To measure the accessibility of the platform I use in my work based on a more comprehensive set of criteria, I first gathered several checklist and created a complete checklist by different elements, as shown below. My evaluation follows the list.

Accessibility Checklist for Online Learning Materials

General Accessibility:

  1. Text Content:
    • Is the text content of the course written in clear, simple language that is easy to understand for all learners?
    • Are headings and subheadings used appropriately to organize content for easier navigation?
    • Is the font size and contrast sufficient for readability?
    • Are there options to change text size or background colours for better readability?
  2. Multimedia:
    • Are all videos captioned or subtitled? If not, are transcripts provided?
    • Are images described with alt-text to ensure accessibility for visually impaired students?
  3. Navigation and User Interface:
    • Is the course website or LMS platform easy to navigate using only a keyboard?
    • Does the website use descriptive links rather than generic text like “click here” or “learn more”?
    • Are there consistent layouts across course materials to avoid confusion?
  4. Interactive Elements:
    • Are any quizzes, forms, or interactive elements designed to be accessible for screen readers?
    • Do interactive elements, such as buttons and dropdowns, have accessible labels?
    • Are there clear instructions and feedback for any interactive activities?
  5. Compatibility:
    • Are course materials compatible with assistive technologies (e.g., screen readers, text-to-speech software)?
    • Do external links open in a new tab/window, clearly indicating to students that they are leaving the course platform?

Content-Specific Accessibility:

  1. Readings and Course Materials:
    • Are all course readings available in accessible formats (e.g., PDF with readable text, Word documents, or HTML)?
    • Is content provided in multiple formats to accommodate different learning preferences (e.g., visual, auditory, kinesthetic)?
  2. Assignments and Assessments:
    • Are assignment instructions and grading criteria clearly written and accessible to all learners?
    • Do assignments and assessments offer flexibility in how students can submit their work (e.g., written, video, audio)?

Learning Activities:

  1. Engagement and Participation:
    • Are students provided with multiple ways to engage with the course content (e.g., discussions, videos, interactive activities)?
    • Do discussion forums and group activities have clear accessibility guidelines, such as providing text-based options alongside video or audio-based interactions?
  2. Feedback and Support:
    • Is feedback provided in multiple formats (e.g., written comments, video/audio feedback) to meet the needs of different learners?
    • Are students provided with clear instructions on how to ask for help or report issues with accessibility?

Technological Accessibility:

  • Are there options for students to provide feedback about their experience with accessibility in the course?

Mobile Accessibility:

  • Are course materials and activities accessible on mobile devices?
  • Is the course platform (LMS or other) mobile-friendly and responsive?

My Evaluation

Based on the checklist above, I reviewed the LMS used in my work and conducted a brief evaluation.

Text Content

  • Since the text design (such as font, size, colour, and line spacing) is set by default in the learning management system, there are no options to adjust text size, font, or background colours for better readability. This issue was initially raised due to branding concerns, but could also pose a barrier in terms of accessibility.
  • Consistency in terminology is also essential to avoid confusion and improve clarity. (e.g. assessments, assignments, learning artifacts)

Navigation and User Interface

  • The overall interface of the LMS is based on the assumption that users are navigating with a mouse. More consideration is required to enhance accessibility for users relying on a keyboard, such as by adding clickable buttons or providing keyboard shortcuts.
  • In the course content, phrases like “click here” or “see here” are often used. It is highly recommended to use more descriptive language for links to improve clarity and accessibility.

Compatibility

  • Some resources are not compatible with assistive technologies.

Engagement and Participation

  • The discussion format could be diversified, not only to increase engagement but to improve accessibility. Currently, only written post are encouraged to use for discussion. However, other formats, such as voice recording, videos, or images, could be used to accommodate different learning preferences.

Feedback and Support

  • Although a comprehensive document is available to use for providing feedback on student learning progress, it solely relies on written feedback. Multiple formats such as video/audio feedback or even 1:1 synchronous feedback session could be considered.

Mobile Accessibility

  • The side navigation panel is sometimes hidden when accessing the LMS on mobile devices, interrupting the user experience. All menus, buttons, and interface should be fully accessible across all platforms, including desktops, tablets, and mobile phones.