Subject: [Wash-at] [Wata-bulletin] WATA Bulletin - Fall 2005
From: UWAT (uwat@u.washington.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 20 2005 - 14:50:24 PDT
Contents:
1. Survey examines use of assistive technology by young people who have
spina bifida
2. Settlement reached in hearing-impaired student’s real-time captioning
complaint
<begin article 1>
1. Survey examines use of assistive technology by young people who have
spina bifida
Laurie McHale, Public Information Specialist, UW Center for Technology
and Disability Studies
An estimated 70,000 people in the United States have spina bifida. In
the most common form, myelomeningocele, a portion of the spinal cord
protrudes through an opening in the back. Despite surgery shortly after
birth, the condition can cause leg paralysis and difficulties with
bladder and bowel control. Hydrocephalus—accumulation of fluid in the
brain—is also common and can result in learning disabilities. There is
also evidence that many people with spina bifida experience chronic
pain, depression and other secondary conditions.
Although there has been considerable research on the use of mobility
aids by people with spina bifida, no comprehensive research has been
conducted on the use of other forms of assistive technology (AT) by
people with spina bifida, nor has there been research on the impact of
AT on quality of life, independence and reduction of secondary
conditions such as depression.
To remedy this lack, Kurt Johnson, Ph.D., of the University of
Washington Center for Technology and Disability Studies and the UW
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, and his colleagues are examining
the use of assistive technology (AT) devices and the incidence of
secondary conditions, with funding from the Centers for Disease Control.
Johnson and his fellow researchers expect that when people with spina
bifida use appropriate AT, they will experience reduced levels of pain
and depression and will be able to participate at a higher level in
home, school, work, and community activities.
The researchers are learning, however, that people with spina bifida are
not taking advantage of the wide range of devices available, with the
exception of those devices that aid mobility, such as leg braces,
crutches and wheelchairs.
The study is being carried out in two phases. The first phase utilized a
database, maintained since 1960 by David Shurtleff, M.D., at Children’s
Hospital and Regional Medical Center in Seattle, to estimate the
utilization of various types of assistive devices among a large sample
of young people with spina bifida, aged 13 to 28. This phase also
included an analysis of State of Washington Medicaid data, showing costs
associated with durable medical equipment, personal assistive devices
and medical supplies from all cases of spina bifida in the state.
The second phase involves telephone and face-to-face interviews with 70
teens and young adults with spina bifida, aged 14 to 23. The goal of
this phase is to examine the personal experiences of young people with
spina bifida and gain their perspectives on their use, or non-use, of
assistive technology. The survey includes questions about mobility,
pain, depression and barriers to full participation in life, both
physical and attitudinal. Participants are being asked about the
characteristics of their disability, their participation in education
and employment, their utilization of assistive technology, and their
ability to be independent, both in terms of personal care and in moving
about in the community.
Survey results thus far are somewhat contrary to researchers’
expectations. Since learning difficulties often accompany spina bifida,
the researchers had hoped to find that at least some of the study
participants would report that they use AT to help with such tasks as
reading, writing, fine motor skills like handwriting, organizing and
memory recall. For example, a student might find it useful to use
software developed for people with learning disabilities that highlights
a word and “reads” the text with synthesized speech. However, the only
assistive technology devices that respondents reported with any
frequency were related to their mobility needs.
A second finding was also surprising. A number of the young people
involved in the study report that they do not participate in community
life to any significant degree and seem to have not transitioned
successfully into employment and independent living.
Although there are likely a number of factors that contribute to this
low level of participation, the researchers speculate that if
appropriate AT were in place to support learning, mobility and other
activities of daily life, the young people with spina bifida would be
able to participate more fully in home, school, employment and community
life.
The researchers have advised the CDC of their preliminary results and
have asked for additional funding to look more closely at the issue of
spina bifida and use of assistive technology.
<end article 1>
<begin article 2>
2. Settlement reached in hearing-impaired student’s real-time captioning
complaint
Sherrie Brown, JD, EdD, Policy Specialist, UW Center for Technology and
Disability Studies
The Seattle Office of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for
Civil Rights (OCR) recently reached a settlement agreement with Highline
Community College (HCC) regarding a student’s request for real-time
captioning. The complaint alleged discrimination under Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA).
A profoundly hearing-impaired student in the HCC paralegal program had
requested word-for-word real-time captioning for her classes, supported
by medical documentation. Instead, HCC provided her with in-class
transcription, based on a meaning-for-meaning system. The student used
this system for about half the quarter, and then notified the college
that the transcription service was leaving out important information and
was inadequate. She again requested real-time captioning, which was not
provided. She filed an OCR complaint, alleging that “HCC had
discriminated against her on the basis of her hearing disability by
failing to provide her with auxiliary aids to ensure that the
communication of classroom information was as effective for her as for
other students.”
Section 504 and ADA Title II both require that communication with
disabled individuals be as effective as communication with others and
that “appropriate auxiliary aids and service where necessary to afford
an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in
and enjoy the benefits of a service, program or activity . . . be
provided.”
OCR extensively investigated this complaint. The agency reviewed
examples of the transcript given to the student using the
meaning-for-meaning transcription service and compared it with another
student’s audiotapes of the same lectures. The conclusion was that the
meaning-for-meaning transcription service was not providing
“communication that was as effective as (that) afforded to other
students” as the laws require. OCR stated that important legal
terminology discussed in class and examples used by the instructor to
illustrate legal concepts were missing completely, incomplete or
inaccurate in the transcript. OCR also “identified many instances where
information was summarized to the point that it did not accurately
reflect, in ‘real time,’ what was occurring in the lecture or classroom
at the time the information was transcribed.” Finally, OCR did not find
that the service “selected by the college was as effective as that
requested by the student.”
Highline agreed to change its policies and practices. The settlement
agreement included both college-wide actions and actions to specifically
address the needs of the hearing-impaired student. The college-wide
actions included reviewing and revising policies and procedures to
ensure that appropriate auxiliary aids and services are provided if
necessary so that hearing-impaired students have “access to
communications that are as effective as communications with others and
that afford such students an equal opportunity to participate in and
enjoy the benefits of the college’s programs and activities.” HCC agreed
to ensure that policies and procedures allow for individualized
determination regarding requests for auxiliary aids and to give primary
consideration to student requests unless the college can provide equally
effective aids and services. The agreement allows HCC to request that a
student participate in an assessment by a qualified hearing specialist,
whose recommendations will be considered. Finally, HCC agreed to provide
information to its staff and faculty about the new policies and procedures.
For the student involved in the case, HCC agreed to do the following:
provide real time transcription of class lectures and discussions and
otherwise ensure that the student has access to all of the content and
discussion; provide written transcripts (based on the real-time
transcription) within a reasonable time following the class; allow the
student, if she desires, to repeat all the courses in which she was
enrolled when she filed the OCR complaint); amend the student’s
transcript to reflect the revised grades in the repeated courses, waive
the tuition and fees for those courses and compensate her for reasonable
non-tuition expenses that she incurs as a result of repeating the
courses; and compensate her up to $100 for non-tuition expenses if she
must attend an additional quarter to complete the paralegal program.
Settlement agreements such as this have limited legal authority outside
the specific case because the complaint was not litigated. Nonetheless,
the findings and OCR conclusions in this case are important to students
in post-secondary education institutions who use real-time captioning as
well as other auxiliary aids. This particular hearing-impaired student
was ultimately provided the auxiliary aid that she needed to participate
in the paralegal program and other students in the future will benefit
from the new policies and procedures that HCC will implement.
Documents related to this case are available online at wata.org/policy:
OCR Resolution Letter to Highline Community College:
http://wata.org/policy/OCR-34981-v1-Highline_CC_Resolution_Letter_to_College-FINAL.htm
OCR Settlement Agreement with Highline CC:
http://wata.org/policy/OCR-35002-v1-SETTLEMENT_AGREEMENT__FINAL_(1).htm
<end article 2>
For a current list of important future events, please visit the WATA
website at wata.org and click on Calendar.
If you have comments, or mailing list additions or changes, please contact:
WATA Bulletin
Box 357920, Seattle WA 98195-7920
206-685-4181 (V), 206-616-1396 (TTY)
800-841-8345 (tollfree V/TTY)
206-543-4779 (fax)
e-mail: uwat@u.washington.edu
The WATA Bulletin is funded by the U.S. Department of Education,
Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), grant number H224A050046,
Kurt L. Johnson, Ph.D., Principal Investigator.
-- Washington Assistive Technology Alliance University of Washington Center for Technology and Disability Studies Box 357920 Seattle, WA 98195 685-4181 Voice 616-1396 TTY 543-4779 Fax uwats@u.washington.edu http://wata.org/_______________________________________________ Wata-bulletin mailing list Wata-bulletin@u.washington.edu https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/wata-bulletin _______________________________________________ Wash-at mailing list Wash-at@u.washington.edu http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/wash-at
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu Oct 20 2005 - 14:53:38 PDT