Search results

This paper seeks to compare the accessibility features and ease of use of three tutorial creation products – Camtasia® 6 (by TechSmith®), Captivate® 4 (by Adobe®), and VoiceThread® – to determine which product creates the most accessible tutorials.

The paper tested the accessibility of the tutorials created using Camtasia, Captivate, and VoiceThread against the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template® (VPAT®) criteria. The tests were completed using JAWS®, a screen‐reading software application. Results were compared to determine which product(s) created the most accessible tutorials. The products' ease of use and user manuals were also evaluated.

Camtasia and Captivate exceed VoiceThread in terms of accessibility compliance. In testing the products, the paper concluded that the VPATs were accurate, with minor exceptions. All products provide user manuals and help guides; Camtasia and Captivate have steeper learning curves than VoiceThread.

This study compares only three of the available tutorial creation products. Accessibility features may change with new versions.

The results of the evaluation will enable other librarians to make more informed decisions when purchasing and using tutorial creation products.

Ensuring accessibility of online resources is everyone's responsibility. This paper will help readers to meet that goal.

While there are comparison studies of the features of Camtasia, Captivate, and VoiceThread, accessibility features are largely uncovered. This study adds this dimension to the literature, enabling librarians to make more informed decisions when selecting and using these products to create accessible tutorials.

In an effort to ensure vendor compliance with Section 508, some libraries have begun requesting Voluntary Product Accessibility Templates (VPATs) or other documentation of accessibility compliance. The purpose of this paper is to assess the accuracy of vendor-supplied compliance documentation, and to identify common accessibility issues highlighted by the VPATs. A detailed discussion of vendor responses to each Section 508 checkpoint is provided in the Appendix.

Researchers compared 17 VPATs with the results of an automated accessibility scan to identify inconsistencies and common problems.

Vendors reported being fully compliant with 64 percent of the applicable VPAT items, and partially compliant with a further 24 percent. However, in 16 of 17 cases, there were discrepancies between the information on the VPAT and the results of the scan. Of the total 189 VPAT checkpoints the author scanned, 19.6 percent had errors (meaning the information on the VPAT was inaccurate 19.6 percent of the time).

Several VPAT checkpoints could not be automatically verified by the scan. Instead they require manual/visual verification, which the author did not do. Because the author only scanned three pages of each resource, the author was not able to check all content.

Vendor-supplied accessibility documentation should not be taken at face value, but requires verification and follow up to ensure its accuracy. This study also identified some of the most common accessibility issues, which will help both librarians and vendors improve their products and services.

Other studies have analyzed the accessibility of library resources and specifically vendor databases, but none have assessed the accuracy of vendor-supplied Section 508 compliance documentation.

This paper aims to describe a variety of accessibility initiatives implemented at the Michigan State University (MSU) Libraries to better support persons with disabilities who want to use and access library services and resources.

By using two campus accessibility policies to help expand and improve its accessibility efforts, the MSU Libraries implemented accessibility purchasing procedures for e-resources; drafted a five-year accessibility plan, which launched an extensive multi-year staff accessibility training plan and detailed plans for content accessibility and accessibility investment; dedicated additional library staff positions and time to accessibility; drafted an accessibility statement and website documentation; established an in-house remediation service; increased library web page and collection remediation; and began leading efforts related to vendor e-resource accessibility in the Big Ten Academic Alliance library consortium.

As a result of these many accessibility initiatives, the MSU Libraries has thought strategically about and taken action on constantly improving its accessibility in a variety of areas; provided or hosted 29 staff accessibility training sessions; implemented new accessibility positions, roles and services; and helped influence and improve library e-resource accessibility, especially through its leadership in the Big Ten library consortium.

Most libraries strive to provide welcoming access to information and library services for all users, including persons with disabilities, but resources and literature on comprehensive accessibility initiatives in academic libraries are somewhat limited. The library accessibility initiatives implemented by a large, academic research library shared in this paper will hopefully contribute to the much-needed library and information science literature on this topic.

This paper aims to review existing literature on distance library services for individuals with disabilities with a specific focus on deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH) users and provide strategies for creating an online library that is accessible to this community.

The authors reviewed articles covering distance library services for D/HH users and then identified specific parts of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 that are applicable to the D/HH community. By using the literature, strategies for developing and purchasing accessible electronic library resources are presented.

While there is a breadth of literature focused on creating accessible resources for online libraries, there is a gap when it comes to D/HH users. Libraries can cater to this community by providing text-based alternatives for all library instructional materials and working closely with vendors to ensure that library databases are accessible.

The authors present strategies for creating and converting electronic resources and services that are accessible to D/HH users.

This paper fills a gap in literature by addressing fully online library services for users with disabilities with a particular focus on meeting the needs of D/HH users in a distance-learning environment.

The purpose of this paper is to review the library and information science literature related to the accessibility of digital resources by individuals with mental, physical or other impairments, to assess the state of research in the field and to explore new avenues for investigation.

There is an increasingly rich body of literature surrounding digital accessibility in libraries, ranging from practical guides for authors of Web content, to principles of universal design, to the ethical considerations of libraries subscribing to packages of digital content, to critical examinations of the accessibility guidelines themselves. This review is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive; less attention is given to studies of specific tools that will become quickly outdated, and more attention is given to underlying considerations and approaches that will remain relevant even as technologies change.

Many libraries and vendors have taken steps to provide equal access to websites and electronic resources in recent years. While the literature reflects an increasing level of critical engagement with concepts around disability and diversity, it also demonstrates methodological weaknesses in assessment projects that do not lead to meaningful accessibility.

This review offers theoretical and practical perspectives from recent work that can assist librarians in planning and decision-making, as they deal with an increasingly complex landscape of digital resources.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a topic where blind participants expressed significant concern: obtaining full text and accessible full text.

This qualitative study includes 18 open-ended telephone interviews with blind academic library users in the USA. The study uses the viewpoint that understanding blind peoples’ perspectives is essential for equal accessibility.

Locating full text via link resolvers seemed problematic. Inaccessible articles and complications and delays creating accessible versions of print books limited participants’ use of materials. Enabling technologies and services were highlighted.

Caution should be used when generalizing from this study due to its sample size and methodology. The study is not a web accessibility test, which would analyze coding, nor a usability test, which would observe users. Additional research would be ideal; however, libraries should not wait to attend to accessibility.

In addition to improving digital accessibility, to address difficulty obtaining full text, libraries could offer to locate full text for blind users and implement SmartLinking and single sign on authentication. To deal with inaccessible full text, libraries could work with disability offices to obtain accessible materials and to convert materials to accessible format. DRM free HTML or EPUB e-books can have accessibility advantages. Outsourcing conversion to accessible format can also help. Libraries could offer reader service to assist blind users locating relevant sections of books to convert.

Compared to previous studies, this study includes a larger number of blind screen reader users; describes some unique issues; and includes blind users’ own interpretations.

The purpose of this paper is to take a critical view at leadership of the American Library Association (ALA) and discuss the extent to which its policies promote, or fail to promote, a barrier‐free online library environment.

Analyses selected ALA policies, and examines the degree to which accessibility advocating groups within ALA participate in the process of policy making.

Several ALA policies and guidelines dealing with digital resources neglect to address the needs of users with disabilities. The organizations within ALA that are advocates for people with disabilities, particularly the Libraries Serving Special Populations Section (LSSPS) and the Accessibility Assembly, fail to pay attention to policy development in other ALA branches.

Suitable ALA organizations should establish a clearinghouse providing easy access to vendor‐supplied information as well as pointers to data collected by independent researchers. Advocates for people with disabilities within ALA need to band together and put in place an organizational structure (a kind of watchdog group) that enables them to systematically monitor, and, if deemed necessary, to respond to the policies and guidelines drafted by other ALA groups.

This is the only article that takes a critical view at ALA's leadership and discusses the extent to which ALA's policies promote, or fail to promote, a barrier‐free online library environment.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and identify the status of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) conformance levels (A, AA, AAA) and accessibility status in terms of Severity (Error, Warning and Review) and Responsibility (Editor, Webmaster and Developer) of Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) Library websites based on Siteimprove Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platform.

The library websites of IITs were tested using Siteimprove web-tool to gather details pertaining to W3C's WCAG 2.1 standards. The data thus obtained were then visualized using spreadsheet software for greater insight. A partial correlation test was also done to assess the relationship between the three conformance levels.

The study could identify significant accessibility-related limitations of the IIT library websites concerning the three WCAG 2.1 conformance levels A (max IIT Bombay), AA (max IIT Dhanbad (ISM)) and AAA (max IIT Gandhinagar and IIT Varanasi (BHU)), Severity and Responsibility. A positive linear relationship exists amongst these conformance levels. The mean value of conformance levels were found to be 18.3 (A), 2.2 (AA) and 3.1 (AAA); Severity scores were found to be 14.4 (Error), 3.9 (Warning) and 5.2 (Review); and Responsibility scores were found to be 6 (Editor), 9.3 (Webmaster) and 8.3 (Developer), respectively.

The study highlights the comparative picture of accessibility issues and conformance levels of the IITs' library website homepage with the help of results derived/based on Siteimprove Accessibility Checker. The findings of the study reveal that though the library website of IITs' in India possess a well-designed and easily navigable website homepage as far as their accessibility for VIPs is concerned, there are several issues that are still to be resolved.

World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) Marrakesh VIP Treaty (MVT) and the W3C's WCAG cater to the requirements and rights of the persons with vision-related disability of accessing information and knowledge building a steeper and deeper knowledge divide. Identifying and rectifying the shortcomings in the library websites will bridge the accessibility-divide and make the society more inclusive.

No previous study could be identified evaluating the accessibility issues of the library website of Indian IITs focussed on vision-disabled persons using Siteimprove. The methodology and approach of this paper have value in terms of reusability and reproducibility facilitating future studies.