Target
Target—not certified
The Learning Labs are designed toward WCAG 2.2 Level AA across the hub, Word Lab, Math Lab, and Life Lab.
Version 1.0 · October 15, 2026
Accessibility Status & Self-Assessment Report
An honest record of the target, current design supports, known limits, evaluation scope, and work still required.
Current conclusion
A complete WCAG-EM conformance evaluation has not been completed. No formal certification, universal conformance claim, or third-party audit claim is made. Current status is a product self-assessment informed by static checks, design review, and prior device/accessibility auditing.
Scope of this report
- Products
- mrbslabs.com, mrbwordlab.com, mrbmathlab.com, and mrblifelab.com
- Experience types
- Public content, interactive practice, locally saved progress, printable tools, read-aloud features, and selected signed-in Word Lab teacher/student workflows
- Baseline target
- WCAG 2.2 Level AA
- Review date
- October 15, 2026
- Not yet completed
- Representative WCAG-EM sample, criterion-by-criterion evidence matrix, broad assistive-technology lab testing, disabled-user testing, and independent third-party review
Implemented design standards
Perceivable
- Text alternatives for meaningful branding/images where applicable
- Written directions alongside audio/read-aloud options
- High-contrast brand palettes and non-color feedback cues
- Zoom-responsive layouts and larger-text options in supported Labs
Operable
- Keyboard-operable native controls and visible focus styling
- Touch-friendly targets and mobile-responsive layouts
- Reduced-motion compatibility
- No speed-based competition required for participation
Understandable & robust
- Predictable routines, plain directions, and encouraging error recovery
- Semantic headings, labels, status regions, and native elements where practical
- Private rather than public performance comparisons
- Support settings that preserve the learning target
Known limits and risks
| Area | Current limitation | Mitigation / next action |
|---|---|---|
| Read-aloud voices | Browser speech quality, voice availability, pronunciation, and controls vary by device. | Keep written text available; allow human reading or approved assistive technology. |
| Visual models | Some diagrams, manipulatives, and interactive representations may not provide an equivalent tactile experience. | Provide adult description, enlarged copy, physical manipulatives, braille/tactile graphics, or alternate task when required. |
| Complex interactions | Interactive practice has not yet been comprehensively verified with every screen reader, switch-control system, voice-control tool, or browser/OS combination. | Complete representative manual testing and document specific compatibility results. |
| Cognitive load | Even with predictable patterns, some learners may need fewer choices, chunking, co-regulation, or adult modeling. | Use built-in supports where available and adapt session length/quantity without reducing dignity. |
| Audio-only needs | The sites do not replace sign-language interpretation, AAC, human reading, or accommodations in an IEP/504 plan. | Follow each student’s plan and provide required human/assistive supports. |
| Formal evidence | No independent VPAT/ACR or completed WCAG-EM report is currently available. | Build a criterion-level evidence matrix, test representative pages, remediate, and commission external review when district scale warrants it. |
Evaluation method and roadmap
Work completed
- Responsive and mobile layout review
- Keyboard/focus and semantic-structure checks in development
- Contrast, motion, touch-target, and readable-text design standards
- Accessibility statements and privacy-safe barrier reporting
- Device and classroom pilot guidance
Highest-priority next work
- Define a representative page/task sample across all four sites.
- Test keyboard-only, screen reader, magnification/reflow, reduced motion, touch, and speech input.
- Record findings by WCAG 2.2 success criterion and severity.
- Remediate blockers and publish compatibility notes.
- Include disabled users and independent expertise in validation.
Method note: W3C’s WCAG-EM methodology calls for defining scope, exploring the product, selecting a representative sample, evaluating that sample, and reporting findings. Automated tools alone are not sufficient; expert manual review is also needed.
Feedback and accommodation planning
Report a barrier using the privacy-safe feedback form. Include the page, task, device, browser, assistive technology, and what happened. Do not include a student’s name, disability, IEP/504 information, school record, or other identifying details.