Hi Jane,

This is what I sent Jayne directly, but might be useful to share here too:

The question your organisation has to consider is whether this reasonable adjustment removes the barriers that prevent this student completing her work? The next question should be is there any other way that the same outcome (the removal of these barriers) can be achieved? If the answer is no, then this reasonable adjustment should stand.

Regarding the question of unfair advantage over other students, what are we measuring? Are we measuring like for like? Of course, if we really were, then your “senior academics’ might have a point. However, this disabled student is starting from a disadvantaged position which, in her case, means we cannot be talking about a level playing field. The intention of the reasonable adjustment would be to create the level playing field that did not exist before. I hope that's clarifies your thinking.

There is one more thing to consider. Will your organisation be able to satisfy itself that the refusal to offer this reasonable adjustment can be defended in law? Can you defend the decision not to offer her this reasonable adjustment because your academics thought it created an unfair advantage over other students? Be warned that the test of a reasonable adjustment is its effectiveness in removing barriers. The fact it might allow a student to do something other students cannot is irrelevant. A good example I can think of would be a parking bay for a disabled person with a blue badge on the university campus with limited parking. This confers an unfair advantage. However, it is a reasonable adjustment that you legally would be expected to make to ensure disabled staff and students worked and studied equally with those who are not disabled.

I hope all that helps. One last slightly cheeky question: have those senior academics undergone disability equality training?

Dr.Ossie Stuart


On 8 Jul 2011, at 13:41, Jayne Mayers wrote:

> Dear Colleagues
> 
> Our team recently  discussed how the institution could support a
> student's progression to her third year. One of the options was that she
> be permitted extra time to complete her work for the third year - it's
> likely that she will not complete all work within the one year period,
> because of limitations on the amount of time she is able to spend at her
> studies.  She has several co-morbid medical conditions/impairments, one
> of which is musculo-skeletal and has been diagnosed within the last six
> months - SFE have kindly agreed a top-up Needs Assessment for her.
> 
> SFE have also provided us with the relevant extract of the regulations
> which show that this is a reasonable adjustment.
> 
> However, one of the senior academics has queried whether this student
> is now being given an unfair advantage because they have an extended
> period to complete.   A "level playing field" has been mentioned!
> 
> Any thoughts or experiences to share?
> 
> I have a meeting with the Academic on Monday morning so any responses
> gratefully appreciated!  Although I realise Friday pm has to be the
> worst time to ask a question!
> 
> Many thanks
> 
> Jayne
> 
> Jayne Mayers
> Inclusion Officer
> Student Information Centre
> Edge Hill University
> St Helens Road
> Ormskirk
> L39 4QP
> 
> Direct Dial 01695 584190 / 01695 584793
> Extension 4190/4793
> Or email [log in to unmask] (
> mailto:[log in to unmask] )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on an award-winning 160-acre Campus near Liverpool, Edge Hill
> University has over 125 years of history as an innovative, successful
> and distinctive higher education provider.
> 
> • Shortlisted for Times Higher Education University of the Year 2007 and
> 2010
> • Top in the North West for overall student satisfaction (Sunday Times
> University Guide 2011)
> • Second in England for graduate employment (HESA 2009, full
> universities, full and part-time, first and foundation degrees)
> • Top 20 position, and the highest ranked university in 'The Sunday
> Times Best Places to Work in the Public Sector 2010'
> • Grade 1 'outstanding' judgements made in all 33 inspection cells,
> Ofsted Initial Teacher Education inspection report 12/5/2011
> -----------------------------------------------------
> This message is private and confidential. If you have received this
> message in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your
> system. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of Edge Hill or associated
> companies.  Edge Hill University may monitor email traffic data and also
> the content of email for the purposes of security and business
> communications during staff absence.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------