Introduction
As we enter 2026, colleges face a critical challenge: meeting the April deadline to ensure all online content complies with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). This responsibility extends beyond IT departments—many professionals in higher education technology also serve as instructors, requiring them to consider accessibility and accommodations at multiple levels.
In recent years, institutions have faced numerous lawsuits for failing to provide even basic accommodations to students with disabilities. My own experience at Iowa’s Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) opened my eyes to how common these legal challenges are—and how often students encounter barriers that should be easily addressed. College is challenging enough without forcing students to fight for fundamental accommodations.
To shed light on these issues, I spoke with Shayla Stater, Manager of VR (Vocational Rehabilitation) Services at the Council Bluffs Iowa Workforce Center. Iowa VR’s mission is to work with individuals who have disabilities to achieve their employment, independence, and economic goals. This includes supporting students who face barriers to achieving the same success as their peers.
Shayla is aware of more than 100 college students currently navigating the complexities of accommodations in higher education with Iowa VR’s support. Our conversation explored what these students encounter, practical steps technologists can take to help, and how we can all do better.
Common Disabilities and Accommodations
Higher education mirrors society as a whole, encompassing students with diverse abilities and disabilities that can impact their learning experience. According to Shayla, learning disabilities are among the most common in college settings. Typical accommodations include extended test time and access to class notes. From a technical standpoint, it’s essential to provide a reliable, timely system that allows students to easily access these notes and recordings.
Proactive planning is essential when addressing physical disabilities, starting early in the design process to anticipate needs rather than react to challenges later. Considerations range from building accessibility and classroom space for wheelchairs and service animals to identifying potential hazards. A common accommodation involves managing the distance between classes, as campus sprawl can create unrealistic time constraints for students without transportation assistance or additional time allowances.
Mental health disabilities are widespread, often co-occurring with other conditions. Students may need time away from campus and/or classrooms, flexible scheduling, or reduced sensory stimuli. For those with Autism Spectrum Disorder, minimizing noise and unplanned schedule changes can be crucial. What may seem like a minor adjustment for instructors can have a significant impact on students’ well-being. Keeping experiences as consistent as possible while ensuring we have dependable recordings and hybrid opportunities helps students have as equitable an experience as possible.
Practical Steps for Inclusive Classrooms
Some accommodations are straightforward and can benefit all students, such as:
- Distributing notes ahead of time
- Establishing clear, consistent guidelines with predictability
- Allowing extended time for assignments and tests
- Standardizing lecture capture with quality captions
- Not penalizing students attending asynchronously
- Including hearing assistance in discrete ways to prevent identification
These practices align with the principles of universal design, which is an approach to creating learning environments that are inherently accessible to the widest range of learners—without the need for individual adaptations. By designing courses and technologies with flexibility and inclusivity in mind from the start, institutions can reduce barriers for everyone.
However, obtaining accommodations is often a complex and inconsistent process. Documentation requirements can vary significantly between—and even within—institutions, creating unnecessary hurdles for students. For some, accessibility isn’t just a preference; it becomes a deciding factor when choosing where to enroll. Institutions that prioritize inclusion and transparency in their processes send a powerful message: every student deserves equitable access to education.
Barriers and Legal Risks
Unfortunately, many colleges erect significant barriers to accommodations, sometimes outright refusing requests. This discourages students from advocating for their needs, and some abandon the process after initial setbacks. Others persist, occasionally taking legal action to defend their rights. Every university can do better, and some need legal encouragement to do so.
The landmark cases of National Association of the Deaf v. Harvard and National Association of the Deaf v. MIT set a powerful precedent for accessibility in higher education. Both lawsuits challenged the universities’ failure to provide accurate and comprehensive captioning for publicly available online content, arguing this violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
The resulting settlements—approved in 2020—require Harvard and MIT to implement robust, industry-standard captioning for all online courses, lectures, and media, establishing some of the most comprehensive accessibility requirements in academia. These decisions not only reinforce the legal obligation to provide equal access but also signal to all institutions that inadequate accessibility exposes them to significant legal and reputational risks.
The impact is clear: universities must proactively ensure their digital content is accessible, or risk falling behind both in compliance and in attracting students who expect inclusive learning environments.
AV Technology and Accessibility Challenges
Captioning remains imperfect across platforms, with accuracy affected by speaker accents, languages, and content complexity. For many, captions are essential—whether due to hearing loss, neurodiversity (supporting focus, processing, or comprehension), or environmental factors like noisy coffee shops or quiet libraries. It’s worth noting that captions differ from subtitles: captions include dialogue and non-speech audio for accessibility, while subtitles focus on translating or transcribing spoken words. Subtitles can be especially helpful for language learners, providing visual reinforcement of vocabulary and aiding comprehension.
Audio assistance technologies offer promise but present their own challenges. Infrared transmitters, which enable wireless audio transmission for hearing aids or assistive listening systems, often require students to self-identify and can feel cumbersome. Wireless systems that connect to personal devices offer a more discreet option, reducing the need for self-identification, but they depend on device compatibility and may invite judgment from peers or instructors who perceive earbuds as distracting. Additionally, all systems must be properly secured to avoid violations of FERPA and HIPAA regulations.
The Cost of Diagnosis and Documentation
Many universities require formal diagnoses from licensed professionals before approving accommodations—a process that can be both costly and time-consuming. For students without easy access to healthcare or insurance coverage, obtaining documentation can mean hundreds of dollars in out-of-pocket expenses, multiple appointments, and long wait times. Even when students manage to secure a diagnosis, the documentation may not meet institutional requirements, forcing them to repeat the process. These barriers disproportionately affect low-income students and those from underserved communities, creating an inequitable system where support hinges on financial and logistical privilege. Ultimately, the need for extensive documentation can discourage students from seeking accommodations altogether, leaving them without the tools they need to succeed.
Call to Action: Universal Design Is the Right—and Smart—Choice
The reality is clear: students and their families are paying attention. Many institutions are taking proactive steps to improve accessibility, and they are earning recognition for it. Conversely, if a university gains a reputation for making accommodations difficult or becomes known for lawsuits over accessibility, prospective students will look elsewhere. In today’s competitive landscape, institutions cannot afford to lose talented individuals simply because they failed to do what is right—and required.
Accessibility is not just a compliance issue; it’s a fundamental human right. We must move beyond reactive fixes and make universal design principles a standard part of every classroom, learning space, and digital environment. When accessibility is built in from the start, everyone benefits. Designing with accommodations in mind from the outset is far easier and more effective than retrofitting solutions after barriers exist—or forcing students to disclose disabilities just to participate fully.
Let’s commit to making higher education truly inclusive. By embedding accessibility into standard practices, we not only comply with the law but also demonstrate our values and attract students who know they will be supported. The time to act is now—let’s make universal design the foundation of our learning environments.
Let’s each take responsibility for making accessibility the norm, not the exception, in higher education.
