1
Submission to the 2015 Review of the Disability Standards of Education 2005
Submitted by
Specific Learning Difficulties Association of NSW
SPELD NSW Inc.
Submission co-ordinated by
Dr Don Gillies
Telephone (02) 94178708
Email:
12 June 2015
The Specific Learning Difficulties Association of NSW
Address: 2/172 Majors Bay Rd CONCORD NSW 2137
Phone: (02) 97396277 Fax: (02) 87651487 Email:
Web:
SPELD NSW Submission to the
2015 Review of The Disability Standards for Education 2005
Introduction
Specific Learning Difficulties Association (NSW) (SPELD NSW) is a Public Benevolent Institution founded in 1968, whose mission is to provide advice and services to children and adults with specific learning difficulties and those who teach, work with and care for them.
SPELD NSW acknowledges the significance and importance of the Commonwealth Disability Standards for Education in providing a basis for ensuring that students with disability are empowered and enabled to participate in education, in such a way as to allow them to achieve their life goals. We also support the review process, but consider that particularly with specific learning difficulties (SLD), there needs to be a more frequent ongoing monitoring of the changes that are occurring in assessment and teaching and learning methods that are proven and implemented.
It is considered that there needs to be a systems approach adopted to change as it affects the provision of education in meeting the challenges of an ever changing environment. This approach must involve a Whole School Approach (WSA) to education that involves Federal and State policy makers, State education departments and regions, school leadership teams, classroom teachers, special education and allied health professionals, administrative staff and importantly the parents and students themselves. Indeed organisations and people from the local community may also play a role in the education process.
Distinction between learning disability and difficulty
The Standards refer to ‘disability’; it is important to point out that this term has to include those students who are acknowledged by educators and allied health professionals as havingimpairment in the way they learn. The American PsychiatricAssociation in its latest DSM-V continues to refer to ‘learning disability’ (Dyslexia, Dysgraphia, Dyscalculia, Dyspraxia and Attention Deficit Disorder). We in Australia tend to refer to ‘learning difficulties’ (Woods, Wyatt-Smith & Elkins, 2005; Graham & Bailey, 2007). There is a need for a more evidence based approach to the identification and assessment of the range of disabilities and an improved awareness of ineffective treatments and teaching and learning strategies that can lead to associated behaviour difficulties, including name-calling, isolation and bullying. It is interesting to note that there was an attempt by an eminent working group to have dyslexia defined as being a learning disability (Coltheart, 2009). The report did not achieve the required political action. It is important to acknowledge that in a learning context the terms ‘learning disability’ and ‘learning difficulty’ are synonymous. This is an important issue with the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme as some parents and carers may have significant expenses involved in the education of their children. Children in remote areas or in socio-economic disadvantaged locations have considerable financial difficulties in insuring they have an opportunity to achieve productive life goals. A further consideration with definitions, involves parents who become aware that their child has a learning disability and when first confronted with labels such as ‘Dyslexia’, ‘Attention deficit disorder’ etc. can become alarmed. It is important that assessment looks at “…learning and behavioural disorders of childhood in their reality as symptoms rather than as diseases.” (Pauc, 2006, p.viii). This will help allay parent concern about their child being labelled as “disabled”.
Early identification
It is imperative that SLD’s are identified early. It can be argued that the pre-school stage of learning plays a foundational role in learning and can have positive or negative impacts on the primary and secondary stages of education. It is proposed that this stage of beginning learning be included in the Standards process and also be subject to review.
Juvenile Justice
In a different context, it is considered essential that the Standards reflect the educational support given to the high proportion of young people with learning difficulties in Juvenile Correction Centres. A significant number, as high as 30% have ADHD alone and 61% of juvenile offenders suffered from conduct disorder and 17% suffered from Obsessive-compulsive disorder (NSW Department of Juvenile Justice, 2003). In a follow up study (Kenny, 2006) it was found that 38% of offenders had received previous special education. This is an important issue as many reoffend. Allowing them to achieve productive life goals through appropriate learning would be of great benefit to them and their communities. This would also reduce the number of reoffenders who become inmates in adult Corrective Services establishments.
School education concerns
In school education SPELD NSW has two main concerns; the training of teachers, particularly beginning teachers, and the closely allied matter of adoption of evidence based methodologies in teaching and learning. From a reading of educational professional journals, it is clear that there is some uncertainty as to the effectiveness and even veracity of some methods of assessment and teaching that are used to assist those with learning difficulties. It would appear that proven evidence based methods, that have been subject to peer review and supported by eminent educators or health professionals, do not achieve the required acknowledgement and adoption into teaching and learning methods because of errant philosophy, mistaken beliefs or at worst commercial marketing activities. This appears to be a world-wide phenomenon. There is considerable confusion in the minds of both teachers and parents as to the effectiveness of various methods. It is understood that Federal and State action is being taken to remedy this uncertainty, particularly as far as Dyslexia is concerned, where many and various and unproven speech and reading comprehension methods are being used or advocated. There needs to be a process of evaluation put in place to continuously monitor developments in educational research and for appropriate prompt adoption of proven methods. There is no place for rhetoric; clear and necessary action is required. It also needs to be mentioned that there are gifted students with learning difficulties whose needs are frequently overlooked. Their developmentalso needs emphasis in the evaluation process.
Training of teachers
The training of beginning teachers has been the subject of some discussion. It is critical that they be exposed to contemporary research based theory and practice and sufficient emphasis placed on understanding and teaching students with learning difficulties. Their initial training has to include practicum sessions where new learning is put into practice under the supervision and mentorship of knowledgeable and experienced teachers. There has to be a closer working relationship established between university teaching faculties and school leadership teams. Similarly practicing teachers require opportunities for participation in continuous professional development (CPD) and involvement in research activities. It has been suggested that formal academic recognition be awarded for satisfactory teacher engagement in CPD. SPELD NSW believes that this would give recognition and reward to engaged teachers and warrants further consideration. Reviews of the Disability Standards need to reflect developments in teacher training and practice, as they affect students with learning difficulties.
Response to Intervention
There is world-wide evidence that to enable students with learning difficulties to achieve learning in an inclusive and collaborative environment a Response to Intervention (RTI) method of teaching is very effective. It is not the intention of this submission to detail this method, as other submissions have been forwarded to previous reviews. It would be of benefit for the Standards review process to include an examination of the uptake and effectiveness of this teaching and learning method.
Adequate funding
There is much to be done and all measures to overcome the deleterious effects of learning difficulties and often-associated behaviour problems require adequate funding. The social costs of doing nothing or, too little, too late have to be given due consideration. Children with learning difficulties are often invisible and unheard. Thus their disability is often not physically obvious. Funding and provision of support for those involved in remote areas or with low socio-economic groups require additional planned and monitored assistance. Schools are trying to operate on the ‘better intervene immediately’ model of RTI, yet funding remains at the out dated ‘wait and see’ approach where schools have to wait for outside testing to be allocated the small amount of money they need. Therefore it’s left to schools to fill this funding gap or else these children are still being told that they are not ‘funded’ and therefore receive no further assistance. There is a further discriminatory measure in funding, in that Federal funding only applies for Autism, cognitive delay and physical disabilities. Other learning difficulties are excluded!
Problems associated with the full adoption of the Gonski Review recommendations and loss of opportunity to provide further assistance to students with disability and from remote and low socio-economic groups, need to be included in this Standards Review.
Vocational Education and Training
The effectiveness of training in the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector has been the subject of significant recent media coverage and normally tends to be given low exposure. It is clear that there has been insufficient or ineffective monitoring by governments and regulatory agencies of private training provider course offerings, processes and standards of training. This has resulted in a lowering of education and training standards, misuse of government financial support to students by providers and unsatisfactory marketing practices. It has been clear that the majority of training providers do not provide a service to the learning disabled and it has been reported that some students with disabilities have been accepted on courses only to have them deemed unable to complete requirements, after course fees have been paid. There is an urgent need for a governmental enquiry into private training provider practices and indeed into the overall provision of VET.
In the context of reviewing disability standards in education, the reduced support for TAFE by Federal and State governments together with increased support for private training providers is of concern and needs critical re-examination. TAFE does provide support for those students who experience learning difficulties or come from remote or disadvantaged areas. In addition TAFE provides support to ‘second chance’ learners who wish to reengage in study to assist them to finally achieve their life ambitions. An excellent example is the Bradfield Senior College within the campus of the Northern Sydney Institute, TAFE NSW.
Summary
The Disability Standards of Education can be seen as being effective, only when all participants in the process work together in a systemic environmentof shared and reasoned responsibilities. Policy and practices have to beevidence based and result in timely and necessary action. This is essential to ensure that people with learning difficulties are engaged in productiveeducation and are enabled to achieve their desired life goals. It is important that those students with learning difficulties be recognised and included in support measures for the more visible disabled. Federal and State governments have to co-operatively work together with their respective departments, education and health professionalsand researchers to ensure that our students are given the best of support, through the use of proven assessment, teaching and learning methods. The implementation of these methods have to be clearly reflected in the Disability Standards for Education.
The Standards need to be applied to the education of those inmates in the Juvenile Justice system who have learning difficulties and to those people in the VET sector desiring to achieve necessary work education, skills and attitudes. It is suggested that potential employers be consulted in this process, as they are the end users of the product of education. It is surprising that employers appear to be accepting of the inappropriate practices being shown by some private training providers. It goes without saying that private training providers also need to address the provision of appropriate support to students with learning difficulties. This support will be necessary if they are to continue to receive public funding and be seen as competitive to the creditable and long standing TAFE system.
References
Coltheart, M. (chair), 2009, Helping people with Dyslexia: a national action plan. Accessed
Graham,L., Bailey, J., 2007, Learning disabilities and difficulties: an Australian conspectus, Journal of Learning Disabilities No. 40, Vol. 386.
Kenny, D.T., 2006, (et.al.), NSW young people on community orders health survey 2003-2006, University of Sydney
NSW Department of Juvenile Justice, 2003, NSW young people in custody health survey
Pauc, R., 2006, Is that my child. London, Virgin Books
Woods, A.F., Wyatt-Smith, C. and Elkins,J., 2005, Learning difficulties in the Australian context: policy, research and practice, Curriculum Perspectives, No. 23, Vol. 3, pp. 1-14