User Testing for Accessibility
As part of More Canvas’s online accessibility initiative, More Canvas Accessibility Consultant Calvin Van Zytveld continues his blog series giving a deeper look into accessibility topics. In today’s blog, Calvin discusses an important point: while some sites are technically “compliant” according to various web accessibility standards, this does not mean that the sites offer a smooth interface for disabled users. User testing for accessibility is an important and valuable step when it comes to ensuring your site offers a rewarding experience for all.
Interested in an accessibility consultation? Get in touch with More Canvas Consulting here.
Recently, I was talking to a small business owner whose clientele includes many disabled individuals (about half of his patrons have at least one disability, he estimates). The web developers that built his business’s website assured him that the website was accessible, yet he still felt it his responsibility to test all the accessibility features the developers had built. He quickly realized that many of the promised tools were unstable and frustrating to use. He reported back to the developers, enumerating the issues with the tools, such as an “invert color” button that turned the background black without turning the text white. As a blind user, I gave the website a quick pass with VoiceOver for iOS and found the website to be mostly usable, but it was far from a slick experience, since no one had given feedback specifically on the nonvisual experience. Some of the issues that the small business owner and I noticed were examples of non-compliance with accessibility guidelines, but many other issues were more subjective in nature.
In the accessibility profession, we talk about the accessibility of the product with the WCAG conformance classifications A, AA, and AAA (AAA meeting the most criteria). But I think it’s also worth considering the integrity of the creation process. As I see it, there are four possible levels of diligence in accommodating the digital needs of the disabled in web content creation:
Do absolutely nothing to plan for disabled visitors to the site.
Have a web developer not trained in accessibility run the website through some sort of widget.
Have an accessibility professional play an integral role in creating an accessible website.
Have an accessibility professional play an integral role in creating an accessible website, and then solicit feedback on the user experience from disabled individuals.
It must be noted that levels 1, 2, and 3 do not guarantee any specific disaster; however, with each measure of increased diligence, the possibility of subjecting disabled users to a dreadful experience diminishes.
A web development team that has checked their website for compliance with the WCAG but has not enlisted the feedback of disabled users is like a restaurant that has been checked by health inspectors but has not conducted taste tests. A restaurant proprietor cannot expect to remain in business long without asking for feedback on the menu. This scenario is level 3.
To continue the restaurant analogy, level 2 would be a restaurant that purchases food from dubious sources and then cooks the food to a very high temperature, hoping this will kill all problematic bacteria. This way of running a restaurant might cut costs but may not always be safe for the customers and certainly won’t be delicious. Far be it from me, however, to resent this method if it is the only one that a website proprietor can afford. Anything is preferable to level 1.
Now most people would probably not take issue with the idea that user testing is an important step in the rollout of web content; however, what may be less commonly known is that the insights the disability community can offer will also enhance the experience of able-bodied users. The comments of low vision users will be appreciated by sighted users who are trying to use the website in direct light on a mobile phone, for example.
The cost of end user testing by disabled individuals is not cost prohibitive for most projects. Hiring a few disabled individuals to go through a website and provide comments would cost far less than the fees associated with the construction and maintenance of a website. Even so, this step would assure a comfortable and frustration-free user experience for the greatest number of people.
However, I suspect that the reason that most websites are not tested by disabled users is not cost, but website proprietors and developers not having relationships with members of the disability community. This may be partly caused by low rates of employment among those with disabilities. Although 15% of the U.S. population has at least one recognized disability, only 35% of them are employed. In short, if you know a disabled person, odds are it’s not from your job. That being said, this does not indicate a lack of enthusiasm for work among those with disabilities. My caseworker at the Bureau of Services for Blind Persons of the State of Michigan (BSBP) says that among his clients alone, he could think of at least three who are looking to provide feedback on web content.
If you are looking for resources, services, and/or information about disability user testing, More Canvas is available to discuss your business's accessibility needs. Reach out using our contact form to inquire about a consultation, and we can discuss how our team may be able to support your business with user testing, digital accessibility management, and other offerings.
