Published on 12, July, 2020
Hey Guys, thanks in advance for listening. I've been refused a place on a secondary English PGCE Programme at a prestigious University because in their exact words:
One key area that we felt made our course not right for you relates to spoken communication. We felt that you would need to work on how you respond to and include others in group discussion activities, as well as maintaining focus spoken discussion.
They are aware that I have ASD and ADHD. I have asked them to reconsider and asked if as this was the only reason and they were again in their words aware that I had very many talents, could I complete a fitness to teach assessment as this is part of their policy. I'm already a lecturer at a local college and a guest lecturer at universities.
They have just emailed to say they will not reconsider and if I am unhappy I need to make a formal complaint.
Does anyone have any thoughts and is there anywhere I can approach to assist me in making a complaint as I struggle with forms?
Many thanks
Emma
Here is the feedback from the lecturer who interviewed me.
I’m very happy to share a summary of positive feedback. The areas where you scored well were:
You also had sufficient scores in subject knowledge and resilience.
I have also included a copy of my interview record.
application –strengthsPart time Business lecturer (teaching 16+)Youth group leader (up to age 12ish)Creative and Professional writing 2:1 predict PlymouthGCSE B/CExcellent written personal statement – high quality of written communication, with focus on supporting disadvantaged students, success for all etc
Application –areas to explore at interviewKnowledge of the full breadth of the English curriculumNo A level
Interview –subject knowledgeDiscussed grammar as a subject knowledge needDiscussed strengths and limitations of knowledge against the curriculum –strong on literary historical and social context; keen on classical literature; has researched literature on the curriculum e.g. Lord of the Flies, Christmas Carol, Gatsby etc. Discussed how the degree included study of literature in order to feed into understanding of writing, and writer craft. Also strong on genres of writing and media studies (has studied podcasting, audio-video); has also taught debate and pitching. Also studied Multicultural Lit.SK target – grammar; Shakespeare.Excited to teach use of language – example of microteaching loan words and portmanteau. Also looking forward to teaching literary classics; Dickens and the sociocultural context.Interview-understanding of the current educational policy context, including any subject-specific curriculum developmentsHas been researching KS3/4 using e.g. BBC Bitesize. Aware of multicultural literature as a priority/debate area at the moment.
Interview –understanding of the role of trainee teacher/teacher in the safeguarding of children Discussed the importance of boundaries and roles.Has done safeguarding course and professional boundaries course for FE teaching; aware of policies, key procedures.Interview –ability to reflect on prior experience Discussed experience of teaching nonnative speakers and students from disadvantaged backgrounds.Asked re. difference between lecturing and teaching in school – discussed wanting to work with young people before they are alienated. Asked re. shared planning and shared teaching. Asked re. how many students teachers will be expected to teach? Suggested students may be less independent. More of a full picture of the student e.g. through communication with parents at school. Capacity for reflection though losing train / focus often; understanding of schools and reflection on what it’s like to work in a school context is less strongInterview –organisation including planning and preparation for interviewWell organised
Interview –organisation including planning and preparation for interviewWell organised presentation. Other tasks were not completed e.g. prior experience form.Interview –communication and interpersonal styleincluding empathy with young peopleGood oral presentation; dominated in discussion task to the detriment of other participants. Very nervous in interview and struggled to maintain focus on questions asked.Clear empathy with students - discussed how to help students engage with classical literature, with example of Christmas Carol – focus on understanding and relating to characters, looking at different contexts, look at social issues e.g. around Christmas and presents; making themes as relatable as possible.Interview –resilience and adaptability, including an awareness of the demands of the PGCE route/courseExpects to find organisation and administration challenging, will need adaptations / strategies for managing workload and writing in the moment– discussed the adaptations and strategies currently in place for this.Interview –leadership potential and career aspirationsDream job would be working in special provision, able to use passion for a subject (e.g. English / Drama / History), enabling children to be successful.Interview –aptitude for teachingThere is clear intellectual capacity and desire to support young people, as well as clear capacity to teach post-16 in current role. The issues around communication in the group discussion and interview as well as organisational issues (not completing documents required) and lack of confident understanding of what teaching in school is like gives rise to concerns about aptitude for teaching in a secondary school environment.
I was only invited to interview three working days before, so was not sent accessible prior experience forms which I contacted them about 48 hours before and was given in paper form on the morning of the interview, so should not have been marked down because of that.
From their feedback there are three areas they flagged up in total:
1 - Capacity for reflection though losing train / focus often; understanding of schools and reflection on what it’s like to work in a school context is less strong2 - Expects to find organisation and administration challenging, will need adaptations / strategies for managing workload 3 - The issues around communication in the group discussion and interview as well as organisational issues (not completing documents required) and lack of confident understanding of what teaching in school is like gives rise to concerns about aptitude for teaching in a secondary school environment.
Each of these would work against you and point 2 probably raised red flags that you are likely to be hard work for them (not a fair assessment, but I suspect what they mean).
I can only assume that they had another candidate that met more criteria than you and they got the job over you.
Sometimes the breaks don't go your way, but keep applying and working on any areas you see have room for improvement and you will get the role you dream of.
I mean .1 is textbook ADHD. Both one and two are the kind of things that you would expect to see addressed through reasonable adjustments, additional time for administrative tasks, additional guidance on paperwork etc. neither of them would amount to a fitness to teach issue.
with point 3 it seems like they’ve assumed that because you have difficulty talking and communicating in a interview setting that you also would in a classroom setting. that’s not necessarily this case. making the assumption that difficulty in an interview setting would automatically translate to communication difficulty in a classroom setting could be seen as a form of discrimination. i’ve certainly heard of such assumptions described as discriminatory from time to time. They are after all two very different types of communication.
you’re not supposed to make assumptions about how peoples disabilities will affect them in their work settings; you are supposed to explicitly ask about it, to investigate. it may not of twiged with interviewer 3 that your communication difficulties in interview might have been autism driven. But assuming that someone Will have difficulty with an essential part of the job just because they had difficulty with something different at interview that was caused by their disability is a definite no no.
This is exactly what has happened yes. The deadline for them to respond to the complaint is tomorrow. Everyone keeps telling me to give up it's just an interview. But when you look at the university the students actually have a campaign going as they don't put reasonable adjustments in place for anyone it seems. www.disabilitynewsservice.com/.../
Iain said:To my knowledge we, as autists, are not entitled to be put ahead of other more talented applicants in positions in courses / jobs etc.
If they had said there were better applicants then that would be another matter but they haven’t. in the specific situation they said the course was inappropriate for her because of her skills (or perceived lack of skills) and specifically referenced whether or not she would be able to pass a fitness to teach test.
on that basis if she’d been the only person who applied they’d have still said no. It sounds a lot more like they simply don’t want to make reasonable adjustments for her or that they just think that people like her shouldn’t be teachers.
I missed the original context a bit there. I read the following:
NAS88174 said: I have asked them to reconsider and asked if as this was the only reason and they were again in their words aware that I had very many talents, could I complete a fitness to teach assessment
and thought it was a teaching position when her subsequent replies show it was a teacher training course. My bad.
Emma does point out that it was a prestigious university where I suspect there was a lot of competition for the places, so the same princiles of where she ranked in the application scales will be a part of the decsion making process.
I get the impression their selection process was quite rigerous and it may just be that she was outperforned by enough other applicants to not make the cut.
To my knowledge we, as autists, are not entitled to be put ahead of other more talented applicants in positions in courses / jobs etc. If this is the case and she was not as good as the other successful applicants then it may just have been bad luck. I don't think they would have discriminated just because she was autistic - or if they did, they seem to have successfully covered their bias with other justifications.