I agree with your main point, Penny, that students need to develop
skills and the capacity to cope by the end of their course, if at all
possible. Access to Work is not all its cracked up to be and wasn't
there a scare recently that it was being abolished anyway?
However you assertion that "effects one sees in specific learning
difficulties are effects of disorientation/panic, however overt or
discreet" is surely just one aspect of dyslexia and not necessarily
manifest in all dyslexics? My colleague in the next office is not in
today unfortunately - I think he'd react pretty strongly to your
statement!
John
Dr John S Conway
Disability Officer / Principal Lecturer in Soil Science / Chair,
Research Committee
Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, Glos GL7 6JS
01285 652531 ext 2234 fax 01285 650219
http://www.rac.ac.uk/index.php?_id=590
email [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Penny Georgiou
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
Dear Margarida,
Re: your request "Could you expand on what you have written,
particularly: ...excited by challenges rather than being intimidated by
them..."
The short answer to this is that the effects one sees in specific
learning difficulties are effects of disorientation/panic, however overt
or discreet. The student encounters new material as an insurmoutable
monolith and goes to pieces, concentration drifts (moving away from the
source), direction is haphazard; in fact, they bale out of the task.
That is, they are not able to stay present in the task long enough to be
enable the thinking (cogitation) process to really take hold and produce
a string. (as in 'string two sentences together'). The elements remain
fragmented -incoherent, unsequenced - disorientated.
I won't go on further here, but the questions that you raise in the
other message are very interesting too.
"Could you specify
1-questions you ask
2- how you infer the related missing links
3- how this then translates into making the writing viable?"
These things are both interesting and complex and are better grasped
through speech: conversation and discussion. Please feel free to contact
me. (I am not in the office today.) Still, I will write some points and
send them to you off list in the next few days.
Regards,
Penny Georgiou
Tel: 0208 411 6285
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. on
behalf of Margarida Dolan
Sent: Thu 08/06/2006 23:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
Dear Penny,
I am interested in engaging with what you write but I am not
sure that
I understand what you are suggesting. Could you expand on what
you
have written, particularly:
> What we need to promote is for students to be excited by
challenges
> rather than being intimidated by them. This is by far the most
> significant challenge that students need to overcome.
Best regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Margarida Dolan, Ph.D. Phone:
0044(0)1225
383241 Learning Support Tutor and Staff Developer Fax:
0044(0)1225 386709
Learning Support Service
University of Bath
Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
The views and comments expressed in this email are confidential
to the
recipients and should not be passed on to others without
permission.
This email message does not necessarily express the views of the
University of Bath and should be considered personal unless
there is a
specific statement to the contrary.
Quoting Penny Georgiou <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear Andy,
>
> There is another point that I should make clear. I am not at
all
> concerned about the cost to the public purse, as a great deal
of
> hypocrisy goes into the upholding of that term, unfortunately.
>
> What I am concerned about is that students leave University
with as
> much real development of their skills as possible, and with a
real
> confidence in their abilities. If we overplay their
difficulties in
> order to justify support, how can we then also recommend
students to
> employers as being able to deliver on the responsibilities
that will
> be placed on them in their working lives?
>
> What we need to promote is for students to be excited by
challenges
> rather than being intimidated by them. This is by far the most
> significant challenge that students need to overcome.
>
> Penny
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support
staff.
> on behalf of A Velarde
> Sent: Thu 08/06/2006 15:48
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
>
>
>
> Hello Penny. I do not quite understand your point, but
as I have still my
> cuppa would like to comment. I may be wrong.
>
> In the parable of talents, if I remember well, god gave
unequal resources to
> reasonably equal individuals. The only asymmetric power
exited between him
> and humans (all males, that was possible the second
asymmetry). Therefore
> doing nothing could be judged as immoral, quite rightly.
>
> That world doesn't exit though. In the world of humans
morality is a
> political battle, because there are existing asymmetries
(inequalities
> between genders, abilities, , class, social and symbolic
capital etc, etc)
> that are created or/and reproduced by humans. Therefore
you need to take
> into account that when we are born social resources are
already been given
> in an unequal manner but not by god, buy by other
humans. Of course this
> applies to disabilities too, if one believes in the
social model.
>
> So when government provides approx 20-25 million pounds
annually for the
> support of disabled student which is diverted to private
companies rather
> than institution that require mechanism for change, one
needs to ask a
> strait question: Is this the best for disabled people?
In my observation,
> the current system operates to perpetuate a medicalised
approach of
> disabilities ('I.e. you are dyslexic, here is you pc and
off you go. Problem
> sorted) and an identity for which the disabled person
has to be humiliated
> first to access his/her label before receives support.
>
> In social terms, this system is called of surveillance
and disciplinary
> power over the 'other' (Foucault). Good busyness though.
Andy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Penny Georgiou" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 3:04 PM
> Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
>
>
> > In the parable of the talents, which is one of my
favourite bible
> > stories, moral purity does not lie with those who do
nothing.
> > Universities are necessarily best placed to provide
services to students
> > with disabilities: Education support workers,
specialist learning
> > support, Assistive Technology training, Mentoring etc
and so be the ones
> > to charge these to the DSA. Many of these services
would not be
> > commercially or logistically viable for those working
outside the
> > institution to run, so it is dangerous and absurd to
attack that
> > principle.
> >
> > One occassionally hears from LEA officers of some
practices that seem
> > difficult to justify, even from an institutional
perspective. This
> > inevitably triggers drives in some quarters to
scrutinise and curtail
> > all activities. Is there anything that can be done
about that, rather
> > than making it difficult for all institutions to
administer the deliver
> > of support services.
> >
> > It is not inappropriate for there to be an annual
review of specialist
> > learning support, where the student does continue to
take it up. Since,
> > needs assessors and assessment centres are not always
the font of
> > knowledge, sainthood and efficiency, I am not sure
that it is a good
> > idea for these items to wait upon them
indiscriminantly. In this
> > instance, I think that the DO or study skills tutor
should be the one's
> > to make the recommendation. However, it should be
understood that if an
> > LEA officer feels that further justification is
required in a particular
> > case, then the specific instance can be referred to
the Assessment
> > Centre.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their
support staff.
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Claire
Wickham, Centre
> > for Access and Communication Studies
> > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:38 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
> >
> >
> > Well said Andy: thank you for reminding us all of the
bigger picture and
> >
> > underlying principles,
> >
> > CLaire
> >
> > --On 08 June 2006 14:09 ? A Velarde
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > Interesting. I just would like to place a thought,
in the most
> > > speculative tradition. Yeah, lets take a cupa. The
separation between
> > > assessment of individual needs (DSA assessment) vs
assessment of
> > > barries (DO's job) may be theoretically possible but
not realistic or
> > > practicle. DOs do not conduct social model
assessments (althoug some
> > > Universities believe they do so, they may be right)
but duplicate
> > > individual assessments becuase their institutions
send them clear
> > > signals that rather than being actors of
organisational change they
> > > should keep to medicalise the condition of the
disabled individual not
> >
> > > the disabled institution. Assessment of individual
needs have been
> > > instrumental for the privatisation of an LEA
function, and it is
> > > working reasonably well. At least this appears to
be the case if one
> > > counts how many companies have been established to
support the
> > > disadvantaged. What appears that is not working is
the Do's role
> > > applicable to Universities. This is a clear example
of how government
> > > funding is being diverted to the private sector
instead of supporting
> > > a social model. Dos are not only underpaid (having
to deal with
> > > 300-400 files per month, managing support workers,
etc) but are a
> > > burger in the sandwish. It would change a bit if
HEFCE helps the Do's
> >
> > > function and support their plea to updated their
1999 guidance (Base
> > > level
> > > provisions...) A clarification of their role/work
load (post senda,
> > > postDES) would solve all these problems. This is
something that if
> > HEFCE
> > > does not commit themself in doing this, noone would
do. Unless of
> > course
> > > NADO wakes up. Maybe one day. Andy
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "LINDA WALKER" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:07 PM
> > > Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > Page 9 of the new (06/07) Bridging the Gap specifies
"Your disability
> > > advisor should not carry out your DSA-needs
assessment."
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Linda
> > >
> > > Linda Walker
> > > Blackpool & The Fylde College
> > > HE Support Co-ordinator
> > > Tel: 01253 504357
> > > minicom: 01253 355755
> > >
> > >>>> [log in to unmask] 06/08/06 11:25 am >>>
> > > Dear All
> > >
> > > This question has not gone away. Having talked to an
LEA this morning,
> >
> > > they are intending to bring in a policy for 1:1
tuition based on a
> > > gospel truth attititude to the example of 23 hours
quoted in Claire
> > > Jamieson's report.
> > >
> > > Despite the DfES assurance that recommendations will
still be based on
> >
> > > student need, we need to be more pro-active about
this now or the
> > > implications for the next academic year are not
pleasant.
> > >
> > > Is anyone actually doing anything about this with
the powers that be??
> > >
> > > Also, the LEA refuses to take Disability Officers
recommendations and
> > > insists on going back to an Access Centre for even
very small changes
> > > to recommendations - apparently DSOs are considered
to have an
> > > interest if they are arranging a student's support.
This is despite
> > > the DfES guidance to the contrary. Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Liz
> > >
> > > Liz Thompson
> > > Learning Support Officer
> > >
> > > Student Services
> > > University of Brighton
> > > Room 2, Manor House
> > > Moulsecoomb Place
> > > Brighton BN2 4GA
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------
> > Claire Wickham,
> > Director: Centre for Access and Communication Studies
University of
> > Bristol Union Building Queen's Road Clifton Bristol
BS8 1LN
> >
> > Tel: 0117 954 5710/5705
> > Textphone: 0117 954 5715
> > Fax: 0117 954 5714
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
>
>
>
|
