a> (Online Education Services) emphasized, accessibility isn\u2019t just about avoiding penalties. It\u2019s about equity, inclusion, and preparing institutions for a sustainable digital future.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Here are five key themes from the discussion<\/a>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Accessibility Improves Learning for the Most Overlooked in Learning Spaces<\/h2>\n

While often framed as a legal requirement, accessibility ultimately benefits everyone. Captions support not only deaf students but also learners in noisy environments or those studying in a second language. Clear headings improve navigation for screen reader users and comprehension for all.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Panelists stressed that accessibility should be seen as a <\/span>quality enhancer.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf we think about accessibility and why it matters beyond compliance, there’s a really crucial reframe here, and that is: while these requirements are often approached as legal obligations, their true value actually extends far beyond just avoiding litigation. The real opportunity here lies in moving beyond reactive fixes to proactivity and inclusion. So, forward-thinking institutions are embedding accessibility as a core component of their institutional mission and reputation. They’re recognizing that inclusive design isn’t just about meeting these Department of Justice mandates, but about delivering on higher education’s fundamental promise of equitable access across learning. When institutions can prioritize digital accessibility, they create learning environments that benefit all students<\/em>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

– Tawnya Means<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

2. Accessibility Requires Institutional Strategy<\/span><\/b><\/h2>\n

Meeting ADA Title II standards cannot be achieved through one-off fixes or by tasking a single staff member with responsibility. Sustainable progress requires a governance model that spans the entire institution. This often means establishing cross-functional committees or task forces that bring together academic units, IT, communications, and instructional design to create shared accountability.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Strategic frameworks also ensure that accessibility work does not stall at the level of individual enthusiasm. Institutions that rely on \u201clone heroes\u201d risk burnout and inconsistency. By contrast, those that embed accessibility into policy, planning, and everyday workflows are able to track progress, set benchmarks, and create training and resources that scale. Effective strategies also include appointing dedicated accessibility coordinators, aligning procurement processes with compliance requirements, and developing phased remediation plans that prioritize the most impactful content first.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe did start with a one large committee, a digital accessibility committee, a number of years ago, and that committee was charged with creating benchmarks and an electronic information technology plan that could be rolled out across the institution.<\/em>\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

– Rae Mancilla<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe learned early on that relying on a single accessibility champion quickly leads to burnout. Real progress came when we built cross-disciplinary task forces and shared responsibility across the institution.<\/em>\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

– Liesel Slingers<\/span><\/p>\n

3. Faculty Support Is Essential<\/span><\/b><\/h2>\n

Expecting faculty to shoulder the full weight of digital accessibility is neither fair nor sustainable. Instructors are subject matter and pedagogy experts, not specialists in remediation, coding, or standards compliance. Yet for years, higher education has placed responsibility at the individual course level, leaving faculty overwhelmed by the prospect of retrofitting thousands of documents or captioning hours of legacy video content.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

True progress requires institutions to reframe accessibility as an organizational obligation. That means providing the structures, staff, and tools to make accessible design routine rather than exceptional. Faculty should be equipped with literacy in high-impact practices like applying proper heading structures, writing meaningful alt text, or running built-in accessibility checkers. But the heavy lifting must be shared. Complex tasks such as remediating PDFs, providing audio descriptions, or auditing multimedia require institutional support.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Sustainable strategies include:<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n