HLTH 6412 Week 8 Video Page Accessibility Audit Example

Course	HLTH 6412 Health and Wellness Education Communication and Technology Strategies
Week	Week 8
Paper type	Accessibility audit
Length	About 660 words, 5 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Walden University
Program	MS in Health Education and Promotion
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for HLTH 6412 Week 8

Accessibility Audit: A Three-Minute Diabetes Class Video and the Page That Hosts It, Six Findings Each Tied to a WCAG 2.2 Success Criterion, a Stated Reason and a Stated Remedy

Student Name

Walden University

HLTH 6412: Health and Wellness Education Communication and Technology Strategies

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title promises separate findings with reasons and remedies, which is how an audit explains its judgments instead of asserting them.

Accessibility Audit: A Three-Minute Diabetes Class Video and the Page That Hosts It, Six Findings Each Tied to a WCAG 2.2 Success Criterion, a Stated Reason and a Stated Remedy

What Was Audited and Against What

The audit covers a three-minute video titled "Your First Diabetes Class," produced by a composite health center, and the web page that hosts it. The yardstick is version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, published by the World Wide Web Consortium as a recommendation in 2023 (World Wide Web Consortium [W3C], 2023). Federal accessibility standards for information technology, codified at 36 C.F.R. part 1194, incorporate the earlier WCAG 2.0 Level AA criteria, so meeting the Level A and AA criteria below also addresses those requirements. Each finding names the criterion, the problem, why it matters to a user and the remedy.

What this page is doingStating the standard and its date first makes every later finding checkable against a published criterion.

Findings

Finding 1: Captions (Success Criterion 1.2.2, Level A)

Problem: the video relies on automatically generated captions. Spot checks found the speaker's "A1c" captioned as "a one see," "metformin" as "met for men" and several sentences missing punctuation.

Why it matters: viewers with hearing loss, and many who watch muted, depend on captions. Errors in medical terms change meaning.

Remedy: replace automatic captions with edited captions that match the audio exactly, including speaker changes.

Finding 2: On-Screen Text Not Spoken (Success Criteria 1.2.3 and 1.2.5)

Problem: at two points the video shows text, a list of what to bring to class and a phone number, without saying it aloud.

Why it matters: viewers who are blind or have low vision miss the only information in the video that asks them to act.

Remedy: have the narrator read on-screen text aloud, or provide an audio-described version.

Finding 3: Images Without Text Alternatives (Success Criterion 1.1.1, Level A)

Problem: the page's photograph of the classroom and an infographic summarizing class topics have no alternative text.

Why it matters: screen reader users hear only "image" and miss the infographic's content entirely.

Remedy: add a brief description to the photograph, and present the infographic's content as text on the page, with the image marked as decorative or given a short description.

Finding 4: Low Text Contrast (Success Criterion 1.4.3, Level AA)

Problem: the paragraph describing class times is set in light gray (#999999) on a white background, a contrast ratio of about 2.8 to 1.

Why it matters: the criterion requires at least 4.5 to 1 for normal text (World Wide Web Consortium, 2023); readers with low vision or older eyes, a large share of a diabetes education audience, may not be able to read the schedule.

Remedy: darken the text to at least #767676, or preferably near black.

Finding 5: Headings Not Coded as Headings (Success Criterion 1.3.1, Level A)

Problem: section titles on the page look like headings because they are large and bold, but in the code they are ordinary paragraphs.

Why it matters: screen reader users navigate by headings; without coded headings, they must listen to the whole page to find the schedule.

Remedy: mark section titles with heading elements in logical order.

Finding 6: Vague Link Text (Success Criterion 2.4.4, Level A)

Problem: the registration link reads "Click here."

Why it matters: users who move through links out of context hear "click here" with no indication of where it leads.

Remedy: change the link text to "Register for a diabetes class."

Beyond the Criteria

Accessibility criteria address access, not understanding. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool includes an audiovisual version that rates whether material is understandable and actionable (Shoemaker et al., 2014). On that measure, the video's clearest problem overlaps with Finding 2: the single action it asks of viewers, calling to register, appears only on screen.

Priority

Findings 1, 2 and 6 should be fixed first, because they block the action the video exists to prompt. Findings 3, 4 and 5 affect how easily users can read and navigate the page and should follow within the same update.

References

Information and communication technology standards and guidelines, 36 C.F.R. pt. 1194 (2025).

Shoemaker, S. J., Wolf, M. S., & Brach, C. (2014). Development of the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT): A new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Education and Counseling, 96(3), 395-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2014.05.027

World Wide Web Consortium. (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/

HLTH 6412 Week 8 instructions, in plain terms

The eighth week asks students to audit a piece of digital health communication for accessibility. The audit is a document about another document, and each judgment must be explained rather than asserted. Students identify the standard used, usually the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, and report findings one at a time: the criterion, the specific problem, why it matters to a user and the remedy. Captions, text alternatives, contrast, structure and link text are common areas. Many prompts ask students to set priorities and to note where accessibility overlaps with understandability. Legal context, such as federal technology accessibility standards, can be mentioned briefly. Sources are the guidelines themselves and related tools or regulations, in APA format.

How this HLTH 6412 Week 8 example is built

The audit names the video and page, cites the 2023 guidelines and notes that federal technology standards incorporate the earlier Level AA criteria. Six findings follow, each with criterion, problem, reason and remedy: captions with errors such as "a one see" for A1c, on-screen text including the phone number that is never read aloud, missing alternative text for a photograph and infographic, light gray text at about 2.8 to 1 contrast, section titles styled but not coded as headings and a "click here" link. A section connects the unspoken phone number to the assessment tool's actionability items. A priority section ranks the findings that block registration first.

Reading the HLTH 6412 Week 8 rubric

Accessibility audits are graded on explained, checkable findings. Faculty reward audits that tie each finding to a specific success criterion, describe the problem concretely, explain the effect on users and give a practical remedy. Assertions without reasons or criteria earn little. Accuracy in citing criteria and thresholds, such as contrast ratios, matters. Setting priorities based on what blocks the user's key action shows judgment. Noting the overlap between accessibility and understandability demonstrates breadth. Clear organization by finding aids grading. Brief, accurate reference to legal standards adds context without turning the audit into a legal memo. APA citations for the guidelines and related sources complete the requirements.

Common HLTH 6412 Week 8 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Accessibility audits often fall short by listing problems such as "bad contrast" without citing the criterion, measuring the ratio or proposing a fix. Another common problem is relying on automated checkers without verifying their results, especially for captions. Some students also treat accessibility and plain language as unrelated. To write a stronger audit, choose the guideline version and note it. Check captions by listening, alt text by reading the code or using a screen reader and contrast with a contrast calculator. Write each finding with criterion, problem, reason and remedy. Rank fixes by what blocks the main action. If you need an audit of a page or video, our team can prepare one.

Get a HLTH 6412 Week 8 example written to your instructions

Send the page, the video or the file your assignment names, along with the rubric, and a full audit in that findings format returns within 24-48 hours at no charge the first time. Where your section prescribes a checklist or a reporting template, send that along and the findings are reported against its items.

More HLTH 6412 papers and MS in Health Education and Promotion samples

HLTH 6412 Week 8 questions, answered

Where can I find a free HLTH 6412 Week 8 sample paper?

The full Week 8 accessibility audit of a diabetes class video and its web page, with six findings and three references, is available here.

What standard does the HLTH 6412 Week 8 audit use?

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, published by the World Wide Web Consortium in 2023, with a note that federal standards incorporate earlier Level AA criteria.

What was wrong with the captions?

They were automatic and mangled medical terms, rendering "A1c" as "a one see" and "metformin" as "met for men."

What contrast did the class times have?

About 2.8 to 1 for light gray text on white, below the 4.5 to 1 minimum the guidelines set for normal text.

Which fixes come first?

Edited captions, speaking on-screen text such as the phone number aloud and replacing "click here" with descriptive link text, because they block registration.