In my role as an APC assessor, I have found there are many common errors that are made when submitting a report for a submission for APC, when marked against the marking criteria.
The second common error is around confidentiality. The issue of confidentiality is marking criterion 1 where it states:
Confidentiality is maintained throughout the report.
- It is essential that you add the word ‘confidential’ to your report title so it reads ‘Confidential Diagnostic Assessment Report.’
- When writing your report, if, during your background collation, a family member is reported as having dyslexia/ medical difficulties/ learning difficulties etc., do not mention them by name in the report. Instead, write a more general comment to the effect that ‘close family members/ wider family members report a difficulty with reading…’
- Please note: It is essential that all parties providing background information prior to the assessment are made aware that the information provided may be used in the report with their permission. If there is material they do not wish to appear in the report, they have the right to indicate this (page 5);
- Do not include actual examples from the tests, e.g. specific timings or references to specific test items, such as a real example from the WRIT, errors when reading and spellings. Instead, put in type of word errors, e.g. “errors were made with reading /ch/ at the start of a word.” This also includes appendix 4, page 13 where it states: ‘Disclosing sensitive details of the test (e.g. items, timing) should be avoided.’
- When submitting your APC for review, remove all names, including school, any identifying areas that could trace back to the student. However, please leave the date of birth and date of assessment on so the assessor can check the chronological age and, in turn, check the scoring.
In this way, you have demonstrated confidentiality, which is marking criterion 1 in the APC Review Proforma that all SpLD APC awarding bodies are using when reviewing an APC (The Dyslexia Guild, BDA and PATOSS).
Part 3 of this series reports on relating performance to a level descriptor.
