One way to avoid this would be for HEIs to ensure that prospectuses
(especially online) contained accurate and pertinant information.
This would include a comprehensive list of awards and their full
titles and duration, description of teaching and learning methods on
each course and the ways in which students are assessed on each course.
Then everyone would know what was happening. However, I like the
suggestion that assessors should spend the day finding out which
individual in a distant HEI is in a position to decribe these things;
perhaps in smaller institutions, this is information that is ready to
hand for receptionists. Elsewhere, the story is very different and it
is often quite difficult to get hold of staff, even when their names
are known. Even better when so many institutions remove all
staff contact information from their sites as part of the
pervasive data protection paranoia that runs rampant in HE. Still, the
point that assessors should be more and more personally responsible for
each individual student (with whom they generally spend a couple of
hours in total) seems to match a general mood; huh, bring it on.
In an amusing reversal of John's observation, I have several times been
informed by students that they were enrolled on four year courses (or
three year courses, for that matter) when in fact they are funded as
foundation year students or DipHE students. Assuming they pass the
course they're on and continue at the same institution, I cannot
imagine why any awards officer would require more than a letter from a
disability officer to continue any previous arrangements.
I suspect that St John knows the result of the debate: while we assess
on the basis of individual need, the impetus for that assessment comes
from legislation concerned with discrimination and proposes that one
person will not be treated differently to another or a group of peers.
It is possible that two people would have identical scores in their EP
assessments, be enrolled on the same course at the same time and in
practice need very different kinds and amounts of support (in fact it
is likely). However, if one complained that the value of support given
to the other was superior and thus discrimination had taken place, I
think the argument would be accepted. St John has elsewhere noted that
the operation of this principle will serve as an inflationary motor for
support provision (the upper limit one year is the norm the next). He
is right, but that is something to take up with the framers of
legislation rather than those whose practice is informed by it (i.e.,
me).
Ah, that feels better.
Regards, Bernard
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 15:57:09 -0000 John Conway
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Would assessors of need please contact the HEI to find out what is required
> within the course - I've had the most inventive comments made on needs
> assessment forms that bear not the slightest resemblance to reality - the
> worst being a statement that a student was on a one year course when it was
> in reality a four year course [so what funding would be available in years
> 2, 3, 4 ?]. Another stated that a first year student would be required to
> produce a 20,000 word dissertation in the first year when in reality that
> wouldn't occur until the third year [which I would have thought was pretty
> standard throughout the HE system?]
>
>
> Dr. John S Conway
> Disability Officer
> Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, Glos. GL7 6JS
> Phone +44 (0) 1285 652531 ext 2234
> Fax +44 (0) 1285 650219
> http://www.royagcol.ac.uk/~john_conway/
> <http://www.royagcol.ac.uk/~john_conway/>
>
> Declaration : CONFIDENTIALITY: The contents of this message are the views of
> the author, not necessarily the views of the Royal Agricultural College.
> This is a private message intended for the named addressee(s) only. Its
> contents may be confidential. If you have received this message in error
> please reply to say so and then delete the message. Any use, copying,
> disclosure or distribution by other than the addressee is forbidden.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skeates,St.John DEAL Awards Tm
> [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 3:40 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: A suggestion
>
> So under the present system we provide support based on the off
> chance
> that a student will experience similar difficulties to those
> previously
> experienced by a student with a similar disability on a similar
> course
> when it entirely possible that the student will not, in fact,
> experience
> any such difficulties?
>
> St.John Skeates
> Awards Section
> Bedfordshire County Council
> Direct Line 01234 718744
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mary Bown [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 3:34 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]; Skeates,St.John DEAL Awards Tm
> Subject: Re: A suggestion
>
>
>
>
> A student (and an LEA)has little conception of the amout or depth of
> study
> requered untill they are on the course so how can they prove that
> their
> disability will NOT have an addvers effect on their ability to
> study!!
>
> Sorry can't find the spell checker in this email package
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Skeates,St.John DEAL Awards Tm"
> ><[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: "Discussion list for disabled students and their support
> staff."
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: A suggestion
> >Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 15:07:00 -0000
> >
> >That the Student Support Regulations pertaining to Disabled
> Student's
> >Allowance be amended to the effect that;
> >
> >In order for a student to be eligible for Disabled Student's
> Allowance
> >and be referred for a needs assessment, they must not only prove
> they
> >have a disability but must also demonstrate to the satisfaction of
> their
> >LEA that their disability has a significant effect on their ability
> to
> >study.
> >
> >Will leave you to kick that one around for a bit :)
> >
> >St.John Skeates
> >Awards Section
> >Bedfordshire County Council
> >Direct Line 01234 718744
> >
>
> >*********************************************************************
> >This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> >intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
> they
> >are addressed.
> >
> >If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please advise the sender
> immediately
> >by using the reply facility in your e-mail software.
> >Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer.
> >
> >Any modification of the contents of this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited
> >unless expressly authorised by the sender.
>
> >*********************************************************************
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>
> *********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed.
>
> If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please advise the sender
> immediately
> by using the reply facility in your e-mail software.
> Please also destroy and delete the message from your computer.
>
> Any modification of the contents of this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited
> unless expressly authorised by the sender.
>
> *********************************************************************
----------------------
Bernard Doherty
Student Adviser
ACCESS Centre
Anglia Polytechnic University
Tel: 01223 363271 x2534
Fax: 01223 417730
Minicom: 01223 576155
[log in to unmask]
|
