HUMAN-TECHNOLOGY INTERACTION

Accessible Interfaces Design in Spanish University

e-Learning Platforms

N. Lloret Romero and L. Fernandez Aquino

Instituto de Investigación IDF,Grupo de Investigación CALSI, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera s/n

46021 Valencia Spain

Keywords: e-Learning, accessibility, disability users, special education systems, human, technology interaction,

accessible interfaces.

Abstract At the moment e-learning platforms are being applied in the University studies of ascending form. The

objective of this work is to analyse the e-learning platforms of different European Universities, to analyse

their user interaction capacities and the degree of accessibility developed in these platforms. Interaction in

e-learning platforms is vital for potential users; in many cases the bad development of these platforms

encourages the abandonment of these studies. Starting off with this hypothesis, we develop an evaluation

study of the interaction of e-learning platforms in European Universities and we study the degree of

interaction with the user, we also consider the level of accessibility developed according to W3C standards.

1 INTRODUCTION

The study considers the necessity to know the

repelling factors in the interoperability and

interaction of the e-learning platforms when they

must fulfil accessibility and standards, these have an

influence on its design and the development of the

system. For the accomplishment of this study we

have analysed the platforms of diverse European

Universities from the viewpoint of user interaction

by means of the design of interfaces and services of

a high level of interoperability of this selection

obtained 10 platforms to analyse of deeper form.

The methodology of the study forces us to make

diverse types of evaluation both of users as of

design. Once this part of the project had been

analysed, the analysis of the accessibility of these

platforms, manual as much as automatic, was made

in order to appreciate the implanted degree of

accessibility. Until levels arrived within the service,

that guidelines had been followed according to the

W3C and that appreciation users with disability of

these services perceived. The data collected from the

study denote that in platforms of a high degree of

interaction and interoperability in many cases the

application of accessibility criteria is reduced.

We analyse the e-learning platforms and make the

study of interactivity according to guidelines

described in the study, the analysis of users and the

test of interoperatibility. Help menus and user-

guides: website. We also make the study of the

accessibility standards, the evaluation of the use of

the W3C guidelines and we test the validation of the

accessibility of these platforms using software.

2 STATE OF THE ART

The year 2003 was declared the “European Year for

the Disabled”; the European Union committed itself

to developing all the actions tending to guarantee the

better integration of the disabled into all aspects of

social life, according to the endorsement of the

European Social Agency in December 2000.

In the knowledge society in which we currently find

ourselves, the concept of accessibility goes further

than mere access to the infrastructures, currently

access to information through the Internet is posed

as a fundamental basis for the integration of all the

collective groups and the respect of equal

opportunities for all citizens.

The Region of Valencia has posed the technological

challenge as one of the basic pillars of economic and

social development. To this end it presented, in its

day, the “1

Region of Valencia Modernisation

Plan” and it is currently working on its “2

Modernisation Plan” in which there is special

506

Lloret Romero N. and Fernandez Aquino L. (2007).

HUMAN-TECHNOLOGY INTERACTION - Accessible Interfaces Design in Spanish University e-Learning Platforms.

In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Society, e-Business and e-Government /

e-Learning, pages 506-511

DOI: 10.5220/0001276405060511

 SciTePress

emphasis on the accessibility of the services for

citizens.

This being one of the basic premises of the Plan,

a UPV team has been carrying out a study on the

degree of implementation of these recommendations

in the e-learning platforms of various Universities on

a European level. In order to carry out the

aforementioned study all the services offered by the

Valencian Generalitat in the various institutions that

offer on-line training have been analysed, as well as

a sample of 10 European Universities, and of these

those that are really capable of being true e-learning

platforms in view of their level of accessibility have

been selected, from this selection interactive services

to be studied were obtained. The methodology of the

study forced us to carry out various types of

evaluation, both manual and automatic, so as to be

able to appreciate the degree of accessibility

implanted. To what extent the levels were reached

within the service, which guidelines had been

followed according to the W3C and what

appreciation disabled users perceived of the said

services.

The data obtained from the study denote a lack

of precision in the application of the accessibility

criteria, which in many cases makes access with

minimum levels of disability impossible. This

communiqué presents in detail how the study has

been carried out, the conclusions and some

minimum recommendations as regards the

optimisation of the services offered in the matter of

accessible e-learning.

2.1 Accessibility and Accessible Design

Accessibility can be defined as: The set of

characteristics that an environment, product or

service should have in order to be usable in

comfortable, safe and equal conditions for all people

and, in particular, for those who are in some way

disabled. Accessibility can be understood in relation

to three basic forms of human activity: mobility,

communication and understanding; the three are

subject to limitations as a consequence of the

existence of barriers. The barriers are any

impediment, hindrance or obstacle that limits or

impedes normalised, dignified, comfortable and safe

ways of access, use, enjoyment, interaction and

understanding of the environment, product and

service. To be specific, the advances insofar as the

degree or level of accessibility that characterises the

environments, buildings and public spaces in

society, are not isolated cases but depend on the

interaction between the three components of that

same society:

• The normative and institutional structure,

which establishes the minimum demands

of accessibility, should encourage their

compliance.

• The technological level, which establishes

the development of solutions and their

application possibilities.

• The social organisation, which is at the

same time the receiver, mediator and

executor of the conditions established by

the regulations, institutions and

technology.

The interaction between these three components

makes up a system that, in an aggregate way, will

determine the possibilities that make an asset or

service appropriate for its use with all people or, on

the contrary, inaccessible for a segment of the

population.

The consequence is that it is not enough to work

in an isolated fashion on one aspect of the system,

but rather that it is essential to work jointly between

the institutional, regulative, social and technological

spheres in order to achieve that, both for the

suppression of barriers as for the Design for All, it

be a reality applied to any asset or service, i.e. that

what is new should be made accessible and what is

old should be transformed in order to become

accessible. Only through planned action and taking

the system as a whole will it be possible to tackle the

area adequately.

Accessibility is a necessary condition for the

social participation of people with different

functional limitations and a guarantee for the best

design for everyone. In a society in which the

information technologies and communications are

being used more and more so as to be informed, in

order to study, to relate to others, for entertainment

and for work, and in which there are increasingly

more services provided via telematics, assuring the

accessibility of the new technological resources,

Internet in particular, is a priority.

In fact, currently, accessibility in the Internet is

very limited, above all due to indifference, or

ignorance of the problem, on the part of many web

designers, and bearing in mind the great number of

disabled all over the world – some five hundred

million people – it is a very important aspect to be

considered.

Before entering into the web design, strictly

speaking, it is a good idea to talk about accessible

Design, broadly speaking, in general terms, given

that many of the principles used here are also

applicable to web design as a result of being

included in the design of a product in general.

The concept of Design for All (as it is known in

Europe, whereas in America it is known by the name

Universal Design) is a synonym of “meant for

everyone”. In a strict sense it is the process of

HUMAN-TECHNOLOGY INTERACTION - Accessible Interfaces Design in Spanish University e-Learning Platforms

507

creating products, services and systems that are

usable by all people, encompassing the greatest type

of situations possible.

According to this philosophy the equipment and

services should be designed to satisfy the needs of

all the users; as much the average user as users with

different functional profiles should be able to use the

product as much as possible and with the maximum

features, without the need for adapting or additional

specialised design.

Seven Universal Design principles have been

established to guide a wide range of disciplines of

design including: the environmental design of

products and communications. These seven

principles can be applied to evaluate existing

designs, to guide the process of design and to

educate both the designers and the consumers on the

most usable characteristics of products and

environments. The Principles are described below,

indicating its definition and the guidelines to be

followed for its observance.

Principle One: Equitable Use

The design is useful and marketable to people with

different capabilities. Guidelines:

a. It provides the same means of use for all

users: wherever possible identical;

equivalent if not.

b. It avoids segregating or stigmatising any

user.

c. The provisions for privacy, security and

protection should be equally available for

all users.

d. It makes the design interesting for all users.

Principle Two: Flexibility of Use

The design should have sufficient flexibility to

accommodate the greatest range of preferences or

individual capabilities. Guidelines:

a. It provides options in the methods of use.

b. It incorporates means of access and forms

of use for both the left and the right handed.

c. It facilitates exactitude and precision for the

user.

d. It provides adaptability at the user’s rate.

Principle Three: Simple and Intuitive Usage

It should be simple and intuitive, easily understood

independent of the experience, knowledge, language

or the level of concentration of the user. Guidelines:

a. To eliminate unnecessary complexities.

b. To be consistent with the expectations and

the intuition of the user.

c. It incorporates a wide range of instruction

and skill in the language.

d. It arranges the information according to its

importance.

Principle Four: Perceptible Information

The design provides the user with the information

necessary for its use independently of the

environmental conditions and his sensorial

capabilities. Guidelines:

a. It uses different methods (graphic, verbal,

tactile) for a redundant presentation of the

essential information.

b. It provides an adequate contrast between

the essential and the additional information.

c. It maximises the legibility of the essential

information.

It differentiates the elements such that they

can be described (i.e. it makes it easy to

give instructions or directions).

e. It provides compatibility with the variety of

techniques or devices used by people with

sensorial limitations.

Principle Five: Error Tolerance

The design is error resistant. It minimises the risks

and the adverse consequences of both accidental and

deliberate errors. Guidelines:

a. It adds elements in order to minimise

dangers and errors: the most used elements

should be more accessible; the dangerous

elements should be eliminated, isolated or

shielded.

b. It provides warnings about dangers and/or

errors.

c. It provides escape routes with safe

characteristics.

d. It discourages unconscious actions in tasks

that require vigilance.

Principle Six: Low Physical Effort

The design should be used efficiently and

comfortably with a minimum of effort or fatigue.

Guidelines:

a. It allows the user to maintain a neutral body

position.

b. It uses reasonable functioning strength.

c. It minimises repetitive actions.

d. It minimises the physical effort sustained.

Principle Seven: Size and Space for Access and

Use

The environment provides a space and conditions

that are adequate for its use independent of the body

size, posture and mobility of the user: Guidelines:

a. It provides a clean line of vision of the

important elements for any user whether

seated or standing.

b. The components should be within

reasonable reach for any user whether

seated or standing.

c. It includes variations in the hand holds for

different hand sizes.

WEBIST 2007 - International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies

508

d. It provides adequate space for help or

personal care devices.

These are the criteria that define a design that is

usable for everyone. Of course other aspects should

also be borne in mind throughout the design process

such as aesthetics, the cost, safety/security, or

respect towards diversity.

3 ACCESSIBILITY AND WEB

DESIGN

With reference to the accessibility problems related

to webpage design, one should bear in mind that

many users may be operating in contexts that are

very different from one’s own:

• They may not be able to see, hear, move or

may not be capable of processing certain

kinds of information easily or at all.

• They might have difficulty in reading or

understanding a text.

• There is no reason why they must have or

be capable of using a keyboard or a mouse.

• They might have a screen that only displays

text, a small screen or a slow connection to

the Internet.

• They may not speak or understand the

language in which the document is written

fluently.

• They may well find themselves in a

situation in which their eyes, ears or hands

are occupied or hindered (e.g. driving a car,

working in a noisy environment etc).

• They might have a previous version of the

navigator, a completely different navigator,

a voice operated navigator or a different

operative system.

• The contents developers should bear in

mind these considerations while designing

the pages.

Given that there are many different situations to

be taken into consideration, each accessible design

chosen generally speaking benefits many groups of

disabled people as well as the entire Web

community. On this aspect, the World Wide Web

Consortium (W3C), through a work group known as

WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative), took up the

challenge and has made the effort to “standardise”

the webpage design procedure in order to make them

accessible. This has been embodied in a series of

recommendations in the form of Guidelines. And it

is in these guidelines that the key to providing

equalitarian access for all Web users is to be found.

The WAI, in association with organisations from all

over the world, is promoting the accessibility of the

Web through five complementary activities:

• To assure that the essential technologies of

the Web support accessibility.

• To develop guidelines for the authorship of

pages, user applications and author tools.

• To develop evaluation and reformation

tools for accessibility.

• To direct training and technical assistance.

• To follow up on the research and

development that could affect the future

accessibility of the Web.

Of all the groups of guidelines dealt with by the

WAI we are mainly interested in one, above all

others, for this project. We are referring to “Web

Content Accessibility Guidelines”.

4 METHODOLOGY OF THE

EVALUATION OF THE

ACCESSIBILITY OF

E-LEARNING PLATFORMS

The steps that were taken to carry out the

aforementioned study were the following:

• In the first place the whole platform was

visited in search of pages claiming to be

accessible, that is to say, pages that had a

WAI logo or that had an alternative

accessible version. These signs of

accessibility should be found in the main

page of the website, given that this is their

entrance point.

• Once having detected the accessible pages

an automatic tool was then applied to them

to check whether they really were or not.

• We also saw fit to pass the said tools on to

the most important Institution Webs,

independently of whether they claimed to

be accessible or not.

• The next step was to analyse the results

obtained and to compare the results of the

two analyses carried out thus obtaining

pertinent conclusions.

• Finally a series of improvements were

contributed, the most common detected,

which helped us to make the said webpages

accessible.

• The levels of priority that were taken into

consideration were 1 (A) and 2 (AA), 3

(AAA) was rejected given that it was very

exacting and no platform was found that

could comply with it, not even the webpage

of ONCE.

HUMAN-TECHNOLOGY INTERACTION - Accessible Interfaces Design in Spanish University e-Learning Platforms

509

• Insofar as the levels of exploration of the

platforms, level 3 (the main page and the

two levels below it) was the maximum

level explored, because if one of the

platforms of dynamic webpages is not

accessible up to level 3, it is difficult for it

to be accessible in subsequent levels.

The study was carried out on the 15 platforms

analysing the levels of priority required by the W3C

regulations. Each point of verification is assigned

one of the three “levels of priority”.

• Priority 1: The Web content developer has to

satisfy this point of verification. Otherwise, one or

more groups will find it impossible to access the

document information. That this point of verification

be satisfied is a basic requirement so that some

groups are capable of using the Web documents.

• Priority 2: The Web content developer should

satisfy this point of verification. Otherwise, one or

more groups will find it difficult to access the

document information. The satisfaction of this point

of verification will remove important obstacles for

accessing Web documents.

• Priority 3: The Web content developer can

bear this point of verification in mind. Otherwise,

one or more groups could find some difficulty in

accessing the document information. The

satisfaction of this point of verification will improve

access to Web documents.

The specification of three “levels of adaptation”

to facilitate reference for other organisations.

• The adaptation level "A" (A) includes the

points of verification of priority 1;

• The “Double A” (AA) level includes

priorities 1 and 2;

• The “Triple A” (AAA) level includes

priorities 1, 2 and 3.

Examples of habitual barriers found in all the

platforms studied:

• Images without alternative text;

• Absence of alternative text for the sensitive

points of the maps of the image;

• The incorrect use of the structural elements

in the pages; the unsubtitled sounds or the

undescribed images;

• The absence of alternative information for

the users who cannot access the frames or

the scripts;

• The tables that are difficult to interpret

when they justify;

• Or, the sites with poor colours contrast.

The Relation of these Guidelines to Other

Guidelines of the Web Accessibility Initiative

(WAI) of the W3C

We could say that the WAI divides its guidelines

into four large groups:

1. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

(WCAG). They study how accessible the

content of a website is. These are the

guidelines that interest us the most.

2. User Accessibility to Applications

Guidelines (UAAG). They study the

accessibility of the navigators.

3. Author Tools Accessibility Guidelines

(ATAG). They study the accessibility of the

author tools employed to develop websites.

4. XML Accessibility Guidelines (XAG). The

XML applications with accessibility

support.

As well as the development of the guidelines,

WAI is also working on the use of the Web

technologies, such as HTML, CSS, SMIL, XML,

DOM, which are collaborating in accessibility.

WAI co-ordinates with other organisations to

develop tools that can help in the evaluation, to

readjust pages, and provide alternative solutions to

support accessibility.

5 CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the great existing legislative cover on the

subject of Web accessibility we have confirmed that

in practice all this legislation is not really taken

seriously given that our analysis carried out on 15

platforms has demonstrated that very few comply

with the web accessibility requisites in levels 1 and

2. Only 2 platforms complied with level 2 and 5 with

level 1, the rest did not comply with any

accessibility requirement.

As regards the Web Accessibility Guidelines, let

us repeat and make quite clear that these guidelines

don’t just make the pages more accessible for the

disabled but also for all users in general. In the case

of training the inobservance of these guidelines

makes the better use of training impossible on the

part of any user given that the said users have to be

in front of the computer for many hours in order to

obtain their training, for which reason it should be

much more of a priority in these services than in

others.

However, in spite of their seeming usefulness

one also has to make clear that the Web Accessibility

Guidelines are a recommendation and not a law,

with all that that entails, and, moreover, the decision

WEBIST 2007 - International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies

510

to place the accessibility logo in a website is the

responsibility of the Content Provider, who is able to

place the icons (if he wishes) without having

complied with the guidelines themselves with the

requisite responsibility and without any kind of legal

penalisation for having done so.

This is one of the reasons for the lack of

seriousness and the contradictions found in our

analysis already commented upon in previous points

of the project.

As general conclusions relating to the analysis

carried out one should say that:

• It is to be highlighted that the majority of

the platforms have used the versions 1.0

and 1.1 of the TAW analyser and we can

say that these versions are much less

“exacting” than the version used in our

analysis (3.0). As a result this has given

numerous “exacting” errors meaning that

we have had to analyse them far beyond the

numeric data returned to us by the TAW

tool. But despite this we recommend

always using the most up-to-date versions

of the tools because in general they are

more thorough and detect more errors.

• Many pages within the same platform have

the same heading or menu, for which

reason many errors in this part of the

website are repeated throughout all the

pages that contain the aforementioned

heading or menu. For this reason these

errors, which should only appear once, crop

up many times. We have kept this in mind

when it came down to evaluating each

platform.

• One should also bear in mind that many

errors unleash or provoke, to some extent,

other errors, for which reason one should

take this into consideration when evaluating

the page errors.

• One should not assume that all automatic

errors are valid given that the experience in

the analysis has demonstrated that, on

various occasions, the programme has

detected an error where none was to be

found.

• For a definitive analysis of accessibility we

can not base our conclusions on applying

just one tool, like TAW, but also the

experience of the person analysing, as well

as the context of the platform, its structure

and the programming method used are also

going to affect the final result of the

Analysis to a large extent.

As a final conclusion on the objective of our

study, it has to be said that, in spite of the fact that

many of the platforms appear to be accessible, their

contents are not, given that only 4.5% of the pages

analysed passed our accessibility tests. We could

sum up by saying that the majority of the platforms

show a “pretty face” aiming to provide an aspect and

image of accessibility, which in reality they do not

possess. This leads us to conclude that it is necessary

for the Universities, in general, and those that have

distance learning platforms, in particular, to

approach this topic with greater seriousness and to

make a real effort in this regard given that we are

talking about Public Administrations, entities that

should show more concern for making the

information reach the citizen, although this means a

loss in the aesthetic beauty of their services, which,

as a result of having a more attractive image full of

images, movements, striking menus etc., only serve

to increase the probabilities of inaccessibility and

place the distance learning student in a backward

situation as regards his real training.

REFERENCES

“Designing a More Usable World for All. General UD

Information, Standards and Guidelines” [on-line].

[Date of consultation: 6

-June-2006].

Available in the Web: <http://trace.wisc.edu/world/>

“Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. W·C

Recommendation 5

-May-1999”

[on-line]. [Date of consultation: 30

-May-2006].

Available in the Web:

<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-

19990505>

“eEurope 2002: Accesibilidad de los sitios Web públicos y

de su contenido” (“e-Europe 2002: Accessibility of the

Public Websites and their Contents”)

Communiqué from the Commission to the Council, to the

European Parliament, to the Economic and Social

Committee and to the Regional Committees. [on-line].

[Date of consultation: 18

-April -2006].

Available in the Web:

<http://www.discapnet.es/documentos/tecnica/0436.ht

ml>

HUMAN-TECHNOLOGY INTERACTION - Accessible Interfaces Design in Spanish University e-Learning Platforms

511