In higher education, we talk a lot about trust, partnership and student-centred design, but meaningful examples of these values in action can sometimes feel rare.
At Cardiff Metropolitan University we’ve been working in partnership with the university to shift the everyday experience of assessment for students with a more student-centric approach to mitigating circumstances.
Over the past few months, I’ve heard from students across levels and disciplines who feel genuinely seen by this new approach. They’ve told us “This feels fair. This feels humane. This feels like the university finally understands how life really works.”
Trust before bureaucracy
The most significant change (and the one students comment on most) is the move away from requiring third-party evidence for both late submissions and deferment requests. Instead, Cardiff Met now operates on a model of self-declaration.
Students can submit four late submission permits per academic level and up to two self-declared deferred assessments per academic year, all with no evidence required.
This simple shift fundamentally reframes the relationship between students and the institution. Instead of treating students with suspicion, the university is recognising that they’re adults navigating complex lives who can be honest and responsible when asking for help.
In a sector that often struggles with heavy administrative burdens, this is an act of trust that students do not take lightly.
Is this real life?
Students tell us all the time that they experience minor crises – a sudden illness, a broken laptop, a patch of overwhelming work hours, a spike in caring responsibilities. Traditionally, these situations required students to jump through time-consuming procedural hoops, often at the moment they were least able to cope.
Now, with a built-in five working day late submission window and a no-penalty allowance for four of those instances, students feel empowered to manage their wellbeing while still staying engaged with learning.
One student described the policy as “the first time a university system has actually reduced my anxiety instead of adding to it.”
A support-first approach
What I appreciate most, and what I’ve emphasised repeatedly in discussions with students, is that this is not a “give students an easy way out” policy. It is a support-first approach.
The use of late permits and deferred assessments is actively monitored, not to penalise students, but so the university can step in earlier with additional support where necessary.
Rather than allowing students to silently spiral into crisis, the system helps connect learners to wellbeing teams, disability support and academic advisors well before a situation becomes unmanageable.
It also preserves academic rigour. Live assessments remain fit-to-sit, late windows don’t apply to exams and excessive deferrals require engagement with structured support processes.
The balance between compassion and standards is handled with clarity and maturity.
And these changes didn’t and couldn’t have happened in a vacuum. It reflects years of shifting attitudes across the institution, it’s a collective recognition that traditional mitigating circumstances systems were often incompatible with student realities.
This is exactly what partnership between students’ unions and universities should look like: co-creation, trust, and systems built around real human experience.
Building a culture of trust
Early feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. Students feel more confident approaching assessments, many report reduced stress around deadlines, those with chronic illness or fluctuating conditions finally feel accommodated rather than marginalised and international students have welcomed the simplicity and cultural sensitivity of the new procedure.
A policy that students understand, believe in, and feel empowered by is a policy that works.
If universities across the UK are serious about tackling the mental health crisis, mitigating hidden workload pressures and making assessment systems fit for purpose, accessible mitigating circumstances policies are key to the conversation.
It shows that trust-based, evidence-light systems can work, and that they can work fairly, with integrity, and to the benefit of academic standards when we start with trusting students. And it’s imperative that this policy is more than a procedural update, it marks a cultural shift.
As students continue to express gratitude for a system that respects their lives, their privacy and their challenges, I hope the wider sector takes note.
Trust isn’t a risk, it’s the foundation of genuine student success.
