Scottish Government Equality Outcomes: Disability Evidence Review

4 Further and Higher Education

4.1 This section summarises the findings on demographics, educational attainment, and barriers to education.

Demographics

4.2 The Equality Challenge Unit's^[17] report on further and higher education in Scotland states that, over the six years to 2011, the proportion of students who chose not to declare their disability status dropped, from 13.3% in 2005/06 to 9.5% in 2010/11. The proportion of students who declared a disability increased from 11.4% in 2005/06, to 13.6% in 2010/11. Dyslexia was the most common impairment type declared in 2010/11 (see Figure 3): 24.3% of students who declared a disability said they have dyslexia.

Figure 3: Students who declared a disability, by impairment type, 2010/11 (Source: Equality Challenge Unit, 2012)

4.3 The Equality Challenge Unit report also offers comparisons for the level of study, the subjects studied, and retention rates. A higher proportion of students studying at further education level have declared a disability (14.5%) than those studying at higher education level (7.9%). Some Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels had markedly higher proportions of students who declared a disability than others. For example, 28.6% of students studying at FE SCQF level 3 have declared a disability, compared with 7.6% of students studying at SCQF level 8.

4.4 In terms of subjects studied, a higher proportion of students studying agriculture declared a disability than any other subject (12.3%). Students studying medicine and dentistry had the lowest rate of students who declared a disability (2.5%), although the total number of students for these subjects is small. Of students who declared a disability,

• 24.1% study creative arts and design,
• 22.2% study business and administrative studies, and
• 10.4% study mathematical and computing science.

4.5 Regarding retention, at higher education level, a higher proportion of students who declared no disability complete their course than students who declared a disability (83.0% and 79.9% respectively). At further education level the gap is smaller: 88.4% of students who declared no disability complete compared with 87.6% of students who declared a disability.

4.6 In the view of the Scottish Funding Council^[18], there is little difference between the distribution of disabilities reported by Scottish domiciled students and Scottish domiciled qualifiers, suggesting that disabled students are just as likely to qualify from their course as those students without disabilities.

Attainment

4.7 The Office for Disability Issues Life Opportunities Survey findings for 2011 show that disabled adults are less likely than non-disabled adults to have degree level qualifications (see Table 3)^[19].

Table 3: Educational attainment by Equality Act disability status, 2009/11 (Source: Office for Disability Issues Life Opportunities Survey, 2011)

4.8 National Indicator data from Scotland Performs ^[20]make similar observations for qualifications at SCQF level 4 or below. In 2010 the proportion of those with a disability who had no or low qualifications was 29%, almost three times the level of those who do not have a disability (11%). However, the fall in the proportion of people with no or low qualifications has been greater for disabled people than for people without a disability. Since 2007 the proportion of disabled people with no or low qualifications has fallen by 3 percentage points, this compares to a fall of 2 percentage points for those without a disability.

4.9 The EHRC Triennial Review ^[21]reports on further education for the UK as a whole. The proportion of students known to have a disability within the further education student population increased from 6.5% in 2004/05 to 8.0% in 2008/09: this rise was entirely due to a rise in the number with "specific learning disabilities" such as dyslexia. Disabled students are as likely to receive a good degree as those not known to have a disability, and this varies little among students with different impairment types: for example, in 2008/09 61% of those who were blind or partially sighted achieved a first or upper second class degree, compared to 65% of those with mental health difficulties and 58% of those with a specific learning difficulty; 62% of students with no known disability achieved these results.

4.10 A report on diversity in the further education workforce in 2005^[22] found virtually no research about staff experiences in relation to disability. The case studies of colleges in this report found that most staff interviewed felt that this area was dealt with effectively and that there was little discrimination, although a small number of disabled interviewees felt that they encountered many difficulties. It was noted in one college that the practical nature of some work would make it unsuitable for people with certain types of impairments, although it was not evident that reasonable adjustments had been fully considered. Most staff felt that access had improved considerably though there were some concerns in relation to specific buildings.

Barriers to education

4.11 The Life Opportunities Survey explores the barriers faced by disabled people in education (Table 4)^[23]. The findings show that transport, lack of support, attitudes of others and health conditions/impairments are all seen as barriers to education for disabled people.

Table 4: Barriers to learning opportunities by impairment status, 2009/11 (Source: Office for Disability Issues Life Opportunities Survey, 2011)

NOTES:
1. See the introduction of this report for the definition of impairment status.
2. Respondents were asked to select all barriers that applied to them from the list of options provided. All respondents regardless of impairment status could select these response options.