Quiet in Class

Research

UK UNIVERSITY SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS WHO STRUGGLE TO PARTICIPATE IN CLASS – FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS

1. The Study

In May 2021, I submitted Freedom of Information (FOI) Requests to 134 UK Universities asking how they support students who struggle to speak up in class.

The responses revealed systematic gaps in how universities identify and support students with participation challenges.

2. Key Findings

Over 90% of universities expect students who struggle to participate to self-advocate for help

Under 6% have proactive identification systems for struggling students

Approx 70% assess presentation skills in coursework

19% have opt-in family communication systems for crisis situations

60+ universities route communication challenges primarily through medical rather than educational pathways.

3. What we asked

  1. Do you have a policy for identifying/tracking/supporting vulnerable students who do not speak up/struggle to speak? If yes, please can I see this policy.
  2. What support/training is available for a student who self identifies as shy/introvert/socially awkward/prone to anxiety when speaking? Who initiates this support/training? When does this happen i.e. year 1, 2, 3 or final exams?
  3. Is writing considered a core skill to their education or to later employment? If below standard/expectations what processes are in place to help the student?
  4. Is speaking considered a core skill to their education or to later employment? If below standard/expectations what processes are in place to help the student?
  5. How many students per tutor (the designated pastoral carer)? Is there a cap on this number? How often must they see each other?
  6. Do you operate the ‘opt in’ system where students are asked at the start for permission for you to directly contact their parents with serious concerns? If yes, what is the take up for this?

4. Why This Matters

The research reveals a fundamental structural contradiction: universities require self advocacy from students who struggle to speak up.

This creates a predictable pattern where students who need support remain unidentified until crisis points develop.

The small percentage of institutions with proactive systems demonstrates these gaps are preventable through intentional design.

5. Methodology

Responses were analysed for:

  • Existence of proactive identification systems
  • Assessment versus preparation alignment
  • Support pathways (educational vs medical)
  • Family communication frameworks
  • Self-advocacy requirements

Analysis focused on institutional policies and systems rather than individual staff efforts.

6. Next Research Phase

Follow up FOI request planned: October 2025

This will assess whether support systems have evolved over the four year period and identify any institutions that have implemented structural improvements.

4.

4.

Research conducted independently.