View source for Base cases: uneven cognitive profiles and assessment failure


== 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 purpose is not to rehearse individual disputes, but to demonstrate a recurring structural failure in assessment and decision-making where uneven cognitive profiles are not properly understood or accommodated.

=== Purpose of this document ===
This document sets out a small number of base cases that demonstrate systemic failure to recognise uneven cognitive profiles. These cases illustrate how assessment systems that assume uniform ability misclassify capability, leading to discrimination, invalid decisions, and avoidable harm.

=== Base Case 1: PP & SP v Trustees of Leicester Grammar School [2014] UKUT 520 (AAC) ===
This Upper Tribunal case concerned a pupil with dyslexia whose disability was denied on the basis that performance in constrained domains fell within the normal range. The Tribunal corrected the error, confirming that disability cannot be dismissed simply because some outputs appear average.

The case demonstrates judicial recognition of the dangers of ignoring uneven cognitive profiles.

=== Base Case 2: Shelter Employee – Employment Discrimination ===
An employee delivering housing advice sought transfer to a text-based service better aligned with his cognitive strengths. Trivial adjustments were refused, leading to exclusion from employment. A tribunal found discrimination and awarded £56,000.

This case shows how misunderstanding uneven profiles directly causes employment exclusion.

=== Base Case 3: Clinical Psychology Selection Panel ===
A candidate with an uneven cognitive profile was judged unsuitable for clinical psychology training due to misinterpretation of cognitive assessment data. The candidate later qualified successfully, demonstrating that the selection process failed to predict real-world capability.

=== Base Case 4: Doctoral Viva – Persistence of Discrimination ===
Despite full knowledge of a candidate’s uneven cognitive profile, adjustments for a doctoral viva were refused, delaying graduation and causing financial loss. The matter was later settled.

This case shows that knowledge alone is insufficient without structural change.

=== Annex: Further Illustrative Examples ===
Additional examples across education, recruitment, internal employment management, tribunals, and professional regulation reinforce the same mechanism: where assessment focuses on constrained processes rather than underlying capacity, outcomes are unreliable and discriminatory.

=== Related pages ===
[[Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity]]

[[Why Generic Assessment Fails with Uneven Cognitive Profiles]]

[[Structured Cognitive Evidence and Uneven Profiles]]