DDB 62 Gabrielle Preston
Draft Disability Bill
Evidence to the Parliamentary Scrutiny
Committee
1. I am writing as the
mother of a child with special needs who I believe is severely
disadvantaged by the failure of the Disability Discrimination
Act to cover general examinations in the secondary school system.
2. My son has a condition
called dyspraxia. The main symptoms associated with dyspraxia
(previously known as 'clumsy child syndrome') are very poor coordination.
Although dyspraxia is not a serious disability, it is a condition
that does disadvantage children right the way through the education
system.
3. My son's dyspraxia
became particularly debilitating when he moved into Junior School
aged 5. He had speech problems, was unable to play sports, his
writing was very poor and he found it almost impossible to draw.
His work was always extremely messy. In effect this rendered
much of school life difficult and irrelevant for him.
4. Although my son received
both speech therapy and occupational therapy, his primary school
teachers were unwilling to acknowledge his particular needs.
I therefore took him a private educational psychologist who diagnosed
severe dyspraxia, and suggested that he would benefit from one-to-one
support and should be encouraged to use a lap-top.
5. Although the headteacher
finally (and somewhat reluctantly) provided my son with a lap-top,
and placed him on level 3 of the special needs register, it proved
very difficult to persuade his primary school teachers that he
should be allowed to use his laptop in class. They were determined
that he should learn to write. This had a negative impact upon
my son's attitude to both himself and school.
6. We moved our son to
new primary school for just two terms when he was in year 6.
His new school recognised his needs and encouraged his use of
the laptop. Thanks to this support, he achieved above average
grades in his SATS.
7. When our son moved
to secondary school in Year 7 he found it difficult to use his
laptop because children moved to different classes. His work
during that first year deteriorated markedly, and was well below
average. This is hardly surprising. The effort he puts into
trying to control a pen leaves his hand exhausted and detracts
from his ability to concentrate on the contents - rather than
the mechanics - of writing.
8. When our son moved
into year 8, the SENCO at the school arranged for him to use a
laptop for his classwork. All his teachers commented in a sudden
and dramatic improvement in his work.
9. When he was preparing
for his keystage 3 SATS last summer, the SENCO at his school contacted
the OCR Examination Board to ask if they would provide the science
papers on a CD-rom or some on-line equivalent, to ensure that
he was not unduly disadvantaged. The OCR refused to make any
adjustments on the dubious grounds that they were not legally
obliged to so.
10. The school is concerned
that my son - and others like him - will be particularly disadvantaged
in his GCSE science because of the OCR's failure to provide examinations
in on-line format.
11. My son's secondary
school is also concerned that tighter restrictions are currently
being imposed upon special arrangements for examinations. It
has been suggested that children with special needs should either
use a scribe (often the SENCO) or write out their examinations
and transcribe them later. Apart from the fact that using a SENCO
as a scribe is hardly the best use of a busy professional's time
(voice recognition programmes would clearly be the best way forward
for children who cannot type) my son's speech problems would render
it very difficult for him to use a scribe. If he had to write
out his examinations, he probably wouldn't be able to read his
writing afterwards. In any case, the difficulties he has controlling
a pen would not only reduce the quantity but also the quality
of what he's writing.
12. I believe that the
failure of the examination system to recognise that some children
are unable to write and to ensure that alternative arrangements
are put in place not only jeopardises a child's future, but may
consolidate existing prejudices within the education system as
a whole, or undermine a school's genuine attempt to make entirely
appropriate adjustments.
13. Clearly it makes no
sense at all to have legislation that requires schools to ensure
that disabled children and children with learning disabilities
or special needs access the curriculum, and yet allows examination
boards to discriminate against such children with impunity.
14. The technology required
to provide examinations in an accessible format is neither difficult
nor startlingly obscure. Everything - from tax returns to job
applications - can now be accessed on-line. It cannot be beyond
the capabilities of the examination system to come up with a computerised
system that will enable disadvantaged children - who under the
current system may be forced to leave school without formal qualifications
- to get the results they deserve.
15. Research emanating
from the DWP indicates that one of the reasons why disabled people
are disadvantaged in the workplace is because they are more likely
to have low, or no, qualifications. It is utterly perplexing
that discriminatory attitudes that ran counter to Government policies
on educational inclusion and welfare-to-work continue to dominate
powerful public sector institutions such as examination boards,
and equally perplexing that a Govenrment that has done so much
to counter discrimination in education should regard this as reasonable
behaviour.
16. I ask the scrutiny
committee to recommend the inclusion of examinations boards in
the Disability Bill.
Gabrielle Preston
10 Woodland Gardens
London N10 3UA
Tel: 0208 883 4058
27 February 2004
|
