Evaluating the Mobile Web Accessibility of Electronic Text for Print Impaired People in Higher Education
Neil Rogers, Mike Wald, E. A. Draffan · 2016 · Proceedings of the 13th International Web for All Conference (W4A) · doi:10.1145/2899475.2899504
Summary
This paper from the University of Southampton presents an Accessibility Evaluation Framework for assessing how well mobile devices support electronic text (eText) reading for people with print impairments in higher education. Print disabilities are broadly defined following Kerscher's definition as the inability to effectively read print due to visual, physical, perceptual, developmental, cognitive, or learning disabilities — with the paper focusing specifically on dyslexia, dexterity impairments, and blindness/visual impairment. The framework maps the multi-stage journey from required academic text through device and user agent settings to content navigation and accessibility. The authors identify a key problem described by McNaught et al as the "inclusion gap": even for average institutional users, accessing eTexts is unexpectedly complex, requiring navigation through multiple institutional systems (federated search tools, discovery layers, metadata layers, content format layers, eReader layers). For users with print disabilities, each of these stages introduces potential barriers. The framework systematically explores over 500 device settings across Android (Nexus 5, Marshmallow) and iOS (iPhone 6, iOS 9.1) platforms, analyzing 233 screenshots to identify and map accessibility-relevant settings.
Key findings
Initial analysis of two smartphone platforms revealed over 500 settings and 40 cross-device mappings. A fundamental inconsistency was identified: manufacturers categorize equivalent accessibility features differently — Android places TalkBack under "Services" while iOS places VoiceOver under "Vision," making it difficult for users to find equivalent features when switching devices. This is compounded by the fact that device upgrades, updates, or changes can alter menu structures, requiring users to relearn settings — a particular challenge for people with dyslexia who may struggle with working memory and complex menu navigation. The authors argue for device-agnostic "mobile functional categories" that classify accessibility settings by what they do rather than where manufacturers place them. Settings that can be mapped across multiple devices, applications, and browsers (such as font/text size adjustment) are identified as "essential" accessibility settings. The framework spans the full chain from searching library discovery layers through downloading eContent formats (PDF, ePub) to navigating content at varying granularity levels (chapters, headings, paragraphs, sentences, words, characters).
Relevance
This research addresses a practical accessibility gap that affects thousands of higher education students: the complexity of configuring mobile devices to read academic texts accessibly. For students with print disabilities, the challenge is not just the text content itself but the multi-stage process of finding, downloading, and configuring the reading environment — each stage potentially presenting barriers. The observation that accessibility settings are categorized inconsistently across platforms is a systemic issue that persists today and imposes a "relearning" burden every time a user changes devices. For accessibility practitioners, the framework's approach of mapping equivalent settings across platforms could inform the development of device-agnostic accessibility profiles that travel with the user. The vision of automatically generating personalized eTexts based on user needs and device capabilities points toward a future where accessibility configuration is handled by systems rather than requiring users to navigate hundreds of settings manually. The research is early-stage (framework only, no user testing yet), but it identifies a real and underexplored problem space.
Tags: print disabilities · mobile accessibility · education accessibility · dyslexia · visual impairment · e-books · higher education · reading accessibility
Standards referenced: ePub3