SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Web accessibility in the institutional repository crafting user centered submission policies

•Download as PPTX, PDF•
•
NASIG
NASIG

Presented by Jenny Hoops and Margaret McLaughlin. As web accessibility initiatives increase across institutions, it is important not only to reframe and rethink policies, but also to develop sustainable and tenable methods for enforcing accessibility efforts. For institutional repositories, it is imperative to determine the extent to which both the repository manager and the user are responsible for depositing accessible content. This presentation allows us to share our accessibility framework and help repository and content managers craft sustainable, long-term goals for accessible content in institutional repositories, while also providing openly available resources for short-term benefit.

1 of 21
Web Accessibility in the Institutional Repository: Crafting User-Centered Submission Policies Margaret McLaughlin and Jenny Hoops
Background
Accessibility Initiative @ Indiana University ● Upper level administrative decision, campus-wide ● Asked to audit our department (Scholarly Communication), and report findings to our Libraries UX team ● No extra resources or funding were provided
Accessibility and Institutional Repositories ● Many IRs were not made with accessibility in mind ● Levels of accessibility in IRs vary widely across institutions ● Different approaches to making IRs more accessible
Accessibility Auditing
Accessibility Audit Websites audited: ● Public informational website ● Internal wiki pages ● Journal publishing platform ● Two open access repositories ● Blog, WordPress site ● LibGuides created by our department Tools used: ● WAVE ● FAE ● Google Lighthouse
Department Audit Results Short-term issues: ● Alt-text ● Empty links ● Forms and labels ● Structuring webpages and metadata ● Coloring and shading Long-term issues: ● University-level website/branding issues ● A large majority of content in the repository
IUScholarWorks Overview ● Open access institutional repository ● Created around 2007 ● Runs on DSpace software ● No initial accessibility policies
Tackling the Broader Issues and the IR ● Peer assessment ● What does our dedication to “open access” entail? ● What can we control as a department, or need to request as an institutional change? ● What sustainable changes can we make with current resources?
IR Accessibility Policy Spectrum
Plan of Action
IUScholarWorks: Submission Process Three-step process for all authors to submit individual files to IUScholarWorks: ● Check your rights: Read our copyright and licensing page. ● Contact IUSW: Email iusw@indiana.edu for authorization to deposit in the collection fo your choice. ● Submit your work: Follow the submission guide.
Updating the Submission Guide GOAL: To develop new submission guidelines that emphasize the importance of depositing accessible documents. ● Recommendation > Requirement ○ Did not want to discourage anybody from submitting or overwhelm submitters ● Provide quick guidelines on making the most commonly submitted file types accessible ● Encourages user to consider accessibility before final upload
Creating “Quick Fixes” ● Researched other IRs and general university accessibility guidelines ○ University of Washington’s IT Accessibility Checklist & Tutorial ● Identified best practices ○ Use headings/structural tags ○ Add alternative text ○ Exporting from word to PDF to preserve accessibility ○ Other tips ■ Document language, hyperlinks, lists ● Incorporated into submission guide
New Submission Guide ● Accessibility guidelines placed between Step 2 (Describe) and Step 3 (Upload) ● Made the new document accessible ○ Help encourage users to submit who weren’t able to before ● Original Submission Guide vs Updated Submission Guide
Looking Forward
Results ● Six months since new submission guide was made public ● New user-deposited PDF and Word documents have showed much higher accessibility rates ○ 38% increase in accessible files according to a random sample from both time periods ● Plan to do more thorough, formal assessment at the end of the year, including our other repositories
Revisiting the IR Accessibility Spectrum
Future Developments ● Accessibility guidelines for other file formats ○ New open data repository ○ Deposits for other repository are done by staff/faculty ● More sustainable ○ With recent resource limitations, this is essential to consider ● Approaching our repository back content ○ Hiring student workers, train to make most popular PDFs accessible ○ Work with Library Technologies to develop accessibility checker for new repository
Questions?
Contact Us iusw@indiana.edu Resource List: https://bit.ly/iunasig ● Template for an Accessibility Audit using free, openly available software ● Original IUScholarWorks submission guide ● Updated IUScholarWorks submission guide with accessibility guidelines ● The extracted “Quick Fixes” accessibility guidelines

More Related Content

Web accessibility in the institutional repository crafting user centered submission policies

  • 1. Web Accessibility in the Institutional Repository: Crafting User-Centered Submission Policies Margaret McLaughlin and Jenny Hoops
  • 3. Accessibility Initiative @ Indiana University ● Upper level administrative decision, campus-wide ● Asked to audit our department (Scholarly Communication), and report findings to our Libraries UX team ● No extra resources or funding were provided
  • 4. Accessibility and Institutional Repositories ● Many IRs were not made with accessibility in mind ● Levels of accessibility in IRs vary widely across institutions ● Different approaches to making IRs more accessible
  • 6. Accessibility Audit Websites audited: ● Public informational website ● Internal wiki pages ● Journal publishing platform ● Two open access repositories ● Blog, WordPress site ● LibGuides created by our department Tools used: ● WAVE ● FAE ● Google Lighthouse
  • 7. Department Audit Results Short-term issues: ● Alt-text ● Empty links ● Forms and labels ● Structuring webpages and metadata ● Coloring and shading Long-term issues: ● University-level website/branding issues ● A large majority of content in the repository
  • 8. IUScholarWorks Overview ● Open access institutional repository ● Created around 2007 ● Runs on DSpace software ● No initial accessibility policies
  • 9. Tackling the Broader Issues and the IR ● Peer assessment ● What does our dedication to “open access” entail? ● What can we control as a department, or need to request as an institutional change? ● What sustainable changes can we make with current resources?
  • 12. IUScholarWorks: Submission Process Three-step process for all authors to submit individual files to IUScholarWorks: ● Check your rights: Read our copyright and licensing page. ● Contact IUSW: Email iusw@indiana.edu for authorization to deposit in the collection fo your choice. ● Submit your work: Follow the submission guide.
  • 13. Updating the Submission Guide GOAL: To develop new submission guidelines that emphasize the importance of depositing accessible documents. ● Recommendation > Requirement ○ Did not want to discourage anybody from submitting or overwhelm submitters ● Provide quick guidelines on making the most commonly submitted file types accessible ● Encourages user to consider accessibility before final upload
  • 14. Creating “Quick Fixes” ● Researched other IRs and general university accessibility guidelines ○ University of Washington’s IT Accessibility Checklist & Tutorial ● Identified best practices ○ Use headings/structural tags ○ Add alternative text ○ Exporting from word to PDF to preserve accessibility ○ Other tips ■ Document language, hyperlinks, lists ● Incorporated into submission guide
  • 15. New Submission Guide ● Accessibility guidelines placed between Step 2 (Describe) and Step 3 (Upload) ● Made the new document accessible ○ Help encourage users to submit who weren’t able to before ● Original Submission Guide vs Updated Submission Guide
  • 17. Results ● Six months since new submission guide was made public ● New user-deposited PDF and Word documents have showed much higher accessibility rates ○ 38% increase in accessible files according to a random sample from both time periods ● Plan to do more thorough, formal assessment at the end of the year, including our other repositories
  • 18. Revisiting the IR Accessibility Spectrum
  • 19. Future Developments ● Accessibility guidelines for other file formats ○ New open data repository ○ Deposits for other repository are done by staff/faculty ● More sustainable ○ With recent resource limitations, this is essential to consider ● Approaching our repository back content ○ Hiring student workers, train to make most popular PDFs accessible ○ Work with Library Technologies to develop accessibility checker for new repository
  • 21. Contact Us iusw@indiana.edu Resource List: https://bit.ly/iunasig ● Template for an Accessibility Audit using free, openly available software ● Original IUScholarWorks submission guide ● Updated IUScholarWorks submission guide with accessibility guidelines ● The extracted “Quick Fixes” accessibility guidelines