In a landmark ruling by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, Oxford Brookes is to be forced to compensate a group of trainee osteopaths. Phil Baty reports
The student complaints watchdog is set to order Oxford Brookes University to pay about £250,000 to a group of students for "failings in educational standards" that left them "distressed" and losing out on career opportunities.
In an unprecedented baring of teeth likely to send shock waves across the sector, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator has upheld complaints from a group of about 25 students who began four-year osteopathy degrees at Oxford Brookes in 1998 and 1999.
The university repeatedly failed to gain the professional accreditation for their BSc course, which they needed to practise as osteopaths. The students claimed this was a breach of contract and a breach of duty of care.
In a provisional judgment leaked to The Times Higher , the OIA says the students should be offered at least £9,000 each, including:
* £1,500 in respect of "the acknowledged failings in the curriculum and educational standards provided"
* £2,000 for the "inconvenience and stress" suffered
* £5,000 for "the loss of an opportunity to students to improve their earning power through professional accreditation earlier than was possible".
The Times Higher first reported on the students' case in May 2003.
Originally, 37 students in the two cohorts were affected and the OIA said this week that payment should be made to "all those involved". But undisclosed numbers have reached individual settlements, and it is understood that about 25 remain. The university insisted that the total payout would be less than Pounds 250,000, but refused to confirm the final sum.
The Osteopaths Act of 1993 set up the General Osteopathic Council to regulate the profession and register practitioners. From 2000, all courses leading to professional status had to be accredited by the GOC, and only graduates of courses with "recognised qualification" status could practise as osteopaths.
The university sought accreditation in 2000 but withdrew its application when the GOC indicated that it was "unlikely to succeed". Oxford Brookes began restructuring, and no students were admitted in 2001. It agreed to postpone a 2001 application after it was again told it was unlikely to succeed. In the event, the university did not apply for accreditation until two years later. It eventually received it in November 2003.
The 1998 and 1999 cohorts of students had to take an extra course, paid for by the university, with the accredited College of Osteopaths to allow them to register as practitioners. This delayed the 1998 cohort from starting to practise by more than one year, and the 1999 cohort by several months.
In February 2003, the university rejected the students' complaint that it had failed in its duty of care, but offered an ex gratia payment of up to Pounds 5,000, depending on circumstances. Some students accepted the money, but others sought a review of the university's verdict.
In January 2004, the review decided that Oxford Brooke's decision to reject the complaint was "unreasonable", recommending that the offer of ex gratia payments be revisited. Again, some students accepted the revised offer, but a final few turned to the OIA.
In the provisional judgment, Alison MacDougall, assistant adjudicator at the OIA, says the material given to the students "makes it clear that the course was vocational and designed for mature students seeking a professional qualification". It was reasonable for students to expect the course would allow them to join the professional register, she says.
She says the university "failed to inform itself sufficiently of the GOC's requirements and failed to ensure that a credible application was made".
She found that new management "turned the situation around" in mid-2002, but before that it had been "mismanaged" and the curriculum had "failed to provide a course capable of meeting recognised qualification standards, including acknowledged failings in educational and teaching standards".
The adjudicator also found that the university had not been open with the students. "Although there is no reason to believe that individual members of staff were acting in bad faith, I am concerned that they generated a misleading impression of progress over... two years."
To the students' complaints, the adjudicator added one of her own: she says the university failed to adhere to its student complaints procedures - it delayed hearing their formal complaint for almost two years after it was first made.
An Oxford Brookes representative said: "A provisional decision has been received by the university from the OIA. The university welcomes the resolution of the students' complaint by the OIA and will act upon the OIA's recommendations as soon as the decision has been finalised.
"The university is pleased that the OIA acknowledges the significant restructuring of the course that was undertaken to enable it to successfully apply for recognised qualification status. The university is also grateful that the OIA recognises the considerable efforts it made to provide an alternative route to registration... "During the restructuring of the course in 2002, the management and quality procedures were also reviewed, and the university has every confidence that the current management arrangements will continue to deliver a high-quality, professionally recognised course."