Hi
I haven't had a BSL user with AT training in the 15-16 cohort so this
may be a new thing/interpretation. My last BSL using student had
explicit funding for AT training + BSL support from her usual providers
so she had someone familiar with her signing styles etc.
I would ask SFE to provide a direct reference to the relevant part of
the DSA regulations which both state that they can't pay for the terps
AND the registered AT supplier's regulations which explicitly states
they MUST pay for terps. I find even asking for a citation gets a
resolution in some cases...
Let us know the outcome as that's an important issue which we must not
let drop quietly cos we need to make sure students CAN fairly and fully
access AT training with whatever support is needed!
Natalya
On 08/12/16 16:58, Cheron Stevenson wrote:
> I have always sought AT quotes that include interpreting support for those students that require it. SFE have refused this as stated below:
>
>
> 'All AT providers who are QAG registered we feel should be able to provide their support in different formats and ways so that all student's can receive this including students with disabilities or difficulties. As mentioned in the previous email we feel we would not pay the additional costs for BSL interpretation to be used in AT training for the above reason.'
>
> Is this response familiar to anyone? I would appreciate any advice and whether anyone has successfully challenged it. I think it is highly unlikely that AT trainers/suppliers will absorb the cost of providing an appropriately qualified interpreter so that the student can access the training. What other appropriate formats could possibly meet the needs of a profoundly deaf students? I am at a loss to understand SFE's 'logic.'
>
> Chéron Stevenson
> Freelance Student Assessor.
>
|