Ensuring Access: ADA Compliance in Higher Education (2026)

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) represents one of the most significant civil rights laws in U.S. history, and its application in higher education has fundamentally transformed how colleges and universities serve students with disabilities. ADA compliance in higher education is not merely a legal obligation—it is a moral imperative that shapes the entire educational experience for millions of students. When institutions properly implement ADA requirements, they create learning environments where students with disabilities have genuine equal access to programs, services, facilities, and all campus activities. This comprehensive guide explores what ADA compliance means in practice, how institutions implement these requirements, the transition challenges students face, and the tools and strategies that make inclusive education a reality.

The Legal Foundation: Understanding ADA Requirements in Higher Education

The Americans with Disabilities Act, signed into law in 1990, represents landmark civil rights legislation that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life, including education. For higher education institutions, the ADA (along with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which predates it) creates specific legal obligations that extend far beyond simply installing wheelchair ramps. Title II of the ADA applies to public colleges and universities, while Title III applies to private institutions, though both face substantially similar requirements.

The core principle underlying ADA compliance is straightforward: students with disabilities must have equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from educational programs. This means more than just physical access to buildings. It encompasses academic programs, student services, housing, dining facilities, recreational activities, employment opportunities, and increasingly, digital platforms and online learning environments. An institution cannot exclude a qualified student with a disability from any program or activity simply because of that disability. The ADA defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, and the 2008 ADA Amendments Act significantly broadened this definition to encompass many more conditions.

Under the ADA, colleges and universities must provide reasonable accommodations to students with disabilities unless doing so creates an undue hardship on the institution or fundamentally alters the nature of the program. This distinction is crucial: accommodations must be individually tailored to remove barriers, but institutions need not fundamentally change what they teach or how they teach it. Additionally, institutions must conduct accessibility audits of their physical facilities and remove architectural barriers where readily achievable. They must ensure effective communication with students, staff, and visitors who are deaf or hard of hearing through interpreters or other auxiliary aids. They must maintain policies and procedures that do not discriminate against people with disabilities and must make reasonable modifications to those policies when necessary.

Navigating Accommodations: From Documentation to Implementation

The process of obtaining academic accommodations in college differs significantly from the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) system that students may have experienced in high school. Understanding this system is essential for students with disabilities to access the support they need. Most colleges require students to register with their disability services office and provide current, comprehensive documentation of their disability before accommodations can be approved and implemented.

Documentation requirements vary by institution but typically require an evaluation from a qualified professional, such as a licensed psychologist, physician, or other appropriate medical professional. For students with learning disabilities, schools often request psychoeducational evaluations that include specific testing of cognitive abilities, achievement levels, and information processing speeds. The cost of obtaining this evaluation can range from $800 to $3,000, and students are often responsible for paying these fees themselves. Some students arrive at college with documentation from high school, but many colleges require updated evaluations, as they argue that disabilities can change over time and that high school documentation may not address college-level demands. The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 attempted to reduce excessive documentation requirements by broadening the definition of disability and limiting how universities can interpret these definitions, but inconsistency remains across institutions.

Once a student registers with disability services and provides appropriate documentation, the office typically conducts an intake meeting to discuss the student’s disability, the barriers they encounter, and what accommodations might help level the playing field. Common academic accommodations include extended test time (typically 1.5 to 2 times standard time), reduced-distraction testing environments, note-taking assistance, priority registration for classes, accessible course materials in alternative formats, and permission to use assistive technology. The disability services office then contacts instructors to inform them that the student is entitled to accommodations, though federal law typically requires that accommodations remain confidential, with the student responsible for disclosing their disability to instructors and requesting specific accommodations.

Common Accommodation	Typical Implementation	Cost to Institution	Effectiveness
Extended Test Time	Testing center administers exam with 1.5-2x time	Staff time only	High for processing difficulties
Note-Taking Assistance	Peer notes provided or CART services used	Low to moderate	High for attention and processing issues
Sign Language Interpreter	Professional interpreter attends classes	$50-75 per hour	Essential for deaf students
Accessible Course Materials	PDFs, EPUB, or Braille formats provided	Varies ($100-500 per course)	Critical for visual impairments
Preferential Seating	Student sits in accessible location	None	Moderate for various disabilities

One challenge that frequently arises involves faculty resistance or misunderstanding about accommodations. Some faculty members worry that providing accommodations gives students with disabilities an unfair advantage, misunderstanding that accommodations aim to level the playing field by removing barriers, not by lowering standards. A student receiving extended test time is not being given easier content—they are simply getting more time to demonstrate their knowledge when processing speed is affected by their disability. Educating faculty about this distinction is a critical role of disability services offices, and many institutions provide regular faculty development workshops on accommodations and inclusive teaching practices.

The High School to College Transition: Special Considerations for Students with Disabilities

The transition from high school to college represents one of the most significant shifts in the educational journey for any student, but for students with disabilities, this transition involves additional complexities that can significantly impact academic success. The legal framework itself changes fundamentally. In high school, students with disabilities are protected under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which requires schools to provide a free appropriate public education and to develop an Individualized Education Plan tailored to each student’s needs. Parents typically play a significant role in advocating for their child and ensuring services are provided.

Upon entering college, students leave this system entirely. The ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act apply instead, but these laws operate very differently from IDEA. Colleges are not required to identify students with disabilities or to provide services proactively. Instead, students must self-identify, request accommodations, and provide documentation. The responsibility for advocacy shifts entirely from parents and school personnel to the student themselves. This fundamental shift catches many students off guard. A student who received substantial support in high school may suddenly find themselves navigating a more independent system for which they are unprepared.

Documentation requirements present another significant hurdle. High school documentation, while extensive, often does not meet college standards. Colleges typically require evaluations completed by qualified professionals, and students frequently must obtain new evaluations specifically designed for college-level assessment. This process is expensive, time-consuming, and not covered by most health insurance plans. Some community colleges and universities have begun addressing this barrier by establishing relationships with local evaluation providers or by helping students understand what documentation they already have and whether it meets college standards. However, this remains an inconsistent practice across the higher education landscape.

Self-advocacy skills emerge as perhaps the most critical factor in successful transition. Students need to understand their rights and responsibilities, know how to describe their disabilities and needed accommodations, be able to initiate contact with disability services, follow up on requests, and communicate effectively with instructors about accommodations. Many high school students, particularly those who had strong parental or school advocacy, arrive at college without having developed these essential skills. They may not understand what their disability means in practical terms, what accommodations actually help them, or how to communicate these needs to others. Programs that explicitly teach self-advocacy skills—including helping students understand their rights and responsibilities, practice describing their disabilities, and develop communication strategies—have been shown to significantly improve student outcomes.

Transition Programs and Support Strategies

Recognizing these challenges, many colleges and universities have developed transition programs specifically designed to support students with disabilities during their first year. The most effective programs combine several key elements. First, they provide structured orientation to the college’s disability services office, explaining how to register, what documentation is needed, and what accommodations are typically available. Second, they include peer mentoring programs pairing incoming students with current students who have disabilities and have successfully navigated college. These peer mentors can provide practical advice, emotional support, and a sense of community. Third, effective transition programs include academic coaching or success seminars specifically designed for students with disabilities, where they learn study skills, time management, organizational strategies, and how to work effectively with their accommodations.

Some institutions have developed bridge programs that begin before the student arrives on campus. University of Massachusetts Boston, for example, offers a summer program for students with disabilities that includes campus orientation, disability services registration, academic skill building, and social activities. Similarly, many community colleges offer transition programs that recognize that their students may have more significant support needs. These programs typically cost institutions $2,000 to $5,000 per student annually, but research suggests they generate positive returns through improved retention and graduation rates.

Family engagement remains important during the transition, even as students develop greater independence. Parents can support their students by helping them understand their disability and its impact, assisting with documentation gathering, and encouraging independence while remaining available for consultation. Some disability services offices explicitly invite parents to transition meetings and include them in discussions about accommodations and support strategies, recognizing that many parents have valuable insights into what has worked for their child in the past.

Physical Accessibility: Creating Inclusive Campus Environments

While digital accessibility has become increasingly prominent in discussions of ADA compliance, the physical accessibility of campus remains foundational. Students cannot benefit from any programs, services, or accommodations if they cannot access the buildings where classes are held, the libraries where resources are located, or the facilities where services are provided. The ADA requires that all areas of a campus be accessible, including academic buildings, residence halls, dining facilities, recreational centers, parking areas, and any other facilities open to students.

For academic buildings specifically, this means that classrooms must be accessible to students using wheelchairs or other mobility devices. Doorways must be at least 32 inches wide to accommodate wheelchairs, hallways must be wide enough for maneuvering, elevators or ramps must provide access to all floors, and accessible restrooms must be located conveniently throughout the building. Lecture halls must include accessible seating areas with level surfaces that allow wheelchairs to be positioned without tipping. Many institutions have implemented solutions such as removable seats or sections with slightly lowered floors to create accessible seating spaces without significantly altering the aesthetic of the building.

Parking accessibility requires designated accessible parking spaces located as close as possible to building entrances, with appropriate accessible routes from parking to buildings. Many campuses have found that the number of accessible parking spaces requested often exceeds the minimum ADA requirement of one space per 25 total spaces, suggesting that accessibility benefits a broader population than just students with permanent mobility disabilities. This observation aligns with the principle of universal design: features created for people with disabilities often benefit everyone. Curb cuts originally designed for wheelchair users are used by parents with strollers, travelers with luggage, and people with temporary injuries.

Residence halls present particular challenges for accessibility. Students with disabilities have the right to live on campus and to have accessible housing options available. This means ensuring that residence halls are equipped with accessible rooms that meet ADA specifications, including accessible bathrooms with grab bars and roll-in showers, accessible kitchenettes if provided, accessible routes throughout the facility, and appropriate door hardware that does not require significant grip strength to operate. Some campuses have retrofitted existing residence halls by modifying bathrooms and installing lever-handle doors and other accessible features. Others have designed new residence halls with universal design principles from the beginning, making all units accessible rather than designating only a few rooms as accessible. This approach eliminates stigmatization and ensures better utilization of accessible housing resources.

Outdoor Campus Accessibility

Beyond buildings, campuses must ensure accessible routes throughout the outdoor environment. Pathways must be smooth and even enough for wheelchairs and canes, with appropriate slopes and curb ramps at transitions. Signage must identify accessible routes, and emergency systems must be accessible to people with various disabilities. Many campuses have conducted accessibility audits of outdoor areas and developed remediation plans to address identified barriers. Costs for accessibility improvements vary widely depending on the extent of modifications needed, but institutions typically budget significant resources for ongoing accessibility improvements. Some institutions have dedicated accessibility coordinators or accessibility offices with responsibility for conducting regular audits and coordinating remediation efforts.

Digital Accessibility: Meeting WCAG Standards and Web Content Guidelines

In the rapidly evolving landscape of higher education technology, digital accessibility has become equally important as physical accessibility. Students access course materials online, submit assignments through learning management systems, participate in online discussions, and increasingly take entire courses in virtual formats. The ADA and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act both apply to digital content and platforms. Most colleges and universities have adopted the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA as their accessibility standard, which represents internationally recognized best practices for web accessibility.

WCAG 2.1 Level AA is organized around four principles, often remembered by the acronym POUR: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. Content must be perceivable, meaning people can see, hear, or perceive it in some other way. This requires providing text alternatives for images, captions for videos, and sufficient color contrast so text is readable for people with low vision. Content must be operable, meaning people can navigate and use it. This requires ensuring that all functionality is available from a keyboard for people who cannot use a mouse, that pages do not contain elements that flash more than three times per second (which can trigger seizures), and that pages include clear navigation and purpose. Content must be understandable, meaning language is clear and pages operate in predictable ways. Content must be robust, meaning it is compatible with current and future assistive technologies.

Implementing WCAG 2.1 Level AA compliance requires a comprehensive approach across multiple systems. Learning management systems like Canvas, Blackboard, and Brightspace vary in their out-of-the-box accessibility, but most major platforms have made significant improvements. However, accessibility depends heavily on how courses are designed within these systems. Course designers must ensure that documents uploaded to the LMS are tagged properly (if using PDFs), that videos include captions, that images include descriptive alternative text, that quizzes are keyboard navigable, and that all interactive content is accessible to assistive technologies like screen readers.

Many institutions have implemented accessibility policies requiring that all course materials be reviewed before being posted to ensure compliance. Some use automated accessibility checkers that scan documents and web pages for common accessibility errors, though these tools have limitations and cannot catch all accessibility issues. More comprehensive approaches include training faculty on accessibility best practices, providing templates for accessible documents, and having disability services staff review course materials for students who request them. According to research from EDUCAUSE, while 82% of higher education institutions report having digital accessibility policies, only about 40% report that they consistently implement these policies across all digital content.

Video Captioning and Audio Descriptions

Video content requires both captions (for students who are deaf or hard of hearing) and often audio descriptions (for students who are blind or have low vision). Captions must be accurate and synchronized with the video, not merely auto-generated captions which often contain errors. Many institutions use professional captioning services that cost approximately $1.25 to $2.50 per minute of video, though some shorter videos can be captioned by staff or volunteers at minimal cost. Others have adopted automated captioning technology that has improved significantly in recent years, with accuracy rates now approaching 95% for clear audio, though accuracy decreases substantially for accented speech, technical jargon, or poor audio quality. Platforms like YouTube, Vimeo, and Kaltura provide automatic captioning capabilities, though human review is typically necessary to ensure accuracy.

Audio descriptions describe important visual elements of videos for people who are blind or have low vision. This might involve adding a narrated track that describes actions, scene changes, text that appears on screen, and other visual elements essential to understanding the content. Professional audio description services cost approximately $2.50 to $4.00 per minute of video. Creating audio descriptions requires skill in writing concise descriptions that fit naturally into the pacing of the video without obscuring dialogue or important audio elements. Some educational publishers are beginning to provide video content with audio descriptions already included, which can reduce costs for institutions.

Accessible PDF and Document Standards

PDFs and other documents uploaded to course websites must also meet accessibility standards. This requires proper tagging of content, using styles for headings rather than just enlarging text, providing alternative text for images, using meaningful hyperlink text rather than generic “click here” links, and ensuring color is not the only means of conveying information. Creating accessible documents requires using accessibility features within software like Microsoft Word, Adobe InDesign, or Google Workspace. Many institutions provide templates and guidelines to help faculty create accessible documents, and some have implemented processes where documents are reviewed for accessibility before being made available to students. Tools like the WAVE browser extension or the Accessibility Checker built into Microsoft Office can help identify accessibility issues, though they cannot verify all aspects of accessibility and human review remains necessary.

Auxiliary Aids and Assistive Technologies

The ADA requires institutions to provide auxiliary aids and services necessary to ensure effective communication with students who have disabilities. These might include sign language interpreters, CART (Communication Access Realtime Translation) services, note-takers, readers for students with visual impairments, and other tools that remove barriers to participation. The institution’s obligation is to provide whatever aid is most effective for the individual student, though students can sometimes request alternatives if available options do not meet their needs.

Sign language interpreters represent one of the most expensive auxiliary aids. Professional interpreters typically earn $50 to $75 per hour and are essential for students who are deaf and use American Sign Language (ASL) as their primary mode of communication. A full-time student taking a typical course load might require interpreters for 15 to 20 hours per week, representing a significant cost to the institution. Some universities have trained interpreters on staff to reduce costs, while others contract with interpretation services. The quality of interpretation varies considerably, and students should have the right to request experienced interpreters who are familiar with the subject matter of their courses. Some institutions have also adopted video remote interpreting (VRI) technology for certain situations, where interpreters appear on screen rather than being physically present. While VRI cannot replace in-person interpretation for classroom settings, it can be useful for office hours, one-on-one meetings, and other situations where video conferencing is appropriate.

CART services, which provide real-time text of everything said in a meeting or classroom, benefit not only students who are deaf or hard of hearing but also students with attention disabilities, ESL students, and others who benefit from seeing text as they listen. CART services typically cost $150 to $300 per hour depending on whether the service provider must travel to the location or can provide remote CART services via a video connection. Some institutions have hired staff CART providers, while others contract with services on an as-needed basis. As with interpreters, the cost of CART services can add up significantly for students attending multiple classes or events regularly.

Note-takers can be peers recruited and trained by the disability services office, or occasionally paid student employees. The cost of providing note-taking services is relatively low, typically just involving recruitment, training, and modest compensation for the note-taker. However, the quality of notes varies considerably. Some institutions have implemented electronic note-taking systems where students can share notes through apps like Evernote or OneNote, while others use older methods of passing notebooks between students. The effectiveness of peer note-taking depends heavily on finding note-takers who are motivated, organized, and able to capture essential information in a form that is useful for the student receiving the notes.

Student Assistive Technology Options

Beyond institutional provision of auxiliary aids, students with disabilities often use personal assistive technologies to access educational content and participate in courses. These might include screen readers like NVDA (free) or JAWS ($90 for a student license), which read aloud everything displayed on a computer screen; speech recognition software like Dragon NaturallySpeaking ($300 for a professional license) that allows students to dictate rather than type; magnification software for students with low vision; text-to-speech software that reads documents aloud; and many other specialized tools. Some institutions subsidize the cost of assistive technology for students, recognizing that these tools are essential for their students’ success. Others require students to purchase their own technology. The challenge is that effective use of assistive technology typically requires training and practice, and many students arrive at college without having used these tools extensively. Disability services offices that provide training and ongoing support for students learning to use assistive technology often see improved outcomes for these students.

Institutional Compliance Strategies and Best Practices

Achieving meaningful ADA compliance requires more than simply reacting when students request accommodations. The most successful institutions take proactive approaches to accessibility, incorporating accessibility considerations into decision-making at all levels. This requires institutional commitment, adequate funding, clear policies and procedures, trained staff, and ongoing monitoring and improvement.

Institutional commitment must begin at the highest levels. Presidents and provosts need to communicate that accessibility is a priority, allocate sufficient resources to support accessibility efforts, and hold departments accountable for accessibility outcomes. Some institutions have appointed Chief Accessibility Officers or created accessibility committees that coordinate efforts across departments. These structural approaches help ensure that accessibility is not simply the responsibility of the disability services office, but rather a shared institutional commitment.

Accessibility policies should be clearly documented and communicated to all members of the campus community. Policies should address how students request accommodations, how courses and materials will be made accessible, timelines for providing accommodations, procedures for appealing accommodation decisions, and processes for addressing grievances. Clear policies help manage expectations and ensure consistency across campus. However, policies must also include flexibility, recognizing that individual circumstances vary and that one-size-fits-all solutions often do not work in accessibility.

Staff training is essential. Disability services professionals need expertise in assessment, accommodation planning, and knowledge of applicable laws. But training should extend beyond the disability services office. Faculty need basic training on accessible teaching practices. IT staff need training on web accessibility and accessible technology. Administrative staff who work with facilities and procurement need to understand accessibility requirements. Student affairs staff who supervise housing, dining, recreation, and other services need to understand their accessibility responsibilities. Some institutions provide brief online training modules to all staff covering basic accessibility concepts, while others provide more comprehensive training to specific departments based on their roles.

Procuring accessible technology and services should be a key part of institutional practice. When selecting learning management systems, institutions should evaluate accessibility as one criterion. When buying software or subscribing to services, specifications should include accessibility requirements. When hiring contractors to design websites or create digital content, contracts should include accessibility requirements and penalties for non-compliance. This systemic approach to procurement can significantly improve overall accessibility by ensuring that systems and tools are accessible from the beginning rather than requiring retrofitting later.

Legal Challenges and Case Law: What Institutions Should Know

Several high-profile legal cases have shaped how colleges and universities understand their accessibility obligations. These cases, though sometimes years old, continue to influence institutional practice and clarify legal expectations. Understanding this case law helps institutional leaders and accessibility professionals understand the serious consequences of non-compliance and the breadth of accessibility obligations.

The case against University of California Berkeley, brought by blind students unable to access course materials and websites, resulted in a settlement requiring the institution to implement comprehensive web accessibility improvements. The case established that websites must be accessible to students using assistive technologies and highlighted the importance of making course materials available in alternative formats. Similarly, cases involving other major research universities including MIT have established that institutions cannot relegate accessibility to a reactive process—they must proactively work to identify and remove barriers.

Cases involving online education have clarified that the transition to online learning does not reduce accessibility obligations. If anything, the challenges are magnified when course materials and platforms are inaccessible. The U.S. Department of Justice has filed statements indicating that online courses must be accessible in the same way as in-person courses. This guidance has been particularly important as institutions have expanded their online offerings.

Other cases have addressed specific accommodation requests, and courts have generally taken broad views of what constitutes reasonable accommodations. Courts have been skeptical of institutional arguments that accommodations create undue hardship unless the institution can demonstrate with specific evidence that the accommodation would be exceptionally costly or would fundamentally alter an essential aspect of a program. This standard has resulted in accommodations that some educators initially resisted, such as allowing students to record classes or receive books in advance of class.

Emerging Issues and Future Directions in ADA Compliance

As technology and education evolve, new accessibility challenges emerge. The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence in educational tools raises questions about whether AI-powered tutoring systems, plagiarism detection software, and proctoring tools are accessible to students with disabilities. Institutions are beginning to develop frameworks for evaluating the accessibility of AI tools, but clear standards have not yet emerged. Some institutions require vendors to demonstrate accessibility before purchasing AI-based educational tools, while others wait for legal standards to develop.

Virtual and augmented reality technologies offer exciting possibilities for education, but present accessibility challenges for students with disabilities. How can students who are blind access virtual reality environments? How can students who are deaf participate in virtual classrooms with audio-based instruction? These questions are still being worked out as technology rapidly advances. Some researchers are exploring multi-modal approaches where virtual environments include text, audio descriptions, and other modalities to make them accessible to students with different disabilities.

The expansion of online proctoring for remote exams has created accessibility challenges. Many proctoring platforms require students to use cameras and microphones, can flag students who move or use accessibility features as suspicious, and sometimes exclude students with certain disabilities from using accommodations available in traditional testing environments. The Department of Education has begun addressing these concerns, but comprehensive standards have not yet been established.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles are increasingly being adopted as a proactive approach to accessibility. UDL emphasizes providing multiple means of representing information, multiple means of action and expression, and multiple means of engagement, so that learning is accessible to diverse learners from the start. Rather than designing for a typical student and then retrofitting accommodations, UDL suggests designing courses and materials that are inherently flexible and accessible. Research suggests that courses designed with UDL principles benefit all students, not just those with disabilities. Implementing UDL requires shifting how faculty think about course design, and many institutions are providing training and support to help faculty adopt these principles.

Practical Implementation: What Different Campus Departments Should Do

ADA compliance requires coordinated effort across departments. Here are key responsibilities for different areas of campus:

Disability Services Office

The disability services office serves as the central hub for accessibility on campus. This office should establish clear procedures for registration, accommodation request processing, and appeal processes. Services should include one-on-one consultations with students to assess needs and recommend accommodations, coordination of auxiliary aids and services, and liaison with faculty. The office should also provide professional development for faculty, advocate for institutional accessibility improvements, and maintain documentation of accommodation decisions. Well-resourced disability services offices employ multiple full-time professionals including disability coordinators, accommodation specialists, and sometimes assistive technology specialists. Many smaller institutions rely on one part-time disability services coordinator struggling to serve hundreds of students. This capacity gap in smaller institutions remains a persistent challenge in higher education accessibility.

Admissions and Enrollment Services

The admissions office should provide information about campus accessibility and the disability services office in recruitment materials. Admissions staff should not ask applicants to disclose disabilities (as this could constitute discrimination in admissions), but should make clear that accommodations and support are available. Once students are admitted, enrollment services should ensure that students understand how to register with disability services and obtain accommodations before arriving on campus. Some institutions conduct proactive outreach to students who disclosed disabilities on their applications, offering information about services before the student contacts the office themselves.

Facilities and Physical Plant

The facilities department is responsible for maintaining accessible facilities and implementing accessibility improvements. This includes ensuring that accessible parking is available, that buildings are maintained in accessible condition, that elevators and other equipment are in working order, and that new construction and renovations comply with accessibility standards. Facilities departments should work closely with the accessibility coordinator or disability services office to address accessibility concerns. Many institutions have accessibility committees that include representatives from facilities, disability services, IT, faculty, and students, meeting regularly to address accessibility issues and plan improvements.

Information Technology Department

The IT department is responsible for ensuring that all digital systems, including websites, learning management systems, email systems, and other software, are accessible. This includes evaluating the accessibility of software before purchasing, implementing web accessibility standards, and providing training to IT staff on accessibility principles. Some institutions have appointed web accessibility coordinators within IT who coordinate efforts to ensure that all web-based systems meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards. The IT department should also maintain resources to help users with assistive technology configuration and troubleshooting.

Faculty and Academic Affairs

Frequently Asked Questions About ADA Compliance in