Posted by 
Researchers at University of Tsukuba have demonstrated that the current accommodations for examinees with blindness for examinations such as those related to admissions are inadequate, particularly for examinations requiring the reading of complex tables. Specifically, the provision of a time extension of 1.5 times the standard duration for answering examination questions with complex tables presented in braille is insufficient for accurately assessing the abilities of examinees with blindness. Considering these findings, the researchers emphasize the urgent need to reassess examination methods to ensure fair evaluation of these examinees’ abilities.
Students often appear for high-stakes tests that hold significant weight in determining their futures. One such examination, the Common Test for University Admissions, currently allows examinees using braille an extended examination time of 1.5 times the standard duration. However, with the recent increase in complex questions and questions involving charts and diagrams in such tests, it is necessary to review whether the current accommodations remain adequate.
The researchers assessed the validity of the current time extension for examination questions containing complex tables by measuring the time required to read the text and complex tables. The results showed that 70% of the examinees completed the braille text reading task within 1.5 times the standard duration and 100% completed it within double the duration. However, none of the examinees finished the braille table reading task within 1.5 or even double the extended time. Furthermore, the table reading task revealed considerable individual differences in reading speed, with no correlation observed between this task and braille text reading. This suggests that people who read braille sentences quickly cannot necessarily read braille tables at the same pace.
These findings demonstrate that the current time extension for examinees using braille is insufficient when examination questions include complex tables. This prompts a consideration of how to properly assess the abilities of such examinees and raises the broader question of how to evaluate the skills of each individual regardless of disability status. This research indicates the need to reconsider the current examination framework itself.
This work was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (grant number 20H00822).