 |
 |
....which means the bottom-line dilemma is: 1) shock tactics - remove all support as in study skills etc and hope that the shock and urgency will help to force rapid and radical change. Dangers being: short-term lack of both support and inclusive approaches leave first wave of students significantly disadvantaged. 2) gradual change - education, education, education then withdraw support in stages according to where inclusive practice has been established. Dangers: without the imperatives, change happens too slowly or not at all. Tricky one - but I'm gonna plump for 2) until or unless I've seen 1) work dramatically successfully..........I think! Paddy -----Original Message----- From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of A Velarde Sent: 07 November 2008 12:26 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support Hello Paddy. this needs to be structured -linked- with primary-secondary education. Whihc i suspect has been linked for a the last 5 or so year. If such skills are tought at that level, terciary education could then be transformed via a sensible flexible curriculum. Many HE modules use pedagogical technologies of the middle ages and do not change because conveninetly organisations consider that the problem are their (dyslkexic) students who cannot be normal (hence lets give them 10-15-100 hrs of study skills). we need a different approach. Study skills yes, but should't the goverment also employ such approach/resources to retrain HE teachers? To teach them what is and more importantly 'deliver' a flexible curriculum? While we approach the problem in a short term baiss (via study skills a computer, etc), we donot allow HE to be inclusive. We are in a catch 22 situation. Andy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Turner, Paddy" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 11:51 AM Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support Absolutely Andy. Speaking for myself (but I suspect many, many others), we are doing both. What you are suggesting below however, will not help today or tomorrow - so the short term solutions still need actioning and that means discussing them too! P -----Original Message----- From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of A Velarde Sent: 07 November 2008 10:37 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support Hi Amanda. thank you. Conflict of interest. I think this one would better be responded by Ekaterina. But I want to comment briefly on a closely related issue. The main stake holder that has not provided its view so far is the dyslexic community (students). Assessors, DOs. administrators, tutors, etc, we all are part of an institutionalised framework, suppliers of services. Shouldn't we better ask 'them' what is best? Isn't this a conflict of interest in itself. We all decide for them. Isn't this very 'medical model' approach? We assume that 'they' want/need 'study skills support' and are discussing how many hours. Isn't it a real possibility that the students are 'really' asking for a flexible curriculum and not only for more 'omega tree fish oil' in the form of 'study skills'? Are we with this approach reversing the blame (what the social model theorist have been criticising form more than 30 years)? Shouldn't we be advocating for dyslexic people to have all books in auditory format? Shouldn't the alternative examinations an entitlement rather than a verification of a real impossibility of writing to 'compensate it with 25 minutes extra time'? Should academic tutors use multisensory approaches to teaching rather than asking dyslexia tutors to 'teach' students 'skills'? Shouldn't we encourage modules to consider problem solving assignments and not only 'essays'? The above are only examples. I think we all here have something to think about here. We are all focusing on auxiliary aids and services. Perhaps the issue is how tomake a flexible curriculum. Best, Andy best, Andres ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 6:28 AM Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support Andy, Where or what is the conflict of interest in your view? Much this discussion thread is about an administrative attitude to disability, tempered with some aspects of professionalization issues. The 'who has what qualification' element seems to me to be red herring because the issue on the ILP (from the administrative point of view) is whether or not the document is fit for purpose. The purpose appears to be to provide a means of auditing the service providers in such a way as to produce evidence of continuing need for the provision of a service which is an additional cost to the student (and therefore DSA-able). That surely IS a conflict of interest because the producer of the ILP is also the agent who stands to benefit financially from the continued provision of the service. The argument that 'dyslexia tutors should be producing ILPs anyway' is similarly irrelevant because we see emerging a situation where the SLC refer to (as yet unspecified) criteria, ie the existing ILP's may be unfit for SLC purpose and have to be adapted to suit the demands of the DSA audit process. So with regard to the development of the ILP template, the criteria, and its possible relationship to down-streaming from the DSA report in an manner that fits with the SLC (or QAG??) audit purposes, there may be risk of conflict of interest arising as a result of developers/advisers coming from within the existing DSA sector and adopting an approach that either replicates or protects their dominant positions or market-shares. That might be a risk or two worth taking in order to ensure stakeholder involvement and also a sense of continuity during a period of change. Amanda On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 16:08:55 -0000, A Velarde <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Hi Ekaterine. I think you have spotted a conflict of interest here. Ta, >Andy > ----- Original Message ----- > From: E.Barakhta > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:45 PM > Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support > > > Andy > > I totally agree with you. > > Personally I would also feel concerned that the same people 'who drafted the NAR' are now devising the ILP. Unless these people have qualifications of Educational Psychologists or SpLD tutors I fail to see how their experience as Needs Assessors can contribute to devising an effective ILP. > > Kind regards > > Ekaterina Barakhta > Senior Assessor > The Access Centre > Disabled Student Services (Frank Henshaw Building) > The Open University > Hammerwood Gate > Kents Hill > Milton Keynes > United Kingdom > MK7 6BY > Tel +44 (0) 1908 655921 > > > > > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- ---- > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of A Velarde > Sent: 06 November 2008 14:32 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support > > > Hi. Technically the ILP and a LEA- Assessment of Needs should be and reflect two different processes. I appreciate that currently they look as if they are the same, particularly when there main concern is the provision of auxiliary aids and services financed by an LEA. > > From a Disability Office that embraces the Social Model however, an ILP and an Assessment of Needs are different. An ILP is an institutional document - with a focus on identifying and addressing organisational barriers (environmental issues). The LEA Assessment of Needs is rather an evaluation of individual efforts under the circumstances of an impairment and follows a medical model of disabilities. The first one docusses on adaptations and adjustments, the second one on auxiliary aids and services. > > This of course is a non PC statement. > > Best, Andy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ros Lehany > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 2:17 PM > Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support > > > ADSHE (Association of Dyslexia Specialists in Higher Education) are > hoping to have examples of ILPs in current use uploaded to their website early next week- www.adshe.org.uk > > > We met with Elaine Urquhart recently and she told us that > '.... the ILP template is work in progress and is being devised by the people who drafted the NAR (SLC, DSA QAG, DIUS, ASASA) and will be out soon on DSA-QAG website.' She also said that ' In order to get feedback it will need to be used for a certain period of time before it can be evaluated' > > Best wishes > Ros > > Ros Lehany > Chair- Association of Dyslexia Specialists in Higher Education > > email: [log in to unmask] > Work: 0113 2193038 > Mobile: 0779 149 4690 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Catherine Salisbury > Sent: 06 November 2008 14:01 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support > > Hi carol > I have an Ilp that I use as a freelance tutor- I have just revamped it > to be in line with the guidelines (I hope!) Would you like to see a copy of it off- list? > Cathy > > On 6 Nov 2008, at 13:09, "E.Barakhta" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > Carol > > > > My assumption is that the ILP would look like Idividual Education > Plan > > that is devised for children with Special Needs at school. > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Ekaterina Barakhta > > Senior Assessor > >> The Access Centre > >> Disabled Student Services (Frank Henshaw Building) The Open > >> University Hammerwood Gate Kents Hill Milton Keynes United Kingdom > >> MK7 6BY > >> Tel +44 (0) 1908 655921 > >> > >> > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carol Thomas > > Sent: 06 November 2008 13:06 > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: 10 hour "rule" for dyslexic support > > > > As the manager of the Learning Support Service responsible for > > supporting the learning and teaching of students with SpLDs I would > > personally like to thank everyone on the list for their contribution. > > Without this list (and several other disability lists) I would be > > unaware of the changes. I feel that I should have been informed of > > this formally - but I realise these formal communications may not be > > delivered to the relevant person in each HEI. > > > > I still feel that I do not know what the ILP should look like - and > > have not seen a standard template. Is there one available? The only > > document I have formally seen so far seen are linked to assessment > > centres (and initial student assessment) not items relevant to study > > skills providers and a ten hour checklist/ progress monitor. Please > > let me know if I have missed this template. > > > > If anyone in the HEI sector has developed an ILP template and would > be > > willing to share this please could you contact me. > > > > Regards > > Carol > > > > > > > > Carol Thomas, Head of Learning Support Services Learning and Teaching > > Institute University of Chester Parkgate Road Chester, CH1 4BJ > > (01244) 513311 > > [log in to unmask] > > > > --------------------------------- > > The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an > > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in > Scotland > > (SC 038302). > > > > > --------------------------------- > The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).