Equity and the Accessibility Game Plan

Strategies to Move Toward Full Inclusion in Educational Testing

Time and new information often shape and change our opinions, but some ideas are evergreen because they are relevant and essential long after their introduction. I believe that the accessibility game plan—key strategies of the disability-rights movement that can address systemic barriers in education—is one such enduring idea. 

Jhan Doughty-Berry and I first introduced this idea on LinkedIn during the summer of 2020, when the world was beginning to grapple more seriously with issues of equity and racism. But it is just as pertinent today, so I aim to refresh the conversation here on CenterLine.

Below I highlight a few strategies from the world of accessibility and offer suggestions for how to advance equity in educational testing in K12. 

1. Forge Bipartisan Alliances and Pass State and Federal Legislation

Since the early days of the disability rights movement in the 1970s, special education and the rights of individuals with disabilities have been bipartisan issues. While this is not critical to getting initial laws passed, it has been key to reauthorization of foundational civil rights legislation such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Those of you working in state government may be keenly aware of the requirements in these laws because the U.S. Department of Justice recently issued a final ruling stepping up the accessibility obligations for state websites by April of 2026. 

Bipartisan support for equality in disability rights is also found in state laws and regulations. The General Services Administration (GSA) maintains a list of the many state specific policies and legislative requirements. For example, the Oklahoma Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Law (EITA) and several intersecting California laws cover information technology, websites, and workplace discrimination. These laws are found in both conservative- and liberal-leaning states, and bipartisan solutions have been key to sustaining them.

2. Promote Standards & Guidelines

While federal legislation has been instrumental in requiring accessibility in the workplace, education, and public places, legislators have relied on academics, non-profits, and other membership organizations to develop standards and guidance on how to implement accessibility requirements. Below are two examples that I would like to highlight:

• The World Wide Web Consortium’s (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. These guidelines for digital accessibility were developed over many years in collaboration with industry and the disability community. They include overarching principles and concrete examples for implementation. Federal agencies point to these standards as best practice and case law considers whether websites, software, and other digital products effectively implemented them. The U.S. Department of Justice’s Division of Civil Rights suggests using a checklist based on these W3C guidelines for evaluating compliance of websites.
• Universal Design for Learning. The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines include three high-level principles with more details on implementation considerations. These guidelines have a particularly wide reach because considerations for UDL were integrated into the requirements of numerous federal laws, including the purchasing of educational products, technology plans, and teacher preparation programs (see a summary compiled by CAST). While Universal Design for Learning has been aimed primarily at special education students (and to some extent English learners), the principles in their purest form call on inclusive design for ALL students. 

3. Develop and Demand Product Equity

One of the early tools used to encourage accessibility in product design was the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template, commonly referred to as a “V-PAT.” The VPAT is a document that explains how digital products meet federal IT accessibility standards (known as Section 508). More recently the V-PAT has become a part of a larger requirement to produce an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) which requires software, hardware, and product creators to document the accessibility of their products based on specific criteria (conformance levels). 

Now most technology companies, like Google and Microsoft, include detailed Accessibility Conformance Reports for their products. These reports allow customers to make comparisons across different products and also educate product designers on the needs and requirements for accessibility. 

The Center on Online Learning and Students with Disabilities attempted to rate products based on the completion of a VPAT, and more recently have been incorporated into an Accessibility Rubric to evaluate edtech products. In the education markets, the use of ACRs and VPATs have increased over time and can be a vehicle to drive change through market demands.

Perhaps it is time for the development of a Product Equity Template to complement the VPAT.

These three strategies have brought about law and policy that have changed perceptions about people with disabilities and our collective responsibilities. Over time, people with disabilities have become welcome, valued voices in public schools and the workplace. While bias and discrimination still exist, progress has been steady. 

Each of us plays a role in moving equity forward in K12 testing. Those of you working with state legislators and boards of education can create conversations that include people from different backgrounds and perspectives on how to advance ideas about equity and inclusion. 

If you are writing standards or guidelines, consider how they can become enforceable under bipartisan laws to ensure long-lasting impact. 

Finally, if you’re in a position to purchase products, you can make sure to prioritize equity and include equity considerations in your request for proposals. 

We hope this “accessibility game plan” inspires you to think about what you can do to advance equity.