Revisiting Accessibility Statements (Again): What Are They For and What Do They Do?

 

August is the time when many philosophers put the finishing touches on syllabi for the coming year. An accessibility statement ought to be regarded as a vital component of these course outlines. In this vein, I have copied below an updated version of a post that first appeared on the blog in August 2015. A very fruitful discussion ensued in the comments on the initial post, which can be found here. The example of an accessibility statement offered below has been adopted and adapted by philosophers and others around the world!

 

What Are Accessibility Statements For and What Do They Do?

 

Most universities and colleges require that instructors include an accessibility statement on the various course syllabi that they make available to their students in hard copy or on course websites and eLearning sites. In some jurisdictions, these statements are legally required.

The central purpose of these statements is to draw attention to the services and provisions available across campuses that enable disabled students to (for instance) attend lectures and seminars, acquire course materials in formats useable to them (say, on audiotape), effectively produce evaluated work (with extended time for term papers and exams), and so on. Some university and college administrations even provide a ready-made statement that faculty are instructed to use on their syllabi. Many faculty, busy as they are at the start of the semester, uncritically reproduce these prepared statements on their course outlines, neglecting to consider what sort of message a given accessibility statement may convey to disabled students.

I want to emphasize, however, that accessibility statements (like education policies in general) rely upon assumptions about, for example, how pedagogy should be organized and transmitted, how learning happens, who is a student, and what the roles and responsibilities of teachers should be. Faculty who are genuinely concerned to create an inclusive learning environment should pause to consider whether the accessibility statement that they currently use is counterproductive to this aim, as well as reflect upon how they use the statement. Among the questions that faculty who want to increase the learning possibilities for disabled students might ask themselves are these:

 

• Does my accessibility statement presume that, in the context of my lecture or seminar, the responsibility for inclusion lies with individual disabled students who have “special needs” that should be accommodated?
• Or does the statement that I currently use convey the message that equal treatment of disabled people in academia demands accessible learning environments, the creation of which should be regarded as a shared responsibility, encompassing my own pedagogical practice?
• Does the statement on my syllabi move in the direction of the principles of universal design?
• Does the statement assume that provision of services to disabled students is a response to a medical problem, or does it, instead, assume that such provision is a response to a matter of social justice?
• Do I quickly pass over the accessibility statement that I have added to my syllabus, treating it as a matter of preliminary course administration?
• Or do I take time in class to discuss the statement and its implications for my pedagogy, recognizing that such discussion offers an ideal opportunity to convey to disabled students in my courses that I uphold their entitlement to an equal education and value their presence in my classes?

 

Most universities and colleges require that instructors include an accessibility statement on the various course syllabi that they make available to their students in hard copy or on course websites and eLearning sites. In some jurisdictions, these statements are legally required.

The central purpose of these statements is to draw attention to the services and provisions available across campuses that enable disabled students to (for instance) attend lectures and seminars, acquire course materials in formats useable to them (say, on audiotape), effectively produce evaluated work (with extended time for term papers and exams), and so on. Some university and college administrations even provide a ready-made statement that faculty are instructed to use on their syllabi. Many faculty, busy as they are at the start of the semester, uncritically reproduce these prepared statements on their course outlines, neglecting to consider what sort of message a given accessibility statement may convey to disabled students.

I want to emphasize, however, that accessibility statements (like education policies in general) rely upon assumptions about, for example, how pedagogy should be organized and transmitted, how learning happens, who is a student, and what the roles and responsibilities of teachers should be. Faculty who are genuinely concerned to create an inclusive learning environment should pause to consider whether the accessibility statement that they currently use is counterproductive to this aim, as well as reflect upon how they use the statement. Among the questions that faculty who want to increase the learning possibilities for disabled students might ask themselves are these:

 

• Does my accessibility statement presume that, in the context of my lecture or seminar, the responsibility for inclusion lies with individual disabled students who have “special needs” that should be accommodated?
• Or does the statement that I currently use convey the message that equal treatment of disabled people in academia demands accessible learning environments, the creation of which should be regarded as a shared responsibility, encompassing my own pedagogical practice?
• Does the statement on my syllabi move in the direction of the principles of universal design?
• Does the statement assume that provision of services to disabled students is a response to a medical problem, or does it, instead, assume that such provision is a response to a matter of social justice?
• Do I quickly pass over the accessibility statement that I have added to my syllabus, treating it as a matter of preliminary course administration?
• Or do I take time in class to discuss the statement and its implications for my pedagogy, recognizing that such discussion offers an ideal opportunity to convey to disabled students in my courses that I uphold their entitlement to an equal education and value their presence in my classes?

Accessibility statements can be mechanisms with which to promote social justice and equality for disabled people or they can be mechanisms to constrain such social change. Faculty must begin to recognize the transformative potential of these statements rather than continue to regard them as reflections of rudimentary administrative policies.

Think about your accessibility statement and what it does. Search the web to find examples of the accessibility statements that experts in the area of disability and accessibility in higher education (such as disability studies scholars Jay Dolmage, Margaret Price, and Stephanie Kerschbaum, among others) use in their courses. Devote time to compose an accessibility statement that conveys to your students that each of them is valued equally. Discuss your accessibility statement and its implications and assumptions with members of your classes at the beginning of each semester and on other occasions over the course of the semester. Review and revise your statement often.

 

Composing Your Accessibility Statement:

There are many resources on the web to assist you with the creation of an accessibility statement. But here are a couple of informative sites:

http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/praxis/tiki-index.php?page=Suggested_Practices_for_Syllabus_Accessibility_Statements

https://anthrodendum.org/2018/08/13/check-your-syllabus-101-disability-access-statements/

 

Example of Accessibility Statement:

I wrote the following accessibility statement for a graduate seminar that I taught at University of Toronto a few years ago. Take some time to read it and think about the assumptions upon which it relies and the message that I aimed to convey to disabled students in the class: 

Accessibility

Your well-being and success in this course are important to me. I recognize that there are multiple ways to learn and that this multiplicity should be acknowledged in the design and structure of university courses and the evaluation of their participants. Thus, I encourage students registered in the course to discuss their learning styles and comprehension requirements with me during my office hours or, if necessary, at another arranged time. Every student is entitled to a meaningful and stimulating learning experience. Disabled students are also strongly encouraged to avail themselves of the services provided by the campus Accessibility Services Office, including the provision of note-takers, extra time for assignments, transcribers, and sign-language interpreters. The Accessibility Services Office is located on the first floor of Robarts Library, 130 St. George St., or visit the Accessibility Services website at:

http://studentlife.utoronto.ca/accessibility.htm for more information.

In addition, you can call OISE Student Services at (416) 987-2277 or visit the OISE Student Services website. 

 

Additional Resources:

Here are some additional resources for fostering more accessible classrooms, campuses, and academic cultures in general:

Dolmage, Jay Timothy. 2017. Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hamraie, Aimi. 2017. Building Access: Universal Design and the Politics of Disability. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Hamraie, Aimi. 2013. "Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Theory of Universal Design." Disability Studies Quarterly 33 (4).

Kerschbaum, Stephanie L., Laura T. Eisenman, and James M. Jones, eds. 2017. Negotiating Disability: Disclosure and Higher Education. Ann Arbor: University of MIchigan Press.

Price, Margaret. 2011. Mad at School: Rhetorics of Mental Disability and Academic Life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Tremain, Shelley L. 2017. Foucault and Feminist Philosophy of Disability. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Tremain, Shelley. 2013. "Introducing Feminist Philosophy of Disability." Disability Studies Quarterly 33 (4).

 

posted by Shelley