An evaluation of the accessibility of top-ranking university websites: Accessibility rates from 2005 to 2015
Open accessAbstract
Accessibility evaluation is an important equity step in assessing effectiveness and usefulness of online learning materials for disabled students. With popular uptake of blended and online learning it is timely to evaluate the accessibility attained by universities in their websites and Learning Management Systems (LMS) .The present study considers this question for the period 2005 through 2015. Previous studies in this area have indicated that university websites have become gradually inaccessible, as the complexity of their content increases, and that the amount of attention being paid to this problem by the universities is low. This study employed a comparative quantitative method, and a random sample of universities’ websites was evaluated using the accessibility evaluation tool designed by AChecker. The inclusion of the specific universities chosen for this study was based on their ranking in the world, and/or in the Oceania and Arab regions. Moreover, the evaluation is organised by page type: homepage, administration page or course description/syllabus page. Thus, through a statistical and empirical study, we demonstrated that there was no significant improvement in the accessibility of universities’ web sites between 2005 and 2015. Furthermore, access to media and document files had the most influential accessibility errors. In addition, there were 27,308 (33%) total home page errors among the 180 evaluated pages from 60 of the top world, Oceania and Arab universities’ sites. There are no significant differences in accessibility level between top-ranking universities in developed or developing countries. Therefore, with participation rate at universities expanding world-wide and equity being a common corporate theme there is a growing need for universities to commit to and responsibly address accessibility to online learning materials for disabled students.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Landing pages are a 'parade door' or 'main entrance' to other pages and often receive the most attention from visitors, web designers, and content developers.
“Indeed, landing pages are a “parade door” or “main entrance” to other pages and often receive the most attention from visitors, web designers, and content developers [14].”
From Does the law matter? An empirical study on the accessibility of Finnish higher education institutions’ web pages (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
The Study design/approach section (page unavailable) describes university home pages as students’ likely first encounter, links them to deeper pages, and says universities are likely to give them more care in construction. It does not establish that landing pages generally receive the most attention from visitors; being encountered first is not the same as receiving the most attention. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPrevious studies have found significant accessibility challenges at higher education institutions' landing pages; they have become more inaccessible, and their content has increased in complexity.
“According to previous studies, there are significant accessibility challenges at HEIs’ landing pages; they have become more inaccessible, and their content has increased in complexity [14].”
From Does the law matter? An empirical study on the accessibility of Finnish higher education institutions’ web pages (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
The comparison section says university websites have become gradually more inaccessible as their content has grown more complex. The paper also reports 605 known accessibility errors on home pages, supporting the claim that landing pages face substantial challenges. It does not establish that home pages specifically became more inaccessible or more complex over time; that trend is stated for university websites overall. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAn evaluation of top-ranking universities' website accessibility found no significant improvements between 2005 and 2015.
“An evaluation of top-ranking universities’ website accessibility found no significant improvements between 2005 and 2015 [14].”
From Does the law matter? An empirical study on the accessibility of Finnish higher education institutions’ web pages (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
Previous studies have shown that higher education institutions' landing pages typically have many accessibility errors.
“Previous studies have shown that HEIs’ landing pages typically have many accessibility errors.”
From Does the law matter? An empirical study on the accessibility of Finnish higher education institutions’ web pages (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
The most general error types found in this study were among the most common errors in previous studies.
“These were among the most common errors in previous studies (see [14, 36, 40]).”
From Does the law matter? An empirical study on the accessibility of Finnish higher education institutions’ web pages (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Abanumy, A., Al-Badi, A., & Mayhew, P. (2005). E-government website accessibility: In-depth evaluation of Saudi Arabia and Oman. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 3(3), 99-106.
- Alahmadi, T., & Drew, S. (2016). An evaluation of the accessibility of top-ranking university websites: Accessibility rates from 2005 to 2015. In DEANZ2016 Conference Proceedings (pp. 224-233). Retrieved from http://flanz.org.nz/flanzorg/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/DEANZ16-Conference-proceedings11-April.pdf#page=224 Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012). Unmet need for formal assistance, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4433.0.55.007Main+Features12012?O penDocument Australian Disability Clearing House on Education and Training (ADCET). (2016). Statistics and research: Access and participation. Retrieved from http://www.adcet.edu.au/inclusive- teaching/understanding-disability/research-and-statistics/ Australian Government. Department of Education and Training. (2015). Equity groups. Retrieved from http://docs.education.gov.au/node/38145
- Baker, R. S., & Inventado, P. S. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics. In J. Larusson & W. Brandon (Eds.), Learning analytics (pp. 61-75). New York: Springer.
- Cooper, M., Sloan, D., Kelly, B., & Lewthwaite, S. (2012, April). A challenge to web accessibility metrics and guidelines: Putting people and processes first. In Proceedings of the international cross-disciplinary conference on web accessibility (p. 20).
- Fichten, C. S., Ferraro, V., Asuncion, J. V., Chwojka, C., Barile, M., Nguyen, M. N., ... & Wolforth, J. (2009). Disabilities and e-learning problems and solutions: An exploratory study. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 241-256.
- Hackett, S., & Parmanto, B. (2005). A longitudinal evaluation of accessibility: Higher education web sites. Internet Research, 15(3), 281-294.
- Harper, K. A., & DeWaters, J. (2008). A quest for website accessibility in higher education institutions. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3), 160-164.
- Jo, I. H., Yu, T., Lee, H., & Kim, Y. (2015). Relations between student online learning behavior and academic achievement in higher education: A learning analytics approach. In C. Guang, V. Kumar, R. Huang, & S. Kong (Eds.), Emerging issues in smart learning (pp. 275-287). Berlin: Springer.
- Peña-Ayala, A. (2014). Educational data mining. Switzerland: Springer.
- Ringlaben, R., Bray, M., & Packard, A. (2014). Accessibility of American university special education departments' web sites. Universal Access in the Information Society, 13(2), 249- 254.
- Vigo, M., Brown, J., & Conway, V. (2013, May). Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools: Measuring the harm of sole reliance on automated tests. In Proceedings of the 10th International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (p. 1).
- Zap, N., & Montgomerie, C. (2013). The status of web accessibility of Canadian universities and colleges: A follow-up study 10 years later. In J. Herrington, A. Couros, & V. Irvine (Eds.), World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (pp. 2498-2507). Victoria: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Accessibility of Indian universities’ homepages: An exploratory study
Ismail, A., & Kuppusamy, K. S. (2018) · Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jksuci.2016.06.006 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Alsaeedi, A. (2020) · Information · doi:10.3390/info11010040 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
“[20], Alahmadi and Drew [21], and Alshamari [7], employed automatic tools to check the accessibility of websites.”
MethodA Heuristic Method to Evaluate Web Accessibility for Users With Low Vision
Acosta-Vargas, P., Antonio Salvador-Ullauri, L., & Lujan-Mora, S. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2939068 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Fichten, C., Olenik-Shemesh, D., Asuncion, J., Jorgensen, M., & Colwell, C. (2020) · Improving Accessible Digital Practices in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-37125-8_2 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Accessibility of South African university websites
Verkijika, S. F., & De Wet, L. (2020) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-018-0632-6 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Web accessibility evaluation of top-ranking university Web sites in Spain, Chile and Mexico
Máñez-Carvajal, C., Cervera-Mérida, J. F., & Fernández-Piqueras, R. (2021) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-019-00702-w · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Accessibility analysis of higher education institution websites of Portugal
Ismail, A., Kuppusamy, K. S., & Paiva, S. (2020) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-019-00653-2 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Laamanen, M., Ladonlahti, T., Puupponen, H., & Kärkkäinen, T. (2024) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-022-00931-6 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Web Accessibility of the Top Research-Intensive Universities in the UK
Alim, S. (2021) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/21582440211056614 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“Authors such as Alahmadi and Drew (2017), Kane et al. (2007), Kesswani and Kumar (2016) and Máñez-Carvajal et al. (2019a) analyzed webpages from universities from different countries, allowing for various comparisons between accessibility evaluations and the corresponding results, and giving a…”
BackgroundEvaluation of Accessibility of University Websites: A Case from Turkey
Yerlikaya, Z., & Onay Durdu, P. (2017) · Communications in Computer and Information Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-58753-0_94 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Systematic Review (2000 to 2021) of Online Accessibility Research in Higher Education
She, L., & Martin, F. (2022) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923647.2022.2081438 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Scanlon, E., Taylor, Z. W., Raible, J., Bates, J., & Chini, J. J. (2021) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-021-00282-3 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Alayed, A. (2025) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-023-01082-y · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Alahmadi, T. J., & Drew, S.
- Affiliations
- Griffith University (AU)
- Venue
- Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning
- Published
- 2017-07-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7-24
- ISSN
- 1179-7665 (ISSN-L)
- 1179-7673
- OpenAlex
- W2555444743
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 30.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Open Flexible and Distance Learning (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
- Keywords
- web accessibility, university websites, AChecker, virtual learning environments, students with disabilities, online learning materials, accessibility errors, higher education equity
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
