Academic standards and non-discrimination (January 2013)
Briefing: Academic standards and non-discrimination1
Principles
Non-discrimination [ND]: People should not be unfairly discriminated
against in entering or pursuing higher education.
High standards [HS]: Universities should maintain consistently high
standards.
Failing to fulfil [ND] would not only be unfair to the people denied the
opportunity to study or to succeed but would also deny society the benefit of
their talents. Failing to fulfil [HS] would not only devalue the degrees
awarded, it would do a disservice to the people to whom lower standards
were applied.
Fulfilling the two together means providing equal access to high standards of
educational opportunity.
The general approach in equality law
Equality law uses three kinds of provisions:
The first kind of provision addresses principle [ND] by making certain kinds of
discrimination unlawful: that is to say, by protecting individuals with
particular characteristics (such as disability) from less favourable treatment,
and by requiring certain kinds of adjustments where those individuals would
otherwise be put at a disadvantage.
The second kind of provision addresses principle [HS] by providing a tight
definition of an area of activity – the content of the curriculum, which we can
also think about in terms of academic or competence standards – within which
no adjustments need be made. Within this area of activity, it may sometimes
be that some disabled people are at a disadvantage, but this is permitted so
long as it can be objectively justified: it must be demonstrated that the
curriculum content, or the standard set, is a proportionate means to a
legitimate end.
Finally, public bodies are under a positive legal obligation to eliminate
discrimination and promote equality, which means they must anticipate
disabled people’s needs and work towards making provision inclusive from the
outset. This will require effort to review academic standards and the content
of the curriculum to ensure that they are objectively justifiable.
How it works in practice
In this context, when we talk about an ‘academic standard’ or a ‘competence
standard’ we are talking about a criterion which is applied to someone to
An electronic copy is available at
learning.cf.ac.uk/inclusive-curriculum/resources
1
1
Academic standards and non-discrimination (January 2013)
determine whether a benefit should be conferred, and which involves them
demonstrating some level of knowledge, ability or skill. Benefits conferred
include, for instance, admission to a course of study, award of a degree, or
registration as a qualified professional.
Example: Applicants for a degree programme in Economics must demonstrate
a certain level of competence in mathematics in order to be admitted.
Example: First-year physiotherapy students must be able to use palpation on
a human subject to identify specific anatomical features in order to progress
to the second year of the degree programme.
Example: Law students must demonstrate a certain standard of knowledge of
specified areas of law in order to obtain a qualifying law degree.
It is important to distinguish the academic or competence standard itself from
the way in which someone demonstrates that they meet the relevant
standard. Only the standard itself is immune from adjustment. Some
standards are relatively independent of the method of assessment, in which
case there may be several ways to assess someone’s level of achievement. In
other cases, the method of assessment is intrinsically connected to the nature
of the skill or ability to be demonstrated.
Example: At University Y, applicants for the economics programme usually
get a good pass in A-level maths. However, ‘having A-level maths’ is not an
academic standard: it is simply one way to demonstrate one’s level of
competence in mathematics. Possessing another recognised qualification in
maths, or successfully completing an Access course, might also demonstrate
that someone meets the relevant standard.
Example: At University Z, first-year physiotherapy students must successfully
complete a directly observed practical skills assessment involving the use of
palpation to identify specific anatomical features. The assessment task is
designed to rely only on the skill being assessed. Here, the method of
assessment is intrinsically connected to the skill in question, so no other
method of assessment would be appropriate.
Example: At University X, law students’ knowledge is ordinarily demonstrated
in an unseen timed written examination. However, the ability to produce
legible handwritten text in a limited time is not part of the academic
standard being evaluated. The academic standard is the level of knowledge,
which might equally well be assessed in an oral test, such as a viva.
2
Academic standards and non-discrimination (January 2013)
Most importantly, there is an objective test for whether a particular standard
is of a kind which is properly protected from the need to make adjustments.
This means that Universities and qualifications bodies cannot simply claim
that something is an academic standard because they define it as such. It
must be a criterion which is
 applied to everyone on whom the benefit is conferred;
 appropriate and necessary; and
 its application must be a proportionate means to a legitimate end.
Example: Ensuring that students embarking on a course of study have the
knowledge and skills which will be necessary if they are to engage with the
learning activities is a legitimate aim. It is appropriate and necessary to
require some proof of applicants’ level of knowledge and skill. However,
there is no single test which is the only appropriate measure of their
knowledge and skill, so a requirement for A-level maths, in particular, would
not be objectively justifiable.
Example: Physio students who begin the second year without basic skills in
anatomy, including palpation, will be unable to participate in essential
learning activities while on clinical placement. It is a legitimate aim to
ensure that students demonstrate those skills before permitting them to
proceed to the second year. A practical skills assessment is a necessary and
appropriate way of achieving this.
Example: Having competent, qualified lawyers is a legitimate aim. Requiring
them to meet a certain standard of knowledge in the course of qualifying is an
appropriate means to that end. It is necessary to assess their achievement of
that standard before awarding them the degree. The application of the
relevant standard is therefore objectively justified. However, it is not
necessary that the demonstration be by means of an unseen timed written
examination, since achievement of the standard could be demonstrated in
other ways. Therefore, if using an unseen timed written examination places a
disabled person at a substantial disadvantage for a reason arising from their
disability, it will be unlawful discrimination.
Q: Is a learning outcome always an academic or competence standard?
A: It often will be, but only if the learning outcome can be objectively
justified in the relevant way (outlined above). This means looking at how
learning outcomes are articulated to make sure they don’t build in
unnecessary hurdles.
3
Academic standards and non-discrimination (January 2013)
Q: ‘Graduateness’, employability and transferable skills: can it be an
objectively justifiable academic standard to require history students to
gain skills in oral presentation? (These are found in subject benchmark
statements and in ‘employability profiles’ such as those at
www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/learning/employability/disciplines )
A: This needs to be addressed with some care. At first sight, it is hard to see
how a requirement for fluency and clarity of oral expression is necessary for a
history degree, and it could result in less favourable treatment of – for
instance – Deaf students and students with speech impairments. However,
the relevant passage in the subject benchmark statement for history reads:
Marshalling of argument: in written and oral form drawing on and presenting
all the above skills. Such argument should have structure; it should be
relevant and concise. In the case of written argument it should be expressed
in clear, lucid and coherent prose. Orally, it should involve the capacity to
sustain a reasoned line of argument in the face of others, to listen, to
engage in sustained debate, and amend views as necessary in the light of
evidence and argument
And in relation to assessment,
6.15 Departments should also consider whether single-honours students
should be given the opportunity to have their critical and communication
skills assessed in other forms. The development of oral communication skills
is important in the process of educating a historian and students should,
where practicable, have opportunity to be assessed on this skill. Oral
presentations can be of different types including, for example: formal paper
delivered to a group; general contribution to seminar discussion; chairing or
otherwise leading seminar discussion; and response to contributions made by
others.2
This makes it clearer that the emphasis is not so much on the mechanics of
producing speech but on the ability to communicate face-to-face or in real
time, in a context where questions and arguments must be developed and
responded to on the spot. Someone who uses a communication support
worker (such as a sign language interpreter) or assistive technology could
demonstrate this skill effectively. It is also clear that no single method of
assessment for this skill is recommended, much less required.
In this case, references to oral and spoken communication are unnecessarily
prescriptive about how face-to-face communication can be accomplished, and
are likely to mean the statements are not justifiable competence standards.
However, they could be rephrased to avoid these references while still
capturing the skills which it appears they were intended to capture.
Suggestions for improving this document are always welcome: please send to
Iain Mossman, Curriculum Design Officer, Cardiff University
at mossmanij@cardiff.ac.uk
2
www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/Subject-benchmarkstatement-History.aspx
4