![[Skip navigation]](../../pics/skip.gif){kind=small}
![[Home]](../../pics/home.gif){kind=small}
Home![[Modules]](../../pics/module.gif){kind=small}
Modules![[Resources]](../../pics/resource.gif){kind=small}
Resources![[Project]](../../pics/project.gif){kind=small}
Project![[Contact Details]](../../pics/contact.gif){kind=small}
Contact![[Sitemap]](../../pics/sitemap.gif){kind=small}
Sitemap![[Help]](../../pics/help.gif){kind=small}
HelpReport on the Feedback Obtained from the Higher Education Funding Council for England Special Initiative Projects 1996-99
January 2001
Mike Wray
Project Coordinator
DEMOS Project
HEFCE Disability Initiative 2000-2002
Contents
[This report is available for download in Rich Text Format (.rtf) (32Kb)]
1 Aim and context of report
1.1. In 1996 the HEFCE announced the launch of its third round of disability project funding 'Special Initiative to Encourage High Quality Provision for Students with Learning Difficulties and Disabilities'. The aim of the initiative was to enhance the quality of provision for disabled students and to increase their participation in higher education.
1.2 HEFCE has recommended that future projects take account of findings from previous projects. With this in mind the eQUIP team commissioned SKILL, the National Bureau for Students with Disabilities, to compile a directory of resources from projects in the 1996-99 initiative.
1.3 The major themes of each 1996-99 project were summarized in the eQUIP team's progress report of 1998. These included - access to the curriculum, IT and staff development. Staff development was quoted as a theme for 23 out of the 31 funded projects.
1.4 As part of the research phase of the DEMOS project, a small survey of the 1996-99 projects was undertaken so that findings could be reported and any lessons learned taken note of in the planning and implementation of our staff development materials.
2 Method
2.1 Due to the demands of time feedback was solicited from a selection of projects (11 out of 23) on their findings in relation to the staff development programmes that were implemented. Specifically, project staff were asked if they had carried out a needs analysis of their target personnel, produced any reports that were publicly available and developed materials using a particular pedagogical standpoint. Contact was made with 8 of the 11 projects and the findings are summarized below (section 3.2).
2.2 Project teams were contacted using a combination of email and telephone. The DEMOS Project Coordinator had direct experience of one of the projects so findings reported here are based on his involvement.
3 Findings
3.1 All staff who were reached were extremely helpful and several offered further help if needed, such as, visits to projects and attendance on their dissemination days.
3.2 Table of findings:
- Institution
- Bradford University
- Contact person
- Liz Clarke
- Also: Stuart Walker, website developer
- Type of contact
- telephone
- Notes from replies
- Academic staff weren't reading material developed by the Disability Office or going to presentations. They've developed PowerPoint presentations on QAA, dyslexia, and technology. They go as a team to the department (usually ones that are approaching SPR) and offer lunch. Emphasis is on the partnership between department and disability office. 2-hour sessions with a half hour discussion session at the end. An information pack is given out at the end to the participants. Have increased activity and disseminate information on many levels. By using the QAA, DDA and Human Rights Act have found that staff are beginning to realise that training is a necessity.
- http://www.brad.ac.uk/disability/
* * *
- Institution
- Leeds Metropolitan
- Contact person
- Helena Jones
- Type of contact
- telephone
- Notes from replies
- Project ongoing, finishes in November 2000. Will be putting a handbook on their website.
* * *
- Institution
- Nottingham Trent University
- Contact person
- Chris Baxter
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Centre for Academic Practice are developing online projects, but nothing specific to disability at their website (http://www.celt.ntu.ac.uk/Monday/frameset.html)
Initially offered secondment but then moved to designing bespoke programme. Produce materials specific to dyslexia and institution specific.
* * *
- Institution
- The London Institute
- Contact person
- Judy Fink
- Type of contact
- telephone
- Notes from replies
- Used inclusive learning approach. Found various ways of addressing 'disability awareness' - training, inclusive learning, briefings etc. Emphasised good practice principles. Embedding disability element within the curriculum. Used 'action research'. Organised a dissemination day in June 2000. Further info at website: http://www.linst.ac.uk/student/
- The project uses an Action Research approach, and works directly with Colleges, academic staff and students. At the centre of the project's philosophy is involvement in the teaching and learning process. It has also adopted a developmental approach to training. The arts curriculum has been used as a medium for exploring ideas around disability and increasing awareness. The project has used practising disabled artists to explore Disability Art, culture and identity within the curriculum.'
* * *
- Institution
- University of East London
- Contact person
- Viv Parker
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Has carried out research with Skill into awareness of staff developers about disability issues in HE which will be published in the journal 'Research in Postcompulsory Education'. Disability unit delivers staff development. Viv teaches modules on disability on the University's modular degree programme - the Education Pathway. Offered consultation on our materials.
* * *
- Institution
- University of Nottingham
- Contact person
- Mark Dale
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Used organic approach. Responded to individual requests from departments or targeted departments with, for example, large numbers of dyslexic students. Work underpinned by the social model of disability. Took into account competing pressures that staff are under. In the training they tried to help staff to set their own boundaries for action and to recognize what support there is outside this boundary (e.g. the disability support service). Didn't do a needs analysis or institutional audit but did conduct a comprehensive policy review. Established a mandatory scheme of university-wide disability liaison officers ; training to commence in 2001. Report on staff development due in 2001.
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/mhhdls/
* * *
- Institution
- University of the West of England
- Contact person
- Mike Wray was a team member
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Reports on website regarding Training Working Group. Training needs interviews within the 3 WEBB Project HEIs. Training programme developed and evaluated.Recommendations include - develop materials in relation to need, sector needs to examine the efficacy of 'general training', training should be embedded within staff development programme, a range of media should be used to develop materials.Reports at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/learning-support/webb/related.htm
* * *
- Institution
- UMIST
- Contact person
- Tina Elliot
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Details of the Access Summit staff development programme and outcomes will be reported elsewhere on the DEMOS website.
* * *
- Institution
- University of Central Lancashire
- Contact person
- Alan Hurst
- Type of contact
- Notes from replies
- Whole institutional approach. Programme of training with staff from varying levels, services, departments. Disabled project coordinator recruited, therefore input in nearly all sessions from a disabled person. Initially, project was advertised so that departments came forward of their own volition but this was only partially successful.Discussion took place before training in some case so that material was tailor made. Other materials devised with particular interest of group in mind e.g. used videos on the history of disability with the History Department. Issue of awareness raising vs. awareness training.Suggests a balance between the two. Mainly 2-hour workshops during away days or on Wednesday afternoons.
4 Conclusions
4.1 Staff development activities have formed a major part of the HEFCE Disability Initiative 1996-99. Most projects reporting that it was a central objective.
4.2 Project staff were keen to disseminate their findings and many offered their knowledge as a source of expertise for reference by the DEMOS Project
4.3 Most projects have developed bespoke programmes of staff development but few have produced publicly available reports on their findings.
4.4 Of the projects contacted only one (the WEBB Accessibility Project) had disseminated the findings of a needs analysis of academic staff. This was based on a small number of interviews within the departments of 3 Universities.
4.5 Some of the projects noted an issue relating to the efficacy of a disability awareness perspective in training materials. It was suggested by some that training materials need to strike a balance between offering practical solutions to disability issues and raising awareness of the social model of disability.
5 Recommendations
5.1 The DEMOS Project should carry out a needs analysis of academic staff in relation to disability related training. This could take the form of:
- needs analysis (survey, interview, focus groups) in the pilot departments.
- needs analysis at an institutional level (survey).
- needs analysis at a sector level (survey).
5.2 Findings of the research and implementation of the DEMOS Project should be made widely available.
5.3 We should develop materials specific to the needs of our target audience.
5.4 If possible, the training materials should be developed so that they can be used by the sector upon completion of the project.
5.5 The materials should offer practical advice relating to the learning and teaching of disabled students.