Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears well balanced

Article summary:

1. The CPACC exam is a foundational certification from the IAAP that covers disabilities, accessibility and universal design, and accessibility-related standards, laws, and management strategies.

2. The author took the Deque prep course for $45 and read through the IAAP Body of Knowledge to prepare for the exam.

3. The author's experience taking the proctored exam was discouraging due to inaccessible software and technical issues during the exam.

Article analysis:

The article provides an overview of the CPACC exam and its importance in developing an accessibility program. It also outlines the author’s preparation process for taking the exam, which includes taking a prep course from Deque and reading through the IAAP Body of Knowledge. The article then goes on to discuss their experience taking the proctored exam, which was discouraging due to inaccessible software and technical issues during the exam.

The article is generally reliable in terms of its content as it provides accurate information about what is covered by the CPACC exam as well as how to prepare for it. However, there are some potential biases present in this article that should be noted. For example, while discussing their experience with taking the proctored exam, they mention that they encountered form fields without labels and a calendar picker that relied on color alone to convey which dates were available or not – this could be seen as biased against those who created or implemented these features on their website as it implies that they did not take into account accessibility considerations when creating them. Additionally, while discussing their experience with taking the proctored exam they mention that it cost $450 for non-IAAP members – this could be seen as biased against those who cannot afford such a high fee for an optional certification.

In terms of missing points of consideration or evidence for claims made, there are no counterarguments presented in this article nor any discussion about possible risks associated with taking such an expensive certification test (e.g., financial risk). Additionally, there is no evidence provided to support any claims made about how difficult or easy it is to pass this certification test or how beneficial it may be in developing an accessibility program – these claims should have been supported by data or research findings from other sources in order to make them more credible.

Finally, there does not appear to be any promotional content present in this article nor any partiality towards either side of an argument – all information provided appears unbiased and factual in nature.