Newsroom
A dispute has emerged between the University of Cyprus and a visually impaired student who alleges she was treated unfairly during her teaching practicum, while the institution insists it provided extensive support throughout her studies.
The student, together with her father, has publicly challenged the university's handling of her case, arguing that insufficient accommodations during her practical training affected both her participation and her academic results. The university has rejected those claims, describing them as inaccurate and maintaining that all required support measures were put in place.
According to the university, the student received a range of accommodations linked to her disability. These included funding for a support assistant during her practicum, financial assistance for tutoring, extensions for completing practicum requirements and coursework, and adjustments to teaching schedules. The institution said additional support tailored to her individual circumstances was also provided but could not disclose further details because of privacy obligations.
The university stated that it remains committed to equal access in higher education and stressed that accommodations for students with disabilities are implemented within established procedures designed to balance inclusion, fair assessment, and academic standards.
The student has asked for a complete reassessment of the practicum courses that form part of her degree programme. In a letter submitted to the Commissioner for Administration and Human Rights, she argues that the grades she received do not accurately reflect her abilities. She contends that existing support arrangements were not adapted to the specific demands of practical training and that she was expected to meet the same requirements as her peers without adequate mechanisms to ensure equal participation.
Among her requests are a fresh evaluation of all practicum-related modules by an independent committee, a detailed written explanation of her grades, and a review of the criteria used in assessing her performance. She also wants university authorities to examine whether the absence of additional accommodations affected the outcome of her evaluation and whether discrimination related to her disability occurred.
The student further called for her case to be considered in light of recommendations and interventions made by disability advocacy organisations and relevant findings issued by the Commissioner for Administration and Human Rights concerning the rights of persons with disabilities in education.
Her father has submitted a separate complaint alleging that his daughter faced unequal treatment throughout her studies. He claims the university failed to implement accommodations recommended by specialists and support organisations despite repeated requests and supporting documentation.
While acknowledging that his daughter successfully completed all academic components of her programme, he argues that difficulties encountered during the practicum placed her graduation and future career prospects at risk. He has also questioned whether assessment standards were applied consistently, alleging that other students who did not fulfil all practicum requirements were nevertheless allowed to complete their studies.
The university, for its part, has expressed strong objection to what it describes as false accusations and misleading claims. It argues that such allegations risk damaging confidence in existing support systems and unfairly affect members of its academic staff.
The case remains the subject of competing accounts, with the student and her family seeking an independent review while the university maintains that it fulfilled its obligations under existing policies and legislation.
