Showing Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association member sites. All education sites
Members of the Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association (NCAA Division II), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.
D 60
Average usability score of 12 fully scanned Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association member sites
22nd
of 96 conferences, ranked by average usability score
12 of 14
Mid-america intercollegiate athletics association member sites fully scanned. We couldn't fully scan 2, so they're listed without grades
D 68
Average usability score of all 2,687 fully scanned education sites
How Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association usability scores are distributed
Smoothed distribution of the 12 fully scanned Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.
Distribution of 12 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.
- Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association average
- All education average
View the data table
| Score range | Sites |
|---|---|
| 0 to 9 | 0 |
| 10 to 19 | 0 |
| 20 to 29 | 0 |
| 30 to 39 | 2 |
| 40 to 49 | 3 |
| 50 to 59 | 1 |
| 60 to 69 | 2 |
| 70 to 79 | 0 |
| 80 to 89 | 3 |
| 90 to 100 | 1 |
Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association by usability grade, compared with all education sites
Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association: 12 sites. All education: 2687 sites.
- A (90 to 100)
- B to C (70 to 89)
- D to F (below 70)
View the data table
| Group | A (90 to 100) | B to C (70 to 89) | D to F (below 70) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association | 8% (1) | 25% (3) | 67% (8) |
| All education sites | 11% (289) | 42% (1,124) | 47% (1,274) |
Top 3 Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association member sites by usability score
#1 in Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association · U.S. education rank 2
Newman University
A 93 usability
- Accessibility B
- Botability A
- Security B
- Usability A
- Readability A
#2 in Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association · U.S. education rank 4
University of Arkansas-Fort Smith
B 87 usability
- Accessibility A
- Botability A
- Security B
- Usability B
- Readability A
#3 in Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association · U.S. education rank 9
Washburn University
B 81 usability
- Accessibility A
- Botability B
- Security C
- Usability B
- Readability A
What each check means
- Open Graph image alt. The social media preview image has alt text for screen readers. Screen readers cannot describe shared images.
- Open Graph site name. The site has a name for social media and browser display. Site name missing in social media shares.
- Open Graph URL. The page has a canonical URL for social media sharing. Shared links may point to wrong page.
- Open Graph description. The page has a description for social media previews. Shared links have no description on social media.
- Open Graph image. The page has a preview image for social media cards. Shared links have no image on social media.
Every education site with one problem
- Education websites missing Open Graph tags: 1,859 of 2,687 fully scanned education sites (69%), with every site listed.
Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association members by usability score
| Rank | Site | Checks passed | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
newmanu.edu
Newman University U.S. rank 2 |
15 of 16 checks pass | A |
| 2 |
uafs.edu
University of Arkansas-Fort Smith U.S. rank 4 |
14 of 16 checks pass | B |
| 3 |
washburn.edu
Washburn University U.S. rank 9 |
13 of 16 checks pass | B |
| 4 |
missouriwestern.edu
Missouri Western State University U.S. rank 10 |
12 of 15 checks pass | B |
| 5 |
fhsu.edu
Fort Hays State University U.S. rank 17 |
11 of 16 checks pass | D |
| 6 |
pittstate.edu
Pittsburg State University U.S. rank 18 |
10 of 15 checks pass | D |
| 7 |
nsuok.edu
Northeastern State University U.S. rank 23 |
9 of 16 checks pass | F |
| 8 |
nwmissouri.edu
Northwest Missouri State University U.S. rank 27 |
7 of 16 checks pass | F |
| 9 |
ucmo.edu
University of Central Missouri U.S. rank 29 |
6 of 15 checks pass | F |
| 9 |
unk.edu
University of Nebraska at Kearney U.S. rank 29 |
6 of 15 checks pass | F |
| 10 |
emporia.edu
Emporia State University U.S. rank 33 |
5 of 15 checks pass | F |
| 10 |
mssu.edu
Missouri Southern State University U.S. rank 33 |
5 of 15 checks pass | F |
|
rsu.edu
Rogers State University |
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We weren't able to fully scan your site. Status 403 | - | |
|
uco.edu
University of Central Oklahoma |
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We weren't able to fully scan your site. Status 403 | - |
About usability
Optimize content structure so users quickly find what they need.
Why it's important
Well-written pages help people understand laws, services, and procedures without confusion, reducing calls and office visits.
Risks
- Users cannot understand your information.
Guidance
What we use to grade usability:
- 21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act (IDEA)
- U.S. Federal Website Standards
- Google Search Central
- Web Vitals / Core Web Vitals
- Open Graph
Standards
- Page title
- Page description
- Viewport meta tag
- www resolution
- Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS)
- First Contentful Paint (FCP)
- Interaction to Next Paint (INP)
- Largest Contentful Paint (LCP)
- Time to First Byte (TTFB)
- Open Graph site name
- Open Graph type
- Open Graph title
- Open Graph description
- Open Graph URL
- Open Graph image
- Open Graph image alt
Grades/scores
ScanGov
About this ranking
About this data
ScanGov scans the homepage of each college and university site on our higher education list. Scores come from the checks in the ScanGov standards. Sites were scanned between 9/30/2026 and 11/7/2026. Each site's report shows its own scan date. A site counts as fully scanned when its homepage loaded and sent us its page content. Averages, grade shares, failure rates, and ranks use fully scanned sites only. We could not fully scan 2 sites. They did not respond, blocked the scanner, or sent no page content. They appear in the table without grades, with their scan status, and are left out of every figure. Grades follow the ScanGov grade scale. Rank follows the ScanGov ranking method. The full dataset, with every county's raw results, is in the ScanGov data repository.