Accessibility of Portuguese Public Universities' sites

The aim of this study is to characterise the accessibility of all Public Portuguese Universities' homepages and the support services they offer to disabled students. We employed two different online automatic tools: using the ‘eXaminator’ to determine the conformance of websites to checkpoints; using ‘HERA’ to identify any automatically detectable errors or checkpoints. The choice of these tools was according to the Portuguese Government recommendation, to public in general, as the ones best suited to perform accessibility check-ups. Thus, we used those tools to present a brief characterisation of the sites' accessibility. The data collection took place in 2007, 2008 and 2009 to identify differences. Following this work, we chose all the sites that stated to have specific services to support disabled students and made a detailed analysis to: (a) identify existing university services to disabled students; (b) identify possible relations among the accessibility' scores in the universities that offer services to disabled students. The main results of this study were as follows: schools overall accessibility of the webpage were not acceptable and only 12.5% sites had information regarding supporting services to disabled students. The data collected identified an overall web accessibility improvement during the 2007–2008, followed by a stabilisation of the results.

[1]  Peter Gregor,et al.  Auditing accessibility of UK Higher Education web sites , 2002, Interact. Comput..

[2]  Helen Petrie,et al.  Remote usability evaluations With disabled people , 2006, CHI.

[3]  Mary Hricko Design and implementation of web-enabled teaching tools , 2003 .

[4]  Holly Yu,et al.  Web accessibility and the law: issues in implementation , 2003 .

[5]  Renata Pontin de Mattos Fortes,et al.  An evaluation of web accessibility metrics based on their attributes , 2008, SIGDOC '08.

[6]  Marilyn Tremaine,et al.  Proceedings of the fourth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies , 2000 .

[7]  Maria De Marsico,et al.  Evaluating web sites: exploiting user's expectations , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[8]  Myriam Arrue,et al.  The use of guidelines to automatically verify Web accessibility , 2004, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[9]  Jean Vanderdonckt,et al.  Automated Web Evaluation by Guideline Review , 2005, J. Web Eng..

[10]  Jonathan Lazar,et al.  Web accessibility in the Mid-Atlantic United States: a study of 50 homepages , 2003, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[11]  Patricia S. Wall,et al.  Disabled student access in an era of technology , 2003, Internet High. Educ..

[12]  Hironobu Takagi,et al.  Proceedings of the 2010 International Cross Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A) , 2010, W4A 2010.

[13]  César I. Llanos,et al.  Design guidelines for web applications based on local patterns , 2007, EATIS '07.

[14]  David Sloan,et al.  Accessibility 2.0: people, policies and processes , 2007, W4A '07.

[15]  Hisham M. Haddad,et al.  Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, March 16-20, 2008 , 2008, SAC.

[16]  Hugo Paredes,et al.  A different approach to real web accessibility , 2001, HCI.

[17]  Peter Gregor,et al.  Accessible accessibility , 2000, CUU '00.

[18]  Álvaro Rocha Qualidade dos Portais Web das Instituições Portuguesas de Ensino Superior , 2003 .

[19]  Aline Chevalier,et al.  A Study of Automated Web Site Evaluation Tools , 2002 .

[20]  Giorgio Brajnik,et al.  Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: a method for tool effectiveness , 2004, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[21]  Melody Y. Ivory,et al.  Using Automated Tools to Improve Web Site Usage by Users with Diverse Abilities , 2003 .

[22]  Brian Kelly Web Watch: An Accessibility Analysis of UK University Entry Points , 2002 .

[23]  Helen Petrie,et al.  Interact'99 Workshop ." Making Designers Aware of Existing Guidelines for Accessibility Evaluation of Guidelines for Designing Accessible Web Content , 2022 .

[24]  Lesley Wilson,et al.  The Bologna Process - Towards the European Higher Education Area , 2007 .

[25]  Henrike Gappa,et al.  The Usability of Accessibility Evaluation Tools , 2007, HCI.

[26]  Peter Gregor,et al.  Evaluating web resources for disability access , 2000, Assets '00.

[27]  Panayiotis Zaphiris,et al.  Website Usability and Content Accessibility of the top USA Universities , 2001, WebNet.

[28]  Bambang Parmanto,et al.  A longitudinal evaluation of accessibility: higher education web sites , 2005, Internet Res..

[29]  Renata Pontin de Mattos Fortes,et al.  An approach based on metrics for monitoring web accessibility in Brazilian municipalities web sites , 2008, SAC '08.

[30]  Laurie Harrison,et al.  Web accessibility validation and repair: which tool and why? , 2003 .

[31]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools: A Survey and Some Improvements , 2006, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci..

[32]  David Comeaux,et al.  Web accessibility trends in university libraries and library schools , 2007, Libr. Hi Tech.