News that dyslexic medical student Naomi Gadian is taking legal action against the General Medical Council, claiming that multiple choice tests discriminate against those with learning difficulties, potentially has huge repercussions for the learning industry, says Linda Loader.
Student Naomi Gadian is dyslexic and claims that the use of multiple choice tests in her medical training at The Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry is unfair. In common with other undergraduate medical training, students must pass all examinations if they are to be allowed to progress their studies from year to year and the use of multiple choice questions, primarily delivered online, are alleged to be discriminatory. The college has said it makes a reasonable adjustment by allowing Ms Gadian and other dyslexic students additional time on the tests, but Ms Gadian's solicitor John McKenzie - speaking to the BBC as well as to the Guardian - is very clear about the issues in this case. "Every professional body or employer who relies for a professional qualification, or as a promotional gateway, on multiple choice questions is heading for a fall," he said.
"Employees don't come with four-option multiple choice questions pinned to their chests and using this method as a means of judging competence is flawed."Using a 'one size fits all' approach to learning and development – and especially to assessment - is potentially problematic. Giving alternatives which make learning accessible is at the heart of how elearning providers should be helping their clients provide fair and equal treatment for everyone who uses their learning programmes.
This issue could be very significant indeed. If this case is successful then the precedent has been set. For many years, vendors of learning management systems and rapid elearning authoring tools have stressed the benefits of being able to use online tests – usually using multiple choice questions – as a means of ensuring learners only progress after having achieved a common level of understanding.
In fact, most LMS's rely to a large extent on limiting access to modules and courses until online tests have been passed. If this becomes case law, the use of multiple choice tools in this way could effectively be outlawed.
Customers or employees don't come with four-option multiple choice questions pinned to their chests and using this method as a means of judging competence is flawed. Interestingly, Naomi Gadian has said exactly the same thing about how multiple choice quizzes can't possibly reflect her true competence as a doctor.
The implications for the whole of the elearning industry are potentially enormous, especially in areas which have seen significant growth - such as legislative compliance and meeting the requirements placed on businesses by various regulators.
For some of us, we have always worried that Disability Discrimination Act compliance in elearning has been heavily focused on meeting the needs of certain groups. In a recent strategic piece for Her Majesty's Prison Service we made exactly this point that dyslexics, and others with recognised reading difficulties, are potentially far more numerous than those with visual impairment or motor skills disabilities which would prevent them using a computer mouse. Yet the focus in the industry has been that if we make learning which meets some kind of electronic standard for accessibility we will be protected under the law. This ignores the learning needs of these and other individuals with various – often hidden – learning disabilities.
If Ms Gadian's action is successful or not, it is high time that those organisations using elearning took a long hard look at these practices and come up with a more creative and intelligent solution than multiple choice assessments.
Read Linda's previous opinion piece on elearning: Crisis, what crisis? The future of elearning
Linda Loader is the managing director of infinity. For more information email or telephone 01280 822082
