Hello all

I sense a link between the comments made by Mike and those who seem in
broad agreement with him and those of Ozcan, whose observations need
public restatement if potential and actual students are not to
be misled.  For several years we have followed a policy that any
text produced by the University will be made available free to students
in a format they find accessible.  We will not do the same for every
book in our library or every book potentially relevant to a course that
rests in book shops.  If students bring us a text, we will convert it
and charge for the time it takes.  More to the point, the equipment
component of the DSA will be directed at enabling students to perform
this task for themselves.  Understandably, many people soon get bored
of the tedious task of scanning page after page, finding something
boring is not the same as finding it inaccessible.

I see nothing in the SENDA legislation to suggest that universities are
expected to take on a huge resource burden that is not applied to, for
example, public libraries or book shops, both of which have been
supplying goods and services under the DDA for some time.  I do not
think it is helpful for various organisations and their representatives
to tell students that if they approach me, I must give them what they
want, when they want it, and for nothing.  This casts me personally in
the role of someone who is denying basic rights to people with
disabilities in an illegal manner.  Nothing could be further from
reality because such rights to not in practice exist nor do I find
evidence that it is intended they will exist in the near future.  This
may be thought a generally bad thing, but it is not my fault nor the
fault of any university.

I was depressed to here prophesies of retribution for this kind of
heresy throughout the recent SENDA conference in London.  I think
people acting as advocates have some obligation to consider what courts
are likely to find, not what they could possibly find.  The evidence
from DDA and other legislation concerned with discrimination is that
they are likely to take a far more conservative view than that
suggested by a number of communications I have had recently.  For
example, to move from Braille to a yet more resource-intensive area,
over the course of the summer I had enquiries from at least two
profoundly deaf prospective students who each assured me that I had to
supply each of them with grade 3 communicators and note-takers, employ
a deaf counselor and provide transcripts of any audio material that
should prove relevant to their study.  (The University was to fund
this support independently of the DSA, which was for 'personal'
needs.)  They had each been independently assured by staff in their
colleges that I was legally bound to provide these things.  In turn,
the people who advised them claimed that the RNID had assured them that
this was the situation (a claim I doubted, incidentally).  A number of
people, no doubt for the best of motives, present recent legislation
and recommendations in a way that confuses what is desirable with what
is compulsory.  The end result is I have circular and unproductive
discussions with those I want to help.

Ah well, as they say in the classiest of comics, 'Flame on'.

Regards, Bernard


On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 22:43:14 +0100 Peter Hill
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Mike Higgins wrote:
>
> > As a Braille user I think it is entirely reasonable to expect in this day
> > and age that a major institution can put everything I need to study for my
> > course into a format of my preference.  Basically, I think Disabled Students
> > aught to be in no less favourable a position than their non-disabled peers.
>
> > snip...
>
> The original question asked about core materials for a PhD student.  Brailling
> those could be potentially daunting for almost any institution - given that they
> could run close to a hundred  thousand brailled pages.
>
> If the student were dyslexic, I suppose that she/he could equally expect the
> material to be taped, or converted to digital format for screen reading.
>
> I'm sure most people would agree with the 'ideal' of enabling equal access to
> all materials.  However, the technology - as yet - is such that the 'practice'
> of converting paper based stuff into alternative formats can be incredibly time
> consuming and expensive.  Of course, truly 'equal access' would involve
> brailling the whole library.
>
> I'm not sure that the HEI would necessarily fall foul of the DDA (part lV - next
> year).  It sounds like one of those cases where the term 'reasonable' would be
> freely used.
>
> By the way: I presume that the Irish student did not expect the whole lot to be
> converted in one go?
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Peter Hill
>
> Disability Coordinator
> University College Worcester
> Henwick Grove
> Worcester
> WR2 6AJ
>
> Tel 01905 855413
> [log in to unmask]
>
> [log in to unmask]

----------------------
Bernard Doherty
Senior Student Adviser
Anglia Polytechnic University
Tel: 01223 363271 x2434
Fax: 01223 363369
Minicom: 01223 576155

[log in to unmask]