 |
 |
I wholeheartedly endorse the comments Anita Silvers has made here; until life is very different from what we know in the U.S., we should be very wary of self-disclosure of disability pre-acceptance by an institution of higher education. Sincerely, Adrienne Adrienne Asch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anita Silvers" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 1:07 PM Subject: Re: "Outing" disability on college entrance applications > The reasons for "disclosure" given by Paul mostly are separable from the > admissions process. They seem to be subsumable under two headings - it's > good for the student to make preparations for any needed services prior to > arriving at the institution, and it's good for the institution to know how > many students will need services (and what kinds of services are needed). > > Of course, these functions can be satisfied as well, and perhaps better, > after the student is admitted. Not all who are admitted to an institution > decide to come to it. So presumably there are provisions for interchange > of information between the individual who has been admitted and the > institution after an admissions decision has been made. That's as good a > time as pre-admissions for student and institution to discuss whether any > services are needed and how accessibility can be achieved. > Post-admissions, both student and institution have made commitments to > each other. > > Presumably, (1) admissions decisions should not be affected by whether an > applicant has a disability. Institutions should not reject a student > because someone supposes that people with that individual's disability > can't succeed in a particular course of study - that's stereotyping. > > Nor (2) should institutions admit a student for the reason that doing so > will bring in extra funds - presumably the cost of any services a student > uses and the cost of providing them zero each other out. If disabled > people bring in more money than they cost to educate, that's exploitation > - it's like the old custodial system in which the nondisabled are paid to > take care of the disabled, where disabled people are pressed into certain > life-courses to generate funds to support nondisabled people. If, on the > other hand, services to disabled student are perceived as costing more > than the institution receives for providing them, there is great > temptation to cherry-pick during the admissions process by turning away > students who are feared to need expensive services. And given the > exigencies of state funding, it takes almost no event at all to shift > from the perception that the state provides more than enough money to > educate disabled students to the perception that not enough money is > provided to compensate for the burden of doing so. > > Points (1) and (2) are reasons for delaying the opportunity for > individuals with disabilities to identify themselves until after the > admissions process. There are, however, at least two good reasons for > retaining such identification in the admissions process. Data about the > percentage of applicants with disabilities who are admitted can be useful > in revealing institutional discrimination (if the percentage is much lower > than the admissions rates of other types of applicants). And knowledge of > which individual applicants are disabled is useful if the institution has > a program to diversify its students by increasing the representation of > students with disabilities. > > It's usually apparent whether institutions' admissions' procedures are > reviewed by an enforcement agency to identify discrimination, and whether > affirmative admissions programs exist. If not, the request for > self-identification pre-admission rather than post-admission becomes > suspect. > > Such suspicion is understandable in a student from the U.S. Thirty years > ago, bias kept students identified as African-American from being admitted > to universities. Subsequently, courts began to admit statistical data as > good evidence of bias, and universities launched affirmative action > programs so that their admissions data would not show patterns of bias. So > the "progressive" view about requesting racial identification > pre-admissions shifted from being against it to being for it. > > U.S. law has never permitted the use of similar statistical data to > demonstrate bias against people with disabilities, nor have institutions > embarked on affirmative action programs for people with disabilities. The > Rehabilitation Act required such affirmative action, but this provision > was never enforced. So it's not surprising that a U.S. student would be > suspicious of a pre-admissions disclosure requirement. > > But perhaps UK institutions generally have well-enforced > anti-disability-discrimination measures and also have equal opportunity > affirmative action programs to increase the diversity of their student > population by increasing the representation of disabled students > (increasing diversity to benefit students' education is a less-self > serving reason than increasing the institution's acquisition of funds. > Probably, information that this is the state of affairs would be most > reassuring. So knowing more about the effectiveness and enforcement of the > equal opportunity policies and processes to which Paul refers below might > help Ron and his student - just a guess. > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Paul Reynolds wrote: > > > I can sympathise with the ethical issue and the autonomous right to > > self-identify, but from the point of view of someone who has had some > > decision-making capacity in admissions to academic programmes (that they > > are social science programmes may be a factor), I'd make the following - > > I accept practical - comments. > > > > 1. Most institutions have robust equal opps. policies and admissions > > processes that would be triggered by rejection of students on such > > grounds. Larry is right that at present in UK universities money talks, > > and some HEI's, my own included, have accrued money and credibility by > > doing exactly the opposite of excluding disabled students, in actively > > encouraging disabled students to apply and developing services and > > facilities to reflect their diverse needs. That includes recruiting both > > disabled and non-disabled staff who want to help > > > > 2. If a student does not self-identify and then arrives in week 1 for a > > class and needs equalising facilities, he or she does a number of > > things. They disadvantage themselves because these facilities sometimes > > take a little time to organise and that can impact upon studies.They > > pressure those who would hope to facilitate equal learning opportunities > > because its one of the most pressured times of the year and we are > > suddenly faced with a new set of needs or demands to respond to > > immediately - and sometimes, if resources like teaching rooms are > > concerns, can do little about. They also do not allow an institution to > > say 'look, we have to be honest and say our provision is not sufficient > > here - even if it should be' (and SENDA now sets requirements for HEI's > > to conform to). One of my concerns, for example, involve some students > > with issues of mental health issues that are admitted for the financial > > benefit of the HEI, but with insufficient care to support the student. > > > > 3. If more students are statistically noted as disabled, more resources > > will flow the way of disabled students in the future. > > > > I do understand the ethical issues and the issues of autonomy, and, of > > course, some people will wish not to take advantage of the sort of > > facilities/assistance that some HEI's try to offer disabled students and > > so will also not want to disclose. I think, however, on balance I would > > disclose - and then be more than willing to complain if rights and > > dignity are not met and preserved. > > > > paul > > > > > > > > Paul Reynolds Senior Lecturer in Sociology Programme Leader in Sociology > > and Social Psychology Centre for Studies in the Social Sciences Edge > > Hill College St Helens Road Ormskirk Lancs L394QP Tel: 01695 584370 > > email: [log in to unmask] > > > > >>> Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]> 08/19 11:39 am >>> > > Admittedly I have only limited experience having applied to only two > > universitys recently however I am familiar with the format of the form. > > > > One could of course go semantic on them and protest one does not have a > > disability but a condition that leads to one being disabled by societal > > devaluation but even I have not gone that far. > > > > It is a tick the box affair with a nebulos category to fill in if one has > > more than one disability. It is not for admission purposes but because > most > > (maybe all) universities do have disabilities offices these days where > one > > can sort out the help or accomodations one needs. Also I guess in the UK > > (not from overseas where funding is different) it relates to ones > applying > > for disabled students allowance. > > > > I doubt my ticking the boxes affected the outcome in either case for me. > In > > case number one I would have been offered an interview on completion of a > > pre interview essay task, however I rejected the course as unsuitable > (that > > means crap in my language.) > > > > In the second case, it made no difference to being accepted, ability to > pay > > being a far more important determinant. The information I doubt much was > > passed to the department teaching the course, all I recieved was some > invite > > to discuss things with the disabilities office. > > > > I guess it realy makes no difference to your rights whether you fill it > in > > or not because you usually have to fight for them anyway. > > > > Personally I see no reason not to actually accompany the form with a > letter > > saying that you do not wish to disclose whether you do or do not have a > > disability for ethical reasons on the grounds you are outlining here and > so > > are leaving it blank. That way they would probably initiate a discussion > on > > it so you could gain clear assurances in writing that you could later > pursue > > if you believed you had been discriminated against. > > > > Larry > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List > > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ron Amundson > > > Sent: 18 August 2003 21:35 > > > To: [log in to unmask] > > > Subject: "Outing" disability on college entrance applications > > > > > > > > > Dear List -- > > > > > > I have a former student who is applying to graduate school at several > > > British Universities. Each application asks the direct question: "Do > you > > > have a disability" and then gives a list of disabilities. > > > > > > The student is accustomed to the U. S. (of course) where it is up to > the > > > individual whether or not they self-identify as disabled. She > > > prefers to do > > > so only after she meets people. She is worried about the > > > implications of the > > > direct question. > > > > > > 1) Might outing herself on an entrance form hurt her chances for > > > acceptance? > > > > > > 2) If she lies and says "no", might that disqualify her for disability > > > services if she is accepted? > > > > > > 3) If she lies and says "no", might that be grounds for deportation, > and > > > transportation to Australia or something? > > > > > > In case it's relevant, she's considering applying to the University of > > > Hartfordshire, the University of York, and St. Andrews. > > > > > > Thanks for any advice. > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > Ron Amundson > > > University of Hawaii at Hilo > > > Hilo, HI 96720 > > > [log in to unmask] > > > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > > are now located at: > > > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > > > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > are now located at: > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > > are now located at: > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > > > ________________End of message______________________ > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List > are now located at: > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page. > > ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.