Re: representation of voices within the disability-in-HE sector.
In January 2006, I suggested to the DfES that DSA funding and DSA policy
and procedures at all levels should be examined in relation to Disability
Equality Duty. I have also tried to suggest this at various levels of the
NNAC administration. One small voice - but I thought it was worth trying to
make the point. And why not? I may be just a freelance assessor and
therefore of no particular importance in terms of the established
administrative hierarchies of institutions but I am an observant person and
I like to take an interest in my surroundings. The DfES now has a nice
Disability Equality Scheme that says they want to hear what disabled people
have to say in order to learn more about their experiences. The DSA
assessment of need involves asking students about the effects of disability
on study. Furthermore, some of us have impairments that lead to disability
under certain circumstances. So it seems reasonable to assume that a DSA
assessor could collect and collate some evidence about a DSA matter and
offer it to the DfES, or any other body with a DES, as a contribution to
their understanding.
Keep going Alex – people are listening – and this is an email forum for
students and staff so there is a flattened sense of hierarchy here that
works to the advantage of those who raise a decent point. (Anyone
interested in the characteristics and effects of email lists,
google ‘cyberspace psychology’ and read Suler’s comments).
Re: the model described by Margaret
There are variations in terms of models and practice throughout the DSA
system. DSA assessors who work for a number of different centres and/or who
see students from a range of HEIs are well aware of the extent of the
differences. To describe the differences is to reframe the scene a bit
and/or to make alterations to people’s mental map of the territory. I like
to see these different models and examine how they work, but I understand
that some people do not like such views. The tendering for services and
supply is something that is seen in the health and social care sector and
it is not without its critics. However it does mean, as Margaret describes,
that the local negotiations and local communications form part of a
tendering process that is visible and up for renegotiation on a known time-
scale. I see objections arising though on the grounds that there is some
tying-in of services going on
Amanda Kent
DSA Assessor
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:29:50 +0100, Nasser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Dear Margaret
>
>I fully endorse your approach and welcome the suggestion you are making
>which is to interact with your preferred supplier to provide a good service
>to the students. This is also what I believe Alex is trying to achieve and
I
>have no doubt he will be supported by all suppliers.
>
>I would like to emphasis my earlier point that I made to Alex's original
>comments on information gathering, which is, the I firmly believe all
>suppliers take their responsibility seriously and will always try to
provide
>a good service and they would welcome the opportunity to be able to put
>mistakes right. This can be achieved only by active participation and feed
>back from Dos and Trainers who meet students face to face on a daily basis.
>
>I am confident sure you would agree with our philosophy that the good
>service can only come about with team effort and the
>suppliers/Dos/assessors/Trainers are equal partners in that team.
>
>
>Best wishes
>
>Nasser Siabi
>Managing Director
>Microlink PC (UK) Ltd
>Direct: 02380 240 316
>Mobile: 07870603128
>
>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
>solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
>If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please advise the sender immediately
>by using the reply facility in your e-mail software. Also destroy and
delete
>the message from your computer. Please note that any views or opinions
>presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
>necessarily represent those of Microlink. Finally, the recipient should
>check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Microlink
>accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
>email. Any modification of the contents of this e-mail is strictly
>prohibited unless expressly authorised by the sender.
>Microlink House, Brickfield Lane, Chandlers Ford, Southampton SO53 4DP
>(Company number: 3325643)
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Herrington Margaret
>Sent: 26 March 2007 12:01
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Computer suppliers
>
>It is hardly fair and definitely not that funny to describe Alex's
perfectly
>reasonable attempt to raise questions about a system, in which so many
>invest so much time and effort, as an example of missionary zeal! ( Always
>something of a put down) His thoughtful questions are those of a serious
>professional...and the discussion he has provoked has been very
informative.
>
>Having had experience of a number of universities, I have found that quite
>different systems operate with differential impacts on the quality of
>monitoring and the burden on the students.It is important to try and gather
>information about these differences.
>
>Though I left direct support regarding DSA in 2002, even then we had to
deal
>with many of the questions Alex raised. On the issue of suppliers we
>defined what we wanted from this role ( based on prior student feedback)
and
>put it out to tender . The winner in this was then put through the
>university's general approved supplier system. Regular meetings between
>Support centre staff and the supplier were part of this...both for feedback
>and for technological updating on new software and equipment.Training was
>part of the deal and this too was reviewed regularly in the light of
student
>feedback...and trainers changed if necessary.
>
>This system offered a decent,locally monitored, quality of supply but we
>recognised that some students wanted to use their own supplier. If they did
>this ( and every year a few did) we simply advised them on what to look out
>for in terms of specification, training and follow up service but made
clear
>that we could not recommend alternative suppliers because we were not well
>enough resourced to keep a regular eye on all suppliers, nor assess the
>quality of a wide range of trainers.
>
>We also informed the local access centres of our arrangement but when
>students came with reports from access centres further afield and
>recommended suppliers, we discussed the issue of supplier with
>them...sometimes sticking with the recommended supplier and sometimes
moving
>to our local supplier,depending on the student's wishes.The system was not
>perfect but it proved workable and was regularly amended in the light of
>feedback.The key factors seemed to be that : the university had its own
>access centre; it took a professional responsibility for the creation and
>review of its system and that some responsibility for informal monitoring
>was built into the role of the study support staff.
>
>This will not be music to the ears of all but it was a workable model and
if
>a range of workable models emerge from Alex's fact finding, both students
>and staff will benefit.
>Margaret
>
>________________________________
>
>From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. on
>behalf of Bryan Jones
>Sent: Mon 26/03/2007 09:47
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Computer suppliers
>
>
>
>While Alex's missionary zeal is laudable, but if it is felt that the
>voices of students are not being heard / represented in the scrutinising
>of quality standards in the DSA service sector, perhaps representations
>should be made to the NUS QAG rep, or QAG Chair, if it is felt that the
>NUS are not taking the matter sufficiently seriously. The issue could
>then be discussed next time QAG meet at their meetings that take place
>at NUS HQ.
>
>Bryan Jones,
>Manager, Disability Support Services
>& North London Regional Access Centre,
>Middlesex University
>Tel: 020 8411 5366
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Beauchamp-Pryor
>Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 2:05 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Computer suppliers
>
>
>As a student, I would like to thank Alex for the courage in opening up
>this debate. I am currently in the final stages of a PhD which supports
>the argument for greater consultation and participation of disabled
>students in
>the development of higher education policy and provision.
>Historically,
>disabled students have lacked a voice, their views have remained unheard
>and there has been a reliance on non-disabled people to represent their
>'needs'. Providing an opportunity for increased feedback and
>consultation can only benefit the level of quality and service offered.
>
>Karen Beauchamp-Pryor
>University of Wales Swansea
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "alex larg" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 12:12 AM
>Subject: Re: Computer suppliers
>
>
>> Nasser,
>>
>>
>> As an independent freelance professional I have a policy of trying to
>
>> be completely open and above board about my Business. I intend to, and
>
>> try very hard to, maintain my integrity so that when I work with
>> (student or other) clients, AT suppliers, LEAs, Assessment Centres and
>
>> Universities, they know
>> that they can trust my professional, independent and uninfluenced
>> opinion.
>> I buy my own equipment with nothing supplied by companies which may
>make
>> me
>> feel obliged to use them as a supplier. I have my own professional
>> insurance
>> and I want to maintain my freelance status with the Inland Revenue.
>>
>> "...Much sooner than this..." I have only been an independent
>> stakeholder for about two and a half years and now I am in a much
>> stronger position to campaign for students' rights since I don't have
>> ties or line management. I answer to myself and my clients. (and if I
>> didn't like their feedback I could put it in the bin I guess - but I
>> don't - I listen and try and
>> improve.)
>>
>> I have worked with and advised a number of suppliers over the 10 years
>> that
>> I have been in the business of advocating the rights of disabled
>students.
>> I
>> have worked with Tony Lees at Avantek and helped his company develop
>> feedback forms, helped him to train professional trainers and also
>> provided
>> disability awareness training for him and his company employees.
>>
>> I personally feel that Avantek are an excellent supplier, who answer
>> the phone when you ring, who provide goods within a reasonable
>> timescale and who provide excellent follow up support if something
>> goes wrong with a machine supplied by them. I have seen from
>> experience that their support is prompt, sympathetic but not
>> patronizing, fast, and on-site, which for a disabled student is
>> essential in my opinion. I am not saying Avantek is perfect and we
>> all have room for improvement, but I have provided a lot of training
>> for students who have been supplied with Avantek computers and this
>> is how I have this knowledge of Avantek's service provision. I am also
>
>> sure
>> that some other companies out there do the same good work, again from
>> experience and client feedback.
>>
>> However it is not my view but the students' views here that count
>> surely.
>> I
>> don't want to make assumptions and that is why I am seeking to gather
>> evidence which is relevant to disabled students' experiences in HE of
>DSA
>> and specifically in this case computer equipment supplied to them. Of
>> course
>> this does and should extend to training. But as an independent
>trainer
>> working across the board with different suppliers machines, I feel
>well
>> placed to gather this evidence. People are writing to me off list, I
>have
>> my
>> own personal experiences with numerous students over the years and I
>have
>> numerous friends and colleagues out there who are disability officers
>> (overworked and under-resourced) who often have to help pick up the
>pieces
>> with D/disabled students. (Again dis-forum members and associates
>please
>> let me know of your experiences and your students' experiences and
>support
>> me if you feel it is appropriate off or preferably on list. A - me
>too -
>> will do.)
>>
>> I may be reinventing the wheel (my version is round by the way) but I
>> am doing this free of charge. I am trying to be open and above board
>> and I am willing to listen to what is said and to keep an open mind.
>>
>> The Walt Disney philosophy is that:-
>>
>> Rule 1 - the customer is always right.
>> Rule 2 - if the customer is wrong then see Rule 1.
>>
>> That doesn't seem like a Mickey Mouse idea to me - it seems like
>> forward thinking and the best possible approach, especially when
>> (disabled - social
>> model) customers are virtually forced to use this premium service in a
>
>> "cartel" type set up.
>>
>> Yours sincerely,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> Alex Larg
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 07931 561 877 or 07916 175 077
>> Freelance Assistive Technology Trainer
>> Freelance study needs assessor
>> Former Disability Officer
>>
>>
>> On 24/3/07 11:42, "Nasser Siabi" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tony
>>>
>>> Don't panic mate, he is saying you are one of the good guys, I say
>>> this because I know Alex is one old timers of this industry and he
>>> knows all the play makers and if he had any issues with your company
>>> or mine or Ian's he would have proactively contacted us to inform and
>
>>> resolve the problems much sooner than this. He does not strike me as
>>> being a type of person to want to wait for things to sort themselves
>>> out and he would rather make sure the student welfare came first and
>>> naturally he would kick some rear ends to make sure this happens
>>> immediately.
>>>
>>> So, I think if you have not heard or spoken to Alex before on major
>>> issues then you are not the type of supplier he is talking about.
>>> Would that be a good assumption Alex?
>>>
>>> best wishes
>>>
>>> Nasser
>>>
>>> Tony Lees wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whilst I am grateful to Alex for mentioning Avantek alongside such
>>>> illustrious company I am sure he did not mean to suggest that
>>>> Avantek are the sort of supplier that would provide our student
>>>> clients with less than adequate machines, support, training or
>>>> service. We are justifiably proud of
>>>> and continually strive to maintain our consistent record of
>excellent
>>>> service
>>>> - see www.avantek.co.uk/dsa.
>>>> (rant over).
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Tony
>>>>
>>>> Avantek are the First DSA-QAG Quality Assured, Accredited Supplier.
>>>>
>>>> Tony Lees
>>>> Avantek Computer Limited
>>>> Computer Systems and Solutions; hand crafted by artisans for the
>>>> discerning
>>>> client.
>>>> St Peter's Road
>>>> Arnesby, Leics, LE8 5WJ
>>>> tel: 0116 247 8515
>>>> fax: 0116 247 8843
>>>>
>>>> http://www.avantek.co.uk
>>>>
>>>> e-mail disclaimer: http://www.avantek.co.uk/e_disc.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support
>>>>> staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of alex larg
>>>>> Sent: 22 March 2007 14:12
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Computer suppliers
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Colleagues
>>>>>
>>>>> I have worked as an AT Trainer, assessor and Disability Officer for
>
>>>>> around 10 years now. Over that time I have worked with hundreds of
>>>>> students and some of them seem to have been supplied with
>>>>> unsuitable computer hardware. This may be due to assessors not
>>>>> recommending appropriate
>>>>> kit: we all make mistakes - I have made and learnt from many
>>>>> myself, but this is not my concern here.
>>>>>
>>>>> It may, however, be due to the suppliers not providing adequate
>>>>> machines and/or not providing good and accessible follow up support
>
>>>>> to their clients.
>>>>>
>>>>> DSA-QAG has been set up, at virtually no cost I believe, to... Well
>
>>>>> I'm not sure what for, but the point is they have introduced a
>>>>> service level agreement (SLA) for suppliers who also have to pay
>>>>> for the privilege of supplying equipment as a percentage of their
>>>>> turnover. (I'm sure I will be kindly corrected for my incorrect
>>>>> facts within this paragraph by
>>>>> colleagues.)
>>>>>
>>>>> My point, when I eventually get there, is that DSA-QAG SLA, is
>>>>> dentally challenged, i.e. there is/are no teeth, or at least none
>>>>> that I am able to find. (see above.)
>>>>>
>>>>> What I would ask of you is to ask your colleagues and students for
>>>>> their feedback of experiences with suppliers such as Microlink,
>>>>> Iansyst, Avantek and other DSA suppliers as I wish to collate some
>>>>> information for evidence to take to
>>>>> DSA- QAG / DfES, as I fear from my experience some students may be
>>>>> receiving a less that satisfactory service.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course positive feedback is welcome, but I have to be more
>>>>> concerned with the less satisfactory side of the service too.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am sending this message cross-forum, and so apologies for those
>>>>> receiving this a number of times.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also ask Nasser at Microlink, in his position as representative
>>>>> for suppliers and tier discussion group, to circulate this message
>>>>> on their list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please pass this onto any other appropriate lists so we can obtain
>>>>> as wide feedback as possible. I am in the process of rejoining NADP
>
>>>>> (if they will have me) and so this has not gone to that list. Maybe
>
>>>>> someone at NADP could pass it on if that is deemed appropriate.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know that suppliers generally ask clients for feedback, but I
>>>>> feel that system may be slightly compromised and I don't know
>>>>> whether that information is published anywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please contact me off-list with your replies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for you time.
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex Larg
>>>>> Freelance Assistive Technology Trainer
>>>>> Freelance study needs assessor
>>>>> Former Disability Officer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent using the Microsoft Entourage 2004 for Mac Test Drive.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Sent using the Microsoft Entourage 2004 for Mac Test Drive.
>
>
>
>This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
>may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer
system:
>you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
>University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>=========================================================================
|
