Beyond Reasonable Adjustments: Transforming Assessment for Meaningful Inclusion is a collaborative project funded by the OfS through its Equality in Higher Education Innovation Fund.
The project is delivered in partnership with ASU London, Norland University of Early Childhood, Richmond American University London, Independent Higher Education, Applied Inspiration, Disabled Students UK and the National Association of Disability Practitioners (NADP). It explores how assessment choice and a self-reflection tool identifying students’ assessment preferences can improve their experiences and outcomes.
We’re now halfway through the project, and midway findings suggest that greater choice in assessment format can make a positive difference to how students experience learning and feel about their studies.
Starting point: The evidence base
The sector has a well-established framework for supporting students through reasonable adjustments, but evidence suggests this approach alone leaves significant gaps. The Access Insights Report (2023), which surveyed over 1,300 disabled students across 107 UK universities, found that 49% felt they received lower marks due to inaccessible assessments. Only 12% had access to alternative assessments. More starkly, just 35% of students reported that the adjustments they needed were actually applied.
The challenge isn't simply lack of availability. Not all students disclose a disability, either because they are unaware they have one or because disclosure can feel risky. When students do seek adjustments, the process itself can create an additional administrative burden and be distressing for those already vulnerable. The evidence therefore points to the need for a different approach.
Research by O'Neill and Padden (2022) involving 30,000 students found increased engagement and empowerment when assessments were diversified rather than adjusted after the fact. Inclusion cannot be achieved through individual adjustments alone. A student-centred education system must configure assessment so that more students can succeed from the outset. This premise underpins the project.
Our work reflects a wider challenge facing the sector: higher education providers are rightly expected to deliver positive student experiences and strong outcomes while meeting the needs of an increasingly diverse student body with varied experiences, learning preferences and routes into higher education. While the data show increasing diversity at the point of access, inequalities in outcomes persist. We argue that reconceptualising assessment can play a role in tackling these gaps, moving inclusion from a retrospective adjustment to a principle embedded from the outset.
A student-centred education system must configure assessment so that more students can succeed from the outset
What we have learnt so far
During the first year of the project, providers piloted inclusive assessment through choice of format in selected modules. For example, students were able to demonstrate their learning through a live or pre-recorded presentation or through a formal essay. Evaluation findings from year one offer encouraging, albeit still emerging, evidence that assessment choice can have a positive impact.
We compared students’ perceptions before and after the intervention, looking at assessment, assessment choice and their ability to demonstrate learning. Students became significantly more likely to agree that assessments were relevant to real life, with agreement rising from 2.48 to 3.46 on a five-point scale. When students see assessment as relevant to real-world practice, their experience feels more meaningful. Students also reported improvements in perceptions of fairness and assessment fit.
Working backwards from outcomes to mechanisms
While student perceptions improved significantly, the data do not yet show measurable gains in attainment. This makes the next stage of the research particularly important. In year two, alongside continuing to collect attainment data, we are expanding our focus and using a Theory of Change to investigate the mechanisms behind the changes we are seeing.
Outcomes are shaped by multiple factors, including prior experience, confidence, belonging and institutional culture, and single interventions rarely affect attainment in isolation. The challenge, therefore, is to understand how inclusive assessment contributes to the student experience and the conditions that make it effective. This understanding is essential both for implementation at scale and for managing expectations about what assessment change can achieve alongside wider institutional efforts.
Theorising change
In the project’s second year, the focus will move beyond whether inclusive assessment works to understanding why it works, for whom, and under what conditions. We will develop a Theory of Change mapping the relationships between assessment design, student perceptions, contextual influences and educational outcomes. Our aim is to create a framework that explains how inclusive assessment creates impact and how this may differ across institutional settings.
The three participating IHE Member institutions highlight different dimensions of inclusive practice. Independent providers are developing innovative approaches to student-centred assessment practice, and the three project partners exemplify different aspects of that work:
- At ASU London, parity between assessment formats and differences in technical skills are emerging as important considerations.
- At Norland University of Early Childhood, competency standards and professional identity are central.
- Evidence from Richmond American University London suggests that authenticity may be a more important driver than assessment choice alone.
The proposed Theory of Change will provide a shared causal framework while recognising these distinct institutional contexts. Further focus groups, student polling and outcomes analysis will test and refine the model, building a stronger understanding of what makes inclusive assessment effective in practice.
This has relevance well beyond the project partners. A better understanding of the mechanisms that drive positive student experiences and outcomes can help institutions make more informed decisions about curriculum design, quality enhancement and resource allocation.
At a time of increasing scrutiny of access, participation and student outcomes, understanding why an intervention works, for whom and in what context may ultimately be as important as demonstrating whether it works. That is a challenge for every provider, regardless of size or mission.