{"batchcomplete":"","continue":{"lecontinue":"20260210102216|117","continue":"-||"},"query":{"logevents":[{"logid":127,"ns":0,"title":"A reasoned framework for understanding, using, and challenging clinical evidence in neurodevelopmental conditions","pageid":98,"logpage":98,"revid":439,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-04-15T07:50:58Z","comment":"new page"},{"logid":126,"ns":0,"title":"When adjustments are refused","pageid":97,"logpage":97,"revid":422,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-03-30T09:58:32Z","comment":"new page on refusing adjustments"},{"logid":125,"ns":6,"title":"File:Reasonable adjustments framework table fixed.pdf","pageid":96,"logpage":96,"revid":414,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-03-27T15:50:36Z","comment":""},{"logid":124,"ns":6,"title":"File:Reasonable adjustments framework table fixed.pdf","pageid":96,"logpage":96,"revid":414,"params":{"img_sha1":"qudfgzm2x4jstzzvpaacbxghaq5c3ix","img_timestamp":"2026-03-27T15:50:36Z"},"type":"upload","action":"upload","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-03-27T15:50:36Z","comment":""},{"logid":123,"ns":0,"title":"Full framework for understanding reasonable adjustments","pageid":95,"logpage":95,"revid":408,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-03-27T15:22:37Z","comment":"new page understanding reasonable adjustments full version"},{"logid":122,"ns":0,"title":"A structured framework to support assessment of reasonable adjustments under Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010.","pageid":94,"logpage":94,"revid":401,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-02-19T09:06:55Z","comment":"Created page with \"'''Equality Act 2010 \u2013 Section 20'''  '''Operational Framework for Reasonable Adjustments'''   The Equality Act 2010 imposes a positive duty on employers to make reasonable adjustments where workplace arrangements place a disabled employee at a substantial disadvantage. This document provides a structured, practical framework to assist employers in complying with that duty in day-to-day decision-making. It reflects the purpose of the Act \u2014 namely, to prevent and remo...\""},{"logid":121,"ns":0,"title":"Base cases: uneven cognitive profiles and assessment failure","pageid":93,"logpage":93,"revid":396,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-02-10T11:33:49Z","comment":"Created page with \" == Base Cases: Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Failure == This page presents real-world examples demonstrating recurring structural failure in assessment and decision-making where uneven cognitive profiles are not properly recognised or accommodated.  All cases set out here are based on real events, including decided tribunal or court cases, settled claims, and documented institutional decisions. Where necessary, identifying details have been anonymised. The pu...\""},{"logid":120,"ns":0,"title":"Applied contexts and systemic consequences","pageid":92,"logpage":92,"revid":383,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-02-10T10:46:36Z","comment":"Created page with \"== Applied Contexts and Systemic Consequences == This page brings together the practical implications of uneven cognitive profiles across education, employment, and decision-making systems, and explains how structural misinterpretation accumulates over time.  The domain separation visible in structured cognitive assessment demonstrates that reasoning capacity and efficiency under load may diverge significantly within the same individual. Where systems rely on aggregated...\""},{"logid":119,"ns":0,"title":"Structured Cognitive Evidence and Uneven Profiles","pageid":91,"logpage":91,"revid":380,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-02-10T10:41:02Z","comment":"Created page with \"== Structured Cognitive Evidence and Uneven Profiles == This page explains how structured cognitive assessment provides empirical support for identifying uneven cognitive profiles.  The framework described in this section is grounded primarily in domain-based assessment models such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS). WAIS separates cognitive functioning into distinct domains rather than treating intelligence as a single uniform capacity. This separation allo...\""},{"logid":118,"ns":0,"title":"Why Generic Assessment Fails with Uneven Cognitive Profiles","pageid":90,"logpage":90,"revid":375,"params":{},"type":"create","action":"create","user":"PeteTyerman","timestamp":"2026-02-10T10:27:47Z","comment":"Created page with \"== Why Generic Assessment Fails with Uneven Cognitive Profiles == This page explains why standard or \u201cgeneric\u201d assessment methods often produce invalid conclusions when cognitive abilities are unevenly distributed across domains.  Generic assessment typically assumes that cognitive abilities are broadly uniform. Where this assumption does not hold, performance may be dominated by the most constrained domain rather than by the reasoning capacity being evaluated.  ===...\""}]}}