I didn't say that this was something we necessarily agree with - we work
on a case by case basis to assess how much extra time a student might
require, based on their Assessment of Study Need. The original point was
whether the 50% recommendation was ever queried, and why, and I think
the only time I've seen it queried (by the exams office, or individual
departments) was in cases where a student has an amanuensis and/or
reader.

I totally agree that using an amanuensis, reader etc does not negate the
need for extra time, and may actually mean that additional time is
required, particularly if a student has not accessed this kind of
support in exams before. 

Harriet Cannon

Disability Coordinator
University of Leeds
0113 343 7538




-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Felicity Burgess
Sent: 18 December 2007 17:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Extra time for visually impaired students


I was struggling to make sense of this as well; the amount of extra
processing needed when using a scribe/reader/practical assistant can be
huge (particularly if there's still that requirement around that all
'unusual'/subject specific words have to be spelt).



Quoting Gerard Conroy <[log in to unmask]>:

> Harriet even for someone using an amanuensis at least 50% extra time 
> is not unreasonable. I have been an amanuensis for someone and it is 
> very stressful
> and time consuming on both parties. As the scribe I had to constantly
> interrupt the flow of ideas since I just could not keep up. I had to
> check
> frequently that what I had written correctly represented the views of
the
> student. All of which broke up the student's concentration. I would
never
> recommend less than 50% extra time. This brings us back to the timing
> issue,
> why is time important? There can be few subjects which need a timed
> response.
>
> Gerard Conroy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Harriet Cannon
> Sent: 18 December 2007 16:34
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Extra time for visually impaired students
>
> Hi Erin,
>
> The only time I've seen a 50% recommendation queried (also happens 
> with 100% extra time recommendations) is when the student is also 
> using a reader and/or amanuensis.  The argument then has been that, if

> someone is there to read and/or write for the student, then they 
> should not need the additional time. Even then, at least 25% is 
> normally recommended to allow for the fact that getting someone to 
> read to you or write for you is not always as quick as doing it 
> yourself.  Readers and amanuenses also need breaks building into the 
> exam time, which depends on the length of the exam, but I think is 
> something like one 10-15 min break for a three hour exam.
>
> 50% extra time is a pretty standard recommendation for our VI 
> students.
>
> Harriet
>
> Harriet Cannon
>
> Disability Coordinator
> University of Leeds
> 0113 343 7538
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jackson, Erin
> Sent: 18 December 2007 14:34
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Extra time for visually impaired students
>
>
> Many thanks to all who replied, you were very helpful!
>
>
> Erin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian F.
> Sent: 16 December 2007 23:00
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Extra time for visually impaired students
>
>  Somewhere between 25% - 50% is common, depending on the effects of 
> the visual impairment, the type of  course and the strategies the 
> student will use during the exam. Too much extra time in itself can 
> cause further problems, especially if there are a few exams on the 
> same day. Often eyesight tends to deteriorate with fatigue and exams 
> are exhausting even
>
> without a disability. On the other hand, in some cases 100% extra time

> (or
> more) can be justified. Sometimes, no extra time might be a reasonable

> recommendation.
>
> A student who can read comfortably from enlarged print for long 
> periods and can also sit and work at a computer with magnification for

> long periods might not need as much extra time (assuming these 
> adjustments will be in
>
> place in the exam) as a student who requires  braille, audio or 
> electronic versions of papers and prepares answers using a computer 
> and screenreader.
> Students who can use enlarged print / magnification but have a very
> restricted field of vision might need longer than those without this
> problem, to take into account how slow reading can be when you can
only
> see
> one or two words at a time irrespective of how large the print is.
Exams
>
> that require  students to refer to diagrams, images, charts or tables 
> might require more time than text-based papers.
>
> Maybe the original assessor can provide you with more details about 
> why 50% exta time was requested in this particular case if it's not 
> made clear in
> the assessment report. It's important that tutors understand why
> recommendations are being made so they are confident these are
> 'reasonable
> adjustments' that don't risk devaluing the exam process for the
student
> (or
> for other students, if grades are calculated based on relative test
> scores).
> Assuming timed exams are a sensible way of testing people, of course
...
>
> Ian Francis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Claire Wickham" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 5:13 PM
> Subject: Re: Extra time for visually impaired students
>
>
> > Yes, 50% does seem a standard recommendation...but why is the tutor 
> > querying this? The extra time is usually justified on a combination 
> > of
>
> > additional time required for reading (questions and reading back
> answers)
> > and additional time required for writing the answers. It is true 
> > that
> the
> > time taken to perform these tasks is not measured and as a sector we
> can
> > be criticised for lack of evidence-based judgements but the 50% is 
> > generally accepted practice.
> >
> > ATB
> >
> > Claire
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> on
> > behalf of Jackson, Erin
> > Sent: Fri 14/12/2007 16:34
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Extra time for visually impaired students
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have had a query from a tutor on a 50% extra time recommendation 
> > for
> a
> > visually impaired student. I thought that this was a fairly standard

> > recommendation, and I wondered if anyone else had the same 
> > impression?
> >
> > The student's Assessment of Needs states 50%, would you query this?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any advice!
> >
> > Erin
> >
> > Erin Jackson
> >
> > Disability Adviser
> > Student Services
> > University of Bolton
> > Deane Road
> > Bolton BL3 5AB
> > Tel: 01204 903087
> > Minicom: 01204 903490
> > www.bolton.ac.uk/disability
> > Please don't print off this email unless it's entirely necessary -
> save
> > the planet!
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > This incoming email to UWE has been independently scanned for 
> > viruses
> by
> > McAfee anti-virus software and none were detected
> >
> >
> >
> > This email was independently scanned for viruses by McAfee 
> > anti-virus software and none were found
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> --------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.1/1183 - Release Date: 
> 13/12/2007 09:15
>
>
> --
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has 
> removed 2847 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this 
> message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: 
> http://www.spamfighter.com/len
>
>
>