Comments on: E-Learning Company Appeals Against Inaccessibility Ruling.

By: adjustments were not enough « it only matters if you care

adjustments were not enough « it only matters if you care — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:44:04 +0000

[…] 8th, 2007 · No Comments That was the decision of the apeal in the case of SamLatif versus PMI in regard to PMIs failure tomake reasonable adjustments to accomedate a disabled candidate in assessment for a professional qualification. see the finding reported here and the original case report here This is a positive day for establishing the applicability of the DDA to education, Technology and assessment. Having read around the case a little to my mind it says more about exam and assessment arrangements than learning resources but is nevertheless valuable. Learning resources was an element of the course with which Sam struggled but it was not at the core of the case in question. […]

By: E-Access Blog » Blog Archive » e-learning accessibility apeal upholds in favour of Sam Latif

Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:31:05 +0000

[…] The appeal by PMI reported here in the posting E-Learning Company Appeals Against Inaccessibility Ruling.we have case law. […]

By: Mardahl.dk » Accessibility and the law

Mardahl.dk » Accessibility and the law — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 07:12:55 +0000

[…] Update: I added a trackback to an article discussing this topic over at the E-Access Bulletin Live blog. […]

By: Peter Fogg

Peter Fogg — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:44:17 +0000

It is very possible that the cost of providing accessible course material would have less than than the cost of fighting this case – in legal fees and damaged reputation !

Peter Fogg

By: Léonie Watson

Léonie Watson — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:16:51 +0000

There is also the emotional investment in taking a case like this to court. For someone working in a full time job and studying for a qualification in their spare time, the effort required to undertake legal proceedings may simply seem unmanageable.
It’s a credit to Sam that she found the strength to do what needed doing. The thought that an appeal has been made is next to unbearable.

By: David Griffith

David Griffith — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 15:39:14 +0000

It is disgraceful that this company are appealing. Blind students are always discriminated against but sadly we do not complain as much as we should. For example I did an MA employment law exam in January this year. Right up to the last minutes I was having to chase up people to make sure arrangements were correct – time I should have spent revising. At the last minute the students were told they could use “Statute books” which they could use in the exam to prevent them having to remember dates sections of law etc and enable these to be looked at.

I received this book 5 minutes before the exam and my reader was completely unfamiliar with its content, layout, sturucture and mode of indexing as she had never done law.

Rather than waste time getting her to describe the book to me and read through emought for me to instruct her on how to use it – I did the only sensible thing given the time constraints. I told her to chuck it in a corner and I relied on my memory. I will be seriously annoyed if I lose marks because I have not remembered the exact date and title of a statute.

This can all be avolded if time is taken out to go through exam arrangements in detail with a blind or disabled student. To avoid these sort of problems you should enable a blind student to do a “mock exam” in the exact circumstances of the actual exams. Problems can then be ironed out. I tried this approach but the type of exam the University came up with was radically different from the type practised.

Well done for taking on PMI and keep on fighting and I am ashamed that I have not made more of a statement in the past. You get frightened of “making a fuss”.