10 opinion
1/21/22
Miller: CWRU refuses to allow remote accommodations for disabled students during the pandemic How many lives is a college life worth? Lio Miller Contributing Writer “The overwhelming number of deaths, over 75%, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities. So really, these are people who were unwell to begin with. And yes, really encouraging news.” That’s what Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky had to say about the COVID-19 pandemic last week. I have six comorbidities. But Case Western Reserve University doesn’t seem to care any more than Dr. Walensky does about students like me. Five semesters into the pandemic, CWRU is intent on pretending it’s over. The administration sends letters to the student body assuring us that they know everyone expects things to return to normal as soon as possible. But who is everyone? Because clearly, I’m not included in that, and neither are other disabled students. Nor are we included in considerations of how to “provide an equitable experience for our students” or allow them “to attend as many classes as possible.” Because if we were involved, CWRU wouldn’t be denying disabled students the opportunity to attend classes remotely after the two-week mark. And yet that’s exactly what they’re doing. Disability Resources is denying almost all undergraduate students’ requests for remote attendance accommodations in the very same semester during which almost the entire school is spending the first two weeks learning online. Their justifications run the whole gamut of excuses, including that if professors had to change their syllabus when the school went remote, “that’s a fundamental alteration”—in
which case, where is everyone’s tuition refund for the spring semester of 2020? This question I again found myself asking when Assistant Dean of Disability Resources Eboni Porter said, “it changes the nature of the degree.” Another excuse was that “courses that are highly participatory, what I’ve found so far is that no university has provided a remote option for it for an approval for a disability accommodation”— false. Or, “If you have a question, and the instructor is talking, the instructor is not always going to be able to pay attention to [you] if you’re raising your hand.” Then why are hybrid courses still being offered through the Master of Public Health Program? And how can we guarantee that they’d see our hands in person? Not to mention just how hard it would be to see the raised hand of a dead student. This one is just grasping for straws. But the cherry on top is when Eboni Porter told a student, “In that situation, what I would say to a student is, for the pandemic situation, then take time away…This would be a time that we would say, do not take classes.” That’s right, folks. Eboni Porter told students that if the pandemic endangers them, they should leave CWRU. Not only is this an extremely unethical thing to be telling students, but it’s also plainly illegal. As an institution of postsecondary education, CWRU is subject to federal law. It is required by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and by Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations to provide reasonable accommodations. There is also a five-year Department of Education (DOE) precedent
establishing that if a class was offered remotely in the past, it absolutely cannot be called an unreasonable accommodation to offer remote attendance for this class in the future. Plus, the DOE said in a letter to the public in 2020 that schools should not use federal law as a reason to deny remote learning. Despite its aforementioned troubling rhetoric, even the CDC recommends remote learning as an accommodation for at-risk students. CWRU made its ability to provide remote education crystal clear two years ago. Since then, its legal requirement to continue to do so has been reiterated numerous times by multiple different governing institutions. This is not a question of ability. It’s not a question of requirement. It’s a question of how far CWRU thinks it can contort the law—and its “reasonable accommodations” qualifier—to appease donors and students who want a traditional college experience while the pandemic rages on, killing disabled people left and right. I have a right to an education. I have a right not to die. And I have a right not to be forced to choose between the two. It is not that difficult of a concept to grasp. So why is the administration struggling so much with this? There is no ethical reason to deny remote attendance. If students want to attend in person, and their professors are comfortable with it, then, by all means, allow it. But that’s a far cry from forcing everyone to do so. The problem is that an influential group of people stands to gain from denying this accommodation: those who monetarily benefit from reinforcing the perception that this pandemic no longer
exists. The sooner everyone gets back in person, the sooner we can cram more students into a room. The sooner we can require fewer safety measures at work. The sooner we can build more profit in industries that rely on crowds or travel. The sooner industries connected to CWRU can churn out more significant profits from their workers. The sooner we can appeal to coronavirus-denying donors who throttle the donation pools when schools dare to buy into conspiracies or scare tactics. The sooner we can stop dropping money on tests, sanitizers and masks—which could be going straight into the administration’s pockets instead. The sooner we can get back to building the castle of our 21stcentury American lifestyle built on the foundations of the dead bodies of those deemed lesser. There’s no doubt that CWRU’s ableist history—and present—have become more visible as of late, revealing an obvious decline in their ability or even desire to pretend that they care about access. I knew going into college that there would be parts of my education that would be subject to ableism; it is simply the reality of living in this society, at CWRU or anywhere else—especially as someone with multiple other marginalized identities. But when did tuition here become so expensive that my life was part of the bill? Would you rather see a fellow student physically present in class for two weeks and then in a coffin, or see them over a computer screen for one more semester? How much value does your in-person education carry compared to that of someone’s life? And what are you going to do about it?
Reyna: A year of Biden’s ups and downs Christian Reyna Staff Writer By the time this column is published, we will have lived through an entire year since President Joe Biden took the oath of office on January 20, 2021. Just before he took that oath, we witnessed a terrifying insurrection on January 6, 2021, in an effort to discredit his presidential election victory over former President Donald Trump. It’s safe to assume that the Biden presidency after one year has had its fair share of ups and downs as the threat of COVID-19, amongst other things, continues to impact his time in office. This brings to mind the following question: what has and hasn’t he done in the one year he’s been president? And, what problems have arisen during his tenure? Let’s take a closer look. We must address the elephant in the room first: COVID-19. It has greatly affected our lives, and we expect the United States government to act accordingly, especially now with the Omicron variant causing a new wave of cases. Ohioans are overwhelmed with the new variant, but they are not alone. The entire country is facing a huge surge in positive tests and hospitalizations. What is the Biden administration doing to combat this? Biden has ordered for one billion at-home tests to be purchased and shipped to Americans who request them and is sending medical teams to help overwhelmed hospi-
tals, including to the Cleveland Clinic. This is helpful, but right now, we don’t know exactly when we will get all of these at-home tests. Furthermore, although the Omicron variant took us all by surprise, the Biden administration has fallen short on its promises as Americans are still being forced to wait in long testing lines and scramble for limited at-home tests. We’re approaching two years of this pandemic; how can this be possible? Yes, vaccinations have significantly increased since he took office, giving us a great defense against the virus. However, the administration should’ve assumed the worst, knowing how unpredictable this entire situation has been. Another defining feature of this administration is the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed this past November. I believe this is one of the bright spots of the Biden presidency compared to its poor handling of Omicron. This legislation will invest $55 billion in expanding access to clean water, $65 billion in broadband infrastructure deployment, $7.5 billion in establishing a national network of electric vehicle chargers and $65 billion in upgrading our power infrastructure, to only name a few–which is incredible. I applaud the Biden administration for finally passing this long overdue piece of legislation. It is a good first step into
preparing the U.S. for the future in the fight against climate change and providing better services to the community. I just hope the implementation isn’t as slow as the rate of road repair here in Cleveland. Lastly, let’s address the situation of student loans—affecting a good portion of Case Western Reserve University students. Some may owe thousands of dollars, since CWRU is a private, not public, university. As a result, we should be concerned about what this administration may do regarding student loan forgiveness. Federal student loan payments have been paused several times under the Biden administration, as well as a pause on interest accrual. This, however, is not a permanent solution. While the extensions are short-term victories, they fail to live up to Biden’s campaign promise of forgiving at least $10,000 in federal student loans per person. Should Biden resume payments again this year or not fulfill his campaign promise quickly, it will certainly hurt Democrats in a midterm election. President Biden had favorable views on his performance, with 51% approving of his first 100 days, but it is now 41%, according to a poll conducted by UMass Amherst. His failure to move forward with student loan forgiveness could further lower this approval percentage as the
midterm elections approach. The President had requested the Department of Education to compose a memo in April 2021 to determine his authority regarding student loan forgiveness, but it has been months since with no word. If he wants his approval numbers to go up, then Biden should act on this delay and avoid leaving recent college grads in the dark. I, for one, am disappointed in the slowness of this situation, and it will most certainly affect my vote if nothing fruitful appears. The first year of Biden’s presidency has certainly been different from Trump’s four years in office. It reminded me that our government could change for the better. There have been some bright spots, but there have also been hiccups along the way. Hopefully, Biden will perform better his second year, and we will all see and experience the benefits. He has devoted his life to public service, and while I am grateful for that, there has to be accountability for his actions, inactions and failures. If we don’t criticize and hold accountable the President, even if we initially voted for him, then we will not progress as a country. However, this doesn’t just stop with Biden. We should challenge your elected officials. We voted them into office to represent us, and we can vote them out if they do not act in our best interests.