Perhaps the most compelling reason to utilize principles of universal design in online education is that access to an appropriate education for all students is a moral and ethical imperative. “Moral and ethical imperatives” make for resounding rhetoric, but have little impact on the lived experience of marginalized
individuals unless backed by the force of law. In the case of educational opportunities for people with disabilities, Federal statutes do exist and should not be ignored by those involved in online education.
Federal laws designed to protect the civil rights of people with disabilities provide them with the best opportunity to engage in every arena of life and to achieve educationally, vocationally and socially. These laws permit free and active participation across multiple environments, including the virtual environ- ment of the World Wide Web. This section of the chapter will provide an overview of Federal law regarding access to assistive technology and informa- tion technology. Particular attention will be given to the following statutes: • The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 (as amended
1997) (P.L. 101-476 and P.L. 105-17). (Originally known as The Education for All Handicapped Children Act passed in 1975 (P.L. 94- 142);
• The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended in 1992 and 1998 – Sections 504 and 508 (P.L. 102-569 and P.L. 105-220);
• The Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) (P.L. 101-336);
• The Telecommunications Act of 1996 – Section 255 (P.L. 104-104); • The Assistive Technology Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-394); and
• The Technology Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (“The Tech Act”) of 1988 and its amendments of 1994 (P.L.100-407 and P.L. 103-218).
Each of these laws share a common focus – the provision of civil rights to individuals with disabilities, and the provision of necessary supports and services to make it possible for them to exercise those rights. In addition, many of the laws share common language that can be traced back to the Rehabilita- tion Act of 1973, the first of a set of sweeping civil rights laws that, in the relatively short span of just under thirty years, have begun to mitigate centuries of oppression and have allowed people with disabilities access to schools, work environments, public accommodations, and information technologies. This increased access can only serve to further enhance their abilities to take their rightful place as productive and informed citizens.
We will return to a discussion of the impact of the Rehabilitation Act following a brief discussion of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The
• the key points of the law — using the language of the law itself as space permits;
• a brief explanation of what the law means in the daily lives of people with disabilities; and
• the manner in which the law has been (or can be) used to provide increased access to online education for students with disabilities.
Key themes will be repeated throughout this analysis. The reader is encouraged to recall these points so as to achieve a holistic understanding of the social and legislative history of the movement toward civil rights by people with disabili- ties. The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the legislative mandates relating to the use of technology in educational settings. If a detailed analysis is preferred, the reader is referred to the section on resources at the close of the chapter.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 as Amended in 1997 (P.L. 101-476 and P.L. 105-17);
Originally Known as The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (P.L. 94-142)
P.L. 94-142 was enacted in 1975 in an effort to address the failure of education systems at the state level to meet the educational needs of millions of children with disabilities who were underserved or completely unserved at the local level. Briefly, the law exists to:
(a) assure that all children with disabilities have available to them…a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs, to assure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents or guardians are protected, to assist states and localities to provide for the education of all children with disabilities, and to assess and assure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities (Tucker, 1988, p. 331).
The law guarantees the right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) based on an individualized education plan (IEP) and mandates that education be provided in the least restrictive environment (LRE). The IEP is a written document that provides a “blueprint” for the determination of the FAPE; any
requirement for the use of “related services” such as assistive or information technology is written into the IEP. The law also outlines various policies to safeguard the rights of the student and his or her guardians. IDEA currently provides protections to students with educationally based disabilities from birth to age 21.
Given the explosive growth in the use of online education as well as other instructional technologies starting at the elementary level, knowledge of the protections afforded by IDEA is of increasing importance to educators at all levels. Early exposure and access to instructional technologies is increasingly important for all children but access to assistive technology is of particular importance for children with severe disabilities as technologies such as voice- output communication devices, word processors, and screen readers not only facilitate learning, but also mastery of the environment and the development of social relationships.
The Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as Amended in 1992 and 1998, Sections 504 and 508 (P.L. 93-112, P.L. 102-569 and P.L. 105-166).
Section 504 states:
No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States…shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency…(Tucker, 1998, pp. 30-31).
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act specifically prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance from discriminating on the basis of disability in numerous areas of endeavor, including employment, education, physical access to the built environment, and social service programs. Section 504 is, in effect, the first national declaration of the rights of people with disabilities, serving to establish the rights of Americans with disabilities to the dignity and respect owed to them as equal and contributing members of society and to permit them access to every sphere of American society. The Act specifically pertains to entities that receive federal funds, the services of federal personnel, or property from the federal government.
Because Section 504 guaranteed access to federally funded programs and activities, including educational programs and activities, Section 504 foreshad- owed IDEA in providing access to FAPE in an appropriate educational setting with appropriate procedural safeguards. Even now, Section 504 provides protections to students who, for a variety of reasons, are not covered under IDEA; for example, students in post-secondary education who fall outside of the age limits outlined in IDEA, and students who have a limitation in one or more major life activities who nonetheless do not meet the definition of “disability” under IDEA (Alexander & Alexander, 1995).
The 1998 amendments to the Vocational Rehabilitation Act — Section 508 — recognized the increasing importance of information technology in American society. The amendments require the Federal government to make the technol- ogy it uses accessible to people with disabilities. The degree of access must be equivalent to the degree of access enjoyed by those without disabilities, unless the provision of such access would result in “undue burden.” The 508 amendments apply to technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the Federal government. Thus, hardware and software used by Federal entities or those receiving Federal funds must be accessible (FCC, 2002a). This would include any web page developed by the Federal government or web pages for online courses sponsored by educational entities receiving Federal funds.
The Americans with Disabilities Act – Title III (1990) (P.L. 101-336)
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is known as the civil rights law for people with disabilities. The language of the ADA echoes both the language and the intent of Section 504. Various Titles provide legal protections across a variety of situations. Title I prohibits discrimination in employment, Title II mandates access to state and local government programs and access to public transportation, Title III, access to places of public accommodation, Title IV requires that all common carriers provide functionally equivalent telecommuni- cations equipment for use by individuals with communication deficits.
Since passage of the ADA in 1990, legal arguments have been successfully developed using the language in Titles I, through IV to provide access to information technologies to individuals with disabilities. Title I with its emphasis on non-discrimination in employment, calls for the provision of “reasonable accommodations” and accessible environments to permit “qualified individuals with disabilities” to be maximally effective in the work setting. The reader is
reminded that accessible online environments can be considered a “reasonable accommodation” and may, therefore, have as much potential to benefit instructors with disabilities as they do students with disabilities (Tucker, 1998). Legal arguments also exist regarding provision of access under Title II and Title III. The reasoning is as follows: Title II, in providing access to state and local government entities is reminiscent of the language of Section 504 and provides the right to access websites and other information technologies maintained by state and local governments and by organizations receiving funding from state and federal sources. The language of Title II is significant in that there is recognition of the power of “effective communication” by way of access to information technology. Simply put, “access to technology” is not enough. People with disabilities must be provided a means of communication that is as
effective as that provided to individuals who do not have disabilities. Finally,
Title II clearly stipulates the requirement to design electronic media that is accessible at first use — that it is a violation of the law to wait to modify existing technology until a request is made (Waddell, 2002).
In a similar manner, Title III, that portion of the ADA relating to access to public accommodations, requires that public accommodations that utilize electronic communication modalities must make those modalities accessible to and usable by people with disabilities. The rationale used in this instance was that accessibility in the virtual environment of the World Wide Web was not just an extension of the guarantees of accessibility in the physical environment envi- sioned with the passage of the ADA, but that the virtual environment had become more and more real with increased opportunities for e-education, e- commerce, e-banking and e-government. And because these sites were designed to be used by the public, the fact that they were not accessible to people with disabilities was analogous to a denial of access to a public accommodation in the built environment (Waddell, 2002).
Title IV of the ADA is specifically concerned with the provision of telecom- munications relay services to those with hearing or speech disabilities. Specifi- cally, the law says that all “common carriers” (telephone companies) must provide “telecommunications relay services.” These services may be provided “through designees, through a competitively selected vendor, or in concert with other carriers” (Tucker, 1998, pp. 283-284). Again, these services must be functionally equivalent to telecommunication services provided to consumers without disabilities. Title IV is specific to telecommunications relay services and does not speak to the use of modems or other telecommunications equipment
more closely related to the use of electronic and information technologies. However, the implicit acknowledgment that current telecommunications sys- tems were inadequate to meet the needs of a significant number of citizens may have foreshadowed the explicit mandates of Section 255 of the Telecommu- nications Act of 1996.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 – Section 255 (P.L. 104-104)
Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 mandates that all telecommunications equipment must be accessible to people with disabilities. Key portions of the statute follow.
A manufacturer of telecommunications equipment or customer premises equipment (CPE) shall insure that the equipment is designed, developed, and fabricated to be accessible to and useable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable.
A provider of telecommunication services shall insure that the service is accessible to and useable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable (Waddell, 2002, p. 36).
CPE includes equipment used in the home, office or elsewhere “to originate, route, or terminate telecommunications” (FCC, 2002b, p. 2). Examples include modems, fax machines, pagers, and telephones. If access is not readily achievable, Section 255 stipulates that manufacturers and providers should make devices and services that are compatible with peripherals and any specialized customer premises equipment that are commonly used by people with disabilities, if compatibility is readily achievable.
The Assistive Technology (AT) Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-394) and The Technology Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (“The Tech Act”) of 1988 and Its Amendments of 1994 (P.L.100-407 and P.L. 103-218)
These two laws are particularly significant in that they provide financial supports to the states to enable the design and implementation of consumer-responsive programs to provide statewide education and training related to assistive technology supports and services. The language of the Assistive Technology Act emphasizes the increasing importance of technology in all aspects of life. For both people with disabilities and those without, technology has become an
increasingly important facet of daily life. If technology represents convenience for people without disabilities, it means greater independence and productivity for people with disabilities.