Keywords

1 Introduction

Web accessibility continues to be an issue (Loiacono 2004; Loiacono et al. 2005, 2009). The Business Disability Forum has been assessing the accessibility of websites since 2008 and has found that 70% of websites reviewed have lacked accessibility (Rocca 2016). Another assessment (Castro et al. 2017) conducted by Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) in 2016 and 2017, indicated that 42% of the 260 most popular federal government websites in the US failed the accessibility test for people with disabilities.

Because websites and applications (apps) have become so ingrained in society, it is important that everyone, regardless of their disability, has equal access to websites and apps. That is what World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Accessibility Guidelines aim to accomplish. Those guidelines help encourage website and app developers to make more accessible websites and apps. For example, one recommendation contained in the newly released Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) (version 2.1, released June 5, 2018) is to “provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be changed into other forms people need, such as large print, braille, speech, symbols or simpler language” (https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/REC-WCAG21-20180605/). This recommendation ensures that people with different disabilities, such as deafness or blindness, can access online materials.

However, many developers are not educated on, or even exposed to accessibility guidelines. Thus, a critical first step is to understand the extent to which current student website and app developers are exposed to accessibility guidelines in their college preparations. In this initial study, as a first step of our research, we used a mixed method to survey and interview student website and app developers to understand their awareness of Web accessibility guidelines.

2 Literature Review

Previous research (Lawton 2005; Lawton et al. 2017) indicated that Web accessibility provides benefits, not only to people with disabilities, but to society as a whole. Web accessibility guidelines are a key resource to incorporate accessibility in websites and apps (Loiacono 2004; Rouse 2018). Research has shown that legislation can compel companies to increase their adherence to accessibility guidelines (Loiacono et al. 2013). Pervious research (Lazar et al. 2004; Abou-Zahra 2017) showed that education, training, and awareness of diverse disabilities help enhance the understanding of Web accessibility.

2.1 Web Accessibility Is Beneficial to Everyone

In its simplest form, Web accessibility means that all people can use websites and apps, regardless of their disability. This includes people with temporary or changing disabilities and means that everyone must be able to perceive, understand, navigate, and contribute to websites and apps (Lawton 2005). Making websites and apps accessible is socially responsible (Lawton 2005); it is a human right for everyone to have equal access and equal opportunity (Lawton et al. 2017). Web accessibility provides benefits to entire society. For example, people from any background or situation can contribute to a worldwide online community, and those with disabilities should have access to this. Accessible websites and apps can also hugely benefit companies. A website or app that is well designed and accessible provides better search-engine optimization (SEO) and usually requires less maintenance (Lawton et al. 2017). Inaccessible websites and apps hinder usage for people with disabilities while also being inconvenient to people without disabilities. For instance, under the WCAG, ensuring that there are definitions for idioms, jargon, or abbreviations used on websites and apps, can not only help those with cognitive issues, but also those unfamiliar with the topic of the website or app. Therefore, Web accessibility can benefit everyone.

2.2 Web Accessibility Guidelines Are Essential to Design Accessible Web

The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) was founded by the W3C in 1996. The WAI has developed guidelines in place to incorporate Web accessibility in every aspect of the Web. The initial WCAG version 1.0 was developed in 1999 and the WAI updated to WCAG version 2.1 in 2018. This new version includes 4 guiding principles (perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust) and 13 guidelines to ensure website page content such as text, images, forms, and sounds accessible to people with disabilities (https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#conformance). In addition, the United States government provides guidelines and tools in the Section 508 initiative (https://www.section508.gov/), requiring that all electronic and information technology must be accessible to people with disabilities (Rouse 2010). Moreover, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted by the United States Congress in 1990, has been expanded to cover the accessibility of websites, requiring that websites must be prepared to offer communications through accessible means (Kaplan 2000).

2.3 Awareness Disabilities Helps People Understand Various Demands of Web Accessibility

Different types of disabilities present unique barriers to users and unique challenges to website and app developers because users need different accessibility features. For example, those with visual disabilities may require an alternative to audio media, while those with cognitive disabilities can be assisted by logical and consistent design and simpler text to use websites and apps. Even people with the same category of disability may require different demands depending on the degree of their disability. For instance, for those who are just hard of hearing, good audio quality and the ability to change the volume of media is an acceptable starting point; however, for those who are completely deaf, an alternative to audio is necessary–usually addressed by using captions for videos or by supplying a separate transcript (Abou-Zahra 2017).

2.4 Education and Training Help Form the Perceptions of Web Accessibility

Lazar et al. (2004) found that societal foundations, such as education and training, influence website and app developers on their awareness and decision of whether a website or app will be built for accessibility or not. Education and training play an important role in the perceptions of Web accessibility, especially for student website and app developers because they acquire knowledge mainly from the classroom and related projects.

3 Research Method

This research uses a mixed method to survey and interview student website and app developers to understand their awareness of Web accessibility guidelines. We have collected and analyzed the quantitative and qualitative dataFootnote 1. The reason for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data is to provide a comprehensive and deep understanding of the awareness of Web accessibility guidelines of student website and app developers.

3.1 Quantitative Data

The survey questionnaire, consisting of 15 questions, was developed by the researchers and reviewed by experts in website and app development and accessibility. Except for the demographic questions, all questions focused on student website and app developers’ education, experiences, and perceptions of Web accessibility guidelines. These questions contained various types of questions, including multiple choice and open-ended questions. The questionnaire was pilot tested by researchers and random subjects (not include in the survey data). Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for the study (both survey and interview protocol). Advertisements to faculty who taught website and app development or design courses in various universities in the Northeastern US. Faculty who were willing to promote this research sent the study promotion email and survey link to their students. Using this approach, we made sure that participants had a background knowledge of Web accessibility. Participants were solicited through Qualtrics.

3.2 Qualitative Data

To enhance our understanding of the quantitative data, at the end of the survey questionnaire, we asked participants if they were willing to sign up for interviews or not. If they were willing to participate in interviews, they would click a link provided in the questionnaire, which leaded to a time-slot sheet for signing up for interviews by Slottr. Signing up for a time-slot required the participant’s email. Then researchers contacted participants through email to check interview dates and times and sent participants the consent form approved by IRB. An approved protocol, which was also reviewed by the experts, was used to conduct the interview. The interview consisted of 14 questions. Overall, the interviews were about respondents’ experiences and perceptions of accessibility guidelines. In addition, some questions delved into respondents’ experiences in implementing Web accessibility in their work. Interviews lasted around 15 min. For those who agreed to it, interviews were audio recorded and transcribed to ensure accuracy of notetaking. Participants who finished both survey and interview were awarded $5 Amazon gift cards.

3.3 Demographics of Participants

As of today, we have collected a total of 76 surveys and 34 interviews. The number of participants in each gender was 54 in male (71.1%), 20 in female (26.3%), 1 in other identification (1.3%), and 1 in preferred not to answer (1.3%). The sample consisted of 56 undergraduate students (73.7%) and 20 graduate students (26.3%). The number of participants in each major was 36 in computer science (47.4%), 21 in information technology (27.6%), 17 in other majors (22.4%), and 2 students did not state their majors (2.6%). The interview sample consisted of 23 male (67.6%) and 11 female (32.4%), 24 undergraduate students (70.6%) and 10 graduate students (29.4%), as well as 18 in computer science (52.9%), 6 in information technology (17.6%), and 10 in other majors (29.4%).

4 Initial Quantitative Results

4.1 Education and Training

There are two items to measure education and training of accessibility—the number of website and app development or design courses a student has taken, and whether or not a student has taken courses that discussed accessibility.

It is noted that the majority of participants reported to have taken one website and app development or design course (55%) or have not taken any relevant courses (28%), as can be seen in the graphic at Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Number of website and app development or design courses a student has taken

Full size image

Not every website and app development or design course discusses accessibility. As it can be observed in Fig. 2, 55% of the participants stated that they have not taken courses that discussed accessibility.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Whether or not a student has taken courses that discussed accessibility

Full size image

4.2 Disabilities Awareness

The item used to measure awareness of diverse disabilities is the number of different disabilities a student website and app developer personally knew people who have.

Figure 3 shows percent of the number of different disabilities students personally knew people who have varied. 82% of the participants at least personally know one type of disability, among which 21% personally know one type of disability, 16% personally know six types of disabilities, and 13% personally know three types of disabilities.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

Number of different disabilities a student personally knew people who have

Full size image

4.3 Accessibility Exposure

For exposure to accessibility, participants were asked to report their level of exposure to the concept of “Web accessibility” as “a great deal” (coded as 5), “a lot” (coded as 4), “a moderate amount” (coded as 3), “a little” (coded as 2), and “none at all” (coded as 1).

In Fig. 4, we can observe that 42% of the participants report that their level of exposure to accessibility is a moderate amount and 28% report that their level is a little. The mean of scores of exposure to accessibility is 2.87 (M = 2.87, SD = .94), which is relatively low.

Fig. 4.
figure 4

Level of exposure to accessibility

Full size image

4.4 Guidelines Familiarity

We used both the level of exposure to accessibility and the level of familiarity with accessibility guidelines because exposure to the concept of Web accessibility did not necessarily mean awareness of accessibility guidelines. Website or app developers may know the concept of Web accessibility that everyone should have equal access to the Web (Lawton et al. 2017), however, to accomplish Web accessibility, they need to know and apply specific guidelines to create accessible features for website and app content.

In the survey questions, participants were asked whether or not they were familiar with any of the three main accessibility guidelines or laws (ADA, Section 508, and WCAG) in the US. If a case reported to be not familiar with any guidelines, it was coded as 0; if a case reported to be familiar with one guideline, it was coded as 1; if a case reported to be familiar with two guidelines, it was coded as 2; if a case reported to be familiar with three guidelines, it was coded as 3.

In Fig. 5, it is observed that many of the participants are not familiar with accessibility guidelines at all (57%) and only 26% are familiar with one accessibility guideline. The mean of scores of familiarity with accessibility guidelines is .66 (M = .66, SD = .89), which is quite low.

Fig. 5.
figure 5

Level of familiarity with accessibility guidelines

Full size image

5 Initial Qualitative Results

5.1 Education and Training

In general, interview participants said that course discussions could make them more aware of Web accessibility, but some courses taught accessibility guidelines briefly, so they were still not familiar with those guidelines.

“In my web design class, we focus a lot on user experience and part of it is to make it more accessible.”

“It’s kind of in general. Like there is a guideline on YouTube for how to use technology and using those features on our computers to use technology. It’s sort of that exposure.”

“As far as the (school name) courses, I’ve taken HCI, the mobile development one, mobile computing and so there I learned briefly about accessibility standards…” “I think if we talk about the more in classes, no brief for it because that was all like how human interacted with computers but how do we make that easy for them?”

5.2 Disabilities Awareness

The results of disabilities awareness varied among interview participants, which were consistent with the results from survey participants.

“No, no one I know uses these web accessibility features.”

“My friend is color blind, so he goes on some sites that let him change the color settings.”

“I have a couple of family members particularly about eyesight. So, like zooming in on text and, that’s about as far as it goes.”

“I have a good friend. She has a couple of disabilities. She uses some of these features.”

Interviewees mentioned attending conferences, seminar, groups, and bigger crowds to communicate with people with disabilities and understand their needs was helpful for the understanding of Web accessibility.

“They (students) really need to be introduced to the concept. They need to be introduced to it (Web accessibility) in seminar in groups or bigger crowds who actually know to what level it is being used.”

“I would say that the best way to encourage people is to give the exposure of meeting those people and understanding …” “… get attending these conferences about accessibility every year.”

5.3 Accessibility Exposure

Most interviewees reported to know a moderate amount of accessibility, which were consistent with the survey data.

“I’m not sure if I know too much. As I understand, it’s more about making sure the websites there easy to understand, all the tools and all the features they use are users need from product end.”

“I assume it has to do with like, you know, disability accident. Yeah. So basically, the only real web accessibility stuff that I know about would be subtitles close captioning that kind of stuff.”

5.4 Guidelines Familiarity

Most interviewees reported that they were not familiar with accessibility guidelines, which were consistent with the survey data.

“No, I’m not aware of them.”

“I know they exist. I don’t know exactly how…what they are.”

“I just don’t think they are very much informed at all. Almost like they are optional goal.”

Interviewees said that check lists and suggestions for how to implement guidelines as well as open resources and tools or plugins could make guidelines easier for them to understand and implement guidelines.

“One thing is just having a quick reference list…”

“I think if there are a set of guidelines and if there’s some way that you’ve actually tell them, if there’s some kind of journal that tells about how you should be doing things.”

“They are not very easy to find for instance, I wouldn’t know where I start to look for resources to find to make my website more accessible.”

“Basically, if there is something that, um, was a tool specifically tasked for each of the individual features. So, like I know that there is, um, I know that there’s apps that are on your computer that can magnify screen the independent of the browser….”

Interviewees also indicated that projects’ requirements and showing business values could enhance their intentions to use accessibility guidelines.

“If the students are provided with a project and the professor gives them these guidelines that needs to be strictly followed, they’ll follow that.”

“My boss would already be interested in the numbers; he’d be interested in money. So, I try to appeal to him by saying that, you know, maybe we’re missing a whole chunk of people who could, who could be a target audience for our website, but I’ve been not able to do because they don’t, they cannot, it’s not very accessible to them. So, by making a page very accessible and all inclusive, maybe we can get more hits and people to visit our website….”

6 Discussion

The initial analysis of the survey and interview data showed a couple of key findings:

  1. (1)

    Participants showed a relatively low level of exposure to accessibility and familiarity with accessibility guidelines.

  2. (2)

    Participants pointed out that deep course discussions, various events exposure, projects’ requirements, open resources, check lists, or tools to implement the guidelines, and business awareness could be helpful to make them understand and use accessibility guidelines.

7 Conclusions and Future Research

This first step of our research utilized a mixed method to survey and interview student website and app developers to understand their awareness of Web accessibility guidelines. Preliminary results of the quantitative and qualitative data analysis indicated that student website and app developers had a relatively low level of exposure to accessibility and familiarity with accessibility guidelines. The future research will use statistic modeling to investigate whether or not education and training play a role in enhancing the awareness of accessibility guidelines of student website and app developers and use qualitative analysis to further explore how to help students better understand and implement those guidelines. Together, we hope that this research benefits society as a whole by increasing the accessibility of websites and apps for everyone. We plan to present more of our findings at the conference next July.