Southland Conference websites ranked by digital experience

Rankings, grades, and the most common failures for 11 Southland Conference member websites, from ScanGov homepage scans.

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

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

B 88

Average overall score of 7 fully scanned Southland Conference member sites

4th

of 96 conferences, ranked by average overall score

7 of 11

Southland 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 Southland Conference overall scores are distributed

Smoothed distribution of the 7 fully scanned Southland Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. Height shows how many sites score near each value.

Distribution of 7 scores. The data table lists counts by score range.

  • Southland Conference average
  • All education average
View the data table
How Southland 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 790
80 to 895
90 to 1002

Southland Conference by overall grade, compared with all education sites

Share of fully scanned sites in each grade band. Southland Conference: 7 sites. All education: 2687 sites.

  1. Southland ConferenceA (90 to 100): 29% (2 sites)B to C (70 to 89): 71% (5 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
Southland Conference by overall grade, compared with all education sites
GroupA (90 to 100)B to C (70 to 89)D to F (below 70)
Southland Conference29% (2)71% (5)0% (0)
All education sites25% (659)73% (1,965)2% (63)

Southland Conference average score by indicator, compared with all education sites

Average of the 7 fully scanned Southland Conference member sites, score 0 to 100. The comparison covers 2687 fully scanned education sites.

  1. Accessibility96All education: 91
  2. Botability87All education: 89
  3. Security89All education: 85
  4. Usability71All education: 68
  5. Readability86All education: 56
  • Southland Conference
  • All education
View the data table
Southland Conference average score by indicator, compared with all education sites
IndicatorSouthland Conference averageAll education average
Accessibility9691
Botability8789
Security8985
Usability7168
Readability8656

Top 3 Southland Conference member sites by overall score

#1 in Southland Conference · U.S. education rank 4

Southeastern Louisiana University

A 97 overall

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

#2 in Southland Conference · U.S. education rank 11

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

A 90 overall

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

#3 in Southland Conference · U.S. education rank 12

Texas A & M University-Corpus Christi

B 89 overall

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

Most common failures by indicator

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

Southland Conference members by overall score

Southland Conference members ranked by overall score
Rank Site Indicator grades Grade
1 southeastern.edu
Southeastern Louisiana University U.S. rank 4
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade A
  • Readability grade A
A
2 nsula.edu
Northwestern State University of Louisiana U.S. rank 11
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade A
  • Usability grade C
  • Readability grade A
A
3 tamucc.edu
Texas A & M University-Corpus Christi U.S. rank 12
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade A
B
4 lamar.edu
Lamar University U.S. rank 13
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade D
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade A
B
5 utrgv.edu
The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley U.S. rank 14
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade D
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade B
  • Readability grade F
B
6 uiw.edu
University of the Incarnate Word U.S. rank 15
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
B
7 sfasu.edu
Stephen F Austin State University U.S. rank 20
  • Accessibility grade A
  • Botability grade A
  • Security grade B
  • Usability grade F
  • Readability grade A
B
hc.edu
Houston Christian 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 -
mcneese.edu
McNeese State 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 -
nicholls.edu
Nicholls State University
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We didn't scan your site because its robots.txt asks crawlers to wait longer than we can. Status 997 -
new.uno.edu
University of New Orleans
Not fully scanned, so not graded. We couldn't scan your site because its security certificate didn't pass validation. Status 993 -

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