Neil Quintrell
Academic Support Services
Flinders University of South Australia
The South Australian committee of the Australian and New Zealand Student Services Association
(ANZSSA) sponsored a half-day seminar on support for students with disabilities in tertiary education on 28 April 1995 at the Adelaide College of TAFE. There were 22 registrants for the seminar representing six TAFE institutes and the three universities. Registrants included a representative of student organisations, an academic staff member, students, student services staff, language and learning staff, equal opportunity staff, and an equity officer.
The seminar was addressed by Sue Barnard who reported on the survey research conducted by her as consultant to the SA Disability Steering Committee of the three universities at the end of 1994
(Barnard, 1995). Respondents to the survey identified some key issues for attention which included:
 achieving funding support for students
 achieving effective staff development
 establishing principles for allocation of scarce funding
 establishing principles for appropriate assessment for people with disabilities
The seminar formed working groups around these themes and reported findings to a plenary session.
Key principles that underscore the following reports is that, as far as possible, the dignity of individuals, their right to determine and communicate their own needs, their right to privacy, their right to access services, and their empowerment in achieving desired outcomes need to be preserved and promoted.
The seminar participants recommended that the following summary report be forwarded to:
 the ANZSSA (SA) executive
 participants in the seminar for use within their own institutions as appropriate
 all Equal Opportunity Units in SA Higher Education with the recommendation that the report be used within institutions to support initiatives for desired change
 the Disability Steering Committee for their attention and appropriate action.
Group 1:
Achieving adequate funding for support for students with disabilities
The work group on achieving adequate funding support for students identified five principles which they thought should inform decision-making in institutions. The group recognised that institutions work in a situation of scarce resources and noted that poor decisions often resulted in wasted resources (having to ‘do things again’ to correct mistakes).
First principle
In decision-making on resource allocation, institutions will perform according to the Disability
Discrimination Act (DDA).
Second principle
Under the Disability Discrimination Act, institutions are responsible for support, relative to their academic programs, for enrolled students with disabilities.
Journal of the Australia and New Zealand Student Services Association
1

JANZSSA: Документ1
Third principle
All institutions should have, in all their procedures, a check-step whereby Equal Opportunity Units and Disability Officers are consulted before funds are committed. (This may be especially important in such things as new buildings or building up-grades but also applies to such things as review of curricula or review of institution policies or statutes.)
Fourth principle
Institutions need to ensure that, in determining curricula, teaching methods and assessment procedures, these are inclusive in design and take into account the needs of people with disabilities.
Fifth principle
The decision-making processes of institutions should be as transparent as possible so that people wishing to participate in the processes can know when to make their inputs, and so that external advice may be sought appropriately where specialist expertise is needed.
Group 2:
Establishing principles for appropriate assessment for people with disabilities (The notion of
‘modification of assessment’ or ‘assessment accommodation’ still carries overtones of deficit.
Although ‘appropriate assessment’ does not fully convey the idea that assessment design should be undertaken in such a way that it is inclusive for all, it is the term chosen here, as it at least moves away from the idea of special pleading on behalf of an individual or group.)
The working group outlined the following points:
1.
In order to ensure that assessment procedures are inclusive for people with disabilities, they need to be designed flexibly (see fourth principle above).
2.
Of primary concern is the aims of the course - what it is
3.
designed to teach - which leads to an analysis of which assessment methods are integral to the course requirements and which can be designed flexibly.
4.
It would be advantageous if it was institutional policy that assessments should be designed to be flexible and inclusive.
5.
Clear guidelines as to what constitutes ‘appropriate assessment’ would help staff when designing assessment methods.
6.
Disability Officers could assist in this process by collecting examples of effective alternative assessments.
7.
Publication of assessment details including a possible range at the beginning of courses would help students with disabilities where negotiation may be needed.
8.
Students need access to policies which outline their rights with respect to assessment.
9.
Analyses of current teaching/learning methods and their relation to assessment would be helpful for academic staff (see below regarding staff development).
10.
There is a need for closer communication between academic staff who are designing assessment and student services staff who are making recommendations for appropriate assessment so that mutual principles can be articulated.
11.
The range of possible appropriate assessments is wide and includes the use of verbal assessments, extended or no time limits, peer assessment, audio/video presentation of materials, take-away exams, exams at alternative times, and so on.
Group 3:
Achieving appropriate staff development and the education of students in their rights and responsibilities (The group noted that several staff development packages are available, including
DTAFE’’s ‘ResponsAbility’, and Griffith University’s ‘AccessAbility’)
Journal of the Australia and New Zealand Student Services Association
2

JANZSSA: Документ1
Any staff development program should include the following elements:

Legal obligations - a shared understanding of the meaning of responsibilities

What are ‘non-negotiable responsibilities’

An attitude shift from whether to assist to how to assist

The difficulties associated with implementing their responsibilities

Accurate statistics of representation of students with disabilities
The process of carrying out staff development should
 be included in staff induction and general staff development
 use powerful presentations that touch the heart as well as the head
 emphasise using people with disabilities as presenters
 occur within faculties/teams perhaps at team meetings, or fitting in with existing systems of staff development
 have management direction and support
 present clear policies within institutions on rights and responsibilities of staff and of students with disabilities
Students need to be

Made aware of their rights and responsibilities through orientation, student diary, newsletters, associations etc.
 empowered to request attention to their rights at grass-roots level
Group 4:
Establishing principles for allocation of scarce funding
The working group noted that the survey report (Barnard, 1995) had indicated that students with disabilities were very unlikely to have participated in the broader activities of the university including those offered by student organisations. It was the opinion of the group that it was likely, under the DDA, that these organisations, who received part of the student fee, would be required to provide appropriate access if it was sought. The group recommended that individual Disability
Officers should draw student organisations’ attention to their responsibilities.
The group was aware that the DDA is a complaints-based Act and that case-law which would direct decisions is accumulating slowly, so institutions will often have to exercise their own judgement.
The group tried to articulate some principles, which include:
1.
Funding for matters that directly affect student access to full participation in academic courses are required to be funded and must be a priority for funding
2.
Funding for participation in the wider university community (which might vary from physical access to buildings to effective participation in a club or organisation) is likely to
be the responsibility of the particular organisation through the student fee
3.
Students can reasonably be expected to provide equipment which is a normal part of their everyday living (eg a wheelchair, or a hearing aid) and this is not part of the
institution's responsibility.
4.
Notwithstanding point 3, if participation in a course requires adaptation of normal equipment the institution may be required to provide funding
5.
Institutions need to have transparent processes by which decisions are made (see Fifth principle above) so that students and staff can have clear understandings of them
Journal of the Australia and New Zealand Student Services Association
3

JANZSSA: Документ1
Reference:
Barnard, S. (1995) Report on the survey of the experiences of students with disabilities at the three South Australian universities. Adelaide, Flinders University Press
Copies of the report can be obtained from and the author contacted at:
Neil Quintrell
Academic Support Services
Flinders University of SA
GPO Box 2100
Adelaide SA 5001
Phone: 08 201 2991
Fax: 08 201 3154
Email: hclnq@cc.flinders.edu.au
Journal of the Australia and New Zealand Student Services Association
4