NAD files complaint

I wonder if the information will be available thru the FOIA?
 
Interpretrator said:
You are taking me too literally here, and not seeing the forest for the trees. I am not saying this or that happened. I'm saying we don't know the whole story. Full stop. I would add editorially that I personally agree if NAD is behind it, they likely have a very good case. But objectively the fact is we don't have all the facts.



Yep, I believe that. Of course once everything is settled one way or the other there is likely to be publicly accessible information about it............ :whistle:
Click to expand...

Guess its a wait and see proposition at this point. Apologies for any misunderstanding.
 
jillio said:
Perhaps this is the policy of RIT,where there is a large deaf population, and therefore, will be deaf students in all classes. However, this is not the policy of universities where the deaf popluation is still the vast minority. Terps are assigned after the deaf student has registered for classes. Once the student has been registered, and their class schedule is available, we contact the terps to be available fort those particfular times necessary to comply with the student's schedule. The only way we know what times we need a terp for a student is following registration for classes. We contract out for terps, we do not have terps on staff. We do not initiate a contract until we know the specifics....such as when and where the terp will be needed.

And this graduate student did request a terp prior to the start of classes.
The university in this case has quite obviously violated his rights under the ADA by refusing to provide a terp and instead refunding tuition and fees.

I might ask you to keep in mind, this is a graduate student. He has already completed an undergraduate degree requiring 4-5 years of study. Therefore, he would have 4-5 years experience in requesting accommodations for himself in an academic setting. He also had to have an undergraduate GPA of at least a 3.0, and scored above the norm on his GREs to even be accepted into a program for graduate study. I doubt seriously that he assumed that a terp would just magically show up without his following procedure to request one.
Click to expand...
Just because a refund was given doesn't exactly mean an interpreter was requested. I've seen students at RIT get refunds for classes when they didn't request an interpreter.
 
VamPyroX said:
Just because a refund was given doesn't exactly mean an interpreter was requested. I've seen students at RIT get refunds for classes when they didn't request an interpreter.
Click to expand...

The NAD alleges that the college returned tuition and fees instead of providing a terp. I doubt they would make that allegation without the information to support that allegation.

I've seen hearing students get refunds, as well. I've seen all kinds of students receive refunds. But only after they have dropped registration of classes. And none of them resulted in contact of an advocacy agency and the filing of complaints with the Dept. of Justice and the Dept. of Education. And, as I've pointed out. This is a graduate student. He has spent at least 4 and, possibly 5, years studying as an undergraduate and has already earned a Bachelor level degree. It is fairly safe to assume that he is well aware of his obligations and responsibilities in requesting accommodations.
 
Did this student get his previous degree at the same college? If he got it from a different college, it was probably a college where interpreter support was readily available. In that case, this college was not readily prepared and/or probably had a hard time finding an interpreter in time. When that happens, they give you back your refund.

That has happened to a couple deaf friends of mine years ago at RIT. One female student did request an interpreter for class, but all the interpreters were already taken for other classes and there were no freelance interpreters available for her scheduled classes. After a couple weeks of nothing, they gave her a full refund.
 
VamPyroX said:
Did this student get his previous degree at the same college? If he got it from a different college, it was probably a college where interpreter support was readily available. In that case, this college was not readily prepared and/or probably had a hard time finding an interpreter in time. When that happens, they give you back your refund.

That has happened to a couple deaf friends of mine years ago at RIT. One female student did request an interpreter for class, but all the interpreters were already taken for other classes and there were no freelance interpreters available for her scheduled classes. After a couple weeks of nothing, they gave her a full refund.
Click to expand...

I guess we'll have to wait and see whether the college acted in violation or not after the complaint is acted upon. But I still doubt that the NAD would have taken the steps to file the complaint if the student had not followed proper procedure and fulfilled his responsibilities as required by the ADA.
 
jillio said:
I guess we'll have to wait and see whether the college acted in violation or not after the complaint is acted upon. But I still doubt that the NAD would have taken the steps to file the complaint if the student had not followed proper procedure and fulfilled his responsibilities as required by the ADA.
Click to expand...
I agree. The NAD must receive hundreds of complaints every year, and probably picks only the strongest cases to support.
 
Reba said:
I agree. The NAD must receive hundreds of complaints every year, and probably picks only the strongest cases to support.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They don't want to pick a case that might end up making them look bad.
 
Interpretrator said:
Agreed. They don't want to pick a case that might end up making them look bad.
Click to expand...

True. And taking a case that is weak and not defendable only weakens their influence in future complaints filed. When a complaint is received by the DOJ, one would prefer that they look at the filing agency and say, "Oh, a complaint filed by the NAD. Maybe we'd better take a good look at this one." rather than, "oh, another complaint by the NAD", and tossing it in the file 13 pile.
 
Back
Top