Just a thought

 

Whilst it is important (probably more so for the individual) to have a label  attached to their disability / difficulty perhaps the focus should be an assessment of the individuals strengths and weaknesses as an initial investigation rather than the current precise diagnosis. By making this fundemental change the technical assessor can then focus their attention on identifying technology and appropriate strategy for the individual rather than the introduction of broadly identified technology as the only solution. The DSA's main focus is afterall to give the individual with a disadvantage, because of disability etc, the opportunity to perform on an equal footing with their able bodied counterparts. By knowing what their stengths and weaknesses are is the key to supplying the basics of that support. The detail of the support - usually supplied by the specialist trainer is more based on the diagnosis than the identification of the general strength and weaknesses. 

 

Existing technology and resources is far better placed to be able to identify areas of an individual's strengths and weaknesses than it is to diagnose any thing as complex as Dyslexia or any other complex disability or illness. On that basis why not focus the initial assessment toward the strength and weakness element which would allow the technology and general strategy to be identified and implemented quickly. THEN undertake the more detailed analysis of the precise nature and characteristic of the disability which would be used to focus and deliver the specialist training and support. This way the process could be speeded up and made more efficient as many individuals require little more than the focused strength / weakness / strategy approach that is currently missing from so many DSA technical assessments. 

 

I appreciate this email will  hit a few nerves with individuals who benefit from the current approach, perhaps seeing the DSA as a Cash Cow to be milked for all it's worth,  but it is clear that this process is creaking at the seams and leaves the individual poorly supported, the service ragged and variable, and what is perhaps significant but not appreciated as much as it should be, it represents poor value for money to the tax payer. 

 

I was bought up and trained in the old fashioned ways of Systems Analysis and Design in the days of valve computers and Ferrite Core where computing power was expensive and at a premium. This required us be very focused in our approach. Our Golden rule was to investigate the whole problem divide it into unique elements and then consider integration. The modern method is to analyse what happens now and then introduce the technology to the process, in other words computerise (or in this case - expand) what already exists. All this achieves is to ensure that errors inbuilt into the system occur more frequently and the existing thinking becomes entrenched and takes on an aura of sanctity protecting it from proper investigation. I cannot help feeling that this is what is happening here with the DSA, I am not arrogant eneogh to suggest my concept is correct what I am saying however, is that it is clear the current procedures are failing and all that is happening is that an expanded  structure is being applied to that which is causing the failure which has not been questioned or analysed since it's inception with the introduction of DSA. I am saying if the DSA is to function in the way it was intended it must be re-appraised from the base upward.

 

I look forward to others comments and observations on this whole subject.

 

Terry Hart

University of Plymouth

 

(Please note that I recognise that these ideas may be unpopular and I must therefore state these thoughts are not neccesaarily shared by the University of Plymouth, Disability Assist Services or any of my colleagues . They are a personal view of a complex situation they are therefore written and offered as a personal view).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message----- 

From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. on behalf of David Grant 

Sent: Tue 01/06/2004 09:28 

To: [log in to unmask] 

Cc: 

Subject: Re: Few Queries





	Mary Haslum [of the University of the West of England] presented a very thoughtful and interesting paper on the first topic at the British Dyslexia Association’s International Conference, held at Warwick, Easter, 2004.

	 

	She [and her co-worker Mo], compared the outcomes of using QuickScan, StudyScan and educational psychologists to diagnose dyslexia.  If my memory serves me correctly, the level of disagreement between StudyScan and Ed. Psych’s diagnoses was about 20% to 25%.   This level of discrepancy raises serious questions of validity.  

	 

	Mary also drew attention to the fact that StudyScan is not a completely automated assessment, so quite a high level of skilled input is required from whoever has responsibility for overseeing assessments.

	 

	I hope that Mary’s talk will be included on the BDA CD of the Warwick Conference.  [This is due for publication this June/July]. 

	 

	 

	The paper Mary presented was a joint one by herself and Mo Kiziewicz [of the University of Bath], titled’ Identification of Dyslexia: Hi Tech or Hi Touch?’

	 

	 

	My additional concern about the use of ‘automated’ computerised assessments is that these are designed for the diagnosis of dyslexia.  Students with undiagnosed specific learning difficulties are not all dyslexic.  Life is far more complicated.  Dyspraxia, ADD, ADHD, are all possibilities, as is Asperger’s.  The overlap between these SpLDs is also quite high.  

	 

	Half a diagnosis, which may also be the wrong diagnosis, is a possibility.  

	 

	At the end of the day, it is a case of the degree of confidence that you – and the student – can have in the validity of the diagnosis.  Educational Psychologists don’t always get it right [or Charted Psychologists either], but if you know that the ones you refer students to routinely check the student profile against the range of possible outcomes, then the degree of confidence in the outcome will be higher than one based on a one-dimensional approach towards  SpLDs.  

	 

	Best wishes,

	 

	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]

	 

	-----Original Message-----

	From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Claire Shanks

	Sent: 28 May 2004 09:07

	To: [log in to unmask]

	Subject: Few Queries

	 

	Good morning! 

	I have a few queries: 

	1. I wondered if anyone has any thoughts/opinions on the CD-ROM 'StudyScan' and it's use as a screening tool for dyslexia?  One of our schools has purchased this, however, I do have reservations and would appreciate some advice.

	2. Does anyone have a job description for a proof reader? 

	Thank you.  

	With best wishes 

	Claire 

	

	Disability Support Manager 

	Disability Support Service 

	University of Huddersfield 

	Queensgate 

	Huddersfield 

	HD1 3DH 

	

	Tel: 01484 473940 

	Fax: 01484 472560 

---

This transmission is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you receive it in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and remove it from your system. If the content of this e-mail does not relate to the business of the University of Huddersfield, then we do not endorse it and will accept no liability.