• Distributing scanned, image-only documents as standard practice. 

  • Saying 'as you can see here' without describing the content. 

  • Issuing standard equipment without checking it actually fits the student's needs. 

  • Assuming an agreed adjustment has automatically reached everyone delivering a class or exam. 

  • Questioning or overriding a student's own judgement of their own capabilities. 

  • Treating verbal description of visual content as optional rather than routine. 

 

In Practice — A locked, image-only exam paper 

A blind student using a screen reader (a composite, illustrative example) had an agreed adjustment for a screen-reader-compatible exam format, confirmed at the start of the year — but the exam paper itself was distributed as a locked, image-only PDF, and the invigilator on the day had not been told any adjustment was in place. 

What helped: the issue was escalated immediately and an accessible version produced on the day, but the underlying fix was structural: the department moved to producing every exam paper as an accessible, structured document by default, and added a pre-assessment checklist confirming agreed adjustments had reached the specific person delivering each exam. 

The lesson: an adjustment being 'agreed' on paper does not guarantee it is delivered in the room — a verification step is needed, and building accessible formats into the default exam production process removes the need to rely on individual adjustments working perfectly every single time.

Last modified: Friday, 31 July 2026, 1:32 AM