The Disability-Research Discussion List

Managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds

Help for DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives


DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives


DISABILITY-RESEARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Home

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Home

DISABILITY-RESEARCH  August 2003

DISABILITY-RESEARCH August 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: "Outing" disability on college entrance applications

From:

Adrienne Asch <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Adrienne Asch <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 19 Aug 2003 18:06:27 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (292 lines)

    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.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager