Chapter 4 - Dealing with disabilities
4.1
This chapter addresses pedagogical issues in
dealing with students with disabilities: a matter which the committee received
much information on from submissions, witnesses and teachers at schools visited
by the committee. From the evidence, and from observations, the committee
concludes that while there are deficiencies in the ways in which schools and
systems are dealing with the challenges of providing quality programs for
students with disabilities, it is clear that most states and territories are
either implementing new policies or programs in disabilities education or are
in the process of conducting reviews.
4.2
The committee heard evidence in Canberra that
problems relating to the way schools dealt with disabilities need to be put
into a context of how well schools dealt with diversity. It was claimed that
schools are not coping particularly well with any kind of diversity, including
social disadvantage suffered by particular groups.[1]
4.3
The committee notes, however, that its broadly
sympathetic view of the way in which systems and schools are dealing with their
responsibilities to students with disabilities is not shared by some parents.
While many children may appear contented, and making progress, there are many
who are not. No one with any experience in any aspect of dealing with students
with disabilities would be unaware of the personal stress which parents suffer,
a strain which becomes more severe and prolonged for parents of children with
severe disabilities, particularly autism and different types of intellectual
disability. Catering for individual difference is fairly easily managed with
most children, but in dealing with different forms of disability in the
classroom, accommodation to individual needs becomes far more difficult,
especially in the mainstream school where most of these children are. The
acute, and understandable, concern that parents have for their children under
these circumstances usually puts them in a wary and critical frame of mind in
their dealings with school administrators. Many submissions reflect this
attitude.
Early intervention and diagnosis of disabilities
4.4
The first test of quality in the provision of
educational services to students with disabilities is that of early diagnosis,
and the subsequent identification of timely and appropriate remedies. Without
this there can be no early intervention so necessary to arrest the onset of
conditions like autism or sensory and other physiological defects which can be
ameliorated by early medical treatment. The committee received evidence of the
fragmented and uncertain provision of diagnostic services. This was most
obviously the case with children whose condition did not warrant medical
diagnosis so much as psychological examination. Diagnosis of physical
disability was commonly done soon after birth, or even before birth. The
committee noted the extension of scanning programs in all states. However,
conditions like autism are liable to be diagnosed only once a child reaches
school age, if then. Children with conditions like dyslexia and other learning
disabilities might wait longer. There appear to be two main opportunities to
screen for disabilities: the first in infancy; and the second in pre-school or
early primary school. One witness told the
committee that it was important to resource and support families during periods
of transition when they may be leaving one service and commencing in another.
An example of transition may be when a child is leaving a pre-school early
intervention program and commencing full-time schooling.[2]
4.5
The committee heard that most research shows
that effective early childhood intervention happens in services that are family
centred, multi-dimensional and community based. It is considered important that
early intervention programs include therapy, education and family support
needs. If services are available under one roof, with independent continuous
case management, parents could be provided with the most appropriate services
with minimum delay. This ideal arrangement is difficult to find. Services are
segmented as a result of differing departmental priorities and there is usually
a lack of coordination between different services. The result is confusion for
many parents, and an inability of the agency involved to offer an equitable
level of service to parents living in remote areas.[3]
4.6
The Australian Education Union pointed out in
its submission that while there do not appear to be any particular problems
associated with identification and appropriate early intervention as far as
schooling is concerned, problems are likely to occur where pre-school education
is not properly coordinated with schools. There is also a likely inadequacy in
identifying late developing disabilities which do not emerge until adolescence.
The danger is that links between school, specialist education and medical
services are likely to be less well established in the secondary years than in
the pre-school years.[4]
4.7
Relevant to the process of early intervention is
the committee’s observation of an instance of dysfunctionality in government
services in Victoria. Responsibility for pre-school education in that state is
taken by the Department of Human Services, and gives rise to some misgivings
about the reliability of early identification of learning disabilities. This
anachronism has survived remarkably intact despite the upheavals which have
characterised the administration of government services in Victoria in recent
times. Although the committee was given assurances about the high level of
cooperation and coordination between that department and the Department of
Education and Training in the identification and diagnosis of early childhood
disabilities, the committee is not persuaded that this arrangement is in the
best interests of children, whether suffering disabilities or not.[5]
Teachers and counsellors in the
early identification process
4.8
While a high degree of specialised skill may be
needed in some areas of diagnosis, a number of witnesses claimed that teachers
should be capable of identifying problems, especially specific learning
problems. The committee asked one witness about the appropriateness of teachers
carrying out screening to detect disabilities in the early intervention phase
at the beginning of kindergarten, with testing of gross and fine motor skills
and language problems, where there might be indications of a potential learning
disability. The response was that:
Teachers can definitely screen for those. I think that the
trouble at the moment is that school counsellors often are not trained enough
in specific learning difficulties themselves to do the assessments and parents
have no choice but to go to private educational psychologists. So the onus and
the financial burden rest with the parents in that situation. I think that
teachers definitely could be trained to do screening.[6]
4.9
Asked whether teachers could not be trained to
undertake preliminary diagnosis as part of an undergraduate course, an
academic witness responded:
We take the view that there are certain things that all teachers
ought to be able to do, and they are not the things that psychologists do.
There are classroom identification strategies that every primary school teacher
ought to know and particularly every kindergarten teacher ought to know. They
are quite simple things, not hard to do. They just need commonsense and a good
educational mind. As a result of those you can make a pretty good guess that it
is worth this child having further assessment at this point. That is what we
want.[7]
4.10
A similar view to those expressed above came
from a school counsellor who told the committee that teachers had to become
diagnosticians in the sense that they had to be observant about deficiencies in
the capabilities of students and of likely disabilities. It was not necessary
for teachers to hazard a more complicated diagnosis. This was the task of the
specialist:
In general, we find that teachers are very aware when a child is
achieving at a different rate or a different level in their classroom. There
are some who are not as good at picking it up, but in general teachers are
fairly aware. But they may not know why a child is behaving like that. They
might say, ‘This child isn’t achieving as well as his classmates. He doesn’t
seem to understand what’s going on in the class. He can’t follow the directions.’
That is where we see people from our organisation as having a role in helping
the teacher to tease out what it is. Is it, for instance, that the child is not
understanding language very well and therefore they are not following
directions because they do not understand the language, or is it because they
have an intellectual disability and they are not following directions because
they really have no comprehension of what the directions entail? That is not
really a job for the teacher, and we discourage teachers from doing it in some
ways. Otherwise, we have teachers saying, ‘I want you to see little Johnny;
he’s autistic,’ or, ‘We want you to see Mary; she’s ADHD,’ and making diagnoses
with no training to do so. As psychologists, we try to dissuade people from
making those diagnoses but encourage them to say, ‘This child’s different.
These are the behaviours I’m observing. Can you help?’[8]
4.11
A number of submissions received by the
committee referred to identification of specific disabilities, and the problems
related to delays in this process. The committee would make the point that
while such expectations of teachers are by no means unreasonable, they rely on
teachers having good basic training with follow-up professional development
which both extends their skills and provides opportunity to reflect on their
classroom experience. Even then, identifying various conditions of disability
can be problematic, and expert assistance is required. Elsewhere in this report
the committee recommends a greatly increased commitment to professional
development in which training in early diagnostic skills should be given high
priority.
Diagnosis of autism
4.12
Autism is singled out in this report for
particular mention because the full extent of its impact is only now being
recognised. Details of diagnosis are given later in this chapter. As the
evidence shows, education systems are almost totally unprepared to deal with
either its early diagnosis or its treatment. Specialist knowledge and
experience in ‘re-programming’ severe autism sufferers to the point where they
benefit from mainstream schooling is very limited.
4.13
Perhaps the saddest representations to come to
the committee were those from parents of autistic children. Action for Autism
asserted that there was strong evidence that intensive and autism specific
early intervention programs designed to treat and rehabilitate children with
autism have been shown to be effective and have lasting results. Unfortunately,
few Australian children with autism can gain access to effective early
intervention. The required intensive treatment is not provided by the health,
disability or education sectors. In the mental health sector it is not
available to pre-adolescent people. The point was made that:
By the time developmental delays and behavioural challenges in a
child with autism reach crisis level it is too late. Intervention for older
children with autism is extremely difficult and may be prohibitively expensive.
Research shows most Australian children with autism have significant levels of
psychopathology (anxiety, depression and psychosis) that often remains
undiagnosed and untreated. Children with autism are among the worst affected by
mental illness.[9]
4.14
The committee was
told that children with autism need early and intensive autism-specific
behavioural intervention to prepare them for school. This is needed to teach
them the basics of communication: to hear language and to speak. Autistic
children need to be taught to learn through imitation of behaviour, which they
are otherwise incapable of. In most cases this training is unavailable because
there are few autism-specific trained teachers. Most children with this
condition have access only to generic programs intended for children with an
intellectual disability.[10]
Diagnosis of sensory impairment
4.15
Early diagnosis of sensory impairments is also
essential for long-term learning advantage. Some problems can be identified
before a child is born, or soon after. Unfortunately, this procedure is only
now becoming routine, even though the technology for early diagnosis has
existed for several years. This is a public health issue with a strong bearing
on education outcomes. The committee was told of developments in the early
identification of deafness, and notes that delays in treatment result in years
of distress for some children and their families:
We now have the technology to screen every baby’s hearing before
they leave hospital. It is a very easy, simple test. In some of the states in
America where it has been introduced and in some European countries we are
finding amazingly exciting developments of children screened for hearing before
they leave hospital, diagnosed in the first couple of months of life and then
parents making decisions regarding communication method, cochlear implant or
hearing aids. All the research is showing that, if children are diagnosed by
the time they are six months old and receive appropriate early intervention,
those children can enter school with language which is within the normal
range—it might be at the lower end of normal, but it is within the normal
range.
In our present situation in Victoria, children’s hearing loss is
not usually diagnosed until about 14 months of age, so there is an enormous
gap. In Victoria, if your baby is known to be at risk for hearing loss—for
instance, if there is deafness in the family or if you have been exposed to
viruses known to cause deafness during pregnancy—your baby can be tested in the
first couple of days, but that is not picking up many of our children, because
most children who are born deaf are not born deaf due to known factors.[11]
4.16
In the case of deaf children, the committee was
told that there was strong evidence to show that delays in diagnosis, which
average 14 months in Victoria for severe and profound hearing loss, delay entry
into early intervention. Children with hearing problems gain an average of only
6 months progress each year, leaving them 14 months behind their learning peers
in language development with the gap widening all the time.[12] Research in the United States
has shown that babies diagnosed within 6 months of birth develop significantly
better language skills than those diagnosed after this time.[13] It is now increasingly common
for babies born in European countries to undergo neonatal hearing screening,
while the United States recently mandated universal neonatal screening.[14] The committee notes that
trials are being conducted in some Australian states, and that New South Wales
has recommended that the procedure becomes routine.[15]
Recommendation 7
The committee recommends that, subject to assessment under
Australian trials currently being conducted, routine screening of the hearing
of all Australian newborn children should be adopted.
4.17
Problems associated with poor diagnosis of
deafness are particularly acute for indigenous children. Indigenous
communities, along with other socio-economically disadvantaged groups, suffer a
high incidence of otitis media, a severe middle ear infection. While early
diagnosis is crucial to identify the onset of the condition in the very young
child or baby, ongoing screening as the child develops is also crucial to
contain otitis media-related deafness, the most widespread disability
afflicting indigenous communities.[16]
4.18
The Deafness Forum of Australia (ACT), in its
submission, advised that in cases where the otitis media cycle has commenced,
it could be necessary to screen at least three times a year. The Forum
recommended that regular screening of hearing should be re-introduced into
schools, in addition to the introduction of mandatory neonatal screening.
Screening could also be coordinated with the provision of community health or
immunisation programs.[17]
4.19
In recent years, many state governments have
been winding back routine screening for sensory impairment, with the emphasis now
being on ‘user pays’ services. The Australian Guidance Counselling Association
reported:
Local community health
centres have traditionally had nurses based in schools or visiting schools who
do early school screening, so every child in kindergarten gets a hearing test,
a vision test and a very brief language assessment done. That has been
progressively dismantled. They are now saying, ‘If you think a child’s got a
problem, you can refer them to the nurse.’ So we are putting onto teachers the
need to become diagnosticians and to say, ‘I think this kid’s got a hearing
problem,’ ‘I think this kid’s got a vision problem,’ or ‘I think this kid’s got
a language problem.’ I think teachers have enough to do without becoming
medicos as well.[18]
Mr Brian Smyth King, Director of Disability
Programs, New South Wales Department of Education and Training, told the
committee that the department took the view that universal screening was not a
sufficiently targeted use of resources, while referral was.[19]
4.20
Nevertheless, the committee accepts the argument
that early intervention is crucial, for example in the case of conductive
hearing loss, and considers that there are grave consequences and huge
long-term costs to the community in the failure to identify evolving sensory impairments
in school-age children. The committee therefore considers that the feasibility
of re-introducing screening for sensory impairment should be evaluated in the
interests of identifying all afflicted children, and especially the
disadvantaged, who might not otherwise be identified.
Recommendation 8
The committee recommends that MCEETYA should examine options to re‑introduce some form of regular screening
for sensory impairment for school and pre-school age
children, either within schools or as part of community health and immunisation
programs.
Diagnosis of attention
deficit hyperactive disorder
4.21
The committee received few submissions on the
subject of attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), but one typical
submission claimed that the current system of early identification of ADHD,
which is in the hands of advisory teachers and counsellors, is ‘failing our
children miserably.’[20]
It was claimed that some teachers and counsellors assert that they do not
believe in ADHD and many professionals were said to blame the mothers of
children with ADHD. On the matter of early diagnosis the submission from the
North Queensland Attention Deficit Disorder Support Group had this to say:
There are no early intervention programs for
children with ADD and associated learning disabilities. Mothers and support
groups have been advocating for early intervention programs as these programs
have the potential to curb the drop out rate and under-achievement of children
within the education system. As previously stated, parents have had to fight
every inch of the way to have their children assessed and advocated strongly to
have access to programs which may assist their children. Often current programs
do not meet the needs of children with ADD.[21]
Problems of managing disability
Autism
4.22
Disorders on the autism spectrum result from
atypical neurological functioning. Autism impairs social interaction, and
impairs communication to the extent that many children with autism have little
or no functional language. As indicated earlier, the committee heard serious
and convincing evidence of the neglect by schools and education authorities of
students suffering from autism. This is partly explained by the quite dramatic
increase in the rate of diagnosis, which has increased four or five time over
the past decade. There is no evidence that this is the sole cause of the
alarming increase.[22]
The current reported incidence of autism is conservatively put at 27 per
10,000, with some studies putting the figure as high as 93 per 10,000. The estimated
number of children in New South Wales suffering from autism ranges from 5 000
to 15,000.[23]
Over the whole of Australia between 0.6 per cent and 1 per cent of children are
affected by autism or a related disorder.
4.23
The difficulty for parents in obtaining more
support for children suffering from autism was quite fully explained to the
committee, and this advice needs to be reported in some detail. One parent, in
describing his dealings with government agencies had the following comment to
make in relation to autism:
I think part of it comes down to the fact that nobody takes
responsibility for it. I have written to the health minister and to the
Minister for Family and Community Services, and both quite clearly point the
finger at each other. Family and Community Services regard autism as being a
disability with very low numbers, so it is probably easier to not provide for
their needs. But the needs of these children are not that unique; there are
children with other conditions that are not on the spectrum who have some
similar needs. Quite a number of disabilities share characteristics—things like
Angelman syndrome and fragile X, which used to be part of autism until we found
out the cause of fragile X and the genetic conditions for it. A number of children
with Down syndrome have autistic characteristics and lots of children with
epilepsy have autistic symptoms, but generally it is not reported because the
epilepsy seems to dominate in the diagnosis. If you get into an educational
setting, the thing that is stopping them from learning is probably their
autistic characteristics.[24]
4.24
It was also claimed that autism is not widely
reported. It is not mentioned in the ABS statistics. Children with autism are
grouped with those suffering from an intellectual disability, with the
assumption that there is little that can be done about it. As the evidence
continued:
Basically, it has fallen through the gaps because people have
believed that it is not that big a number and is not important, and because the
families are often so weighed down by looking after a child that they are not
politically active and they really do not have a support network that is
effective. There is a huge variance in opinion amongst the families and parents
about what should be done. Most of the research is relatively new and the older
families have not really picked up on that. All of those sorts of issues mean
that it is really an emerging area and the services do not really exist at this
stage.[25]
4.25
The committee visited the Western Autistic School
in Melbourne to find out more about this disability. The role of the school is
to develop social and communications skills which in non-sufferers are learned
through imitation and response. At this school even the most basis tasks are
taught through repetition. Autistic students think in pictorial terms.
Sufferers of Asperger Syndrome, at the high function end of the autism
spectrum, develop extensive and elaborate ‘filing systems’ in order to
anticipate social responses, and are liable to panic if they cannot make the
right connection between situation and response. The committee also heard that:
In the case of students with autism spectrum disorders, you have
a student who is completely literal, for example, who takes everything
literally and who does not understand all the nuances of social body language
and that kind of thing. They are going to get into an awful lot of trouble at
school. They are often targets for bullying and teasing which, in turn, can
cause them to act out and to get very distressed. They may have sensory
overload, and that is something that is often overlooked or not understood at
all. So a child in a playground who cannot cope with the noise and maybe the
light will lash out. He will immediately then come to the attention of the behaviour
support people, who do not understand why he is behaving the way he is
behaving—assuming he is a difficult student, he is noncompliant and he is
aggressive. It is usually boys, so that is why it is fairly safe to say ‘he’;
it is a 4:1 ratio. [26]
4.26
Perhaps the most telling example of the failure
of school authorities to deal with autism was given in evidence in Canberra by
a parent who reported that if his son had received early assistance when he
needed it he would probably be functioning at a level where he could attend
high school.[27]
This witness continued:
The evidence that we have had presented to us—and that is now in
a court case in the Discrimination Tribunal in the ACT—is that children who are
given early intervention while they are young have a significantly higher
probability of developing normal language. A large number of children with
autism do not speak or do not speak effectively. Their language may consist of
phrases of one or two words and relatively small vocabularies in some instances.
Most psychologists will tell you that if they do not develop natural or flowing
language by the time they are eight they are unlikely to develop it at all. So
you need to get in and make sure that these children develop those kinds of
skills early.
What we are talking about is intensive behavioural intervention,
which is a psychological treatment. It needs to be given for a significant
amount of time. Research suggests that less than 28 hours a week will not
produce a significant effect. With over 30 hours a week, nearly half the
children are able to function in mainstream classes from then on without
additional support. So there is a huge difference, a divide, for the children
who get that kind of intervention. This kind of intervention is not available in
the public system in Australia and there are virtually no people who know who
to do it in Australia. Anybody here who knows how to do it has been trained in
America or Norway—or one of the Scandinavian countries.
4.27
The committee is greatly concerned that in many
cases such students are not being educated in appropriate settings because
schools and school systems lack the specialised skills to deal with their
problems. It should not be open to states and territories to turn their backs
on their responsibilities to deal with difficult cases, as the committee has
heard has been done.
4.28
Inexperienced or untrained teachers will usually
attempt to deal with non-compliance or aggression without understanding the
reasons for it. Few people have any understanding of communication difficulties
faced by sufferers of autism:
In severe cases you can have situations where people fall foul
of the law and end up in the judicial system because of the characteristics of
autism. For example, a young man was picked up recently. He had had problems at
home and he was riding the trains, which was a particular obsession for him. He
had been on the trains for five days when the railway police picked him up.
Obviously by that stage he was looking pretty dishevelled. They asked him if he
had any needles in his bag, thinking he was a drug addict. He had a sewing kit,
so he said yes, he did. Of course they searched him and found the sewing kit
and then roughed him up because he had given them cheek. He literally responded
to their question.[28]
4.29
The committee regards the lack of knowledge
among education professionals generally about the characteristics of autism as
a matter of serious concern. Such ignorance adds to the difficulties faced by
afflicted students in their grappling with school life and social adjustment,
and adds greatly to the frustration of teachers and school administrators.
Autism awareness should be addressed through relevant theoretical and practical
components of teacher education. If the numbers of diagnosed autistic students
in schools is increasing, this commitment will be necessary if schooling is to
make a difference to the lives of these students.
Sensory impairment
4.30
Of the total number of students with
disabilities, those suffering from some form of sensory impairment alone make
up only a small percentage of the total. In some respects the difficulties
faced by students with sensory impairment alone appear to be more
straight-forward; being of a different order from the greater majority of
students who have some form of intellectual disorder. This is because the issue
for these students and their parents is more often than not to do with
resources. The particular difficulty lies with the diminishing human resources:
specialist teachers proficient in skills and knowledge who are the link between
the student and worldly success. The complaint of parents, the main source of
their frustration, appears to be the reluctance of governments to make
decisions which would alleviate, over time, the pressures placed on the
diminishing numbers of specialist teachers.
Deafness and hearing impairment
4.31
The small numbers of deaf students present a
challenge to school authorities on how best to manage their education given the
expense of maintaining proper services for them. A submission from the
Traralgon Deaf Facility in Victoria explained that fluctuating demand for
places at Lilliard Road Primary School, where the Facility is located, and the
Traralgon Secondary College, which has some appropriate facilities and staff,
put the future of the deaf program in jeopardy. The two schools have put in a
submission to the Department of Education and Training for accreditation as a
prep to year 12 deaf facility and to allow them to draw in students from a
wider area of Gippsland to ensure the viability of the facility.[29] The submission explains that
under current arrangement, students in the secondary years are disadvantaged as
a result of the more limited resources available to them. For instance, there
is no secondary school in Gippsland where deaf students can use Auslan as their
first language. The educational advantages of a prep to year 12 facility are
obvious, but as the submission concludes, the problem remains of funding
transport to the school for those who live considerable distances away. Most
children (and their parents) in rural areas are disadvantaged by the lack of a
public transport network, and those with disabilities have an additional
handicap.
4.32
The committee received evidence from a number of
quarters expressing concern about the neglect of Auslan by education systems.
The submission from the Australian Association for the Deaf gave typical
expression to misgivings about prevailing teaching methods:
AAD has grave concerns about the pedagogical approach being
taken in providing an oral education on a large scale with only minimal
inclusion of sign language, or with sign language provided as a kind of last
resort when the child “fails” in the oral system. Research and anecdotal
evidence has shown that such an approach can be detrimental psychologically,
cognitively and educationally and is even more so at current resourcing levels.[30]
4.33
Not all the evidence about hearing disabilities
was bad news. The committee received a submission from representatives of
parents of children attending the Bendigo Deaf Facility, which they claim as
the leading a model of a deaf facility in Victoria. It is the only deaf
facility in rural Victoria that covers both primary and secondary schooling to
year 12 and extends across three campuses, each being a mainstream school.
Parents attribute its success to the excellent cooperation between the schools,
the school councils and the community:
At Kennington Primary School there is an outstanding
Auslan–English Bilingual program in which some of the Key Learning Areas are
taught in Auslan. This program provides both our deaf and hearing students an
understanding of the curriculum through Auslan. Auslan is also taught by deaf
adults as a LOTE subject at Kennington Primary School and at Golden Square
Secondary College. External assessment of the Auslan program is currently being
undertaken by La Trobe University.
Our deaf students are involved in all aspects of the primary
school and the two secondary colleges. With the introduction of Auslan to the
facility, they are achieving at a higher level academically and socially than
before. They are now performing at CSF levels appropriate to their grade
levels. This has not occurred before. The deaf students at Bendigo Senior
Secondary College have access to the widest range of VCE subjects and to the
excellent On-Line Technology which the college offers. The outcomes of our
deaf students are proof that this system gives our deaf children the best
opportunities to successfully gain employment and contribute to society.[31]
4.34
Nonetheless, parents did express some concerns.
They anticipate funding cuts by way of an increase in the staff–student ratio.
This occurred previously in relation to the Visiting Teacher Service, with
adverse results, for without good support students become ‘extreme
underachievers’. Also at risk, the submission suggests, are professional
development days and resource funding.[32]
4.35
Another concern is the perennial rural problem
of isolation and the cost and duration of travel. Children at the Bendigo Deaf
Centre come from across north western Victoria. The closure of a hostel,
presumably for the reason of cost, has resulted in children travelling each day
from distant parts. Instances were cited in the submission of the effect on
individual families:
A family works a farm three hours away from Bendigo. When the
hostel closed they bought a second house in Bendigo. During the week dad works
the farm while the rest of the family live in Bendigo. Another family works a
farm one and a half hours from Bendigo. When the hostel closed they bought a
unit in Bendigo. During the week their son lives at the unit and is looked
after by one of the deaf Auslan instructors.
There are other children who live out of Bendigo whose parents
drive them to school at the deaf facility. All of these children have homework
they are required to do. With the travelling time they are exhausted even
before they reach their homes. To have to face homework on top of that is a
mammoth task. How much easier it would have been for each of these families if
the hostel had been kept open.[33]
4.36
Indigenous children in remote areas have been
the recipients of targeted programs to address the prevalence of deafness
resulting from the high incidence of otitis media. Western Australia, for
instance, has two programs which deliver initiatives for children up to the age
of 8. These involve research, production of teaching resources and guideline
development, screening, referral and medical intervention, family and community
counselling, intensive tuition and teacher training initiatives.[34] The Northern Territory also
provides a range of services designed to address the particular problems of
disability in remote communities.[35]
Queensland does not at present target conditions affecting indigenous
communities, such as otitis media related conditions or the effects of foetal
alcohol syndrome, but assesses according to state-wide disability standards.[36]
4.37
In addition to the problems of community
isolation experienced by the deaf in rural and regional areas, the cultural
appropriateness of service provision was an issue for the deaf in indigenous
communities. One submission remarked how deaf indigenous people may have
particular needs in the learning of Auslan, as they often use their own sign
languages.[37]
The South Australian Government confirmed that cultural difference also limits
deaf indigenous access to regular high quality services, appropriate programs,
multi-agency and or community support teams.[38]
Blindness and vision impairment
4.38
Vision impairment has been described as a ‘low
incidence’ disability in children and young people. In 1993, approximately 18
per cent of the population had one or more disabilities, and of these about 9
per cent had some degree of vision impairment.[39]
There are believed to be some 3,000 children of school age with a visual
disability. The committee was informed that the population of children who
require specialised educational services because of vision impairment is highly
diverse.[40]
For some children, vision impairment is their only disability, but for a large
proportion of students, vision impairment will only be one of several
disabilities, including intellectual, emotional and physical, that will affect
their learning. There has been a shift away from ocular impairment to brain
damage as the major cause of vision impairment, and a consequent likelihood
that other disabilities, like cerebral palsy, intellectual impairment and
autism, will be associated with vision impairment. The committee was told that
the major reason for this was that babies are increasingly surviving the
experience of extreme premature birth, and that some of these babies have
multiple disabilities.[41]
4.39
The committee noted a number of general areas of
concern expressed by advocacy and parent groups. First, there is a concern
about the acquisition of literacy and numeracy skills, which are often quite
low among students with good underlying cognitive ability. Second, there is a
serious lack of appropriate tape, large print and braille material. Third, many
students, particularly those living outside metropolitan districts, have very
limited access to itinerant specialist teachers.
4.40
It is generally accepted that as much as 80 per
cent of learning is acquired through vision.[42]
Visually impaired students can excel in many of the same activities as their
sighted peers and are able to do most things that other students do, but they
need to do them in a different way. Most visually impaired students have some
residual vision, and can be taught to use magnifiers. Research by the Department
of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (now the Department of Education,
Science and Training) has highlighted successful practice in high achievement
levels attained in literacy and numeracy for visually impaired students. A
collaborative approach to learning, with activities aimed at maximising student
experience has been shown to be successful, supported by a sympathetic school
ethos and appropriate facilities and physical environment.[43]
4.41
‘Best practice’ is often the exception rather
than the norm. A 1999 project undertaken by the Royal Blind Society and Royal
Institute for Deaf and Blind Students showed that parents and students were
disappointed with the way schools met their expectations. The efforts of
schools were neither systematic nor sustained, and relied too heavily on the
efforts of particularly caring individual teachers.[44]
4.42
The shortage of appropriate learning materials
in the various media used by the visually impaired has been a continuing source
of anxiety to parents, students and schools.
Information, even at Preschool level is becoming more visual and
State testing programs are placing an increased emphasis on viewing. In
regular settings, there is a heavy reliance on pictures and diagrams. This
makes the task of presenting class materials to vision impaired students even
more complex. Students must be specifically taught how to scan, interpret and
respond to tactile graphics. Tactile graphics instruction should be introduced
at an early age, along with instruction in literacy and numeracy. There is a
need for research into tactile graphics acquisition and the development of
teaching materials and a set of Guidelines for the production of tactile
graphics. Specific funding needs to be allocated to this area.[45]
4.43
The committee received evidence in a number of
submissions about the increasing problems associated with the teaching of
braille. Braille is a key to literacy and central to numeracy for many blind
people, including children who have lost their sight early in life and adults who
have become blind later in life. Properly instructed, and with sufficient
brailled material, a blind child will acquire a degree of literacy comparable
to a sighted child. A blind person without skill in braille is functionally
illiterate:[46]
Our students are at significant educational risk due to
inadequate funding for specialist support staff, technology and the production
of materials in alternative formats (eg. Braille, large print, audio).
Students who are blind or who have low vision need specialist instruction from
trained teachers of the vision impaired in literacy and numeracy. Without this
their levels of literacy and numeracy will not be adequate for survival in life
so is not acceptable.[47]
4.44
There are three main areas of concern in regard
to braille. The first has to do with the shortage of people trained to produce
material in braille; the second is with the increasing lack of familiarity with
braille as a medium among teachers of the visually impared; and the third
problem is with the shortage of material produced and the high cost of
producing it. The effect of the last problem is particularly noticeable in
universities and will be covered in chapter six.
4.45
For a number of reasons, even specialist
teachers of the visually impaired are now less likely to be trained to teach
braille. The committee received evidence from the National Information Library
Service of the very limited opportunities available to acquire skills to
produce braille, large print and e-text. Typically, training was done ‘on-the-job’,
with the Australian Braille Association conducting the demanding accreditation
process. While software existed to make English text transcription relatively
straightforward, maths, sciences, music and languages other than English
required extensive knowledge of relevant braille codes. The demands on
braillers transcribing university level texts is such that they need exposure
to the subject matter at university level in order to undertake the
transcriptions.[48]
Recruitment of appropriately trained staff is a problem for not-for-profit
organisations like the Royal Blind Society, which cannot offer competitive
salaries.
Physical disabilities
4.46
Almost four per cent of the Australian
population have physical disabilities.[49]
The committee received surprisingly little evidence on the incidence of or
educational implications for children with disabilities that constrain
mobility. Perhaps this is due to the level of recognition and attention this
area of disability has received over recent decades. The Physical Disabilities
Council of Australia submitted that over half those with a disability have a
physical disability. Physical impairment was the sole impairment for thirty per
cent of people with disabilities. A further twenty seven per cent had a
physical impairment in conjunction with other impairments.[50]
4.47
The resources usually available to adapt the
school environment to student’s individual needs range from minor planning
considerations to building modifications. Taking students’ mobility needs into
account when making room allocations and careful planning for excursions can
avoid many problems. Occupational therapists, physiotherapists or speech
pathologists can prescribe a range of adaptive equipment. Mobility equipment
available includes ramps, lifts and transfer equipment to assist the student’s
mobility around the school grounds. In the classroom and playground there are
also a range of equipment specifically designed for children with motor
impairment or similar disabilities.[51]
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME–CFS)
4.48
Myalgic Encephalomyelitis, or Chronic Fatigue
Syndrome as it is commonly known, is a neurological illness closely related to
Parkinson’s Disease and Multiple Sclerosis. There is currently no cure or
diagnostic test for the disease, despite its incidence being between 1 and 5
per cent of the population.[52]
4.49
The symptoms of CFS include: persistent profound
exhaustion, post-exertional fatigue, cognitive impairment, sleep disturbance,
muscle and joint pain, headaches, digestive disorders, sensory dysfunction, flu-like
feelings, mild fevers, sore throat, irritability, sensitivity to foods and
chemicals, painful lymph nodes, heart palpitations, disturbance of balance and
night sweats.[53]
4.50
CFS affects the frequency and duration of a
student’s school attendance, the volume of work they can undertake and the
speed with which they are able to learn. Specifically the neuro-cognitive
symptoms impact short term memory, concentration, and the ability to find words
or do simple calculations. Sufferers commonly refer to these symptoms as ‘brain
fog’.[54]
4.51
One submission pointed out, that unlike some
readily identified and accepted disabilities, the onus is on the parent to
negotiate with the school for assistance. The submission contends:
...this is inherently
discriminating against the student and their family—there is a power imbalance
in this system and a conflict of interest for the school. Schools are not
required up-front to provide guidelines for parents on how they can go about
securing accommodations for their child...the
entire system is ad-hoc...it is not in
their [the school’s] interest to be transparent and open about the possible
accommodations that could be made available to various students. Accommodations
naturally create more work and schools are stretched...Well-educated parents stand a better chance of arguing their
case.[55]
4.52
This illness is recognised by the World Health
Organisation, the US National Institute of Health, and the Australian National
Health and Medical Research Council. Despite this fact the definition of disability
under the Disability Act makes classifying CFS a disability difficult on the
grounds of the huge variation in severity and, particularly, the unknown
duration of symptoms.[56]
The inadequacy of the community’s and many medical practitioners’ information
on this illness exacerbates the difficulties students have in obtaining
assistance needed to complete their schooling.[57]
4.53
Several strategies to assist students with CFS
were suggested by submissions to this inquiry. Of fundamental importance to
their educational outcomes is the attitude of teachers. If a teacher is
sufficiently informed and aware of the limitations of these students, they can
adjust their expectations of a student’s performance. Accommodation can be made
in assignment deadlines, and cutting out unnecessary or extraneous commitments
like PE or standing for school assemblies. Whereas for some disabilities simply
increasing the amount of time given for an exam may be adequate, for students
with CFS a better approach is to spread the exam over two sessions. One of the
most important contributions a teacher can make to a student with CFS is to
treat them with respect and their illness as credible. This will pay huge
dividends in building a student’s self-esteem and confidence, as well as in how
other children relate to the student. The provision of a beanbag and a quiet
room to rest, taped lessons or a laptop computer can also enhance educational
outcomes. A school-appointed advocate for the student can assist in negotiating
special arrangements.[58]
Learning disabilities
4.54
The detection of learning disabilities and the
determination of appropriate teaching strategies were issues raised by many
people who gave evidence to the inquiry. The push by some advocates for access
to specific funded support, and an unwillingness on the part of education
authorities to define this sub-group of students has made the definition of a
‘learning disability’ as distinct from a ‘learning difficulty’ a vexed issue
over recent years.
4.55
The qualities which the Australian Federation of
SPELD Associations (AUSPELD) defines as being characteristic of learning
disability (which it terms Specific Learning Difficulties) are those which:
- are considered to be intrinsic to the individual;
- can cause a person to learn differently;
-
are not linked to intellectual impairment (except incidentally);
-
may coincidently exist with problems in self-regulatory
behaviours, social perception and social interaction;
- are life-long; and
- result in difficulty accessing the curriculum unless identified
early and educational adjustments appropriate to individual need are provided, to prevent failure.[59]
4.56
A learning disability is a disability for the
purposes of the Disability Discrimination Act. Typically, state education
departments provide for students with learning disabilities under umbrella
programs designed to assist students with learning difficulties. These students
are not eligible for specific Commonwealth or state disability funding even
though some states define the term for other purposes. State education
departments, however, have the discretion to use Commonwealth funds, made
available under the Strategic Assistance for Improving Student Outcomes (SAISO)
program, towards students with learning disabilities.
4.57
The New South Wales Department of Education
provides support for students with learning disabilities through its learning
difficulties program. This program is available to those students within the
normal range of intelligence but who are not achieving at a level expected for
their age and stage of development, and whose difficulties may be experienced
across the span of school life.[60] The department does not
distinguish between learning difficulties and learning disabilities:
At this point in time, the New South Wales Department of
Education and Training in the school sector does not distinguish between
learning difficulties and learning disabilities. We would contend that the
students that have dyslexia and the sorts of things that you are talking about
are well and truly supported through the Learning Difficulties Program. [61]
4.58
Similarly, the Department of Education and
Training, Victoria, listed a number of programs designed to support students
who may be experiencing difficulties with their learning but who are not
eligible for disability support. These include: the literacy coordination
program; the reading recovery program; and, the managed improved information
pathways priority program.[62]
4.59
Education Queensland defines students with
learning disabilities as: ‘one small group of students with learning
difficulties who, because of the neurological basis of these difficulties, have
persistent long term problems and high support needs in one or more areas of
literacy, numeracy and learning how to learn’. These students do not have
generalised intellectual impairments but rather demonstrate idiosyncratic
learning styles that are determined by the nature of their specific disorders
and inhibit their learning at school.[63] In response to a question
about whether every student in a Queensland school who had a learning
disability would have it diagnosed an Education Queensland officer advised that
they would have been able to access a learning support teacher to work with
them to develop a program that was suitable for that student.[64]
4.60
When asked the same question, the Tasmanian
Department of Education responded:
I would not be confident that every student in that situation
was well catered for but certainly, with the number of guidance officers and
special education teachers we have who have that understanding and background,
I would be confident that most of those students would be picked up and
strategies would be provided to their teachers in their classroom.[65]
4.61
Under the Tasmanian system, students with
learning disabilities may receive district support. The committee noted that of
all the state education departments appearing before the committee, the
Tasmanian department was the only one to acknowledge that for some students
with learning disabilities, compensatory strategies may be more appropriate
than remedial tuition:
I would say that there are students who, for example, have more
difficulty than others in learning to read. For those students, programs like
Reading Recovery or the sporting program that we have in place or some of the
other specialist interventions work very well. Often those students can then
learn to read and proceed through the school system without any further
difficulty. However, I believe that there is a subset of students—and we have
certainly talked about those students in publications that the department has
put out and in some of the programs we run—who probably do have auditory visual
cognitive processing difficulties that really mean processing of print is
almost impossible for them to do. For those students, you probably do have to
look at compensatory strategies because they will simply never be able to
process the printed word no matter how much intervention you provide for them.
Those students certainly do exist but they are a small subset of the larger
group of students who have difficulty with literacy.[66]
4.62
Other states may also provide for students with
learning disabilities under programs designed to address the needs of students
who are having difficulty learning. For example, in Western Australia programs
such as Making the Difference focus on students who are experiencing
difficulties learning.[67]
While in South Australia students with learning disabilities are assisted
through the use of learning difficulty support teams:
It has picked up a range of young people. It has not picked up
students with learning disabilities as such, like dyslexia; however, we do have
a learning difficulty support team which operates right across the state and
they work very closely with schools in a training and development model.
Schools negotiate for a customised service in training and development in the
area of learning difficulties. Whilst they are not inside that language and
communication definition, it is not that they are without any service.[68]
4.63
Dr Paul Whiting of AUSPELD told the committee
that by not distinguishing between the two conditions, education departments
were failing students with learning disabilities. He explained:
The difficulty [of the present approach] is that it conflates
difficulties in learning that are produced by extrinsic factors—that is, things
like poor schooling, absence from school, emotional problems and sensory
problems—with intrinsic factors such as dyslexia when we know there are
biochemical and physiological differences between people who are dyslexic and
people who have no reading problems. So the issue of definition is important
from our point of view because the treatment implications will be different
depending on how you define the problem.[69]
4.64
The evidence from those witnesses advocating on
behalf of students with learning disabilities, or from people who themselves
had a learning disability, left the committee in little doubt about the failure
of schools in this area. Dr Whiting cited the plight of one student:
I have recently been looking at a young chap who is 14 years of
age. He has a reading level of grade 2 and a spelling level of grade 1. He has
been assessed as dyslexic by a private psychologist. He has had three years of
remedial teaching at that psychologist’s clinic. He has had a support teacher
for learning difficulties in school, and he has attended an intensive reading
class in school. He has had every provision that the government system can
provide. At 14 he is in a school for behaviour disordered children and has been
told that, at the end of this year, he can leave because there is nothing more
the system can do for him. His parents will tell you that he is not behaviour
disordered at all; he is a delightful child. I certainly did not find him at
all difficult to deal with. He is behaviour disordered because he has finally
refused to do things that nobody has enabled him to do—namely, to read, write
and spell. When they ask him to do it, he just says no. So he is oppositional
defiant and in a school for behaviour disordered kids. And where is he going?
What is his chance in life in the future?[70]
4.65
And from the President of the Australian
Learning Disability Association:
Another issue that our organisation would like to stress is that
in the compulsory school sector, in Tasmania at least, learning disability is
not recognised, (meaning) that children, particularly with a learning
disability, are falling through the net...We are hearing only the stories of a
very few survivors who have managed to negotiate a very difficult system. The
stories our organisation has heard have only been of those who have survived.
We are not hearing the stories of all the people and all the students who have
found it too difficult to survive within the system and then have had to pull
out because it had simply become too difficult for them.[71]
4.66
The committee heard conflicting evidence about
appropriate support for students with learning disabilities. Some advocates
argued that a learning disability may not be corrected by the standard methods
of remedial intervention, such as reading recovery programs.[72] Such advocates argue that
there is ‘a lack of awareness and understanding’ of the real nature of learning
disability in the education sector. The Australian Learning Disability
Association advised:
A fact with learning disability is that because it is a
neurological impairment and a functional disability, a person’s functional
learning abilities are impaired. You can provide—and I have heard this from
about 100 students probably and others that I have talked to all around the
country—as many remedial classes and exercises as you like and you will only
move a person’s skill a small amount upwards; there needs to be some
compensatory strategies.[73]
4.67
Referring to the university sector, which better
addresses the needs of those with learning disabilities, it was explained to
the committee that technological assistance could be used in primary and
secondary schools:
... some of the great successes we have had at the University of
Tasmania involve providing access to information for a person with a learning
disability who cannot do as you or I can do: look at a lecture, listen to a
lecture and take good notes at the same time—it is impossible. We provide them
with peer notes in an electronic format so they can sit down in front of a
computer, which are in the schools, with a speech synthesis program. They can
read the information visually and hear it as the computer is saying it at the
same time. This takes care of just about all of the language-affected people
with learning disabilities. Again, it is that thing about appropriate access to
information.[74]
4.68
Other witnesses supported the use of remedial
programs. When asked about their appropriateness, Dr van Kraayenoord replied:
I am not sure that I fully concur with the statement that these
children need a completely different diet or series of programs. I believe that
many of the instructional practices that we know about that have been well
researched do equally well for children with learning difficulties and learning
disabilities as for normally achieving children.[75]
4.69
A mother of a dyslexic child gave the following
positive account about the use of remedial support for her son:
I then went to a friend of mine who taught in this field and
whom I had spoken to and she said, ‘Bring him to me and I’ll work with him.’
She taught him to read in a couple of months. She had the specialist training
to know what to do. By this stage he was running away from school. He could not
cope because his teacher was saying, ‘Write neatly. Stay in at lunchtime and
write out your spelling list a hundred times because you can’t do it properly.
You can’t copy off the board correctly.’ There are all of these other issues
that are going on at the same time. You spend your time keeping the kid’s head
above water so that they can survive in the school. But once you find some
specialist support, once you find somebody who understands, it makes it much
easier. His life changed when we found this other woman to help him. She
supported him. She told him he was bright. In the end his IQ test is up in the
gifted and talented range but he was just not showing that at school.[76]
4.70
The committee notes the obvious need for schools
to provide support for students with learning disabilities through the use of
assistive technology, remedial tuition and teacher aide support, depending on
individual circumstances. The committee also notes that learning disabilities
need to be seen in the much wider context of learning difficulties. The
proportion of students in this cohort is very large, and their interests should
not be overlooked in any attempt to assist those whose learning disability
arises from a neurological condition which puts them in a recognised disability
category. Students with learning difficulties, as distinct from those with
learning disabilities, are also educationally disadvantaged. The cause may
arise from many circumstances, but is most likely to be poor socio-economic
circumstances or serious family disruption. The UNICEF report on comparative
school performance, referred to in chapter four, adds weight to the committee’s
concern. Many students with mild disabilities who do not qualify for support
under state disability programs, are also educationally disadvantaged. The
committee would not like to see funding directed towards students with learning
disabilities at the expense of students with learning difficulties.
Scotopic Sensitivity
4.71
Scotopic Sensitivity Syndrome is a
visual-perceptual problem that occurs in some people with learning/reading
disorders, autism, and other developmental disorders. People with Scotopic
Sensitivity/Irlen Syndrome experience 'perceptual stress’, which can lead to a
variety of perceptual distortions when reading or viewing their environment. It
is triggered by one or more components of light, such as its source, luminance,
intensity, luminance, wavelength or colour.[77]
A submission argued that the New South Wales education system had failed to
meet the needs of one student with this disorder. As one witness with Scotopic
Sensitivity wrote:
When I was diagnosed it validated that I was not stupid only
struggling to learn within my limited capabilities due to my disability,
finally I believed the same education system that had failed me could assist.
I was wrong. The severity of such symptoms are only classified by
the Board of Education as a learning “DIFFICULTY” and all the school is
required to do to assist is present me with one blue overlay to place over my
work. This is insufficient.[78]
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity
Disorder
4.72
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD),
or Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), is recognised under the Disability
Discrimination Act as a disability, but like a number of similar impairments is
not recognised by most state and territory education departments as requiring
special funding. It is estimated that between 2.3 per cent and 6 per cent of
the population suffer ADD to a significant extent. Around half of the childhood
sufferers of this problem have associated disabilities, which entitles them to
special assistance.[79]
4.73
The committee was informed that children in
Queensland with ADHD were not well looked after by the education system. In
general, teachers do not have a sound understanding of learning difficulties
and it is largely left to parents to insist on school assessments of the needs
of their children with ADHD. The policy of appraisement was not working in the
interests of ADHD students. Submissions to the committee on this disability
were few, but one from the North Queensland Attention Deficit Disorder Support
Group was quite emphatic:
Many mothers report very negative experiences
when dealing with teachers concerning their child’s ADD and or learning
disability. Many professionals blame the mothers of children with ADD and
almost everyone has an opinion on ADD, even though they will tell you they do
not know much about it.[80]
Neurofibromatosis
4.74
Neurofibromatosis (NF) is a name given to two
distinct genetic disorders which primarily affect the nervous system. The most
common of these (NF1) occurs in 3,000–4,000 live births and in the majority of
cases the disorder is regarded as mild. The committee noted from the submission
from the Neurofibromatosis Association that the physical and intellectual
complications of this disorder are highly variable and cover a wide scope of behaviour.
In some cases the physical symptoms of the disorder do not result in any
learning difficulty, though this does not seem to be the norm.[81]
4.75
The physical manifestations of NF include
curvature of the spine, an enlarged head, a liability to bone fractures, optic
tumors, impairment of gross and, or, fine motor skills, and lumps involving
groups of nerves. Children with these conditions can experience learning
disabilities and the physical manifestations of NF can result in the social
isolation of children with this condition. Some children with NF1 may also be
diagnosed as having Attention Deficit Disorder, and may be disruptive in class.
The submission from the Neurofibromatosis Association instanced case study
experiences of a number of families in finding sympathetic and accommodating
schools for their children. The committee notes the similarity of these stories
across all disability areas. The submission from the Neurofibromatosis
Association described the experience of a family whose three year old child
suffering from NF1 was refused enrolment at pre-school because the school had
already filled its quota of special needs children. The submission stated:
... a child may have no learning disabilities but may have
educational restrictions imposed on them simply because a school is aware of
the diagnosis of NF. A quandary for many parents of young children with NF, who
does not present with any obvious learning disability problem at a young age,
is the concern that by disclosing to the child’s school the fact that the child
has NF and therefore may have such a disability, will in some respects be self
fulfilling. The concern is that the child’s education will suffer because of
the disclosure and the assumptions that may then be made about the child’s
abilities, irrespective of whether any actual learning disability is found to
exist.[82]
4.76
The committee regards such arbitrary decisions
as likely to result from ignorance and a failure in many cases of
community-based organisations to act in the interests of the community. Such
attitudes provoke the demand for more central supervision of local operations,
which would not necessarily result in an improvement to services.
Transition to work or further study
4.77
While the opportunities available for students
with disabilities to access higher education are generally good, there is a
serious concern about the limited opportunity for students with disabilities to
find employment after leaving school. In its submission the Australia National
Training Authority wrote that nearly one-fifth of the working age population
with a disability left school before they turned 15.[83] This suggests that schools are
failing this group. Data shows that student with high support needs are being
squeezed out of Commonwealth employment support programs into state and
territory day activity programs. This lamentable situation, as it is described
in one submission, is often analogous to ‘child minding.’[84]
4.78
Professor Parmenter submitted that one of the
factors impeding the effective transition from school to work or higher study,
is the highly structured support given to students in school. This resulted in
students having to make few decisions for themselves and made them less
independent. His observation was supported by a number of submissions, including
that from the University of Sydney:
The University of Sydney’s experience is that students within
the school sector often provided with intensive staffing support that does not
encourage independent management of their condition. The lack of experience in
the independent management of their disability and study may result in
significant difficulties in the University environment.[85]
4.79
Professor Parmenter argued that in the
post-secondary sector, the focus of control shifts to the student; the student
is required to negotiate their own support network. As an example he described
how students with disabilities would take several consecutive TAFE courses with
little planning as to their expected employment outcome. A further
recommendation in the submission was that the transition planning process
should start early in the student’s secondary school life, with decision making
skills built into individual transition planning processes. In this way,
students are encouraged to become increasingly responsible for initiating their
own support networks.[86]
4.80
Research has indicated that students in schools
with well-structured work experience program have better employment outcomes,
post school.[87]
The committee was told that in New South Wales there was an unfortunate gap in
the support base for young adults attempting to access skills to make them
workplace ready:[88]
The current focus for my son at this time is to gain skills to
make him workplace ready, and this has projected us into a whole new realm of
discovery which requires a strong constitution and an exceptional sense of
humour. There is apparently a yawning gap in the support base for young adults
attempting to access skills to make them workplace ready.
When we made inquiries to ascertain where the responsibility for
assistance for accessing workplace training lay, we became very quickly aware
that at this point in time there appears to be no protocol in place to
effectively address this issue. After consultation with all the key people who
we had perceived would be a part of this process, we were amazed to discover
that, in fact, nobody within the department was willing to take responsibility
for such issues.
When it came down to it, it was a whole new area for the careers
adviser at the school: he had never been in a situation where he had to place a
child who had a disability in a workplace for a short period of time.[89]
4.81
A literature review of the transitional
arrangements existing between schools and the community for students with
disabilities, concluded that students, parents, schools, communities and
various departmental agencies needed to work as a partnership to improve the
experience and post-school outcomes of students with disabilities.[90]
4.82
Both the Australian National Training Authority
and the Enterprise and Career Education Foundation also identified a need for
greater collaboration across all levels of government and non-government
agencies. Both agencies were advocates for early intervention strategies. The
Enterprise and Career Education Foundation argued for the involvement of
disability employment agencies in the transition planning for students with
disabilities. It was argued that these agencies have close involvement with
industry and understand employer expectations. The foundation argued for better
collaboration between the Commonwealth Department of Family and Community
Services, Department of Education Science and Training and state governments to
expand the jurisdiction of employment agencies to include the school sector.
4.83
The Enterprise and Career Education Foundation
stressed the importance of linking VET teachers with special education or
disability support teachers in the school system as part of an individual’s
transition planning. Unfortunately, the submission acknowledged that in reality
this rarely happens.
4.84
The committee regrets that it was unable to give
more attention to the transition of students with disabilities into the
workforce. Although only a handful of submissions addressed this issue, the
committee was left with the strong impression that schools need to invest much
more effort into helping students prepare for this change. This issue warrants
an inquiry of its own.
Recommendation 9
The committee recommends that the transition of students with
disabilities from school to further study, employment and lifelong learning
should be the subject of further inquiry.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page