accessibility | Campus Safe Words

TERM: accessibility
RISK LEVEL: Moderate

Why It’s Risky

“Accessibility” has increasingly been scrutinized under state-level reforms aimed at reducing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) mandates in public higher education. Laws such as Texas Senate Bill 17 and Florida Board of Governors Regulation 9.016 discourage institutional language that implies systemic bias or obligates broad-scale structural accommodation. Though originally associated with disability services, “accessibility” is now often interpreted more expansively to include race, gender identity, and socio-economic status—raising concerns among conservative policymakers that the term serves as a proxy for DEI initiatives.

Common Critiques

Some policymakers argue that the term promotes an ideology of entitlement or over-accommodation, particularly when used outside of ADA compliance. There is growing concern that “accessibility” in curricular or hiring contexts signals a preference for modifying standards rather than maintaining merit-based expectations. Additionally, critics claim that accessibility language can imply institutional fault or systemic exclusion, which may conflict with legislative efforts to restrict such narratives.

When It’s Still Appropriate

“Accessibility” remains appropriate in reference to ADA compliance, assistive technology, or physical access to facilities and instructional materials. It can also be used in IT and instructional design contexts when referring to web standards, captioning, or usability for individuals with documented disabilities. In these cases, pairing the term with regulatory references (e.g., Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act) can help frame its use within a legally defensible scope.

Suggested Substitutes

1. ADA compliance (when referring to legal obligations)

2. Equal access (when describing facility or digital availability)

3. User-friendly design (for software or course layout discussions)

4. Accommodations for individuals with disabilities (for clarity)

5. Support services (when referring to institutional offerings)

Notes:
To reduce risk, avoid using “accessibility” as a catch-all for inclusive practices not directly tied to disability support. When appropriate, clarify that the term refers to legal compliance or technical usability rather than broader equity goals. Use specific, functional language when describing improvements to campus access or learning environments.