The best education money can buy? Disabled university students and the Equality Act 2010
| Author | Pauline Roberts,Erich Hou |
| Published date | 01 June 2016 |
| Date | 01 June 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1358229116655651 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
The best education
money can buy?
Disabled university
students and the
Pauline Roberts
1
and Erich Hou
2
Abstract
Amid the financial cuts in the public sector and changing academic environment, this
article considers key aspects of the legal and regulatory framework within which a
university is obliged to make ‘reasonable adjustment’ for a disabled student. In particular,
we examine the scope of the 2010 Equality Act for promoting inclusive higher education,
focusing on the duty to make reasonable adjustments and the public-sector equality duty.
At the same time, it is pertinent to consider the relationship between the equality
framework and alternative mechanisms whereby students can challenge the reason-
ableness of university procedure and decision-making, in particular the role of the Office
of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education. Finally, the article considers the
potential for consumer protection legislation to provide an additional focus on achieving
an inclusive educational environment for disabled university students.
Keywords
Equality, disability, higher education, reasonable adjustments, public-sector equality duty,
consumer protection, inclusive education
1
Cardiff School of Law and Politics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland
2
Faculty of Business and Society, University of South Wales, Treforest, United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland
Corresponding author:
Pauline Roberts, Cardiff School of Law and Politics, Cardiff University, Law Building, Museum
Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3AX, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Email: robertspi@cardiff.ac.uk
International Journalof
Discrimination and theLaw
2016, Vol. 16(2-3) 143–160
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1358229116655651
jdi.sagepub.com
Introduction
The Equality Act 2010 (EA2010) imposes obligations on higher education institutions
(HEIs) in England and Wales not to discriminate against students with disabilities. This
article developed from the reflections of a junior lecturer upon his responsibility in
relation to his employer’s legal duty, under section 20 of the EA2010, to reasonably
accommodate several present and past university students with disabilities. The main
purpose of the article is twofold: first, it examines the scope of the duty to make
reasonable adjustments in the context of higher education, with discussion of how HEIs
may discharge their obligations under the EA2010; second, there is consideration of the
advantages and limitations of alternative forms of action which may be available to a
student seeking redress for a university’s failure to make accommodation.
There are a number of themes within both the legal framework and government
higher education policy, which merit a brief discussion in order to set the context for
the subsequent discussion and analysis of the section 20 duty. First, the relationship
between a student and her university reflects the dual public/private nature of uni-
versities. For example, most universities in England and Wales are regarded as
public bodies, as highlighted by the EA2010 public-sector equality duty (PSED),
which imposes an obligation on universities to have a due regard to the need to
advance equality of opportunity. On the other hand, the steep rise in the cost to the
student of higher education, and the developing relationship between the student as
consumer and the university as seller of education services, place the spotlight on
the private contract between the student and her university. Indeed, the student-
consumer may be more focused on whether the university is providing ‘the best
education money can buy’ than on the university’s obligations under the EA2010.
Universities may fear the burden of increased costs in complying with the expanded
legal and regulatory framework while, from the student’s perspective, there is also
uncertainty surrounding the provision of the disability students’ allowances (DSAs).
1
The DSAs are, at the moment, still available whereby individual students may seek
financial assistance to help them to meet the additional costs they may incur because
of their disabilities.
Finally, the section 20 duty of reasonable adjustment can be linked with the concept
of ‘inclusive education’ enshrined in Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the
2
According to educationalists Topping and Maloney
(2005, p. 2), the social-engineering agenda of inclusive education started its life with
special educational needs (SENs). Under the influence of human rights (parti cularly
through the overarching concepts of equality and diversity; Hammarberg, 2011), the
new educational model of inclusion (for disabled students to integrate into mainstream
secondary education) has gradually replaced the previous segregated one (special
schools). During the transformation of this discourse, particularly in the United King-
dom, the United States, Canada and Australia, equality legislation such as the EA2010 in
the United Kingdom has played an integral part in changing society (Hepple, 2014).
Topping and Maloney (2005, p. 5) affirm that ‘[a]ll commentators now agree that
inclusion should mean much more than the mere physical presence of pupils with SENs
in mainstream schools’.
144 International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 16(2-3)
To continue reading
Request your trial