next »

[Forums Moderator]

A former Capella University student has filed a lawsuit against the online institution, asserting that it violated the Americans With Disabilities Act by using technology that does not accommodate his learning disabilities. What can distance-education providers do to make technology accessible to students with disabilities, including less-obvious ones like dyslexia and attention-deficit disorder? When assistive tools are not available, what allowances should institutions make for learning-disabled students? Read more...

[Zarkov]

About the online software, WebCT, eCollege, Blackboard, and even Outlook Express all can deliver online content and provide the vehicle for online discussion.  It was not at all clear -- from the article -- what problem the student had with WebCT, and I would doubt it was anything unique about WebCT.  (Yes, I've used them all.)

The other issue is the student being inappropriate in online discussions.  The school was correct to withdraw him from the course.  It sounds to me that he was making WebCT the scapegoat for his problems in online learning.

[Wendy]

Unfortunately, many disabled students use the normal classroom requirements as an excuse for failing. It is amazing how many of these claims suddenly evaporate if a tuition refund is approved.

[Beverly]

Actually I see two seperate issues, accessibility of technology, especially for on-line courses and students with disabilities enrolled in higher education. Most universities and colleges have a procedure in place for identifying, registering and supporting students with disabilities based on ADA requirements. My first question regarding this incidence is was the student registered as a student with a learning disability with the college. (A sidebar issue is do on-line universities have disability services offices/procedure in place for persons with documented disabilities?). If he was registered then they should have outlined his necessary accommodations and would be held responsible for meeting them - not necessarily changing programs but time adjustments would have worked. If there was a stated disruption and behavior policy (should be printed on each syllabus) then he knew what behaviors he had to conform to, his LD wouldn't have anything to do with this.  As for accessiblity of on-line courses, software designers have not been as quick to integrate this technology into their designs as they could be. But then schools aren't as quick to insist that any software, or technology, purchases have to be accessible.

[%sig%]

[ITC]

Most students with dyslexia in higher education normally work more slowly than their peers on the same course of study, this is due to a problem with phonological processing. The following are some indicators and dyslexia might be described using a “cluster” of these descriptors rather than one in isolation such as poor reading skills:
· poor spelling
· difficulties in comprehension of complex written material
· slower writing speed.
· short term memory problems,
Because students with dyslexia have problems comprehending written material and cannot work through as much reading as other students ways of reducing this burden need to be utilized. Perhaps certain chapters or sections of the e-lectures, containing the main arguments, can be recommended. Techniques such as the SQ3R (Survey, Question, 3 (Read, Recall, Review) method of reading could be brought to students' attention. For example the main texts should be highlighted.
Obviously, dyslexic students are assessed in the same way as other students; they sit examinations and hand in assignments. WebCT is an excellent e-learning platform but perhaps not the best one for students with short-term memory problems. We may be given certain adaptations to the assessment situation buy these adaptations for these students and are not intended to give an advantage.

[Ellen Nuffer, Keene State Coll]

There is a movement among many of us in higher ed to adopt the principles of Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) for use in designing our curricula and choosing our pedagogical approaches, online or not.  (*Background below)  In so doing, we believe that we are creating a better learning environment for all of our students, whether they may have a documented disability or not.  It has also has caused many of us to re-think such issues as how we approach extra time for tests (permissible for only some students or for any student who believes that s/he needs it?), or whether we require specific types of assignments (all students must do an oral presentation or may students choose from an array of presentation possibilities?).  It is my belief that a fundamental shift in thinking about what it is that we want students to learn (as opposed to what content we want to teach) will help all students, those with learning disabilities, sensory impairments, subject specific anxieties, etc to get more from their academic experiences.

*(Background) The University of Connecticut http://www.cped.uconn.edu/ (Dr Sally Scott and Dr Joan McGuire) has a multi year federal grant to research Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) in higher education.  Keene State College has been a participant in this grant and has taken the approach of engaging a group of faculty in a learning community (both face to face as well as online) to explore the applications and challenges of the principles.  This learning community (directed by Dr Steven Bigaj and facilitated by Dr Ellen Nuffer, Dr Mary Ellen Fortini, and Ms. Jane Warner) has examined such principles as #2) flexibility in use – design materials and strategies to accommodate a wide range of abilities by offering choice in methods or approaches, and #5) tolerance for error – design materials and approaches in such a way that anticipates that students may have a range of background skill and pace of learning.

[Barbara]

Ellen Nuffer, Keene State Coll wrote:

>  It is my belief that a fundamental shift in
> thinking about what it is that we want students to learn (as
> opposed to what content we want to teach)


Huh? This is complete nonsense and an utterly illogical statement.

If we are to believe ellen, then there are actually people out there who

1. take the time and effort to prepare a lecture
2. make an effort to show up for class
3. actually stand up in front of a class and teach that material
4. have absolutely no interest in knowing whether anybody got anything out of the lecture.

This is just more crap about "pedagogical techniques" that is oh so pervasive in the primary and secondary school system. And we all know how successful THAT'S been...

[%sig%]

[Sandys]

I have grown so tired of students complaining of "disabilities" when they just aren't good at something. Universities have become far too lenient on people who don't belong in college. I wish I could have complained about my "disability" when my old stats prof made us learn SPSS...on DOS. College isn't meant for everyone. If you can't complete the assignments, you don't belong there. In addition, on-line diploma mills offering "degrees" are jokes.

[Capella Rocks]

Go to the following link to see the OCR findings of fact in this case:

http://forums.degreeboard.com/showthread.php?t=5708

These findings of fact are available through the OCR by making a Freedom of Information Act Request.

[Ed]

I am tired of all the nonsense about disabilities, too. If you can't complete the work, then that's too bad. I write long tests. No one ever finishes them. That's by design. I want students to answer the questions they are good at, and I want to see how well they handle a variety of question types and topics. I also want them to learn how to demonstrate their knowledge.

I am 5'9" and 160 lb. I am not going to be a football player. Is this a disability? No. It's life.

While I can appreciate you have dyslexia, you are not safe in a chemistry laboratory if you cannot read the formulae correctly. You probably should not work with chemicals. Is this a disability? Sure, but no one wants to state the obvious: go do something you are good at.

I don't think the ADA was envisioned to give everyone a crutch for every conceivable need. I think it was intended to make sure that people with wheelchairs could go to city council meetings or public libraries or churches. So that people who are deaf could know what their elected officials are saying as they say it. So that people who are blind would be able to find their way in a department store elevator or be able to know when to cross the street. These are basic life functions or fundamental rights most Americans take for granted. Getting extra time on one of my tests is not a fundamental right.

Somethings lead to occupations where time is not essential or where some disabilities do not get in the way. Do you want a civil engineer with dyslexia reading blueprints who got a whole bunch of breaks in college? If he has learned to overcome the disability, fine. Do you want a nurse with dyslexia choosing the vial to give you an injection? Do you want a pharmacist with dyslexia filling your prescription? Do you want a chemist with dyslexia analyzing your drinking water? I don't if they couldn't meet the same rigorous requirements that everyone else had to.

What about a lawyer who needs extra time to review the prosecution's closing arguments? Do you want him defending you?

Reasonable accommodations end where work quality, safety, and public welfare begin.

There are plenty of jobs that don't require these types of rigor, and many online courses offer unlimited time or other accomodations. You can make the font size bigger, you can print them out, you refer to them again and again. They often allow multiple and stepped testing situations, etc. Is there really a need for further accommodations?

[walt 235]

Reasonable accomodation!!! Not insane accomodation! The ADA is a public nightmare! The only ones coming out ahead on it is shyster lawyers!

[serious?]

This discussion has me worried.  What's next?  Do we just give out diplomas?  As some have stated, not all of us are college material.  What is it with this mindset that everyone can be successful at everything?

Plus, it seems logical that a student would not put himself in the position to struggle.  Why take an online course when you know you have trouble and that trouble is documented?  The modifications should be in the form of holding students responsible for their own decisions.    Perhaps the university should be required to offer in-person sections of the same online courses.    University campuses are turning into nusery schools wah, wah! When's nap time...?

[JT]

Could someone please enlighten me about the difference between:

1.  This person  is bright, and can do the work, but has certain learning disabilities.

2.  This person is not bright and therefore is not college material.


I am not belittling the distinction here.  I am rather interested in fundamental criteria for the distinction.   Unless we are  clear about the difference, how can selective colleges justify their admissions-rejections decisions?

[Oran, Instructor, AIU]

Perhaps there are some other ways of looking at this. Capella is but one of several for-profit institutions of higher education. Colleges of that ilk could actually market their specific accomodations to certain disabled students, in the same sense as GM builds and markets smaller cars for people who want to save money on gas. Acme University could design and advertise the extra strides it has made in making its courses more accessible to the visually impaired, for example. And Beta College could do likewise for hearing impaired students. Now if a hearing impaired student paid his/her money to Beta College, but eventually discovered that Beta did not really offer any special benefits at all, then a lawsuit might make more sense, or at least complaints about false advertising.

In my own case, I happened to be born legally blind, but in public schools and all the way thru the doctorate, I was like most people with special needs, who tried to find ways to help ourselves. But that's a different generation.

[%sig%]

[Big State School]

I would add to JT's list:
This person is bright, but not yet mature enough for college.