# Towards the Implementation Process of Accessible Virtual
## 7 Conclusions  
The search for literature through a multivocal review has allowed us to know the requirements, strategies, regulations, and status in recent years of the implementation of accessible virtual campuses. It was identified that HEIs generally have regulations in compliance with the laws adopted at the federal level in each country, in order to create equal opportunities for people with disabilities. Despite the laws or institutional policies enacted, generally there are no accessible educational environments, resulting from a lack of technical knowledge, rejection of technology, limited resources available to an HEI, or a combination of the three. These factors imply the appearance of barriers that limit the performance of students with disabilities, among which are architectural, educational, discriminatory, and pedagogical barriers. In HEIs there are virtual platforms and institutional portals that try to support the activities of the student community; however, it was detected that generally these platforms do not comply with accessibility standards, such as those established by the W3C. In addition, the integration of virtual platforms seeks to establish processes that integrate the entry, permanence, and graduation supported by the principles of universal design, in order for people with disabilities to have equal conditions. This paper proposes a process to guide the implementation of an accessible virtual campus based on a process quality approach. This proposal is based on the PDCA continuous improvement process, which is complemented with an adapted version of the methodology for the implementation of accessible virtual environments by [PERSON] et al. [63]. The process proposal includes the use of a checklist organized by phases, dimensions, activities, and criteria, which facilitates the implementation and monitoring of an accessible virtual campus by the work teams. A conceptual validation of the proposal was made by 16 experts, where 81.25% found that the proposal is logically coherent, theoretically relevant, congruent, and theoretically solid. The usefulness of this process is conditional upon its implementation in HEIs, in order to obtain results that allow refinement of the proposal. For future research, we propose the execution of a case study that can provide feedback that contributes to obtaining results to improve the process. Additionally, an evaluation method is required in order to assess the degree of process completeness based on the analysis of the criteria and their relevance. **Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, F.S.V. ; Investigation, G.C.V. ; Methodology, J.C.P.-A. ; Supervision, S.L.-M. and S.O.T. ; Validation, S.L.-M.; Writing--original draft, F.S.V. ; Writing--review & editing, J.C.P.-A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. **Funding:** This research work has been co-funded by the Erasmus+ Program of the European Union, project EduTech (609785-EPP-1-2019-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP). **Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable. **Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects in-volved in this study. **Data Availability Statement:** The survey used in this study is available at URL: [[https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1) FAlpQLSd9h9 NDYSl9T0 fysdC9p0 CVvcz9 iLNrAPZlIIZi5 GRg00 bw/viewform?usp=sf_link]([https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1) FAlpQLSd9h9 NDYSl9T0 fysdC9p0 CVvcz9 iLNrAPZlIIZi5 GRg00 bw/viewform?usp=sf_link), accessed on 5 February 2022. Data related to the expert evaluation are available at URL: [[https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1) SL9 NtiYlKPxZPwQvCtH8 cbjIjYzzuMOU?usp=sharing]([https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1) SL9 NtiYlKPxZPwQvCtH8 cbjIjYzzuMOU?usp=sharing), accessed on 5 February 2022.