The Tech Faculty Imperative: Leading with Inclusive Design and Dual Title II Compliance

This article was written in collaboration with:

Michele Kelmer, MS Ed.
Director of Faculty Engagement and Outreach
UITS Learning Technologies

Michael Mace, MS Ed.
Manager
UITS Assistive Technology and Accessibility Centers

Cara Reader, PhD
University ADA Coordinator
Director of Compliance, Training, and ADA
Indiana University – Office of Civil Rights Compliance

As technological advancements reshape education, faculty in computing, engineering, data science, and information technology sit at the intersection of innovation and inclusion. But with this influence comes a responsibility: ensuring the digital environments we create are accessible for all learners.

This is more than compliance—it’s about shaping a future where every student, regardless of ability or background, can thrive. Two federal statutes—Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title II of the Higher Education Act (HEA)—along with recent executive orders provide a powerful framework for technology faculty to lead transformative change in education.

Why Accessibility? Because There Are Students in Your Classes with Disabilities.

The data makes this clear:

  • According to 2022 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), around 28% of the US public reports having one or more disabilities, including physical, mental, and emotional disabilities. This includes 23.8% of individuals ages 18-44 and 34% of military veterans.

  • In a 2019-2020 survey of college students by the National Center for Education Statistics, 21% of undergraduates and 11% of graduate students reported having a disability. These percentages were similar for traditional and adult students and across disciplines of study, and they increase each year.

There are four main reasons why you may not know who your students with disabilities are:

  1. Most disabilities are invisible. You can’t always look at someone and know they have a mental health, learning, chronic health, physical, hearing, vision, or neurological disability.

  2. Students don’t disclose. Less than 50% of students report their physical disabilities, and less than 30% report mental health, learning, or neurological disabilities. Most students who do not disclose cite the fear of stigma from peers, pushback on accommodation requests by instructors, and the general hassle of documentation.

  3. Students may have a disability but don’t have documentation. They may not have been formally diagnosed due to the cost of testing, lack of adequate health care, or cultural norms. ADHD and autism, for example, can be diagnosed later in life.

  4. Students with new acute or chronic health conditions or injuries may not consider themselves as having a disability, even if it impairs their learning for a semester or more. Being diagnosed and treated for conditions like cancer, multiple sclerosis, or major injuries can significantly impact a student’s ability to manage coursework.

Based on 2024 data, any given 100 college students could include:

  • 30% diagnosed with anxiety and/or depression

  • 20% with sleep difficulties like insomnia or sleep apnea

  • 12% attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

  • 10% who experience migraines or other severe headaches

  • 4% with specific learning disabilities including dyslexia and dyscalculia

  • 4% with autism

  • 2% who are blind or have low vision

  • 2% with a trauma-related disability including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

  • 2% who are Deaf or hard of hearing

It’s common for people to have overlapping disabilities, so while this isn’t to say everyone has a disability, the point is that it’s extremely unlikely that no one in your classes has a disability.

Understanding Title II: ADA + HEA

Accessibility isn’t just the right thing to do for your students; digital accessibility, like physical accessibility provided by ramps and curb cuts, is now the law.

Title II of the ADA (1990, updated 2024): Prohibits discrimination by public entities, including public colleges and universities. In April 2024, the Department of Justice released new rules requiring digital content and services to be accessible to people with disabilities. This includes:

  • Course content in Canvas (your Learning Management System (LMS))

  • Department websites and internal platforms

  • Educational technologies used in class

  • Videos, documents, and simulations

  • Social Media Posts

Key Deadline:

April 2026 for institutions serving >50,000 

The purpose of this update is to help ensure that people with any of a wide range of disabilities can easily access the same web content and online services provided by state and local government and public educational institutions that those without a disability can. Your online courses and anything you put within your LMS are considered web content.

This web content must meet the new accessibility standards if:

  • students or the public can access it online,

  • it’s currently being used (not archival content), and

  • it’s part of the work you do for your institution.

For something to be considered accessible, it must be:

  • Equally integrated: provided at the same time and not separate.

  • Equally effective: provides equal opportunity or outcome.

  • Substantially equivalent in ease of use: should not be more difficult.

According to the Title II update, content in Spring 2026 courses and beyond must be accessible, whether or not you have a student with an accommodation request. There will no longer be an option to wait for an accommodation request to make your course site meet basic accessible guidelines. Accommodations apply when the basics of accessibility are insufficient to meet the specific need of the student. You will still receive accommodation requests for extended time on assessments or specialized accommodations such as a sign language interpreter, a Braille textbook, or tactile graphics as needed.

Title II of the HEA: Requires teacher preparation programs (and increasingly, faculty across disciplines) to use evidence-based pedagogical practices and report on outcomes like teaching effectiveness and alignment with workforce demands.

What Tech Faculty Can Do: Inclusive Teaching in Action

Here’s how you can align your pedagogy with Title II ADA, Title II HEA, and federal priorities—with real-world examples to guide you.

  1. Design Digitally Accessible Content from the Start

  • Use alternative text (alt-text) for all images, charts, and graphs:

  • Example: In a software engineering course, use: “UML diagram showing user login process, including ‘Enter Credentials’, ‘Verify’, and ‘Authenticate’.” This applies to images embedded in presentations, documents, and web pages.

  • Caption all video and transcribe all audio content:

  • Example: A data structures professor records weekly screencasts with auto-captioning, edited for accuracy and posted with transcripts on Canvas. For students who are deaf or hard of hearing, this is essential. Providing a full transcript also benefits students who prefer to read or who need to quickly search for specific information within the content.

  • Structure documents for readability and navigation: When creating lecture notes, assignments, or syllabi in Word, PowerPoint, or PDF, use proper heading structures (e.g., H1, H2, H3), bullet points, and numbered lists—not just bold or color. This allows screen readers to navigate the document logically and helps all students process information more easily. Avoid using color alone to convey meaning (e.g., “red text indicates a critical warning”) as this can be inaccessible to color-blind individuals.

  • Use accessibility checkers in Word, Adobe Acrobat, or Google Docs. IU recommends this practice across all digital materials.

  1. Evaluate the Accessibility of Tools and Platforms

  • Check for WCAG 2.1 AA compliance before adopting new software, simulations, or online learning platforms:

  • Example: Before adopting a new online code editor, the faculty requests a VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) and only proceeds after reviewing it with IT accessibility staff. If a vendor cannot provide evidence of compliance, consider alternative solutions or work with your institution to ensure reasonable accommodations can be made.

  • Test for keyboard navigation and screen reader compatibility:

  • Example: In a web development course, the professor makes part of the final project require full keyboard navigation and ARIA labels.

  • Leverage built-in LMS accessibility tools like Canvas Accessibility Checker or Anthology Ally.

  • Example: When uploading a new module to Canvas, a professor runs the accessibility checker to identify any images without alt-text or poorly contrasted text, rectifying these issues before publishing.

  1. Implement Inclusive Pedagogical Practices (Title II HEA + ADA)

  • Use Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to offer multiple means of engagement and representation: Provide information in various formats (e.g., video, text, simulation) and allow students to demonstrate their learning in diverse ways (e.g., flexible assessment like a prototype + presentation or GitHub repo + write-up).

  • Example: In an IoT capstone project, students can present via slide deck, interactive demo, or video walkthrough—with guidelines for accessibility built into the rubric. This accommodates different learning styles and abilities.

  1. Track Outcomes and Improve with Data

  • Align assignments to real-world certifications (e.g., AWS, CompTIA, Python Institute), and track student success to inform redesigns.

  • Use learning analytics in GitHub, Jupyter Notebooks, or Canvas to see where engagement or comprehension gaps occur.

Moving Forward: Build a Culture of Accessibility

Implementing Title II effectively isn’t a one-time project; it’s an ongoing commitment that requires a cultural shift towards proactive accessibility. For technological faculty, this means:

  • Continuous Improvement: Regularly audit your courses with accessibility in mind each semester. Ask students for anonymous feedback on digital barriers.

  • Collaborate: Partner with your institution’s accessibility services office and instructional designers. Join or form a cross-departmental working group on inclusive STEM teaching.

  • Educate Yourself and Others: Complete self-paced training or attend workshops on accessibility and UDL. Share accessible templates with your colleagues.

Tech Faculty: You Are Equity Catalysts

By aligning your teaching with Title II of the ADA and HEA, you’re doing more than following the law. You’re building a future where every student—regardless of disability, background, or learning style—can succeed in STEM and computing fields.

Additional resources:

IU Knowledgebase documents:

IU Expand Training Courses

Web resources

“A Map Makes You Smarter. GPS Does Not.”: A Story About AI, Work, and What Comes Next with Jose Antonio Bowen

Jose Antonio Bowen is introduced as a Renaissance thinker with a jazz soul. His background includes leadership roles at Stanford, Georgetown, and SMU, as well as being the president of Johnstreet College. He is also a jazz musician who has played with legends, a composer with a Pulitzer-nominated symphony, and the author of “Teaching Naked,” 30% off with the code TNT30 at Wiley “Teaching Change,” and “Teaching with AI.” 30% off Teaching Change or Teaching with AI with Code HTWN at JH.

He provided a workshop for us on AI Assignment and Assessments, where he mentioned:

“A map makes you smarter. GPS does not.”

It was such a small, quiet moment, but it cracked open something bigger. Because this wasn’t just about directions. It was about how we’re all starting to think less, remember less, and—if we’re not careful—become less, all thanks to the technology we depend on.

The Decline of Entry-Level Everything

Dr. Bowen shared that Shell, a global energy giant, had laid off nearly 38% of a particular workforce group. Internships? Vanishing. Entry-level jobs? Replaced.

Replaced by what?

Artificial Intelligence

Tasks that used to belong to interns or fresh graduates—writing reports, creating slide decks, analyzing data—are now handled by machines that don’t take lunch breaks or need supervision.

And that’s where the real twist came in: the people who still have jobs? They’re not the ones who can do the task better than AI. They’re the ones who can think better than AI. Who can improve, refine, and oversee what AI produces.

If AI is writing the first draft, the humans left in the room better know how to write the final one—with nuance, clarity, and insight.

Offloading Our Minds, One Task at a Time

Back to that GPS quote. Dr. Bowen called it “cognitive offloading”—how we gradually stop using certain mental muscles because tech is doing the lifting.

We used to memorize phone numbers, navigate with paper maps, even mentally calculate tips at restaurants. Now? We ask Siri.

The scary part isn’t that we’re forgetting how to do these things. It’s what happens when we offload creativity, problem-solving, and thinking itself.

Because if AI can be creative—can write poems, code apps, design marketing plans—what do we do? What’s left for us?

Creativity, Reimagined

But here’s where things got interesting. Dr. Bowen isn’t anti-AI. In fact, he practically gushed about it.

He showed how AI can be used to spark creativity, not stifle it.

He explained how students could upload a 700-page textbook and have the AI turn it into a podcast. A nine-minute podcast. With baseball analogies, if that’s what helps them learn.

He talked about using AI to create personalized assignments: instead of a generic math problem about trains, give a politics student a question about voter turnout rates. Suddenly, they care. Suddenly, they’re engaged.

Because AI isn’t replacing the teacher—it’s becoming the chalk, the blackboard, the entire toolset that a smart educator can use to make learning come alive.

Prompt Like a Pro

Here’s another nugget that stuck with me: prompting isn’t coding. It’s storytelling.

Don’t just ask the AI to “fix your proposal.” Ask it to “transform your proposal into something your provost will love.”

Use emotion. Use intent. Give context. AI, it turns out, responds best when it knows what you’re really trying to say.

The 70% Problem

Still, AI isn’t perfect. Dr. Bowen introduced what he called the “70% problem.”

AI can do a lot of things—but only up to a C-level standard. That’s fine for a rough draft. It’s dangerous for a final product.

If students rely on AI to do the work, and they can’t take it past that 70% mark, then what happens when employers expect more?

The solution? Raise the bar.

What used to be acceptable for a B or C should now earn an F—unless the student can make the AI’s work better, smarter, more human.

From Tools to Teaching Assistants

The future of education, the he argued, is not about banning AI—it’s about designing with it.

He showed how teaching assistants could use AI notebooks filled with chemistry texts to answer student questions on the fly.
How AI can test business plans, simulate presidential decisions, or offer critiques from the perspective of a political opponent.
How students can train AI to “be” Einstein and ask it about thermodynamics at their own pace, in their own language.

AI isn’t replacing teachers—it’s becoming part of the classroom, like textbooks once were.

The Arms Race

Of course, there’s a darker side. AI can cheat. It can take online courses for students, fake typing patterns, even simulate human error.

Dr. Bowen called it an “arms race” between those building smarter AI and those trying to prevent it from being misused.

But even in this, he saw hope.

If educators embrace AI—not as an enemy but as a creative partner—they can design assignments AI can’t complete alone. They can build simulations, storytelling challenges, and editing tasks that require a human mind.

Because at the end of the day, that’s what this moment demands: humans who think more deeply, ask better questions, and create things worth remembering.

Final Words

The session ended with a simple truth:

“AI raises the floor. You must raise the ceiling.”

Whether you’re a student, a teacher, a manager, or a job-seeker, AI is now the baseline.

It will write the first draft, sketch the first idea, solve the first problem.

But it’s still up to us to bring the brilliance.

AI can produce work at a “C” level, which is problematic if students can only perform at that level. Instructors need to raise their standards and expectations. Assignments that would have been considered a “C” should now be evaluated as an “F” if they only meet the level of quality that AI can produce.

Implications

Students need to surpass AI capabilities to be competitive in the job market, especially in fields like coding and writing.

And maybe—just maybe—it’s time we all learned to read the map again.

How UDL Helps Us Create Classes Where Everyone Can Learn and Succeed

A few weeks ago we talked about UDL in the conversation around accessible syllabi. This post provides more back ground on what UDL or (Universal Design of Learning) is, and how it can be useful to you when you for the purposes of teaching and learning. The information I am providing was adapted from the work of Flower Darby, author of Small Teaching Online. and the UDL Higher Education Special Interest Group.

Within the higher education landscape, there are unique challenges. Some of these include: differing school models and missions, degrees of faculty’s focus on research (sometimes over instruction), the size of classes and campuses, the connections between faculty and students, the lack of  background in the area of teaching for many individual faculty, the relationship among faculty and other service providers (e.g., disability services), and the impact of legislative accessibility standards (different for different countries).

Although UDL first took hold in K12 education, the neuroscience and the principles that undergird this framework certainly apply to higher education as well, to address the wide variety of students that an institution may serve. When we think about the college context and about today’s students, we realize that other considerations come into play in addition to students’ needs and preferences relating to both learning and technology.

For example, today’s college students [at both the graduate and undergraduate level] are more likely than ever to be juggling at least one of the following challenges, and often more than one:

  • Working to pay for college

  • Raising a child on their own

  • Dealing with mental health challenges such as anxiety

  • Facing food or housing insecurity, if not both

  • Or a myriad of other issues.

Given this reality, it’s important that we build in support and options within the very design of the class. While students  at IU can request accommodations based on need, Newt Miller, Associate Dean at Ashford University has said, we can “accommodate off the bat,” (2020) so that students don’t need to request special treatment, deadline extensions, or opportunities to revise and resubmit, as examples.

General Resources:

This video provides more information about the importance of UDL in our college classes.

Additional Resources

Creating an Accessible Syllabus

Research related to the Universal Design for Learning https://udlguidelines.cast.org/ reminds us that creating accessible material is a win for all students. One of the access points that students may have to you and your course is the syllabus. The course syllabus communicates more than just due dates and contact information. You can set a tone of respect and inclusivity in your course by providing a syllabus that includes IU’s disability accommodation statement with a personalized touch and in an accessible and usable format.

The Accessible Syllabus Website: https://www.accessiblesyllabus.com provides examples, as well as advice to consider about how to present text, images, rhetoric, and policy in an inclusive manner. These approaches can also be used in the development of lectures and other course materials.

Additionally, the site embeds multiple resources within each topic area. For example, the section on Policy compares traditional and inclusive policy statements, discusses approaches to expanding deadlines, and addresses various types of grading practices.

Again, all approaches mentioned on this site may not work for your course; as inclusive teaching emphasizes that there is no one size fits all approach. The advice, as presented, may require modification to best support your teaching goals.

You can also find additional resources related to syllabi creation in this IU Expand course: https://iu.instructure.com/courses/1716451/pages/the-syllabus-a-must-have, and in this IU Pressbooks chapter: https://iu.pressbooks.pub/semesterchecklist/chapter/add-your-syllabus/