It isn't just about sexuality, it's about disability, race and any other discrimination that can take place. The idea is that 'non-traditional' (in the language of the report) students should be catered for. For example, family law problems might commonly include same-sex couples in exam problem questions, but what about contract law, or commercial law, or tort?
In my experience, academia has actually been addressing these issues for years and the ratcheting up of quotes by NUS folks in a bid to get a headline (rather than base them on the substantive report) coupled with the near hysterical academic reactions on the Times Higher story are both misplaced responses.
This was a well meaning report that seems to have suffered a PR disaster. I'd be interested in hearing the thoughts of fellow academics and students on this.
Post a Comment