The Abrahart Framework: A compliance model for UK universities on the anticipatory duty to disabled students after University of Bristol v Abrahart

May combine two claims.

In Abrahart, the competence standard exemption did not apply to the oral presentation because the requirement was to demonstrate scientific knowledge and the ability to communicate it, and written or pre-recorded video presentations were alternative methods.

“Applied to the Abrahart facts, the requirement was to demonstrate scientific knowledge and the ability to communicate it.The oral presentation was one method of doing so.A written presentation or a presentation made through pre-recorded video was another.The Court held that the competence standard exemption did not apply.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Oral presentations and vivas are the assessment format closest to the Abrahart facts.

“Oral presentations and vivas are the format closest to the Abrahart facts.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The pillars can be operated in a way that includes pastoral pathways and out-of-assessment support.

“The pillars can be operated in a way that includes pastoral pathways and out-of-assessment support.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

The case for shifting responsibility from the student to the institution is the case the Court of Appeal accepted.

“The case for the shift is the case the Court of Appeal accepted.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A periodic audit produces an artefact: the institution has a record of having conducted the analysis.

“The first is an artefact.The institution has a record of having conducted the analysis.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The literature on institutional compliance is uniform that explicit allocation is the difference between a framework that operates and a framework that exists on paper.

“The literature on institutional compliance is uniform on the point: explicit allocation is the difference between a framework that operates and a framework that exists on paper (Hutter, 2011).”

• cites Hutter, 2011Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The Pillar 3 protocol moves from staff observation through institutional response to a retained evidence record without requiring the student to initiate a formal disclosure as a precondition.

“The protocol moves from staff observation through institutional response to a retained evidence record without requiring the student to initiate a formal disclosure as a precondition.”

May combine two claims.

The framework does not transform institutional culture, and it does not in itself reduce the gap between what universities aspire to and what they deliver.

“It does not transform institutional culture, and it does not in itself reduce the gap between what universities aspire to and what they deliver.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Implementing the Abrahart Framework requires institutional decisions that cannot be delegated to a single committee.

“Implementing the framework requires institutional decisions that cannot be delegated to a single committee.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The Abrahart Framework offers an eighteen-month implementation cycle organised around three milestones.

“The framework offers an eighteen-month implementation cycle organised around three milestones (Figure 4).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

In most subjects, the underlying competence of command of material and ability to construct an argument is not inextricably linked to oral delivery.

“In most subjects the underlying competence (command of material, ability to construct an argument) is not inextricably linked to oral delivery.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The Abrahart Framework requires that every programme conduct a periodic audit of its assessment methods, with a written outcome that can be produced for institutional and external review.

“The framework requires that every programme conduct a periodic audit of its assessment methods, with a written outcome that can be produced for institutional and external review.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

The competence standards test addresses the Schedule 13(4) exemption from the duty to make reasonable adjustments and applies the 'inextricable link' analysis the Court of Appeal endorsed.

“The test addresses the Schedule 13(4) exemption from the duty to make reasonable adjustments and applies the 'inextricable link' analysis the Court of Appeal endorsed.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The Abrahart Framework is designed to operate across the disciplinary spread of UK higher education.

“The framework is designed to operate across the disciplinary spread of UK higher education.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Where the institution's response to a student is contested, the contest must run through a route the student can use.

“Where the institution's response to a student is contested, the contest must run through a route the student can use.”

May combine two claims.

The framework is consistent with the wider Equality Act provisions but does not replace them.

“The framework is consistent with them but does not replace them.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

A periodic audit produces a learning opportunity.

“The second is a learning opportunity.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Programmes that audit their assessment methods find, repeatedly, that some methods cannot be defended once the analysis is conducted.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The framework does not directly address the public sector equality duty under section 149, the direct and indirect discrimination provisions in sections 13 and 19, or the harassment and victimisation provisions in sections 26 and 27.

“It does not directly address the public sector equality duty under section 149, the direct and indirect discrimination provisions in sections 13 and 19, or the harassment and victimisation provisions in sections 26 and 27.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

The pillar's outcome is the document a quality regulator, an Equality and Human Rights Commission inquiry, or a court would ask to see.

“The pillar's outcome is the document a quality regulator, an Equality and Human Rights Commission inquiry, or a court would ask to see.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The time required by the Abrahart Framework is not new in kind but is new in scale.

“The time is not new in kind but it is new in scale.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Faculty disability leads operating the constructive knowledge protocol need to understand the legal threshold.

“Faculty disability leads operating the constructive knowledge protocol need to understand the legal threshold.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

The framework operationalises the duty the Court of Appeal has identified.

“The framework operationalises the duty the Court of Appeal has identified.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The Office for the Independent Adjudicator handles complaints against higher education providers in England and Wales.

“The Office for the Independent Adjudicator handles complaints against higher education providers in England and Wales.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The Abrahart Framework rests on six pillars: anticipatory design of assessment, a structured competence standards test, a constructive knowledge protocol that does not depend on formal disclosure, a periodic audit of assessment methods, explicit allocation of governance responsibility, and an accessible complaints route.

“It rests on six pillars: anticipatory design of assessment, a structured competence standards test, a constructive knowledge protocol that does not depend on formal disclosure, a periodic audit of assessment methods, explicit allocation of governance responsibility, and an accessible complaints route.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The framework is not a substitute for cultural change in UK higher education on the treatment of disabled students.

“It is not a substitute for cultural change in UK higher education on the treatment of disabled students.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The complaints pillar's function is to make sure such a route exists.

“The pillar's function is to make sure such a route exists.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Universities that have not adopted the Abrahart Framework cannot show, when asked, what they did.

“Universities that have not, cannot.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The framework adds a specific Abrahart item to existing programme review cycles.

“The framework adds a specific Abrahart item to those cycles.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Most UK universities have annual or triennial cycles for programme-level review at which assessment is already considered.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The framework deliberately resists the language of confidentiality protocols that would force the institution to behave as though it did not know.

“The framework deliberately resists the language of confidentiality protocols that would force the institution to behave as though it did not know.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Constructive knowledge means knowledge the institution could reasonably be expected to have, not knowledge it actually held.

“Constructive knowledge means knowledge the institution could reasonably be expected to have, not knowledge it actually held.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Abrahart was a mental health case.

“Abrahart was a mental health case.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

Institutional service leads coordinating the framework's outputs need to understand the compliance architecture as a whole.

“Institutional service leads coordinating the framework's outputs need to understand the compliance architecture as a whole.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The framework's operation produces evidence.

“The framework's operation produces evidence.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The complaints pillar's contribution is to make the framework defensible from below.

“The pillar's contribution is to make the framework defensible from below.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The disability lead is the link between the academic side and the central disability service.

“The disability lead is the link between the academic side and the central disability service.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

The framework's recording route is consistent with Section 20 not requiring a formal disclosure as a precondition.

“The framework's recording route is consistent with that.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

The programme director is the person closest to the academic content and best placed to apply the inextricable-link test.

“It is reasonable to allocate this responsibility because the programme director is the person closest to the academic content and best placed to apply the inextricable-link test.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The Abrahart Framework requires staff time, particularly from programme directors and disability leads.

“The framework requires staff time, particularly from programme directors and disability leads.”

May combine two claims.

The duty to disabled students is statutory and the resource for disability services is the cost of compliance.

“the duty is statutory and the resource is the cost of compliance.”

• cites Equality Act 2010Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The institutional review route's existence is the institution's response to the structural risk that a programme will defend a position the institution itself would not.

“The route's existence is the institution's response to the structural risk that a programme will defend a position the institution itself would not.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The framework focuses on the section 20-21 duty in further and higher education contexts.

“The framework focuses on the section 20-21 duty in further and higher education contexts.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

Programme directors carrying out the inextricable-link analysis need to know how to do it.

“Programme directors carrying out the inextricable-link analysis need to know how to do it.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

An institution that has gone through the anticipatory design process for each assessment brief in a programme can demonstrate, on demand, that it has anticipated.

“An institution that has gone through this design process for each assessment brief in a programme can demonstrate, on demand, that it has anticipated.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The record showing that staff flagged a concern, that the relevant body responded within a defined timescale, and that an adjustment was made or the reason no adjustment was made protects the institution against the Abrahart line of argument that internal procedures were in place but produced no anticipatory response.

“The record protects the institution against precisely the Abrahart line of argument: that internal procedures were in place but produced no anticipatory response.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

If institutions resource the disability service appropriately, the Abrahart Framework operates; if they do not, the framework collapses into a documentation exercise.

“Where institutions resource the disability service appropriately, the framework operates.Where they do not, the framework collapses into a documentation exercise.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The record protects the institution and demonstrates institutional response to the duty.

“The record protects the institution and demonstrates institutional response to the duty.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The framework can be operated narrowly or broadly, depending on what the institution wants to achieve.

“The framework can be operated narrowly or broadly.It depends on what the institution wants to achieve.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Estimating the cost of the Abrahart Framework in advance is difficult.

“Estimating the cost in advance is difficult.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

The three strands of reasoning from the Court of Appeal are not new propositions of law but clarifications that close routes by which universities had, in practice, avoided the substantive demands of the Equality Act 2010.

“They are not new propositions of law.They are clarifications that close routes by which universities had, in practice, avoided the substantive demands of the Equality Act 2010.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The institutional disability service's institution-level role is the consolidation point at which the framework's outputs are assembled into a defensible whole.

“The institution-level role is the consolidation point at which the framework's outputs are assembled into a defensible whole.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The audit becomes a route to assessment reform.

“The audit becomes a route to assessment reform.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Programmes that audit their assessment methods find, repeatedly, that some methods cannot be defended once the analysis is conducted.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Where the institution has constructive knowledge of substantial disadvantage and a forthcoming assessment risks producing it, the institution should take anticipatory action before the assessment.

“Where the institution has constructive knowledge of substantial disadvantage and a forthcoming assessment risks producing it, the institution should take anticipatory action before the assessment.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The Abrahart Framework's contribution is to make the existing legal obligations operational, in a form an institution can adopt, that produces evidence on demand, and that survives the analysis the Court of Appeal applied.

“The framework's contribution is to make those obligations operational, in a form an institution can adopt, that produces evidence on demand, and that survives the analysis the Court of Appeal applied.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The Abrahart Framework's contribution is not to introduce new legal obligations.

“The framework's contribution is not to introduce new legal obligations.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The county court has jurisdiction under section 114 of the Equality Act 2010.

“The county court has jurisdiction under section 114 of the Equality Act 2010.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A framework organised around assessment-by-assessment analysis may underspecify what the cumulative experience of university creates for students with mental health conditions.

“A framework organised around assessment-by-assessment analysis may underspecify what the cumulative experience of university creates for students with mental health conditions.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Mental health conditions are characterised by fluctuation, by under-disclosure, and by the cumulative effect of repeated minor stressors.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

If the constructive knowledge protocol increases the volume of cases the disability service handles, the disability service requires additional resource.

“Where the constructive knowledge protocol increases the volume of cases the disability service handles, the service requires additional resource.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The framework is a substantial part of a response to Abrahart; the remainder is harder, slower, and less amenable to compliance documentation.

“The framework is a substantial part of a response.The remainder is harder, slower, and less amenable to compliance documentation.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has investigation and enforcement powers.

“The Equality and Human Rights Commission has investigation and enforcement powers.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Whether the pillars are operated to include pastoral pathways and out-of-assessment support depends on institutional choice.

“Whether they are depends on institutional choice.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Each allocated role carries a training requirement.

“Allocation has a second implication.Each allocated role carries a training requirement.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

An institution that has the document is in a substantially stronger position than one that does not, irrespective of any particular case.

“An institution that has the document is in a substantially stronger position than one that does not, irrespective of any particular case.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Knowledge is constructive at the point at which a member of staff, in the ordinary course of teaching or pastoral interaction, becomes aware that a student is at substantial disadvantage.

“The framework's answer is that knowledge is constructive at the point at which a member of staff, in the ordinary course of teaching or pastoral interaction, becomes aware that a student is at substantial disadvantage.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

The Abrahart Framework's operation produces evidence.

“framework's operation produces evidence.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Where the competence is collaborative problem-solving, group work is part of the assessment.

“Where the competence is collaborative problem-solving, group work is part of the assessment.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Where the competence is the production of a piece of work that happens to have been produced collaboratively, the assessment can be designed to allow non-group production.

“Where the competence is the production of a piece of work that happens to have been produced collaboratively, the assessment can be designed to allow nongroup production.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The Abrahart Framework's analysis applies to the way the regulator's competence standards are tested by the institution, not to the standards themselves.

“The framework's analysis applies to the way the regulator's competence standards are tested by the institution, not to the standards themselves.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Clinical and professional skills assessments in medicine, dentistry, nursing, and allied health professions are governed by external regulators with their own competence standards.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Whether the evidence produced by the Abrahart Framework is used to defend the institution against future Abrahart-line claims or to drive institutional reform depends on whether the framework's outputs feed into the institution's senior governance.

“Whether that evidence is used to defend the institution against future Abrahart-line claims, or whether it is also used to drive institutional reform, depends on whether the framework's outputs feed into the institution's senior governance.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Where the way the institution tests for in-the-moment clinical reasoning imposes substantial disadvantage on a disabled student, the institution may need to adjust the test, even though the underlying competence remains.

“Where the way the institution tests for in-the-moment clinical reasoning imposes substantial disadvantage on a disabled student, the institution may need to adjust the test, even though the underlying competence remains.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Where the General Medical Council requires demonstration of in-the-moment clinical reasoning, that requirement is binding on the institution.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The Abrahart Framework requires that adaptations for timed written examinations be in pre-approval lists in the assessment brief rather than negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

“The framework requires that these adaptations be in pre-approval lists in the assessment brief rather than negotiated on a case-by-case basis.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Timed written examinations remain widely used and are easily adapted through time extensions, separate rooms, and rest breaks.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Practical and laboratory work in STEM, where the underlying competence often includes the procedural performance itself, requires more careful analysis.

“Practical and laboratory work in STEM, where the underlying competence often includes the procedural performance itself, requires more careful analysis.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Where the inextricable-link analysis concludes that no adaptation is possible, the institution can defend the decision.

“Where the analysis concludes that no adaptation is possible, the institution can defend the decision.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Frameworks that produce evidence that sits in committee minutes without being acted on are themselves at risk of becoming the kind of procedural construction the Court of Appeal in Abrahart identified.

“Frameworks that produce evidence that sits in committee minutes without being acted on are themselves at risk of becoming the kind of procedural construction the Court of Appeal in Abrahart identified.”

• cites AbrahartNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.