Connecting Claims and Outcomes: Applying Accessibility Criteria to Alternate Assessments

Abstract

The study’s purpose was to evaluate how accessibility is forwarded through technical test specification and how specifications are influenced by policy guidance. Although universal design (UD) is frequently identified as a guiding principle in test development, Johnson, Trantham, and Usher-Tate (2019) found many assessment programs neither realize these promises, nor ensure the necessary steps for optimal accessibility. We reviewed assessment development approaches and features in light of UD principles by conducting a qualitative review of relationships between UD elements and Peer Review Critical Elements (2018), and the relationships between UD elements and “Criteria for Procuring Evaluating High-Quality Assessments (CCSSO, 2014) using expert judgment (Patton, 2002). Results illustrated where raters identified UD elements within policy guidance and showed a concentration of references to UD in test development processes, consistent with findings from previous studies (Davidson, 2019). Results suggest the limited definition of fairness and a view that accessibility is only a consideration at the item level may contribute to the lack of connection to these UD elements in Peer Review guidance.