Embedded Files
Video Presentation
Video Presentation
You can view my poster presentation at the fall 2024 Mid-Atlantic Regional Archives Conference using the embedded YouTube video below, or you can keep scrolling for a written overview!
Importance
Importance
The word “accessibility” means many things in an archival context. Here, I examine its meaning for Disabled users. At present, many—if not most—online archival materials are not accessible to Disabled users, which is a violation of their human right to information access and their legal rights (in the U.S.) to public accommodations. To break down the large concept of “accessibility,” I use three metrics: discoverability, usability, and readability. By sharing these metrics, I hope to inspire other archivists to increase their focus on archival accessibility.
Definitions
Definitions
Discoverable: Archival materials should be easy to locate on an archive’s website, paths to materials should be logical (but not necessarily short) [1], users should be aware of the materials’ existence, and keywords should be included in descriptive text to facilitate web searching.
Usable: Online archival material should use the most recent version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) [2] or equivalent standard, provide multiple access points for materials, and have been tested by Disabled users.
Readable: 54% of people in the U.S. read at or below a sixth-grade level [3]. Archival descriptive materials and finding aids should be written in language that is simple, clear, and easily understood. Aim for a fifth-grade reading level.
Finding aid: A webpage (or set of webpages) intended to facilitate access to and use of a particular archival collection, including pages called "collection guides," "collection information," "location documents," etc. Finding aids provide collection-specific information, not general information about an archive or its website
Record page: A webpage that provides access to a specific archival record. Webpages that provide information about the record but do not provide online access to it would not be included in this definition.
Record items: Records accessed through a record page. They might be musical scores, recordings, photographs, letters, or any other item that traditionally falls into the category of archival record.
What I Did
What I Did
I analyzed finding aids, record pages, and record items from 55 archives based on the DUR metrics. To analyze discoverability, I looked at the length and logic of the path from an archive's or library’s homepage to the item in question. To evaluate usability, I used WebAIM’s Web Content Accessibility Checker (WAVE) and Adobe Acrobat's Accessibility Check and Accessibility Report. To analyze readability for finding aids and record pages, I used a Flesch-Kincaid calculator to determine the grade level of the text input.
What I Found
What I Found
Discoverability: Archival materials generally had short but confusing discovery paths, browse pages were long and often uncategorized, and finding aids often didn’t link to record pages or items (or vice versa).
Usability: All but one webpage I analyzed had usability errors.
Readability: Most descriptive text was written at or above a college reading level, but most people in the U.S. read at or below a fifth-grade reading level.
Focusing on Record Items
Focusing on Record Items
For record items, I looked only at discoverability and usability. I did not look at readability because archivists cannot control the text of a record item.
Discoverability
Discoverability
On average, the number of clicks from homepage to record item was 4.5, the mode was 3, and there was a range from 3 to 8. In general, those paths were confusing and difficult to follow.
Somewhat unexpectedly, the longer paths were usually easier to follow because they would use a nesting format where the user would follow a series of increasingly specific folders to the record item, while the shorter paths were generally more confusing because it wasn't clear which buttons they were mean to click next. As a result, the analyzed record items were generally difficult to discover.
For Disabled users, logical paths are particularly important, especially for those with cognitive disabilities. Likewise, screenreader users or keyboard navigators would benefit from clearly labeled buttons or links because those would, say, make it easier to search a page using the Find function.
Usability
Usability
Below is a list of the most common usability issues encountered, as measured by a combination of WebAIM's Web Content Accessibility Checker, or WAVE, Adobe's Accessibility Reports, and my own human inspection of the items. Of the 23 analyzed record items, 6 had two major usability issues, so the total for the table is 29.
The three most common issues (no audio alternative, no alt-text, and image-only .pdf) share a common resolution: multiple points of access. For example, "no audio alternative" refers to instances where the record item was provided only as an audio file—as an embed, .mp4 file, YouTube video, that sort of thing. But for users who can't listen to an audio file, those items were effectively unusable. But, if transcriptions of audio items, scores, waveforms, written descriptions, or other audio alternatives were provided, those record items would have been usable for those users. Likewise, providing alt-text for images and ensuring that assistive technologies could interact with the .pdf files would ensure that those record items were usable.
.pdf files were the most common way to distribute record items (10), followed by embeds (7) and videos (3). Attention to .pdf usability features is, therefore, essential for archivists preparing those files for dissemination. Many of the .pdf files I examined had issues that were relatively easy to correct. Examples might include redundant links or titles (using the same links or titles in multiple locations) or color contrast (colors that blend into each other).
Takeaways
Takeaways
Improve discoverability by
creating logical, intuitive navigation paths, and
clearly labeling buttons and links.
Improve usability by
offering multiple format options for record items,
providing effective alt text, and
paying attention to PDF accessibility.
Recommended Reading
Recommended Reading
Co, E., Dirig, R., Halstead, J., Hendrie, M., & Masilko, T. (2023). Reimagining access: Improving access to digital archives through participatory design. Journal of Digital Media Management, 11(4), 324–333. https://doi.org/10.69554/IAGK5522
Pineo, E. Discoverability, usability, and readability: A framework for assessing accessibility for Disabled users of online archives. Forthcoming.
Pineo, E.A. (2024). Human rights, information access, and finding aids. Including Disability, 4.
Southwell, K.L. & Slater, J. (2013). An evaluation of finding aid accessibility for screen readers. Information Technology and Libraries, 32(3), 34–46. https://www. doi.org/10.6017/ital.v32i3.3423
References
References
Porter, T. & Miller, D.R. (2016), Investigating the Three-Click Rule: A pilot study. MWAIS 2016 Proceedings. https://aisel.aisnet.org/mwais2016/2
World Wide Web Consortium. (2023, October 5). Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/
Schmidt, E. (2022, March 16). Reading the numbers: 130 million American adults have low literacy skills, but funding differs drastically by state. APM Research Lab. https://www.apmresearchlab.org/10x-adult-literacy#:~:text=by EMILY SCHMIDT | March 16, 2022&text=This means more than half,of a sixth-grade level
Presented at:Mid-Atlantic Regional Archives ConferenceNovember 13–15, 2024
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse