Descriptor
Source
Journal of College and… | 4 |
Author
Giddings, Robert | 1 |
Guthrie, R. Claire | 1 |
Orleans, Jeffrey H. | 1 |
Smith, Mary Anne | 1 |
Steinbach, Sheldon E. | 1 |
Tucker, Bonnie Poitras | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 4 |
Legal/Legislative/Regulatory… | 4 |
Opinion Papers | 4 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Rehabilitation Act 1973… | 4 |
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating

Orleans, Jeffrey H.; Smith, Mary Anne – Journal of College and University Law, 1982
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 promises that colleges will provide auxiliary aids to hearing-impaired students including "signing" interpreters, and colleges and students can expect state vocational rehabilitation programs to pay for those aids. The uncertainty over who is to pay for interpreter services is discussed. (MLW)
Descriptors: Costs, Court Litigation, Deaf Interpreting, Deafness

Tucker, Bonnie Poitras – Journal of College and University Law, 1981
In failing to address procedural or substantive issues regarding Section 504, the Supreme Court has not guided lower courts in interpreting a widely significant statute, leaving basic questions of defining rights and obligations unanswered. A full review of the entire Camenisch case, involving services to a deaf student, is needed. (MSE)
Descriptors: Accessibility (for Disabled), Court Litigation, Deaf Interpreting, Federal Legislation

Guthrie, R. Claire; Steinbach, Sheldon E. – Journal of College and University Law, 1981
A condensed brief filed by the American Council on Education and the National Institute of Independent Colleges and Universities on behalf of the University of Texas is presented. The arguments concern the applicability of Section 504 in the university's responsibility to provide an interpreter for a deaf graduate student. (MSE)
Descriptors: Accessibility (for Disabled), Court Litigation, Deaf Interpreting, Deafness

Giddings, Robert – Journal of College and University Law, 1981
A condensed version of a brief filed in the case of a deaf graduate student requesting that the university provide a sign language interpreter is presented. Arguments concern the misconstrual of previous court rulings, of the law, and of whether or not the specific program in question must be federally funded. (MSE)
Descriptors: Accessibility (for Disabled), Court Litigation, Deaf Interpreting, Deafness