 |
 |
Hmmm - I am assessing the needs of a student for the MA SW course right now and although I have yet to be able to speak in detail to the course tutors, (time of year) the feedback I have received so far suggests that it is accelerated. If Deaf/disabled students are indeed receiving the advice you mention, doesn't this suggest that the accelerated courses are perhaps discriminating by making them inaccessible purely as a result of the acceleration? If the students are academically capable of achieving a PGrad award but being redirected to an UGrad are they not being disadvantaged? Going back to the original question, however. Have colleagues seen this? http://www.deaflawyers.org.uk/blawg/?m=20070630 Not that this proves anything as the outcome is yet to happen, but it does show that the DRC are prepared to support this kind of case, if the student wishes it to. cheers Paddy -----Original Message----- From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Felicity Burgess Sent: 06 July 2007 13:00 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Deaf student on placement (going off on a tangent) Dear Paddy, I can't make any informed comment, as I can only compare the criteria for allied health placements (UG/PG), which fall under a different qualifications body. I do wonder whether social work students are given similar advice with regard to accelerated courses (or even whether the postgrad. SW course is accelerated in the same way as OT and PT ones are). I know a number of allied health students who chose to do a second degree rather than a PG degree to get their qualification due to the stress/workload related to the accelerated PG courses. I certainly know that when prospective Deaf/disabled students have asked for advice on professional web forums, other people have suggested doing the undergrad course due to better funding and more time in which to complete. Quoting "Turner, Paddy" <[log in to unmask]>: > Thanks Felicity - I agree, the competence aspect, however, is not what > I meant with regard to the difference in the placements. Simply that > the MA seems to me to be a bit more intensive so that the interpreter > might be needed more often? Maybe not...... > P > > -----Original Message----- > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Felicity Burgess > Sent: 06 July 2007 10:16 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Deaf student on placement > > > 3) You mention 'department' - is this your academic department or > > the employer? If it is the former, then the employer may be more > > flexible and accommodating than the department currently imagines. > > We have sent students on social work placement before and the > > interpreting needs were not so great (but this was U/G rather than > > P/G). If the student were to go on and gain employment for the > > social services there may well be arrangements in place to minimise > > the interpeting costs through Access to Work by structuring the work differently. > > In theory, there should be no difference between the competence > standards/level of work on placement between the undergrad/postgrad > courses (there is a difference between the standard of academic work > expected, having done interprofessional modules with MSc and undergrad > students concurrently). > > I would second the call to look at the way the placements are > structured; I would not have got through my placements if I/clinical > supervisor/school contact had not negotiated sensible working practices. > There needs to be a balance between getting a wide enough range of > placements to meet competence standards and not forcing students to do > too many placements in areas where they would be unlikely to work due > to > (e.g.) the uncertainty/pace etc. > > > >