Accessibility Review

Proactive Review

Accessibility professionals at the University of Michigan work to proactively prioritize digital information and resources to make more accessible. In general, the university audits against the Technical Accessibility Guidelines (TAG) or to respond to reported issues. The university uses automated, semi-automated, and manual evaluation strategies and tools in order to cover a broad scope of university resources.

Web Accessibility Auditing

The university tries to test accessibility across commonly used web browsers and device types. The university makes use of an enterprise level automated web accessibility evaluation tool. Automated tools can provide quick overviews of a small sub-set of accessibility issues on websites and webpages. We also recommend the use of the following evaluation tools for semi-automated evaluation:

  • Deque's axe plugin in Chrome and Firefox
  • WebAIM's WAVE tool
  • Deque WorldSpace Attest
  • Stylish to apply visible focus indicators
  • NoCoffee Chrome and Firefox
  • Colour Contrast Analyser

We also conduct manual evaluations using common Assistive Technology, devices, and browsers. When doing manual evaluations, we consider the ways that different user groups interact with and move through the organization, and try to consider tasks which users will do in different systems. On desktops and laptops, we primarily test with the Non Visual Desktop Access (NVDA) screen reader and VoiceOver (VO). On mobile devices we primarily test using VoiceOver. The primary browsers that we test in are Google Chrome (latest stable version) and Mozilla Firefox (latest stable version).

Document Accessibility Auditing

Many document creation tools have accessibility checkers which can be used to understand how accessible the content you are creating is. We recommend the use of Microsoft accessibility checkers and Adobe's accessibility checker in Acrobat Pro. Note that accessibility checkers are not a perfect substitute for manual evaluation while considering the user experience. Sometimes different document types do not allow content creators to create accessible, substantively usable experience for individuals with disabilities, depending on the formatting used and the context of how the document is presented to user. In general, websites and webpages can be made more accessible than documents due to the rich amount of semantic information that can be provided using HTML and ARIA. Some specific technologies also have maintained accessibility standards, such as the EPUB standard, which may also be applied to other digital publication types.

Other Information Technology

The university is committed to assessing best practices for accessibility over time and to developing standards for unique and dynamic information technologies.

Request an Audit

University units are expected to prioritize their resources and proactively engage with accessibility review and remediation. Units can request a consultation for additional help to evaluate the accessibility of a resource.