Hello Amanda. I wonder whether this dialogue  may be a bit etherious.  I
send you some views anyway. Reply to [log in to unmask], as I guess others
may find unpractical. Any other person who wants to hear form this
conversation pls do so too.

I "Assume that the disability is located in the
environment, not in the student".

exactly. Hence,

1. The point is to identify to which measures of quantity, movement,
cognitive capabilities such environment has being constructed (for us), so
we don't continue doing it in that manner. And convince people of the need
to relies efforts (someone said funding?) to make it, progressively, more
universal

2. There is a strong evidence that such environment would obey contemporary
economics of return (although this would only be possible to be understood
by those who would read history in 50 year in the future), not humanitarian
values. I.e. Although  in the present a ramp not only brings more consumers
to an establishment, and not also is a PR, against competitors, people also
care.

II. 'The label the student wears for statistical and financial purposes is
all part of the picture'.

Yes, but who is holding and reading that picture?  if the case is to make an
environment for all, why not turning into the implied acceptable model (the
one for whom UPIAS stood against in the first place. They created the Social
Model in the 1970s).

Who could describe a normal person? Statistician, functional professionals
of mass society and consumerism,  reply only after you have reached a point
of material experience of a existence that denies your changing humanity)

III. 'To describe it is a creative act I think (elsewhere
called discourse and dialogism)'

Lest apply the art to picture the normal, shall we? There is a urgent
practical reason too. We may help people not to create human bonsais for
their own conveniences.

Best, Andy



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: Number of Dyslexic students in HEI?


Dear Andy,
Research into email comunication suggests that although I am pretty sure I
understand what you are saying, there's about a 50% chance that I am not
correct. I recognise the theories you refer to. And I see that you are
asking 'and so how can that be applied in practice?'.

A place to start might be with one's own practice (or praxis as it might
be called elsewhere). Assume that the disability is located in the
environment, not in the student. The student is a person who moves,
communicates, thinks in a particular ways; that affects the way they
negotiate their way through spaces or carry out certain activities. They
can adapt to a certain extent - adaptations might include the use of tools
or of human support. The picture is one of a person moving through an
environment carrying out certain tasks and activities. It's a moving
picture and the questions you ask the student helps to create a sense of
the detail and also the extent to which some of the behaviours are
repeated and some are variable.

The label the student wears for statistical and financial purposes is all
part of the picture. To describe it is a creative act I think (elsewhere
called discourse and dialogism)

Amanda

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:58:52 -0000, A Velarde <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Hello Amanda. Thanks.
>I guess there is a intrinsic inter locking devise in the social model
>perspectives. Post modernist views have a appoint in saying that the
>dichotomic separation between 'Impaired and 'not impaired' also
perpetuates
>the asymmetric power relations between them (at a cultural, paradigmatic
>level). What is this? Well categorisation, which is what we DOS may do
while
>counting, 'assessing' and 'supporting' 'them'.
>
>Some postmodernist suggest to decentralise the subject as a technique to
>unlock the power relations that would perpetuate 'disablism' by shifting
the
>gaze to 'the normal'. By that act we would instantly realise that the
>emperor is a rather mediocre being.
>
>How can we do that? Is it possible? feasible? I doubt anyone would suggest
>to say that in a committee meeting but there must be some other subtle
ways
>this process could start. Creativity is something DOs have been
>demonstrating in the last 10 years.
>
>Best, Andy
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:33 PM
>Subject: Re: Number of Dyslexic students in HEI?
>
>
>Dear Andy,
>I very much like to see your critical statements made on purpose. While i
>understand that the counting of heads is in some way is necessary in order
>to provide services and plan for the future, i see that the labelling and
>categorising process can reveal assumptions about people that are
>questionable. It is important that those doing the labelling and those
>labelled question their own assumptions and also try to understand each
>others position. That way leads to respect for difference and (one always
>hopes) human rights. The social model makes a distinction between
>impairment and disability and I think it is important to write about that
>distinction as a means of thinking through to the future that you
suggest -
> ie to a time when it is assumed that the environment may disable anyone
>and any stage of their life, and it is normal to lead life using a range
>of tools and strategies that assist with adaptation to the environment.
>Best wishes
>Amanda
>
>
>On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:23:37 -0000, A Velarde <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Perhaps it is not totally bad (or wrong)  that we do not know exactly how
>>many people have a disability. I am making a critical statement, on
>purpose.
>>Perhaps it would be better to define and count people who 'are' normal.
>Yes,
>>categorise them.
>>
>>Perhaps if we do that writing about the 'social model' would not be
>>necessary.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 1:43 PM
>>Subject: Re: Number of Dyslexic students in HEI?
>>
>>
>>The difficulty with establishing definitions/criteria and reliable stats
>>in relation to disabled students in HE generally [not just for dyslexia]
>>is acknowledged in the DFES DES 'Action
>>plan':http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/des/index.shtml
>>
>>The HE section includes the following-
>>
>>
>>"What are the gaps in our evidence?
>>
>>We do not know what proportion of disabled people go on to HE and doubt
>>whether that could be established at the present, given there are
>>different definitions of disability used by different data sources.
>>
>>Previous studies have shown that a major problem with data in the HE
>>sector is that there is no generally recognised definition of disability
>>and also no general taxonomy of subsets of disability."
>>Amanda Kent
>>DSA Assessor
>>=========================================================================
>=========================================================================