About our site

HomeAbout usAbout our siteAccessibilityAccessibility statement

Accessibility statement for www.exeter.ac.uk

This accessibility statement applies to content published by the University’s Web Content Management System (Web CMS) to www.exeter.ac.uk and associated university department sub domains:

University of Exeter Departments
Arab and Islamic Studies Earth and Environmental Sciences Health and Care Professions Physics and Astronomy
Archaeology and History Ecology and Conservation Language Centre Psychology
Biosciences School of Education Law School Sport, Exercise and Nutrition Sciences
Business School Engineering Languages, Cultures and Visual Studies Sport
Classics, Ancient History, Religion and Theology English and Creative Writing Mathematics and Statistics Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy, and Anthropology
Communications, Drama and Film Fundraising Medical School www.exeter.ac.uk
Clinical Education Development and Research Geography Natural Sciences www.exeterinnovation.com
Computer Science Humanities and Social Sciences, Cornwall News archive  

This statement does not apply to content on subdomains at blogs.exeter.ac.uk, sites.exeter.ac.uk, or projects.exeter.ac.uk.

This website is run by the University of Exeter.

How you should be able to use this website

We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:

  • change colours, contrast levels and fonts
  • zoom in up to 170% without the text spilling off the screen
  • navigate most of the website using just a keyboard
  • navigate most of the website using speech recognition software
  • listen to most of the website using a screen reader (including the most recent versions of JAWS, NVDA and VoiceOver)

AbilityNet has advice on making your device easier to use if you have a disability. 

How accessible this website is

Parts of this website are not fully accessible. For example:

  • some pages and document attachments are not written in plain English
  • some tables do not have row or column headers
  • some documents have poor colour contrast
  • some heading elements are not consistent
  • some images do not have image descriptions
  • some images used to convey information have poor colour contrast
  • some information in tables cannot be reached with a keyboard
  • many documents are in PDF format and are not accessible

Feedback and contact information

If you:

  • experience problems whilst using assistive software to access our site,
  • need information on this website in a different format like accessible PDF or Word document, audio recording or braille
  • have any other feedback

Please contact the digital team at digitalteam@exeter.ac.uk.

In your message, please include any of the following:

  • the web address (URL) of the content
  • your email address and name
  • the format you need.

Our Contact page lists other departments you can call for information.

Reporting accessibility problems with this website

We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, contact the digital team - digitalteam@exeter.ac.uk.

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’).

If you’re not happy with how we respond to your accessibility-related issue, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

Technical information about this website’s accessibility

The University of Exeter is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

Compliance status

This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances and exemptions listed below.

Non-accessible content

The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.

Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations

  1. Some input elements with a type attribute value of "image" do not have an alt attribute. Users of assistive technologies may not have access to the information conveyed by these image buttons. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
  2. Some images do not have an alt attribute. This means that users of assistive technologies may miss out on the content or purpose of these images. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
  3. Object elements rendering non-text content are missing accessible names. This makes it difficult for assistive technology users to understand the content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
  4. Some SVG elements with an explicit role do not have accessible names. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
  5. Some data tables do not contain summaries. This means that assistive technologies may not be able to convey the relationship of the data properly. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  6. Layout tables contain captions or summary attributes. This may confuse users relying on assistive technologies, which typically use these attributes for data tables. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  7. Some ARIA attributes have invalid or undefined values. This could lead to assistive technology users not being able to interact with the content properly. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  8. Certain ARIA roles, states, and properties are not set or are missing. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  9. Table headers are not associated with their data cells correctly. This means that screen readers may struggle to interpret the data within tables. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  10. Some tables are incorrectly structured. This makes it difficult for screen readers to understand the relationships between cells and their headers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  11. Certain elements with a role attribute are missing required states and properties. This can cause issues with assistive technology recognizing the purpose of these elements. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  12. Frames lack a title attribute. Without a title, screen reader users may not know the purpose of each frame. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 (Bypass Blocks).
  13. Some iframes with interactive content are excluded from the tab order. This could prevent keyboard users from accessing content within the iframe. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard Accessibility).
  14. Some meta elements have refresh delays. This can disrupt users, particularly those using assistive technology. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.1 (Timing Adjustable).
  15. Auto-redirects are being used on some pages. These can confuse users who need more time to interact with content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 (Pause, Stop, Hide).
  16. Blink elements are being used on some pages. This could cause visual accessibility issues for users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.2.2 (Pause, Stop, Hide).
  17. HTML pages are missing a title. This can make it difficult for users to identify the content of the page. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.2 (Page Titled).
  18. Some links do not contain text. This means screen reader users may struggle to understand the link's purpose. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 (Link Purpose).
  19. Document language attributes are missing or invalid on some pages. This can make content unreadable for screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 (Language of Page).
  20. The reading direction is not marked on pages where the primary language is read right to left. This can lead to confusion for users relying on screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.1.1 (Language of Page).
  21. Some input elements have multiple labels or labels with no text. This can confuse users about the purpose of input fields. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions).
  22. ID attributes are not unique on some pages. This can cause issues with screen readers identifying the correct element. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 (Parsing).
  23. Some elements with aria-hidden have content that can be navigated to sequentially. This can confuse users relying on keyboard navigation or assistive technology. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  24. Some images of text do not have suitable alternative descriptions. This makes it difficult for screen reader users to understand the content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
  25. Link text colour does not contrast sufficiently with its background on some pages. This can make it difficult for users with visual impairments to read the links. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 (Contrast (Minimum)).
  26. Some text has insufficient contrast with its background. This makes content difficult to read for users with visual impairments. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 (Contrast (Minimum)).
  27. Some pages still use the bold, italic, basefont, or font tags, which are outdated and not recommended for accessibility. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 (Resize Text).
  28. Links inside text are not sufficiently distinguishable. Users may struggle to identify links without additional visual cues. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.1 (Use of Color).

Disproportionate burden

At this current time, we have not made any disproportionate burden claims.

Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations

The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our services.

What we’re doing to improve accessibility

We are working alongside other university departments and partners to fix content which fails to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was prepared on 11 September 2020. It was last reviewed on 23 September 2024. 

This website was last tested on 23 September 2024. The test was carried out using the Monsido accessibility tool and the Axe browser extension.