ADA Title II Compliance Guide for Higher Education: Real Barriers and Practical Solutions 

An accessible homepage is vital. ADA Title II compliance for higher education allows prospective students, including blind students using screen readers, to independently assess whether a college suits their academic and accessibility needs.

Students with disabilities may encounter multiple issues when navigating higher education homepages, including:

• Unlabeled images: Often, promotional banners and carousels lack proper alt text. Instead of clearly describing content (e.g., scholarships or open houses), screen readers announce "graphic" or skip these entirely.
• Inaccessible navigation menus: Menus triggered by hover-only interactions are inaccessible to keyboard users, creating significant barriers.

Best Practices for Accessible Univerisity Homepages:

• Logical heading structures.
• Descriptive alt text for images.
• Keyboard-operable menus.
• Skip navigation links and accessible search.

Browsing academic programs via digital course catalogs is essential for students choosing a college. Still, inaccessible designs can severely hinder students with disabilities.

Barriers may include:

• Non-semantic menus: Expandable menus without proper coding, confusing screen readers, and leaving students unsure
• Improper heading usage: Lack of semantic HTML headings prevents efficient navigation.
• Inaccessible PDFs and graphics: Course descriptions and degree requirements embedded in images or untagged PDFs render information inaccessible.

Accessible catalogs provide clear headings, dynamic announcements of content updates, and ensure all information is readable by assistive technology.

Best Practices for Accessible Course Catalogs:

• Semantic HTML with proper headings.
• Real-time announcement of expandable elements.
• Avoid embedding critical information solely in images or PDFs.
• Ensure document tagging.

 Students may face significant obstacles due to inaccessible digital forms, particularly:

• Inaccessible date pickers: Visual-only calendars without keyboard or screen-reader compatibility.
• Inaccessible CAPTCHA verification: Lack of audio or alternative verification methods.

These barriers can prevent students who rely on assistive technology from independently scheduling visits, sending a harmful message of exclusion.

Best Practices for Accessible Campus Tour Forms:

• Keyboard-compatible date pickers.
• Manual date-entry options.
• Audio CAPTCHA or alternative verifications.
• Comprehensive screen-reader testing.
• While the college application process is often accessible, avoidable pitfalls are common here, too, including:
• Vague documentation requirements: Ambiguity about accessible file types.
• Inaccessible third-party integrations: External test-score portals with inconsistent accessibility features.

Prioritizing clear instructions, labeled fields, and consistent navigation,in application platforms supports ADA compliance in higher education while greatly enhancing the student experience and independence

Best Practices for Accessible College Applications:

• Clear instructions on acceptable documentation formats.
• Accessibility testing of third-party portals.
• Proper labeling and logical keyboard navigation.
• Accessible error messages and confirmations.

Task 1: Exploring Academic Programs

• Issue: A visually prominent menu with degree categories was entirely image-based, invisible to screen readers.
• Impact: Michael was forced into tedious navigation, taking significantly longer to find desired information.

Task 2: Scheduling a Campus Visit

• Issue: A date-picker form was inaccessible—no keyboard support or readable calendar for screen readers.
• Impact: Unable to schedule independently, Michael had to abandon his attempt, effectively excluding him from a critical step in college decision-making.

Task 3: Completing a College Application

• Positive experience: Accessible fields, logical navigation, and clear instructions allowed independent submission.
• Remaining issues: Ambiguous documentation requirements and third-party integrations still posed accessibility challenges.

Best Practices Highlighted:

• Replace image-based navigation with accessible text.
• Ensure all interactive form elements are screen reader-friendly.
• Provide clear, accessible instructions and third-party integrations.

• Real Impact for Students: Inaccessible digital experiences negatively impact both academic performance and emotional well-being. Encountering barriers damages confidence and can negatively affect students' sense of belonging. Practical issues such as inability to submit forms or missing essential updates unfairly disadvantage students, undermining equity in education.
• Legal and Ethical Responsibilities: Title II of the ADA mandates accessibility, making ADA compliance in higher education a critical responsibility. Accessibility reflects an institutional commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
• Institutional Benefits: Colleges and universities that prioritize digital accessibility benefit from improved institutional reputation, reduced legal risks, and increased student satisfaction and success.

Ultimately, when institutions integrate digital accessibility into their core practices, they foster stronger, inclusive academic communities where all students can achieve their full potential.

Common Misconceptions and Challenges:

• Misuse of Widgets: Local governments and institutions often consider accessibility widgets as quick fixes. However, these solutions alone are insufficient.
• Underestimating Remediation Efforts: Post-audit remediation often requires extensive manual work, especially on websites with large numbers of pages, legacy content, and integrated third-party systems. Code-level issues, interactive features, and inaccessible documents necessitate manual intervention, specialized expertise, and significant time investment.
• Limited Internal Resources: Many organizations face a shortage of internal resources or technical knowledge, causing remediation to stall even after an audit identifies accessibility issues. Without a clear roadmap or dedicated personnel, compliance becomes challenging to achieve and sustain.

Rapidly Approaching Compliance Deadlines:

• Large entities (population ≥ 50,000): Compliance required by April 24, 2026
• Small entities (population < 50,000): Compliance needed by April 26, 2027

Both groups must adhere strictly to WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards.

This guide features examples based on firsthand experience, not an extensive survey or aggregate study. While every institution's digital environment is unique, the patterns Michael encountered reflect issues commonly faced by students with disabilities.

UsableNet Assistive: Your Managed Service Solution for Sustainable Compliance

UsableNet Assistive offers a practical and streamlined alternative to struggling through remediation alone. As a fully managed service, Assistive ensures your institution or local government achieves and maintains Title II compliance, including ADA compliance in higher education.

UsableNet Assistive enables your team to focus on core functions and strategic priorities while UsableNet takes care of accessibility.

Take the next step with UsableNet Assistive, and ensure your digital platforms provide inclusive, equitable experiences, without the ongoing internal strain.

Curious if UsableNet Assistive can support your compliance goals? Book a consultation with our team.