[nabs-l] waver

[Steve Jacobson]

Boy, there are some things in these notes that really make me feel uncomfortable.  I think that a case can be made 
that there needs to be reasonable accommodations in a visual arts class, and I even wonder a little about a school 
that does not provide some options to fulfill and art requirement.  Having said that, though, to say that there is no 
reason for us to learn about visual arts because we are blind makes no sense to me.  To have a course waived 
because it might take some extra work for us without investigating how we might take the course seems hard to me to 
defend.  Comments are made about life being fair.  Well, it isn't fair to many people besides those who are blind.  How 
fair is it that some people have to work so much harder to get the same grades while others learn easily and hardly 
have to study.  How fair is it that some have to work to have spending money while they are in school and may even 
graduate with a debt while others are fortunate enough to get everything from their parents.  Aren't most classes more 
difficult for us than someone with vision but with our equal intelligence?  Part of the reason that we justify getting extra 
help in college by having the rehabilitation system cover some of our expenses is because we do have to work harder.  
Part of the reason for Disabled Students Services offices is to help bridge this kind of gap.  It seems to me that we 
have some responsibility to conform to the requirement of the college we have chosen because we presumably 
picked that college for a reason.  Where does it stop if we start deciding not to take a class at all because it is harder?  

I respectfully admit that I don't know all of the details here, and it would be interesting to hear exactly what the college 
would say about this.  It would be good to know if another art class was suggested as a replacement, too.  But with 
some flexibility, this doesn't seem like an impossible task.  We have to talk about what is reasonable more than what is 
fair or even just.  This could well be a good learning experience for dealing with aspects of one's job after graduation, 
where some of the protections we have as students doesn't apply and we may have to find alternatives to dealing with 
visual charts and such.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobson

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:47:23 -0800, humberto wrote:

>High 5!!!!!!!!!!! I agree with this!

>> ----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Marc Workman" <mworkman.lists at gmail.com
>>To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list" 
><nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>Date sent: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:08:10 -0700
>>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] waver

>>I wasn't going to say anything, but Sean has motivated me.

>>SW,
>>Being blind, this class would present me with additional 
>challenges and
>>extra work not required of other students.
>>Therefore, I shouldn't have to take it.

>>Short argument, I know. Seems there must be a missing premise 
>there
>>somewhere, no? Maybe something like:

>>People shouldn't have to do things that aren't fair.

>>MW,
>>Not sure you've presented the argument as strongly as you could 
>have.  How
>>about:

>>Being blind, this class would present me with additional 
>challenges and
>>extra work not required of other students.
>>Being require to complete extra work not required of other 
>students, solely
>>because I'm blind, is a form of discrimination.
>>Students should not have to take classes that discriminate.
>>Therefore, I shouldn't have to take this particular class.

>>Now, you'll probably disagree, but don't disagree with the above 
>version.
>>Instead, show me why the following one is wrong, or why the two 
>cases are
>>not the same.

>>Being a woman, this class would present me with additional 
>challenges and
>>extra work not required of other students.
>>Being require to complete extra work not required of other 
>students, solely
>>because I'm a woman, is a form of discrimination.
>>Students should not have to take classes that discriminate.
>>Therefore, I shouldn't have to take this particular class.

>>Besides, of course we shouldn't have to do things that are 
>unfair.  I'm not
>>sure exactly what you mean by fair/unfair, but I have in mind 
>something like
>>just/unjust.  Saying we should have to do things that are unfair 
>is like
>>saying we should have to do things that are unjust.  We certainly 
>do have to
>>do things that are unfair/unjust, particularly because we live in 
>an unjust
>>world, but this doesn't mean we should have to do these things.

>>The point I would make is that a college that requires all 
>students to take
>>very visually oriented classes as part of completion of a degree 
>has been
>>badly designed.  It has been designed on the assumption that only 
>sighted
>>students will be attending the university.  And that is unfair, 
>it's unjust,
>>and it should be challenged.  Do you think it is common to 
>require a music
>>appreciation class at Gallaudet University? Imagine there were a 
>university
>>for the blind, would it make sense to require these highly visual 
>courses?
>>My guess is you will say yes because a lot can be learned from 
>taking
>>courses like this, math, biology, art history, etc.  I agree, but 
>I'm also
>>sure that if Gallaudet required a music appreciation course, and 
>if this
>>blind university required an art history course, the courses 
>would be
>>designed in such a way that the deaf and blind students wouldn't 
>be forced
>>to work harder simply to make up for the ignorance of the people 
>who
>>designed the course/curriculum.

>>SW,
>>If we say we want to be treated like anybody else, we have to 
>mean it. The
>>"when it suits me" Caveat undermines the whole stance.

>>MW,
>>If we say discrimination is wrong, we have to fight against it, 
>in all its
>>forms, including those cases where blind students are forced to 
>do extra
>>work simply because they are blind.

>>SW,
>>Wouldn't it be easier, and maybe more fair, to just have you skip 
>the
>>optional trip?"

>>MW,
>>Don't see how this would be more fair.  Perhaps if there were an 
>argument
>>showing that this really would be more fair, then you'd have 
>something, but
>>without this, I think the analogy fails.

>>SW,
>>Fortunately, we in the NFB are working together to make things 
>less
>>difficult, and through our collective work we have built, and 
>continue to
>>build, a brighter future for all blind people. I will, however, 
>assure you
>>that none of our progress was ever attained by requesting a 
>waiver.

>>MW,
>>It sort of depends on what you mean by a waver.  The NFB has 
>asked for
>>things to be altered for the benefit of the blind.  I read 
>Walking Alone and
>>Marching Together not that long ago, and if I recall, one of the 
>early goals
>>of the organization was to make it so that blind people could 
>earn money in
>>the market place without having welfare benefits cut back.  Is 
>this not a
>>kind of a waver? Everyone else gets their benefits cut when they 
>earn a
>>certain income, but this shouldn't happen for blind people? This 
>is one
>>example that readily comes to mind.  I think pretty much any time 
>a change
>>has been requested that is designed to make things easier for 
>blind people
>>and will lead to differential treatment, this can be construed as 
>a kind of
>>a waver.

>>I think it is too commonly thought that equality requires equal 
>treatment,
>>or that equal treatment requires treating people the same.  This 
>is a
>>simplistic understanding of equality.  If someone has good 
>reasons for
>>wanting to be treated differently, and I include the fact that 
>treating her
>>the same would result in discrimination among good reasons, then 
>there is
>>nothing wrong with treating her differently.  If someone sees 
>that
>>differential treatment and makes mistaken assumptions about the 
>abilities of
>>blind people, and then discriminates against me in the future, I 
>will hold
>>him responsible for making those false assumptions, not her for 
>insisting on
>>her right to be free from discrimination.

>>I think if more energy were spent fighting the discriminatory 
>design of
>>products, services, and institutions, and less time spent coming 
>up with
>>clever ways of getting along within these badly designed systems, 
>all blind
>>people would be a lot better off, not just the clever ones.

>>Best,

>>Marc


>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Sean Whalen" <smwhalenpsp at gmail.com
>>To: <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 1:50 PM
>>Subject: Re: [nabs-l] waver


>>> Good afternoon,

>>> I don't necessarily think that it is the purpose of NABS or the 
>NFB to
>>> prescribe rigid stances on issues like class waivers, 
>paratransit use,
>>> reduced price tickets for transport, when to accept or not 
>accept
>>> assistance, etc. In fact, I think that is not our purpose at 
>all. People,
>>> both inside and outside of the organization, seem to get the 
>impression
>>> that
>>> we are some monolith that holds clear positions on such issues. 
>If you
>>> want
>>> to know what the NFB thinks, go look at our resolutions and the 
>programs
>>> we
>>> implement. Those are the policies of the organization. And, 
>while we all
>>> work to further them, the policy objectives of the organization 
>may or may
>>> not be in line with the thinking of any particular member of the 
>group. I,
>>> for instance, certainly have my points of disagreement with the 
>NFB's
>>> policies in certain areas, and just because I have chosen to be 
>a member
>>> does not mean that I have forfeited the right to my own 
>opinions. Like
>>> anything, you take the good with the bad. If I tell you I'm a 
>Democrat,
>>> would you automatically assume that I hold a specific set of 
>views? Would
>>> your knowing that I am a democrat entail your knowing how I feel 
>about
>>> every
>>> issue, abortion, economy, education, etc.? Of course it 
>wouldn't. So, why
>>> does your knowing that I am an NFB member entail your knowing 
>how I feel
>>> about all issues related to blindness? Obviously, it doesn't.

>>> This said, when it comes to the question of whether one should 
>take a
>>> waiver
>>> for a class, there isn't even an official NFB stance. Nor should 
>there be.
>>> Certainly you are likely to find a prevailing opinion among our
>>> membership,
>>> but that doesn't make it "what the NFB thinks."

>>> My personal opinion on the matter is that it is lazy, 
>counterproductive,
>>> and
>>> absolutely the wrong thing to do. I'm sure somebody can show me 
>a case
>>> where
>>> a waiver was the right decision, but there are counterexamples 
>to
>>> everything.

>>> Ok, so you don't want to take the visual arts class that is 
>required for a
>>> BA. It would present certain challenges, and surely is not 
>essential for
>>> your history major. It would be way easier to just pick up 3 
>other credits
>>> somewhere else. The argument goes:

>>> Being blind, this class would present me with additional 
>challenges and
>>> extra work not required of other students.
>>> Therefore, I shouldn't have to take it.

>>> Short argument, I know. Seems there must be a missing premise 
>there
>>> somewhere, no? Maybe something like:

>>> People shouldn't have to do things that aren't fair.

>>> That's about what you'd have to believe to make the "I'm blind, 
>please
>>> don't
>>> make me." Argument hold water. Jeez, is it fair that math takes 
>me so much
>>> longer than my classmates. I'm an English major, and who really 
>needs math
>>> anyway? Wouldn't it be more fair if I could pick up some 
>additional
>>> English
>>> credits to replace that pesky college algebra? More fair, maybe. 
>Better,
>>> no
>>> chance in hell.

>>> Universities have these requirements for a reason. You may agree 
>or
>>> disagree
>>> with the reason, but there is an objective, namely graduating 
>reasonably
>>> well-rounded students, behind them. And please do not come with 
>the line
>>> about how blind students simply won't take anything away from 
>certain
>>> classes. I, a Political Science and Philosophy major by the way, 
>took
>>> calculus, statistics, and economics courses which were heavily 
>visual in
>>> many respects. Through work with classmates, instructors and 
>readers I was
>>> able to master the concepts at play in each without ever having 
>any of the
>>> information represented to me visually. So, can I draw or 
>examine economic
>>> or mathematical graphs? Nope, but I can sure understand what 
>economists
>>> are
>>> talking about when they refer to them, and I can absolutely ask 
>the right
>>> questions of a lay person to glean the information I need from 
>the graph.
>>> So
>>> often people get caught up in and intimidated by graphs, when 
>all they are
>>> are tools to represent data and illustrate concepts. Mastery of 
>the
>>> underlying concept is what is important.

>>> So what about a visual arts class. Fortunately, I never was 
>required to
>>> take
>>> one. I say fortunately, because I have no inclination to take 
>such a
>>> class,
>>> and don't think I would enjoy it, though one can never know. But 
>what if I
>>> had been required to take a class on art history or something of 
>the sort.
>>> What if I had to have a reader come in and describe paintings to 
>me? Would
>>> that be a pain in the ass? Yes, probably. In an entire semester 
>of
>>> learning
>>> about different styles of painting would I ever have the 
>pleasure of
>>> enjoying the aesthetic beauty of any of these works? No, I would 
>not,
>>> which,
>>> incidentally is just another one of those things in life that 
>isn't fair.
>>> But, at the end of the class, would I know something about the 
>progression
>>> of artistic expression that I didn't know at the start? Yes, 
>hopefully I
>>> would. That is the point. I likely won't enjoy it, but neither 
>will any of
>>> the other students in the class who were forced to take it to 
>graduate. So
>>> I
>>> had to work a little harder to not enjoy something. Such is 
>life. If we
>>> say
>>> we want to be treated like anybody else, we have to mean it. The 
>"when it
>>> suits me" Caveat undermines the whole stance.

>>> Imagine you get a waiver and don't have to take that bothersome 
>art class
>>> or
>>> science lab, but some time later you wish to go on a student 
>trip abroad,
>>> and the school doesn't want to allow you to come along. "Why do 
>you need
>>> to
>>> come with us to Egypt?" they ask, "It isn't required for your 
>major, and
>>> besides, it would really present us with some logistical 
>problems."
>>> Wouldn't
>>> it be easier, and maybe more fair, to just have you skip the 
>optional
>>> trip?"

>>> I'll leave it to you to draw the parallel.

>>> If you think you can compete, compete. If you think it's just 
>too hard,
>>> then
>>> either just cash it in now, or take a real close look at what 
>you believe
>>> and ask yourself whether it is consistent with your ending up 
>where you
>>> want
>>> to be in life.

>>> Sorry for the length, but this thread has been driving me up the 
>wall. All
>>> the bellyaching: "This is hard because I'm blind." "That sucks 
>because I'm
>>> blind." A lot of things suck about being blind. A lot of things 
>also suck
>>> about being stupid, disorganized, or lazy; having cancer or 
>having one
>>> leg;
>>> or growing old and dying. That. is. life!

>>> Fortunately, we in the NFB are working together to make things 
>less
>>> difficult, and through our collective work we have built, and 
>continue to
>>> build, a brighter future for all blind people. I will, however, 
>assure you
>>> that none of our progress was ever attained by requesting a 
>waiver.

>>> Sean


>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nabs-l mailing list
>>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
>info for
>>> nabs-l:
>>> 
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/mworkman.
>lists%40gmail.com


>>_______________________________________________
>>nabs-l mailing list
>>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>for nabs-l:
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/humbertoa
>5369%40netzero.net


>_______________________________________________
>nabs-l mailing list
>nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nabs-l:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com