News

NADP Annual Conference 2010

[23 Feb 2010] 'Inclusive Curriculum and Assessment - equalising the student experience, how level is the playing field?', 29th/30th June 2010, Oxford. {Workshops updated} [More information and booking form]

NADP Spring Conference 2010

[11 Feb 2010] This one-day conference on Neurodiversity will take place in Birmingham on Thursday 29th April 2010. Reminder: Early bird booking ends on 26 Feb. [More information]

DSA-QAG update

[27 Jan 2010] For members: DSA-QAG Update January 2010 (login required)

NADP Research Ethics Procedure

[20 Jan 2010] For anyone wishing to engage in research via the NADP mailing lists. [More] (login required)

Student Finance Stakeholder Interest Group

[10 Jan 2010] For NADP members: New SFSIG Terms of Reference.

Journal of inclusive practice in Further and Higher Education

[18 Dec 2009] Issue 2 of the journal (Neurodiversity) will be available from Monday 21st December.

NADP Autumn Conference

[9 Dec 2009] Notes from the one-day conference The Multi-disciplinary Team (MDT), London, 16 November 2009, are now available.

Chair's Update

[24 Nov 2009] November 2009 Update by NADP's Chair Nicola Martin.

Hopkins Review

[6 Nov 2009] The NADP Board of Directors have submitted a paper of evidence for Professior Sir Deian Hopkins Review into Student finance Delivery in England 2009.

Disabled Students Allowances

[6 Nov 2009] NADP report on DSAs situation sent to parliamentarians asking questions in both houses this week.

NADP Action Plan

[5 Nov 2009] For NADP members: Download the NADP Action Plan 2009-2010. (login required)

All recent news

NADP Annual Conference & AGM 2009 - Feedback from evaluation forms

[Presentations / Transcripts] [Feedback] [Photos] [Message from Mat Fraser] [Programme] [Abstracts of presentations] [Venue] [AGM]

Number of Delegates: 130
Evaluation Forms Completed: 64

[Word icon] Download Conference 2009 Feedback (MS Word .doc, 84 Kb).

How would you rate the conference venue and facilities?

Excellent: 22
Good: 24
Adequate: 13
Poor: 0
Did not respond: 5

Conference Content - Keynote presentations

Creating Accessible Teaching and Support in Australian Universities

Excellent: 38
Good: 21
Adequate: 1
Poor: 0

Accreditation Scheme Presentation

Excellent: 22
Good: 24
Adequate: 8
Poor: 0

Appearance matters: Disfigurement Confidence for All

Excellent: 17
Good: 22
Adequate: 9
Poor: 4

The Equalities Act

Excellent: 19
Good: 24
Adequate: 5
Poor: 0

Disabled Students Allowance increasing awareness and partnership

Excellent: 13
Good: 21
Adequate: 2
Poor: 0

Conference Content - Workshops

Ensuring quality in specialist support for students with SpLDs in HE Association of Dyslexia Specialists in HE (ADSHE)

Excellent: 2
Good: 7
Adequate: 1
Poor: 0

Martini information - anytime, anyplace, anywhere

Excellent: 5
Good: 7
Adequate: 1
Poor: 1

Developing Inclusive Practice through an appreciative inquiry approach. Getting the attention of academic staff

Excellent: 3
Good: 12
Adequate: 0
Poor: 0

Supporting the support workers: Training and supporting workers for students with disabilities through e-learning, online resources and communication

Excellent: 5
Good: 9
Adequate: 5
Poor: 1

Attitudes to dyslexic students and approaches to dyslexic support amount teaching staff at University

Excellent: 2
Good: 11
Adequate: 2
Poor: 0

Developing Inclusive Practice in vocational education and training and adult education

Excellent: 3
Good: 5
Adequate: 3
Poor: 0

Students using free online tools to support their learning

Excellent: 4
Good: 7
Adequate: 5
Poor: 1

Equality impact assessment: a method to engage academics

Excellent: 0
Good: 8
Adequate: 5
Poor: 0

Developing the AchieveAbility of an inclusive curriculum in HE

Excellent: 1
Good: 2
Adequate: 5
Poor: 3

DAISY - the results of early seeding

Excellent: 0
Good: 2
Adequate: 3
Poor: 0

Mentoring: Does mentoring promote learner autonomy

Excellent: 12
Good: 9
Adequate: 0
Poor: 0

Providing quality support services

Excellent: 3
Good: 9
Adequate: 2
Poor: 0

Did the Conference Meet your expectations?

Exceeded: 15
Met: 44
Did not meet: 3
Much Worse: 0
Did not respond: 2

How helpful/useful did you find the conference?

Excellent: 20
Good: 36
Adequate: 3
Poor: 1
Did not respond: 4

How well do you think the conference was organised?

Excellent: 36
Good: 22
Adequate: 4
Poor: 0
Did not respond: 2

Would you like to attend future one-day conferences?

Definitely: 44
Maybe: 18
No: 0
Did not respond: 2

Specific Comments about the Conference

  • It would be nice to hear from students themselves, either in person or on video/audio.
  • Thank you very useful once again.
  • Very first NADP conference, I enjoyed it and learnt a lot.
  • NADP conferences (attended 3) are always really worthwhile and value for money.
  • Workshops from specialist areas - innovations in supporting students with specific disabilities always appreciated.
  • Always very interesting and informative, thank you. Some of the more technical/legal presentations/workshops would have benefited from being a little more in 'plain english'!
  • It was good to have all events in the hotel, have been to conferences where you had to go between lots of venues and thus the NADP conference was better.
  • Wonder if it would be useful to have a conference aimed at new practitioners - people aiming for full membership and a separate one for 'old hands' or service leaders/managers whose needs are different.
  • Excellent range of workshops and would certainly attend future conferences - wherever they are located - as the conference content is brilliant!! Well done NADP.
  • Equality Challenge Unit would be interested/welcome opportunity to present at future conference.
  • Liz Carr was excellent!
  • Entertainment after dinner was not entertaining.
  • Perhaps due to the great hotel features to host a conference, more pressure could be exerted on the hotel to provide complementary transport to and from the local station.
  • Complimentary transport between the hotel and hotel was much appreciated.
  • Terrible food and organisation at lunch.
  • I found the venue to be very good. Staff were very helpful and supportive, facilities, meals, etc., were also good.
  • Vegan catering was poor - two others with non-dairy requirements also mentioned this. It is a minor thing but for the price I think we should expect more protein! However, I have lost weight so every cloud... much better on Friday!
  • Ideal location, lovely rooms, good facilities - sit down lunch would have been good.
  • Not sure how it qualifies for 4 stars?! No air-conditioning in bedrooms, no decaf tea in whole hotel (did ask), running out of water/juice/glasses at meal times, not providing clean glasses and water between sessions, slow service at dinner (I did not get veggie meal requested as 'ran out'. NADP is brilliant and well-organised - Belfry Hotel less so!
  • Rooms were of a very good standard.
  • Hotel standard was excellent but the main conference room felt crowded, I presume the conference was over-subscribed which caused problems. Conference dinner was most acceptable.
  • Enjoyable, good discussions as well as networking.
  • Was not entirely sure, before hand, how practical some of the workshop options would be and found most of them to be much more applicable than expected.
  • Good variety of workshops and speakers.
  • Good meaty subjects not too much 'academic' stuff, all practical.
  • I found the conference very informative and enjoyable. The opportunity of networking is phenomenal.
  • Key important issues were covered.
  • Issues that affect work directing addressed.
  • Provided opportunity to meet practitioners in other HEIs. Opportunity to have short discussions re: inclusive practice and other areas of interest.
  • Excellent planning and presentation. Excellent opportunity to network and lots of ideas to take and implement, made some great contacts as a result. Great evening meal and fantastic comedian.
  • Good organisation, helpful and friendly staff which makes a big difference to 'first timers'.
  • Lots of useful information to take away, to contemplate further and see how can be implemented.
  • New to role and disability assessing in universities so good opportunity to learn about the field.
  • Several of the workshops felt rushed - not enough time for discussions/questions. Was unable to attend dyslexia workshop as already fully booked.
  • All information provided was clear and concise, the NADP staff/speakers were very friendly, approachable and organised.
  • Speakers interesting and informative; workshops valuable - but ADSHE workshop could have benefited from being half an hour longer.
  • It would be helpful if the workshops identity who the sessions are aimed at e.g. HOPs or practitioners, etc.
  • Workshops were varied but covered different services which were useful. It was also good to meet those from other institutions and discuss best practice.
  • Unfortunately one or two sessions were quite poor. However the discussions on accreditation made it worthwhile.
  • Conference concerns much broader than in previous years - more relevant to embedding inclusive practice and equality encompassing disability - as we need to.
  • Did not feel the selection of workshops were as varied and good as at other conferences in previous years.
  • Slightly disappointed the conference was targeted almost exclusively at DPs and people working directly with students. Consequently it was less relevant to academic researchers whose involvement with students is less direct.
  • With the exception of the technology workshop, felt I did not learn much to take back to practice.
  • Useful information about new initiatives e.g. NADP accreditation, some ideas for projects in own institution.
  • Content pitched at right level, excellent venue and facilities, amount of information judged correctly - enough time to think and meet other people.

What was your main reason for coming to the conference?

  • Meeting others, information gathering/sharing - networking.
  • To learn, CPD.
  • Not long in job so wanted to learn as much as possible.
  • To gain a better understanding of what work NADP do.
  • Board member.
  • Fairly new to the sector.
  • Annual updating and time out from work.
  • Information on support worker schemes.
  • To learn more about inclusive curriculum/dyslexic.
  • To expand on working knowledge, mainly for specific workshops i.e. 'supporting the support worker'.
  • Mainly to see how Randstad works and to get ideas on how other institutes co-ordinate their support workers.
  • To deliver service, learn about good practice.
  • To find out more about the proposed accreditation scheme.
  • The Bond Pearce very nice, need to make a full-day conference on how to implement this Act.
  • To deliver a workshop and liaise with disability practitioners in relation to this. To increase own awareness of issues facing the DP community.
  • To investigate NADP conferences as a prelude to membership.
  • Wanted to hear about new legal framework, also interested in accreditation, suppliers showcase and mentoring. The equalities act presentation was too fast to follow.
  • Learning & Development.
  • To learn more about disability support for academics and exchange best practice.
  • To learn more about the accreditation scheme.

What did you find most useful?

  • Mentoring workshop.
  • Appearance matters.
  • Workshop sessions on martini information and equality impact assessment - because relate to work at present.
  • All of it! Workshops and the chance to chat, so I guess the structure was great.
  • Well balanced overview of provisions of service by other HE institutions.
  • Chris Dunlop's talk very open.
  • Equality bill information and meeting fellow colleagues.
  • Keynote presentations all excellent but appearance matters was new territory for me and most informative.
  • Fining out the research/publications available from contributors/NADP.
  • Discussions about how things operate in other institutions, finding out about projects that have been done.
  • Workshop 'supporting the support workers'.
  • Plenary sessions.
  • Thoughts on accreditation so far, mentoring, changing focus, legal update.
  • Networking with other colleagues, time away to reflect with ideas to spark imagination.
  • Workshop on online tools.
  • Changing faces - very challenging, raised awareness, provided essential tools for engaging with this group of students.
  • DAISY.
  • AGM.
  • The opportunity to deliver a workshop to an audience of relevant enthusiastic DPs and the time to elicit great feedback as well as networking during breaks and social events.
  • Workshops.
  • **Accreditation scheme.
  • Tony Payne's presentation.
  • Bettina Rigg - fast but very clear and useful.
  • Opportunity to share experiences and identify common issues.

What did you find least useful?

  • Supporting support workers workshop. Spent 1 hour explaining computer system rather than process and how it could work. Did not meet expectations as based on the abstract, but still interesting.
  • Workshop on inclusive curriculum. Would have been more relevant for me to go to supporting support workers but was not allocated that workshop. Problem with workshop.
  • attended is that based on a funded project which was not yet finished, approaches which have been successful would be helpful.
  • DAISY, but only as they ran out of time before we got to try the equipment.
  • Third workshop, had the feeling that it could have been presented with more practical actions/suggestions.
  • The one workshop I attended 'providing quality support services' was very frustrating as poorly chaired. Would have been better to provide questions before workshop to see what people wanted to cover. When time is tight more structure and discipline is needed in fielding questions and answers and not allow people to stick to one topic.
  • Appearance matters.
  • Workshop on live materials was not what I expected.
  • Developing the AchieveAbility, session needed a moderator.
  • Discussions in the workshops were interesting but frustrating as there is rarely time to discuss the subject in depth. Really wanted to have the opportunity to pick apart the issues.
  • SpLD workshop.
  • Least useful but most fun... Liz Carr was just great!
  • Negativity amongst colleagues, especially towards SFE and reluctance to accept change within the sector.
  • Unfortunately the workshops I was particularly interested in attending were full. Hope that all presentations will be on the website afterwards.
  • Relevant to post-accessable and informative.
  • Online tools - too much assumed information re: online applications, some of the workshop descriptions did not give enough info to make a choice.
  • Exhibitors - do not personally have any involvement in this side of my institutions processes.
  • The focused workshop topics which seemed more relevant to a very specific audience and less relevant to those not directly related to the profession. This could have been resolved with more workshop slots but as there was only 3 slots over the 2 days, less information could be delivered.
  • Keynote speakers, apart from Alan Hurst.
  • Acoustics not good in the conference room - needed microphones.
  • Lunch was below expected standard. Equality Bill - have already developed understanding of the Bill (ECU have been doing consultation events with the sector and will be responding to the Bill on behalf of the HE sector).
  • Martini workshop - very dry considering what it was about. Played the podcast instead of the popular one! Got better at the end though.

[Word icon] Download Conference 2009 Feedback (MS Word .doc, 84 Kb).