Reality check?

[kcatalyst]

My university has a requirement that all syllabi have a statement about the disability office and accommodations and that furthermore this statement (but nothing else on the syllabus) must be in 16pt font. I can see the original logic behind the font requirement, but am I being overly grumpy in finding it ridiculous

Comments

[docstrange]

Am I missing something?

I suspect it is an attempt to meet the NIMAS requirement of immediate access via notice (the students are supposed to receive their alternate materials at the same time as non-visually-impaired students).

I think that's the most likely driver behind that accessible-but-duh statement.

[kcatalyst]

But they don't get their materials this way. I'd find it much more reasonable if we had to bring one or two 16pt copies of the whole syllabus to every first class.

[docstrange]

Yes, that's what I mean -- since the alternate materials need to be available at the same time and those aren't them, the notice is a "if you can read only this, these are the wrong ones" alert. By giving notice that "hey, yes, you're looking at the wrong materials" that notice is, I suspect, an attempt to provide that simultaneity. I agree with you it's playing to the lowest level possible, but that's regulatory compliance for you.

[wotw]

What you're missing is that the purpose of the disability office (at least if it's anything like the disability office around here) is not to help students; it's to call attention to its own existence.

[kcatalyst]

I've had good experiences with mine at two universities, although as the instructor I can't report on how helpful the students found them. They all seemed ok with the support provided. They do actively useful things like turning scanned-in PDF readings into accessible versions and so on.

[fennel]

Wait, does the requirement mandate that the notice be the only 16pt text (i.e. it has to be bigger than the other print)? Or is it just silent on font size for the rest?

[kcatalyst]

No, afaik we're at liberty to do the whole thing in 16pt font, just not required to. I would be less annoyed if we at least had to include our name, phone and email in the 16 pt rule.

[leback]

I find the requirement, like most similar requirements, to be unduly clunky in its design, but probably better than nothing. I don't know enough about your campus to know whether #s 2 and 4 are plausible, but as to #3, I think most students with disabilities have more than enough reason to be dubious about an instructor's willingness to help them. I know more than enough instructors whose attitude is "I'll do for a student what the disability resources office tells me I have to do, but otherwise I don't want to be bothered with special requests," or perhaps just, "Isn't there supposed to be somebody else on campus who will help you get accessible materials? You should contact them

[kcatalyst]

Yeah, I didn't get into the issues about 3. Obviously dubiousness is rampant, both because it's totally reasonable and because people are often just dubious of others' behavior. I myself am dubious about the helpfulness of mandated stuff for that, but I could see if students didn't know it was mandated or if it generally fosters a sense of inclusion. Certainly I think that's a benefit to the statement itself

[shandrew]

16 point isn't large print.

and to be technically accurate, 16 point doesn't even define a font's physical size.

i suggest that every campus web page be required to put a blinking banner ad promoting the office.