A priority for instructors and institutions over the last several years has been making our online content accessible, in accordance with the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) standards on accessibility. One requirement of the standards is the use of “alternative text,” (aka “alt text” or “alt txt”) on every image used in a web-based setting. In the richly visual discipline of Art, this is a critical responsibility. However, instructors and their accessibility support teams are running into two challenges: coding intricate images, and using alt text in assessments.

Before exploring how to address these challenges, what is alternative text?

Alt txt is an HTML code that describes an image with words. There typically are two types of images in our texts: “decorative” images and intricate or “complex” images. As Art instructors, we might consider all images decorative, but in the context of accessibility, decorative images can be skipped and the intellectual content of the page is not lost. Complex images, on the other hand, are key to understanding the content of the page (e.g., a photo of a pietà in a discussion of sculptors and their works.)  If you hold your arrow over an image with alt text, a description of the image will pop up. A visually impaired student using a screen reader will hear a description of the complex image.

The use of alt text is not new, but guidelines for describing the visual image in text form continue to evolve. An early purpose of alt text was to make it easier for search engines to find information—including images—that met a search criteria. So, if I were looking for info on apples, the search engine would read through the HTML code of websites and identify text that mentioned apples. If the alt text said the image was an apple…the search engine accepted that it was. 

When a screen reader program encounters alt text, it’s a signal that it needs to read a description of the image; it is not merely “decorative” and thus can be skipped. Whatever detail is provided in the alt text gives the reader more information beyond just “it’s an image.”

According to the W3C standards, when using alt text the description should be 125-150 characters or fewer: one or two sentences to describe the image. If the image is decorative, one places “decorative” or “null” in the alt text description, alerting screen readers to skip the image and focus on the content of the page. 

It can be a challenge to adequately characterize complex images in only 150 characters. For example, consider Hieronymus Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights triptych, and the complexities of both the triptych format and the content of the paintings. A minimal alt txt would be the artist’s name and title of the work, which would be sufficient if the image is fully described in the text content on the page. If the image is not related to the content on the page, then you might choose to make the alt text read “decorative,” or consider removing the image. If you retain the image, you will want to describe it—in only 150 characters!—richly enough for someone using a screen reader to imagine it.

The task of coding images for assessments is a little more complex and depends on context. Why is the image being used? Is this an image the class has been exposed to before or is it new to students? 

When drafting alt text in assessment situations, we need to be mindful of both our descriptors, and visual bias. In the first instance, in describing the image we don’t want to give away the answer to a question: if my exam has an item asking which image is a triptych, I don’t want the alt text for the image to include “triptych” or “three panel!” In this particular case, I might eliminate images altogether and ask students who have already studied both works to select which of Garden of Earthly Delights and St. Luke Painting the Virgin is a triptych. But if these are new images that a student with visual impairment has not encountered before, I would carefully consider either the alt text attached to the images…and the possibility of creating a different question altogether to avoid visual bias.

Although the technology of alternative text can feel intimidating, and the challenge of describing a beloved work of art in roughly 150 characters may be daunting, it is deeply satisfying to know that you are making your course accessible for all students, including those who require ADA accommodations. Sharing best practices and innovations with your colleagues and peers is the ticket to more efficiently and effectively making your course accessible to everyone.