Accessibility Checkers: What Is the Checker Really Telling You?

Accessibility checkers are pattern finders, not final judges. They can locate missing attributes, suspicious markup, contrast problems, and repeated issues much faster than a person can. They cannot determine whether every description is meaningful, every caption is accurate, or every learning experience is equivalent.

Use the Canvas Rich Content Editor checker while creating an individual item. Use UDOIT and/or Pope Tech for a more robust check and to find patterns across a course. Then complete the work with a focused human review.

The question that matters

After the automated findings are addressed, have you checked the meaning and experience that the software cannot evaluate?

A Practical Workflow

Check while the content is editable.
Run the RCE checker before saving each Canvas page, assignment, discussion, announcement, or quiz prompt.
Scan the course.
Use Pope Tech and/or UDOIT. Filter for content learners will encounter and identify repeated patterns.
Read the finding before applying a fix.
Confirm what the content is supposed to communicate. The correct choice for an image, heading, table, or link depends on context.
Repair the source of the pattern.
If the same error came from a template or copied page, correct the reusable source as well as the current instances.
Review what automation misses.
Check caption accuracy, complex-image equivalence, audio description, keyboard access, meaningful order, plain language, and instructional clarity.
Rescan and spot-check.
Confirm that repairs persisted, did not create new barriers, and work in Student View and the final file formats.

A perfect score is not the goal

Scores and finding counts change as tools, rules, and Canvas change. Aim for usable, equitable content—not a particular number or a badge that can never certify the whole experience.

What Tools Can and Cannot Decide

Automated findings and required human review
A checker can often detect	A person still needs to decide
An image has no alt attribute or uses a filename	Whether the image is decorative, simple, functional, or complex and whether the alternative communicates its purpose
Heading levels are skipped or headings appear absent	Whether the heading names form a useful, logical outline
A link is empty or uses suspicious wording	Whether the link text accurately describes the destination or action in context
Table headers, captions, or scope attributes are missing	Whether a table is the right format and whether each header-data relationship is correct
Some text contrast failures	Whether color, position, or visual styling is the only way meaning is communicated
A media object or file exists	Whether captions are complete and accurate, essential visuals are described, the player works, and the file itself is accessible

Quick Check

A course-level checker reports no errors on a page containing a captioned instructional video. What can you conclude?

The page and video are fully accessible.: A clean automated report cannot establish caption quality, visual equivalence, player access, or instructional clarity.
No automated problems were reported in the scanned scope; the captions, visuals, player, and learning experience still need review.: Correct: The report is useful evidence, but it covers only what the tool checked and could evaluate.
The video needs no captions because the checker did not object.: The absence of a finding does not remove the need for reviewed captions.

Use the Tools Together

No one tool is perfect; together they do a lot.

Canvas Rich Content Editor Checker

Use this checker while editing a single Canvas item. It reviews content inside the Rich Content Editor for common issues such as missing image alternatives, heading order, list markup, link patterns, contrast, and table structure.

Open the item in Edit mode.
Select the Accessibility Checker icon near the bottom of the editor.
Read the explanation and inspect the highlighted content.
Enter or choose the correction that matches the actual meaning.
Apply the fix, continue through the findings, save, and review the finished item.

Canvas guide to the RCE Accessibility Checker (opens in a new tab)

UDOIT

UDOIT scans Canvas content and course files, groups findings, and provides UFIXIT guidance. It is especially useful for locating repeated issues and reviewing a course at scale.

Open UDOIT from the course navigation and run or refresh the scan.
Filter for content in use, high-impact findings, or a specific issue type.
Open the content preview and read why the issue was reported.
Use UFIXIT when the repair is appropriate, or open the source item or file when a fuller revision is needed.
Review course files separately; an alternate format or automated tag is not automatically an equivalent final document.
Rescan and manually verify representative items.

Pope Tech Accessibility

Pope Tech provides an Accessibility Guide inside the Canvas editor and dashboards for reviewing a course or multiple courses. The Guide helps authors inspect and repair editable Canvas content. The dashboards help instructors locate patterns, prioritize work, and open findings in context.

Open Pope Tech Accessibility from course navigation. If it is hidden, check Settings > Navigation or follow local support guidance.
Review the course dashboard, last scan information, errors, alerts, and common patterns.
Open a finding in the Accessibility Guide and read the explanation before changing the content.
Use the Documents and Videos area when it is available to inventory files and media. A document listing or caption-status result is a starting point, not proof of accessibility.
Rescan after repairs and complete a manual review.

Some Pope Tech features, including PDF scanning and Alternative Formats, may be optional institutional add-ons.

Canvas Course Accessibility Checker

Canvas offers a separate course-level Accessibility Checker as an optional feature. Its availability depends on institutional settings. If it is enabled, follow local guidance about whether faculty should use it, UDOIT, or both.

Its current scan focuses on Canvas-created pages, assignments, discussions, announcements, and syllabus content. It does not scan uploaded files, videos, New Quizzes, or linked external documents. Do not assume similarly named tools review the same material; check each tool’s stated scope before interpreting its report.

Canvas Course Accessibility Checker overview (opens in a new tab)

Manual Review

Navigate headings, links, form controls, and media controls with a keyboard.
Zoom or enlarge text and inspect the page on a narrow screen.
Review alt text and complex descriptions against the teaching purpose.
Listen to or read every caption track and transcript.
Check videos without watching for missing visual information.
Open documents and PDFs in the formats students will receive.
Use Student View to confirm permissions, links, media, and file access.

Prioritize Without Freezing

Remove complete blockers first: inaccessible required files, uncaptioned required videos, unlabeled controls, and content unavailable without sight or hearing.
Repair repeated patterns: templates, navigation, copied pages, recurring headings, and course-wide color or link habits.
Fix active content before unused archives: verify what is published, assigned, linked, or scheduled.
Record what needs specialist help: complex PDFs, forms, equations, third-party tools, and media remediation may require support.
Build the better habit into the next item: prevention is the fastest long-term remediation strategy.

Before You Call It Checked

The RCE checker was used while authoring individual items.
The course-level checker—Pope Tech, UDOIT, or both—reviewed the intended scope.
Findings were reviewed in context rather than applied mechanically.
Repeated problems were corrected in their templates or sources.
Captions, descriptions, reading order, keyboard access, and instructional meaning received human review.
Required files and third-party content were opened and checked.
Alternative Formats, when available, were treated as delivery options rather than remediation.
Repairs were rescanned and representative items tested in Student View.
No score or zero-finding report is being treated as proof of complete accessibility.