Hi Chris
I do think dis-forum is considered as a feedback route to the Roundtable
/ QAG. I recall myself and other colleagues, who attend the round table
meetings representing the views from colleagues on the NADO / dis-forum
email lists. I am sure a similar approach is taken during QAG meetings.
If this helps, the NADO summer conference (which is being held in
Nottingham) aims to have a section on QAG which could provide an
opportunity for colleagues to ask questions etc ... to those individuals
involved.
Many thanks
James
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Baxter, Chris
Sent: 28 May 2004 11:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Computer training
I think the comments from colleagues recently have been very useful and
in some cases insightful but I am left feeling concerned that comments
on disforum are just that, this forum is not recognised as a feedback
route to QAG, Mick is trying to respond to all comments and I think it
is unfair that he feels he is placed in that position and I think we
would all agree that we wouldn't expect Mick to be the mouthpiece of
QAG. Perhaps we should discuss here how we might have some useful input
into the whole process since the consultation process does not seem
'whole' in many ways.
Perhaps I could venture to offer to forward all comments directly to
Malcolm Matthews as chair of QAG as whenever I have met with him in
recent weeks he has been surprised that Assessment Centres at least are
concerned. Or perhaps we could decide on a better approach?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Bloor [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 28 May 2004 09:47
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Computer training
Perhaps the type and level of reaction this issue provoked is an
indication of how QAG has been received "in the shires"
I'm sure that most of us involved in the delivery of DSA related
services would welcome an examination of quality and standards with the
aim of raising our game in the interests of disabled students and all
those who support them...but perhaps the idea that QAG might so readily
get involved obviously touched a few raw nerves - mine included!
We need to remember that QAG was established with representation from
what the DfES considered to be key stakeholders in the assessment
process. This suggests to me that at the very least, should QAG concern
itself with other areas of DSA support, it will need need
re-constituting in order that proper representation be achieved...QAG as
it stands at present is not a representative body in terms of say NMH
Support Delivery.
I would venture that if QAG took such issues on without re-constitution
at the very least there would be some pretty strong reactions - at the
very least...
The Round Table seems to me to be the appropriate forum for such reviews
and developments to be aired in the first instance and rather than it
dissolving I'd have thought it should be the other way round...QAG
should dis-band having done its "good work" and the Round Table should
be consolidating itself...and now be getting ready to move on to other
areas of support needing attention.
Simon Bloor
Access SUMMIT
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Trott
Sent: Thursday May 2004 20:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [DIS-FORUM] Computer training
In a message dated 26/05/04 23:26:51 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask]
writes:
<< If you feel that Needs Assessments, Equipment, training and
dyslexia/study support should come under scrutiny, which areas will QAG
*not* be looking into? If it does look into dyslexia/study support,
what sort of issues might it focus on? >>
OK, well I was originally passing on a request from one of the training
organisations that training came under a similar arrangements as the
Suppliers SLA. Several people suggested just today the organisations
providing study support MIGHT also be considered appropriate services.
I don't see why not but I don't at present have any specific views on
what they might look at. It might be qualifications, it might be
demonstrating the they have no connection with the assessment service
that recommended them or if they have, establishing that they were not
the only service suggested.
Having said that, I exprect to get shot dowen for meddling All I would
say is it wasn't my idea and I don't have a view on what should happen.
As the topic was raised I thought it worth mentioning that QAG MIGHT
look at training and support.
In answer to your question, no I don't think there is anything within
the DSA process that QAG can be expected to ignore. This is not saying I
want to be involved in those things myself though.
Mick Trott
|