Course Access Check

Make your Canvas course work for everyone.

Build a practical accessibility checklist in three questions. Start with what students need next, then improve the course as you go.

Build your plan

What are you working with?

Select every format students use. The guide will show only the relevant checks, plus a course-wide Canvas sweep.

1. Which types of content are in the course?

Choose all that apply.

2. Where are you in the course cycle?

This changes the suggested order, not the requirements.

3. How much time do you have right now?

The short path focuses on the highest-impact barriers first.

Optional context

Why accessibility belongs in course design

Use this section for conversation, department planning, or a quick response to common misconceptions.

Why instructors need to make courses accessible
Equal participationStudents should be able to get the same information and complete the same work at the same time, without avoidable barriers.
Better learning designClear headings, captions, meaningful links, and flexible formats improve comprehension and navigation for many learners.
Proactive, not reactiveBuilding access in from the start is faster and more respectful than emergency remediation after a student is blocked.
Institutional responsibilityAccessibility is part of educational equity and, depending on the institution, disability law and policy obligations.

Current U.S. public-entity context: The Department of Justice’s Title II web rule uses WCAG 2.1 Level AA for covered state and local government web content and mobile apps, including public schools, community colleges, and public universities. A 2026 interim rule extended compliance dates to April 26, 2027 for entities serving 50,000 or more people and April 26, 2028 for smaller entities and special district governments.

This is general information, not legal advice. Follow your institution’s accessibility office, counsel, policies, and accommodation procedures.

Read the DOJ Title II web accessibility rule fact sheet (opens in a new tab) · Read WCAG 2.1 (opens in a new tab)

Common misconceptions about accessibility
“Accessibility is too expensive.”

The misconception

Access always requires costly software or outside remediation.

A more useful story: Many of the most important practices—headings, meaningful links, alt text, captions review, and accessible source files—use tools instructors already have. Early design avoids more expensive emergency fixes.

“It takes too much time.”

The misconception

Accessibility is a separate project that must be completed all at once.

A more useful story: Use accessible templates, fix the material students need next, and build the checks into ordinary authoring. Small habits compound; retrofitting at the last minute is what consumes time.

“Only a few students benefit.”

The misconception

Accessibility serves only students with a disclosed, permanent disability.

A more useful story: Captions, readable structure, keyboard access, and flexible formats help people with permanent, temporary, and situational disabilities—and support multilingual learners, mobile users, and students in noisy or quiet environments.

“It is too technical for instructors.”

The misconception

Only specialists can create accessible learning materials.

A more useful story: Instructors own the meaning and learning context; built-in Canvas, Microsoft, and Ally tools guide common fixes. Specialists are valuable for complex PDFs, media description, and unusual barriers.

“Accessibility will limit creativity or rigor.”

The misconception

Accessible courses must be plain, less visual, or academically easier.

A more useful story: Accessibility changes how information is conveyed, not the learning standard. Multiple representations, clear structure, and purposeful visuals can make creative work stronger and the intellectual challenge more visible.

“Automatic captions or an Ally score finish the job.”

The misconception

A machine-generated result proves that content is accessible.

A more useful story: Automation finds detectable patterns. Only a person can judge whether captions are accurate, alt text conveys the learning purpose, reading order makes sense, and a student can actually complete the activity.

“We can wait until a student asks.”

The misconception

Accessibility is an accommodation to add after disclosure.

A more useful story: A request-based approach makes students announce a disability and wait for equal access. Proactive design protects privacy, reduces delay, and lets accommodations focus on individual needs rather than preventable barriers.

“Accessibility features give some students an unfair advantage.”

The misconception

Captions, transcripts, or flexible formats weaken fairness.

A more useful story: Access features remove barriers to the same learning goals. Fairness is not identical obstacles; it is a genuine opportunity to perceive, engage with, and demonstrate the intended learning.

Keep learning

Core resource library

AI as an assistant—not an approver

Top Accessibility Issues and How AI Can Help

Generative AI can accelerate a first draft, identify patterns, and reformat content. It cannot determine whether the result gives students equivalent access. Use an institution-approved tool and complete the human check shown on every card.

Missing or weak alt text

Ask AI to: Draft a concise description based on the image’s purpose, surrounding text, and learning goal.

Human check: Verify facts, context, bias, and whether the image is actually decorative. Never upload sensitive images to an unapproved service.

Missing or inaccurate captions

Ask AI to: Create a caption or transcript draft and identify speakers, punctuation, and meaningful sounds.

Human check: Correct names and technical terms, synchronize timing, and confirm important audio is represented.

Complex or unclear language

Ask AI to: Suggest a plain-language version with shorter sentences, familiar words, and definitions for necessary jargon.

Human check: Make sure disciplinary meaning, nuance, rigor, and learning objectives have not changed.

Poor heading structure

Ask AI to: Propose a logical outline and descriptive headings for existing content.

Human check: Apply real semantic heading styles in Canvas or the source document and verify that levels are not skipped.

Scanned or inaccessible PDFs

Ask AI to: Extract text with OCR or help reformat the source as structured HTML, Word, or MathML.

Human check: Verify reading order, formulas, tables, images, and OCR accuracy. Complex PDF remediation may require a specialist.

Missing overviews or summaries

Ask AI to: Draft a module overview, key takeaways, glossary, or study guide from the approved course content.

Human check: Confirm alignment with the lesson and clarify that a summary supplements rather than replaces required content.

Inaccessible table formatting

Ask AI to: Restructure data into a simple rectangular table with a caption and clear row or column headers.

Human check: Build the table with actual header cells, avoid merged cells, and test whether it reads meaningfully in sequence.

Vague link text

Ask AI to: Suggest link text that describes the destination or action within the sentence.

Human check: Open the destination, confirm the wording is accurate, and distinguish links that perform different actions.

Long or dense instructions

Ask AI to: Break directions into ordered steps, meaningful headings, and a concise checklist.

Human check: Preserve every requirement, deadline, exception, grading criterion, and safety instruction.

Reading level does not fit the audience

Ask AI to: Estimate complexity and draft a version at the intended reading level while retaining essential terminology.

Human check: Use a readability tool, review with a real reader when possible, and confirm that simplification did not reduce accuracy.

Before using AI: Follow institutional policy. Do not submit student records, accommodation information, unpublished assessments, copyrighted readings, or other protected material to a tool that is not approved for that data. Treat every output as an editable draft and test the finished content with the same accessibility checks used elsewhere in this guide.