UNC’s Disability Scramble

For blind students trying to log onto university websites, things as simple as downloading a syllabus, signing up for a class, or watching a lecture can turn into headaches—especially when nothing is built for them. However, by April 24, 2026, that must change.

The U.S. Department of Justice has updated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 1990 civil-rights law that requires organizations open to the public to ensure their services, programs, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities. The ADA was passed just as the World Wide Web was emerging, so the original law did not specifically address the accessibility of digital technologies. It required public institutions (including public and private colleges) to make their services accessible, but it offered no clear rules for how as yet undreamed of websites and mobile apps should be made usable for people with disabilities. The internet was new and exciting, and companies around the country were figuring out how to use it to their benefit. Disability access didn’t seem to be a priority.

The ADA was passed just as the World Wide Web was emerging and did not address the accessibility of digital technologies. Now, decades later, the federal government is attempting to make the online world accessible for every citizen. The new compliance regulations require universities to make their websites and online materials work for people with disabilities. That includes ensuring screen readers can read webpages and documents, that videos have captions, that images include text descriptions, and that online systems can be used without a mouse. This is no small feat. It will require time, resources, and money. Universities will have to work overtime to convert millions of documents into audible material, professors will need to update content, and websites will have to be reviewed and fixed to meet the new standards. Mobile apps, learning platforms, and some third-party sites will also need to be checked and altered if required. Finally, universities have got to get all of this done by April or risk lawsuits and fines. With just a month left, have UNC System universities made any real progress? Can they pull this off?

Decades later, the federal government is attempting to make the online world accessible for every citizen. The UNC System is made up of 16 public universities with diverse enrollments, missions, and budgets. Nevertheless, most UNC schools have at least released a statement acknowledging the new standards and promising steps to meet the deadline. UNC-Chapel Hill has a fairly detailed site with information on the new ADA requirements and the university’s plan of action, including vendor-management expectations, staff responsibilities, training resources, and a compliance plan. Other schools, such as NC State, East Carolina University, and Appalachian State have similar sites, though they are not as thorough.

Meanwhile, smaller schools such as Western Carolina, UNC Pembroke, and Elizabeth City State University have accessibility websites with little to no information on the new ADA standards. (With the exception of ECU, no UNC System school responded to multiple requests for comment.) This is where the pressure begins: Will smaller UNC System schools be able to meet the new requirements with their limited budgets, smaller staffs, and more modest resources?

To accomplish as much, each school will need to launch accessibility-training programs for faculty and staff, teaching them how to create content that works with screen readers, to caption videos, and to structure documents for accessibility. Professors will need to structure lesson plans to fit these requirements, which may mean reformatting PowerPoints and syllabi, adding text to photos and videos, and assigning homework that complies with the new standards. Some universities, such as UNC-Chapel Hill and NC State, have called for back-up, assigning ADA coordinators to oversee compliance and accessibility teams to help with the changes. Not absolutely everything needs to be updated. There are some exceptions to the new ADA rules: Archived content no longer in use, pre-existing electronic documents, third-party content, and password-protected material do not need to meet the new standards. While this may ease some of the burden on schools, the core challenge remains, and the task ahead is great.

Some universities across the country have turned to AI for help. AI can assist in refreshing online content, transcribing and captioning videos, lectures, and other materials. Overall, it can quicken the process and help streamline compliance, at least theoretically. This can take some of the burden and manpower needs off of staff. AI-powered tools can quickly scan thousands of web pages and documents to identify accessibility problems. UNC-Chapel Hill is using AI to centralize policies in a searchable database, thus improving accessibility.

AI can be extremely useful, but ensuring accuracy can be tricky. AI programs may misinterpret complex content or generate inaccurate captions, meaning human oversight is still essential. Since AI is relatively new, the technology is still being experimented with, and ironing out kinks is part of the process. Nevertheless, by reducing manual workload and allowing accessibility staff to focus on complex tasks, AI can make meeting the deadline more manageable. Bigger schools such as UNC-Chapel Hill already have AI courses, staff, and resources, but most smaller schools have limited AI support, making heavy reliance on AI for this particular set of tasks more difficult.

Like almost everything, this effort will cost money—and lots of it. Like almost everything, this effort will cost money—and lots of it. Large state schools can usually cover the costs, but smaller campuses, with fewer donors and less revenue from popular sports programs, could struggle. For UNC-Chapel Hill, a large budget may make this doable, but what about smaller schools such as Western Carolina University? The Department of Justice estimates that implementing and maintaining digital services nationwide could cost roughly $3.3-$3.5 billion annually over 10 years. Breaking this down per university is difficult, but it’s safe to say that UNC System schools will collectively spend millions. How funds are being reallocated, and by how much, is unclear.

Smaller UNC campuses have released little information about the new ADA requirements or their progress. These new changes come with possible downsides. Ensuring that academic content is accessible to everyone is a worthy goal, but the new standards also raise concerns about academic freedom, potential liability, and faculty workload. Professors may feel constrained in how they present course materials such as lectures, syllabi, and multimedia projects. They may unintentionally alter their teaching styles or subject presentations. If a course or professor falls short of accessibility standards, who is responsible, the department, university, or professor? In addition to existing responsibilities, faculty may now have to spend more time captioning videos, describing images, or converting documents. Smaller schools, barely scraping by with staff as it is, are going to feel this pain even harder.

These standards will challenge employees, but they could have positive benefits for students. For students with disabilities, these alterations will likely be welcomed with excitement. Accessible academic materials can open doors to educational and professional opportunities that were previously closed. Even students without disabilities may benefit from clearer, more organized course content. Accessible academics could make campuses more appealing to a wider variety of students, potentially boosting enrollment. Who wouldn’t want to go to a school where the content can be read out loud to you if you so desire? A more diverse learning environment that includes people from all walks of life with different struggles can foster a supportive campus culture.

Across the country, universities are scrambling to meet the same deadline. UC Berkeley, with years of experience in digital accessibility, leads the charge, offering extensive training, transparent policies, and collaboration with other universities. The University of Illinois Chicago has formed committees to ensure that faculty and administrators work together on compliance. The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is also making progress auditing materials and rolling out departmental training. One thing all these universities have in common is that they are large schools with ample budgets. Nevertheless, many of their websites have not yet changed to comply with the new ADA policies. Much work still lies ahead.

The UNC System has just weeks left before the April deadline, and whether schools are prepared is uncertain. Some larger campuses have laid groundwork by training faculty, releasing compliance plans, and hosting webinars. Other, smaller universities have released little information about the new ADA requirements or their progress, leaving the public to question whether they’ve made a solid start. Rushing through last-minute fixes can drive up remediation costs and force universities to spend heavily to comply. Schools can also risk losing federal funds and public trust, which could damage reputations.

What began as a well-intentioned update to ensure digital access for everyone has become, for many universities, a “regulatory time bomb.” Whether it goes off in North Carolina remains to be seen.

Reagan Allen is the North Carolina reporter for the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.