[teknoids] If gadget is required, accommodations must be made ...

Nathan DeGruchy ndegruchy at fcsl.edu
Thu Jul 1 12:14:48 EDT 2010


Not to start a flamewar, but I don't see how a pilot like this was somehow maliciously excluding the disabled. As has been stated before, the methods used by current blind and low vision students isn't changing, but these techniques (like digital copies/OCR scans) are often more convent than having to haul and use standard textbooks. 

Sure, students with disabilities *using* said devices would be at a disadvantage, but why would they use them over the current techniques anyway?  There would be no tangible net gain for them.  If anything, these pilots would be bringing non disabled students to a state where blind and low vision students are today. Having search, bookmark and ease of portability, same as with a digital copy of a book on a PC or Mac.

I have to object.  It really does seem like the Fed killing a perfectly viable pilot because of external lobbies and/or overreacting to the rally cry of "It's not accessible/ADA compliant!". 

On Jul 1, 2010, at 11:58 AM, "John Quentin Heywood" <heywood at american.edu> wrote:

> On Thursday 01 July 2010, Tracey wrote:
> 
>> Maybe I'm not cynical enough, but I think this is just the Feds 
>> reminding institutions of higher learning that e-readers are covered by 
>> the ADA
>> 
> 
> I see it as the Feds smacking Amazon for making an ereader that only has 
> speech capability if it is in the ebook itself, and more damningly, has no 
> speech in its menus and navigation, making it absolutely useless for folks 
> with sight issues. The iPad, however, is fully functional, just lacking 
> academic content.
> -- 
> John Quentin Heywood
> heywood at american.edu
> 
> <signature.asc>
> <ATT00001..txt>



More information about the Teknoids mailing list