Read the BATA Response

BATA has produced a comprehensive, evidence-based response template to the consultation drawing on peer-reviewed research, the direct experience of disabled students, and the professional expertise of needs assessors and AT practitioners. Read it, use it, share it, and adapt it for your own submission

Respond to the Consultation

Tell the Department for Education directly what you think. Individual responses from students, practitioners, parents, employers, and members of the public all count. The more voices the Department hears, the stronger our collective position.

Note: you only have until 11:59pm on 18 June 2026.

Sign the Petition

Add your name to the petition calling on the government to withdraw these proposals and protect specialist assistive technology funding for disabled students.

Write to your MP

MPs need to hear from their constituents about what these proposals mean for disabled students in their communities. We have drafted a letter you can send directly to your MP. Find your MP at theyworkforyou and use our template to get in touch today.

Share Your Experiences

Disabled Students UK has created a short form for disabled students to share how assistive technology has impacted their studies. Your experience will be used to submit a response to the consultation directly on your behalf, with your consent.

These are not software preferences. For many disabled students, specialist assistive technology is the difference between participating in higher education and being unable to do so at all. A DfE-commissioned study found that only 23% of DSA recipients felt confident they would pass their course without their DSA support. 59% said they would not.

The proposals are built on a flawed and factually inaccurate evidence base. The consultation document miscategorises software products, lists tools that no longer exist, and conflates free general-purpose tools with purpose-built specialist software that has been individually assessed, professionally recommended, and clinically configured for a specific student's needs. These are not equivalent, and the research evidence is unambiguous that the difference matters.

The proposals also directly contradict the government's own Get Britain Working White Paper, which committed £240 million to supporting disabled people into employment, and the SEND reform agenda, which has committed to a generational overhaul of support for neurodivergent children and young people. You cannot invest in getting disabled people into work while dismantling the educational support that makes their degrees, and their careers, possible.