Page content

Accessibility and Special Arrangements

  • Inclusive Assessment

    Where feasible, academic staff should aim to design accessible, flexible, non-biased methods of assessment that meet the needs of diverse learners including learners across cultures, and with varied physical and language abilities.

    Non-biased methods

    An assessment threshold should be gauged on achievement of the specified learning outcomes and should not be unduly influenced/weighted by any non-relevant knowledge, skills, or attributes. Additionally, assessment contexts should be equally familiar to all students, using plain language that conveys a common meaning for all students.

    Assessment briefs

    Assessment briefs and instructions must be simple, concise, clear, unambiguous and intuitive. All text and non-text items must be legible, using font size that can be viewed by persons with low vision.

    Inclusive assessment design

    Inclusive assessment design allows all students to meet the learning outcomes through various assessment options without the requirement of adjustments. This flexible design approach might include for example, a portfolio approach, a choice of options approach, or an approach negotiated between the student and member of staff (also see section 6.2).

    Alternative assessment

    Alternative assessment is where a different assessment task is offered to meet the specific needs of an individual student while meeting the same learning outcomes and assessment criteria. An example could be a video presentation rather than a live presentation to a group.

  • Contingent Assessment

    The Special Educational Needs and Disability (NI) Order 2005 extends protection against disability discrimination to people being educated in Northern Ireland. As a ‘responsible body’, the University has a legal responsibility for ensuring that discrimination in education does not take place.

    A disability is defined as ‘a physical or mental impairment which has substantial and long-term, adverse effects on his/her ability to carry out normal day to day activities.’ This definition may include people with a wide range of physical and learning disabilities, mental health or medical conditions.

    In accordance with SENDO (NI) 2005, the University anticipates any barriers which may exist for disabled students by encouraging inclusive, alternative assessment design and through contingent approaches which facilitate reasonable adjustments.

    Where an assessment practice places a disabled student at a substantial disadvantage compared with other students, it is the duty of the University to take such steps as are reasonable to prevent this disadvantage. This duty is both anticipatory and reactive.

    Anticipatory Steps

    Proactively designing inclusive, and accessible assessments will minimise the chance of any student being disadvantage through the assessment process (see section above on inclusive assessment). Proactive inclusive assessment design accommodates the needs for all students including those with undisclosed disabilities and may include elements of student choice in how the learning outcomes are to be achieved.

    Reactive Steps

    Whenever a member of staff within the University (or other associated responsible body) becomes aware of an individual student’s disability, they have a duty to meet that individual requirement by making reasonable adjustments.

    Student Wellbeing AccessAbility Advisers can make reasonable adjustment recommendations (RARs) based on the specific needs of individual students and will communicate these to Schools and Departments. RARs can include the following types of support:

    • Assessment support
    • Learning support
    • Library support
    • Access considerations and physical adaptations
    • Support providers/additional study support
    • Use of assistive technology

    A reasonable adjustment may also mean the provision of an alternative assessment method which enables the same learning outcomes to be met. Furthermore, it is always a reasonable step to grant an exemption from one or more components of an examination or assessment where that exemption is the only reasonable step that could be taken.

    The University is exempt from making reasonable adjustments where competence standards are to be applied.

    Competence Standard

    Equalities legislation define a competence standard as:

    ‘An academic, medical or other standard applied for the purposes of determining whether or not a person has a particular level of competence or ability.’

    Under SENDO 2005 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Higher education institutions are responsible for developing non-discriminatory competence standards and designing programmes to address these standards. Professional qualifications bodies also have a duty not to discriminate against disabled people. Consequently, they are required to review the competence standards for all their qualifications to ensure that the manner in which they are measured (rather than the competence standard itself) does not exclude disabled people from being able to meet them (i.e. bearing in mind what reasonable adjustments could be made to the process without affecting the competency being measured).

    It is important for University staff to liaise with the relevant professional qualifications body to ensure that their competence standards have been reviewed in light of the SENDO Amendment Regulations.

    Further Guidance

  • Assessment Co-Design

    The Student Charter guides staff and students to:

    • Create and encourage collaborative learning opportunities through participation and interaction with staff and students
    • Support and develop a culture of continuous learning and high performance through effective partnership

    Course teams should aim, where possible, to include students as key stakeholders in assessment design. Transparency and open dialogue around assessment will help staff and students to share an understanding about the nature, purpose and process of assessment.

    Approaches to assessment co-design may involve collaborative design of assessment, student choice in assessment, student representation in the quality assurance of assessment, and transparency and shared dialogue around assessment practice to encourage learner engagement and self-regulation. Examples of assessment co-creation may include:

    • Assessment briefings that encourage peer to peer and staff to student dialogue around the nature of the task and the criteria
    • Peer and self-assessment
    • Student co-design of marking rubrics
    • Marking sample assessments
    • Choice between two or more equivalent assessments
    • Students designing a small proportion of exam questions (e.g. Peerwise)
    • Students designing their own artefact to meet the learning outcomes
    • Student stakeholder representation during course design/re-design
    • Effective Student representation mechanisms
    • Course team responding to student feedback on assessment (e.g., ‘you said, we did approach).

    Where students are to collaboratively design a proportion of examination questions, the examination answer plan must indicate:

    • the proportion of emergent questions that will be included in the plan
    • A rationale for their inclusion e.g., student questions selected due to highest relevance with examinable themes