Over 3,400 candidates with varying disabilities sat CXC examinations in 2025. 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Unbalanced reporting

Presenting only one institutional perspective (CXC leadership) without any independent or critical viewpoints.

The article relies solely on statements from CXC’s Registrar and CEO, Dr Wayne Wesley, and official treaty information. There are no quotes or perspectives from students with disabilities, teachers, disability-rights advocates, or independent experts. For example: - “Registrar and Chief Executive Officer at the CXC, Dr Wayne Wesley, spoke to the issue during a CXC press conference…” - “CXC will actively advocate… for the adoption and implementation of this Treaty to support accessible learning…” - “we commit to ensuring that all candidates — regardless of ability, can participate fully and fairly.” All evaluative or forward-looking statements about CXC’s performance and commitments come from CXC itself, with no external corroboration or questioning.

4 suggestions

Include perspectives from students with disabilities who sat the exams, describing their actual experience of accessibility (e.g., exam formats, accommodations, challenges).

Add comments from independent disability-rights advocates or educators on how well CXC is currently meeting accessibility standards and where gaps remain.

Provide basic contextual data or expert commentary on regional accessibility in education (e.g., how many students still lack accommodations, or how implementation varies by country).

Clarify that the article is reporting statements from a CXC press conference and explicitly note that independent verification of outcomes (e.g., quality of accommodations) is not provided in this piece.

Appeal to authority

Relying on statements from an authority figure as sufficient support for evaluative or predictive claims.

The article presents CXC’s commitments and intentions largely through the authority of its Registrar and CEO, without additional evidence: - “CXC will actively advocate through ministries of education across the Caribbean for the adoption and implementation of this Treaty…” - “we commit to ensuring that all candidates — regardless of ability, can participate fully and fairly.” - “He said CXC will continue to widen access to its services in inclusive ways for the disabled or ‘differently-abled’, thus fulfilling its duty of care to the people of the region.” These are forward-looking and evaluative claims (about advocacy, inclusivity, and ‘fulfilling its duty of care’) supported only by the authority of the CXC head, not by independent data or examples of implementation.

4 suggestions

Supplement the quoted commitments with concrete evidence: describe specific accessibility measures already implemented (e.g., braille papers, extended time, assistive technology) and how many students benefited from each.

Include brief historical context on CXC’s track record with accessibility (e.g., changes over the last 5–10 years, previous numbers of special needs candidates).

Attribute evaluative language clearly as opinion or institutional position, e.g., “He said this would help fulfil CXC’s duty of care…” rather than stating it as an uncontested fact.

Where possible, add independent verification (e.g., ministry reports, NGO assessments) that corroborate or nuance CXC’s claims about inclusivity and duty of care.