Skip to navigation

Web Accessibility - Key Findings 2005

Preliminary Sampling – End User Feedback, Interviews, and Surveys (Manual)

Key Findings: The KKC community tends to use the site to access third party links and carry out specific tasks (Blackboard, My.CCC.edu, Center for Distance Learning, Paying Tuition Online, Registering for Classes, Requesting Transcripts, etc.); while prospective students and the general public tend to use the site to access information about the college and its programs.

According to the data gathered via preliminary feedback, the end user often spends too much time trying to find information or accomplishing a task. Sometimes, out of frustration, end users leave the website before they find what they need. Often, they are turned off by the site’s lack of usability, outdated information, and  in some instances - excessive scrolling (and loss of access to navigation as a result).

The KKC homepage has the most frequently recurring end user complaints and is one of the pages which failed the human (manual) usability test. The most cited complaints were:

 

Overall, end users would like to see components implemented that will improve functionality and usability of the site in order to make their browsing experience more successful and efficient. They suggested additional components / areas such as: a site wide search engine, document resource section, Human Resource section, Academic Community section, Student Community section, expanded departmental sub-sites, more timely news and other information. 

Example of feedback concerning the usability of the current site:
“I’m just getting frustrated trying do what should be a simple task.”
-Darla Ware, End User

 

Compliance with City Colleges of Chicago Web Accessibility Recommendations – Manual

Key Findings: When the Kennedy-King College website was manually measured against the City Colleges of Chicago Web Accessibility Recommendations, we found that the site failed to comply with eight out of fifteen guidelines. The failed CCC guidelines are counted among the guidelines failed in the automated evaluations (see “Validators – Automated, Key Findings”). Kennedy King College does, however currently support the following CCC guidelines:

 

Validators - Automated

Key Findings: According to the validators used, the Kennedy-King College website (as it stands) appears to not meet most of the accessibility guidelines set forth by W3C’s WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative) Priority 1, 2, 3 and City Colleges of Chicago.

Total number of pages evaluated: 25
Total number of pages that passed the evaluation: 0
Page with the most errors: Homepage

According to the automated tests, Kennedy-King College continually failed to comply with 22 (34%) of the Priority 1, 2, 3 guidelines. Conversely, Kennedy-King College is in general compliance with 43 (66%) of the guidelines, with random violations occurring on an average of only 2 pages per violation. According to the automated tests, KKC is in 100% compliance with 15 (23%) of the Priority 1,2,3 Guidelines with no violations in any of the pages tested.

 

Some of the recurring non-compliance issues include:

 

According to the automated evaluations....

Validator Output Summary At-A-Glance

Violations – How frequently they occurred

Priority Level 1

#

Guideline

% of pages on which it occurred

General

1.1 

Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element (e.g., via "alt", "longdesc", or in element content). This includes: images, graphical representations of text (including symbols),image map regions, animations (e.g., animated GIFs), applets
and programmatic objects, ascii art, frames, scripts, images used as list bullets, spacers, graphical buttons, sounds (played with or without user interaction), stand-alone audio files, audio tracks of video, and video.

96%

2.1 

Ensure that all information conveyed with color is also available without color, for example from context or markup.

100%

4.1

 Clearly identify changes in the natural language of a document's text and any text equivalents (e.g., captions).

16%

6.1 

Organize documents so they may be read without style sheets. For example, when an HTML document is rendered without associated style sheets, it must still be possible to read the document.

8%

6.2

 Ensure that equivalents for dynamic content are updated when the dynamic content changes.

N/A

7.1 

Until user agents allow users to control flickering, avoid causing the screen to flicker.

24%

14.1

 Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content.

12%

Images and Image Maps

1.2

 Provide redundant text links for each active region of a server-side image map.

0%

9.1

 Provide client-side image maps instead of server-side image maps except where the regions cannot be defined with an available geometric shape.

0%

Tables

5.1

 For data tables, identify row and column headers.

100%

5.2

 For data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or column headers, use markup to associate data cells and header cells.

100%

Frames

12.1

 Title each frame to facilitate frame identification and navigation.

N/A

Scripts

6.3

Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide equivalent information on an alternative accessible page.

100%

Multimedia

1.3 

Until user agents can automatically read aloud the text equivalent of a visual track, provide an auditory description of the important information of the visual track of a multimedia presentation.

N/A

1.4

For any time-based multimedia presentation (e.g., a movie or animation), synchronize equivalent alternatives (e.g., captions or auditory descriptions of the visual track) with the presentation.

100%

If all else fails

11.4

If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page, provide a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is accessible, has equivalent information (or functionality), and is updated as often as the inaccessible (original) page.

N/A

Priority Level 2

#

Guideline

% of pages on which it occurred

2.2

 Ensure that foreground and background color combinations provide sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having color deficits or when viewed on a black and white screen. [Priority 2 for images, Priority 3 for text].

100%

3.1 

When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images to convey information.

0%

3.2

 Create documents that validate to published formal grammars.

8%

3.3

 Use style sheets to control layout and presentation.

0%

3.4

 Use relative rather than absolute units in markup language attribute values and style sheet property values.

100%

3.5

 Use header elements to convey document structure and use them according to specification.

4%

3.6

 Mark up lists and list items properly.

0%

3.7 

Mark up quotations. Do not use quotation markup for formatting effects such as indentation.

0%

6.5 

Ensure that dynamic content is accessible or provide an alternative presentation or page.

N/A

7.2 

Until user agents allow users to control blinking, avoid causing content to blink (i.e., change presentation at a regular rate, such as turning on and off).

100%

7.4

 Until user agents provide the ability to stop the refresh, do not create periodically auto-refreshing pages.

0%

7.5

 Until user agents provide the ability to stop auto-redirect, do not use markup to redirect pages automatically. Instead, configure the server to perform redirects.

0%

10.1

 Until user agents allow users to turn off spawned windows, do not cause pop-ups or other windows to appear and do not change the current window without informing the user.

100%

11.1

 Use W3C technologies when they are available and appropriate for a task and use the latest versions when supported.

4%

11.2

 Avoid deprecated features of W3C technologies.

100%

12.3 

Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where natural and appropriate.

4%

13.1

 Clearly identify the target of each link.

4%

13.2 

Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites.

0%

13.3

 Provide information about the general layout of a site (e.g., a site map or table of contents).

0%

13.4 

Use navigation mechanisms in a consistent manner.

0%

tables

5.3 

Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version).

20%

5.4

 If a table is used for layout, do not use any structural markup for the purpose of visual formatting.

20%

Frames

12.2

 Describe the purpose of frames and how frames relate to each other if it is not obvious by frame titles alone.

N/A

Forms

10.2 

Until user agents support explicit associations between labels and form controls, for all form controls with implicitly associated labels, ensure that the label is properly positioned.

0%

12.4

 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.

4%

applets and scripts

6.4

For scripts and applets, ensure that event handlers are input device-independent.

4%

7.3 

Until user agents allow users to freeze moving content, avoid movement in pages.

8%

8.1 

Make programmatic elements such as scripts and applets directly accessible or compatible with assistive technologies [Priority 1 if functionality is important and not presented elsewhere, otherwise Priority 2.]

100%

9.2

Ensure that any element that has its own interface can be operated in a device-independent manner.

100%

9.3

For scripts, specify logical event handlers rather than device-dependent event handlers.

100%

Priority 3 checkpoints

#

Guideline

% of pages on which it occurred

General

4.2 

Specify the expansion of each abbreviation or acronym in a document where it first occurs.

N/A

4.3

Identify the primary natural language of a document.

100%

9.4 

Create a logical tab order through links, form controls, and objects.

16%

9.5 

Provide keyboard shortcuts to important links (including those in client-side image maps), form controls, and groups of form controls.

100%

10.5 

Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render adjacent links distinctly, include non-link, printable characters (surrounded by spaces) between adjacent links.

100%

11.3 

Provide information so that users may receive documents according to their preferences (e.g., language, content type, etc.)

N/A

13.5 

Provide navigation bars to highlight and give access to the navigation mechanism.

0%

13.6

 Group related links, identify the group (for user agents), and, until user agents do so, provide a way to bypass the group.

100%

13.7

 If search functions are provided, enable different types of searches for different skill levels and preferences.

N/A

13.8 

Place distinguishing information at the beginning of headings, paragraphs, lists, etc.

0%

13.9

 Provide information about document collections (i.e., documents comprising multiple pages.).

100%

13.10

 Provide a means to skip over multi-line ASCII art.

N/A

14.2 

Supplement text with graphic or auditory presentations where they will facilitate comprehension of the page.

0%

14.3

 Create a style of presentation that is consistent across pages.

20%

images and image maps

1.5 

Until user agents render text equivalents for client-side image map links, provide redundant text links for each active region of a client-side image map.

100%

tables

5.5 

Provide summaries for tables.

100%

5.6 

Provide abbreviations for header labels.

100%

10.3

 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render side-by-side text correctly, provide a linear text alternative (on the current page or some other) for all tables that lay out text in parallel, word-wrapped columns.

20%

forms

10.4

 Until user agents handle empty controls correctly, include default, place-holding characters in edit boxes and text areas.

4%

Total Violations Per W3C’s WAI Priority Level

Errors (Average)

Warnings (Average)

Priority 1

40 violations

Priority 1

273 violations

115 instances

1568 instances

Priority 2

79 violations

Priority 2

411 violations

1739 instances

3668 instances

Priority 3

68 violations

Priority 3

216 violations

221 instances

216 instances

Average Violations Per Page

Errors (Average)

Warnings (Average)

Priority 1

1.7 per page

Priority 1

11.9 per page

5 instances

68.2 instances

Priority 2

3.4 per page

Priority 2

17 per page

75.6 instances

159.5 instances

Priority 3

3 per page

Priority 3

9.4 per page

9.6 instances

9.4 instances

Summary

Summary

Least Violations

Priority 1

Least Warnings

Priority 3

Most violations

Priority 2

Most Warnings

Priority 2

 

Accessibility Tools - Automated

Key Findings: Various Accessibility tools were used to both simulate the impaired end user’s online environment; and reveal any additional barriers. 

Visicheck Results
All information conveyed in color is still distinguishable from both the background, and the foreground. Three forms of color blindness were tested for (Deuteranope, Protanope, Tritanope).

Screen reader Simulation Results
The designer / developer was able to experience how the end user receives webpage information through Screen Reader Software. Each table is described audibly and the contents of each table are read in a linear fashion. Content that is not organized in a linear fashion so that it makes logical sense when read aloud can frustrate the end user.

Windows XP’s “Narrator”
This software was difficult to test because it seemed to just read the title of the active window instead of the contents of the active window.

Low-vision Simulation
The designer / developer was able to experience some of the difficulties that a person with low vision (glaucoma, cataracts, macular degeneration) may encounter while browsing the web. Many times, one form of navigation is not enough when the end user must magnify their screen output in order to see content. Main navigation (especially when it is positioned at the top) is often lost during scrolling.

Distractibility Simulation
The designer / developer was able to experience some of the difficulties that a person with cognitive impairments may encounter while browsing the web. Continual movement, abrupt and irrelevant audio snippets, illogical layout, and disorganized content can be extremely distracting for a person with a cognitive impairment. These distractions can cause frustration; and can ultimately turn the end user away from your website.

Readability index calculator
This tool tested the readability of textual content of the Kennedy-King College website. The results were far too varied - ranging from:

Flesch-Kincaid Grade level: 21 to 10 (this number represents the grade the person would have to have reached in order to understand this information).

Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score: -12 to 47 (In comparison comics typically score around 90 while legalese can get a score below 10)

According to this calculator, the content on the KKC website is often difficult to comprehend.

 

Flicker Rate Test for Gif Images
This test was performed and no critical range variations were found.