You are here:

NCAC: Research & Solutions: Effective Teaching Practices: Overview Summary of State Studies: Footnotes

Footnotes

1. The National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC), a co-sponsor of this discussion, is funded by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in the U.S. Department of Education. However, the opinions expressed in these source documents do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S. Department of Education or the Office of Special Education Programs and no endorsement by that office should be inferred.

2. Co-Director, Universal Learning Center (ULC); Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST)

3. "The new emphasis on participation in the general education curriculum…is intended to produce attention to the accommodations and adjustments necessary for disabled children to access the general education curriculum and the special services which may be necessary for appropriate participation in particular areas of the curriculum…" (U.S. Senate, 1997, p. 17).

4. "Current textbook materials and teaching practices typically fail to effectively provide support that can be individualized for students who need help…" Research Connections in Special Education, Number 5, Fall 1999, Universal Design; The ERIC/OSEP Special Project, Council for Exceptional Children. Online at: http://ericec.org/osep/recon5/rc5sec2.html

5. A Curriculum Every Student Can Use: Design Principles for Student Access. ERIC/OSEP Topical Brief, by Raymond Orkwis and Kathleen McLane, 1998, Non-classroom Material (055); Eric Product (071); ERIC Identifier: ED423654; Available from: ERIC/OSEP Special Project, The ERIC Clearinghouse on
Disabilities and Gifted Education, The Council for Exceptional Children, 1920 Association Drive, Reston, VA 20191-1589; Tel/TTY: 800-328-0272 (Toll-Free); Fax: 703- 620-2521; e-mail: ericec@cec.sped.org; Web site: http://www.cec.sped.org/ericec.htm; Rose, D. and Meyer, A., The future in the margins: The role of technology and disability in educational reform. [Online]. Retrieved March 5, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.cast.org/udl/index.cfm?I=114

6. Vice President for Legal & Governmental Affairs, Association of American Publishers (AAP)

7. This report was completed on August 13, 2002.

8. Senior Director of Systems Development, Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST)

9. Research Attorney, Harvard Children's Initiative (HCI); Managing Director, National Center for Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC) Policy Group

10. Despite the fact that so many internet users thrive on free information, Charles Cooper points out in a recent on-line commentary that the number of free content providers is quickly diminishing as sites like Salon.com and TheStreet.com try to keep their bills paid. See The Free Ride is over - Thank Goodness, ZDnet.com, August 9, 2002; http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1107-949089.html

11. See Federal and State Legislation Regarding Accessible Materials, by Erica S. Perl, 9/12/02 (companion report to this document, also posted on "Policy, Property and Permissions: A Discussion of Accessible Curriculum Materials" website).

12. http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_6/kerscher/index.html

13. This report was completed on September 12, 2002.

14. Research Attorney, Harvard Children's Initiative (HCI); Managing Director, National Center for Accessing the General Curriculum (NCAC) Policy Group.

15. The text of the Act reads:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated annually to the Library of Congress, in addition to appropriations otherwise made to said Library, the sum of $100,000, which sum shall be expended under the direction of the Librarian of Congress to provide books for the use of the adult blind residents of the United States, including the several States, Territories, insular possessions, and the District of Columbia. Sec. 2. The Librarian of Congress may arrange with such libraries as he may judge appropriate to serve as local or regional centers for the circulation of such books, under such conditions and regulations as he may prescribe. In the lending of such books preference shall at all times be given to the needs of blind persons who have been honorably discharged from the United States military or naval service. Approved, March 3, 1931. Chap. 400. Sec. 1, 46 Stat. 1487, 71st Congress

16. Section 121 provides, in relevant part, as follows:

• 121. Limitations on exclusive rights: reproduction for blind or other people with disabilities
  
  
• (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 710, it is not an infringement of copyright for an authorized entity to reproduce or to distribute copies or phonorecords of a previously published, nondramatic literary work if such copies or phonorecords are reproduced or distributed in specialized formats exclusively for use by blind or other persons with disabilities.
  
  
• (b)(1) Copies or phonorecords to which this section applies shall --
• (A) not be reproduced or distributed in a format other than a specialized format exclusively for use by blind or other persons with disabilities.
• (c) For purposes of this section, the term --
• (1) "authorized entity" means a nonprofit organization or a governmental agency that has a primary mission to provide specialized services relating to training, education, or adaptive reading or information access needs of blind or other persons with disabilities;
• (2) "blind or other persons with disabilities" means individuals who are eligible or who may qualify in accordance with the Act entitled "An Act to provide books for the adult blind", approved March 3, 1931 (2 U.S.C. 135a; 46 Stat. 1487) to receive books and other publications produced in specialized formats; and
• (3) "specialized formats" means braille, audio, or digital text which is
  exclusively for the blind or other persons with disabilities.

• No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States … shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance …

18. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is another applicable anti-discrimination statute. The ADA specifically prohibits discrimination by educational institutions on the basis of disability. Title II of the ADA requires that all State and local governments (and their public educational facilities) give people with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from all of their programs, services, and activities. Private educational facilities are also covered under the ADA (Title III - Public Accommodations) and must comply with basic nondiscrimination requirements that prohibit exclusion, segregation, and unequal treatment.

19. 34 C.F.R. § 104.4(b)(1).

20. Id. § 104.4(b)(2).

21. See e.g. Sabo v. O'Bannon, 586 F. Supp. 1132 (E.D. Pa. 1984); Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (1979).

22. IDEA was originally called P.L. 94-142 or the Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975.

23. IDEA also mandates that particular procedures be followed in the development of the IEP. Each student's IEP must be developed by a team of knowledgeable persons and must be at least reviewed annually. The team includes the child's teacher; the parents, subject to certain limited exceptions; the child, if determined appropriate; an agency representative who is qualified to provide or supervise the provision of special education; and other individuals at the parents' or agency's discretion. If parents disagree with the proposed IEP, they can request a due process hearing and a review from the State educational agency if applicable in that state. They also can appeal the State agency's decision to State or Federal court.

24. For further comparisons of Section 504 and IDEA, see "Section 504 and IDEA: Basic Similarities and Differences," by S. James Rosenfeld; available at http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/legal_legislative/edlaw504.html

25. Some individuals with disabilities may need accessibility-related software or peripheral devices in order to use systems that comply with Section 508.

26. New versions of OCR software (OmniPage Pro 11 from ScanSoft.com, for example) claim increasing accuracy and digitizing that can retain the page layout (including graphics) while translating files from and to formats such as PDF, WORD, and RTF. While this new functionality helps to increase the speed of the process, digitizing a textbook is still a non-trivial task that requires considerable oversight and human intervention in order to guarantee a result that can be effectively used in a classroom.

27. H.R. 4582 and S. 2246.

28. In addition to the $1 million to develop the center, $5 million would be available for the first few years to help states pay for the technology needed to make use of the electronic files.

29. http://www.afb.org/info_document_view.asp?DocumentID=1705

30. The legislation applies only to accredited, nonprofit educational institutions.

31. On 8/20/2002 the bill, H.R. 5211, was referred to House subcommittees on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.

32. For the complete text of this bill, go to: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.5211:

33. On August 20, 2002 this bill was referred to House subcommittee.

34. Most, although not all, states already have laws pertaining to materials for blind and visually impaired students. A state-by-state list of laws on accessible materials for the blind and visually impaired is available at: http://www.afb.org/info_document_view.asp?documentid=360

35. This research was conducted in June, 2002. It is possible that the status and/or text of some of these laws has been altered since then. A chart summarizing the provisions of the states surveyed in this section is attached to this report as exhibit "A."

36. The statute is available at:
http://www2.state.ga.us/Legis/2001_02/fulltext/hb1342.htm

37. The statute is available at: http://www2.state.ga.us/Legis/2001_02/fulltext/hb228.htm

38. A summary of the Kentucky statute is available at http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/record/02rs/SB243.htm and the full text is available at http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/record/02rs/SB243/bill.doc

39. CA AB 804. For more information, go to: http://www.cde.ca.gov/spbranch/sed/lawsreg2.htm

40. 2002 K-8 Reading / Language Arts / English Language Development Adoption Criteria, available from CA Department of Education, Curriculum Frameworks and Instructional Resources Office, (916) 657-3023

41. The New York statute is available for those with LEXIS access at http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve/frames?_m=2afbbacb985a182437c4248ca9990e5b&csvc=le&cform=byCitation&_fmtstr=CITE&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVlb-lSlbz&_md5=248d7eed6a63bdec0804c5e344aa14db

42. The Texas statute is available for those with LEXIS access at http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve/frames?_m=c0dcbb03e01cd02045749602d1a5fb59&csvc=bl&cform=bool&_fmtstr=XCITE&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVlb-lSlbz&_md5=0facb2997b1055c28c684921c087640d

43. The Maryland statute is available for those with LEXIS access at http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve/frames?_m=5f601088a8daea7e69b5228090fb4708&csvc=bl&cform=bool&_fmtstr=XCITE&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVlb-lSlbz&_md5=da9a89d2c93462987279421e0c2a52fc

44. In addition, Maryland has a statute that requires all computer-based instructional material (including digital textbooks) to be Section 508 compliant. For a summary, see http://www.mdtap.org/content/accesslaw.html

45. See: http://www.its.mnscu.edu/webmaster/access/

46. See Thompson Publishing Group's Section 504 Compliance Handbook, Supplement No. 281 (April 2002), available from TPG, 1725 K St. NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20006

47. If the non-profit organization in question is a public school, the best approach might be to establish a distinct program within the school that specifically addresses the needs of print-disabled learners.

48. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Whitepaper, Unintended Consequences - Three Years Under the DMCA; available at: http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_consequences.html

49. Annotated Summary of the DMCA by David C. Niemi, available at: http://www.tuxers.net/dmca/dmca-notes.txt

50. Id.; see also von Lohmann, Fred, Fair Use and Digital Rights Management: Preliminary Thoughts on the (Irreconcilable) Tension between Them; available at: http://www.eff.org/IP/DRM/fair_use_and_drm.html
51. As the Copyright Committee of the Association of American Publishers (AAP) states: "Fair use, as a judicially-created principle of equity subsequently codified in Section 107 of the Copyright Act, does not give anyone a right to have access to a copyrighted work; nor does it create any obligation on the part of a copyright holder to facilitate reproduction or distribution of a lawfully-acquired copy of a copyrighted work. Properly understood as embodying a limited, circumstantial privilege to engage in certain otherwise infringing conduct without the permission of the copyright holder, the "fair use" doctrine is not compromised by the use of technological measures and is not in conflict with [the DMCA's] mandate to prohibit the circumvention of technological measures." See AAP Copyright Committee Position Paper on Contractual Licensing, Technological Measures, and Copyright Law; available at: http://www.publishers.org/abouta/copy/licensing.htm

52. The phrase "seemingly no" indicates that after extensive searching, we could find no law requiring that provision.