Rock and a Hard Place?
I think it's best to acknowledge where deficiencies are and work with a team of colleagues to eliminate them.
Acknowledging the deficits is certainly the most direct way to approach this, but it may not be received very well. Faculty may become defensive if they feel you are only seeing the mistakes they have made. You don't want to get their backs up and have them defending the wrong thing just out of principle. I think I might approach things by saying, "I was looking over your technical standards. I'm concerned about how to explain some of the pieces with students who inquire about admission to your program. It seems to me that there are some barriers there to inclusion -- and I know you want to open up the possibility for as many students as possible. Can we talk?"
You get more flies with honey... GRIN
I agree - you definitely get more flies with honey! I would also approach it from an educational perspective - most individuals(collegues) like to learn and what better way then to use an example of a technical standard that creates barriers.
I would agree, Amy. I'll give you another hint. In my experience, if you are going to offer up examples of barriers, use barriers to someone who is blind, deaf, or in a wheelchair. If there is no lingering doubt about whether or not the individual has a disability, it is easier to demonstrate how a rule creates a barrier, and the change that is needed is often pretty straightforward. Once you have established that barriers exist, it is easier to introduce the topic of barriers to students with less noticeable or recognized disabilities.
Dr. Jane Jarrow
You always want to explain to your team, the WHY for what are are asking them to do. Get them onboard by making the assignment crystal clear. You will get better results.
I agree, Linda. You will want to make sure that faculty from the given area of study have some background regarding the legal issues. My experience is that such discussions are dicey to begin with, though, as faculty may fear that you are criticizing them directly, and dig their heels in regarding the necessity for maintaining the status quo. I think folks would do well the approach the discussion from the perspective of "making these standards tighter, to be sure they say exactly what you mean" instead of "what you have here is discriminatory and will have to be changed."
I think it depends on how you approach the issue. I am lucky enough to have faculty that take constructive criticism very well. The best way to approach it would be to ask the question "Are we limiting participation in a discriminatory manner?" If the answer is yes, then we need to work on how to accommodate without giving undue help towards success.
Nick,
I think that is true, Nick. The first questions is always, "Am I treating students with disabilities differently BECAUSE of their disability?" There is nothing wrong with being up front and honest with students about the problems you foresee in their future so long as you would do the same for any student who PERFORMED the same way (rather than for a student who you ANTICIPATED would have problems -- because of disability).
Dr. Jane Jarrow
I feel you should appoach the Dean or other person in charge of the academics department and then express yourself. Then it is up to the Dean to communicate that to the academics team. They may alread be aware of the inapproapriate standards and they simply were not enforced or if they were not aware of it, it is thier responsibilty to make those changes. As long was we communciate to managment direclty or throught our manager I think we will get the quickest resolution.
Helmi,
Well said. I agree that communication is the key, and I agree that often the mistakes that are made are due to oversight, not intent.
Dr. Jane Jarrow
Sit Sit Sit. You cant train in one setting. I think the communication needs to be ongoing, and part of normal communication practice throughout the staff.
Stacie,
Sounds like a plan! GRIN
Dr. Jane Jarrow
I think that sticking directly to the facts is key. Everything is so open to intepretation. Communication is the most important part.
Kenneth,
I would tend to agree, Kenneth, as long as we are careful to be communicating facts and not opinions. That has traditionally been the problem for students with disabilities. Folks have colored their facts with a heavy dose of skepticism! GRIN
Dr. Jane Jarrow
I will be working with each of the program chairs in the academics department at our career college to develop technical standards for each program over the next few weeks. It will a learning experience for all, as we work together to establish appropriate technical standard that do not create barriers.
Beth,
You have your work cut out for you, but if I can help in any way, let me know. The main thing to keep in mind is that technical standards should be based on what is TAUGHT in the program, not what someone thinks is needed to do the task. "Bend, stoop, kneel and grasp" are not technical standards, because you don't teach those skills to students -- those are the way that most people DO the things that are taught in the program (transferring patients, administering meds, etc).
Dr. Jane Jarrow
I agree that explaining the WHY to a team helps overall, understanding.
Marty,
I'm curious, Marty. Would you explain the "WHY" in the context of the law, or in the context of the essential functions of the field?
Dr. Jane Jarrow
I would discuss with a student the issue at hand, and come up with a resolution that both parties can agree that is within guidelines and allows a student the opportunity to succeed in school.
Eric,
It sounds like a great plan, Eric, except that my experience is that faculty often don't see their technical standards as "negotiable"! GRIN But I think the idea of a sit down discussion among well-meaning individuals INCLUDING the student is a positive way to try to resolve differences.
Dr. Jane Jarrow
