Digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2

For the assessment of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, the unit of review should correspond to the full reach of the decision, including significant differences in provision and population.

In the context of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, WCAG 2.2 was published as a W3C Recommendation on 5 October 2023. It adds nine success criteria concerning keyboard focus, dragging, target size, consistent help, repeated entry and accessible authentication. The standard remains organised under the four established accessibility principles. Education providers should identify the version and conformance level applied and should test complete learner tasks, including third-party components.

When examining digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, implementation should be organised around a decision that can be tested.

Scope and application of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2

WCAG 2.2 provides the contemporaneous context. It does not, without setting-specific evidence, demonstrate the operation of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2. A reliable record should not merge factual findings with policy intention or institutional judgement.

For decisions concerning digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, the central objective should not be obscured by the form of the administrative response. For the assessment of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, implementation evidence should be sufficient to identify unequal consequences and assign corrective responsibility.

• Identify barriers before they affect an individual learner.
• Correct systemic barriers rather than isolated symptoms.
• Test physical and digital access.
• Train staff with decision-making responsibilities.
• Monitor unequal outcomes.

Controls relevant to digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2

Across the defined scope, the judgement should state its supporting evidence and any condition limiting application to the declared scope.

Risk assessment should give particular attention to formal access without practical participation, assessment methods unrelated to intended outcomes, and complaint routes that are not accessible. A provider should also consider delayed or inconsistent accommodation and support dependent on repeated disclosure. For the assessment of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, the control response should reflect whether an affected learner can identify the error and obtain an effective remedy in time.

Relevant evidence for the conclusion will normally include records of accommodation decisions and response times, accessible learning and assessment materials, complaints and resolution records, testing with affected learners, and accessibility reviews covering the learner journey. For the assessment of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, conflicting records require reconciliation before a complete assurance conclusion is reached.

• What outcome is intended?
• Where do exceptions occur?
• What action is required by the finding?
• Which evidence establishes operation?
• Who controls each stage?

Review criteria for digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2

For the applicable requirement, the reviewer should map the complete process, identify the intended result and responsible authority at each stage, and test normal cases together with exceptions. In the context of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, averages should be tested against adverse cases that may indicate unequal effect or incomplete operation.

Interpretation of the applicable requirement should produce a test that another competent reviewer can apply to comparable evidence.

Proportionality in relation to the control does not mean reduced protection for learners exposed to greater risk. For the assessment of digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, assurance should examine whether support is available in time, whether learners can use it without disadvantage and whether outcomes reveal persistent barriers.

For decisions concerning digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, the evidential trail should allow an affected decision to be identified, examined and corrected. For the matter, the responsible body should be able to identify the evidence considered, the judgement made, the person or body authorised to make it and the action that followed.

When examining digital accessibility following publication of WCAG 2.2, where responsibilities for delivery are shared with partners, suppliers or several public bodies, responsibility should be mapped across the complete service.