Context & Conditions
This artifact was created during Summer 2025 in EDET 735: Technology Applications for Diverse Populations at the University of South Carolina. The assignment required me to evaluate the accessibility of a real-world website using both automated tools and manual testing methods, then compile findings into a professional report with actionable recommendations. I selected the Spirit Airlines homepage due to its relevance as a high-traffic, real-world platform with known accessibility challenges that impact a wide range of users.
​
At the time of creation, I brought my classroom experience working with diverse learners, including students with varying learning needs, but I was still developing my understanding of digital accessibility and inclusive design in online environments. This artifact required me to apply accessibility frameworks and tools, including WAVE (WebAIM) and Axe (Deque), as well as manual techniques such as keyboard navigation and screen reader testing using VoiceOver. I also drew on principles from Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and web accessibility standards (WCAG 2.1), focusing on how digital environments can either support or hinder equitable access. This work reflects my growing ability to evaluate learning environments not just content delivery, but for usability, inclusivity, and accessibility.
​
Scope
The purpose of this artifact was to analyze the accessibility of a single webpage and identify barriers that could impact users with disabilities, then propose actionable improvements. This project was created for graduate coursework but has strong-real world application in both educational and professional digital environments. Within a broader instructional design context, this artifact represents evaluation and improvement of a digital learning environment, rather than the creation of new instructional materials.
​
For instance, I analyzed key accessibility issues such as missing alt text, poor color contrast, inconsistent heading structures, and lack of keyboard navigation support. These findings highlight how design decisions directly affect user experience, particularly for individuals using assistive technologies. This artifact demonstrates my ability to critically evaluate an existing system and propose improvements that enhance accessibility and usability for all learners.
​
Role
I served as the sole evaluator and instructional designer for this artifact. I independently selected the website, conducted all accessibility testing, analyzed findings, and developed recommendations. My role required both technical and pedagogical thinking, as I had to interpret how design flaws impact user experience and learning access.
​
For example, I identified how missing form labels would cause screen readers to announce “edit text” without context, making navigation difficult for users with visual impairments. I then translated these findings into actionable recommendations, such as implementing proper HTML labeling and improving heading hierarchy. This demonstrates my ability to connect technical evaluation with user-centered design improvements.
​
Instructional Design
This artifact reflects the ADDIE model and the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp (MRK) model, particularly in the Analysis and Evaluation phases of instructional design. From an ADDIE perspective, this work represents both the Analysis and Evaluation phases (Molenda, 2015). During Analysis, I examined how users interact with the website and identified barriers that prevent equitable access, such as poor navigation flow and lack of semantic structure. During Evaluation, I assessed the effectiveness of the website’s design in supporting diverse users and proposed improvements based on identified issues.
​
Within the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp model, this artifact demonstrates key components such as learner characteristics, instructional problems, delivery systems, and formative evaluation (Morrison et al., 2019). For instance, I considered learners with visual and motor impairments as key user groups and identified instructional problems such as missing alt text and inconsistent heading structures that disrupt navigation. The delivery systems, the website itself, was evaluated as a learning and interaction environment, and my recommendations function as a form of formative evaluation to improve accessibility and usability. This work is also informed by Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2018), as it emphasizes removing barriers and providing multiple means of access for all users.
​
Related Performance Indicators
AECT Standard 3: Learning Environments
-
3.1 Creating learning environments
-
3.2 Managing learning environments
Reflection
This artifact represents a meaningful shift in how I think about learning environments, particularly in digital spaces. At the time, I was beginning to understand that accessibility is not just a “nice to have,” but a fundamental component of effective instructional design. For example, I recognized that issues such as missing alt text or poor keyboard navigation are not minor inconveniences, but significant barriers that can completely prevent users from accessing content. This directly connects to AECT Standard 3, as it highlights my ability to evaluate and improve learning environments to support all users.
​
Now, I see that this artifact reflects an intermediate level of expertise in accessibility and learning environment design. While I effectively identified and explained accessibility issues, I would now expand this work by incorporating more user-centered testing, such as observing real users interacting with the site or using additional assistive technologies (e.g., JAWS or NVDA). I would also align my recommendations more explicitly with WCAG success criteria and include accessibility scoring or prioritization of fixes.
​
This artifact strongly aligns with AECT Standard 3 because it demonstrates my ability to analyze and improve a digital learning environment to make it more inclusive and accessible. Compared to earlier work, this artifact shows growth in my ability to think beyond content and consider the full user experience. It reflects my development as an instructional designer who understands that effective learning environments must be intentionally designed to remove barriers and support all learners, not just the majority.
​
References
CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
​
Molenda, M. (2015). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 54(2), 40–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21461
​
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2019). Designing effective instruction (8th ed.). Wiley.