The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Failures in library website accessibility: A problem of accountability
Abstract
Not every library can have an accessibility expert on staff while redesigning their website. Every library can, however, develop their own informed personnel. At Kansas State University Libraries, a task force focused on developing and maintaining a new website formed, coinciding with the hire of a librarian who is disabled and experienced in human factors, user experience, and accessibility. This provided an opportunity not only for improved accessibility, but a more nuanced understanding of the needs and experiences of disabled patrons. In this process we learned that lack of accountability is often a significant barrier to libraries designing an accessible website. To successfully design an accessible website, accessibility must be a priority from the beginning of the design process rather than a checklist and fixes applied at the end of the process. A common hurdle to an organization adopting an accessibility focused approach to design is the lack of personnel dedicated specifically to accessibility. All too often, this responsibility becomes dispersed among a team of designers, by which accessibility becomes an afterthought. To paraphrase Bandura (1990), if everybody is in charge, nobody is in charge. At least one person must be tasked with developing knowledge of accessibility and advocating for the needs of disabled users. While everyone on the team responsible for web content development should possess some basic knowledge of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Vague ownership and dispersed responsibilities regarding website accessibility often make accessibility an afterthought.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
In the citing paper
“A key topic in the web accessibility literature is that web accessibility is most effective when integrated into the earliest stages of digital design, rather than retroactively fixed through remediation.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
In the citing paper
“suggests that accessibility should be a top organizational concern and that at least one person be assigned accountability for ensuring that accessible criteria are met.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
In the citing paper
“Organizational structural and cultural impediments, as well as technical deficits, are also hampering advances in accessibility.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
In the citing paper
“When accessibility is an afterthought in the website building process, they argue, duty is diluted, and accountability is obfuscated.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
In the citing paper
“Their case study shows how advocacy and users' perspectives in design-stage decisions might help to prevent whole classes of accessibility problems from arising in the first place.”
From Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries (2026) · cites this paper as Brunk and Ireton, 2022
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Accountability for Web Accessibility in Academic Libraries
Lovins, C., & Bragg, C. (2026) · International Journal of Librarianship · doi:10.23974/ijol.2026.vol11.2.590
“Similarly, the article by Brunk and Ireton (2022), “Failures in Library Website Accessibility: A Problem of Accountability,” suggests that accessibility should be a top organizational concern and that at least one person be assigned accountability for ensuring that accessible criteria are met.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Brunk, A., & Ireton, D.
- Venue
- AHFE International
- Publisher
- AHFE International
- Published
- 2022
- ISSN
- 2771-0718 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4285149397
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 0.36
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- AHFE international (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Web and Library Services
- Keywords
- library websites, disability theory, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, accessibility testing, assistive technology, disabled users, user experience, human factors, snowball sampling, inclusive library services
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review