How does the Act affect the way in which course criteria and requirements are applied?
8.7 The inclusion of unnecessary or marginal requirements for entry to a course can lead to discrimination.
The entrance requirements for a postgraduate diploma in management stipulate that the application process will assess whether
applicants are ‘active and energetic’, when in fact the course is predominately classroom-based. The requirement could unjustifiably exclude some people whose impairments result in them getting tired more easily than others.
The entrance requirements for a GCSE French course state that applicants ‘must be able to speak clearly’. This requirement could
unjustifiably exclude some people whose
impairments result in a significant effect on their speech.
8.8 Blanket policies (ie policies which do not take account of individual circumstances) can also lead to discrimination. Indeed, such policies are likely to amount to direct discrimination and so be
A higher education institution states that many of its courses require a high level of commitment and that applicants with a history of mental health conditions should not consider applying, believing that such applicants would not be able to cope with the demands of the course. The institution rejects an applicant solely because he has a history of mental health conditions,
without checking the individual’s history of
educational progress. This is likely to amount to direct discrimination and therefore will be
unlawful.
A college states that anyone with an infectious disease cannot take part in a practical cookery course. The college refuses to admit someone with AIDS onto the course, believing him to be a health and safety risk. This action is likely to amount to direct discrimination and be therefore unlawful, as the education provider has not
considered the actual circumstances of the case.
8.9 Stating that a certain personal, medical or health- related characteristic is necessary or preferable can lead to discrimination if the characteristic is not necessary for the course. An education
provider would therefore need to ensure that any such requirements were genuine competence standards essential for the course.
A university requires all applicants for the sports science degree course to have a certain level of fitness. However, this level of fitness is not
actually essential in order to complete the course so it is not a genuine competence standard.
If the university refused to admit a disabled student because he does not have this level of fitness it is likely that the university will be acting unlawfully.
8.10 Likewise, although an education provider is entitled to specify that applicants for a course must have certain qualifications, it will have to show that these are genuine competence
standards required for the course and that the application of the competence standard is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
8.11 If an education provider has a genuine
competence standard for entry onto a course it should show flexibility in accepting different
qualifications which show an individual meets the necessary competence standard. In some
circumstances it might be more legitimate and proportionate to waive the requirement for a particular qualification, if an individual applicant has alternative evidence of the necessary level of competence.
8.12 An education provider may have to justify rejecting a disabled person for lacking a
qualification if the reason why the disabled person lacks it is related to his disability. Justification will involve showing that the particular qualification is either a genuine competence standard (which is applied equally to everyone and which is
proportionate and legitimate), or, where it does not concern application of a competence standard, showing that there is a material and substantial reason for the rejection.
A university specifies that the entrance criteria for its degree courses are usually three A levels and one AS level or an equivalent level of
qualifications. The university rejects a disabled applicant who has five GCSEs, but has no
qualifications at A level or equivalent, due to periods of disability-related absences. If the level of qualification required fairly reflects the level of study of the course, and the course cannot be reasonably altered, it is likely that the university will be justified in rejecting the disabled
applicant.
An adult education college states that it requires a level of English language fluency for entrance onto its courses and specifies a particular test of language fluency that it will accept. An applicant with a speech impairment found that this
particular test did not allow for additional time to be given, and as a result she scored much lower than she should have done on the test. It is likely that the college would be unable to justify
rejecting her for not having the required test result if she could show through an alternative test that she had the relevant level of fluency required.
8.13 When designing a course, an education provider should consider the anticipatory nature of the reasonable adjustments duty (see Chapter 5) and design the course and any assessments to be as accessible as possible. In addition, education
providers should regularly review the way courses are delivered and assessed. Providers will also need to consider these in light of their disability equality duties.
A university designs a new religious studies degree course and specifies that a student’s performance can be assessed through a number of different assessment methods including
written course work, oral presentations and timed examinations. This enables students to choose the assessment method which suits them best and therefore reduces the number of
reasonable adjustments required.