The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

10. SCHOOL YEARS: ACCESS ISSUESs

10.1. THE IMPACT OF SOME KEY LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY DEVELOPMENTS

10.1.1. NEW REGULATIONS REGARDING ToD QUALIFICATION

As already demonstrated, ToDs are key providers and facilitators of linguistic access to deaf pupils. The new regulations for ToD qualification, and accompanying guidance (Scottish Government, 2007b) were intended to guarantee a high standard of knowledge, understanding and skills among ToDs (see Section 7.1., above), and have been greeted positively because of this.

However, in addition to issues already raised about the shortage of qualified ToDs and the need to build in financial incentives to encourage young teachers to join the profession, the following concerns emerged from informants:

• The competencies may be accumulated via in-service training. While the general principle of the new regulations was welcomed, fears were expressed by a number of interviewees, that localised interpretations of current guidelines could lead to unacceptably wide variations between local authorities in the breadth and standards of competence accepted. The greatest fear was that this may have a knock-on affect on consistency of standards of linguistic access provided to deaf pupils. The in-service training option counter to the teacher training policy of the British Association of Teachers of the Deaf ( BATOD), which states that a mandatory qualification should not be gained by accumulating free-standing units and that trainees should demonstrate practice competence in more than one type of educational provision ( BATOD, 1995).
• There are no clear means by which the standards of specific competencies will be set and monitored, as yet, as HMIE do not inspect compliance with policy guidelines (although, see 10.1.3., below).
• The regulations do not cover staff who work with pupils less than 'wholly or mainly'. Informants expressed concern that, occasionally, learning support teachers, without knowledge or experience in deaf education, are designated to provide specialist access/support to deaf pupils, including those with cochlear implants. In these cases the teachers would be expected to provide support to a range of children, deaf and hearing, and therefore the employing local authorities would not be subject to the regulations (see also Section 7.1., above).

10.1.2. THE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR LEARNING ( ASL) ACT

As explained in 5.1., above, the new Additional Support for Learning Act (Scotland, 2004), has replaced the ' SEN' framework with that of ' ASL'. The phasing out of Records of Needs ( RoNs) and the introduction of Co-ordinated Support Plans ( CSPs), has led to concerns that many deaf children, who would previously have been eligible for RoNs, will not be eligible for CSPs.

Concerns centre on fears that the linguistic access/support services of deaf pupils who do not qualify for a CSP will be less secure because there is less legal redress. There are anecdotal reports of some local authorities giving the impression that possession of a CSP will give more guarantee of service. More than one member of visiting services interviewed expressed concern that support and access services for deaf pupils may be vulnerable to resource constraints because they are so dependent on people: 'linguistic access is fragile because it's personnel-dependant'. Some concerns were expressed about the potential co-ordinating role of educational psychologists, who may not have a background in deaf issues.

However, the Enquire service, which provides advice to parents on the implementation of the Act, understands that the quantity and quality of support and access services will not be dependent on a CSP. Where there are disputes about support and access, mediation is available to all children with additional support needs and their families, although those with CSPs are able to take dispute resolution to a higher legal level.

HMIE are currently reviewing the implementation of the Act, but only in terms of progress with the implementation of the Code of Practice. Initial findings suggest regional variation in implementation; implications for deaf pupils will need to be explored.

10.1.3. HMIE DEVELOPMENTS

HMIE has recently published a key report for local authority staff at all levels of education services, which largely focuses on issues around deaf pupils' linguistic access to learning ( HMIE, 2007). It is intended as an aid to self-evaluation of provision and was produced in partnership with the National Deaf Children's Society. The report aims to:

• report on quality of education currently experienced by deaf children in Scottish schools;
• provide examples of good practice;
• identify signs for improvement.

The report will provide the criteria against which provision for deaf pupils will be inspected. Alongside this, the HMIE service is increasing its capacity to explore more specific detail of access and support services provided to deaf pupils than they have previously been able to do. For example, they have appointed an associate inspector who is both a ToD and a BSL/English interpreter.

10.2. STAFFING ISSUES

10.2.1. THE ToD ROLE: SUPPORT AND ACCESS

Visiting service informants reported that ToD work is a mixture of access (eg notetaking or interpreting) and teaching support (eg assisting with task or differentiating the curriculum). As well as providing support in the classroom, ToDs withdraw pupils for 1:1 and small group work, to varying degrees.

In response to a general question about access vs support, some services reported that the distinction is relatively clear: access services are offered to pupils where a child is able in the subject, and support offered when there are language or cognitive issues. However, others reported that effectively transferring responsibility for a pupil's learning to the class teacher could be a real challenge - a temptation to continue to provide individual management of learning, when a negotiated access service (such as notetaking, amplification, interpreting etc) might encourage more independence and be less intrusive for a pupil.

More than one service reported that some secondary pupils reject the service of support/ access staff due to embarrassment of having a 1:1 adult in the class - it's 'not cool'. One head of service felt that this was not an issue in their service because pupils were clear about the strategies used and that ToDs have become 'part of the wallpaper' in classrooms. In this case, as with some other services, ToDs have an agreement with the class teacher that they work with other pupils in the class when the deaf pupil is working independently.

On the other hand, there were some reports of difficulties in persuading class teachers to include deaf pupils, which then becomes a particularly challenging part of the ToD role.

10.2.2. DEAF STAFF

The importance of employing deaf staff was raised by a number of people, in terms of role models for pupils and in terms of native use of BSL. The HMIE report, referred to in 10.1.3, above, pinpoints the significance of deaf staff as one of its 'Signposts to Excellence'.

10.2.3. LEARNING SUPPORT ASSISTANTS

As detailed in Section 7.2., above, Learning Support Assistants (or equivalent title - eg classroom assistants) provide a high proportion of in-class support for deaf pupils. Visiting services report that they can be asked to take on specific access tasks, but also to implement ToD-created programmes and to keep the pupil on task. It was reported that pupils can be particularly dependent on learning support assistants in primary school. It was hard to get a clear picture of the role of assistants in secondary situations.

One service reported that they employ 'inclusion classroom assistants', who work with mainstream children with moderate and conductive hearing losses. Their role is to keep other children on task, thus giving the classroom teacher extra time to spend with deaf child (demonstrating 1:1 etc). They have found that mainstream schools are very supportive of this development.

10.2.4. COMMUNICATION SUPPORT WORKERS ( CSWs)

As also demonstrated in Section 7.2., a few school services employ staff known as CSWs. It is likely that they have more specific access function than learning support assistants, but there is also likely to be at least some overlap.

In one authority a SASLI-registered 'Education Communication Worker' is employed to provide in-class BSL/English interpretation.

One head of service felt she preferred to have learning support assistants who had LSP skills rather than LSPs per se, because the role is more flexible: providing learning support as well as access - and in being able to be left in charge of a child.

See also Section 15.5 for details of the CSW role within further and higher education.

10.3. TRANSITION ISSUES

Benefits of identifying and negotiating specific linguistic access strategies in secondary situations have already been raised, in terms of facilitating pupil independence as well as in preparation for post-school education (and employment) situations.

One head of service thought that the implementation of the ASL Act would be beneficial, in terms of a formal start to transition planning at 14 years.

There were some examples of specific planning: school links courses with local FE colleges (although provision of access services for taster courses could be problematic) and seminar-type days for older pupils. One ToD commented that she felt planning sessions should start in S3, but thought there may be problems persuading pupils to opt into the sessions.

The BRITE Centre website contains a multi-media guide for deaf students which defines access strategies and staff roles. In addition to being a resource for ToDs to use with individuals and groups, the BRITE Centre reports that parents and pupils like the fact that pupils can use it in private in their own time.
( http://www.brite.ac.uk/resources/deaf/index.html )

One well-established FE service for deaf pupils reported that deaf students were increasingly likely to know what services they wanted. Other FE services, as well as school services, reported that lack of preparation was a major issue - particularly in relation to the need for addressing the support/management/access distinctions in upper secondary. The fact that only a small minority of FE and HE institutions provide specialist tutorial support for deaf students is pertinent and will be addressed later.

See also Section 14.2 for more exploration of transition issues.

10.4. ACOUSTIC ENVIRONMENTS

The Disability Discrimination Act has provided a legal incentive for local authorities to create good acoustic environments for the large number of deaf pupils who make use of audition. However, it seems that some areas in Scotland are better than others at providing such high quality environments. Some new-build schools have been designed with good acoustics in mind, and soundfield systems have been installed in many primary schools. However, informants reported that provision can sometimes be tokenistic (eg assuming carpets and blinds are sufficient).

There are particular problems in secondary situations, where lack of staff awareness and size of buildings are major issues. There are only isolated examples of soundfield systems in secondary schools.

In addition, the open plan nature of some primaries also creates a challenge.

There is at least one service which encourages pupils to take home radio aids in order to boost communication strategies with family and friends outside of school. It was reported, however, that few services are known to allow such loans.

Again, the lack of educational audiologists in many areas is an issue, in terms of the application of audiological expertise to classroom situations.

NDCS has produced an 'acoustic toolkit' for schools and local authorities, which can be used as a guideline, available at: http://www.ndcs.org.uk/document.rm?id=2663

10.5. PUPILS WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS

The cochlear implant centre team consists of 3 full-time SaLTs and 3 full-time ToDs, who are regionally based. They aim to liaise with local ToDs and to provide advice when needed. Language assessment information is shared.

Heads of service reported good academic results among the early diagnosed/early implanted children. One described a primary resource base serving pupils with and without implants. Here, all ToDs have Level 3 BSL. The implanted pupils all access the curriculum via audition/spoken English and all are achieving age-appropriate National Test levels - as is one of the BSL-using pupils.

10.6. SUBTITLING

Despite strides in technology, it does not seem to be prevalent that educational DVDs are subtitled. DVDs are often part of curriculum coursework, but there were reports of:

• not enough warning to allow ToD to make arrangements for DVDs to be subtitled or to enable advance viewing;
• difficulties in persuading some class teachers to use subtitled versions.

One service has appointed a technology officer to subtitle DVDs.

10.7. BSL TRANSLATION

There is little evidence of BSL translations of key DVDs, for those pupils who wish to access information in BSL.

10.8. RISK OF ISOLATION IN MAINSTREAM SITUATIONS

In many cases a deaf child may be the only deaf child in a class - or in a school. There were examples of schools making good efforts to include individual deaf pupils - particularly at primary stage (for example assemblies on topics related to deafness, involving the pupil and ensuring that other pupils use the radio aid microphone; pupils and staff undertaking BSL qualifications; teachers willing to consider a variety of approaches etc).

Services reported arranging opportunities for deaf pupils to meet socially, but some reported difficulties in setting up meetings.

One service described two instances of pupils going to a specialist grammar school in England because they had problems in coping with this isolation - and finding great support and confidence from being in an environment with other deaf pupils.

Particular concerns were expressed about:

• isolated BSL-using pupils in mainstream situations (both in terms of staff capacity to provide quality BSL/English interpretation and in terms of lack of peer group);
• pupils who are neither fluent in spoken English or BSL.

10.9. EXAM/ASSESSMENT ISSUES

10.9.1. 5-14 ASSESSMENTS

While there are clear guidelines from SQA about arrangements which may be made to access certificated examinations taken from mid-secondary level upwards, the situation for accessing 5-14 tests is rather vague, with teachers simply being informed that pupils can receive whatever access arrangements are normally provided in class. However, it is not necessarily easy to separate out access arrangements from specialist teaching support in primary/lower secondary. Some report the challenge of choosing specific tests to reflect what the ToD already knows about the pupil, without providing unfair advantage by selecting tests which the teacher knows will be easier.

As with the data in reading, the only analysed ADPS data on special access arrangements for 5-14 National Tests (Reading Writing and Maths) is from 2001. The list of tick-box options was chosen to mirror options provided in SQA examinations. Chart 9 shows that the most common types of access arrangement were 'extra time' and 'questions read aloud'. It would be interesting to explore the detail of data in later years to look for any changes in trends over time for each of the three areas of testing - and also to explore the circumstances in which questions are read aloud, in terms of pupil linguistic strategy.

Chart 9 Instances of special arrangements made for all 5-14 National Tests among ADPS Group A pupils, 2000-2001 (total instances =866)

One of the most significant features of the special arrangement data is the fact that no information on special arrangements was provided for 73% of the 2176 National Test assessment results reported in 2000/2001 (again this applies to all three National Test subjects: Reading Writing and Maths). In this first year of ADPS data collection, there was no tick-box option for 'no arrangements made', as there was in later years. It would be interesting to compare with later years to explore whether the low response rate for this section of the survey does indeed reflect low levels of access arrangements made in National Test situations.

It seems, therefore, that there may be a need to address practice and possible developments in providing linguistic access arrangements for non-certificated tests administered in school.

10.9.2. SQA EXAMINATIONS

SQA produces guidelines on special arrangements for accessing examinations. The most recent version was published in 2004 ( SQA, 2004), and an updated version is in publication at the time of writing. No major changes will be included, but it is intended that it will highlight Disability Equality Duty implications and that it will be in a more accessible format.

Chart 10 shows ADPS data on instances of special arrangements used by pupils in Standard Grade exams in 2000/2001, for direct comparison with Chart 9 above, relating to 5-14 National Tests.

A high proportion of 'extra time' is common to both, but there are significantly lower proportions of 'questions read aloud', 'verbal clarification of written questions' and 'amplification of sound'. There is a slightly higher proportion of 'scribe'. It would be interesting to explore the significance of these differences, particularly in the light of the above discussion relating to provision of access for 5-14 assessments.

Data on Standard Grade arrangements are available for 4 years
(see: http://www.education.ed.ac.uk/adps/survey/00-04/certificated_qualifications/SGrade_specarr_summary_00-04.pdf ).

Chart 10 Instances of special arrangements used by ADPS Group A pupils in Standard Grade examinations 2000/2001 (total instances =411)

Chart 11 shows these data averaged out over the four years. It shows little difference from the picture in 2000/2001, apart from the higher proportion of 'signed responses' as the new arrangement began to be increasingly taken up.

Chart 11 Instances of special arrangements used by ADPS Group A pupils in Standard Grade examinations 2000/2004 (average instances across four years =401)

SQA assessment policy

The SQA assessment policy is about to be reviewed in the light of implications of the Disability Discrimination Act. An 'impact assessment' will be starting soon: for example, looking at accessibility aspects of listening/speaking/writing in modern languages. The impact assessments will take place over the next couple of years, and external consultants are likely to be used.

Accessibility of English in SQA exams

Modification of exam papers for individual deaf students is not allowed, as it is for some exam boards in England. Exam setters receive guidance and are expected to use BATOD/ NATED guidelines. However, it is intended that the impact assessment will re-evaluate the situation by reviewing how far English can be a barrier to deaf candidates.

It is deemed possible that BATOD trained modifiers will become part of the process in future, although it is not yet clear which stage of the process. It is likely that the BSLLAWG and SCoD will be approached for help and support during the review process.

Signed questions and responses

The standardisation of signing in examinations is an ongoing issue: for example, establishing means of ensuring that pupils are neither advantaged nor disadvantaged by the personnel used (ToDs, BSL/English interpreters) or the lack of familiarity and suitability of sign vocabulary.

Pragmatic solutions are being found in individual settings: one school described how staff without interpreting training sign the papers, after a preparation session with a BSL/English interpreter.

Concerns have been expressed that SQA's collaborative pilot project with the University of East Anglia and RNID to produce 'Avatar' computer-graphic 'signers' is seen to be an inappropriate solution to the standardising of signed questions. Staff from SCoD and from the Universities of Edinburgh and Heriot Watt have formally expressed anxieties that the 'Avatars' inevitably miss vital aspects of BSL.

Meanwhile the SSCBSL Glossary project continues to produce BSL/English glossaries of maths and science terminology. The glossaries are pioneering in their depth - as both reference and teaching tools.

10.10. RECOMMENDATIONS

• There is a need to address concerns that the guidance provided for new ToD qualification regulations allows for accumulation of competencies via in-service training. Concerns centre around: the likelihood that local interpretations will lead to variations in standards; the lack of specific means of monitoring quality and the fact that 'generic' learning support staff can be responsible for a ToD service with deaf pupils, but fall outwith the regulations.
• There is a need to further monitor the impact of the ASL Act in terms of the planning and provision of access and support to deaf pupils, particularly in relation to any impact on services provided to pupils who do not qualify for CSPs.
• It is hoped that the HMIE/ NDCS self-evaluation 'Count us in' report will be used to encourage and support good practice in the development of linguistic access services in schools.
• As the ToD role constantly develops in mainstream situations, there is a need to continue to address and explore the definition of, and relationships between: management of pupil learning; provision of direct linguistic access services, and provision of teaching support. The situation in secondary schools is worthy of particular attention, including the lead up to transition.

The model of a ToD being a resource for the class teacher and other pupils, when the deaf pupil is working independently, may be useful experience to share.

• There needs to be more clarification about the specific roles of learning support assistants and CSWs in terms of linguistic access provided; there is also a need to address relevant training and qualifications.
• As mentioned in other sections, there is also a need to address regional variations in numbers and types of access and support staff (eg ToDs, educational audiologists) and in access related qualifications held (eg notetaking; advanced BSL fluency; BSL/English interpretation, etc).
• The regional variation in standard of acoustic environments in schools should be addressed, making use of the NDCS 'Acoustic Toolkit'.
• All services should consider the benefits of allowing pupils to take home radio aids, whenever pupils would find this useful.
• There is a need for deaf people to be encouraged into professions at various levels within school education.
• DVDs relating to school coursework should automatically be subtitled and recorders purchased by schools should have the facility to record subtitled TV programmes. This needs to be built into the culture of schools. BSL translations of key DVDs are also needed.
• There are concerns about isolation of deaf pupils in mainstream situations. There is a continued need to share inclusive practice and to enable deaf pupils to meet each other.
• There is a need to address practice and comparisons in providing linguistic access arrangements for both 5-14 tests and SQA exams administered in school.
• The results of the forthcoming SQA 'impact assessment' of exam access are likely to lead to improvements in a number of ways, including accessibility of English. It will be interesting to keep in touch with developments.
• Ongoing work is needed on the practice and standardisation of the provision of signed questions in exams. It is hoped that SQA takes on board the expressed concerns about the piloting of Avatar 'signers'.

« Previous | Contents | Next »