Concurrent Session 5.9: Increasing Access by Decreasing Reliance on
3rd Party Documentation to Assess Accommodations.
Slide 1: Increasing Access by Decreasing Reliance on 3rd Party Documentation
to Assess Accommodations.
Adam Meyer, Disability Resource Center, Eastern Michigan University.
Slide 2: Goals for Today’s Session.
Discuss the big picture behind documentation changes.
Review Eastern Michigan University’s journey to change documentation policies.
Offer you my experience to guide you as you see fit.
Slide 3: Defining documentation for today.
When challenging the current model, documentation = 3rd party documentation (external from the
disability office).
When proposing a new way, documentation = internal, disability office created documentation.
Slide 4: Quick EMU Details.
18,000 undergraduate students.
Five Colleges.
Arts & Sciences.
Education.
Business (2nd admit).
Health and Human Services (2nd admit programs).
Technology.
No medical school or law school.
2 primary disability advisors in DRC.
600 students actively use DRC resources.
Slide 5: My Own Journey.
8 years in the field.
Relied on 3rd party documentation heavily first two years.
New, uncertain, learning.
Recognized what was happening when referring.
Came to trust my judgment.
From AHEAD: Experienced disability professionals should feel comfortable using their observations of
students’ language, performance, and strategies as an appropriate tool in validating student narrative
and self-report.
Formal minimal documentation policy for 3 years but practicing for about 5.
Slide 6: Looking at the big picture behind the change in documentation
practices.
Slide 7: Social Welfare vs. Social Justice.
Slide 8: Broad Social Welfare Concept.
Provide certain minimum standards and certain opportunities.
Helping people facing contingencies and who may not have opportunity otherwise.
Striving to promote the basic well-being of individuals in need.
Slide 9: The Social Welfare Model as Seen in DS Field.
Sort, label, and determine need eligibility.
Retrofit activities to fit needs (accommodations).
Offer segregated or parallel services.
Disabled students are the needy clients.
Disabled students ask to be included in a system (such as classroom) or society that does not fit the
individual otherwise.
Slide 10: Considering Disability as a Matter of Social Justice.
A Definition of Social Justice.
A belief in the human rights of all people and the equality of their human value.
Everyone has a right to fair treatment, a share of the benefits of society and participatory democracy.
Slide 11: Social Justice Concepts.
Promotes full inclusion and participation.
Freedom from discrimination.
Open doors, include everyone.
Inclusive design reduces retrofitting.
Inclusive strategies minimize segregation.
Slide 12: Medical Model of disability vs. Sociopolitical model of disability.
Slide 13: The Medical Model’s Characteristics.
Disability is a deficiency or abnormality.
Being disabled is negative.
Disability resides in the individual.
The remedy for disability-related problems is cure or normalization of the individual.
The agent of remedy is the professional who affects the arrangements between the individual and
society with focus on the person.
Slide 14: The Social Model suggests.
Disability is a difference.
Being disabled, in itself, is neutral.
Disability derives from interaction between individual and society.
The remedy for disability-related problems is a change in the interaction between the individual and
society.
The agent of remedy can be the individual, an advocate, or anyone who affects the arrangements
between the individual and society.
Slide 15: Documentation and the Big Picture.
Strict reliance on 3rd party documentation seemingly promotes the medical model of disability.
Deficiency information.
Places problem within the person.
Offers recommendations as to how person can cure self (so as to adjust to society).
Asks professionals to be the change agent.
Social welfare models require people to disclose their inabilities or problems in order to gain access to
special services.
Is that the model that we want to promote through the work we do in our offices?
Slide 16: Eastern Michigan University’s Three Year Journey to Minimize
Documentation as a Critical Need for Decision-Making.
Slide 17: Previous EMU Documentation Policy.
Need documentation within 3 – 5 years.
Generally resembled previous AHEAD Best Practices for Documentation.
Students without the documentation in place could not proceed with accommodations.
Approximately 20 – 30 students per semester came to office, were told to get documentation in order to
get accommodations, but never returned.
Slide 18: Gaining Necessary Support for change.
Ran the idea by.
Supervisor.
Legal Affairs.
Campus Counseling Center.
Faculty Senate.
DRC Faculty Advisory Committee.
Slide 19: Through guidelines and processes, our decisions would ideally.
Establish judgment based on the reasonableness of accommodations fitting the situation.
Not a judgment on the disability, including diagnosis.
Consider all collected information for the given situation.
Slide 20: Key Elements.
Create our own “documentation” for justification through consideration of.
Self-Report.
Environment’s Incompatibility with Disability.
Current and past treatments, medications, auxiliary aids, assistive devices, and utilized resources.
Available documentation presented.
Assessed clarity, internal consistency, and observed behaviors of student during initial discussion.
Slide 21: Current documentation guidelines.
Slide 22: Core Aspects of Guidelines.
Just come to the office.
The DRC encourages students to meet with an advisor without the need for documentation in
hand…Determinations on individual documentation needs will be made…Our first priority is to get to
know each student individually.
What accommodations, if any, would be reasonable given each situation presented? Acknowledge
environment.
Explain reasonable accommodations and categorize unreasonable ones upfront.
EMU decision is isolated from other universities and testing agencies.
Subsequent requests may require a need for 3rd party info.
3rd party info varies by situation when needed.
Slide 23: Created Internal and Published Guidelines.
Published guidelines include core aspects.
Internal guidelines include.
Key elements used to collect student information.
Differentiation among visible and invisible disability situations.
Slide 24: Visible Disabilities.
3rd party not necessary…unless requests do not correlate with disability information.
Topic of consideration.
Student with hearing impairment wants “more” in college than in high school.
Support student as often as possible but request info as necessary.
Slide 25: Invisible disabilities with History.
3rd party not necessary…unless requests do not correlate with disability information.
Current Exceptions.
Course substitutions (but building a process for change).
Alternative media (but considering a process for change).
Slide 26: Invisible disabilities (Potential) with No Known History.
Assessed with care by the advisor.
Would a reasonable person conclude a connection between the situation presented and reasonable
accommodations?.
No uniform answer because so many variables.
In some situations, no 3rd party documentation needed.
Student may remain in contact with the advisor for follow-up and assessment response to
accommodations.
In other instances, third-party documentation needed up front.
Use feedback from external experts who can offer further insight on the presence of a disability and the
impact of a disability.
These situations will be documented in detail by the advisor and the advising team will consult as
necessary.
Slide 27: Previous approach to Invisible disabilities (Potential) with No
Known History.
Student required to either.
A) Get 3rd party documentation before access to accommodations.
B) Maintain semester check-in schedule with advisor in lieu of documentation.
Abandoned because.
Could not agree on system to best track this approach.
Philosophical differences.
New process offers more flexibility around options with advisor documentation key.
Slide 28: 3rd Party Documentation.
Role: Add to the pool of knowledge; fill in gaps in understanding access when necessary.
What does not make sense?.
The bigger the gap, the bigger the need.
No time frame limitations generally.
Simple statements may work.
Prescription pad notes.
List of medications.
List of symptoms, pain, etc.
IEP/504 shows history.
Slide 29: Essential in decision-making.
Is request consistent with disability/story? And what about the environment?.
The focus is on access…period.
Accommodation requests and decisions must be.
Reasonable overall.
Reasonable fitting the situation at hand.
Goal of accommodations is not to maximize the learning potential of the student.
Slide 30: Something to think about.
If we focus on barriers and access, rather than on the professional(ism) belief that we need to be the beall-end-all for the student about his or her disability, it’s easier to be satisfied with information (from the
student, from our own observations or from a variety of external sources) that simply illustrates how the
barrier and the disability are connected and how an accommodation could remove that barrier.
Carol Funckes, University of Arizona.
Slide 31: Questions to Ponder.
Do we really need documentation to help students transition successfully through college?.
Are there other ways to assist with learning strategy development than documentation?.
The environment is prevalent in each situation. Who is in the best place to address the disability and
environmental disconnect?.
Slide 32: Frequent Discussions over past Year.
Course substitution – ultimately need 3rd party documentation requirement but may change
philosophy.
Currently need 3rd party info for alternative media but may change philosophy.
Psychiatric situations – to what extent do we need information for accommodations vs. “campus
safety”.
What is the role of the DS office?.
When is 3rd party documentation really required for accommodation decisions vs. when is it nice to
have to offer greater support to the student?.
Slide 33: What We have Learned.
Refreshing to go through initial discussion without focus on documentation.
Allowed focus to be on the student and on the environment.
Students and parents immediately more relaxed about the process.
We have the individual and collective expertise to make most decisions regarding reasonable
accommodations.
Consistency perhaps more possible because we were the lead decision-makers, not the varied quality of
documentation.
Working with students without prior disability history were the most challenging.
Slide 34: Overall.
Our energies are not being wasted on third party documentation collection and critical scrutiny.
Focus is on students, environments, accommodations, and quality resources.
Try to proceed without 3rd party documentation as much as possible.
Slide 35: Using the student interview to make decisions easier and to decrease
3rd party documentation need.
Slide 36: The Student’s Story as Primary Source.
It is only through understanding an individual's experience in context that we can.
Recognize environmental barriers that create gaps to access.
Student’s disability.
History and past experiences.
Specific request relative to specific situation.
Unique characteristics of the course, program, or requirement.
Truly translate any diagnostic evaluations into useable information.
Slide 37: Considering a Shift in the Initial Meeting.
“Intake” .
What does this word suggest?.
How might it impact the student experience?.
Power in asking about the environment.
Generally why a student comes to the disability office.
Students know what environmental variables they like and hate, are compatible with or not, etc.
Easier than discussing that within?.
Slide 38: Our role as interviewers.
Our initial meeting questions are powerful.
Dictate conversation and information collected.
Dictate the “tone” of the conversation.
Is the student’s disability (problem) the focus or is the environment’s barriers?.
May be a subtle difference.
General belief students do not know about their situation.
Can we help them become experts?.
Slide 39: Standard Questions?.
For what disability are you seeking accommodations?.
Did you get help for your disability in high school?.
How does ADD impact you?.
What is your biggest problem with classroom learning?.
Does your disability make it hard to take notes?.
What assistance do you need with exams?.
Any difficulties with reading?.
Do you struggle with time management?.
Do you have concerns/limitations outside of the classroom?.
What accommodations did you use in high school?.
Slide 40: Questions that Focus on Environment.
How does “that experience” impact you?.
What type of classroom environment do you prefer? What environments create barriers for you?.
How is X class designed?.
How do you do on different types of exams?.
What is it about Y test (class, paper, etc) that you do not need accommodations for it?.
What type of assignments challenge you?.
How is your time management?.
How is the housing experience going?.
What accommodations did you use in high school?.
Slide 41: Translating decisions to the accommodation letter.
Slide 42: Two Categories of accommodations.
Requiring timely implementation.
Requiring discussion and consideration.
Slide 43: Requiring timely implementation.
Those accommodations standard in most course situations.
Extra time for exams.
Computer technology for exams.
Note-taking.
Accessible documents.
Hearing impairment accommodations.
Generally needs to happen.
Student needs to arrange details with professor.
(Professor cannot really deny).
Slide 44: Requiring discussion and consideration.
Respects the unique nature of each course and the fact that different outcomes exist.
Attendance accommodation.
Extra time on assignments.
Others: Exam notes, laboratory accommodations, etc.
Idea is to show student (and faculty) that all decisions not isolated to disability office only.
Access is a collaborative process with the campus community.
The environment plays a key role.
Professor assessment matters in these cases.
Slide 45: Questions??? Open Discussion.
Slide 46: Adam Meyer. Eastern Michigan University. ameyer12@emich.edu.