I am in agreement with Mich Trott.


I have several such students in the past couple of weeks and the issues are
not easy to deal with. There is also an ethical principle as well.


1] I would argue that there is an initial obligation on the part of the
psychologist to advise the student that they are out of their depth on a HE
course. This is an uncomfortable process and you have to have absolute
confidence in your judgement. This is why the WAIS is so important. There
is always a grey area but I would argue that if a student's verbal reasoning
scores are consistent and reveal a verbal reasoning ability that places them
in the bottom 25% of the population, then they have virtually no chance of
coping with the level of conceptual language encountered in lectures,
tutorial, crits and text books/journals.

This point in an assesment is sometimes made even more difficult because
some students have been told they are dyslexic based on a screening at FE
level. Poor reading and spelling abilities are also linked to low levels of
intellectual ability. Sometimes these students will argue that if only they
were to be given the kind of support that enjoyed previously they will
succeed.



2] The students of low ability I encounter have either no qualifications at
all [e.g. they are on a part-time degree course] or have an Access or NVQ
Level 3 qualification. Very often close questioning reveals that their
written assessed work is far from their own.

I spend over an hour taking a personal history so this allows time for
exploring key points. I can't always write up what I have been told, but
very frequently there is a history of extensive support - sometimes from
family members - which helps explain why they have been awarded a certain
qualification.

I have to explain why this support is not justified in HE, even if they are
dyslexic.


3] I always advise students to discuss my report with the referring person
from their institution. I recognise that this will not be an easy occasion
for the DO [or equivalent]. Maybe a code of conduct is required to cover
such instances?


4] The ability to benefit from HE is the key requirement for determining
whether to admit a student into HE. There is no way that a student with a
verbal and visual reasoning score that places them within the bottom 5% of
the population is going to succeed. [I do occasionally see such students.]


In my experience the students of very low ability I see are mature women who
are desperate to escape a life of badly-paid, unskilled employment. They
have taken on debts to enter HE. Any attempt to encourage such students to
continue in HE, which will lead to higher debts and failure, is
irresponsible and - I would argue - unethical. Perhaps HE institutions
should refund fees to such students once they have been very clearly
identified. This may be wishful thinking but I would argue that it would be
fraudulent to continue to take fees from these students. [SKILL might wish
to offer advice on this point.]



5] I suspect that there is a great wariness about advising students to
withdraw because they are not intellectually able enough. No one wants to
get it wrong on this issue. That includes me. However, there is the issue
of preventing further damage to often already low self-esteem by giving such
students the hope they will succeed - only for them then to fail and fall
further into debt. There is also the issue of academic integrity. HE by
definition is elitist. Widening access to HE is an important principle - but
this has to be based on ability to potentially succeed.




David



David Grant, PhD., Chartered Psychologist
dyslexia diagnosis - a specialist service for students
3 Rosebank Road
Hanwell
London W7 2EW

Tel: 020 8579 1902

e-mail: [log in to unmask]

----------
>From: Michael Trott <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: dyslexia assessment of general learning difficulty
>Date: Thu, Apr 3, 2003, 3:57 pm
>

>In a message dated 03/04/03 15:01:18 GMT Daylight Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
><< Does anyone have experience of an assessment for dyslexia concluding that a
> student has a general learning difficulty rather than a specific one? (The
> consequence being that the student stands very little chance of completing a
> degree course successfully.)
>
> Regards
>
> Liz >>
>
>Yes.
>But I expect you were hoping for more than that.....
>This is my own understanding of the situation (I could be wrong) In theory
>the student must be capable of benefiting from higher education and as I
>understand it the LEA could conclude that a student with general learning
>difficulties is not 'disabled' and is therefore ineligible for DSA.
>Occasionally they will still send the student for a needs assessment,
>*perhaps* in the hope that either:
>a) the assessor will be brave enough to decline support
>or
>b) that they have someone else to blame if it gets picked up in an audit.
>
>If I'm right then the institiution really has an obligation to counsel the
>student on whether they should continue with the course and if they cannot to
>help them to ifdentify something more appropriate.
>
>As I said, I could be wrong and I would be happy to be corrected.
>
>Mick Trott