There was a comment about support tutors not "editing" or "proof
reading" dyslexic students work and that they should have developed the
skills within whatever time was allocated [the notional 23 hours maybe].

It's maybe worth stopping to consider the comment by one such tutor "if
they haven't developed the skills during 12-13 years at school - how is
a dyslexic tutor at an HEI going to remedy that in 23 hours?   Are we
employing magicians as study tutors?  Are schools totally and utterly
incompetent at teaching?

Seems that the easiest answer would be to continue to provide support
throughout the degree.  Requiring a signed [by the student] time sheet
or invoice needs to be trusted by the LEA as proof of work undertaken.
Is there a hint that LEAs think HEIs are ripping them off?

Also, in our experience, very few of the students here with DSAs
actually use much support - but those that do really benefit from it and
would probably crash and burn without it.  The long term cost of that
failure is probably far greater to society than a few hours of support.

But why are LEAs reputedly being so difficult?  It's not their money is
it?  Do they perhaps get to keep what isn't spent on the student? ???

[shouldn't have watched the Da Vinci Code - got the conspiracy bug] 

Dr John S Conway 
Disability Officer / Principal Lecturer in Soil Science / Chair,
Research Committee 
Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, Glos GL7 6JS 
01285 652531 ext 2234  fax 01285 650219 
http://www.rac.ac.uk/index.php?_id=590 
email [log in to unmask] 
  
  
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Penny Georgiou
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 3:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs

In the parable of the talents, which is one of my favourite bible
stories, moral purity does not lie with those who do nothing.
Universities are necessarily best placed to provide services to students
with disabilities: Education support workers, specialist learning
support, Assistive Technology training, Mentoring etc and so be the ones
to charge these to the DSA. Many of these services would not be
commercially or logistically viable for those working outside the
institution to run, so it is dangerous and absurd to attack that
principle.

One occassionally hears from LEA officers of some practices that seem
difficult to justify, even from an institutional perspective. This
inevitably triggers drives in some quarters to scrutinise and curtail
all activities. Is there anything that can be done about that, rather
than making it difficult for all institutions to administer the deliver
of support services. 

It is not inappropriate for there to be an annual review of specialist
learning support, where the student does continue to take it up. Since,
needs assessors and assessment centres are not always the font of
knowledge, sainthood and efficiency, I am not sure that it is a good
idea for these items to wait upon them indiscriminantly. In this
instance, I think that the DO or study skills tutor should be the one's
to make the recommendation. However, it should be understood that if an
LEA officer feels that further justification is required in a particular
case, then the specific instance can be referred to the Assessment
Centre. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Claire Wickham, Centre
for Access and Communication Studies
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs


Well said Andy: thank you for reminding us all of the bigger picture and

underlying principles,

CLaire

--On 08 June 2006 14:09 +0100 A Velarde <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Interesting. I just would like to place a thought, in the most 
> speculative tradition. Yeah, lets take a cupa. The separation between 
> assessment of individual needs (DSA assessment) vs assessment of 
> barries (DO's job) may be theoretically possible but not realistic or 
> practicle. DOs  do not conduct social model assessments (althoug some 
> Universities believe they do so, they may be right) but duplicate 
> individual assessments becuase their institutions send them clear 
> signals that rather than being actors of organisational change they 
> should keep to medicalise the condition of the disabled individual not

> the disabled institution. Assessment of individual needs have been 
> instrumental for the privatisation of an LEA function, and it is 
> working reasonably well. At least  this appears to be the case if one 
> counts how many companies have been established to support the 
> disadvantaged. What appears that is not working is the Do's role 
> applicable to Universities. This is a clear example of how government 
> funding is being diverted to the private sector instead of supporting 
> a social model.  Dos are not only underpaid (having to deal with 
> 300-400 files per month, managing support workers, etc) but are a 
> burger in the sandwish. It would change a bit if  HEFCE helps the Do's

> function and support  their plea to updated their 1999 guidance (Base 
> level
> provisions...) A clarification of their role/work load (post senda,
> postDES) would solve all these problems. This is something that if
HEFCE
> does not commit themself in doing this, noone would do. Unless of
course
> NADO wakes up.  Maybe one day.  Andy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "LINDA WALKER" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:07 PM
> Subject: Re: One to one tuition and LEAs
>
>
> Hi All
>
> Page 9 of the new (06/07) Bridging the Gap specifies "Your disability 
> advisor should not carry out your DSA-needs assessment."
>
> Regards
> Linda
>
> Linda Walker
> Blackpool & The Fylde College
> HE Support Co-ordinator
> Tel: 01253 504357
> minicom: 01253 355755
>
>>>> [log in to unmask] 06/08/06 11:25 am >>>
> Dear All
>
> This question has not gone away. Having talked to an LEA this morning,

> they are intending to bring in a policy for 1:1 tuition based on a 
> gospel truth attititude to the example of 23 hours quoted in Claire 
> Jamieson's report.
>
> Despite the DfES assurance that recommendations will still be based on

> student need, we need to be more pro-active about this now or the 
> implications for the next academic year are not pleasant.
>
> Is anyone actually doing anything about this with the powers that be??
>
> Also, the LEA refuses to take Disability Officers recommendations and 
> insists on going back to an Access Centre for even very small changes 
> to recommendations - apparently DSOs are considered to have an 
> interest if they are arranging a student's support. This is despite 
> the DfES guidance to the contrary. Any comments?
>
>
> Regards
>
> Liz
>
> Liz Thompson
> Learning Support Officer
>
> Student Services
> University of Brighton
> Room 2, Manor House
> Moulsecoomb Place
> Brighton BN2 4GA



----------------------
Claire Wickham,
Director: Centre for Access and Communication Studies University of
Bristol Union Building Queen's Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1LN

Tel: 0117 954 5710/5705
Textphone: 0117 954 5715
Fax: 0117 954 5714

[log in to unmask]