repayable) to help with essential, additional expenditure a disabled student incurs while studying, because of their disability (which includes long-term health conditions, mental health conditions, or specific learning difficulties such as dyslexia). Changes were made in 2014 to bring the definition of disability in line with that used in the Equality Act. In 2015/16 and 2016/17, the funding model changed to ensure it represents good value for money through paying for truly ‘additional’ costs. The 2015/16 changes introduced a £200 contribution for students towards the cost of recommended computer hardware. The 2016/17 changes transferred responsibility for less specialist non-medical help (NMH) provision to higher education providers (HEPs), and other changes were made to areas, such as IT consumables, etc.. In most cases, the expectation is that HEPs will offset the impact of the removal of DSAs funding by providing reasonable adjustments to disabledstudents as they are required to do under the Equality Act 2010. The
The FEFC recently proposed a funding mechanism for disabledstudents based on the severity of a person’s impairment. Whilst concerns have been expressed that such a mechanism tends to categorise and pigeon-hole the individual, it does attempt to link payments for training provision to the cost of meeting individual need. One suggestion is that the RTPs should assess the living accommodation and training programme needs of the individual, along with an assessment of the learning support required. Social Services and the Health Authority would then be responsible for providing independent living support.
83. DSA-QAG is a non-profit making company with charitable status. Its board is made up of representatives from HEIs, DSA needs assessors, DSA equipment suppliers and the NUS, with observers from BIS and the SLC. A central administrative unit supports this work. DSA-QAG has responsibility for a quality assurance framework against which levels of service for both DSA assessment centres and equipment suppliers are audited. From 2015/16, only DSA-QAG registered or accredited assessment centres can provide DSA-funded study needs assessments. Assistive technology, including assistive software is expected to be provided and installed by registered assistive technology service providers. However students may opt to source a computer from the open market. Assistive technology training is currently provided by a mix of providers, some of whom fall within this arrangement and some who do not. More information on DSA-QAG and a list of registered and accredited assessment centres and suppliers is available at the following website: http://www.dsa-qag.org.uk/.
Disabledstudents’ allowances (DSAs) are non-repayable grants that assist with the additional costs that a disabled student incurs in relation to their study in higher education. DSAs currently provide a range of support. This includes the purchase of laptops and specialist equipment, provision of support workers and assistance with additional travel costs. The support is not means-tested and is available for eligible full- time and part-time students, studying at undergraduate and postgraduate level. In 2011-12 DSAs provided over £125 million of additional support for over 53,000 full- time undergraduate higher education students, compared with £91.7 million awarded to 40,600 students in 2008-09.
Reducing aggression in students and prevention of damage caused by aggressive behaviors have great impor- tance (Parciack, Winnik, & Shmueli, 1975). Painting as a one of art therapy approaches allows ID children to express their emotions, which increases their self-esteem and consistency (Alavinezhad, Mousavi, & Sohrabi, 2014; Hartz & Thick, 2005). In dealing with children with abnormalities, the child may be afraid and worried about asking question, especially when the child inevitably uses his or her limited vocabulary to explain a sense or feeling. Providing intervention programs which be able to reduce aggressive behaviors can promote effec- tiveness of educational programs in ID students (Cusimano, Nastis, & Zuccaro, 2013; Rose, 2013). The main objective of the present study was to investigate the therapeutic efficacy of paintings therapy on the level of ag- gression in educable ID students, and evaluation of the therapeutic effect of painting between the educable ID boys and girls.
This allowance is to help you buy any items of equipment you may need. You can also use it to pay for any repair, technical support, insurance or extended warranty costs arising from owning that equipment. We recommend that you insure your specialist equipment and your DisabledStudents’ Allowances can be used to pay the additional insurance premiums. We can also reimburse costs you have to pay to rent, rather than buy, a major item of equipment if this is more economical. You can apply for the specialist equipment allowance at any time during your course. If your Access Centre assessment recommends initial training in using any equipment this cost may be reimbursed.
Depending on your circumstances, your course and where you study, you may be able to get a range of financial help and support. You could get grants and bursaries (which you don’t have to pay back) and loans (which you do) and most students won’t have to pay any tuition fees up front.
167. Generally the cost of purchasing wheelchairs and scooters would be incurred regardless of whether the student is attending a course and therefore would not normally be an appropriate charge to the DSA. Individual health authorities have duties to meet the mobility needs of people who are unable or virtually unable to walk. However, some students may have requirements which arise specifically because of the course. For example, attendance on a course may mean that a student has to use hilly terrains which can be avoided in ordinary life. Advice may be requested from the institution’s Disability Adviser. A hilly university campus terrain may mean that a manual wheelchair is inadequate or that a student with mobility problems might require human assistance to move around the campus. An electrically powered wheelchair/scooter in such cases would probably be more cost effective over the life of the course. If lectures are held in different parts of the campus which are some distance apart, students may be required to travel quickly in order to reach their next lecture on time. This may not be possible for a student with limited mobility or a manual wheelchair. Therefore, we believe that each request for mobility equipment such as wheelchairs and scooters should be considered individually in the light of course requirements and the terrain of the university campus.
7. Five focus groups with students funded by SFW: focus groups with students funded by SFW were held at five of the 12 HEPs in Wales (all SFW- funded students). The original method stipulated six focus groups but due to the timescales of the project, many students had returned home for the summer break and some HEPs struggled to provide students. In total, 25 students were consulted via focus groups. Students were informed of the topic for discussions prior to the visit and were selected on their willingness to take part, as well as their range of support needs. Students were recruited through the DAs. These students were known to the disability support teams as a result of being recommended for, and engaged in, DSAs support. Therefore, these students reflect the views of those who successfully navigated through the system and had a positive view of the support. With the permission of students, interviews were recorded and were semi-structured in nature. Upon completion of interviews, participants were awarded a £20 voucher. The HEPs were unable to supply any students who preferred to communicate in Welsh; as noted earlier, due to the timescales of the project, many students had returned home for the summer break and this left a very small pool of students from which to select. The topic guide for the focus groups and telephone interviews is included in Annex I.
Some students described difficulty in connecting with their teachers. Maher, for example, said, “When I transferred into seventh grade it took me a long time to get along with the students… and also the teachers. It wasn’t easy to learn to understand how each and every one of the teachers thought.” Students also reported feel- ing that their teachers did not understand or support them and even belittled them. Statements indicate tangible feelings of alienation toward teachers, and it seems that the students feel that they are misunderstood at school and have no one to talk to. “I feel they don’t understand me” (Amir). “They belittle me” (Roni). “They don’t understand us the way they should, and they are strict and mean. It is difficult to create and build a relationship with them” (Manal). In addition, it appears from the students’ statements that they are not getting their academic needs met by their teachers, and that they feel that the level of instruction is not always adapted to their needs. Thus, students reported that teachers tend to explain the material in a manner that LD students find too difficult and too rapid, and that the students, on their part, refrain from asking questions or expressing their difficulties during the lessons: “They (the teachers) are short-tempered. But there is no need to ask, I have a home tutor, and I ask her. At school the teachers explain the material too quickly” (Anwar). “No, I don’t ask for help; I don’t want them to know how hard it is for me to learn” (Miryam).
The benefits of childcare, both for the disabled child themselves and the rest of the family is well documented. Providing parents with an opportunity to work potentially increases family income, and helps to combat the financial and materially deprived circumstances that disabled children are more likely to grow up in (Read et al 2007). Studies have highlighted higher levels of mental distress among parents of disabled children (Emerson, 2003) and it has been shown that employment provides both material and social resources and is associated with lower levels of distress (Sloper 1999). Disabled children themselves may also benefit from attending childcare settings, with positive effects on their social and educational development. A policy review in 2007, undertaken as part of Aiming High for Disabled Children: Better support for families (AHDC) identified a lack of adequate childcare provision to meet need, with many disabled children facing challenges in accessing appropriate early education and childcare provision. In order to develop more responsive services, local authorities needed to develop a clearer picture of the population of disabled children at a local level so that disabled children’s needs could be planned for. Parents also needed greater choice and control to put together flexible packages of services according to the needs of their child. Some survey data has shown take up of childcare by families of disabled children to be lower than by families which do not have a child with a disability. For example, all children aged 3-4 are entitled to free early years education for up to 15 hours a week, but in 2005 82 per cent of those with a disability or SEN had taken it up, compared with 87 per cent of other children (Bryson et al. 2006). Work by Kazimirski et al. (2008) has also found take-up of childcare and early years education to be lower than average among some sub groups of the population including low income families, lone parents and ethnic minority groups.
In the post-test treated with care on the hearing related to the use of electronic devices. Effects of noise and loud music are present in society, and have been a concern in recent years, especially among adolescents and adults, who hear frequently stereos . Students reflected on the importance of listening to sound at low vo- lume and avoid early problems in hearing. Most of the time the running game showed students using electronic devices and had interest and curiosity about the risk of deafness. Approximating activity to reality allows meet- ing and promoting health through education and training to acquire healthy habits .
Microsoft PowerPoint KBP revised University of Huddersfield Repository BeauchampPryor, Karen From Absent to Active Voices the participation of disabled students in higher education Original Citation[.]
norms, cultural norms, situational factors, personality characteristics and level of familiarity. A teacher can help students avoid such misunderstandings by using the different aspects of proxemics. A teacher can increase the comprehension and expression, hold attention and become more successful in the communication process by knowing and using these cues of proxemics. He can create more focus on those students who are learning disabled by reducing the physical space between both of them. This act motivates students to be alert and attentive in the classroom. Moving around the classroom frequently teacher tells students that he owns all the classroom space but it simultaneously aids teacher-student communication by including all students through shifting proxemics. Researchers believe proxemics is a significant tool in nonverbal communication (Anderson, 1999; Defleur, Kearney, & Plax, 1998; Devito, 2009; Leathers & Eaves, 2008; Miller, 1998; Richmond & McCroskey, 2004). Miller (1998) stated that a good teacher should always adopt some flexible changes in the classroom that could be beneficial to student’s learning or class interaction. He should keep in mind the point that there are very few chances to be successful learning without using proxemics.
avoid their use. There were frustrations and misunderstandings about the way information was required to demonstrate disability and disadvantage at work, earnings from different kinds of self-employment, and childcare costs. Because these problems are reflections of the structural and administrative elements of DPTC they are also amenable to policy intervention. In addressing these issues there is a case for paying particular attention to the needs of people with mental health problems who often find the application and administrative procedures ill-suited to their health condition. There is also a need to promote the message among potential claimants and employers that receiving DPTC is not comparable to 'working and claiming', which is presented in DWP publicity campaigns as a principal means of benefit fraud. More difficult for policy makers to address in development of financial support targeted at disabled people is the failure of many people to identify themselves within a group categorised as ‘disabled’. Some people just do not think of themselves in this way, for example people whose conditions are well-controlled pharmaceutically and people who expect to return to fitness. Some people strongly dislike being categorised as ‘disabled’, a group in society who may be perceived as stigmatised, excluded and unable to participate fully in life.
Accreditation requirements have presented a number of challenges to an inclusive model of training, especially in ballet, but also in the case of musical theatre training. In particular, the technical level that must be attained for assessment may be beyond the reach of some disabledstudents. In an inclusive training context schools would have to consider whether exceptions can be made for them, and the implications of so doing for non-disabledstudents less able, for example, in dance than in other aspects of performance, but obliged nevertheless to achieve to standard in this element. With flexibility built into the assessment process, validating bodies could provide advice to schools on a case-by-case basis, safeguarding standards while sharing with them decisions for each course module about adjustments that can be legitimately made, within the relevant university’s validation requirements, to accommodate individual needs.
The above reinforces Llewellyn and Hogan’s (2000) view that the individual/medical model discourse presents disabled people as something to fear. It also reflects Barnes' (1996) and Oliver's (1986) assertion that the individual/medical model identifies the impairment as the main cause of the disadvantage experienced by disabledstudents. It concurs with Clough and Corbett (2000) who view an individual/medical model approach as locating problems within individual disabled people rather than in any curricular or pedagogical context and Bury’s (2000) view that impairment effects are more significant barriers to inclusion than social barriers. The fact that some placement supervisors thought some jobs were not suitable for some disabled people is reinforced by Gough’s (1979: 25-26) perception of a ‘functional limitation’ view of impairment which legitimises exclusion from the labour market. Walker (1982); Thomas (1992); and Barnes (1992) refer to this as underemployment, whereby disabled people find themselves in low status jobs below their capabilities. The focus on impairments associated with unpredictable behaviour is confirmed by Cefai and Cooper’s (2010) assertion that disabledstudents with behaviour related impairments are more likely to be excluded and be on the receiving end of discrimination than disabledstudents with other impairment labels. The specific concerns around mental health issues are not so surprising according to Thomas (2007:131) because disability studies has concentrated on social barriers that physically impaired people confront and researchers and writers in disability studies have only recently begun to explore the workings of 'the mind'.
assumptions was very helpful. Reliance upon such assumptions would arguably lead to a lack of appreciation of the way that disabled learners could rise up against the restrictive barriers that seek to confine disabled people within limited spaces provided by a disablist society (Goodley, 2014; Watermeyer & Swartz, 2016). I was very aware that my longstanding presence at university was unusual. Indeed, being in a position of (relative) authority in being the course lead for a university degree is also unusual and places me in a position of being able to challenge some of the restrictive barriers mentioned above. I suggest that analysing the experiences of disabledstudents through lenses such as those that query dualism; those that emphasise the use of power in society; and those that see life as the accumulation of experience would result in highly sophisticated analyses that are capable of being resonant to the lives of many. Throughout this article, I have engaged with theoretical insights that were not intended to be used to increase understanding of the disabled student journey. However, I contended that theoretical insights come alive and are both hugely relevant and powerful when related to everyday situations and used as a tool for social change (Goodley et al., 2012). This is further exemplified by Steven Seidman (2016, p. ix) when he states in the preface to his book Contested Knowledge: Social Theory Today, that: