Skip to main content

Academic Video Online (AVON)

Summary

Accessiblü conducted a high-level accessibility evaluation of the Academic Video Online (AVON) platform from Alexander Street to assess its usability for individuals with disabilities. The review was conducted using the JAWS and NVDA screen readers, keyboard-only navigation, and manual inspection for conformance to select WCAG 2.2 AA success criteria.

AVON demonstrates thoughtful design in several areas, particularly in its comprehensive video content library and educational focus. The platform provides structured navigation and clear content organization that serves as a strong foundation for accessibility improvements. However, our evaluation identified some accessibility barriers that may create challenges for users who rely on assistive technology.

Our testing identified several opportunities that, when addressed, would significantly enhance the platform's accessibility. The most impactful improvements focus on interactive elements, navigation clarity, and ensuring all functionality is available through keyboard navigation. These enhancements would support users with various disabilities while also improving the overall user experience for all users.

Top 3 Issues

  1. Interactive Elements Without Accessible Names

Brief Description: Many buttons and interactive elements lack descriptive accessible names, making it difficult for screen reader users to understand their purpose or function.

Impact: Users who are blind or have low vision may not be able to identify the purpose of buttons and controls.

WCAG Success Criteria: 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (AA), 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (A)

  1. Keyboard Navigation Barriers

Brief Description: Several interface elements cannot be accessed or operated using keyboard-only navigation, preventing users who cannot use a mouse from accessing all functionality.

Impact: Users with motor disabilities who rely on keyboard navigation may be unable to access video controls, filtering options, and other interactive features.

WCAG Success Criteria: 2.1.1 Keyboard (A), 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap (A)

  1. ARIA Implementation Opportunities

Brief Description: Some interface components use ARIA attributes that could be enhanced to provide better context and state information for assistive technology users.

Impact: Screen reader users may receive incomplete or confusing information about interactive elements and their current state.

WCAG Success Criteria: 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (A), 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (A)

Disabilities Impacted

Blind and Low-Vision Users

  • Issues: Missing alternative text for interactive elements, unlabeled buttons, and inconsistent heading structure may create navigation challenges.
  • Impact: Users may have difficulty identifying the purpose of interface elements and navigating efficiently through content.

Users with Motor Disabilities

  • Issues: Some interactive elements cannot be accessed through keyboard navigation alone.
  • Impact: Users who cannot use a mouse may be unable to access filtering options, video controls, and other interactive features.

Users with Hearing Impairments

  • Issues: Video content lacks clear indicators for caption availability and transcript access before selection.
  • Impact: Users may spend time accessing videos only to discover they lack captions or transcripts, creating an inefficient research experience.

Neurodiverse Users

  • Issues: Inconsistent labeling and unclear interface states may increase cognitive load.
  • Impact: Users may experience difficulty understanding interface functionality and completing tasks efficiently.