Abstract
 

The author will discuss common accessibility barriers faced by students with disabilities when trying to access visual information included in Web-based instruction. Visual examples of access barriers will be included, as well as suggestions for the alternative design of these materials to ensure the accessibility of Web-based instruction for all users. Additional accessibility resources will also be discussed.

Introduction
 

With the creation of groups such as the World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) Web Accessibility Initiative, issues of the accessibility of the Web by persons with disabilities has gained a growing amount of media attention. Assistive technologies such as screen readers and customized Web browsers struggle to keep up with the rapidly changing and increasingly complex Web page designs found on corporate and educational sites alike, resulting in an almost daily software revision process by assistive technology developers. Despite this growing amount of attention, at this time there has been no legal precedent set for the legal requirements of creating accessible Web sites. As debates and speculation continue about the possible legal battle looming ahead, many consider Web-based instruction to fall under the area known as "reasonable accommodations." Reasonable accommodations are modifications to course materials or activities that serve to enable a qualified student with a disability to have an equal opportunity to attain the same level of performance as a similarly qualified student without a disability. Reasonable accommodations are required by law in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as well as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the case of Web-based course materials, this may mean providing alternative text-only Web pages or non-Web-based alternatives.

The push toward Web-based distance education has brought with it a promise of "anywhere, anytime, and for anyone." Since the introduction of the first graphic-mode browser, Mosaic, the ability to display graphical information on the World Wide Web started a revolution, not only in increasing public access to information archives but also in opening up the possibilities for exciting visual modes of information communication. Web designers, recognizing the exciting possibilities made available through Web-based multimedia, began to push the coding limits of the Web further and further out, often to what many refer to as the "bleeding edge." But designers who found themselves on the "bleeding edge" often also found themselves with Web designs that could only be viewed by the latest Web-browsers with large amounts of memory allocated to them in order to handle the information display.

Ironically, the price of being on the "bleeding edge" may be to exclude the very population that may best benefit from Web-based distance education, tarnishing the "anyone" promise of these distance education technologies. This population, students with disabilities, now faces the very real possibility that the computer-based technologies that helped level the playing field for so long may become yet another barrier due to the difficulties that assistive software has with keeping up with the fast-paced coding environment of the World Wide Web. Additionally, the expense of constantly upgrading hardware and software to keep up with new innovations in Web site design is cost prohibitive for most. Although many designers of Web-based instruction have preferred to remain a few paces behind the latest coding innovations to increase the accessibility of the their courses by students with slower modem connections and older computers, much greater attention to the difficulties faced by students with disabilities is still needed. This is particularly the case with graphical information.
The focus of this paper is to present the results of a year-long evaluation study on the accessibility barriers faced by students with disabilities when trying to access Web-based instructional materials, with a special emphasis on the barriers of graphical information. Attention is also paid to the advantages that graphical information can provide. Additional resources about access are included at the end of the paper.

Evaluating for Accessibility
 

A year long evaluation (February 1997-1998) of the accessibility of a variety of web-based instructional materials was conducted by the author (Hinn, 1997; Hinn, 1998a; Hinn, 1998b; Hinn, 1998c). Four different representations of Web-based instruction were included in the study. The first half of the evaluation looked at an interactive Web site created by an educational psychology professor for his introductory statistics course. The second half of the evaluation looked at three Web-based instructional environments that were developed at and used by a large number of classes at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Over the course of the year, computer-assisted focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with eleven university students with disabilities. The student participants included students with Attention Deficit Disorder with a Learning Disability (1), Traumatic Brain Injury (1), Severe Visual Impairments (2), Blindness (1), Cerebral Palsy (1), Muscular Dystrophy (3), Quadriplegia with limited arm mobility (1), and Quadriplegia with no arm mobility (1). In addition to the focus groups and individual interviews, a Web page HTML analysis tool, ãBobby,ä was used to find additional accessibility barriers. A review of articles and Web sites pertaining to access issues served to augment the findings.
The students who participated in the evaluation study used a variety of assistive technologies, including screen magnification software, screen readers, Braille output devices, screen manipulation software, and keyboard versus mouse navigation. The interaction between the assistive technologies used by the participants and the visual elements encountered during the focus groups and individual interviews will be discussed throughout the paper.

The following subsections will address many of the major findings of the evaluation study, focusing on three areas pertaining to graphics and other visual information found on Web pages: Layout Issues; Graphics; and Interactive Components. Examples from the focus groups and individual interviews conducted with students with disabilities will also be provided.

Layout Issues
 

The canvas for any Web-based instructional environment is its layout. The importance of providing a well-organized navigational layout for a Web site cannot be overemphasized. Carmela Cunningham and Norman Coombs in their book entitled ãInformation Access and Adaptive Technology,ä suggest several compensatory strategies for a person with traumatic brain injury who has problems remembering things such as their daily schedule. These strategies include the use of electronic organizers (Cunningham & Coombs, 1997, p. 101). We can extend this a bit by thinking about Web-based instructional environments as electronic organizers for course information.

One participant in the evaluation study, a student with traumatic brain injury, experienced many difficulties navigating through several of the Web sites presented in the study. Like many people with traumatic brain injury, the student had some visual, language, and memory impairments, as well as some difficulties in organizing information. When encountering one particularly well organized site, the student was visibly relieved. The student complemented the site, noting that it was self-explanatory and easy to use overall (Hinn, 1998c).

Itâs not hard to understand the studentâs relief in the previous example when encountering a well-organized Web site after struggling with ones that were not as intuitive. For students with disabilities who have relied on computer-based technologies as compensatory strategies, issues like poor organization and other access barriers can be very disarming. While it may seem logical to most to ensure that a Web-based instructional environment is fairly easy to navigate through, clearly there are environments where this is not the case. Designers should use consistent design strategies and navigational features for all documents within a site to create an easy to use layout for all users, not just those with cognitive disabilities (WAI, 1998). This includes consistent positioning of logos, navigational links, and overall design of the site.

One popular technique that Web designers use to organize information on a Web site is frames (Figure 1). Frames provide users with a consistent, visually obvious navigational environment. The Web sites examined in the evaluation study were seen as an advantage by the participants with cognitive disabilities. However, the use of frames can present some major difficulties for persons with disabilities. First, they are impossible for visually impaired students who rely on screen readers in conjunction with older versions of Lynx, a text-mode browser, to access. If designers do not provide an alternative set of instructions using the <NO FRAMES> tag, then the site will not be possible for these users to access. If an <NO FRAMES> tag with a clear alternative navigation strategy, then these students will still be able to access the information on the Web site. However, many designers will include a <NO FRAMES> alternative that simply tells users that they need to upgrade to a newer version of Netscape or Internet Explorer. The expense of consistent upgrade of assistive technologies to meet the challenges of new browsers may prevent some users from upgrading. Also, the use of graphical mode browsers such as Netscape or Internet Explorer is not as popular for visually impaired users. Therefore, the set of alternative instructions in the HTML source code should provide links to pages within the site.

Newer versions of Lynx allow users to navigate through frames. However, when choosing to use frames for site navigation, always use descriptive frame names such as <frame name = ãnavigation_ barä·> instead of <frame name = ãleftä·>. This allows those using text-mode browsers such as Lynx to make more a more confident choice when browsing through frames. In one of the Web-based learning environments, the designers had included a help document that contained seven frames within one page. This caused the blind participant quite a bit of difficulty as they navigated through the complex framed environment where they were presented only with frame names like ãleft,ä ãtop,ä and ãmiddleä (Hinn, 1998a)

Another difficulty that frames present is that they can be extremely difficult for students using speech recognition software to navigate, such as the quadriplegic students in the evaluation study with little or no arm mobility. These students use voice commands to scroll through the pages and since frames split the browser window into several smaller windows, the software often does not know which frame window to focus on, which can leave the student extremely frustrated (Hinn, 1998a; Hinn 1998b; Hinn 1998c). Therefore, itâs a good idea for designers to include a link in a prominent place on a page that uses frames to an alternative page that does not utilize frames. This way the students can choose between the two layout options whether they find frames difficult or advantageous to navigate. Also consider including a lead page to the site that allows the users to choose up front as to whether they wish to navigate using frame or not. If you choose to create a lead page however, be sure and place a link to the unframed version on the framed version (and vice versa) in case users have entered the site without passing through the lead page.

Tables are another visual layout option that many site designers use as a way to design the visual layout of a Web page, as well as to organize information such as calendar information or spreadsheet information use. Some designers will also use tables to create text in columns. The format of this paper provides a visual example of the last example. Screen readers that persons with severe reading disabilities or visual disabilities use, often have a difficult time reading tables or other multicolumn text found in word processing and Web documents. For instance, instead of reading down each column individually, they read across both columns. This may result in making your text inaccessible to students with these disabilities. However, tables can be an ideal way of visually organizing information, especially for students with cognitive disabilities. Therefore, consider creating a text-only version (containing only text and hypertext links ö no images or tables) of your pages that include tables and linking to these versions at the top of pages using tables.

The palette of a Web-based instructional environment is the color choices that a designer has to choose from. The first aspect of this palette involves the use of background images on Web pages. The use of background images, particularly images that are less subtle, can often make text difficult to read, especially for persons with low vision or dyslexia. The same can be said for background colors if the text on the page does not sufficiently contrast the background color. If used, be sure that the background patterns and colors contrast well with the font color so that readability is not impaired. However, for some students, the use of any background image or background color may not be friendly. Most, but not all, browsers allow the user to override background colors and images as well as text colors with their preferences. Yet during one of the focus groups, it became evident that some of the participants did not know that they could override the color scheme until the evaluator demonstrated it to them (Hinn, 1998a). This suggests an area where disabled student services at universities could provide students with more training with regards to interacting with Web-based course materials.

Many color combinations can reduce text readability for students with visual disabilities (without total blindness), dyslexia, and color blindness. Designers should be careful when using very intense colors such as bright red on a bright blue background. This can cause psychological effects such as ghost images, after images and even irritability. When using combinations of font colors to distinguish information, be careful when using red/green color combinations, as many color blind students will have trouble distinguishing between the colors. Additionally, some color blind students will also have trouble distinguishing between blue/yellow color combinations. Be cautious when using text and background color combinations in the same color family, such as medium blue against dark blue. A high contrast of colors should be used (such as black text against a white background) in order to maintain text readability. The Web Accessibility Initiative (1998) suggests that designers should test their pages using a black and white computer screen to see if their color choices will provide sufficient contrast.

Graphics
 

Perhaps the most commonly overlooked, yet easiest to fix, accessibility barrier with regards to visual information is when a Web site designer fails to include alternative text (ALT text) for the graphics that they include in their Web site. When alternative text is not included within an image tag, a student who turns off image loading on their browser, uses a text-based browser such as Lynx, or uses a screen reader, will be unable to tell whether the image was important or merely decorative. In these cases, images without alternative text will be interpreted either as [INLINE] (when image is not a graphic link), [LINK] (when image is a graphic link), or with the browserâs default ãmissing graphicä image. It was pointed by the participant that was blind that the intermittent use of alternative text for the icons used for navigational links in one of the environments being evaluated made site navigation extremely difficult. Since this student was using Lynx to access the Web site, both the student and the evaluator had to take a guess as to which link to follow in order to make their way through the Web-based learning environment (Hinn, 1998a).

To include alternative text for images, a designer need only to add a description of the image placed after the ALT tag within the image tag (<img src=ãname_of_image.gifä ALT=ãPhoto of my cats, Sneezie and Gatoä>). For images such as graphical bullet, a shorter description can be used such as a asterisk (*) symbolizing a text bullet. Images that are linked to separate Web pages should include a description of the link in the alternative text description such as ãLink to Class Syllabus.ä

The use of imagemaps (Figure 2) can cause a similar problem for students with visual disabilities. When alternative text is not included within an imagemap hot-spot, a student using a text-mode browser such as Lynx will be unable to know exactly where to click within an imagemap. In browsers such as Lynx, imagemap hot-spots without alternative text will be interpreted either as [LINK] and the map, if alternative text has not been included for the imagemap itself, will be interpreted as [ISMAP]. Adding alternative text for imagemaps is similar to adding it for imagesWhen using HTML imagemap hot-spots (<area shape = ãrectä coords=ã5,5,100,40ä href = ãname_of_file.htmlä ALT=ãdescription of fileä> for the imagemap hot-spot it defines.

The use of imagemaps can also be an advantage to students with other disabilities. In one of the focus groups in the study, it was noted by the students who had little or no arm mobility, such as the students with Cerebral Palsy, Muscular Dystrophy, and Quadriplegia, that the large, clickable areas found in an imagemap serve as an advantage for site navigation. These students often have difficulties, as explained a bit later in this paper, with the precision needed to activate text links (Hinn, 1997; Hinn, 1998b; Hinn, 1998c). For the learning disabled student, the use of a navigational device in the form of an imagemap can provide a consistent means for navigation. The combination of text and graphics in most imagemaps can also be an advantage for the learning disabled student who tends to be more of a visual thinker. However, the icons chosen by the designer may not be as intuitive as the designer intended, therefore an alternative text navigation environment should be included beneath any image map that is the sole means for site navigation.

Picture cues and/or color contrast can help some students with disabilities differentiate between links in a graphical navigation button bar and/or an imagemap (such as those in Figure 2). The lack of a picture cue  and/or color contrast for graphical navigation links (Figure 3) caused a few problems for the participants with visual disabilities and the participant with traumatic brain injury. Due to the inability to enlarge graphic icons, unlike font size, one participant pointed out that they would have to memorize the location of each icon in order to see which one was which (Hinn, 1998c). It was suggested that the inclusion of some sort of small graphic or different color icons would be beneficial. These participants also noted that since the graphics were mostly text (such as those in Figure 3), it would be helpful to offer the students the option to navigate via textual links, as the students can enlarge those. In one extreme instance, one of the evaluands made extensive use of navigational icons that included black text on gradient gray backgrounds, causing extreme frustration for these users (Hinn, 1998a). Without text alternatives, these students were unable to independently read the graphic icon text and, when failing to be able to read the screen from an extremely close range (1-2 inches from the computer monitor), had to rely on the evaluator for assistance. This lack of independence seemed to genuinely anger these students.

One Web-based courseware environment examined during the evaluation was particularly complemented because of its visually pleasing and intuitive graphic icons. One participant with a severe visual impairment noted that the use of a variety of colors in graphic icons was important to help differentiate between icons as well as to focus attention on an important feature or navigational mechanism (Hinn, 1998b). On the other hand, the designers of another Web-based learning environment that was examined did not receive as much praise, as the site included a large amount of decorative icons as well as functional icons that were difficult to differentiate. In fact, the student with traumatic brain damage as well as the students with severe visual impairments found the large number of graphic icons on any particular page, particularly noting the animated graphics, gave the pages a ãcluttered,ä ãconfusing,ä and ãdisorientingä look and feel (Hinn, 1998a).

Interactive Components
 

Asynchronous and synchronous chat features are becoming commonplace in Web-based instruction, a feature that may not be immediately considered to be in the category of graphical/visual information. However, there are certainly aspects of a chat feature that include some definite aspects of visual information such as a designerâs choice of visual layout such as spacing within a chat feature.

Many asynchronous message-posting forums are designed so that the posted messages appear in a list format, with each list item hotlinked to itâs corresponding message. The spacing of listed information can cause difficulties for students with arm mobility and learning disabilities. For those with learning disabilities, particularly learning disabilities that include reading disorders, visually differentiating between lines of text can be extremely difficult. With regards to the asynchronous boards that were examined in the evaluation study, the spacing of individual messages did in fact pose a problem for the focus group participant with a learning disability. The student felt that the forum was too cluttered and difficult to differentiate between messages, mentioning that more ãwhite spaceä between the messages should be used.

Likewise, for students with limited or no arm mobility, the close proximity of the lines of text can cause extreme frustration when trying to maneuver the mouse pointer over one linked entry over another. One student participant in the study with Cerebral Palsy explained that ãIt would be hard for me to try to click on any of these·the highlighted hyperlinks. You never know where [the mouse pointer] is going to land on. It could land on two of [the links]. I get frustrated with thatä (Hinn, 1997). Another student in the focus group, a student with quadriplegia with no arm mobility, agreed and clarified by saying that it is difficult for the screen manipulation software (in this case Dragon Dictate) to move the mouse down with that much precision. The lack of sufficient leading (amount of white space between lines of text) caused difficulties for the quadriplegic students with and without limited arm mobility, as well as the students with Cerebral Palsy and Muscular Dystrophy.

The examples of the students with learning and arm mobility disabilities certainly suggest that lines of hotlinked text should have a greater amount of space between them. One technique that many designers use is to include a graphical bullet in front of the linked text (Figure 4). This often results in a bit more space between lines of text (depending on the amount of space around the graphic) and also provides a visual cue to indicate separate linked text lines. Be sure an include an asterisk (*) as alternative (ALT) text for graphical bullets. Another suggestion was that designer could use a visual cue to let user know that they are over the link that they want such as JavaScript ãmouse overs.ä Use of a visual device like this would in a change of some sort, such as scripting that a graphic bullet in front of the link change to a different color bullet, to the link when the student passed over a certain link. However, keep in mind that some students with limited vision may not be able to clearly see what is happening and may worry that they are missing something important. Additionally, one student also mentioned that the message topics should be separated in a better fashion, such as separating discussion topics so that it is visually more obvious. This may suggest the need for the inclusion of more graphics or other visual cue or organizer in asynchronous message boards for some users.

Another interactive feature, HTML forms, contains many visual layout aspects that can present access difficulties. Several participants with disabilities that included limited or no arm mobility had difficulty activating parts of a standard Web form such as radio buttons and check boxes. For students with limited arm mobility that could use the keyboard but had difficulty manipulating the mouse relied on keyboard navigation using the number pad along with the assistance of accessibility features available with their operating system. These features help the student move the mouse pointer on the screen. Despite the helpfulness of these accessibility features, they still require a fair amount of manual dexterity. This became evident when the students tried to activate answer choices in an online quiz that used forms with radio buttons and check boxes. Several passes over the radio buttons and check boxes were needed before the students were able to position the mouse pointer over the button or box that was next to their answer choice.

Students, such as those with no arm mobility, relying on speech input devices to activate on-screen elements had similar difficulty. For most of the affected participants, however, the ability to fill out an online quiz was more attractive to them than a traditional paper/pencil format, adding that the independence of being able to complete an online quiz themselves was the part that they found to be extremely valuable.

The major recommendation that the students had was that future versions of HTML and Web browsers should include the option for designers and end-users to be able to increase the size of these form elements. One more immediate solution is simply to provide an alternative quiz site for students who have difficulties with these elements on a text form, such as one that relies on text entry boxes versus radio buttons and/or check boxes.

The use of graphics in one online quiz created by one of the learning environments examined in the evaluation study brought up another example of an accessibility barrier presented by visual aspects of a Web form. The developers of the environment had used non-standard HTML in the Web form to provide graphical form submission buttons and answer choices (replacing the use of radio buttons for answer selection) instead of using the traditional gray form buttons that are standard with HTML. This impacted the participant who was blind, as their text-mode browser, Lynx, could not interpret the graphics as form elements. Ironically, this is one potential solution for the students with disabilities involving limited or no arm mobility. The use of larger graphical icons that can be activated to submit a particular answer choice on an online quiz question would require less precision in positioning the mouse pointer. Oftentimes, a solution for one set of users is a limitation for others.

One additional interactive component that is used by Web site designers as a source of visual information is the integration of non-HTML components such Java applets and items requiring plug-ins such as Macromediaâs Shockwave and video. These items have the potential for interactivity, although it is noted that these elements can also be provided to students in a more traditional delivery-style format. The use of interactive, particularly animated, components can be the key for understanding difficult concepts for those who are more visual thinkers, such as certain students with learning disabilities. However, as it is the case with images, students with visual disabilities will be unable to know if the applet is important to understanding a concept or just decorative if no alternative text is included within the applet tag. When referring to a Java applet, include alternative text within the tag such as <applet code=ãmy_applet.classä ALT=ãDice Rolling Simulation for Probability Lesson that·ä>. It is also recommended that designer include a longer descriptive narrative separate from the applet tag, especially if the applet is demonstrating an important concept (WAI, 1998). The same goes for other interactive components included in a Web page requiring plug-ins such Shockwave. This additional descriptive text will also help students with arm mobility limitations for whom downloading and installing any required plug-ins may not seem worth the amount of physical effort needed.

In a similar vein, use of video, which also requires a plug-in of some sort depending on file type, can provide difficulties for some users. Video clips are not accessible to the blind and are difficult to access for people with slow connection speeds and/or minimal computer system capabilities. Additionally, if audio is included as a part of the video clip, users with auditory disabilities will be unable to tell if there is a narrative that is important to understand the concepts in the video. As with other Web-based instructional components requiring the use of a plug-in, always include a full descriptive narrative as an accessible alternative. This means that the students should be provided with a transcript of any audio portion of the video, as well as a rich description of the visual aspects of the video.

Additional Accessibility Resources
 

There are many valuable resources on the Web to help Web designers analyze their existing Web pages for accessibility as well as learn more about Web site and hardware/software accessibility. Links to a number of these resources can be found on Access.Edu (http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu/access), a site created by the author (Figure 5). The following sections discuss some of the more popular resources.

Companies
 

A few computer companies have created special resource pages on accessibility on their corporate Web sites. They include Apple, Microsoft, and Sun Microsystems.

Apple Computerâs ãDisability Resourcesä (http:// www2.apple.com/disability) contains information about Macintosh-compatible hardware and software tools for people with disabilities (Mac Access Passport) as well as information about their ãUniversal Accessä (known as ãEasy Accessä prior to Mac OS 8) utilities bundled with Mac OS 8. Additionally, they offer links to their shareware/freeware library of third party software utilities for users with disabilities, links to online disability-related chats, and resource sheets about the latest adaptive technologies.

Microsoftâs ãAccessibility and Disabilitiesä (http://www.microsoft.com/enable) Web site provides information about Microsoftâs current accessibility projects as well as tips about how to use the accessibility features found in specific Microsoft products, such as Office, Windows, and Internet Explorer. They also offer a listing of third party accessibility products for Microsoft Windows. Microsoft also includes a special section on accessible design for developers and designers of hardware, software, accessibility aids, and web sites.

Sun Microsystemsâ ãEnabling Technologies Programä (http://www.sun.com/tech/access) primarily focuses on the design of accessible software aimed at developers through a series of white papers but they also provide some useful information about why accessibility is important for developers to consider. These include papers entitled ãTowards Accessible HCI,ä ãNew Technologies Open to the Web to Everyone,ä and ãDesigning for Accessibility.ä They also include information about Java accessibility in an effort to provide developers with information on how to build accessibility into their Java projects.

Organizations
 

Additionally, there are several organizations dedicated to Web and software accessibility that offer guidelines and information for the public. A few of the sites with the most extensive information for creating accessible Web sites are discussed below.

ãPeople with disabilities must have the same access to information and resources as everyone elseä is the slogan for EASI (Equal Access to Software and Information), an affiliate of the American Association for Higher Education. EASIâs (http:// www.isc.rit.edu/~easi) mission, is to provide information and guidance to educators and businesspeople regarding ãaccess-to-information technologiesä by people with disabilities. The site includes a listing of technology resources and publications, including EASI sponsored online publications like their journal ãInformational Technology and Disabilitiesä and information on their online workshops on creating accessible Web sites.

The National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM), is part of the media access department at WGBH, Boston Public Broadcasting. NCAM (http:// www.wgbh.org/wgbh/pages/ncam) extends the public broadcastingâs 25-year history with media accessibility that began with the creation of closed captioning for the deaf and hard-of-hearing with their ãWeb Access Project.ä This project primarily focuses on creating accessible Web sites for users with vision and hearing disabilities. Perhaps the most unique part of their focus is their work on creating accessible video clips for the Web, via captioning and audio-description.

Tools, Tutorials & Web Design Guides
 

Finally, there are a few Web site accessibility tools, tutorials, and design guides to help designers check their own sites for accessibility and are discussed below.

 ãBobbyä (http://www.cast.org/bobby), developed at the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST), is a free, automated Web page analysis tool. Two versions of Bobby now exist. The original version is Web-based and allows developers to quickly check a single page for its accessibility for persons with disabilities. To use the Web-based version, a designer simply enters the URL of the page into a text-entry box on the Bobby homepage and clicks on the submit button below the text-entry box. Bobby then analyzes the HTML source code and returns a list of accessibility errors and suggestions to the user. A second version of Bobby now exists as standalone Java application. Designers can download the application, now in beta testing, and test an entire Web site on their local machine. Additionally, this version of Bobby provides the Web site designer with previews of what the Web page would look like in Lynx, a text mode browser that many blind students use.

ãConsidering User Differencesä (http:// www.ed.uiuc.edu/people/mhinn/sbd) is a Web site design tutorial written by the author that looks at accessibility issues surrounding a designerâs choices of color and backgrounds in Web pages.  The disabilities that the tutorial focuses on are reading disabilities such as dyslexia, color-blindness, and visual impairments. The tutorial offers visual, interactive examples of the issues addressed in the site.

The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) was launched by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in April 1997 in order to pursue the creation of a universally accessible Web. WAI provides a ãwork in progressä draft of Web page authoring guidelines (http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-WAI-PAGEAUTH/) that, despite the draft status of the work, is probably the most extensive set of page authoring guidelines available. The recommendations of Bobby are based on these guidelines.

Conclusions
 

In their opening statements of their proposed recommendations for authoring accessible Web pages, the Web Accessibility Initiative notes that: ãAccessibility does not mean minimal page design, it means thoughtful page designä (WAI, 1998). They go on to say that Web page ã·authors should not be discouraged from using multimedia, but rather should use it in a manner which ensures that the material they publish is accessible to the widest possible audienceä (WAI, 1998). This is certainly the spirit in which this paper should be taken.

Having course resources available on the World Wide Web can serve as an advantage for many students with disabilities, particularly those with mobility disabilities. As one focus group member stated: ãFor me·having things around on the Net is a lot easier to read materials because I donât have any hand movement. So in other words, using a book and so forth to look things up·itâs a lot harder. Whereas having it on the computer, I can just sit there and go ahead and work through it and get everything from the page. But I wish that I had a lot more classes that had [materials] on the Netä (Hinn, 1997).

However, as evidenced by some of the examples in this paper, often the solutions for one group can be a barrier to another. Itâs important to solicit the options of all of your students with regards to accessibility, as universal accessibility is about providing access to course materials to all students ö not just those students with disabilities. Certainly with regards to the growing number of courses that rely on student access of Web-based materials, issues such as slow connections and hardware come into play for many students, serving as a disadvantage for these students -- with and without disabilities. With regards to accessibility for users with disabilities, the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) recommends frequent retest with their analysis tool ãBobbyä and familiarity with the most current working draft of the WAI page authoring guidelines. They also urge page designers to review their FAQ page, as there are certain recommendations from WAI that are important for accessibility but cannot be automatically tested by an HTML code analysis tool. But perhaps most importantly, CAST reminds designers to request feedback from their users, stating ãTrue accessibility is ultimately a human endeavorä (CAST, 1998).

References
 

Center for Applied Special Technology (1998, August 26). Welcome to Bobby 3.0. [Online]. Available: http://www.cast.org/bobby

Cunningham, C., & Coombs, N. (1997). Information access and adaptive technology. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

Hinn, D. M. (1997). Evaluation of the Educational Psychology 390 Web site with regards to accessibility for persons with disabilities. Unpublished final technical report, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Hinn, D. M. (1998a). Evaluation of CyberProf with regards to accessibility for persons with disabilities. Unpublished final technical report, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Hinn, D. M. (1998b). Evaluation of Mallard with regards to accessibility for persons with disabilities. Unpublished final technical report, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Hinn, D. M. (1998c). Evaluation of the Virtual Classroom Interface with regards to accessibility for persons with disabilities. Unpublished final technical report, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Web Accessibility Initiative (1998, September 8). WAI accessibility guidelines: Page authoring. [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-WAI-PAGEAUTH/