This is a difficult one - and while programmes and Advance HE would both want, and claim to be inclusive, many people running and assessing programmes will argue that the UKPSF descriptor for D2 is difficult to evidence without evidence of f-f teaching in a traditional context.  It is one of a number of examples, including PBL facilitation, supervision, Master's level seminars etc which causes these problem and raises the question.

It is partly a problem with the lack of clarity about the function of the UKPSF,  If it was like a teaching qualification - a licence to teach then it would be clearer, but it isn't.  In the past I have said to people who I have observed doing one of those types of session that I am happy to agree that they can teach in that context but that I have not seen evidence of them being able to teach across the board - a bit like passing the driving test in an automatic car, with a request that they come back to talk to me if they ever have to teach a large undergraduate class for example.  If the UKPSF is a quality assurance mechanism then we have a problem with someone who has no experience in the main form of teaching in HE (lecturing f-f) being able to claim competency in delivering teaching and facilitating learning.

Often in my experience it does not come up at the point of admission - but when there are requirements in coursework, or teaching observations that can't be met. 

Hope that helps 

David