As part of a training course that I help deliver, we explore the idea of a
SMART approach.
We work with a student-centred interpretation of the acronym.
a.. Specific
b.. Measurable
c.. Agreed
d.. Relevant
e.. Time-based
Specific: outcomes are detailed, clear and focused.
Measurable: achievement of outcomes can be assessed.
Agreed:
- objectives are mutually agreed by the tutor and student;
- both parties are clear about workload and what is required from the
partnership
to achieve the objectives within the timeframe set.
Relevant:
- objectives are relevant to the student's learning context, goals and
needs;
- objectives are challenging but realistic (e.g. there will be sufficient
resources in
terms of time, equipment, funding etc)
Time based: objectives have specific dates for review and completion.
'Agreement' and 'relevance' are key principles.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Penny Georgiou" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: "study skills" for dyslexic students
> Hmmm - Specific is good...but i guess one needs more adjectives to make
> an acronym.
> Kind regards,
> Penny
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A private list for NADP members. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Ember Kelly
> Sent: 02 September 2009 13:09
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: "study skills" for dyslexic students
>
> Hello
>
> S - specific, M - measurable, A - achievable R - realistic,
> T - time-based
>
> I am quite sad that I know that!
>
> Ember
>
> --On 02 September 2009 12:54 +0100 Penny Georgiou <[log in to unmask]>
>
> wrote:
>
>> I am not sure what the SMART targets are either. Perhaps, someone can
>> clarify.
>>
>> It is certainly not a matter of 'cure', as what presents with
> dyslexic
>> effects is not a disease - but neither is it a matter of a student
>> always needing support. It is not possible to predict at the outset
> what
>> support will be needed, or indeed taken up, or indeed the quality or
>> relevance of what is provided. So, the system is asking for a review
> in
>> order to justify the expenditure. A review of needs regarding learning
>> support is not a new idea. It has always been around but was not
>> routinely demanded by funding bodies. However, tutors within our
>> institution always expected to provide summaries of the work covered,
> as
>> well as a rationale for further work, should funding bodies request
> it.
>> My recommendations in assessments were almost always written with a
>> recommendation to review support at the end of each academic year.
>>
>> PG
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Conway
>> Sent: 02 September 2009 10:55
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: FW: "study skills" for dyslexic students
>>
>> I certainly agree that doing a student's work for them and
> retrospective
>> marking are definitely not acceptable, equally I agree wholeheartedly
>> about helping the student to develop their own skills.
>>
>> but I think the writer's message was that skills and abilities "come
>> and go" and can't be learnt definitively within a specific period of
>> time (I'm not sure what a "compensated dyslexic" means!) hence the
> need
>> for ongoing support rather like a deaf or blind person would need????
>>
>> Dr John S Conway BSc PhD FGS FRGS FHEA MNADP
>> Director, MSc International Rural Development
>> Director, BSc Countryside Management
>> Chair, Research Committee
>> Principal Lecturer : Soil & Earth Science
>> Disability Officer
>> Royal Agricultural College,
>> Cirencester, Glos GL7 6JS
>> tel 01285 652531 fax 01285 650219
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> on
>> behalf of Penny Georgiou
>> Sent: Wed 02/09/2009 10:23
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: FW: "study skills" for dyslexic students
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear John,
>>
>> A few points in reference to this interesting 'problem'.
>>
>> - 'Dyslexia' can only legitimately claim to refer to dyslexic effects
>> rather than any disabling physiological entity - or lack of enabling
>> physiological apparatus.
>>
>> - The comments that I sometimes hear from learning support tutors are
> -
>> 'I almost had to write their essay for them.' This is rare but it
>> happens. This is not to criticise the tutors who have said this to me,
>> who clearly do not practice this as the norm.
>>
>> - We would be betraying students if we did not work towards students'
>> ongoing learner autonomy. The diagnostic label does not rule this out.
>>
>> - I also heard from a student yesterday, during an assessment,
> speaking
>> about support at college saying that it was not helpful because,
>> "instead of helping me to develop strategies to work with the way that
> I
>> think, she was trying to get me to think in a different way, and she
> had
>> an agenda that she wanted to get through."
>>
>> - It is incumbent on tutorial practitioners to follow the rigours of
> the
>> practice, including the student's starting position as a point of
>> departure. To facilitate their learning, while challenging them to
>> engage with the task. It is also incumbent upon all of us not to
>> patronise students with sympathy, which is merely a cover for contempt
>> for their potential to go beyond what they have thus far accomplished.
>>
>> - As a DO, I was occassionally asked about retrospective marking once
> a
>> diagnosis was established, and of course, my reply was, 'no', this is
>> not relevant. The support is aimed to enable the student to develop
> for
>> themselves the skills to meet the requirements of the programme, not
> to
>> give a consolation for a supposed in surmountable lack.
>>
>> - The formulaic mindset of audit culture is disabling as it seems to
>> offer a way out of having to think in a versatile way and to assume
>> responsibility for one's practice. Blaming audit culture for all
>> problems is another version of the same dis-ease.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Penny
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: A private list for NADP members. on behalf of
> John
>> Conway
>> Sent: Wed 02/09/2009 09:48
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Cc:
>> Subject: "study skills" for dyslexic students
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd like to canvas members opinions about a discussion
>> on-going elsewhere - and hopefully message 4 might be taken up????
>>
>> Message 1 - ILPS etc should measure SMART targets for
>> dyslexia study skills
>>
>> Message 2 What exactly are SMART targets? I do hope
>> they aren't something like: In two weeks time you will be able to read
> a
>> chapter of your text book and understand it during a morning's session
>> in the library. Because sometimes I can do that and sometimes it
> takes
>> several days and I need a friend to help me sort out where I've gone
> off
>> on the wrong tangent. Same with writing: sometimes I'm fluent and
>> sometimes the words jam between the understanding in my head and my
>> fingers on the keys or the pen in my hand and again I need a colleague
>> to sort me out. And I'm a compensated dyslexic in David McLoughlin's
>> scheme. (written by an experienced professional person with dyslexia)
>> The continuous development I'm suggesting may be
>> difficult to put a measurement to, but the students are so individual
>> and the effects of the SpLD so variable that trying to fit numbers to
>> their (our/ my) attainment of SMART targets doesn't map on to the
>> experience of life as a dyslexic.
>>
>> Message 3 My concern is that "dyslexia study skills"
>> are being seen as a commodity which can be quantified [in advance by
> an
>> assessor], measured [i.e. 'ticked off as complete' in an ILP] and
>> audited [SFE-DSA team] like building a bog-standard car in an assembly
>> line, whereas supporting a student is a one-off customised service.
>> Somewhere the idea of supporting a student has been exchanged for
>> remedial teaching [i.e. remedying a deficit in earlier education] by
>> some fast-track method. WE all know the latter does not exist but the
>> accounting mentality that has taken over seems to think it does!
>> Other disabled students get on-going support
> recognising
>> that their disability will not go away - why are dyslexic students
>> treated as though they can be cured?????
>>
>> Message 4 I do hope someone from SFE has seen Message
>> 3, will understand and be able to act on it sensibly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr John S Conway BSc PhD FGS FRGS FHEA MNADP
>> Director, MSc International Rural Development
>> Director, BSc Countryside Management
>> Chair, Research Committee
>> Principal Lecturer : Soil & Earth Science
>> Disability Officer
>> Royal Agricultural College,
>> Cirencester, Glos GL7 6JS
>> tel 01285 652531 fax 01285 650219
>>
>>
>>
>> This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipients. Access to this
>> e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken
> or
>> omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and unlawful. The
>> recipient acknowledges that the Royal Agricultural College cannot
>> control the content of information received in transmissions made via
>> the Internet.
>>
>> Royal Agricultural College (Registered in England No: 99168) & Royal
>> Agricultural College Enterprises Ltd (Registered in England No:
> 2752048)
>> are the trading names of the Royal Agricultural College
>>
>> Registered Office: Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester,
>> Gloucestershire, GL7 6JS
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> Dr Ember Kelly
> Communication & Support Services Coordinator
> Access Unit for Deaf and Disabled Students
> University of Bristol, 4th Floor, Union Building
> Queens Road, Clifton, Bristol BS8 1LN
> Minicom: 0117 9545731 (text only)
> Mobile: 07717 360868 (SMS text only) Fax: 0117 923 8546
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.71/2336 - Release Date: 08/30/09
17:51:00
|