STV BULLETIN September Share The Vision

							STV BULLETIN 73, 20 September 2010
Compiled by David Owen

Visually impaired children miss out yet again!
In March, STV submitted a detailed response to the call for
evidence from the School Library Commission established by the
National Literacy Trust and the MLA under the chairmanship of
Baroness Estelle Morris.
See: http://www.share-the-
vision.org.uk/consultation/school_library_commission.doc

On 15 September 2010, the Commission’s report, “School
Libraries: a plan for improvement” was published. This
comparatively short 28 page report is excellently drafted; well
researched; cognisant of the need to accommodate the change of
Government and resulting changes in educational and fiscal
policies and makes a series of sound recommendations to all
parties concerned. Unfortunately, it makes no mention of the
special needs of visually impaired and other print disabled children
and how school libraries and school library services should plan to
meet those needs. It would be understandable if this was the result
of the necessity to deal with the generality of children in such a
short report but the report does refer to the specific needs of ethnic
minority children and the linguistic issues which arise in terms of
the provision of materials. Indeed, section 4.4 of the report
emphasises the importance of “personalisation” in developing a
better understanding of how children learn and their different
needs. Surely, this applies to print disabled children and their need
for alternative formats and it is disappointing that yet again their
personal circumstances are not recognised.
See:
http://www.mla.gov.uk/news_and_views/press_releases/2010/~/m
edia/Files/pdf/2010/policy/SLC_Report

The previous day, Ofsted published a review of SEN and disability,
“A statement is not enough” and not surprisingly this attracted
much greater media interest because of its headline finding that
there is a need to concentrate on better assessment and teaching
rather than identifying pupils as having SEN and issuing a
statement. Ofsted believes that sometimes the problem is that
mainstream teaching is not good enough to meet the needs of
some of these children. Legislative changes have made the
system more complex and difficult for parents and young people to
understand and negotiate. Partly, this is a result of the different
terminology used by different professionals and because “SEN” is
used too widely. Not surprisingly, it found that the more obvious
disabilities such as visual and hearing impairment are more swiftly
dealt with than more complex issues across the spectrum of
learning disabilities. It also believes that no one model [special
schools; full inclusion in mainstream settings or specialist units co-
located with mainstream settings] works better than any other.
This is a major study covering educational provision from early
years through compulsory education to provision for 16-19 year
olds and the contribution of heath and social care services. It
encompassed 345 detailed case studies and visits to 22 local
authorities and 228 nurseries, schools and colleges.

Annex B of the report brings together statistical data from various
sources. Table 1 reveals that the number of pupils with statements
of SEN has gone down from 250,550 in 2003 to 220,890 in 2010
whereas those without statements has increased from 1,169,780
to 1,470,900. Table 6 provides data on the specific needs of
696,550 children in primary, secondary and special schools of
whom 8580 [1.2%] are visually impaired but these are not total
figures as they do not include pupils at School Action rather than at
School Action Plus or with statements. [One does sympathise with
parents and pupils regarding the terminological complexities!]
See: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/ofsted-home/Publications-and-
research/Browse-all-by/Documents-by-type/Thematic-reports/The-
special-educational-needs-and-disability-review

Ofsted’s report is extremely timely. Bulletin 69 reported that the
Government intended to launch a Green Paper on SEN in the
autumn and that it would consult on what it should contain. In
Bulletin 70 we reported on RNIB’s update on the Department for
Education’s funded pilot project to create electronic versions of
textbooks which comes to an end this December. We suggested it
might be appropriate to refer to the lessons of this pilot in response
to the forthcoming consultation which was duly launched on 10
September 2010. “Green Paper: Children and Young People with
SEN and Disabilities. Call for views” invites all interested parties to
submit views on what should be included. It states that the
Government particularly wants ideas about how improvements
could be made by making more effective use of scarce resources.
The consultation poses 6 suggested questions and asks for 150
word outlines of ideas to be submitted by 15 October 2010. Is this
another opportunity to propose a coordinated and cost effective
provision of essential curricular materials in alternative formats for
print disabled children?
See:
http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=Cons
ultationDetails&consultationId=1736&external=no&menu=1

Will libraries become less accessible?

There have to be concerns about the future accessibility of
libraries, especially public libraries, following the anticipated budget
reductions resulting from the Government’s Spending Review to be
announced on 20th October. Even before that announcement,
there have been reports of forthcoming library closures and book
fund reductions in numerous local authorities. Obviously, libraries
will become less accessible to the general public overall and in
order to mitigate the effects of these budget cuts and “to do more
with less” library managers will look to take advantage of the
benefits of modern technology. An obvious consideration is the
introduction of self-service systems to reduce staffing numbers but
what effect will this have on the library’s accessibility to disabled
people?

Having pondered on these issues I was grateful to read an article,
“I want to access my local library” which was posted on the
Reading Sight website on 3 September 2010. In his article,
Norman Ellis, sets out how he went blind and now uses the RNIB
Talking Book Service and audible.com but wants to carry on using
his local library to extend the range of audio books available to
him. Unfortunately, his library is now less accessible to him and
other disabled users because of the use of touch screen
technology. He does not believe that this was taken into account
when the system was introduced.

The article is reproduced from the June issue of RNIB’s NB
magazine which is aimed at professionals who serve visually
impaired people. Each month one free online article is made
available on the RNIB website but this wasn’t the one for June so it
is helpful that the Reading Sight has made this available to non-
subscribers to NB.
See:
http://www.readingsight.org.uk/about_us/news/i_want_to_access_
my_local_library/?page=1

For details of the September issue of NB magazine go to:
http://www.rnib.org.uk/professionals/healthsocialcare/eyecareprofe
ssionals/nbmagazine/Pages/nb_magazine.aspx

Digital developments

On 13 September 2010 Ofcom published a 129 page report, “Next
Generation Services for Older and Disabled People” which had
been commissioned from i2 media research by its Advisory
Committee on Older and Disabled People. The report addresses
the social and technological context; has chapters on health and
wellbeing, work and education, leisure and other day-to-day
activities; addresses the risks and challenges and comes to
conclusions. In many respects it reads very much like earlier
reports on digital inclusion but NGS increases both the potential
benefits and disbenefits for older and disabled people. The
potential benefits are improved accessibility; increased flexibility
and inclusion; improved choice from a range of richer services;
lower cost access to more relevant services and an improved
sense of wellbeing and security. However, none of these potential
benefits can be taken for granted because of the challenges faced.
For the benefits to be realised there is a need for an adequate and
reliable infrastructure; internationally coordinated work on usability
and accessibility; support for user centred design and user
involvement; a supportive regulatory and legislative framework and
standards for interoperability so that personalised interfaces can
be easily integrated into new NGS and products. It is essential to
ensure that potential beneficiaries are not excluded by cost and
there is a danger that the roll out of NGS could increase the digital
divide and have a more negative impact than currently applies.
Chapter 5, leisure, covers personalised contacts, TV, radio,
gaming etc… but not enhanced opportunities for access to reading
content.
See: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/files/2010/09/ACOD-NGS.pdf
On 14 September 2010 the DCMS published “Digital radio
switchover: what is in it for consumers?” This is a report from the
Consumer Expert Group which was established as part of the
Digital Britain action plan instituted by the last Government.
Chapter 6, pages 39-43, covers Accessibility and sets out 5
requirements addressing the needs of older and disabled people
which must be met before the switchover from analogue to digital
radio. As the Chair of the CEG is Leen Petre of RNIB it is not
surprising that accessibility is so prominent and it is pleasing that
the Government has welcomed this report on the basis that
“consumers should lead the way to switchover.”
See: http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/news_stories/7421.aspx

Impact of the DDA

On 9 September 2010, the Department for Work and Pensions and
the Office for Disability Issues published a research report into how
organisations have responded to the Disability Discrimination Acts
1995 and 2005. “Organisations’ response to the DDA: 2009 study”
follows up previous studies carried out in 2003 and 2006. In
autumn 2009, Ipsos MORI conducted 2000 x 20 minute telephone
interviews with a range of public, voluntary and private sector
organisations and 97 in-depth interviews, including 23 with local
authorities. This 194 page report contains a mass of data and I
looked to identify the most relevant which I would identify and
summarise as:

- 76% of respondents were aware of the DDA but that is below the
2006 figure of 80%.
- Only 46%collected disability information as part of their
recruitment process.
- Only 30% were currently employing a disabled person but 42%
reported that they had done so in the last 10 years.
- 61% claimed to have made an employment related adjustment in
the past or planned to do so but this was mainly in response to the
specific needs of an existing employee.
- 80% of all goods and services providers claimed to have made at
least one service adjustment or planned to do so but in 2006 the
response rate was 87%.
- Most of these adjustments concerned physical access and were
more likely to have been carried out by larger rather than small or
medium sized organisations.
- Only 34% had made adjustments to communication methods.
- public bodies have made the widest range of adjustments such
as providing information in large print but few had introduced
signage in Braille.
- 61% claimed that they would have made adjustments without the
legislation but the qualitative research revealed that the DDA did
drive forward action, especially the more costly adjustments to
premises.
- Only 29% were aware of the forthcoming Equality Act 2010 but
awareness was much higher in the public and voluntary sectors.
- Most respondents did not think that the recession would impact
on their recruitment of or services to disabled people but it might
alter what they considered as ‘reasonable’ adjustments.
- Figure 2.4 on page 30 has an interesting table on respondents’
views of the ease or difficulty of employing people with various
disabilities or impairments. Whereas 88% thought it would be easy
to employ somebody with facial scarring only 10% thought it would
be difficult. The figures for people with dyslexia were 75/20% but
for people with ‘severely impaired vision’ they were 17/62%.
- Table A8 on page 150 provides even more information on the
challenges faced by visually impaired people. The responses to
this question on ease or difficulty of employing a VIP were:

                    2006              2009

Easy                 19%               17%
Difficult            64%               62%
Impossible           16%               19%
Don’t know            2%                3%

I doubt that this summary has provided any earth shattering
information. It rather confirms that the DDA has had an impact
despite what the interviewees may believe but disabled people still
face many barriers in securing equality of opportunity in obtaining
employment or receiving goods and services, especially visually
impaired people.
See:
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/report_abstracts/rr_abstracts/
rra_685.asp
Income support

Given their poor employment prospects, disabled people and their
carers might be helped by the DWP’s publication on 8 September
2010 of “A guide to income support for professional and voluntary
advisers and others who want to learn more about income
support.” This 85 page document attempts to provide an easy
guide to this complicated system and is of obvious value to library
staff attempting to assist poorer people.
See: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/is-20.pdf

IFLA guidelines

The IFLA Public Library Service Guidelines were first published in
2001 and STV was delighted that the editor, Philip Gill, requested
us to comment upon the draft in order that they took full account of
the needs and interests of print disabled people. We were pleased
that he took on board our comments. IFLA published a second
edition in August 2010 but we do not know if and how they have
been updated to take account of the extensive developments in
public library services to disabled people in the last decade. The
print and e versions cost Euros 89.95 so we can’t afford to find out
and in the present financial climate we doubt that many public
libraries will be inclined to either!
Publication details for those who can afford it are at:
http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/ifla-publications-series-147

Useful information for book selection and
production

Given the limited resources available to the voluntary sector to
produce books in alternative formats it is obviously critical that they
choose their production titles as carefully and knowledgably as
possible to maximise the benefits for their users. This came to
mind when I read a fascinating “In Depth” article posted on the
Bookseller’s website on 03.09.10. The Nielsen Bookdata Company
introduced a new service. Libscan, in July 2009. This records loans
from public libraries using their services. According to Nielsen,
there are 44 public library authorities on their panel covering 1210
branches. What this article sets out is a comparison of the loans
data from a 10% sample of this panel with the data from their
BookScan Total Consumer Market for book sales for the period 27
December 2009 to 10 July 2010.
It demonstrates the major differences between what is bought and
what is borrowed. For example, fiction accounts for over 50% of
library loans but only 35% of sales. It demonstrates the disparity
between the sales and loans of the top 20 titles and top 50
authors. The children’s author Mick Inkpen is number 7 in the list
but he only sold 85,000 books compared with 707,000 loans
during this period. Norah Roberts is number 2 overall with 203,000
sales and 1,355,000 loans. There is obviously the effect of the
libraries’ backlist of holdings compared to the predominantly newer
stock held on the shelves of bookshops but it is quite surprising to
see how low popular non-fiction titles rank in the library loans
compared to sales. Presumably a considerable number of these
titles are bought as presents, especially pre-Christmas, which is
the major season for publication and promotion of these titles.
Obviously, we already have the Public Lending Right sample data
to inform selection but this could be another useful source of
information for the voluntary sector, public libraries and
booksellers, accepting that these are early days and that the
forthcoming book fund reductions will have a major effect.
See: http://www.thebookseller.com/in-depth/feature/127595-
business-focus-libscan.html

David Owen
16 September 2010

Share the Vision is a partnership of UK libraries and library
organisations that work together to improve the accessibility of
library services for blind and partially sighted people. More
information available from the Co-ordinator, Helen Brazier, RNIB,
helen.brazier@rnib.org.uk or 0161 355 2004.

Contributions for the bulletin can be sent to David Owen at
davjaniso@btinternet.com