Transitioning to Microsoft Teams: Accessibility Concerns for Students with Disabilities

In an era where digital solutions drive our academic interactions, the recent decision by a notable college to transition from Zoom to Microsoft Teams for online meetings comes with a myriad of implications—especially for students with disabilities. As we face the reality of this shift, we need to unpack how it might affect accessibility and our commitment to inclusive education.

The Shift from Zoom to Teams​

Effective Spring 2025, students and faculty at this institution will be required to adopt Microsoft Teams for their virtual meetings, effectively phasing out Zoom, which they have relied on since the pandemic. Understanding the rationale, budget constraints seem to underpin this decision. Microsoft Teams is readily integrated with Microsoft Office 365, which is already supplied to students. Cutting ties with Zoom is seen as a financially prudent move.
However, with budgets tight as steel strings, we need to ask: at what cost? While hefty savings might glisten atop the surface, the deeper currents of accessibility concerns are beginning to ripple beneath the waterline.

The Rising Tide of Accessibility in Technology​

Zoom flourished during the pandemic, turning into the go-to platform for educational institutions due to its robust features, particularly regarding accessibility. The rise in Zoom's quarterly revenue from $27 million in 2017 to an astounding $1.1 billion in 2024 is a testament to its growth and evolution. The company has dedicated resources to enhancing accessibility features, an effort that hasn’t gone unnoticed among users, especially those who rely on these enhancements.
Conversely, Microsoft Teams, while powerful in collaboration and organizational tools, falls short of offering substantial accessibility features. The concern raised by a student contributor evokes a harsh reality: while Teams provides some support for hearing impairments and epilepsy, it lacks adequate options for visual impairments. This inadequacy can pose significant barriers to those striving to navigate their learning environments effectively.

The Features That Matter​

In examining the critical differences between Zoom and Microsoft Teams, it’s helpful to understand the tools employed by both:

• Zoom offers features such as:
• Real-time closed captioning, which can be crucial for hearing-impaired students.
• A user-friendly interface that allows for easy adjustments according to user preferences.
• Enhanced integration with assistive technologies.
• Microsoft Teams, on the other hand, has:
• Limited settings for those with visual impairments, such as a restrictive text size that is not adjustable based on a user’s system settings.
• A closed captioning feature that is not consistently enabled due to institutional controls, presenting a contradiction, especially when students are encouraged to utilize AI-powered tools for assistance.

Perhaps the most perplexing aspect is the restriction on the use of Microsoft Teams’ transcript features—tools that could make meetings significantly more accessible to those with disabilities—while simultaneously promoting other AI tools like Microsoft Copilot without such restrictions. This inconsistency raises questions about the college’s commitment to ensuring equitable access to education for all students.

A Call for Thoughtful Decision-Making​

A transition like this inevitably stretches the college's commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). The decisions made surrounding technology should not merely revolve around financial efficiency; they need to be grounded in a holistic assessment of how those choices will impact the diverse student body. It is imperative that institutions consider not just the immediate cost savings but the long-term implications for all students, especially those with disabilities.
Can we genuinely call ourselves a DEI-oriented institution if we neglect the needs of the most vulnerable in our community? Transitioning to a tool that is less accommodating for students with disabilities undoubtedly contradicts those values.

Bridging the Accessibility Gap​

So, what can institutions do to ensure that accessibility does not take a backseat in their technological upgrades?

• Perform Inclusive Tech Assessments: Before adopting new software, colleges should evaluate its accessibility features through an inclusive lens involving students with disabilities in the decision-making process.
• Enhance Training for Faculty and Staff: Implement training to ensure that all users, especially educators, are well-versed in the features and limitations of the tools they are using and how to navigate them to aid their students.
• Monitor and Update Features: Continually review and update the tools being used to ensure they keep pace with accessibility standards and user needs.
• Integrate Feedback Mechanisms: Establish channels for ongoing feedback from students about their experiences, allowing for timely adjustments and improvements to be made.

As institutions navigate the digital landscape, we must advocate for solutions that acknowledge and address accessibility concerns. If we are to foster an inclusive educational environment, technological choices must reflect the diverse needs of all students, ensuring that every learner has the opportunity to thrive.

---

Source: The Columbia Chronicle Op-Ed: How the college’s decision to switch to Microsoft Teams could impact students with disabilities