ILT IN SPECIALIST COLLEGES

Report to the Specialist Colleges ILT Sub-Group of the National

Learning Network Programme Board of a survey into
Information and Learning Technology Provision, Access and
Policy in Specialist colleges in England.

Bob Powell

Steve Davies

April 2002

1
Acknowledgements

Bob Powell is Associate Director: Lifelong Learning at Becta. Steve Davies is Project Officer with the Ferl
team and carried out the bulk of the statistical analysis.

The questionnaire that informed this report was based on one initially developed by Alison Page of Becta
in 1999 for a survey of ILT in FE colleges and on a refinement of that survey that was conducted with
Specialist colleges in 2001 The final survey instrument and the results and analysis arising from it has
benefited from the advice, guidance, comments and observations of a range of individuals and agencies,
in particular the members of the Specialist Colleges ILT Sub-group of the National Learning Network
Programme Board, under its Chair, Ceri Prosser of Treloar College.
Particular thanks are due to Jacqueline Marsh, NLN Development Officer at LSC for her contributions to
the document and for her energetic chasing of late returns, ably assisted by her colleague, Kate Halliday.
The main findings were first aired at a meeting of the Specialist Colleges Sub-group and this final report
has taken account of the supportive and critical commentary offered by the group at that event and
subsequently by email.

The online survey facility was provided by Infopoll.

2
Contents

Contents................................................................................................................................................... 2
Tables....................................................................................................................................................... 4
Charts....................................................................................................................................................... 4
1 Management summary ..................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 The survey................................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 The Specialist college sector ...................................................................................................... 5
1.3 College computer infrastructure ................................................................................................ 5
1.4 Access to computers ................................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Uses of ILT................................................................................................................................. 7
1.6 Staff skills .................................................................................................................................. 7
2 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Context and purpose of the study .............................................................................................. 8
2.2 Survey methodology and response ............................................................................................ 8
2.3 The Specialist college sector ...................................................................................................... 9
2.4 IT Funding and Expenditure ..................................................................................................... 10
3 Infrastructure.................................................................................................................................. 12
3.1 Baseline computer specification .............................................................................................. 12
3.2 College computer stock ........................................................................................................... 12
3.3 Local Area Networks................................................................................................................ 14
3.4 LAN Performance .................................................................................................................... 15
3.5 Internet connectivity ............................................................................................................... 16
3.6 Constraints on Internet use ..................................................................................................... 17
3.7 Technical Support.................................................................................................................... 18
4 Access to Computers....................................................................................................................... 20
4.1 IT and ILT Policy ....................................................................................................................... 20
4.2 Access for staff ........................................................................................................................ 20
4.3 Access for learners .................................................................................................................. 21
4.4 Meeting student demand for computers ................................................................................. 22
4.5 Student demand for Internet ................................................................................................... 24
5 Uses of ILT ...................................................................................................................................... 26
5.1 ILT and the curriculum ............................................................................................................. 26
5.2 Staff use of the LAN/Intranet ................................................................................................... 26
5.3 Student use of the LAN/Intranet .............................................................................................. 27
5.4 Other Networked Activities ..................................................................................................... 28
5.5 Uses of the Internet by staff .................................................................................................... 29
5.6 Uses of Internet by students .................................................................................................... 30
5.7 Email access ............................................................................................................................ 30
6 Staff skills........................................................................................................................................ 32
6.1 Staff IT and ILT competence..................................................................................................... 32
6.2 Teaching/learner support staff ................................................................................................ 32
6.3 Student/personal support staff ................................................................................................ 33
6.4 Administration/institutional support staff ................................................................................ 34
Appendix: Assistive Technology in the Specialist college sector ......................................................... 36

3
Tables

Table 1 Respondents by college specialism........................................................................................ 8

Table 2 Programmes of study ............................................................................................................ 9
Table 3 Computer specifications ..................................................................................................... 12
Table 4 Prices for “best buy” computer ........................................................................................... 13
Table 5 Local Area Networks ........................................................................................................... 14
Table 6 LANs by college size ............................................................................................................ 14
Table 7 Total number of major sites ................................................................................................ 15
Table 8 Total planned bandwidth .................................................................................................... 17
Table 9 Internet service providers ................................................................................................... 17
Table 10 Ideal staff/computer ratios ................................................................................................. 20
Table 11 Ease of computer access ..................................................................................................... 23
Table 12 Causes of difficulties ........................................................................................................... 24
Table 13 Student access to Internet .................................................................................................. 25
Table 14 ILT use by programme type ................................................................................................. 26

Charts

Chart 1 Specialist college staffing .................................................................................................... 10

Chart 2 College computer stock....................................................................................................... 13
Chart 3 Network capability to meet demand ................................................................................... 16
Chart 4 Constraints on increased use of the Internet ....................................................................... 18
Chart 5 Technical support by college size ........................................................................................ 19
Chart 6 Staff using own designated computer ................................................................................. 21
Chart 7 Student/computer ratios .................................................................................................... 22
Chart 8 Student demand for computers .......................................................................................... 23
Chart 9 Student demand for Internet .............................................................................................. 24
Chart 10 Staff use of the LAN/Intranet .............................................................................................. 27
Chart 11 Student use of the LAN/Intranet ......................................................................................... 28
Chart 12 Staff use of Internet ............................................................................................................ 29
Chart 13 Student use of the Internet ................................................................................................. 30
Chart 14 Email access........................................................................................................................ 31
Chart 15 Skills of teaching/learner support staff ................................................................................ 32
Chart 16 Skills of student/personal support staff ............................................................................... 33
Chart 17 Skills of administration/institutional support staff ............................................................... 34

4
1 Management summary

1.1 The survey

A total of 50 colleges (88% of the sector) submitted completed questionnaires in time for inclusion in the
analysis. The sample therefore includes the overwhelming majority of Specialist colleges, between them
representing over 95% of the sector’s students.

1.2 The Specialist college sector

The whole sector accounts for approximately 3200 students, predominantly under 25 years of age.
Students typically attend on a residential basis and are enrolled on study programmes in excess of 2 years
in length.

Most specialisms are covered by very small numbers of colleges. The largest group “Learning difficulties
and/or disabilities” accounts for nearly half the sector, but is something of a catch-all category, masking
further wide variation within the classification. Only the nine colleges for students with visual impairment
stand out as a significantly-sized group within the sector.

Students numbers are small by comparison with mainstream FE and sixth form colleges. The largest
college caters for 254 students, whilst the median college (the college in the middle of the range
surveyed) caters for only 42.

Very nearly half of all Specialist college staff have as their primary role support for the living needs of
students. Two-thirds of teaching staff are full-time, exactly reversing the proportions within the general
FE sector where sessional staff make up two-thirds of all teaching staff.

1.3 College computer infrastructure

The typical baseline specification quoted by Specialist colleges is 650Mhz with 64Mb of RAM and 10Gb
hard disk. 76% of the current installed stock of computers in Specialist colleges are at or above baseline
specification. (63% in mainstream colleges) 90% of all computers are desktop machines, and over 70% of
these are networked.

The median price paid for a middle-range computer is £750, slightly higher than in FE generally where the
median price is £700. However, there is considerable variation in price paid for similar machines across
the sector, a situation mirroring that in FE.

Local Area Networks (LANs)

Around two-thirds of Specialist colleges have a Local Area Network. Over half of these colleges have
networks that are at least partly 100 Mbps Ethernet or higher, indicating well-specified networks within
the sector. The distribution and bandwidth of LANs are both closely related to college size. However, the
one in three colleges that currently have no significant LAN must be of great concern in the context of
extending the benefits of ILT and e-learning to all students.

Despite generally robust LAN specifications, 57% of Specialist college networks are currently at capacity
and a further 13% are unable to meet even current demand. However, only 45% of specialist colleges
restrict network traffic in bandwidth-hungry applications, as opposed to 80% in mainstream FE colleges.
Only 6% report that slowness and unreliability are a frequent problem of network performance. 34%
describe their network as working without appreciable delay, with the remaining 60% reporting their
network to be slow at busy times.

5
Internet connectivity
88% of Specialist colleges are connected to the Internet, though only 4 (8%) have the 2Mbps connection
equivalent to the JANET connection for FE. Of particular concern are those colleges still relying upon
modems and the one in three colleges that have no Local Area Network to distribute Internet traffic
across machines.

The most pressing barrier to increased use of the Internet is the number of access points, i.e. internet–
connected computers. The level of student skill is seen as the second most important constraint. This,
taken along with colleges reporting the availability of staff for student support as an additional constraint,
reflects the particular needs of the student body.

Technical support
Half the Specialist colleges directly employ technical support staff, and just under two fifths use an
outsourced service. The remaining colleges make use of technical support provided by their parent
organisation or by other college staff members. As might be expected, the larger colleges are more likely
to employ technical support staff, and the smaller colleges are more likely to use non-specialist staff, such
as teachers.

1.4 Access to computers

Staff access
All or most administration staff have access to their own computer in the overwhelming majority of
colleges. Teaching staff are far more likely to share a computer; all or most teaching staff share
computers with other staff in 19 colleges, and with students in a further 21.

In the majority of colleges, all staff can access a computer to use, but there remain 3 colleges where
neither the teaching and learner support staff nor the student and personal support staff have any
computer access, nor is it seen as a priority. Only one college has achieved the situation where all
teaching staff have a computer for their sole personal use, and 33 do not regard this situation as a
priority.

Student access
The median ratio of students to a computer was 1.7:1. The mean value was distorted by the small
number of very large ratios, producing a value of 2.9:1. The importance of computers as a basic tool to
enhance communication and to support learning and essential living needs of the Specialist colleges’
students is reflected in this outcome. Whilst the calculation of ratios is helpful to facilitate comparison
with provision in the FE sector generally, it is likely to be of far less use as a measure for setting any kind
of sensible target for Specialist colleges.

Given the relatively good levels of computer resource noted above, it is no surprise to find that around
60% of Specialist colleges report sufficient capacity to meet student demand for computers. Only two
thirds of Specialist colleges, however, report demand for ILT to be widespread among students, compared
with over 97% of mainstream colleges.

While access to computers is easy in close to 30% of colleges, the remainder experience difficulties,
students having to wait or queue in around half of Specialist colleges. Students are entitled to computer
access to enable them to complete work in less than half of the colleges, while a further quarter of the
sample report that students can expect access, but it could not be described as an entitlement.

6
1.5 Uses of ILT
More than three quarters of Specialist colleges that offer Basic/key skills, Vocational programmes, GCSE/A
levels and Communication skills programmes make some use of ILT in delivering these. Programmes
supporting independent living skills, which are reported by the largest number of colleges, have the
lowest levels of ILT use.

Use of the LAN/intranet

Use by staff of the college LAN for email and Internet access is reported by all 33 colleges with a LAN in
place. However, only just over half of those with a LAN describe these activities as common practice (53%
for staff accessing the Internet, 59%for staff use of email).
Student use of college LANs follows a similar pattern to staff use, though typically tracking behind staff in
scale, most notably in the use of the LAN for email traffic. Internet access remains the principal use, with
87% of respondents making use of the network for this purpose, with just over half describing it as
common practice.

Use of the Internet

44 colleges have Internet access, all of whom report staff use of the Internet for email. 27 report email as
common practice within the institution, 8 more than describe use of the LAN for this purpose as common.
The only other major use of the Internet is as an information resource, where activity parallels that of
email, with 27 colleges reporting common use.
The Internet is used as an information source by students at 40 colleges, but commonly used at only 22.
This level of use is significantly lower than in mainstream colleges. 26 colleges described themselves as
providing e-learning, with a further 6 having definite plans to provide e-learning, whilst a further 4 may
introduce this type of learning in the future.

Access to email
Relatively few staff, full-time or sessional, have a personal email address at college. Only 13 colleges rely
wholly upon an internal email system, whilst a further 5 supplement internal provision with externally
based services. 22 rely wholly upon external email.

1.6 Staff skills

The picture for teaching and learner support staff shows a remarkable degree of transfer of personal IT
skills into use in the classroom, when compared with their counterparts in mainstream colleges. 66% of
staff are considered competent or advanced in their personal use of IT, with 64% translating that into a
similar level of skill in a teaching situation. This could be a spin-off from the use of assistive technologies
within Specialist colleges, giving teaching staff the experience of adapting to ILT and the confidence
necessary to be comfortable with it.

As might be expected, there is a lower level of skill among student/personal support staff. 41% are
competent or advanced in their IT skills, with 30% at a similar level in ILT. Colleges will need to make a
judgement about the particular skills required within this staff group in the context of the particular
student needs that they support.

The IT skills of administration and institutional support staff are reasonably high, with 89% of this group
reported to be competent or advanced. Colleges were asked solely about he personal IT skills of this
group, given that they have no direct role in the delivery of learning.

7
2 Introduction

2.1 Context and purpose of the study

This study was carried out in February and March 2002 on behalf of the Specialist Colleges ILT Sub-group
of the National Learning Network Programme Board. The aim of the survey was to assess the extent and
significance of Information and Learning Technology infrastructure and use within this sector.

The study took the form of a survey by questionnaire of all the 57 Specialist colleges in England in receipt
of Learning and Skills Council funding. The study explored quantitative issues relating to infrastructure
and practice. The questionnaire was published and disseminated in both paper-based and web-based
formats.

2.2 Survey methodology and response

A total of 50 colleges (88% of the sector) submitted completed questionnaires in time for inclusion in the
analysis. All of the colleges that did not reply were small, having fewer than 20 students each. Only 9
colleges submitted their responses on-line, the remainder either completing the paper-based
questionnaire, or via telephone interview.

Table 1 below shows the breakdown by college specialism.

Table 1 Respondents by college specialism

Survey sample

Learning difficulties/disabilities 22

Visual impairment 9

Autistic spectrum disorders 4

Deafness 4

Behavioural difficulties 3

Epilepsy 3

Physical/learning disabilities 3

Brain injury 1

Range of impairments 1
Base = No of respondents

Most specialisms are covered by very small numbers of colleges. Even the largest group “Learning
difficulties and/or disabilities” is itself something of a catch-all, masking further wide variation within the
classification . Only the nine colleges for students with visual impairment stand out as a significantly-sized
group within the sector.

8
2.3 The Specialist college sector
The 50 colleges surveyed had a combined total of 3166 enrolled students in academic year 2001/02 , the
whole sector therefore accounting for little more than 3200. Each college is very small by comparison
with mainstream FE and sixth form colleges. The largest college in the sector reported 254 enrolled
students, but the median college (the college in the middle of the range surveyed) caters for only 42. It
should be noted that as the 7 colleges that did not respond had student numbers that would place them
in the smallest 25% of the survey sample, the median student number for the whole sector is in fact
below 40.

Specialist colleges are predominantly residential, with 87% of all students boarding at their college. 87%
of students are under 25 years of age, and two-thirds are male. The table below shows that over 70% of
college programmes are greater than 2 years in length.

Table 2 Programmes of study

Programme length Number of students

Less than 1 year 277

1 – 2 years 606

2 – 3 years 1327

3 years and more 937

Base = No of respondents

A further distinctive feature of the Specialist college sector is their staffing structure. Very nearly half of
all staff have, as their primary role, support for the living needs of students. Amongst teaching staff, two-
thirds of are full-time, exactly reversing the proportions within the general FE sector where sessional staff
make up two-thirds of all teachers.

9
 2500

2000

1500
Part Time
Full Time
1000

500

0
Teaching staff Student/personal support Admin staff
staff

Chart 1 Specialist college staffing

A further contrast with mainstream colleges, all of whom maintain substantial technical support
functions, is that only 25 of the 50 colleges surveyed directly employ technical support staff.

2.4 IT Funding and Expenditure

The table below shows all the sources of funding respondents cited as contributing to their IT
development. The very small number of capital project funders on the list suggests that specialist colleges
may rely heavily on their revenue budgets to fund ILT.

Sources of funding for IT

LSC 33
Non lottery charity 19
Employment Service 5
College funds 5
Social Services 4
LEA 3
Residential Training Unit (RTU) 2
Lottery 1
Connexions 1
CMF 1
Base = No of respondents

Only 40 out of the 50 respondents gave figures for IT expenditure, but that number contained all the
larger colleges in the sector. The total expenditure on hardware by these respondents for the year
2000/01 was £1.1million, and software expenditure was £250,000. Fewer colleges gave a figure for staff

10
development for IT. Non-respondents tended to leave the box blank rather than enter a zero, inviting
speculation that they were unable to make a sensible estimate of expenditure, rather than that they do
not spend in this area. The 30 colleges that did respond spent £110,000 on IT and/or ILT staff
development.

The full extent of spending on technical support is more difficult to gauge due to the different types of
support utilised in the sector. We estimate that the 25 colleges that directly employ technical support
spend around £700,000 in wages and associated costs. 14 of the 19 colleges that use outsourced services
quoted a figure for spending on technical support, totalling £100,000 between them. Figures are
unavailable for those colleges that have a service provided by the parent organisation, but clearly
someone, somewhere in the organisation foots the bill. Similarly, there is an opportunity cost to those
colleges that rely on their own staff, while apparently getting a ‘free’ service, arising from the diversion of
staff effort away from their ‘real’ job for periods of time.

Partnerships

17 colleges reported working with other organisations to develop their ILT provision. 8 have some form
of working arrangement with other colleges, 4 with Ufi/learndirect and 4 with UK online. A further 7
collaborate to some degree with other organisations, including a local adult education service, charitable
foundations and, notably in one case, a commercial software company looking to develop the college’s
internal systems into a marketable product.

11
3 Infrastructure

3.1 Baseline computer specification

Respondents were asked to describe the baseline specification that they would currently consider buying
for delivery of learning programmes, in terms of speed, RAM and hard disk capacity and classify stock in
terms of that baseline. This is more robust as a basis for comparison over time of changes in computing
capability than arbitrary choice of any particular current specification or machine, since it matches the
continual changes in technology of computers with changes in user expectations.

Colleges were also asked to describe what they would consider the current ‘best buy’ specification. The
three dimensions of speed and memory were then weighted to produce eight bands representing
machines of increasing capability. The Table below shows a typical specification for each band.

Table 3 Computer specifications

Typical band specifications
Speed (MHz) RAM (Mb) Hard Disk (Gb) Baseline Best buy
Band 1 200 32 2 10 0
Band 2 500 32 4 3 0
Band 3 500 64 6 3 0
Band 4 650 64 10 7 2
Band 5 650 128 15 5 4
Band 6 700 128 20 3 11
Band 7 750 256 20 1 3
Band 8+ 1000 256 20 7 19
Base = No of respondents

Nine colleges chose not to respond to this question, with the implication that some may not identify a
defined baseline specification for this purpose. There was a wide spread around the median baseline
specification of 650Mhz with 64Mb of RAM and 10Gb hard disk, with 25% of those that responded
reporting a baseline of 200Mhz with 32Mb of RAM and a 2Mb hard disk. This is very slightly higher than
the median calculated for mainstream colleges in Becta’s 2001 survey of FE in England and identical to
that in Scottish colleges in the same year, leading us to conclude that there is no significant difference
between Specialist and mainstream colleges in this variable.
One in seven colleges quoted a baseline specification in excess of 1000Mhz with 256Mb of RAM and hard
disk capacity of 20Gb.

3.2 College computer stock

The Chart below shows that 76% of computers in Specialist colleges are at or above baseline specification.
(63% in mainstream colleges) 90% of all computers are desktop machines, and over 70% of these are
networked. The remaining computers are mainly laptops, with a small number of hand held devices
(PDAs) reported at two colleges.

12
 24%

Below baseline
42% specification
Meet baseline
specification
Above baseline
specification

34%

Chart 2 College computer stock

The best buy is typically a significantly higher specification than the baseline. Although 22% of
respondents cite the same specification for both baseline and best buy, the average best buy is three
bands higher than the quoted baseline specification. This almost certainly is a simple reflection of the
continual upward movement of technical offer within the marketplace; colleges may define a baseline
requirement in terms of user needs, but find it cheaper to buy over-specified machines, or indeed
impossible to buy the baseline as the market has moved inexorably on.

Colleges were also asked if there were any other factors they considered critical when purchasing a
computer. Value for money was by far the most widely cited single factor, with 17 respondents (34%)
mentioning this, compared to 43% of FE colleges. The most important issues for general FE colleges, the
build quality and robustness of machines, and support and service, while significant for 10 and 6
respondents respectively, were far less widely cited, which is slightly surprising given that many Specialist
colleges have no in-house network support staff. Technical issues emerge as a concern, notably monitor
size (9 respondents), access devices (7) and compatibility with existing systems (6). Other more general
technical issues were raised by 15 respondents. The prevalence of technical concerns may reflect the
complexity inherent in maintaining individualised assistive technologies within many Specialist colleges.

Table 4 Prices for “best buy” computer

Median price Lowest price Highest price
Band 4 800 600 1000
Band 5 950 600 1500
Band 6 700 400 1800
Band 7 850 750 1000
Band 8+ 850 500 1500

13
The median price paid for a “best buy” computer is £750, higher than in FE generally where the median
price is £700. The table above shows a similar picture to FE, where the variation in price within each band
is greater than the differences between each band. The higher prices paid overall may reflect a
combination of the particular technical specification enhancements needed by Specialist colleges and the
small size of each institution resulting in an inability to leverage bulk purchasing deals. Some colleges may
lack the in-house expertise and knowledge to make a full assessment of all the offers in a complex, rapidly
changing and commercially predatory marketplace.

3.3 Local Area Networks

Table 5 Local Area Networks

10M 9
100M 11
1G 2
10/100M mixture 4
Other 4
Base = No of respondents

Around two-thirds of Specialist colleges have a Local Area Network. Over half of these colleges have
networks that are at least partly 100 Mbps Ethernet or higher, indicating well-specified networks within
the sector. The distribution and bandwidth of LANs are both closely related to college size. The table
below shows that larger colleges are more likely to have a LAN in place. Analysis of the data further
reveals that LAN bandwidth is closely related to college size. Given that a key determinant of LAN
performance at any given time is the number of concurrent users, it is likely that the performance offered
by a 10 Mbps LAN is less problematical for the relatively small number of students supported by Specialist
colleges than would be the case in much larger FE colleges.

The one in three colleges that currently have no significant LAN must be of great concern in the context of
extending the benefits of ILT and e-learning to all students. Without a comprehensive and robust LAN a
college is cut off from access not only to Internet-based services, but also to a whole range of networked
applications, including the outputs of the National Learning Network which are now universally available
to mainstream students.

Table 6 LANs by college size

Large colleges: Medium-large Medium-small Small colleges
>82 students >42 students >21 students 21 students and
less
LAN 12 10 5 4
No LAN 0 2 5 9
Base = No of respondents

Around half of Specialist colleges have only one site. Less than half the single-site colleges are networked,
a finding in line with the numbers of small Specialist colleges without a LAN. Nine of the multi-site
colleges have computer links to at least one subsidiary site: 4 use cable technologies, 3 use ISDN and/or
modem and 2 use leased line technology. Further work is required in order to determine the purpose and
status of the subsidiary sites. It has been suggested that some of these may be solely residential
accommodation, rather than teaching and learning facilities. Given that 87% of all students within the

14
Specialist sector are residential, then many colleges may wish to develop a strategy that extends the
network into residential areas for leisure as well as extended learning.

Table 7 Total number of major sites

Colleges Total sites Networked sites
1 site 23 23 12
2 sites 12 24 12
3 sites 4 12 6
More than 3 sites 7 43 8
46 102 38
Base = No of respondents

3.4 LAN Performance

60% of those Specialist colleges with a network report that performance is slow at busy times, and a
further 6% report that slowness and unreliability are a frequent problem, with the remaining 34%
describing their network as working smoothly and without appreciable delay. There is far greater
tolerance of large files across the networks than in mainstream colleges. 23% of Specialist college report
that they are not a problem, while 45% who have networks that could cope, nonetheless discourage
traffic in large files. Only 32% of networks have problems with this type of usage. Mainstream colleges, by
contrast, continue to restrict network traffic in bandwidth hungry applications. Four out of every five FE
sector colleges in 2001/02 identified large files as an actual or potential source of problems on the
network, and hence look to control their use. This is only 4% fewer than the 84% who cited large files as a
problem in 1999, despite massive investment in network improvement since that date. The implication
could be drawn that existing network specifications within the specialist institutions are comparatively
better able to support the volume of traffic generated by their smaller student numbers than their
mainstream counterparts.

15
 18

16

14

12

10

0
Over stretched At capacity Spare capacity

Chart 3 Network capability to meet demand

Despite generally robust LAN specifications, 57% of Specialist college networks are currently at capacity,
whilst 13% are unable to meet even current demand. These data must be seen against a backcloth of
substantial future increases in demand upon networks. Not only must each college network support its
share of a general trend towards increasing numbers of machines, but it must also deal with the increased
reliance upon networked applications rather than stand-alone computers. In all of Becta’s ILT surveys we
have observed a motorway effect, comparable to that which sees traffic rapidly adjust upwards each time
an additional lane is opened. Additional computers, greater network capability and increased Internet
access within Specialist colleges is likely to unleash comparably greater demands upon an already
stretched network infrastructure. Only 9 colleges (30% of those with networks) consider that they are
able to meet any such additional demand.

3.5 Internet connectivity

44 Specialist colleges (88%) are connected to the Internet, though only 26 were able to report the
bandwidth they have, or plan to have, for the current year. Most colleges depend upon telephone line
based services, with BT the most prominent amongst the 24 named Internet Service Provider. Only 4
colleges have a 2Mbps permanent line connection equivalent to the JANET provision for FE sector
institutions. Any direct comparison between the sectors must take into account the influence upon
performance of the number of concurrent users sharing the bandwidth. The 2Mbps JANET connection is
likely to be distributed between many more users in FE than in Specialist colleges, with consequent
reduction in performance at any given machine. This notwithstanding, any further exploitation of the

16
learning potential of Internet-enabled services and benefit from future involvement in the National
Learning Network materials demands significant improvements in connectivity amongst Specialist
colleges, particularly at the lower end. Of particular concern must be those colleges still relying upon
modems and, equally worrying, the one in three colleges that have no Local Area Network to distribute
Internet traffic across machines.

Table 8 Total planned bandwidth

<64kb (modem) 3
64kb 2
128kb/ISDN 11
256kb/ADSL 2
512kb 4
2Mb 4
26
Base = No of respondents

Table 9 Internet service providers

BT 15
RM 4
Demon 3
JANET 3
Freeserve 2
Single providers 19
46
Base = No of respondents

3.6 Constraints on Internet use

Colleges were asked to rank a list of possible constraints on expansion of Internet use in the order of their
significance within the college. The results are shown in the Chart below. The number of access points
(i.e. internet-connected computers) is seen as the key constraint, despite the large influx of Internet-
capable machines into colleges, a picture repeated in FE generally. Access speed is less of an issue that
might be expected a priori, but the generally robust state of LANs in those colleges that have them, taken
together with the relatively small numbers of concurrent users suggest that they are capable of delivering
acceptable levels of performance with Internet traffic.
Course design, an increasingly important constraint for FE, where it ranks second, is placed fourth. This
may imply that Specialist colleges have as yet not addressed the issue of embedding e-learning into
curriculum activity to any great extent. Student skills, the fourth constraint for FE is placed second by
Specialist colleges, perhaps reflecting the particular needs of their client group. This interpretation is
reinforced by colleges who report the availability of staff for student support as a major additional
constraint upon increased use of the Internet.

17
 Access points

Student skills

Access speeds

Course design

No interest

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Chart 4 Constraints on increased use of the Internet

Of the other constraints upon increased use, cost is the only issue cited as important by a significant
number of colleges. Four colleges noted restrictions on access outside college hours, or in residences.
Inappropriate use was a factor raised by only two colleges, a striking contrast with the 11% of FE colleges
who have concerns about this.

3.7 Technical Support

Any expansion of the existing infrastructure demands adequate technical support. This is made more
pressing by the particular skillset required to support the comprehensive LANs essential to maintain
Internet access and networked applications.
Only 25 of the 50 colleges surveyed directly employ technical support staff. These colleges employ 41 full-
time and 11 part-time staff between them. 19 colleges use an outsourced service, sometimes in
combination with employed staff. The remaining colleges rely upon technical support provided by their
parent organisation, or by other college staff members. The chart below shows the breakdown of
technical support by college size. As might be expected, the larger colleges are more likely to employ
technical support staff, whereas the smallest colleges are most likely to utilise the broader skills of their
existing staff.
33 colleges (around two thirds) regard their technical support as “mostly adequate” or better.
Interestingly, whilst there is no statistically significant difference in the level of satisfaction reported
between the differing types of technical support (directly employed, outside agency, other college staff),
the raw data show a very slightly greater degree of satisfaction among those relying upon other members
of staff. This result may tell us more about who filled in the survey than about any real differences in the
quality of support. This notwithstanding, reliance upon the technical skills of those whose primary

18
 responsibility is teaching cannot be sustained with increased use of ILT in general and networked
applications in particular.

100%
90%
80%

70%
Others
60%
Other members of staff
50% Parent organisation
40% Outsourced
Employed
30%

20%
10%
0%
>82 students >42 students >21 students 21 students
and less

Chart 5 Technical support by college size

19
4 Access to Computers

4.1 IT and ILT Policy

Only two fifths of Specialist colleges have a written strategy policy on the use of ILT in teaching, learning
and communication. A similarly small number have a written strategy on the use of IT in administration.
The number with a written policy on acceptable use of the Internet is greater, with two-thirds of colleges
having such a policy. This figure is a matter of concern, nonetheless, given that all colleges offering
Internet access should have such a document. 12 colleges have all three policies in place, and a further 12
have none.

4.2 Access for staff

There was a high degree of agreement among respondents as to the ideal ratios of staff to computers for
each of the different types of staff. The table below shows the similarity of the mean and median values
of these data. These ratios indicate that computers are currently regarded as critical to college
administration, but somewhat less critical to the delivery of learning programmes. This might be expected
to change as colleges begin to build ILT more explicitly into the curriculum and into learner support.

Table 10 Ideal staff/computer ratios

Staff type Mean Median
Teaching/learner support staff 2.1 2
Student/personal support staff 4.3 4
Administration/institutional support staff 1.1 1
Base = No of respondents

The chart below shows the distribution between the different groups of staff of access to a designated
computer. It can be seen that all or most administration staff have access to their own computer in the
overwhelming majority of colleges. This degree of access for teaching and learner support staff exists in
only 8 colleges. Teaching staff are far more likely to share a computer; all or most teaching staff share
computers with other staff in 19 colleges, and with students in a further 21. This last figure is substantially
higher than in mainstream colleges, but may reflect a culture of closer relationships and more mutual
working between students and staff in the Specialist colleges rather than a second-best rationing process.

20
 45

40

35

30 Administration/institutional
support staff
25
Teaching/learning support staff
20
Student/personal support staff
15

10

0
all/most some/few none

Chart 6 Staff using own designated computer

In the majority of colleges all staff can access a computer to use, but there remain 3 colleges where
neither the teaching and learner support staff nor the student and personal support staff have any
computer access, nor is it seen as a priority. Only one college has achieved the situation where all
teaching staff have a computer for their sole personal use, and 33 do not regard this situation as a
priority.

4.3 Access for learners

We were able to calculate the ratio of students:computer for 39 colleges (78%). We used the colleges’
reported student numbers as a base, assuming that, as the sector is overwhelmingly residential, each
student is full-time.
The calculated ratios range from considerably less than 1:1 up to a maximum of 17:1. However, as the
Chart below shows, the majority were low ratios. 75% of respondents report 1:4 or less, producing a
median value of 1.7:1. This is significantly lower than the NLN target for mainstream colleges of 5:1,
which is now the norm in the typical FE institution. Three Specialist colleges reported values of 15, 16 and
17:1 respectively, but there was a substantial gap between these outliers and the next highest value of
8:1.
The better resourcing of Specialist colleges may be assumed to arise from the fundamental importance of
computers as a basic tool to enhance communication and to support learning and essential living needs
within many of the Specialist colleges.
Whilst the calculation of ratios is helpful to facilitate comparison with provision in the FE sector generally,
it is likely to be of far less use as a measure for setting any kind of sensible target. The size of Specialist
colleges, taken together with the close relationship between staff and students puts them in a position to
determine an appropriate level of computer resourcing to meet the educational needs of each learner,
taking account of their programmes of study and personal development and assistive technology
requirements. The estimation of an optimum computer stock, which larger colleges calculate as the

21
number of computers necessary to achieve the target ratio given planned student numbers, may be more
meaningfully achieved in Specialist colleges by simply adding up the actual requirements of individual
learners and learning groups. In this context, the LSC’s NLN target of 1 computer for every 5 f.t.e learners
is likely to be inappropriate both in terms of number and as a device.

1:1 and less

2:1

3:1

4:1

5:1 and more

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Chart 7 Student/computer ratios

4.4 Meeting student demand for computers

Given the relatively good levels of computer resource noted in the section above, it is no surprise to find
in the Chart below that around 60% of Specialist colleges report sufficient capacity to meet student
demand for computers. Only two thirds of Specialist colleges, however, report demand for ILT to be
widespread among students, compared with over 97% of mainstream colleges. There are several possible
explanations for such a striking difference from the norm amongst the remaining one third of Specialist
colleges, who report current demand as limited to particular courses or groups of students. One such
explanation may derive from the observation that many colleges have yet to embed ILT across the
curriculum. It may well be that the principal use of ILT is for teaching and learning of IT skills, as key skill or
as part of an accredited IT programme of study. Analysis of the use of ILT within specific programmes (see
below) provides some support for this view; only two thirds of the 41 colleges offering programmes
supporting independent living, for example, involve ILT. This is the biggest separately identified area of
curriculum offer amongst the colleges and the lowest rate of ILT involvement.

22
 35

30

25

20 little demand
limited demand
15 widespread demand

10

0
Difficulty Sufficient capacity More capacity

Chart 8 Student demand for computers

The table below shows that while access to computers is easy in close to 30% of colleges, the remainder
experience difficulties, students having to wait or queue in around half of Specialist colleges. Eight
colleges report much more limited access, with three describing access to a computer as very hard.
Students are entitled to computer access to enable them to complete work in fewer than half Specialist
colleges, while a further quarter of colleges report that students can expect access, but it could not be
described as an entitlement.

Table 11 Ease of computer access

Easy at any time 14
Wait or queue at busy times 25
Cannot rely on finding a computer 5
Very hard to find a computer 3
Base = No of respondents

Respondents reporting difficulty of access were asked to rate the importance of a number of possible
causes, giving a score from 1 (very important) to 5 (not a constraint). Though the three causes have
scores clustered in the middle of the scale, indicating a similarity of seriousness, lack of computers comes
out as most important. Clearly, however, access for students will not be eased by the addition of more
computers if the binding constraint remains staffing or lack of appropriate assistive technology. Looking at
the individual scores shows 12 colleges of the 32 who answered this question giving a rating of 1 to
computers, with only 4 citing staffing and 7 identifying assistive technology at this level of importance. If

23
we look at scores of either 1 or 2, then staffing emerges strongly as a significant constraint, with 17
colleges giving this ranking, compared with 18 for number of computers.

Table 12 Causes of difficulties

Not enough computers 2.5
Availability of staff 2.7
Availability of Assistive Technology 3.1
Base = No of respondents

4.5 Student demand for Internet access

A slightly smaller proportion of colleges regard student demand for the Internet as limited to particular
groups or courses, but more feel they have sufficient capacity to meet increased demand. This mirrors
the situation in mainstream colleges, where access to the Internet is relatively easy provided the student
has achieved the more difficult task of first finding a computer.

Those colleges reporting limited demand for access to the Internet are essentially the same as those
reporting limited demand for computers per se, suggesting a similar analysis for both observations.

30

25

20
little demand
15 limited demand
widespread demand
10

0
Difficulty Sufficient capacity More capacity

Chart 9 Student demand for Internet

24
Table 13 Student access to Internet
Can get access at any time 8
Must wait or reserve slot 14
Difficult outside lessons 11
Access is limited 8
No access 5
Base = No of respondents

The reported extent of queuing is evidence that computers are typically in use by students. Elsewhere in
education, increased investment in computer infrastructure has done little to shift queues, suggesting
that the motorway effect of releasing pent-up demand guarantees that new investment is soon put to
productive use. The reported one in three Specialist colleges who detect only a limited demand amongst
students, that can be met within existing stock, offer a different perspective on the needs of Specialist
colleges. It may suggest that the opportunities for effective use of ILT are disproportionately distributed
between colleges and student groups, so that some will benefit greatly from investment in infrastructure
and connectivity, whilst the needs of others lie elsewhere. An alternative explanation that the results
appear to support is that more needs to be done to make all colleges aware of the extraordinarily wide-
ranging possibilities of ILT, e learning and access to the Internet.

25
5 Uses of ILT

5.1 ILT and the curriculum

The responses to the survey’s questions about demand for ILT suggest that its use may be framed by a
college’s curriculum offer and student needs. The table below shows the numbers of Specialist colleges
offering particular types of learning programme alongside the numbers that make some use of ILT in the
delivery of these programmes. It shows that more than three quarters of colleges that offer Basic/key
skills, Vocational programmes, GCSE/A levels and Communication skills programmes make some use of ILT
in delivering these. Programmes supporting independent living skills, which are reported by the largest
number of colleges, have the lowest levels of ILT use. However, it should be noted that no measure of the
extent of ILT use was made here, and that programmes that make greater use of ILT may contain ICT as a
curriculum subject. Responses to other questions in the survey suggest that the extent of e-learning,
rather than IT skills, is almost certainly very low.

Table 14 ILT use by programme type

Programme type Deliver this Use ILT % to use ILT

Independent living 41 26 63%

Vocational 34 26 76%

GCSE and A levels 9 8 89%

Basic and Key skills 37 32 86%

Communication skills 40 31 78%

Other Programmes 26 17 65%

Base = No of respondents

5.2 Staff use of the LAN/Intranet

Only 33 of the 50 respondents report a LAN or intranet, but these colleges account for 85% of all enrolled
students. The survey asked respondents to distinguish whether particular applications were in use
(intermittent, occasional, small in scale) or whether they could be described as common practice within
the college.

Use by staff of the college LAN for email and Internet access is reported by all 33 respondents, though
only just over half of those with a LAN describe them as common practice: staff accessing the Internet is
described as common practice in 53% of colleges, whilst staff use of email is common in 59% of colleges.

Equally significant, though smaller in scale, is the use being made of networked applications to directly
support learning and teaching. 14 of the 26 who report using the LAN as a repository of course
documentation, describe it as common practice, with 9 out of 29 commonly using it for delivery of
learning materials. Not surprisingly in a community of small colleges with extensive student support, less
effort has gone into developing an online alternative to face-to-face advice and guidance.

26
 Access to the
Internet

Email

Providing Learning
Support Material In use
Providing course Common use
documentation

Providing guidance

Videoconferencing

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Chart 10 Staff use of the LAN/Intranet

5.3 Student use of the LAN/Intranet

Chart 10 shows student use of college LANs following a similar pattern to staff use, though typically
tracking behind staff in scale, most notably in the use of the LAN for email traffic. Internet access
remains the principal use, with 87% of respondents making use of the network for this purpose, with just
over half describing it as common practice. This is surprisingly low, given that information search on the
Internet is the most common form of e-learning activity and the entry point for early adopters in most
colleges.

Though the other activities are developing, the data suggests that students have yet to take full advantage
of the opportunities for use of the LAN or Intranet created by staff. An intriguing example arises in the use
of the LAN to access course documents. Whilst 26 colleges report that staff use or make common use of
the LAN for storage of documents, only 19 colleges believe that students currently access them and in
only 5 is this described as common practice. This may well accord with the observation that the need to
develop student skills in the use of the Internet applies more generally to browser-based skills, including
ease of use of the Intranet.

27
 Access to the
Internet

Obtaining Learning
Support Material

Email In use
Common use

Obtaining course
documentation

Obtaining guidance

Videoconferencing

0 10 20 30 40

Chart 11 Student use of the LAN/Intranet

5.4 Other Networked Activities

Virtual Learning Environments (VLE)

Given the size of the sector, it is surprising to discover that three colleges already have a VLE, including
one that is currently using, presumably trialling, 3 separate products. None of these is reported to be in
common use, leading to the inference that, as in mainstream colleges, the Intranet is likely to be the most
commonly used platform for delivery of networked learning materials.

Student Progress Tracking

Twenty two colleges report that they use some form of computer-mediated student tracking. Of these, 16
rely upon self-generated Excel spreadsheets rather than a bespoke tracking package. The survey did not
explore the scale or scope of tracking, but it must be inferred that, in the main, these systems are unlikely
to be comprehensive in either coverage of the student body or in breadth of information.

28
5.5 Uses of the Internet by staff

There were 44 respondents to this compared with 33 who have a LAN, indicating that a quarter of those
who access the Internet in specialist colleges do so via non-networked computers. Drilling down into the
data confirms the suspicion that these stand-alone connections are modem, or relatively low bandwidth
links.

Email

As an information
resource

Administration and
management In use
Common use
Market the college

Provide guidance
and support

To support
distance learning

0 10 20 30 40 50

Chart 12 Staff use of Internet

All respondents report staff use of the Internet for email. 27 report email as common practice within the
institution, 8 more than describe use of the LAN for this purpose as common. We can infer that these 8
colleges use an external email service for communications. These results, taken together with those for
LAN/ Intranet use, suggest that a significant number of colleges lack the infrastructure required for
extensive reliance upon electronic communications, both within the organisation and beyond it. The only
other major use of the Internet is as an information resource, where the use parallels that of email, with
27 colleges reporting common use for this purpose by staff. A dozen colleges have dipped their toes into
developing and supporting distance learning via the Internet, with one reporting it as common practice.
This must be regarded as an encouraging development and a potential source of shared experience for
the sector’s colleges.

29
5.6 Uses of the Internet by students

As an information
resource

Email

In use
Recreational use
Common use

Obtain guidance
and support

For distance
learning

0 10 20 30 40 50

Chart 13 Student use of the Internet

The development of Internet use by staff and its adoption by students demonstrates a similar pattern to
Intranet activity,with student use lagging behind staff. The Internet is used as an information source at 40
colleges, but commonly used at only 22. This level of use is significantly lower than in mainstream
colleges. This is a telling comment on the penetration of ILT / e-learning into this sector, particularly given
that information search and retrieval is not only a fundamental skill, but also is relatively easy to absorb
into conventional curriculum practice as a first step towards innovative and pedagogically effective
practice. 26 colleges described themselves as providing e-learning, which the survey defined as:
“….. the part of ILT that relates to the use of IT/ICT to facilitate teaching and learning in all its forms,
ranging from the use of whiteboards or data projectors in whole class work through guided group or
individual work assisted by a tutor to computer-based independent or remote learning”.
A further 6 have definite plans to provide e-learning, whilst a further 4 may introduce this type of learning
in the future. It is possible that at least some respondents took a narrower interpretation of this question
and may have focussed upon remote online learning in framing their response.

5.7 Email access

Relatively few staff, full-time or sessional, have a personal email address at college. An interesting finding
is that more residential students than staff have a personal email address. It may not be fanciful to infer
that college culture is lagging behind student culture in embracing the communication media of the

30
twenty-first century. Only 13 colleges rely wholly upon an internal email system, whilst a further 5
supplement internal provision with externally-based services. 22 rely wholly upon external email.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%
No email access
50% Shared email address
Personal email address
40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Perm. staff Sess. staff Res. Students Day students

Chart 14 Email access

31
6 Staff skills

6.1 Staff IT and ILT competence

Respondents were asked to estimate the proportion of each group of staff with low, medium or high
levels of skill (beginner, competent, advanced), both in their personal use of IT and in their use of ILT with
learners(where appropriate). Definitions within these broad classifications were left to the judgement of
respondents on grounds of practicality. The research team considered the identification of suitably
bounded criteria to be a daunting task, if not impossible within the timescale. More telling, however, was
the belief that while respondents’ assessments of the categories would not be identical, they would share
sufficiently similar common understandings of competency to enable comparison and judgements to be
drawn from the results. An average of the values estimated by each college was calculated for each major
category of staff, defined as:
1. teaching/learner support staff
2. student/personal support staff
3. administration/institutional support staff

The results are shown in the charts below.

6.2 Teaching/learner support staff

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Beginner Competent Advanced
IT skills 34 52 14
ILT skills 35 50 14

Chart 15 Skills of teaching/learner support staff

32
The picture for teaching and learner support staff shows a remarkable degree of transfer of IT skills to the
class room. This compares favourably with FE where teaching staff’s IT skills are at a similar level to the
teaching staff in Specialist Colleges, but only 48% are competent or advanced in ILT skills as opposed to
64% here. This could be a spin-off from the use of assistive technologies within Specialist colleges giving
teaching staff the experience of adapting to ILT and the confidence necessary to be comfortable with it.

It may be wise to interpret this assessment of skill levels as optimistic. The lack of a commonly agreed and
well understood set of definitions of ILT competencies, taken together with the uncertainty about what
constitutes good practice and effective pedagogy in e-learning may have led many respondents to
overstate the ILT skill level of staff. Estimates of skill levels are typically based upon a very small skillset,
often as limited as competence in word processing and in presentation software. The message that
emerges from the mainstream colleges, despite similarly rosy estimates of skill, is that this is not enough .
Most feel ever more urgently that a major staff development effort is necessary if the investment in
infrastructure is to be converted into better student learning experiences and outcomes.

6.3 Student/personal support staff

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Beginner Competent Advanced
IT skills 59 31 10
ILT skills 70 22 8

Chart 16 Skills of student/personal support staff

As might be expected, there is a lower level of skill among student/personal support staff. However it
should be noted that in cases where a high degree of assistive technology is used, the technical
competence of these staff will need to be higher. Colleges will need to make a judgement about the
particular skills required within this staff group in the context of the particular student needs that they
support.

33
6.4 Administration/institutional support staff

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3
IT skills 12 69 20

Chart 17 Skills of administration/institutional support staff

Colleges were asked solely about he personal IT skills of this group, given that they have no direct role in
the delivery of learning. Not surprisingly, IT competence is widespread amongst administrators given the
increasing reliance upon computers in the management of all colleges.

34
35
Appendix: Assistive Technology in the Specialist college sector

This information was requested by the Specialist colleges ILT sub-committee to inform future work. It ids
reproduced here without comment.

College Name Assistive Technologies employed

Arden College 2 touch screens
2 large letter keyboards
Various switches and other equipment currently on order
Beaumont College This is an example of regularly used equipment, we have more that is used for
assessment.

Specialist Pointing Devices-

Various Trackballs
Penngt & Giles Joystick Tracker
Unusual mice, gupmice, small mice and cordless mice
Specialist Keyboards-
Initailkeys
Big Keys
Wireless Keyboard (infrared)
Keyguard for standard keyboards

For Switch access We have a variety of switches such as

-grip switch
-necklace switch
-pressure switch
-chip switches
-jelly bean
-head switches
-electrostatic switch
-tilt switch
-pressure variable 4" switch

These switches interface via-

-Don Johnson switch box
-serial switch board
-Discover switch
-Joystick switch

We use height adjustable tables of the manual and eletrically operated type. We
also use fixed height tables at various appropriate heights to allow easy access.
Belford College none
Bridge College Intellitools
Switch technology
Clicker 3
voice output commuication aids
-liberator
-deltatalker
-alphatalker
-gotalk
Big Mack
Step-by-Step

36
 Planning to get: Magic, Writing with Symbols, Clicker 4
David Lewis Centre One step communications
Big Macs
WWS 2000
height tech/low tech aids ie pictoral timetables
A variety of interactive software
Soundbeam Sensory Room Switch access throughout all areas
Aopted keyboards/ rollerballs
Derby College for Deaf widgit
People kudos smartboard
basic skills CD
Derwen College Hardware:
microphone/headphones
soundbeam
digital cameras
digital videocameras
keyboards
trackerballs
touchscreens
switches
dycem mats

Software
scanning software
magnifiers
Voice regulator
Talking word programme
Word Prediction
Writing with Symbols
Boardmarker/Makaton
Graphic timetable

+ full range of educational and edutainment programmes, eg Wellington

square/CTAD Life Skills Explorer
Dilston College Of
Further Education
Doncaster College For We have very little assistive technology. We do have some large screens for
The Deaf students with poor eye sight
Dorton College Of JAWS - Screen reader and speech synthesiser SUPERNOVA - Combined screen
Further Education reader, speech synthesiser and magnification
MAGIC - Magnification
KURZWEIL 1000 - Scanner with screen reader and speech synthesiser
BRAILLE LITES - Electronic braille notetaker
E.S.P.A Colleges None
Fortune Centre Of
Riding Therapy
Green Laund Rollerball,
Big Keys keyboard and cover,
Scamel,

Henshaws Society For LUNAR - speech synthesis/magnification Switch access

37
The Blind - Harrogate BigKeys keyboards
Intellikeys
Concept Keyboards
Staff Enabling Support
Trackerballs Touchscreens
Hinwick Hall College Expanded Keyboards,
Of Further Education switch interfaces,
specialist switches,
touch screens,
specialist keyboard,
infra red interface,
voice synthesiser,
trackerballs,
trackerballs with latching switches,
dynovox,
dynomite,
liberator,
touch talker,
cameleon (Cabridget Adaptive Technology Makers), Alpha Talker,
Pathfinder.
Iver House Ltd No assistive technology is currently in use
Landmarks Widgits symbols software
Langdon College large keyboards
large monitors
keypads
tft screens
Linkage College - Concept Keyboards
Sampson Campus Widgit
Digi Cameras
Lufton Manor College None at present. Being reviewed as part of an overall ICT strategy for the college.
Nash College of Touch screens,
Further Education Switches,
Centre Concept keyboard,
Tracker balls,
Intelikeys keyboards,
Key guards,
On screen keyboardsa,
Symrite 2000,
Clicker 4,
Vocas
National Star Centre Keyboards with Keyguards
College of Further Trackerballs
Education USB Headmouse (Remote activation of cursor by movement of head or hand)
Mousekeys and other Microsoft assistive software. Onscreen Keyboards used
with cursor control or with switches using sequential access methods.
Joysticks
Oakwood Court
Portland College Communication Aids:
Pathfinder Delta Talker
Liberator
Dyna Myte
Dyna Vox

38
 Cameleon
Cameleon 3
Queen Alexandra Speech Output:
College For The Blind Kurzweil flatbed scanner
Robotron flatbed scanner
Franklin talking dictionary
Talking calculator
Talking microwave
Talking scientific calculator
Parrot Plus organiser
Micrometer with speech synthesis
Electronic speaking scales
Talking tape measure
Jaws screen reader
Keystone (to be used with Dragondictate)
Lookout screen reader
PW webspeak
Texthelp screen reader
Vocaleyes screen reader

Tactile Media:
Perkins brailler
Mountbatten electronic brailler
Eureka
Aria
Jotta
Minolta stereo copying unit
Duxbury braille translation system
Keynote companions
Nomad tactile reader
Refreshable braille display
Braille master
Braille maker
Winbraille
Windots
Picture braille
RNIB Transcript

Enlargement:
Supernova
Zoomtext
Magic
Lunar
CCTV Mono
CCTV Colour
Portable CCTV
Magnalink CCTV
Split screen CCTV
TFT Monitors 15”
Monitors 15-21”
Visualex

Miscellaneous:

39
 Portable computer
Keyboard stickers
Memoscriber
Pocket memo
Braille dymo labeller
Fluorescent lamp
APH Four track recorder
Splitter lead
Interactive White Board
Kidglove

Input Devices:
Ergonomic mouse
Big Ball trackball
Kensington trackball
PS/2 scroll mouse
Intellikeys Keyboard
Big Keys keyboard
Keyguards
Genius trackball
ANIR vertical mouse
Natural ergonomic keyboard
Dragon Dictate

Hearing Impaired Assistive Technology

Audio Loop
Portable Audio loop
Plantronics headset with induction loop
Fire alarm transmitters
Binaural headset
Neck loop and microphone amplifier
Minicom
BSL CD-ROM
Picture Tel video conferencing

Physical Impairment Assistive Technology

Ergo armrest
Adjustable workstations
Adjustable electronic chairs

Other Software:
Writing with Symbols
My World
Dragon Dictate
Touch type Read and Spell
Birmingham University Specialist Touch typing tutor
Predictive Word processor
Word Work

Queen Elizabeth's Software:

Foundation Brain Accibilty in Microsoft,
Injury Centre Clicker plus,
Dragon Dictate,

40
 Inspiration,
Keystone screen reader,
textHELP!,
Togglernoise,

Hardware:
mouse wrist rest,
wrist rest,
mini keyboard and guard,
trackball,
joystick trackball,
ABC big keys keyboard
RNIB Condover Hall touch screen jelly switches
F.E. Centre
RNIB New College
Worcester
RNIB Vocational Jaws Speech Screen Reader
College Loughborough Lunar Plus - Magnification and limited speech screen reader
SuperNova - Magnification & Screen Reader
Zoom Text - Magnification & Screen Reader
Electronic braille lines
Royal National College HARDWARE
For The Blind CCTVs –
b/w & colour Document readers –
Rainbow/Galileo Talking book players –
RNIB Desktop tape players –
Sanyo TRC8080 Hand held tape recorders –
Sanyo TRC850 Digital recorders
Splitter boxes

Electronic Braille writers –

Mountbatten Brailler Referable Braille displays –
Braillex 2D/PowerBraille Speech output Braille input note takers –
BrailleNote/Braille 'n Speak/BraillePad Speech/Braille output Braille input note
takers –
BrailleLite/BrailleNote Speech output

QWERTY input note takers –

TransType QWERTY note takers –
Alphasmart/Dreamwriter
Laptop computers
Desktop computers
Printers
Thiel/Index Talking calculators –
Cobolt Large print calculators –
Cobolt Graphical talking tablet
Voice recognition organisers –
Voicemate/Voice Diary
Talking teletext
Task lighting
Talking microwaves
Talking weighing scales
Liquid indicators

41
 Talking watches/clocks/timers
Specialised keyboards –
Meltron Talking telephone switchboard
Audio/video tape copier Hearing Loop system
Audio announcement pla
Royal School for the touch screens
Deaf concept keyboard
single switches and switching system
digital camera
video minicom
tracker balls
video projector
fax
Royal West of England none
School for the Deaf
Ruskin Mill Further Ed Not applicable
Unit
St Elizabeth's Centre Trackerballs and specialist mice.
St Piers Touch Screen Monitors * 6
Big Switch * 4
Strathmore
The Interact Centre none
Thornbeck College Digital Cameras
Scanners
Internet Editing suite
Video Cameras
Computers
Laser printer
Treloar College Specialist joysticks, trackerballs
Purpose built joysticks, trackerballs
Head/chin/foot/mouth switches
Head/mouth sticks
Infra red pointing devices
Clicker
Cowriter
Zoomtext
Penfriend
EZ keys
Dragon dictate
Widgit
Writing with symbols
Adapted keyboards
Keyguards
Screen doors
Screen reader
Prophet
Windows accessibility options
Wivik
Touch pads
Ergonomic mice
Keyboard stickers
Wrist rests

42
 Touch monitors
Desk extensions
Keyboard slopes
West of England BRAILLE KEYBOARDS
School (for Children CLOSE CURCUIT TV
with Little or No Sight) SCREEN REALITY SOFTWARE
BRAILLE MONITORS
SPECIALISED KEYBOARDS
TEXT IN BRAILLE
TRANSLATION SOFTWARE
SPECAIL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE
DIGITAL CAMERAS
SCANNERS (OCR etc)

43