The evidence for digital access is considered with the basis for a reliable conclusion and the limits beyond which it must not extend.
Evidence relevant to digital access
Any conclusion about digital access still requires evidence from the setting concerned.
In the context of digital access, the applicable expectation should be capable of consistent application.
Review of the applicable expectation should follow a stated and reproducible method. Evidence concerning digital access should be relevant to the stated requirement, sufficiently complete for the affected scope, current for the decision period and attributable to a source with knowledge or control of the matter. Volume does not cure a gap in relevance.
For the matter, the most relevant material is likely to include disaggregated participation and outcome data, records of barriers and support, resource allocation by need, and progression and early-warning information. For digital access, confidence is strengthened by corroboration, not by the volume of records drawn from the same underlying source.
Application to digital access
The principal risks in relation to the conclusion are aggregate gains concealing excluded groups, admission without adequate support, support allocated without evidence of need, and completion measures detached from learning. Across the defined scope, a weakness in one part of the control environment may obscure a related failure elsewhere. For digital access, documents should be tested against the decision process they record and the outcome that followed.
- Report limitations in available data, identifying the accountable function and affected scope.
- Review policies that create avoidable exclusion.
- Target support transparently.
- Monitor progression at useful intervals.
- Analyse barriers across the learner journey.
Controls for digital access
A competent review of the applicable requirement should define the proposition to be established, identify the minimum combination of records, test authenticity and reconcile contradictions. Expand the sample where an exception, complaint or material unexplained variation indicates that the initial evidence may not be representative.
Proportionality in relation to the applicable expectation does not mean reduced protection for learners exposed to greater risk. For digital access, equal treatment does not necessarily produce equitable access or outcomes.
Across the defined scope, decisions concerning the matter should remain traceable to the information available for the stated reference period. For digital access, changes in condition, evidence, method and interpretation should be recorded separately when a conclusion is revised.
Review of digital access
Review prompted by the present development should establish how the control moves from stated commitment to accountable implementation and outcome.