"In fact the small extra expense of the DSA is a good investment both for
the individual's right to a successful life and to the national economy."

Yes, and this is precisely why it is crucial that we get the support right
on the ground, where it really makes a difference to students and not just
to the balance sheets of those selling products and services.  

Kind regards, 

PG

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Conway
Sent: 18 May 2012 21:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Software- course specific

We don't know if or when it might be reviewed, but it would be useful to
have all our reasoned and evidenced arguments as to why it is not only
essential, but incredibly good value in ensuring those students can succeed
at university and so become valuable employees contributing to the economy
and possibly paying back their student loan.  In fact the small extra
expense of the DSA is a good investment both for the individual's right to a
successful life and to the national economy.  Think not only of the repayed
student loan but the savings on benefit costs......

It would be very shortsighted to withdraw it. But I'm also thinking of the
personal benefits, the self esteem of the person, being enabled to be a
successful and fulfilled person.

I hope that makes sense?

Regards
John

On 18 May 2012, at 20:54, "Natalya Dell" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 18/05/12 16:30, J Fox wrote:
>> 1.universities to include in their charges access to the software 
>> required and to provide adequate numbers of computers
> 
> There will never be enough "public PCs" for all students who need them 
> and many of my students have very particular ergo-setups which when 
> successful increase their ability to study both in terms of duration 
> and quality of output and when not set up right are barely usable.  
> The uni could provide some ergo-stuff but not always the right 
> ergo-kit or configured correctly for some students' specific needs.
> 
> I would support course-specific software for a student who has some 
> significant reason they have to work at home and can't use campus 
> machines easily and there may be an argument for the HEI having to 
> provide that software one way or another (stand alone copy if needed!) 
> as it may be a 'reasonable adjustment'.
> 
> 
>> 2. for disabled students to return equipment or purchase it at 
>> reduced cost at the end of their course
> 
> After 3-4 years most equipment isn't fit to be given to anyone else 
> again and certainly not for the duration of a 2nd person's course. 
> I've seen students in 4th or 5th year and often their computer a 
> complete mess and is increasingly unreliable.
> 
> From personal experience as a heavy computer user, laptops struggle to 
> go for the 3 years many students need them for and DSA ones are 
> usually fairly sturdy stock.  Laptops which are transported rarely or 
> carefully by car might last 6+ years and become obsolete (Moore's law) 
> before they deteriorate but laptops which are hoiked around from A to 
> B by walking students or on public transport do get fairly battered 
> and abused.  Not to mention many students have "clumsiness" of some 
> kind caused by or related to their disability.
> 
> I manage an equipment loan pool for disabled students and the laptops 
> are a *nightmare*. It is not the cost of the hardware - it is the 
> human
> (my) time/cost dealing with the OS (windows degrades badly over time), 
> software like office installation, rot that's been installed on them 
> (students usually need admin rights), virus checker updates (every few 
> days), windows updates (ever 2 mins these days) etc etc.  And that's 
> before you deal with snapped bits, lost power cords, battery 
> degradation, screen hinges going floppy, USB ports getting full of 
> gunk etc etc.
> 
> Managing loan systems doesn't scale and even our uni wide tech bods 
> with a pool of 50 identical sturdy laptops; 15 staff (sharing the 
> shifts) and proper network/power/bench resources (which I don't have) 
> ditched their laptop loan scheme for all students as they couldn't 
> keep the machines alive and chasing students for machines back took 
> hours.  The human time cost way more than the hardware and as ever 
> with tech anywhere you can get money for the tech and nothing for the 
> ongoing maintenance and TLC that it needs.  A lot of "tech" is hard work!
> 
> While (rare for us) donations to us of old DSA equipment are kindly 
> meant, often the donated equipment isn't in a very good state or 
> becomes obsolete very quickly. Genuinely useful equipment (which I 
> think most
> is!) tends to be kept by students for their own use.
> 
> 
> While I see the arguments for not providing a computer/laptop on DSA I 
> worry that that creates the chicken-egg Access to Work style funding 
> problem where X won't pay for Y until A pays for B (which is admin and 
> hassle).  I am in no doubt that forcing students to pay up first 
> before they get DSA stuff will create impossible barriers for a 
> significant number of students.
> 
> Or assessors will be recommending software on machines which aren't in 
> a fit state to take or run it. I think SFE have got better at making 
> it so Assessors can recommend around students' existing laptops and 
> providing adequate tech checks and insurance for them so that students 
> are covered if their own "adequate" machine becomes inadequate - under 
> the old LEA system this didn't work, so it's good to see it now can and
does.
> 
> Anyway, isn't 80% of spend for DSA on non medical helpers anyway?
> 
> 
> Regarding the media view of DSA mentioned a few posts back: I suspect 
> we need to be expecting "when" not "if" after government and media 
> attitudes on Motorbility and DLA in the last year or so are anything 
> to go by.  I'm not sure we would have much chance in being able to 
> justify and explain DSA even when we know it's totally reasonable 
> because we're not dealing with reasonable or informed people, we're 
> dealing with the sort of people who (largely because of government and 
> media lies) believe the fraud rate for DLA is ~30% and that society is 
> already accessible to disabled people because the DDA happened in 
> 1995. Or that disabled people are asking for unjustified special 
> treatment and "That's not FAIR!".
> 
> Do we know when the government is going to review DSA and when and 
> where the results will be disseminated?
> 
> Natalya