 |
 |
Hi I'm not sure if this has been brought up already but I had a case today where a student who applied in 13/14 has had their equipment recommendations pended until they complete a 14/15 application form. I was already in correspondence with SFE as they were querying the recommendations but I can't see where the requirement for a 14/15 form has suddenly come from. These seems to go beyond ticking a box to say that they will continue to require the DSA in 14/15. Has anyone else come across something similar? Regards Kevin Brunton DSA Needs Assessor On 3 July 2014 18:03, Imogen Bowers <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Indeed john, it is hard enough, and often very time consuming to even find > out from the HEI if the course runs on a mac platform or not. To be tasked > with finding out the very large number of variables in terms of support, > adjustments etc at each and every institution that delivers degree courses, > will be challenging, to say the least. > > > Regards, Imogen Bowers, Sent from my iPhone > > On 3 Jul 2014, at 17:38, John Conway <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I'm a director of NADP but not necessarily speaking on NADP’s behalf …… > I think our view is that Assessment Centres are not in a position to know > exactly what is available at each HEI on each programme and might not be in > a position to dictate to an HEI. > > > > They do a great job in assessing what would be suitable provision for a > particular student but BIS are putting them in a difficult position by > expecting them to decide what a HEI should provide and what the DSA should > provide. > > > > Regards, > > John > > > > Dr John Conway > > Director of Research > > Principal Lecturer in Soil Science > > Programme Manager, MSc International Rural Development & MSc Sustainable > Agriculture and Food Security > > Disability Officer > > Royal Agricultural University, Cirencester, Glos GL7 6JS > > 01285 652531 ext. 2234 > > [log in to unmask] > > > > *From:* Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On Behalf Of > *Phil Davis > *Sent:* 03 July 2014 5:22 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: SFE implementing proposed DSA cuts/changes already? > > > > Hi Imogen > > > > My understanding is that the new evidence requirement is for SFE to decide > whether a student is eligible to receive DSA (and therefore in a position > to arrange a needs assessment in due course). > > > > The conversations I have been party to have indicated needs assessors will > be required to indicate where the ‘balance’ of reasonable adjustments lies > between DSA and HEIs – in effect instructing HEIs which adjustments they > will be required to put in place. But this development is one of the > changes to be introduced in 15/16, so should not be an issue at present as > far as I understand. > > > > NADP have been key to voice their concern that assessment centres are not > necessarily in a position to fulfil this expectation (though I would not > want to speak for NADP here!). > > > > Phil > > > > *From:* Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On Behalf Of > *Imogen Bowers > *Sent:* 03 July 2014 17:11 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: SFE implementing proposed DSA cuts/changes already? > > > > Hi Phil > > > > Does this guidance apply to how assessor make recommendations within DSA > reports or just to the nature of the medical evidence being provided by > students to be deemed as eligible for DSA? Will assessors now have to > consider how the disability impacts on day to day life and/or access to HE > as this SFE staff member seems to be suggesting that assessors need to > demonstrate how the disability impacts on day to day life in order to have > recommendations approved. > > This has huge implications for how assessors conduct assessments and how > they make recommendations. > > This needs urgent clarification. > > > > Many Thanks > > > > Imogen > > > > Imogen Bowers > > DSA Needs Assessor > > > > Imogen Bowers Consulting Limited > > [log in to unmask] > > > > Company Registration Number: 6905754 > > > > > > > > On 3 Jul 2014, at 16:51, Phil Davis <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > Hi Imogen > > > > I am currently the Chair of the National Association of Student Money > Advisers – at recent meetings of the BIS Student Finance Stakeholder > Interest Group, and the SLC Operations Group it has been confirmed the > Equality Act 2010 definition is to be used for 2014/15 (this is reflected > in the 14/15 DSA Guidance Chapter on the Practitioners website). > > > > It has also been confirmed that there has been an increase in the number > of applications being pended awaiting evidence where the evidence does not > explicitly state the equality act definition is met. > > > > We (and NADP) have expressed concern this will inevitably cause detriment > to disabled students seeking to access HE by requiring them to source > replacement evidence, sometimes with costs attached, and without any > generally available published guidance either to students, GPs or other > agents issuing such evidence regarding this requirement, or that the > requirements have changed mid-application cycle. > > > > We understand the SLC are in conversation with BIS regarding these > concerns, but ultimately SFE are acting on BIS instructions. > > > Regards > > > > Phil > > > > Phil Davis > > National Association of Student Money Advisers (NASMA) > > c/o Bishop Grosseteste University > > Lincoln > > LN1 3DY > > > > T:01522 583602 > > www.nasma.org.uk > > > > > > > > *From:* Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On Behalf > Of *Imogen Bowers > *Sent:* 03 July 2014 14:52 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* SFE implementing proposed DSA cuts/changes already? > > > > Apologies for cross posting > > > > Hi > > > > One comment made by an MP (I forget whom) at the recent debate by MP’s on > the cuts to DSA said that some universities are reporting that SFE appeared > to be implementing the proposed changes to DSA now. I can also state that > SFE seem to be implementing the changes when considering the > recommendations made in DSA reports. > > > > I am a DSA Assessor and have today received an email from SFE disputing > the DSA recommendations I have made for a student with VI. Amongst the many > infuriating queries, one relates to my recommendation of an adjustable > natural daylight task lamp recommended as the student struggles to see when > reading or working (typing/writing) in standard lighting (much more > justification than this given in the DSA report). SFE have responded by > asking….. > > > > *"Why does it have to be a daylight lamp, can't XX use her own lamp? I > would also say that it is the HEI's responsibility to provide adequate > lighting. Please can you confirm how XX copes in every day life and can I > also ask that you provide a further disability justification.* > > > > There are so many things wrong with this statement. Firstly, since when > has it been HEIs responsibility to provide adequate lighting (?!) in the > homes of students with VI?. But more worrying is the assertion by SFE that > the HEI is “responsible” for this support (surely a reference to the > proposed DSA changes and the “rebalancing” of support from DSA to the > HEI?). Also, and this is really obviously a reference to the cuts I think, > asking me to justify how the student copes in her *“everyday life”. * > > > > As far as I am aware, I do not (currently, at least) have to show how the > students disability affects their day to day life, but rather how it > affects their access to higher education. It seems that, by posing this > question, SFE are asking me to show how she meets the Equality > Act definition of disability? Give that she has already been approved for > DSA why are they asking me to provide further disability justification? > > > > Why are SFE asking for this information unless they are trying to get these > *proposed* cuts in by the "back door”? Is this a widespread new policy > and practice or is this just a “rouge” SFE person?! > > > > There has been no consultation and no Impact Assessment on these > changes/cuts and yet SFE seem to be going right ahead and implementing the > changes, on the ground, right here, right now. How can this be right? > > > > > > > > Many Thanks > > > > Imogen > > > > Imogen Bowers > > DSA Needs Assessor > > Working free lance for Staffordshire Regional Access Centre, Lancaster > University Assessment Centre, Pennine Lancashire Access Centre and > Broadbents & Co. > > > > > > > > Imogen Bowers Consulting Limited > > [log in to unmask] > > > > Company Registration Number: 6905754 > > > > > > > >