DEV Community

Diana Le
Diana Le

Posted on

Better Accessibility: My Path to the CPACC

#frontend #webdev #a11y #html

I took the Certified Professional in Accessibility Core Competencies (CPACC) exam offered by the International Association of Administrative Professionals (IAAP) in August of this year, and aside from PSATs/SATs in high school, I have never studied so much for one exam in my life. I have also never PAID as much for an exam in my life. I found people's shared online experiences helpful when I was debating taking this test, so I'm adding my thoughts as well. Overall I'm glad that I decided to take the test, but the entire process had some surprising steps and was not entirely smooth.

This is not a direct how-to guide. I may have failed passed, but people are different in how they learn; I'm just hoping some added context is helpful to anyone else looking to take the exam because I researched as much as I could before registering.

Why Take the Test

I got laid off earlier this year so I had plenty of time each day to study (albeit not while in the happiest mood), although after going through this process I feel it's better to spread out the information over more days because getting a good night's sleep helped me retain the knowledge.

There is also a lack of certifications for web development / front-end engineering. This certification felt at least somewhat universally known and I wanted to learn more about accessibility anyway. There are also more job postings that mention accessibility and ones that have specifically mentioned IAAP and their certifications — not a lot total but more than I've seen in the past.

My Background

I've been a front-end web developer for 12+ years. I started focusing more on accessibility 7-8 years ago after learning more about the topic from conferences and from other web developers I follow, but this effort has always been non-critical to my jobs. I’ve proactively made the effort to learn and to be accessible as I can within the budget, particularly regarding using the proper semantic tags in HTML, making sure form labels are appropriate, ensuring contrast is sufficient, and interactive states are captured by ARIA, etc. I also run through my sites using VoiceOver on MacOS. But overall the jobs I've had never required or had specific criteria to check against. I would give and receive feedback from other accessibility-minded developers at work, but this was nothing official. Accessibility was a nice-to-have and something to strive for, but the on-work training and executive buy-in for a standardized process was never there.

Why Focus on Accessibility

What kickstarted my focus the most was during a talk on accessibility, the presenter said that it's highly unlikely that designers/developers were specifically trying to make life harder for people with disabilities, but rather they lacked that extra viewpoint when navigating web sites. I try to be as empathetic as I can, and this opened my eyes to all the things that HTML natively provides that a developer can unintentionally break.

Earlier on in my career I really had to fight to keep things accessible. Project managers would ask to remove focus outlines from input fields just because they didn't like the look but I would argue to keep them because of the accessibility issues of removing them. It was one thing to not follow checklists, but proactively spending time to remove useful if visually displeasing things was mind-blowing to me.

Previous Lack of Management Buy-in

The biggest argument I had was when a client wanted to remove all keyboard focus states off their web site because my company never designed the native focus outlines provided by the browser, so the outline colors were the browser defaults. For my client these outlines didn't match the color scheme of their branding. I told my project manager that I would choose a more appropriate color and updated the CSS. The client came back and said they still wanted them removed. I told my project manager to wait, and then talked to my director. I told him what the client wanted, why this was bad — both from an accessibility perspective and from a potential lawsuit perspective — and also linked relevant articles on why focus states should never be removed. He responded with, "But the client doesn't like them," and that was the end of the conversation.

I felt incredibly dejected that day. I've had plenty of bad experiences at work, but this one particularly bothered me because it felt especially wrong to exclude people with disabilities from functionally navigating the site for the sole reason that one person didn't like it for aesthetic reasons. And I had substantial evidence for why they shouldn't be removed, but my managers seemed to only want the path of least resistance.

With an accessibility certification though, I feel like I would be empowered and have credibility to argue my positions. If this certification had existed back then, maybe I would have had more power in that exchange. The environment now is also much different than it was 5 years ago, with more accessibility laws in existence across the globe and more general awareness of its importance.

A Condensed Timeline

Deque University

I already knew of Deque University from a previous job where my coworkers were trying to complete the Web Accessibility Specialist (WAS) course outside of project work to get certified (this wound up being an untenable goal due to the nature of client work unfortunately). But since I had heard good things about the platform, I decided to purchase. The IAAP exam dates are arranged into sessions, and ideally I would have preferred an additional two weeks to prepare, but since I had no idea what my job situation would be like by the time of the next exam session, I decided to register even if the timeline felt rushed.

My goal was to finish the Deque course and finish my own separate notes on the course at least a couple days before applications closed on July 16. If I reached that critical goal I would apply and register for the exam. I received access to the Deque course on June 17. I planned to take the exam near the end of the period which was August 12. That would give me a little less than two months to prepare for the exam.

Because Deque has a progress tracker on the course depending on how far you've clicked through the lessons, I used this to set a mini-goal to achieve a certain percentage each day. The problem with this strategy is that Deque seems to base this on number of pages rather than total content. So if you're reading through lessons with one or two paragraphs per page, it will seem like you're progressing further than you actually are. Once I reached pages with 10+ paragraphs and tabbed sections, I felt demoralized at how slow I was going.

Book of Knowledge

Once I finished the Deque course, I read through the IAAP Book of Knowledge (BOK) and cross-referenced my notes from the course and filled in any missing information or better-worded concepts. That took another full week. By the end my converted PDF of notes was 160+ pages long. I was surprised how short some sections in the BOK were compared to Deque, but I suppose that's why you pay for the course.

Second Thoughts

Once I got deeper into the Deque course I wondered if I had made the right choice in taking the CPACC versus the WAS, which would have been more in line with what I've already been doing for years. I appreciated the background information and context that I was learning on why we should do things certain ways on the web. But it was so much new information and the diversity of topics made it harder for me too. Information like the disability models and types of disabilities, while mostly new information, made sense. Web accessibility and universal design were the most familiar topics but still a lot of new information.

Once I reached universal design for learning, which was so different from anything I've learned during work, I hit my first stumbling block in terms of retaining information. I would read the same sentence over and over but it would not sink in. And the terminology for the guidelines seemed bizarre. The description and the guidelines just didn't seem to tie together; I could only imagine how difficult this topic is for people who can't take this test in their native language. When I got to accessibility laws, it became too much — just so much diverse information I couldn't remember all of it after re-reading it multiple times.

Going Old School

People online mentioned using flashcards to study and once I only had two weeks until my test date, I decided to make an account on Brainscape where there were already a few sets dedicated to CPACC. At this point I knew that reading the material over and over was not going to help me. I tried a few of the CPACC flashcard sets on Brainscape but none of the answers satisfactorily matched my notes so I basically took one already built CPACC class and slowly replaced every single answer card, deleted many cards, and added my own. You probably would be better off just creating your own set of cards from scratch.

I hadn't used flashcards since high school when I had to write them out by hand, and I really enjoyed the paced repetition on Brainscape that can only happen because it's digital. For every card, you rank on a confidence scale of 1-5 how well you knew the answer. The less confident you are on a card, the more often that card will show up. But the app also doesn't just keep throwing new cards at you; you have to reach a certain confidence level before it starts slowly testing new cards you haven't studied yet.

Slow and Steady

I organized my cards into sections based on the Deque course, and I would re-read my notes on a section, then do flashcards pertaining only to that section for a day. The next day I would read a new section, then do the flashcards on the previous section until I surpassed a certain percentage, then do flashcards on the section I just read. Slowly but surely I increased my confidence levels. Some of the more comprehensive sections I would revisit over and over but still continue my reading on new sections. For instance, disabilities, universal design for learning, and laws all stayed around 40% for days while other sections quickly increased to 70-80%. I opted to do this method because I didn't want to just know the subject well enough to pass a multiple choice test, I wanted to be able to rattle off as much as I could about a specific topic as if I needed to explain it to someone.

An Unexpected but Relevant Roadblock

I made a goal to hit 80% in Brainscape by the Saturday before my test. Since level 5 is for cards that you feel you'll know "forever," it's unlikely you'll hit 100%. I then was hoping to cycle through all the cards in the final 3 days before the test. On Saturday however, my mom fell and fractured her wrist, and I had to spend the next 3 days watching her like a hawk, driving her to multiple doctors, cutting her food for her, helping her to shower, and doing other things she couldn't do by herself.

On the one hand, watching all the limitations she encountered without being able to use her dominant hand made me see directly how much daily life is impacted by disabilities. On the other hand I started to panic at this point, wondering if I should cancel my test because the scheduled studying I had planned to do the final 3 days was out the window. But the test fee was not refundable and I had already put in so much effort that I decided to proceed. I studied wherever I could. I brought my iPad to my mom's doctors' appointments so I could study in the waiting room. I studied at night after she went to bed. By the time of test day I had reached 97.6%. I almost cried with relief that final night.

Taking the Test

Although you can take the exam at home from your own computer, based on Reddit threads most people recommended taking it in-person at an exam center, with the main reason being that the online proctors could be especially strict, and if something happens where the exam becomes nullified (bad internet connection, loud noises, etc.), it's on you to argue. Whereas at Pearson in-person they're responsible for making sure the exam runs correctly and are obligated to fix problems. After taking the exam at Pearson, I can confirm that it was a nice quiet environment for concentrating.

The Application Process

The process from registering with IAAP to scheduling the test is actually much more manual than I thought it would be, and some of the steps do take time, so keep that in mind:

  1. Register with IAAP and submit an application for the exam you want to take. According to the web site, approval can take up to 5 business days but mine was approved by the next day via email. I'm assuming this was quicker because the requirements for CPACC are lenient compared to WAS.
  2. Once approved, submit payment for the exam online at IAAP.
  3. Once paid, wait for the "Authorization to Test" email from Pearson VUE. You cannot schedule an exam until you are authorized. This took 5 days (including the weekend) for me to receive the email.
  4. Create an account and schedule your exam on the Pearson VUE site.
  5. Take the exam.
  6. Wait 4-6 weeks after the exam close date for results.
  7. If you passed, wait another week for your Credly badge and IAAP documents.

Scheduling

The Pearson scheduling experience was terrible if you signed up later like I did. Be aware that because there are so many different tests administered by Pearson, people may have scheduled exams months in advance, and when you take the test it’s this mixture of people in the room with you. Because I scheduled this exam later in the schedule, most days weren’t available at all until one to two weeks before at four of the test centers near my house (probably because people were rescheduling their exams), and each time you reschedule costs an additional $50. I begrudgingly paid the reschedule fee to get my ideal date and time which luckily opened up 9 days before. I recommend registering earlier to have more openings for the test.

Test Day

Check-in for the test was very smooth. I was actually planning to do an additional run through of my flashcards in the waiting room but the employee waved me in since the policy seemed to be to let people into the room on a rolling basis as other people finished. I had to turn off my phone in front of them, show my ID, scan both my palms a couple of times each, take a photograph, and then store items in my locker. At the testing station they provided me with a laminated scratchpad for notes, and noise-canceling headphones were available at each desk.

The computer had nice options for the interface. You could change the color scheme and had 10+ options at any point (which is very accessible). I tried to do white on black text but then the highlighting didn't look clear enough to me. You could use strikethrough on text on the answer options, although depending how you clicked, you could wind up accidentally selecting an answer as well. There was also an option to write feedback comments on every question, which I did on several; however be aware this does take away from your exam time. You could flag any question you wanted to return to, which was useful when using the navigation button, or at the end when you review, as it shows you a list of all questions with statuses on completion and on flagging.

The Exam

I did a first pass through the test which took 70 minutes. I flagged 15-20 questions, but I decided to also double-check and re-read every single question and this took up the rest of the two hours. I probably could have spent another 15 minutes. There were at least 5 questions that referenced things I did not encounter at all in my studying, and another 10 questions that I could have flipped a coin between two choices. Maybe I felt sure about 30 questions and "pretty sure" about 20 more. Overall I felt good... but also would not have been entirely shocked if I didn't make the cutoff. I can understand why many of the people writing about their experiences say they didn't feel particularly confident afterwards. There were a few questions that felt not exactly random, but you would have had to go DEEP into material to know the answer.

Total Time Spent Studying

The IAAP site recommends that people spend anywhere from 30-80 hours in preparation for this test. Because of the statistics from the Brainscape site, I know that I spent 29 hours on flashcard studying alone. This did not include the time I spent creating the flashcards, which probably took another 10 hours. I probably spent at least another 20-30 hours on the Deque course and on writing out my notes. So my total time was definitely on the higher end of the scale. I also consulted other sites and blogs which are listed at the end of this post.

Exam Criticisms

Wide Range of Topics and Specificity

Having read through both the BOK (but not every externally-linked reading) and having completed Deque's course, those covered ~90% of the material on the test. Maybe with luck you might get a test that matches everything exactly. Most likely if you want full knowledge, you'll need to read through all the supplemental materials on both, however the net is especially wide. It was pretty demoralizing to click on an external link that led to 20 subpages. On the exam there were references to laws or medical conditions that felt too specific and not in the spirit of what this overall certification is trying to accomplish. There was a question on the test about the global numbers of a specific disability. I happened to know the answer, but only because when I read it while studying I thought, “This is such a random specific statistic that there’s no way they’re going to ask this on the exam.” Well they did.

There were also a few questions on the exam regarding a specific law which I had never heard of. I found this surprising because I made a huge effort to memorize all the accessibility laws that I could (and for many countries outside the US). When I got home and looked it up I realized I did study that law and knew it well, however I only knew it by its official, technical name, not the friendlier "common" term for it. I don't recall in any of the questions where it had the technical name in parentheses, so my thought at the time was, "How is there another law that seems to overlap with existing laws?" I felt this was another example of the test questions relying too much on unguided direct memorization.

Not Following their Own Recommendations

The biggest irony was the format of the test itself. Universal design for learning emphasizes that using one method to demonstrate knowledge proficiency is not enough (the principle of multiple means of action and expression) because some learners may have barriers with certain methods, and others may just need to express themselves in different ways... and yet this test is offered in one format of multiple choice answers. In the Deque course, they used multiple choice tests as a specific example of a format that may cause issues for certain learners. I understand the added complexity of administering multiple formats for a global exam, but it was ironic nonetheless.

Post-Exam Reflection

Lack of Confidence

I researched people's experiences with the test online before I signed up, and a lot of people mentioned that they were uncertain on how well they did afterwards. I felt exactly the same way, which is an odd feeling about a multiple choice test. There were enough questions that I either had no idea about because I didn't know the topic at all, and other questions that felt specifically tricky between two answers. I was expecting to pass but also would not have been surprised if I barely made the cutoff.

To be clear, I felt extremely confident in my knowledge about all of the topics, but not about how I did on the test itself. I don't think I've ever taken a test where I felt that much uncertainty afterwards, which was not a great feeling. Some of this may also have been due to me knowing that IAAP uses a modified Angoff scoring method, which requires subject-matter experts to review each question. So while taking the exam I was unintentionally also thinking about whether each question seemed "easy" or "hard."

The Wait

The results can take 4-6 weeks from the end of the exam period, which lasts about a month. I took my exam the second to last day, and even then the wait felt like forever. I would watch jobs get posted wanting the CPACC certification and debated whether to wait to apply after I got the certification (if I even got it), or to apply as soon as possible. I also wanted to start studying for the WAS certification, but not if I failed the CPACC. While it felt frustrating to wait for all the reviewing, I told myself it's better than getting a strict cutoff immediately after finishing the test.

Finally, 5 weeks and 5 days after the exam period ended, I found out that I had passed with "Above Standard" in each domain, with a scaled score of 724/800. Being laid off this year and struggling in the job search has been very demoralizing every day, but the day I found out I passed, I felt a joy I hadn't felt in months. Knowledge in web development can feel nebulous, and there are points where you can feel you know a lot until you learn more and realize all of what you don’t know. But here was something that I put the effort to learn and felt validated by the results.

Lingering Questions

There are still scenarios regarding web accessibility or universal design that I still don't know which concept fits the most. For example on a web site, let's say you have a word game where a banner will display only if you lose or win the game. Following the rules of interaction, you will need to create an aria-live region for screen readers so that users will know without being able to look at the content that they won or lost. But which of the web accessibility principles (perceivable, operable, understandable, robust) does this apply to?

Deque had this type of alert listed as both perceivable (able to perceive through sight, sound, or touch) and robust (compatibility including with assistive technologies). Is it both or is one case stronger than the other? I could also argue this would be under understandable because if you kept trying to play the game even after the game is over, you are going to be confused. This was frustrating because as a developer, I know why this solution needs to be implemented, but when you're limited to a multiple choice test you have to know exactly which principle fit the best.

One Tool

I had to remind myself that while this was an accessibility certification, like every other certification out there, it's only as good as what you make of it. There are plenty of people who know accessibility without being certified, but for me I liked having some structure in which to guide my learning. And as I had mentioned earlier, I wanted some official credibility if I have to fight to keep something accessible in an environment that doesn't proactively support it.

A Needed Boost

I intend to keep accessibility as a priority in my front-end career whether or not it’s a specific requirement of my job, and being a CPACC is just one part of it. While I had qualms with some of the questions on the CPACC exam, and there are certain details I won’t need in my career, I’m still glad that I learned this information and now understand the larger context that accessibility plays in this world. And I'm glad this certification exists to motivate people like myself to learn more. I plan to keep learning accessibility from online courses and conferences, and also plan on taking the WAS exam so I can become in combination with CPACC a Certified Professional in Web Accessibility (CPWA).

Recommendations in Hindsight

  • Online sites that have example multiple choice tests are useful, but I would make sure that you can answer the questions open-ended just because of how varied and encompassing the subject is. I did maybe 5 runs of multiple choice tests but spent the bulk of my time with flashcards
  • Deque University only allows one active subscription at a time. If you are considering taking both the CPACC and WAS, then I would pay for the combined course. I only signed up for the CPACC course and had to contact customer service in order to switch over to the WAS course and wound up paying more than if I had just signed up for the combined CPACC/WAS to begin with.
  • If you are reading and re-reading the same content and it is not sinking in for you, consider watching some YouTube videos for a different way for the information to be presented. After being stuck on universal design for learning for days, I listened to a portion of a YouTube video and this cemented the basics for me immediately — all because the information was presented in an auditory manner.
  • Apply and register for the test early so that you will have more options for scheduling in-person at Pearson.

Online Resources

Top comments (0)