Results of expert reviews on accessibility-oriented metrics in Higher Education classes utilizing data comparisons from 2 industry-standard accessibility content review tools, Ally and YuJa, are provided. Results of this study provide guidelines alongside recommendations for tool selection criteria for campuses of all sizes and stages in the digital accessibility journey.

The rise of digital learning, significantly accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has permanently transformed the landscape of higher education. Institutions rapidly shifted courses to online platforms, often without the luxury of a thorough review process for critical quality factors such as accessibility, navigability, nor effective design. Post-COVID, it has become imperative to scrutinize the quality of these and all upcoming online courses to ensure they meet the quality course design standards necessary for effective and inclusive education, beyond standard "good teaching" checklists that abound today. This proposal aims to underscore the importance of quantitative, scientific reviews of quality as it translates to accessibility for our online learners in the digital learning space, and outline best practices for assessing and improving accessibility within the context of overall course quality. The Importance of Accessibility in Online Learning Accessibility is a cornerstone of quality in online education. It ensures that all students, regardless of their physical abilities or learning challenges, have equal access to educational resources. Accessibility in online learning is not just about compliance with legal standards, nor may it be fully and accurately gauged with just one tool or technique. Rather, it is instead about fostering an inclusive learning environment where all students can succeed (Goegen & Daniels, 2022; Hollins & Foley, 2013), along with developing an inclusive course design, review, and administration culture with faculty and support staff that holistically evaluates accessibility for the good of each unique student. This culture-driven approach involves designing courses that are usable by a diversity of people with a wide range of abilities and disabilities, which may be chronic or temporary, alongside ensuring that content is perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust. Importantly, many online courses and content may be visually well-designed, but remain inaccessible to a wide variety of our populations. In that respect, we chose in our research study to evaluate 2 primary, leading accessibility review and support tools within the Higher Education arena today. Accessibility Assessment Tools: Anthology Ally and YuJa Panorama To better understand how accessibility impacts the quality of online courses, we conducted a review using two industry-standard accessibility content review (ACR) tools: Anthology Ally and YuJa Panorama. These tools provide valuable insights into the accessibility of online courses by analyzing various content formats and generating detailed reports on their accessibility status. In consideration of how the component of “accessibility” serves as either an integral approach of online course quality, or in contrast as a separate variable measured outside of quality metrics, we have further reviewed the value and outputs of these tools relating to quality assessments of online courses. We provide considerations for recommended use-cases for ACRs, recommendations for improvement of accuracy and comprehensive of online course reviews inclusive of accessibility, along with considerations for integration of accessible course design and administration within the faculty development curriculum. Further, the results of this study provide guidelines alongside recommendations for accessibility tool selection criteria for campuses of all sizes and stages in the digital accessibility journey. Data points reviewed across our study include considerations from online course design from industry-standard OL course quality review tools, and incorporate data points such as the following: Number of accessibility-related criteria reviewed in each document format, per YuJa and Ally Accessibility related metrics provided to faculty based on content type, course-level metrics, etc. Additional self-service options provided to users/students Utilization of non-academic options with industry-standard accessibility content review tools Data tracking and distribution options from tools Automation of processes for tools User-experience of tools (Students/Tool Admins/IDs/Faculty) The quality of online learning is inextricably linked to its accessibility (Sanchez-Gordon & Luján-Mora, 2016). As higher education continues to embrace digital learning, it is crucial to ensure that all students have equal access to educational resources. By integrating accessibility into the quality assessment process and utilizing tools like Anthology Ally and YuJa Panorama, institutions can enhance the inclusivity and effectiveness of their online courses. This proposal outlines a comprehensive approach to assessing and improving accessibility, providing a roadmap for institutions to follow as they strive to create an equitable online learning environment for all learners (Kent, 2015; Seale et al., 2015). In conclusion, prioritizing accessibility in online learning is not just a matter of compliance; it is a commitment to educational equity and excellence. A wide array of accessibility review, detection, provision, and correction tools abound within the educational technology industry across K-20+, but navigating through the pros and cons may be challenging. This presentation will share relevant, timely, unbiased, real-world findings from academic faculty/instructional technology staff with extensive background in these areas of study. We believe by leveraging the insights and capabilities of advanced ACR tools and applying those as best-fits within each unique organization, institutions can ensure that their online courses meet the highest standards of quality and accessibility, ultimately benefiting all students. Audience Engagement and Support: Participants to this workshop will be provided with data outcomes from this original research comparing results of these two studies, as a take-away to review and utilize for review and considerations at their own institutions. Further, resources curated by the authors of this study relating to accessibility and quality online course design will be provided for all participants to our session. A designated Question & Answer session will be provided at the end of this presentation for participants in attendance References Goegan,L. D., & Daniels, L.M. (2022). Online learning for students with learning disabilities and their typical peers: The association between basic psychological needs and outcomes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 37(2), 140-150. Hollins, N., & Foley, A. (2013). The experiences of students with learning disabilities in a higher education virtual campus. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 607-624. Kelly, R., Phipps, L., & Swift, E. (2004). Developing a holistic approach for e-learning accessibility. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 12(1), 41-50. Kent, M. (2015). Disability and eLearning: Opportunities and barriers. Disability Studies Quarterly, 35(1). Sanchez-Gordon, S., & Luján-Mora, S. (2016). How could MOOCs become accessible? The case of edX and the future of inclusive online learning. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 22(1), 55-81. Seale, J., Georgeson, J., Mamas, C., & Swain, J. (2015). Not the right kind of ‘digital capital’? An examination of the complex relationship between disabled students, their technologies, and higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 82, 118-128.