YuJa Panorama: Configurations, Scoring & Availability in D2L Brightspace

Overview

Minnesota State has configured YuJa Panorama in D2L Brightspace to help instructors identify and remediate accessibility issues and to provide students with alternative formats of supported course content.

Panorama is an accessibility support tool, but its features are not available in every part of Brightspace. Available functionality also differs depending on whether the user is an instructor or student, the status of the course and content, and where the content is located in Brightspace.

Important: Panorama’s automated accessibility results can help identify potential barriers and guide remediation. Automated testing does not replace manual accessibility review or guarantee that content is fully accessible.

Instructor and Student Access

Instructor access

Within supported areas of current and future Brightspace courses, instructors can use Panorama to:

• View accessibility scores and reports.
• Identify accessibility issues detected in course content and documents.
• Review guidance for addressing identified issues.
• Access supported alternative formats.
• Monitor the accessibility of supported course content.

Student access

Within a Brightspace course, students can use Panorama to obtain alternative formats of supported course content.

Students do not have access to:

• Instructor accessibility reports.
• Course or document accessibility scores.
• Accessibility findings associated with an instructor’s course content.

Students may use Panorama DocHub to upload and assess content they own. When students use DocHub, the accessibility reports, scores, and remediation features apply only to the content they upload and assess themselves.

Course Availability and Scanning

Panorama is configured to scan current and future courses. Past courses are not scanned for ongoing accessibility reporting.

Focusing scans on current and upcoming courses helps keep institutional reports relevant to content that is currently being used or prepared for future instruction.

Panorama functionality available in an active or upcoming course should not be expected to remain available in the same way after the course has ended.

Hidden and Unpublished Content

Panorama is configured to exclude hidden or unpublished content from scanning.

This means that Panorama does not assess:

• Hidden course content.
• Unpublished content.
• Unpublished files.
• Other course materials that are not currently available for scanning through the Brightspace integration.

Because excluded content is not assessed, it is not represented in Panorama’s current course accessibility reporting or scores.

Instructors should not assume that a high course accessibility score accounts for content that is hidden, unpublished, or located in an unsupported area of Brightspace.

Alternative Formats

Alternative formats are enabled for supported course content.

Instructors cannot disable alternative formats for students. This configuration provides students with consistent access to alternative formats without requiring them to request that an instructor enable the feature.

Alternative formats can include options such as:

• Tagged PDF.
• HTML.
• Electronic braille.
• EPUB.
• Audio.
• Other formats supported by Panorama for the original content type.

The formats available for a particular item may depend on the original file type and whether Panorama can process the content.

Panorama stops offering alternative formats through the course after the official course end date passes. Students with extended access will not be able to generate additional alternative formats after the official end date of the course. Students should generate any needed alternative formats during the official course dates. To reduce the digital footprint, Panorama removes generated alternative formats after 12 months.

Alternative formats should not be treated as permanent copies or as replacements for making the original source content accessible.

Accessibility Scores

Panorama provides accessibility scores to help instructors understand the results of its automated checks and prioritize remediation.

Minnesota State uses the default accessibility score thresholds:

A score should not be interpreted as a direct percentage of how accessible the content is. For example, a score of 70 does not necessarily mean that a document is “70% accessible.”

The score is an automated indicator based on Panorama’s checks and severity calculations. Manual review is still necessary to evaluate the actual experience of people with disabilities.

Dynamic Severity Scoring

Minnesota State uses Panorama’s Dynamic Severity scoring model.

This model considers:

• The number of elements in the document.
• The number of accessibility checks performed.
• The number of checks that passed.
• The number of minor, major, and severe issues.
• The severity weighting assigned to each issue.

The configured severity weights are:

Major and severe issues have a greater effect on the score than minor issues. As a result, two documents with a similar number of issues can receive substantially different scores when the severity of those issues differs.

The following examples illustrate how the Dynamic Severity model can produce different scores.

Scenario 1: 64%

Although 35 of the 40 checks passed, the two major issues carry more weight than the three minor issues. The resulting score is 64%.

Scenario 2: 26%

Most checks passed, but the document contains 1,000 major issues and 50 severe issues. Because major and severe issues receive substantially greater weight, the resulting score is 26%.

Scenario 3: 62%

Although more than 80% of the checks passed, the 10 major issues lower the Dynamic Severity score to 62%.

Scenario 4: 44%

This document has many minor issues and 100 major issues. Even without severe issues, the combined volume and weighting of the identified issues result in a score of 44%.

Scenario 5: 19%

Thirty-eight of the 50 checks passed, but the document has four severe issues. Because each severe issue has a weight of 25, these findings significantly reduce the score.

Scenario 6: 74%

This document contains 250 issues, but all of them are classified as minor. Because there are no major or severe issues, the document receives a score of 74%.

Comparing the scenarios

The examples show why the Panorama score is not a simple pass rate or issue count.

In Scenario 5, 38 of 50 checks passed, but the presence of four severe issues resulted in a score of 19%. In Scenario 6, only 350 of 600 checks passed, but all identified issues were minor, resulting in a score of 74%.

This does not mean that the 250 minor issues in Scenario 6 should be ignored. It means the Dynamic Severity model gives greater scoring weight to issues Panorama classifies as likely to have a more significant accessibility impact.

Using Scores to Prioritize Remediation

The Dynamic Severity model can help instructors decide where to begin, but it should not be the only basis for determining remediation priorities.

When reviewing results:

1. Address severe issues first.
2. Review and address major issues.
3. Continue correcting minor issues.
4. Verify automated findings through manual review.
5. Consider the context, purpose, and instructional importance of the content.
6. Test whether users can perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with the content.

A lower-severity issue affecting essential instructional content may still need immediate attention. Similarly, an automated finding may require manual verification to determine whether it represents an actual accessibility barrier.

The goal is not simply to increase the score. The goal is to proactively improve the usability and accessibility of the content for everyone.

Issues Cannot Be Manually Dismissed

Minnesota State does not currently allow individuals to manually dismiss accessibility issues identified by Panorama.

This configuration helps maintain consistent institutional reporting and prevents an issue from disappearing from results solely because a user dismissed it.

If Panorama identifies something that does not appear to be an accessibility barrier, review the actual content before making changes. Automated findings can include false positives or findings that require additional context and manual evaluation.

If an issue appears to be a product error or an inaccurate automated finding, document the behavior and report it through the appropriate support channels.

Rich Text Editor Limitations

The Panorama accessibility checker may not appear in every D2L Brightspace Rich Text Editor when it first loads. Expanding the editor toolbar or refreshing the page may help load the JavaScript required for the checker to display. However, refreshing the page can result in the loss of unsaved content and may not be practical when the editor is opened within a modal window or another dependent interface. Save your work before refreshing whenever possible.

The absence of the Panorama checker does not mean that content entered in these areas is exempt from accessibility expectations. If Panorama isn't present in the tool bar, D2L's built-in checker should be used manually as a starting point. Instructors must still apply accessible content practices when creating materials.

Examples include:

• Using meaningful link text.
• Adding alternative text to informative images when the editor permits it.
• Providing sufficient color contrast.
• Avoiding the use of color alone to communicate meaning.
• Using headings and lists appropriately.
• Writing clear instructions and feedback.
• Ensuring that tables have an appropriate structure.
• Providing accessible versions of any files attached or linked from these areas.

What Instructors Should Know

When using Panorama:

1. Use Panorama as one part of the accessibility review process. An automated score is an indicator, not proof that content is accessible.
2. Prioritize significant barriers. Dynamic Severity scoring can help identify findings with greater potential impact.
3. Do not ignore minor issues. A high score does not mean that remaining issues are unimportant.
4. Review content manually. Automated tools cannot identify every accessibility barrier.
5. Make the original content accessible. Alternative formats provide additional options but do not replace accessible source documents.
6. Review unsupported Brightspace areas. Content still needs to be accessible when the Panorama checker is not available for automated scans.
7. Use current or upcoming course shells. Past courses are not included in ongoing Panorama scanning and reporting.
8. Publish content when it is ready to be assessed. Hidden and unpublished content is excluded from scanning and will not have options to generate alternative formats.
9. Evaluate the student experience. Remediation efforts should improve meaningful access for everyone instead of focusing only on improving accessibility scores.

Summary of Minnesota State Configuration

About Panorama Results

Panorama supports accessibility improvement by identifying potential issues, assigning severity levels, providing remediation guidance, and generating alternative formats.

It does not:

• Guarantee compliance with accessibility standards.
• Replace manual accessibility testing.
• Evaluate every aspect of the user experience.
• Scan every location within Brightspace.
• Assess hidden or unpublished content under the current configuration.
• Replace the need to create accessible source content.
• Replace disability accommodations or other individualized access supports.

Use Panorama results as actionable guidance while continuing to apply accessible design practices and manual review.