Abstract

This chapter examines digital accessibility challenges faced by second language (L2) learners in higher education. It argues that accessibility must go beyond physical and sensory needs to include linguistic barriers that impact how L2 learners engage with digital learning environments. Drawing on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and culturally responsive pedagogy, the paper identifies key barriers and offers practical strategies such as multilingual captioning, adaptive technologies, and inclusive assessment design. A case example illustrates how UDL can support linguistic inclusion. The paper concludes by calling for institutions to embed language accessibility into broader equity and inclusion efforts.

Introduction

As digital learning becomes increasingly embedded in higher education, accessibility has gained greater attention as a foundational principle of inclusive education. Yet, accessibility is often narrowly interpreted as addressing physical or sensory impairments, with less focus on linguistic and cognitive barriers. This narrow scope can marginalize second language (L2) learners—students whose primary language differs from the language of instruction—by failing to address the specific accessibility challenges they encounter in digital learning environments. These challenges include difficulty understanding academic language, navigating Learning Management Systems (LMS), and engaging with multimedia content without linguistic support.

Drawing on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and culturally responsive pedagogical frameworks (Al-Azawei, Serenelli, & Lundqvist, 2016; Edyburn, 2010), this chapter explores how linguistic accessibility intersects with digital equity. It analyzes key barriers facing L2 learners in higher education and offers instructional design strategies and digital solutions that can create more equitable, inclusive, and accessible learning environments.

Theoretical and Policy Context of Accessibility

Accessibility in education encompasses more than compliance with disability legislation. It involves proactively designing environments and content to support diverse learners’ full participation and success. In Ontario, Canada—where this research is situated—the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) outlines standards for educational accessibility. However, its primary focus remains on physical and sensory accessibility, with insufficient attention to linguistic diversity (Seale, 2013).

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.1), developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), highlight “understandability” as a core accessibility principle (W3C, 2018). From this perspective, second language barriers fall squarely within the scope of digital inaccessibility. Gonzalez (2019) argues for a broader interpretation of accessibility that includes cultural and linguistic dimensions, particularly in increasingly diverse and global academic institutions. Without such a shift, L2 learners remain structurally disadvantaged.

Moreover, accessibility is a prerequisite for educational justice. Inaccessible design reinforces systems of privilege and exclusion, undermining institutional commitments to equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). A truly inclusive institution must recognize that L2 learners’ challenges are not rooted in individual deficits, but in systemic inattention to linguistic equity.

Barriers to Accessibility for Second Language Learners

Linguistic Complexity in Course Materials

Course materials such as syllabi, lecture slides, readings, and assessments are often written in highly technical academic English. This includes complex sentence structures, discipline-specific terminology, idioms, and assumptions about cultural context (Hyland & Jiang, 2021). For L2 learners, these materials create excessive cognitive load, impeding comprehension, retention, and engagement. Without scaffolds such as plain language summaries, vocabulary lists, or visual explanations, L2 learners are less able to access core content (Sweller et al., 2019).

Additionally, academic discourse in higher education often reflects cultural assumptions that may be unfamiliar to international or immigrant students. For example, concepts like criticality or citation practices may not align with students’ prior learning experiences, compounding comprehension challenges. The absence of pedagogical transparency exacerbates exclusion and reinforces dominant linguistic norms.

Multimedia Content Without Language Support

Video and audio content are ubiquitous in digital learning environments, but they are often inaccessible to L2 learners. Many instructional videos lack accurate captions or transcripts. Automatic captioning tools frequently misinterpret accents, subject-specific language, or rapid speech (Yoon & Kim, 2021). This leads to confusion, especially when videos are the sole source of essential course information. Multilingual captioning or annotations can enhance understanding (Caimi & Antonini, 2020), but they remain rare in higher education contexts.

The lack of multimodal reinforcement—such as visual aids, gestures, or transcripts—limits L2 learners’ ability to contextualize and retain spoken content. Moreover, without multilingual subtitles or synchronized transcripts, L2 learners may experience language fatigue, leading to disengagement.

Navigation and Usability Challenges in LMS Platforms

LMS interfaces such as Canvas or Moodle often use abstract icons, academic jargon, and inconsistent navigation labels. For L2 learners, such designs present major usability issues. Without multilingual interfaces or simplified language options, learners may miss key tasks or deadlines (Meyer & Wilson, 2020). Furthermore, default LMS structures tend to reflect Western academic norms, with limited regard for alternative linguistic and cognitive styles.

Research suggests that user-centered LMS design rarely involves non-native speakers in testing or feedback loops. As a result, platforms perpetuate the same exclusions they claim to address. Culturally sensitive and linguistically inclusive user experience (UX) design must be embedded in platform development.

Assessment Language Bias and Feedback Ambiguity

Traditional assessments often privilege native-level proficiency. Rubrics contain dense academic language, and written feedback assumes familiarity with discipline-specific expectations (Lea & Street, 2006). L2 students may receive poor grades not due to lack of knowledge, but because they cannot adequately decode the linguistic demands of an assessment. This results in distorted performance metrics and reduced learner confidence.

Furthermore, formative feedback that emphasizes grammar over content sends implicit messages about whose language is valued. When L2 learners receive vague or overly critical feedback, their motivation may decline, contributing to lower retention and academic success.

Inclusive Instructional Design Strategies

Universal Design for Learning (UDL)

UDL emphasizes providing multiple means of representation, action, and expression (CAST, 2018). For L2 learners, this means diversifying content formats (e.g., visual, auditory, textual), integrating scaffolding strategies (e.g., simplified summaries, vocabulary glossaries), and offering flexible assessment formats. UDL also promotes learner autonomy by allowing students to access content in ways that align with their strengths. A practical example of this can be seen in a first-year psychology course at a Canadian university. The instructor adopted UDL principles by designing lecture slides with simplified summaries and visual icons, providing weekly vocabulary lists, and recording short video lectures with multilingual captions in English, Mandarin, and Arabic. Students were also given the option to complete assessments either as written reflections or visual presentations. One student from Syria shared that having access to bilingual subtitles and visual assessment options helped her better engage with the content and express her ideas confidently without the pressure of perfect academic English. This case highlights how intentional design, grounded in UDL, can empower second language learners through flexibility and linguistic inclusivity. This case highlights how intentional design, grounded in UDL, can empower second language learners through flexibility and linguistic inclusivity.

Instructors should apply UDL from the planning stage—not as an afterthought—to ensure linguistic inclusivity is not retrofitted. This involves creating templates, captions, and visuals that can be reused across courses, saving time and promoting consistency.

Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Pedagogy

Culturally responsive instruction foregrounds the lived experiences, identities, and linguistic repertoires of diverse students (Gay, 2018). Educators can integrate translanguaging practices—encouraging students to draw on all their language resources in meaning-making—and avoid penalizing students for non-standard academic English, thereby validating multilingualism as an asset.

Responsive pedagogy also requires shifting from a deficit model to an asset-based perspective. Teachers should acknowledge that language variation is not failure, but a legitimate form of academic discourse. This mindset is critical for cultivating an inclusive learning climate.

Plain Language and Visual Design

Plain language principles—concise phrasing, active voice, and avoidance of jargon—can significantly improve accessibility for L2 students. Supplementing text with visuals, icons, or infographics enhances comprehension and provides contextual cues that aid retention (Gass & Mackey, 2015). Infographic summaries, timelines, and visual metaphors can transform difficult concepts into accessible entry points for discussion.

Inclusive Assessment and Feedback

Alternative assessment formats such as oral presentations, visual portfolios, or bilingual submissions allow students to demonstrate understanding without being penalized for language limitations. Rubrics should be rewritten in accessible language and accompanied by annotated examples. Feedback should emphasize clarity and encouragement, focusing on content knowledge rather than surface language errors.

Additionally, co-creating rubrics with students can demystify academic expectations and empower learners. Feedback loops that involve L2 students in their own assessment interpretation foster metacognitive growth and academic confidence.

Digital Tools and Technologies

Captioning and Subtitling Tools

Platforms like Kapwing (n.d.), YouTube Studio (Google, n.d.), and Amara (Participatory Culture Foundation, n.d.) allow educators to edit auto-generated captions and provide multilingual subtitles. These tools enhance access to course videos for L2 learners and support repeated, self-paced engagement with content. Educators can also assign caption editing as a collaborative learning activity, enhancing both comprehension and media literacy.

Text-to-Speech and Speech Recognition

Text-to-speech (TTS) tools such as NaturalReader (NaturalSoft, n.d.) and Read&Write (TextHelp, n.d.) help students process dense academic texts. Speech-to-text tools like Dragon Dictation (Nuance Communications, n.d.) aid learners who prefer to verbalize their ideas. Both support multisensory learning pathways (Chen & Yao, 2016). Embedding these tools in LMS environments reduces barriers and fosters independent learning.