University of Nottingham - Disability Support in CBA

University of Nottingham
Case Study - Disability Support in Computer Based Assessments

Background
The Special Educational Needs and Disability (SENDA) act that was introduced in 2001 added to the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) that was introduced in 1992 to cover all educational establishments. Together they outlaw discrimination in relation to disability including services within Higher Education Institutions.

Institutions are responsible for making reasonable adjustments that are anticipatory of all student needs and thus not treat a disabled student (or staff member) less favourably for any reason relating to their disability. Thus they are required to make changed to all aspects of teaching and learning and general University life.

What the case study is about
The University of Nottingham has noted an increase in students applying to the study has increased but also noted the medical school applicants with disabilities remains lower than average. The medical school wished to increase the amount of electronic assessment but also acknowledged that this type of assessment could exacerbate and discriminate against some students in relation to their disability. This case study reviews how they creased an electronic assessment that could be individualised by each student thus accommodating students whose disabilities might have impeded its use.


The system
The system used was Touchstone which has been designed to provide support for a full customisation of background/foreground colours and a range of different font sizes, additional features were added to accommodate screen readers and Braille tablets as well as dyslexia requirements (this they noted was more difficult due to the wide range of requirements). On a practical level the system needed to be non-technical staff friendly thus have user-friendly interface for assessment designer, in addition clear user instructions for students and accessible for on all networked computers and not just specifically designated computers.


Implementation
The design team consulted widely throughout the university and used the university disability polices to embed the process and outcomes. Consultation included colleagues in the student support unit, timetabling administrative staff, teaching programme staff and students. The student body was informed of the changes via the VLE and students who wished to use the adaptive system were asked to report to the administrative staff that coordinated adjustments for future assessments. The student then evaluated the changes made to the system before these being implemented for use for assessments specific to the student. The adaptive system is only open to students who are declare their disability and are registered as such within the university system.

Tangible benefits
· Compliance with DDA and SENDA – both legal requirements and important for the university reputation and recruitments (Seale, 2006)
· The use of Touchstone was thought to be simple and readily applicable to network computers and importantly could accommodate keyboard stoke use and did not require mouse usage.
· Touchstone timed students exactly thus student with additional time allowance were continually aware of their constraints. In addition these students did not need to be segregated into different rooms thus highlighting their differences with other students.


Disadvantages
· The time taken to set up the system and the numbers of staff involved made it a time consuming and large project.
· Continued negotiation with students on requirements – this requires a lot of time from many staff members.

Kathryn’s thoughts
I liked this project and I think it highlights a number of things in relation to both projects in general and also more specifically projects in relation to the disability legislation.

First of all I think it shows that all projects take more time than you think they will initially. Specifically in relation to projects and disability they always take more time especially as HEI are only beginning to come to terms with the fact they have to anticipate the needs of their disabled students and as a result implement all sorts of things. It costs a lot of resources and even when they get funding they have to get the staff to work together and this is time (which we all know is not costed).

In relation to benefits not mentioned in the case study I think one of the main ones in the longer terms if the fact staff work across departments to achve a task and this is a good thing for all sorts of reasons not only in relation to the project

In relation to innovation – I am not a IT person but it seams to me that this may not be a huge innovative thing to have done on the IT front but it is on the human font. It took someone to think of this and drive the project and that is part of innovation for me.

I was unclear about why they introduced it only to the registered disabled students and why student were not able to set their own parameters on the system perhaps before they started the test. Perhaps students would have found that for example a black background with white text suited them and they did not have declared sensitivity to this…. ??