CATS Self Review and Planning Tool An Introduction and Overview Alison Poot and Melody West, CATS Project Team (University of Tasmania)

Creating Accessible Teaching and Support: a brief history  Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) funded project (UTAS- led), for the development of:  a research project into how university staff access and use information about strategies for improving teaching and support for students with disability;  a web based resource aimed at improving the quality of teaching and support for students with disability ( andwww.cats.edu.au  a self assessment tool to assist institutions to review practice against the UA Disability Guidelines, for the development of disability action plans and other evaluation purposes.

General Principles Underpinning the Universities Australia (UA) Disability Guidelines are two key principles: 1.That universities will uphold academic standards such that students graduate with the requisite skills and knowledge associated with the degree conferred. 2.That universities provide students with a disability with the opportunity to realise their academic and social potential and to participate fully in university life.

UA Disability Guidelines: a framework for ‘better’ practice Policy and Administration Transition to University Planning and Quality Assurance Information Management University Culture and Safety Learning and Teaching Course Design and Review Delivery and Assessment Specific Learning Environments Campus Life and Services Physical Access Library and ICT Access Student Services Graduation and Employment

Why a Self Review? To establish a clear understanding of the organisation, department or team’s activities and, specifically, to identify areas for improvement. To engage staff at all levels in a collaborative, visible and proactive process that that encourages involvement and increases commitment. To raise awareness and provide education around particular issues or themes To develop ‘action plans’ that identify measures to be taken for improvements, and that align with University-wide plans and policies To provide ‘base-line’ data for benchmarking processes

The ‘Tool’: functionality & resources Developed with MYSQL database (v4) using PHP (v4.3) – common instruments for database development System and software requirements should make it straightforward for university system administrators to install. Full accessibility testing to take place after trials have finished, but has been developed within web accessibility guidelines User & administrator manuals have been produced and are downloadable from the CATS website

The Process Appoint a Project Manager to coordinate all activities Identify key areas for review and contact relevant staff to discuss priorities and objectives Each key area must be represented by a ‘Coordinator’ Review indicators and determine ‘Information Collectors’ (remember there can be more than one person collecting information on each indicator) Engage Information Collectors in the process Distribute review documentation to Information Collectors Facilitate an ‘Information Briefing’ session for all Information Collectors (short presentation, Q&A session etc.) Information Collectors return completed review documentation to Coordinator Coordinator reviews documentation, ensures accuracy and collates information into one document Documents from each key area returned to Project Manager to develop summary document for the institution List of actions can be used in a number of ways: i.e. an ‘Action Plan’ to be shared among identified stakeholders (round table, working party to implement improvement plans etc.).

Project Manager (oversees the whole review process and reports on actions) Coordinators (coordinate information collection, collate data and report on areas of review they are responsible for) Information Collectors (collect information against indicators of practice, establish actions for improvement) System Administrator (install and setup) The ‘Tool’: people & processes

Coordinator Area 1 Information Collectors Indicator 3 Information Collectors Indicator 2 Information Collector Indicator 1 Project Manager Coordinator Area 2 Coordinator Area 3 CATS Self Review & Planning: collecting the information

Recommendations The CATS Self Review & Planning process needs to be focussed on achieving ‘practical outcomes’ - clearly articulate how the review will inform practice and policy The process must be ‘educational’ rather than prescriptive Keep a flexible approach (‘one-size’ doesn’t always fit all) Use a clear and broad definition of ‘disability’ Ensure staff ‘ownership’ at all levels Coordinators to ensure cohesive and accurate information is reported ‘Piggy-back’ CATS Self Review & Planning process with other strategic activities where possible Start small Use tight time frames

Questions to ask yourself Will the CATS Self Review and Planning process be adequately ‘resourced’? What type of ‘evidence’ will you require staff to collect – will this be clearly defined or open to interpretation? How ‘deep’ will the review process go – will staff at all levels be involved? What is the ‘scope’ of the review – which of the guidelines or areas will you focus on? What are the ‘timeframes’ that you need to work to?