Equality of opportunity

Various legislation has come into effect in recent years, which supports the Government's drive for wider participation in learning with the aim of creating a more competitive workforce.  Legislation, regulations and national strategy provide a framework aimed at delivering equality of opportunity for all learners, irrespective of their age, sex, religion, sexual orientation, and whether or not they have a disability, learning difficulty or any other characteristic. Legislation, which applies in this area within the UK, includes the Race Relations Act, Sex Discrimination Act, Human Rights Act 2000, the Disability Discrimination Act, and the Learning and Skills Act 2000. 

The AAT firmly believes in equality of opportunity for all who participate in its qualifications. To this end, we aim to ensure that:

  • our qualifications are free from barriers that restrict access and progression, i.e. they are attainable by all who can demonstrate the required standard by whatever means
  • our qualifications and publications are free from discriminatory practices and/or stereotypes with regard to gender, race, age, creed or sexual orientation
  • assessment tasks and study opportunities are sufficiently varied and flexible to ensure that no particular group of students or would-be students is placed at any disadvantage
  • all reasonable adjustments are made to cater for the individual requirements of students
  • assessments are valid and reliable to ensure that all students receive impartial treatment.

All centres must have an equal opportunities policy. This should be available to centre staff and students alike so as to advise them on equal opportunities in addition to the centre's complaints and appeals procedures. This is a basic requirement of AAT centre approval. Centres need to review their policy, provision and approaches on a regular basis to ensure that best practice is being used and that they comply with the Acts and regulations.  It also makes good business sense for centres to ensure that they are customer-focussed in addressing the needs of their students.

In a few instances we have found that individual centre staff have not been able to locate the centre's policy on equal opportunity, so it is useful to have a centralised folder that holds such basic information.  Centres, particularly those offering a range of NVQs/SVQs, will also have established initial assessment procedures.  Where different departments are offering similar programmes it is useful to consult and exchange best practice information.  Examples of this not happening are centres that are criticised for weak initial assessment within one department by ALI (Adult Learning Inspectorate), whilst another department is being held by the DfES (Department of Education and Skills) as an example of good practice for the same aspect.

Further education providers and many other centres often have sound provision catering for students with learning difficulties, visual or learning impairment, mental illness, numeracy or literacy needs, or for whom English is a second language.  However, increasingly the emphasis is not just on the delivery of programmes that cater for these different needs, but also the evaluation and reporting on such provision.  It is therefore useful to have an organisation-wide strategy that ensures best practice and avoids a duplication of information. The Exams Officer is often a good centralised source for records on individual candidates and could be a key person to involve in the collation and review of data on equality and access.

Centres need to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their equal opportunities policy. The following are the types of questions that your centre should be addressing.

  • How is the equal opportunity policy implemented and monitored?
  • Does the centre maintain a centralised source of statistical data for reporting to ALI, DfES and others?
  • What is the centre's policy on eligibility of candidates into the AAT programme?
  • How far does the take-up reflect local employment patterns?
  • Are there differences in take-up by candidates of different backgrounds?
  • To what extent does the centre cater for full-time and part-time students?
  • Does the centre actually look at barriers to qualifications (e.g. costs, lack of local awareness of course, lack of employer support, timing issues)?
  • Does the centre provide key skills support at all levels of the AAT programme?
  • Does the centre use IT, simulations and other approaches to widen access?
  • Does the centre actively support assessors with the necessary resources in enabling them to assist with students with special considerations?

It is useful to note that frequent weaknesses identified by ALI include a lack of consistent application of policy and procedures across staff and a lack of record keeping. Overall, we recognise that centres work hard to cater for the needs of the diverse range of students who present themselves, using a range of methods and approaches.