British Sign Language and Linguistic Access Working Group ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE SCHOOL SECTOR:LINGUISTIC ACCESS TO EDUCATION FOR DEAF PUPILS5.THE NUMBER OF DEAF PUPILS5.1. SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT STATISTICSThe Scottish Government’s ScotXed programme supports the collection of statisticalinformation about numbers of deaf children in school education via the annual schoolcensus. The definition of the population included has changed in recent years, inresponse to policy and legislative developments. Up to and including 2001/2002, thepopulation included only those who had a Record of Needs (RoN) and for whom the‘main difficulty’ was deafness. In 2002/2003 the group was widened to encompassthose who did not have RoNs, but who did have an Individualised Education Plan (IEP),again for whom the ‘main difficulty’ was deafness. In 2004, the Additional Support forLearning Act (Scotland, 2004) changed the framework within which numbers of deafchildren are reported, replacing the concept of ‘special educational needs’ with that of‘additional support needs’, and broadening the population to include all deaf pupilswith specified records, whether or not deafness is their ‘main difficulty’.The Scottish Government and Learning and Teaching Scotland provide guidance oneligibility for IEPs. However, local authorities have created a variety of systems forrecording additional support needs, and it is likely that this creates regional variations.For example, staged intervention systems can vary from three to five stages amongauthorities. Also, some are able to moderate the implementation of their particularstaged systems across schools and some have not yet got moderation systems in place.In the latter cases, it is possible that there will be variations in eligibility for IEPs atindividual school level. Further study will be helpful in identifying how far there areinconsistencies at both school and regional levels. National networks of AdditionalSupport for Learning Officers and Educational Psychologists would provide usefulsources of information.In November 2005, within the new ASL framework, RoNs started to be phased out andnew ‘Co-ordinated Support Plans (CSPs)’ were introduced. The School Census statisticsreflect this transition period for the first time in 2006. Also, until RoNs are phased out,figures will show both RoNs and and CSPs, in addition to IEPs.These changes are likely to largely explain the significant variations in the numbersreported annually since 2000, as shown in Table 1.13
5.2. ADPS STATISTICSSection 11 provides basic information on the ADPS project, which collected statistics ondeaf pupils between 2000 and 2005. The deaf pupil population was defined by the levelof service received, in recognition of the fact that mild and unilateral hearing losses cansometime impact on learning (Most, 2004) and that conventional descriptors can besometimes misleading (Brett, 2003). The target population (known as ‘Group A’) includedall pupils who either attended a school for deaf pupils or a mainstream school with aunit for deaf pupils, or were visited by a teacher of deaf children twice a year or more.Table 4 shows that the ADPS population was consistently higher than that identified bythe, then, Scottish Executive, during 2000/2004. Even when pupils with mild andunilateral hearing loss are excluded from the ADPS data, there was still a significant gap.TABLE 4 Numbers of deaf pupils in Scotland, 2000/2007YearScottish Executive/ScottishGovernment data*ADPS dataCriteria forinclusion indeaf pupilpopulation*2000/1 Has Record ofNeeds, for whichdeafness is the‘main difficulty’Total no.of deafpupilsreportedCriteria for inclusion indeaf pupil population576 Attends school or unitfor deaf children, orreceives service fromToD twice a year ormoreTotal no.of deafpupilsreported(surveyreturn rates)1408(99.4%)2001/2 As for 2000/1 572 As above 1379(99.6%)2002/3 Has Record ofNeeds or IEP,within whichdeafness is the‘main difficulty’728 As above 1311(98.6%)2003/4 As for 2002/3 657 As above 1283(87.4%)***2004/5 As for 2002/3 639 As above Not yetavailable2005/6 As for 2002/3 624 n/a n/a n/aTotal excludingpupils withmild/unilateraldeafness andnon-returns/infonot available908882835751***Not yetavailable2006/7(impact ofAdditionalSupport forLearninglegislation)Has Record ofNeeds,Co-ordinatedSupport Plan orIEP, wheredeafness is a‘reason forsupport’**837 n/a n/a n/a* Figures from Scottish Government statistical publications:http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/School-Education** There can be more than one reason for support*** In year 4, a lower return rate and complexities over tracking pupil migrations may have caused a slightunder-reporting affect14
Page 1 and 2: BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTI
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe are very gratefu
Page 6 and 7: CONTENTS (continued)THE FURTHER AND
Page 8: 1.INTRODUCTIONThis study, conducted
Page 11 and 12: 2.METHODS2.1. STATISTICAL INFORMATI
Page 13 and 14: Interviewees were selected on the b
Page 15 and 16: TABLE 1Type of approach‘Natural a
Page 17 and 18: 3.3. ‘NO SPECIFIC POLICY’Betwee
Page 22 and 23: 5.3. PRESENTING STATISTICS ON THE P
Page 24 and 25: 6.THE NUMBER OF PROFESSIONALS WHOPR
Page 27 and 28: 6.1.3. RECOMMENDATIONS■■■■T
Page 29: CHART 4 Location of deaf ‘other p
Page 32 and 33: 7.THE QUALIFICATIONS OF PROFESSIONA
Page 34 and 35: There are a limited number of types
Page 37 and 38: Table 7 BSL qualifications among To
Page 39: ■■As has already been demonstra
Page 42 and 43: The title ‘Communication Support
Page 44 and 45: 8.PRE-SCHOOL ISSUES: INFORMED CHOIC
Page 46 and 47: There is UK-wide evidence that unde
Page 48 and 49: ToDS (who may be Educational Audiol
Page 50 and 51: Table 8 Types of assessment done by
Page 52 and 53: 9.SCHOOL YEARS: LINGUISTIC ASSESSME
Page 54 and 55: 9.3. LATE DIAGNOSISThe cochlear imp
Page 56 and 57: 9.7. ASSESSMENTS OF LINGUISTIC STRA
Page 58 and 59: 10.SCHOOL YEARS: ACCESS ISSUES10.1.
Page 60 and 61: 10.2. STAFFING ISSUES10.2.1.THE ToD
Page 62 and 63: 10.4. ACOUSTIC ENVIRONMENTSThe Disa
Page 64 and 65: CHART 9 Instances of special arrang
Page 66 and 67: CHART 11 Instances of special arran
Page 68 and 69: ■■■■■■There is a need f
Page 70 and 71:
The wide range of types of informat
Page 72 and 73:
A ToD currently visits three times
Page 74 and 75:
12.2. THE NUMBER OF DEAF STUDENTS I
Page 76 and 77:
Table 14 compares selected qualific
Page 78 and 79:
Table 16 All students* 2001/2002-20
Page 80 and 81:
CHART 13 Age groups of deaf/hearing
Page 82 and 83:
13.THE NUMBER OF PROFESSIONALS WHOP
Page 84 and 85:
■■ways in which the current str
Page 86 and 87:
They all indicated some kind of fas
Page 88 and 89:
■■■■■■More staff are op
Page 90 and 91:
15.ISSUES RELEVANT TO BOTH FE ANDHE
Page 92 and 93:
It is known that it can sometimes b
Page 94 and 95:
The Association of Notetakers does
Page 96 and 97:
Bearing this in mind, between 200 a
Page 98 and 99:
Qualifications relating to other ta
Page 100 and 101:
Communication Support Workers■ Th
Page 102 and 103:
One college, which attracts a high
Page 104 and 105:
Table 22 Deaf/HI FE student enrolme
Page 106 and 107:
■■■■■■■■All college
Page 108 and 109:
The validation processCurrently, 30
Page 110 and 111:
A related issue is the lack of stan
Page 112 and 113:
■■There is a need for robust qu
Page 114 and 115:
19.FULL LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONSTHE
Page 116 and 117:
7.2. OTHER PROFESSIONALS■There is
Page 118 and 119:
■■■■■■■■■■There
Page 120 and 121:
■Equality Forward’s ‘Deaf Stu
Page 122 and 123:
■There is anecdotal evidence that
Page 124 and 125:
Knoors, H. (2007) ‘Educational Re
Page 126 and 127:
Scottish Parliament (2006) ‘Acces
Page 128 and 129:
APPENDIX 2GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS CO
Page 130 and 131:
) Competency in BSL/English interpr
Page 132 and 133:
The word ‘deaf’ is used through
Page 134 and 135:
APPENDIX 5RELEVANT SQA QUALIFICATIO
Page 136 and 137:
APPENDIX 7PROPOSED SQA QUALIFICATIO
show all

British Sign Language and Linguistic Access Working Group ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?