Claire,
I thought this was the lead up to a consultation?  It says on the DSAQAG 
site “A follow up consultation with SLC and Users of the new report format 
will commence at the start of 2009”. Don’t the NMH providers and the HEIs 
count as ‘users’? It is possible to be user and supplier both?
I have read the above to mean that QAG with consult with SLC and Users. But 
I can see there’s other ways of reading it! Clearly there’s a problem if 
you do not have access to a QAG rep. Meanwhile, it says ask Elaine Urquhart 
at the SLC.

I agree about the lack of forum, but there is always this disforum which is 
open in terms of joining or just looking at the archives without 
registering. Alternatively ask SLC for something that is a bit more 
interactive/dynamic than the FAQ exercise. FAQ response is fine, but how do 
we know if anyone has asked questions on different topics and/or if there’s 
answers forthcoming? I am not sure what format that would take, but maybe 
something like a posting on DSAQAG website at the end of the week 
saying ‘questions on XYZ have been received. The answer to x is 3, the 
answer to y is no, and z will be answered by the end of November.’….  

Amanda







On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:21:39 +0100, Claire Wickham 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Well said Ian: I also find the us of the term "study skills" confusing
>as this is exactly what all students receive...either as personal
>tuition, workshops or via the intranet. I do think this should be
>challenged as the next step might be to say that HEIs are responsible
>for "study skills" tuition for all students, disabled and non-disabled.
>
>What is frustrating is that there doesn't appear to be a well-signposted
>forum for us, as a sector not as individuals, to discuss and challenge
>the new guidelines....consultation by SLC would have been helpful.
>
>ATB
>
>Claire  
>
>
>Claire Wickham
>Senior Disability Officer
>Disability Resource Centre
>University of the West of England
>Frenchay Campus
>Coldharbour Lane
>Bristol BS16 1QY
> 
>Tel: 0117 328 3737
>Textphone: 0117 32 83644
>Fax: 0117 32 82935
> 
>Please note that this e-mail was written using speech input and may
>contain some small voice recognition errors.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian F.
>Sent: 16 September 2008 02:23
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Study Skills FAQs - for info
>
>Guidelines on how DSA should be administered are aimed at the bodies
>involved in its administration. Some of these bodies even produce their
>own guidelines to try to make the administration of the DSA fit in with
>their own systems (e.g. demanding multiple quotations for equipment,
>support or even taxis). Irrespective of any guidance, the legislation
>remains the same and it's up to us as assessors and DOs to ensure it is
>properly implemented even if this means guidance needs to be challenged.
>I suspect that should it come to court, just claiming we were following
>guidelines  wouldn't really wash considering we're supposed to be the
>specialists rather than the administrators.
>
>In the case of 'study skills', it's really hard to work out a precise
>formula to identify just how much assistance a student might need,
>especially when they haven't even started the course yet. For some
>reason, there were concerns raised about allowing the student, DO and
>specialist tutor to set the number of hours needed from the start. Hence
>the "up to 10 sessions then review" guidance, which was never supposed
>to be set in stone as a regulation, it just seemed a sensible
>compromise.
>
>Assessors and DOs should continue to make recommendations for the number
>of sessions they feel is appropriate, whether it's 1, 10, 20 or 30  but
>rather than having to carefully justify their recommendations in each
>case (as was the case prior to this guidance) it would appear should now
>just take extra care to justify their recommendations when suggesting
>more than ten sessions are required. I don't really have a problem with
>the "up to 10 sessions" 
>guidance because I know it wouldn't actually stand up in court, if
>challenged.
>
>I have more of a problem with the use of the phrase "Study Skills" to
>describe this type of support. Many universities provide 'study skills' 
>support to all students, some even offer it on a one-to-one basis. The
>type of assistance we're talking about is specialist non-subject based
>learning support aimed at helping the student address the effects of
>specific learning difficulties on participation in the course. Referring
>to it as 'study skills' seems, to me, patronising both to the student
>and to the person who we're assuming has undergone specialist training
>in order to provide this specialist assistance.  Referring to this as
>'study skills' to me demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the
>nature of, and justification for, this assistance.
>
>Ian Francis
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "A Velarde" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 4:33 PM
>Subject: Re: Study Skills FAQs - for info
>
>
>Manda. "should" may be read as a compulsory suggestion. Particularly
>when
>univesities also provide disabled students suport for students who do
>not
>'qualify' for goverment fundings. Some students may need on session,
>some
>others 300. the number 10 is only indicative. Perhaps we should look at
>this
>in a different perspective. Would be acceptable is deaf people are given
>10
>hours of sinig language or blind people a certain amount of 'accessible
>material'? Andy
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 7:51 AM
>Subject: Re: Study Skills FAQs - for info
>
>
>Probably worth pointing out that the FAQ Study Skills should be read in
>conjunction with the 19 08 08 document 'Completing the SLC DSA
>Assessment
>of Needs report', section C3 'Personal Support Non Medical Helpers'.
>http://www.dsa-qag.org.uk/content.asp?ContentID=77
>
>The 'Completing' document is where the initial 10 sessions is
>stipulated: "SLC will accept recommendations of up to ten one hour
>sessions
>of individual non subject specific study skills support made in the DSA
>Need Assessment report." (p12) and it includes the instruction that "The
>DSA Needs Assessment report should recommend that study skills tuition
>is
>undertaken by a suitably qualified tutor."(p15)
>
>Amanda Kent
>DSA needs assessor
>
>
>
>On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:21:57 +0100, Elaine Shillcock
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Dear All
>>
>>
>>
>>See below the text of a FAQ document released on 12 Sep - available for
>>download from the DSA QAG website
>>
>>
>>
>>Elaine Shillcock
>>
>>The University of Manchester
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Study skills - Frequently Asked Questions
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1              How does the SLC define 'study skills'?
>>
>>The SLC requires all 'study skills' funded by DSA to be in accordance
>with
>>the DIUS guidance document as follows:
>>
>>Study skills tuition to help manage difficulties within higher
>education,
>>language and numeracy through the more effective use of dyslexic
>thinking
>>styles. Individual study support sessions may be required because
>>generalised advice offered by a department may not take into account
>>different learning skills. DIUS has not set a ceiling on the number of
>hours
>>of study skills support that may be provided through the DSAs. However,
>the
>>aim of such support should be to impart generic skills which, together
>with
>>any specialist equipment that has been provided, will allow the student
>to
>>become an independent learner. Therefore, any study skills support
>>recommended should be tailored to the student's individual
>>
>>needs, setting out clear goals and timescales for achieving those goals
>>(Para 96).
>>
>>2              Should 'Study Skills' be on a one-to-one basis?
>>
>>The SLC requires that each study skills session should be on a
>one-to-one
>>basis in line with the DIUS guidance document.
>>
>>DSAs may be used only where a student is obliged by reason of his
>disability
>>to incur costs in receiving specialised individual support. Some
>students
>>will require additional support to develop appropriate learning
>strategies
>>because of their disability, for example dyslexia or a mental health
>>condition. The aim of this support is to maximise their ability and
>remove
>>the barriers caused by the impairment. The costs of extra tutorial
>support
>>to improve his study skills (e.g. in essay construction and writing,
>>examination techniques, revision skills) would be appropriate for DSAs
>(Para
>>135).
>>
>>3          When is an Individual Learning Plan [ILP] required?
>>
>>
>>
>>SLC expects all study skills support provided to students to be
>directed by
>>an Individual Learning Plan (ILP).  Working with the study skills
>provider,
>>students identify goals and targets related to his / her individual
>learning
>>needs and styles.  These should be monitored and reviewed jointly and
>>recorded regularly in the ILP.  The aim is that students develop
>strategies
>>for independent learning which enable them to access their course (in
>>accordance with DIUS guidance).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>4              What constitutes an ILP?
>>
>>SLC expects all ILPs to indicate:
>>
>>* Goals and timescales for achieving these;
>>* Goals achieved (ascertained through formative and summative
>>assessment);
>>* Additional individual needs;
>>
>>
>>
>>The ILP should also evidence student attendance at study skills support
>>sessions, for example, a signed attendance timesheet.  DSA QAG will be
>>commissioned by the SLC to carry out annual audits. ILPs should be
>available
>>on request to DSA-QAG auditors when the auditing of NMH begins.
>>
>>5              What if the assessment of need is being undertaken on
>behalf
>>of a funding body other than SLC e.g. a local authority?
>>
>>SLC notes that ILPs are already being compiled by the majority of study
>>skills providers and are an example of good practice and having sought
>>advice from LA officers have agreed that this should become standard
>>practice.
>>
>>
>>
>>6              In the event of a student being assessed for the second
>time
>>on the basis of SpLD (e.g. undertaking a PG course), should the DSA
>assessor
>>recommend the standard 10 sessions with an ILP?
>>
>>SLC views study skills provision under DSA in the same light as the
>>provision of any previous strategies either technological or
>human-based.
>>The number of study skills sessions received should be noted in the
>>assessment of need report.  Further funding for study skills should be
>>consolidated with a request for an ILP from the provider concerned.
>The
>ILP
>>will form the basis for any further recommendations for funding.
>>
>>
>>
>>7          What if it is not possible for an ILP to be obtained for
>study
>>skills previously awarded?
>>
>>
>>
>>SLC views that the assessment of need report should detail why this is
>not
>>possible with respect to the supplier concerned.  In the light of there
>>being no means of obtaining an ILP, the DSA assessor should resort to
>the
>>recommendation of 10 sessions with an ILP for all future study skills
>>sessions.
>>
>>8          If a request for further study skills support is made by a
>>supplier with respect to a student that has already been awarded study
>>skills in previous years, should an assessor ask for a further 10
>sessions?
>>
>>
>>
>>SLC feels that an ILP will suffice in this case and the assessor should
>>inform the student that any request for further study skills support
>can be
>>made once this has been provided to him/her by the supplier concerned.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>9              Who should keep a copy of the ILP?
>>
>>SLC feels that the student, the study skills provider and the funding
>body
>>concerned should all have copied of the ILP.  These should be available
>on
>>request to DSA-QAG auditors when the auditing of NMH begins.
>>
>>
>>
>>Student Loans Company Ltd.
>>
>>12th September 2008.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
>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