[nfbmi-talk] FW: MCB College Policy

Fred Wurtzel f.wurtzel at comcast.net
Tue Mar 2 01:58:15 UTC 2010


Hello,

 

Great letter Gwen.  I am gratified, it is not just me.  I have attached the
NFBM resolution on the college policy.  I believe we have identified most of
the same issues.

 

Commissioners, please take these suggestions and write a policy that is
positive, encouraging and one that will lead to success for blind students.
Thank you for your attention.

 

Warm Regards,

 

Fred

 

 

P.S. By the way I accidentally attached a Word 7 version of our resolution.
I will resend a Word 2003 version.

From: Gwen Botting [mailto:mpvi at intergate.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:06 PM
To: Alicia Li; 'Amy Shepherd'; 'Beth Kennedy'; 'Casey Dutmer'; Catherine
Hula; 'Charis Austin'; 'Charis Austin'; Chris Boone; Collette Bauman; DB
Central; Fred Wurtzel; Geri Taeckens; 'Joe Sibley'; Jones, Leamon (DLEG);
Nancy Jo Blucher; Pat Love-Sypho; rob.essenberg at yahoo.com; 'Scott Ford';
Susan Langendonk
Cc: Geri Taeckens; 'Jo Ann Pilarski'; 'Pat Cannon'
Subject: MCB College Policy

 

Below is an email I sent to Geri Taeckens regarding the MCB college policy
that is currently in process.  I believe there are some serious problems
with the way the Commission is going about writing this policy.  I've
attached a copy for you - I urge all of you to write similar letters to
either Commissioners such as Geri or Jo Ann Pilarski, or to Pat Cannon, if
you see the same dangers I see, or even if you don't!  All of our children's
futures will be negatively affected if this policy is written in this
manner.

 

Here are my comments:

 

Recently I reviewed what has been done on MCB's college policy and I have
several concerns.   I don't know how long you have been working on this
policy, but from my vantage point it is a missing a key perspective - that
of the student and their family.  I don't know who your audience is, but if
a parent was to pick this policy up to try to figure out what to expect from
the Commission for their college bound student, and what was expected of
them, I don't think they would be able to understand it.  Most of the
paragraphs are awkwardly written, and the subject of related paragraphs
shifts so that you don't really know what they are referring to anymore.  

 

One particular issue I have is that the playing field is not level within
this document.  Students with additional life challenges or disabilities are
expected to jump through way too many hoops.  In the third paragraph of the
preamble it states that "in some instances it may be possible for exceptions
to the policies, if approved by the Director of Consumer Services."  First
of all, there is no verb in this sentence!  I assume that "to be made" would
be a reasonable fix for this.  Secondly, there are so many words of
indecision - some, possible, exceptions, if - that I wouldn't want to have
to apply for such exceptions, especially if I have to go all the way to the
top of the authoritative heap for that exemption.  If I already have a
problem with low self esteem like so many of our kids do, then I most likely
would not even try.  What are "the Policies"?  is it supposed to be "this
Policy"?

 

I think the Commission needs to reassess their view of the population they
serve.  Greg's teacher, April, has a caseload of 26 kids.  Greg is the only
Braille reader of those 26.  While many are succeeding in school with large
print, many more have additional disabilities, such as autism or cerebral
palsy.  Some have significant cognitive delays and would not be considered
"college material".  But with the State Board of Education's increased
emphasis on college or postsecondary education for nearly everyone,
including requiring such classes as advanced algebra for anyone expecting a
"normal"  High School graduation diploma, more kids with mild forms of other
disabilities will be expecting to qualify for Commission services.  Add to
this the dilemma of proper diagnosis of additional disabilities in a child
who is also blind, and you have many kids with mild learning disabilities
who have not been adequately cared for in the public school system.  Again,
"he's doing so well, for a blind child" comes back to bite us.  None of our
kids is alike.  Writing policies for such a diverse population is fraught
with difficulties.  This policy seems to be written for the Greg's of the
world - the "vanilla blind."  Most of our kids would fall into the
"non-traditional"  category - they could have a positive college experience,
giving them vital work skills, if their college and the Commission is
willing to work with them on a plan of completion that is not the typical 4
year program.  This is especially important for students who are "otherwise
health impaired", such as students with Usher's syndrome, brittle diabetes,
or other lesser known congenital diseases,  where their health status may
not allow them to take more than one course at a time.

 

This policy also seems to be written from a primarily cost savings point of
view, and a punitive point of view, rather than being open and accepting and
willing to work with students in an affirming manner.  It will NOT save
money if students are not successful in finishing their degree program.
Maybe it is not in the scope of this document to delineate the various
supports the Commission has available?  What would be wrong with the
Commission funding two classes per semester for 10 years, if that's what it
takes?  I know a lot of people who have needed this length of time.  Also,
you would probably want to include the alternate measuring system of
credits, rather than credit hours, in your description of "full time
student" - not all colleges use credit hours.  

 

It seems that some kind of term like adequate yearly progress could be used.


 

Another issue - the statement that the Commission will pay for one
associates degree or one bachelor's degree, yet they encourage students to
attend a Community College in order to save money.  This seems to be
contradictory.  I also disagree with encouraging students to attend
community college.  This many be appropriate for some students, but in my
opinion, transfer students never really recoup those first two years
socially.  A student who attends one college for their entire undergraduate
program is much more likely to participate in community and extra-curricular
activities. I feel that college is not primarily about academics - it's
about learning to make good choices for yourself when the structure of your
life is in flux.  A student is, I believe, and I have NO data to back up my
opinion, much more likely to become a well adjusted functioning member of
society when they have an alma mater that they can believe in, and that's
tough if you've split your time between a number of different colleges. I
also feel that employers give more credit to students who have stuck out a
four or five year program in one place.  One of the problems employers have
is with young employees just getting up to speed in their jobs and then
leaving for greener pastures.  Students who have completed a degree in one
place might be more willing to stick around for 4 or 5 years in a job,
rather than 1 or 2.

 

Under Financial Aid, are you now saying that parents have to pay their
normally expected contribution?  Or are you saying that the Commission IS
paying the family contribution and that other resources pay the rest? This
paragraph is confusing - RSA and FASA need to be spelled out, too, although
I found FAFSA in another place in the document - this is the first time it
appears.  

 

Comparable services paragraph really awkward and hard to understand.
Actually, I didn't really understand this entire section.

 

Questions about postgraduate study - if a student wants to be a Social
Worker, I believe that a masters is required in most circumstances, to be a
Physical Therapist, this program is now a doctorate level program - you
cannot practice as a PT without a PhD.  Nursing, medicine and law all have
their various requirements.  Are we saying here that, if a student does well
enough in college to get accepted to law school or medical school, that the
commission will wash their hands of this kid because he or she could make a
living with their BA or BS in a related field?  Won't the commission still
at least work with the graduate program to provide adapted materials, O&M
services, and tuition assistance?

 

The section on academic progress needs to be modified with something like
"as per the consumer's IPE" .  There are plenty of normal reasons for not
finishing a semester.  Just getting mononucleosis, or, like my nephew,
leukemia, or being jilted by a boyfriend has derailed lots of deserving
kids.  Having signed up for more than they can handle, or spending too much
time in the bars are also reasons.  There seems to be an underlining
assumption here that if a student doesn't complete a semester successfully
its their fault - either because they have been goofing off or are just
plain lazy.  

 

Please consider revamping this document to be more clear, less redundant,
and to truly have the students needs in mind.

 

Gwen Botting

Michigan Parents of Children with Visual Impairments

 

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2714 - Release Date: 03/01/10
07:34:00

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCB College policy draft 2-19.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 107520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100301/73de8099/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 9 resolution on college policy.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 25088 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100301/73de8099/attachment.docx>


More information about the NFBMI-Talk mailing list