Mid-American Conference: website rankings

Rankings, grades, and the most common failures for 12 Mid-American Conference member websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

  • Sites: 12
  • Last scan: 11/8/2026

Members of the Mid-American Conference (NCAA Division I), from the NCAA membership directory. Conferences change membership every year; this list follows the directory's current academic year.

B 84

Average overall score of 8 fully scanned Mid-American Conference member sites

8th

of 96 conferences, ranked by average overall score

8 of 12

Mid-american conference member sites fully scanned. We couldn't fully scan 4, so they're listed without grades

B 85

Average overall score of all 2,687 fully scanned education sites

How Mid-American Conference overall scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 8 fully scanned Mid-American Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

Distribution of 8 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.

  • Mid-American Conference average
  • All education average
View the data table
How Mid-American Conference overall scores are distributed
Score rangeSites
0 to 90
10 to 190
20 to 290
30 to 390
40 to 490
50 to 590
60 to 690
70 to 792
80 to 895
90 to 1001

Mid-American Conference by overall grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Mid-American Conference: 8 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. Mid-American ConferenceA (90 to 100): 13% (1 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 88% (7 sites)
  2. All education sitesA (90 to 100): 25% (659 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 73% (1,965 sites)D to F (below 70): 2% (63 sites)
  • A (90 to 100)
  • B to C (70 to 89)
  • D to F (below 70)
View the data table
Mid-American Conference by overall grade, compared with all education sites
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
Mid-American Conference13% (1)88% (7)0% (0)
All education sites25% (659)73% (1,965)2% (63)

Mid-American Conference average score by indicator, compared with all education sites

Average of the 8 fully scanned Mid-American Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. The comparison covers 2687 fully scanned education sites.

  1. Accessibility91All education: 91
  2. Botability91All education: 89
  3. Security86All education: 85
  4. Usability67All education: 68
  5. Readability71All education: 56
  • Mid-American Conference
  • All education
View the data table
Mid-American Conference average score by indicator, compared with all education sites
IndicatorMid-American Conference averageAll education average
Accessibility9191
Botability9189
Security8685
Usability6768
Readability7156

Top 3 Mid-American Conference member sites by overall score

#1 in Mid-American Conference · U.S. education rank 7

Miami University-Oxford

A 94 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security C
  • Usability A
  • Readability F

#2 in Mid-American Conference · U.S. education rank 12

Western Michigan University

B 89 overall

  • Accessibility A
  • Botability A
  • Security B
  • Usability D
  • Readability A

#3 in Mid-American Conference · U.S. education rank 15

Bowling Green State University-Main Campus

B 86 overall

  • Accessibility B
  • Botability A
  • Security B
  • Usability C
  • Readability A

Most common failures by indicator

The check Mid-American Conference member sites fail most often in each indicator. Each indicator page lists the top five.

Mid-American Conference members by overall score

Mid-American Conference members ranked by overall score
Rank Site Indicator grades Grade
1 miamioh.edu
Miami University-Oxford U.S. rank 7
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade C
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade F
A
2 wmich.edu
Western Michigan University U.S. rank 12
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade D
  • Readability grade A
B
3 bgsu.edu
Bowling Green State University-Main Campus U.S. rank 15
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade C
  • Readability grade A
B
3 umass.edu
University of Massachusetts-Amherst U.S. rank 15
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade D
  • Readability grade F
B
4 cmich.edu
Central Michigan University U.S. rank 16
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade D
  • Readability grade A
B
5 uakron.edu
University of Akron Main Campus U.S. rank 17
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade C
  • Readability grade A
B
6 ohio.edu
Ohio University-Main Campus U.S. rank 25
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade C
  • Security grade D
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade -
C
7 buffalo.edu
University at Buffalo U.S. rank 26
  • Accessibility grade B
  • Botability grade C
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
C
bsu.edu
Ball State University
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We weren't able to fully scan your site. Status 999 -
emich.edu
Eastern Michigan University
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We couldn't scan your site because it showed our bot a captcha or browser check instead of the page. Status 996 -
kent.edu
Kent State University at Kent
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We couldn't fully scan your site because it responded without any page content. Status 995 -
utoledo.edu
University of Toledo
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We couldn't fully scan your site because it responded without any page content. Status 995 -

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 10/27/2026 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 4 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.

Plans Demo