Should You Delete Your Course Materials? A Better Alternative to the Nuclear Option
Faculty across the country are considering deleting slides, images, and videos rather than remediating them. Here's why that's understandable—and what to do instead.
"Many faculty members are considering removing all slide presentations and images from their Canvas courses rather than jump through hoops."
This quote from a faculty member on Reddit isn't an isolated sentiment. Across universities, professors are facing an impossible choice:
- Spend hundreds of hours remediating decades of course materials
- Delete everything and start from scratch
- Risk non-compliance and hope nobody notices
If you're considering option 2—the nuclear option—this article is for you.
Why Faculty Are Considering Deletion
Let's validate the frustration first. The accessibility compliance situation is genuinely difficult:
The Workload Is Overwhelming
Typical department content:
- 500-2,000 PDFs (lecture notes, syllabi, readings)
- 200-500 PowerPoint presentations
- 100-300 hours of video
- Thousands of images across all materials
Manual remediation time:
- PDFs: 30-60 minutes each
- PowerPoints: 15-30 minutes each
- Videos: 20-40 minutes per hour of content (caption editing)
- Images: 2-5 minutes each for alt text
Total estimate for one faculty member: 200-500 hours
That's 5-12 weeks of full-time work—on top of teaching, research, and service obligations.
There's No Compensation
From Reddit:
"There is no additional compensation for meeting the new guidelines. The administration expects faculty to remediate all materials as part of their normal duties."
Universities are mandating compliance without providing:
- Course releases
- Summer funding
- Graduate assistant support
- Meaningful tool budgets
Faculty are being asked to do hundreds of hours of uncompensated labor.
The Tools Don't Actually Fix Anything
"YuJa Panorama is varying levels of suck that won't actually fix the problem."
Most accessibility tools only identify issues. They don't remediate them. You get a report saying "This PDF has 47 accessibility errors" with no actual solutions.
That's like a doctor saying "You have 47 health problems" and walking out of the room.
Publisher Materials Are Someone Else's Problem
"There was a 20-chapter textbook and each chapter had its own publisher-provided PowerPoints that were NOT accessible and I refused."
Faculty didn't create these materials. Publishers did. But faculty are responsible for making them accessible—even though they can't modify the source files.
Why Deletion Feels Logical
Given all this, deletion makes a certain kind of sense:
Argument for deletion:
- Zero content = zero accessibility violations
- Fresh start with accessible-by-design materials
- No more legacy headaches
- Forces publishers to provide accessible alternatives
The appeal: If you can't fix the problem, eliminate it.
Why Deletion Is Actually a Terrible Idea
Here's why the nuclear option will backfire:
1. Students Suffer Immediately
Your course materials exist for a reason. They represent years of pedagogical refinement:
- Diagrams that explain complex concepts better than words
- Slides students rely on for exam prep
- Supplementary readings that deepen understanding
- Video explanations for difficult topics
Deleting them doesn't just affect students with disabilities. It hurts everyone.
2. You'll Recreate the Same Problem
Unless you've fundamentally changed how you create content, your new materials will have the same issues:
- Images without alt text
- PDFs without structure tags
- Videos without captions
- Low-contrast slides
You'll be back where you started—but with worse materials.
3. Compliance Doesn't Mean "No Content"
WCAG compliance doesn't require:
- Removing all images
- Eliminating videos
- Stripping visual design
It requires making those elements accessible. An image with good alt text is accessible. A video with accurate captions is accessible.
Deletion is over-compliance to the point of absurdity.
4. You Lose Years of Institutional Knowledge
Those PDFs and slides represent accumulated expertise:
- Edge cases students struggle with
- Explanations refined over semesters
- Examples that actually resonate
- Diagrams that took hours to create
Deleting them is like burning a library because some books have torn covers.
5. It Doesn't Solve the Legal Problem
If a student with a disability needs accessible materials, deleting content doesn't help. You'll need to provide something—and creating new accessible materials under time pressure is worse than remediating existing ones.
The Better Alternative: Triage and Automate
Instead of deletion, use a strategic approach:
Step 1: Triage by Impact
Not all content is equally important. Prioritize:
Priority 1 (Fix First):
- Current semester materials
- High-enrollment courses
- Content students actively use (exam prep, required readings)
Priority 2 (Fix This Year):
- Next semester's courses
- Materials you update regularly
- Core course content
Priority 3 (Fix or Archive):
- Courses you haven't taught in 2+ years
- Supplementary "nice to have" content
- Materials you plan to replace anyway
Priority 4 (Consider Deletion):
- Truly obsolete content (outdated information)
- Duplicate files
- Content you've already replaced
Step 2: Automate What You Can
What automation can handle (80% of issues):
- PDF OCR and structure tagging
- Alt text generation for common image types
- Caption cleanup and timing fixes
- Contrast adjustments in PowerPoints
- Reading order corrections
What requires human judgment (20% of issues):
- Complex diagram descriptions
- Discipline-specific terminology in captions
- Pedagogical decisions about content importance
- Publisher content negotiations
Aelira's approach:
- Scan entire directories in minutes
- AI generates fixes for automatable issues
- Humans review and approve
- Export compliant versions
Result: 200 hours of work becomes 20 hours of review.
Step 3: Fix As You Go
For Priority 2-3 content, adopt a "fix when touched" policy:
- Updating slides for spring? Add alt text while you're in there.
- Recording new lecture? Add proper captions.
- Revising a reading list? Check PDFs for accessibility.
This spreads remediation across time instead of requiring a massive one-time effort.
Step 4: Push Back on Publishers
For publisher content you can't modify:
- Request accessible versions (many publishers have them for US/ADA compliance)
- Document the request (shows good faith if audited)
- Find open alternatives (OER, open textbooks)
- Report to your disability services office (they can escalate)
You're not responsible for making third-party content accessible. But you are responsible for requesting accessible versions and documenting that effort.
What Your Administration Should Provide
If your university is mandating compliance without support, advocate for:
1. Centralized Tools
Department-wide or institution-wide licenses for remediation tools (like Aelira) are far cheaper than expecting each faculty member to handle it alone.
Math: 50 faculty × $200/year each = $10,000 for individual tools
vs. $999/month × 12 = $11,988 for department-wide unlimited access
The centralized option is barely more expensive and infinitely more efficient.
2. Student Worker Support
Train work-study students to:
- Run accessibility scans
- Add basic alt text
- Edit auto-captions
- Organize files for batch processing
Faculty review the output; students do the mechanical work.
3. Faculty Development Workshops
Not punishment for non-compliance—actual skill-building:
- How to create accessible content from the start
- How to use remediation tools efficiently
- Templates and checklists that save time
4. Realistic Timelines
Remediating 10 years of content in 3 months isn't realistic. A 2-year rolling remediation plan is.
The Mindset Shift
The accessibility "crisis" is really a process problem, not a content problem.
Old approach: Create content → Discover it's inaccessible → Panic → Consider deletion
New approach: Create content → Run automated scan → Apply automated fixes → Quick human review → Publish
With the right tools and processes, accessibility becomes a 10-minute step in your workflow, not a 200-hour nightmare.
Don't Delete. Triage.
Your course materials have value. Years of refinement, student feedback, pedagogical expertise—that doesn't deserve the recycle bin.
Instead of deleting:
- Prioritize what matters most
- Automate what can be automated
- Review what needs human judgment
- Fix as you go for lower-priority content
- Push back on publishers and administration
The goal isn't perfect compliance on day one. It's a sustainable process that gets you there without burning out or burning everything down.
See how Aelira automates 80% of remediation work or join the pilot program for hands-on support with your department's content.

Aelira Team
•Accessibility EngineersThe Aelira team is building AI-powered accessibility tools for higher education. We're on a mission to help universities meet WCAG 2.1 compliance before the April 2026 deadline.
Related Articles
Faculty Accessibility Burnout Is Real: Here's What IT Directors Can Do
Faculty are overwhelmed, resentful, and threatening to delete content. Here's how IT leaders can address the systemic causes of accessibility burnout.
Publisher Materials Aren't Accessible: Dealing with Pearson, Cengage, and McGraw-Hill
You didn't create inaccessible content, but you're responsible for it. Here's how to handle publisher materials that don't meet WCAG standards.
Publisher Materials Aren't Accessible: Dealing with Pearson AU, Cengage AU, and Wiley
You didn't create inaccessible content, but you're responsible for it. Here's how Australian universities can handle publisher materials that don't meet WCAG standards.
Ready to achieve accessibility compliance?
Join the pilot program for early access to Aelira's AI-powered accessibility platform
Apply for Pilot