<<< CONTENTS>>>
- INTRODUCTION: PRIORITY REGISTRATION HAS
TOP PRIORITY
- PRIORITY REGISTRATION: Reasonable?
Responsive? Required?
- ...AND JUSTICE FOR ALL! If One
Disabled Student is Entitled, Aren't They All?
- WHEN DOES A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
BECOME UNREASONABLE???
- VISIT THE DAIS HOMEPAGE AND FIND...
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
<<< PRIORITY REGISTRATION HAS
TOP PRIORITY >>>
A recent thread on the DSSHE-L listserv has troubled me on
a number of levels. The initial discussion had to do with the issue of granting
priority registration privileges for students with disabilities and asked
(paraphrase):
"How do you discern whether or not students registered with
your office are to be allowed priority registration? I can see where students
in wheelchairs or those who have cognitive/learning disabilities would need
priority registration to get those professors that would be amenable to their
situations. I can also see where students need certain schedules because of
treatment schedules (e.g., for dialysis). But if you allow all THESE students
to have priority registration, shouldn't you allow ALL students with disabilities
to have priority registration? Are there any campuses out there that do NOT
do this?"
After several days of coming back to look at this post again,
I finally realized that the reason it concerned me was not because of what
it said/asked, but because of the underlying issues potentially raised in
exploring the practice of priority registration as an accommodation. Three
separate threads come to mind: (a) (PRACTICE) Is priority registration a required
accommodation under the law and is it reasonable? (b) (LEGALITY) If you make
an accommodation for one student with a disability, must it be given to all
students with disabilities? and (c) (PHILOSOPHY) When does a reasonable accommodation
become unreasonable? This issue of the DAIS Newsletter will speak to all three
of these issues.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
<<< PRIORITY REGISTRATION:
Reasonable? Responsive? Required? >>>
The discussion of priority registration as an accommodation
came at an opportune time. In the past month, I have been asked twice about
this practice. Is priority registration a reasonable accommodation? Is it
required by law? Where does it say that?
Priority registration CAN be a reasonable accommodation for
students with disabilities and has long been acknowledged as such. Remember,
the purpose of accommodation is to facilitate equal access to educational
opportunity. ANY accommodation is nothing more than a means directed to that
end.
Priority registration can serve that purpose.
In response to the question asked on the listserv, a number
of individuals detailed the policies they have established regarding the granting
of priority registration to students with disabilities. Two of the most well
defined examples have been posted (with the authors' permission) to the DAIS
website at http://www.janejarrow.com/study. Most individuals granted priority
registration to some students with disabilities based on specific criteria/need.
Others made a good case for granting priority registration to all students
with disabilities because they felt that NEED could be established (albeit
for different reasons) for all students with disabilities on their campus,
largely due to unique issues of classroom accessibility, small staffing, limited
course offerings, and so on. People talked about providing priority registration
for students in wheelchairs when the campus is very spread out and covering
distance would be a problem unless you could plan your class schedule carefully.
There was discussion of the needs of students with medication or treatment
schedules that might influence when they were available (and functional) for
classes. Some spoke of the need of students with learning disabilities to
be able to balance their course load each semester so that they are not taking
too many classes that hinge on the areas/abilities most effected by their
disability. All of these and more are, in my mind, legitimate reasons for
providing priority registration as a means of assuring equal access to the
chance to perform appropriately during a given semester.
Other respondents spoke of the need for advance notice to provide
alternate media, move classes to accessible locations, schedule interpreters,
or recruit notetakers or lab assistants. These, too, are good reasons for
providing the student with priority registration. I have to question, however,
whether the priority registration is being provided to THESE students as an
accommodation in response to the need of the student or as a convenience to
the institution in meeting its responsibility to students. The blind student
has NEED for materials in alternate media. The institution has a RESPONSIBILITY
to provide that alternate media. It makes it easier for the institution to
do its job in a timely (and legally compliant!) manner if the student registers
early. I think that over the years we have allowed ourselves to confuse student
needs with our needs. As a result, the outside world often looks askance at
the number of students with disabilities receiving priority registration,
believing that if so many students are participating in the process they must
somehow be taking advantage of the system. While it MAY be possible to take
advantage of the system (see the article below entitled "When Does a Reasonable
Accommodation Become Unreasonable?"), the idea of priority registration is
sound and the mechanism it provides to reach that elusive goal of equal access
is legitimate.
Is priority registration reasonable? It does not pose a direct
threat to health or safety. It does not require a substantial change in an
essential curricular requirement or in the functioning of the institution.
It is not an undue financial burden (it is one of the few accommodations I
can think of that is, essentially, free!), and it isn't an administrative
burden. Yes, I think it is reasonable.
Is priority registration required by law? Specifically? No.
There is nothing within Section 504 or the ADA that mentions priority registration
as an accommodation. As noted above, however, priority registration may be
an effective way of providing the access that IS required by law. If the institution
can assure all necessary access without providing priority registration, then
it is not required. But it is an expedient and cost-effective way of working
to achieve that access and it is in common use at campuses across the country.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
<<< ...AND JUSTICE FOR
ALL! If One Disabled Student is Entitled, Aren't They All? >>>
In the original post under discussion, the questioner acknowledged
the need for priority registration for students with a variety of disabilities
and then asked, "But if you allow all THESE students to have priority registration,
shouldn't you allow ALL students with disabilities to have priority registration?"
I have a question in response. WHY? Why would you give an accommodation
to all students with disabilities on the basis of their status as students
with disabilities, instead of on the basis of need? Somewhere along the line,
have we lost sight of the reason we give accommodations? We give accommodations
in order to provide (as much as possible) equal access to educational opportunities.
It doesn't matter whether the accommodation is the provision of a sign language
interpreter, the assistance of a scribe, or the granting of priority registration.
We SHOULD NOT be providing accommodation because of a label ("disabled") but
because of an established need.
In reality, my guess is that everyone functions on this basis
most of the time, at least on a gut-level. We do not provide sign language
interpreters to blind students, or Braille to students with learning disabilities.
Why not? Because they have no need for these accommodations. Then why was
the question raised for this accommodation? I can see two possibilities, one
of which is potentially dangerous to our "cause" and one of which stems from
a common misperception about the law.
It is possible that some service providers grant priority registration
as a blanket accommodation for all students with disabilities because, without
realizing it consciously, they (along with some faculty and administrators)
see the ability to register early as a privilege made availabl e as a "freebie"
from the institution for students with disabilities. If this is a little added
something, thrown in by the institution to make life a little easier for students
with disabilities, then why get involvedwith discussions of "need" or "eligibility."
If students are being served through the DSS office, let's give 'em all a
break!
WARNING. WARNING. WARNING. Giving them a break is NOT the intent
of providing accommodations to students. It is NOT the mission of the disability
services component on campus. And those who engage in the practice run the
risk of undermining everything they say to faculty in other contexts. We work
so hard to make it clear that these are "otherwise qualified students with
disabilities" who meet all the same requirements and are held to all the same
(albeit sometimes modified) rules and standards. Don't throw it all away by
giving out accommodations based on a label instead of based on an established
need. There are circumstances (as discussed in the article above) in which
institutional policy may be that ALL students with disabilities will receive
priority registration. I am not arguing against the practice, only against
the granting of privilege based on label v. accommodation based on need.
Having spoken with the person who made the original post, I
think her question actually stemmed from a misunderstanding, rather than from
a lapse in rigorous enforcement of need-based accommodation. The ADA tells
us that institutions are prohibited from imposing or applying eligibility
criteria that screen out, or tend to screen out, an individual with a disability
or any class of individuals with disabilities on the basis of that disability.
What does that mean?
It means that you may NOT say, "People with disabilities need
not apply." You may NOT say, "Blind students are not allowed to participate
in this activity." It even means that you may NOT say, "All potential nursing
students will be required to demonstrate that they can climb a flight of stairs."
Climbing stairs is not a nursing task. Never has been and never will be. There
may be certain nursing jobs that require the ability to climb stairs because
of the setting. But climbing stairs is not a requirement for training as a
nurse and you cannot make entry into the program contingent on a criteria
that would, presumably, screen out people with certain disabilities (e.g.,
wheelchair users) because of their disability.
Somewhere along the line, however, we seem to have slipped into
thinking that this legal prohibition also means that you may not make things
available to individuals with disabilities, or groups of individuals with
disabilities, without making them available to ALL persons with disabilities.
In other words, in the example at hand, would it be illegal to say, "Students
with learning disabilities or students in wheelchairs will be granted priority
registration, but students with psychological disabilities will not?" Isn't
that screening out some individuals on the basis of their disability?
If priority registration is being granted to students in wheelchairs
or with learning disabilities because they are DISABLED, then the answer may
be "yes -- that's discriminatory. The person with a psych disability is equally
eligible." BUT... if priority registration is granted to students in chairs
or with learning disabilities because they have NEED for that accommodation
in order to have equal access, then there is no conflict.
Remember, "persons with disabilities" is not a homogenous group
in terms of need for protection in the same way that other federally-protected
classes may be. Women everywhere need protection in the same way against sexual
harassment, the effects of the "glass ceiling" in employment, and so on. Minority
individuals, whether African American or Hispanic or Native American, all
want the same protection from discrimination. But people with disabilities
need different things to GET the same protection. And if WE forget that, so
will everyone else!
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
<<< WHEN DOES A REASONABLE
ACCOMMODATION BECOME UNREASONABLE??? >>>
I have had some heated arguments in the past with individuals
who suggest that one can withdraw accommodations from a student with a disability
if he/she is "abusing the privilege" (e.g., a student caught cheating while
taking a test with extended time in a separate location). I am fond of saying,
"Accommodations are not a privilege, they are a right, and you cannot abuse
the right." I still believe that. But (you knew there was a "but" in there
someplace!)...while the student cannot jeopardize his/her right to access,
I am not so sure that service providers cannot be guilty of abusing an accommodation!
Back to the issue of priority registration. The discussion of
when it is and isn't granted sometimes included references to using the system
to assign students to the best instructors in order to give the student with
a disability a better chance to be successful. I think that is a misuse of
the accommodation. We hope all students (disabled or otherwise) will be successful,
but nondisabled students don't have an opportunity to maximize their chances
by hand-picking their faculty. They get the luck of the draw. I think students
with disabilities should have the same level of access to a chance to get
a truly outstanding (or truly awful?) teacher.
(NOTE: Sometimes we use priority registration as a means of
avoiding having students end up in courses with faculty members whom (through
past history) we KNOW are obstructive, we KNOW will be difficult to work with,
and/or we KNOW have been guilty of less-than-model interactions with students
with disabilities. I have less problem with the idea of using priority registration
to avoid a BAD experience than in using it to try to assure a GOOD experience.
Who are we really helping here? The student benefits from not having to fight
every step of the way, but the service provider and the institution are MOST
helped by not creating a potentially litigious situation!)
A more egregious misuse of the priority registration system,
however, may occur when students who are legitimately entitled to the priority
registration because of their disability-related needs use it to as a means
to get the classes they need -- AND as a means to get the classes they want
-- the most fun classes, the best times, the most difficult-to-get-into opportunities.
It isn't a big issue. But it isn't fair. It isn't what was intended by the
accommodation. AND IT COULDN'T HAPPEN IF WE DIDN'T LET IT!!! I think that
granting access to priority registration should entail more than just handing
students a piece of paper that allows them to turn in their requests early.
It should entail working with them to determine the best schedule of classes,
overseeing the process. If it is being used frivolously then it is NOT being
used as an accommodation but as a privilege, and SHOULD be withdrawn.
I recently heard a more alarming example of accommodations-run-amuck.
There has been a lot of talk on the listserv lately about the issue of granting
extension on the absence policy for students with disability-related needs.
There may be times when a student with a disability has VERY legitimate reasons
for requesting that they be allowed to miss additional classes without penalty.
And there may be classes in which that accommodation IS reasonable (in a lecture
course, yes; in a lab course or a practicum experience, probably not). But
even if the request is legitimate from the student's side and reasonable in
the context of the course/curriculum, there need to be limits.
I visited a campus recently where one faculty member complained
that the accommodation letter he received indicated that the student had a
disability-related need to miss classes and that absences should not be counted
against her. This student had missed 18 classes over the course of a 16 week
semester!!! When does a reasonable accommodation become unreasonable? When
it is granted without appropriate parameters being established and takes on
a life of its own as somehow supplying "preferred status" for the student.
As a service provider, it is easy to fall into the trap of
assigning accommodations that are easy to implement without thinking through
the consequences that may arise. Priority registration and extended absences
are two classic examples of this pitfall. Neither costs money, both can be
assigned to any one at any time by the services provider, and the "work" of
implementing the accommodation falls to someone else. One less thing on your
plate?
Perhaps this article should have been introduced as a cautionary
tale for disability service providers. The early bird catches the worm. He
can also catch a lot of grief if he is eating more than his share. In the
case of academia, absence does NOT make the heart grow fonder. THINK about
how the accommodations you assign for students will be used and implemented
(by the student/staff/faculty) and make sure that you have done everything
you can to make sure that an accommodation given to provide equal access is
used for that purpose -- and not for something else!
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
<<< VISIT THE DAIS
HOME PAGE AND FIND >>>
NEW!!! A SECOND ONLINE EDUCATION ACTIVITY FROM DAIS!
* It had been my intention to provide information about the
second online course from DAIS as part of this newsletter. The course is entitled
"Developing Written Policies and Procedures: Guiding the Implementation of
a Support Program for Students with Disabilities at YOUR Institution." It
is due to begin the week of April 26. Rather than go into detail regarding
this offering now, I will send out a separate mailing to subscribers to the
DAIS Newsletter on Friday of this week with specifics of information. BUT...
if you don't want to wait, go to http://www.janejarrow.com/homeoffice/index/html
and take a look at the information posted there!
* This months offering in the Administrators' Corner is an
article from the March, 1998 edition of the newsletter entitled, "How Important
Are Rules? (http://www.janejarrow.com/dinroom).
* This month's offering in the Faculty Corner is an article
from the April, 1998 edition of the newsletter entitled, "It's That Time of
Year Again: Writing Recommendation Letters for Students with Disabilties"
(http://www.janejarrow.com/dinroom).
DON'T FORGET TO CHECK OUT the newest resource from DAIS, the
Locked Files. Visit the DAIS website at http://www.janejarrow.com/homeoffice/index.html
and find out how you can subscribe to the DAIS website and receive the benefits
available at a bargain price!
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
