Interesting discussion. Here are things we do at Kent.
1.Invigilators/exam note takers are paid centrally (by central
administration rather than by the DSU via LEA funding). This is important to
keep in mind as institutions are now obliged to provide auxiliary aids and
services to make their services accessible. Hence, no dsa money is used to
pay for these services.
2. For the above reason, Examinations office finds very costly (and that is
the reason) to hire both: an invigilator and a note taker. Reasonable
measures has been taken to avoid appearances of misconduct (Exams office has
a serious recruitment procedure, independlty of the ones employed by the Dis
Support Unit. The DSU has a very professional recruitment procedure too.
Sometimes a dsu member of staff could also be recruited by the exams office)
The system seems to work reasonably well.
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernst Trustram, Rosie" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
Also, doesn't the DSA pay for the scribe anyway? In which case it is
still the University's responsibility to pay for an invigilator,
whether that is for the whole class or an individual student(due to
the adjustment to the assessment).
Rosie Ernst Trustram
Learning Support Unit
Caxton House
Tel 020 7815 6433
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of KC Thomas, Centre for
Access and Communication Studies
Sent: 02 March 2006 13:19
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
In my opinion, scribing and invigilating are two different roles and
there should be no question that the two should be combined. The
scribe is working solely with the student or client and at their
direction. The role has nothing to do with invigilation and combining
the two will blur and confuse professional boundaries.
Kate Thomas
PSW 2006, University of Bristol
--On 02 March 2006 13:00 +0000 "Turner, Paddy" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Well not much actually Iain. The point is that I genuinely am NOT
> assuming a lack of professionalism. You are assuming I am and the
vast
> majority of your argument is based on that, unfortuately. Suspicion,
> surveillance???? My whole point was regarding protection in the case
> of accusation - the questioning of professionalism comes with the
> accusation and the 'my word against her/his' situation is never very
> satisfactory for anyone concerned....ask anyone so accused.
>
> I'm happy for you to try again, naturally. (Is it any better at the
> end of a sentence, I wonder?)
>
> Obviously, I'm only teasing here. (....or is 'obviously' the same as
> 'naturally'?)
>
> Words are tricky things aren't they?
> Paddy
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Iain Hood Sent: 02
> March
> 2006 12:16
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
>
> How about this as the argument, Paddy. You ARE placing the scribe in
> an assumed unprofessionalism position (I feel as uncomfortable with
> any sentence I begin with "Naturally" as I do about other people
using it).
> Scribes should be a colleague without conflict of interest (i.e.,
say
> a spouse was somehow the access to learning support for the student,
> we would probably assume them to be inappropriate as the
> scribe/invigilator). Of course assistants can start identifying with
> their student (sometimes this is necessary, sometimes unavoidable),
> but they remain colleagues. What if we widened the circle of
> suspicion? Why not assume lecturers are unfairly advantaging
students
> in all sorts of ways? Why not cave to the generalist feeling some
> academics have that the whole project of disability support is to
> unprofessionally advantage students, that we're writing their
> assignments for them etc.? Why should we be allowed to continue with
any of our work without surveillance?
>
> To respond to your examples directly: scribes/invigilators should
> answer for themselves in any investigation. So it should be assumed
> they should be professional if asked whether they 'wrote something'
> for the student, or they should answer for themselves if a student
has complained.
>
> Persuaded at all?
>
> Iain
>
> Iain Hood
> Senior Student Adviser, Learning Support Student Support Services
> Anglia Ruskin University East Road Cambridge CB1 1PT
>
> 0845 196 2316
> [log in to unmask]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Turner, Paddy" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:17 AM
> Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
>
>
> Hi Brigid,
> Thanks you for your guidelines I think they are very useful. I would
> like to raise one question, however, and hear others' thoughts also
on
> the subject.
> At Sheffield Hallam we have made it policy that the invigilation and
> support worker roles must remain separate. Naturally, this is not to
> question the professionalism of the readers/scribes but to protect
> them and the student for those times when something goes wrong or a
> complaint may be made.
> Some examples:
> A tutor questions the students exam answer relative to their usual
> coursework - has the scribe/reader assisted the student? A student
> complains that the scribe/reader has not done their job properly and
> disadvantaged them in the exam. Scribing/reading can be engrossing,
> tiring work - how easy is it for them to miss the end time? An
> invigilator would act as the witness and/or arbiter in these matters
> and save any question of unfairness. This policy has proved to be
> pretty unpopular, as you can imagine, with regard to the additional
> resources it requires, so I am happy to be persuaded! How would you
> respond to the issues I have raised above?
>
> Cheers
> paddy
>
>
> Paddy Turner
> Disability Support Manager
> Sheffield Hallam University
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Callaghan, Brigid S
> Sent: 02 March 2006 10:57
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> People are still asking for these guidelines, so I thought I would
> post them again. These have actually been amended slightly since I
> sent the last lot as I liaised with the exams office and they have
> inputted. There are two sets of guidance, but I have to send them
> separately as disforum can't take big attachments.
>
> Thanks
>
> Brigid
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roz Catlow
> Sent: 02 March 2006 09:47
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Amanuenses & readers in exams
>
>
>
> Brigid
>
> I would appreciate a copy of your materials too please. I can't seem
> to get your email address.
>
> Thanks
>
> Roz
>
>
>
> Roz Catlow
>
> Assessment Co-ordinator
>
> Disability ASSIST Services
>
> University of Plymouth
>
> PL4 8AA
>
> 01752 232694
>
> -----Original Message-----
----------------------
KC Thomas,
Organising Tutor: Personal Support Worker Training 2005 Project
Co-ordinator: Employment Scene 2005-6 Centre for Access and
Communication Studies, University of Bristol [log in to unmask]
0117 954 5718
|
