Students shouldn’t need accommodations for a course because they should be accessible to begin with

This week, I had a very pleasant meeting with one of my course instructors and it made me wonder: why can’t courses be set up in a way that is accessible to begin with?

Let me backtrack a bit. I’m registered with Student Accessibility Services, which is a service that allows you to request accommodations for your courses. To receive your accommodations, you must register and confirm your accommodations every term. Once you register, an accommodation letter is sent to your instructor and you are expected to communicate with your instructor about your accommodations. This is to ensure any details of your accommodations are taken into consideration and that you and your instructor are on the same page.

This can be a tedious process and if I’m being honest, I often forget to schedule a meeting with my course instructors. Unfortunately, this avenue is the only way to access “formal” accommodations from the university and as a result, many disabled students are left advocating for their needs.

Last week, I set up a meeting with my instructor. I was very nervous to meet her as I have had issues with accommodations in the past. Yet, I felt a glimmer of hope — the course had lecture transcripts, which is not something I’ve seen in any of my other courses in the past three years that I’ve attended McMaster University. With in-person classes, many lectures were not podcasted and if they were, they were rarely captioned and never had a transcript. Online classes have obviously been better with recording lectures, but many of them are still not captioned.

Yet, I felt a glimmer of hope — the course had lecture transcripts, which is not something I’ve seen in any of my other courses in the past three years that I’ve attended McMaster University.

As I mentioned previously, the meeting was great. My instructor was very kind, understanding of my situation and made sure to ask me if she could alter anything about the course to make it better for me. She asked me if I needed a notetaker, but I mentioned that the lecture transcripts were very helpful — maybe even better than having course notes. I brought up my concerns surrounding the quizzes and exam, as one of my accommodations included extra time and I wasn’t sure if that would be accounted for on Avenue to Learn. But she assured me that the quizzes were not timed and that the exam was a take-home exam. She also let me know that if I needed any extensions on assignments to just let her know a few days beforehand and that it would be no problem to grant an extension.

When we started discussing the course as a whole, she mentioned something that gave me an interesting perspective on course accessibility. My instructor told me that she could empathize with my disability as she also took medication for anxiety. She let me know that because of her experience with mental illness, she tried to set up the course in the way that she would have liked to take it as someone with anxiety. This meant providing transcripts, offering untimed quizzes and being lenient with deadlines. Since she set the course up this way, I didn’t really need to use my accommodations because I was already accommodated for.

During this meeting, I felt like I was able to sigh a breath of relief. I hadn’t realized until now how often I had to advocate for accommodations. Sometimes it would be just a meeting, but sometimes I had to contact my SAS coordinator because my instructor refused to accommodate me. For this class, though, my instructor considered students’ disabilities when designing the course. Accommodations were considered not as an afterthought but during the preparation of the course. As a result, I didn’t need to push for my needs to be heard because the course was accessible to begin with.

Accommodations were considered not as an afterthought but during the preparation of the course.

This made me reflect on other courses I’ve taken throughout my undergraduate career. Most courses I’ve taken were not set up in a way that I didn’t really need to use my SAS accommodations; they were more of an afterthought. If you had accommodations, the instructor would find a way to incorporate them into the course. Otherwise, the course would just run as the instructor intended it to be, even if the course is inaccessible.

I’m grateful to have SAS accommodations. If a course isn’t set up in a way that is accessible for me, I can meet with my instructor and figure out an accommodation plan. But not everyone who needs accommodations is able to use SAS. If you don’t have accommodations, it’s up to you to figure out how to make the course accessible, whether that’s through asking your peers for notes or asking your instructor for extensions even though you don’t have an official letter to back up your disability.

Although this is the norm right now, it shouldn’t be. We’re paying to take these courses, so instructors should make sure that we are able to take the course. The responsibility of making courses accessible should not fall on disabled students. Instead, courses should be set up in a way that considers disability. Offering accommodations is a good start, but we should strive to make courses accessible to begin with.

How remote education benefits students who experience disabilities

By: Yvonne Syed, Contributor

Since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 as a pandemic in March 2020, educators and postsecondary institutions have been hard at work transferring their teaching to online delivery methods. To accommodate everyone’s health and safety, remote learning has become a norm and is something we will be engaging in for at least a year. 

Earlier this year, McMaster University students completed the remainder of their winter 2020 term online and offered spring and summer courses remotely. Then this past week, through a letter from the provost, it has been confirmed that the university will remain online until the end of the winter 2021 term. 

To accommodate for remote methods of teaching and learning, the university prepared for the fall term by making pre-recorded lectures, posting slides on Avenue to Learn and offering remote office hours. While online learning may not be a preferred method of learning for some students, remote delivery has undoubtedly made life easier in the sense that learning is more accessible for some students with some of the flexibility it brings. This is evident in the ability for students to learn at their own pace in some courses that are now being offered asynchronously, or for courses that now pre-record, podcast or post lecture recordings, as it does not constrain students to set times for learning. The adjustments made related to COVID-19 are showing us that more effortful accessibility accommodations for students with disabilities could have always been arranged.

Prior to the adjustments made as a result of the pandemic, students who experience disabilities were at a significant disadvantage in terms of access to an educational experience that best facilitated their learning and met their individual needs. For instance, students with attention and concentration problems may have trouble focusing during in-person lectures and some students with physical and invisible disabilities may be unable to maintain regular in-person attendance as a result of their conditions. Additionally, deaf and hard of hearing students benefit from the closed captioning made available on the pre-recorded lectures the university is now offering for some courses. 

While Student Accessibility Services is available for students to seek accommodations to support their learning, the services provided by SAS are limited and may fail to completely meet the needs of students. For example, SAS note takers are provided on a volunteer basis, meaning that if there are no student volunteers that come forward to provide notes for a given course, the students requiring accommodations will not receive the support they need to be successful in the course. Thus, students have had to rely on minimal and potentially unreliable accommodations such as having a note-taker for their courses, when they could have more support ensuring that the delivery method of their education is made more feasible for their learning needs. While it is disappointing that these students’ needs were not given priority and that it took a crisis like a pandemic for everyone to realize that these measures could have been implemented earlier, it would be extremely beneficial to have these accommodations implemented in future. 

While it is disappointing that these students’ needs were not given priority and that it took a crisis like a pandemic for everyone to realize that these measures could have been implemented earlier, it would be extremely beneficial to have these accommodations implemented in future. 

Moving forward, it is imperative that McMaster University re-evaluates the extent to which it offers accommodations so that they can support all types of learners, including neurodivergent students and students with disabilities. The current accommodations with online learning may not be necessary for all students once the pandemic improves, but remote or blended learning should still be offered as an option for students who learn better this way. Making access to class materials online and not just in-person allows students who are unable to attend every class, due to mental health symptoms or disabilities, to catch up. The same goes for students who need mobility aids during a harsh winter semester with many snowy days, which may hinder their ability to make it to class.

While creating these accommodations are undeniably a timely and effortful process, it yields results that support an inclusive learning environment and ensures that all students can excel in their educational endeavours. Empowering all students in education, beyond those who are neurotypical and able-bodied, is a matter of great importance. Accordingly, postsecondary institutions must transcend beyond using the universal design for instruction in order to meet these needs.

Photo by Matty Flader / Photo Reporter

By Mads Clement, Contributor

cw: mental health, suicide

In 2018, the Student Representative Assembly voted to rescind the Peer Support Line (PSL), an anonymous hotline that existed to support students and their mental health. 

PSL offered students a place to chat with another student trained in peer support about difficulties that they were experiencing. These challenges could range from relationship issues to academic problems. 

According to a former vice president (administration) of the McMaster Students Union, the main reason the PSL was rescinded was because it received too many “crisis calls”, which posed a liability to all parties involved. Given student staff were not trained in crisis management or how to address calls with students experiencing suicidal ideation, this is a reasonable concern. 

However, closing a mental health-based service has had negative impacts on the student body. We have lost one more resource on our already very small list of mental health resources. Anonymous peer support is extremely valuable. These services can be accessed without the fear of your name being officially attached to your mental health issues and because peers can relate to you on levels that adult therapists often cannot. Having someone who can relate to you without worrying about whether you will be institutionalized is an important facet of mental health care.

For these reasons and many others, students were outraged by the closing of PSL. We took to Twitter and Facebook, asking for answers as to why such a valuable service would be rescinded. It’s hard to find mental health care on campus, and reducing our options makes it even harder. 

I actually received a reply from a member of the SRA to my outraged tweets where they wrote; “actually, there are 4 new counsellors that have been added to increase 4,000 hours of counselling to decrease the waiting time that students face when accessing the Student Wellness Centre.”

There are three main reasons why this resolution is an issue.

Problem number one: as mentioned above, going to a therapist is not the ideal option for everyone, as some students are likely to have minimal shared experiences with therapists. This especially applies to marginalized folks; patients of colour are less likely to find a racialized therapist that understands the impacts of systemic racism on their mental health. 2SLGBTQ+ students face a similar struggle when dealing with cisgender, heterosexual therapists. The same can be said of various other marginalized identities.

The second problem is that four more therapists isn’t enough. Ask anyone who goes to therapy at the SWC about how long they wait for appointments. In the majority of cases, there’s a two week to one month gap in between appointments. This is not adequate. On top of that, the therapists and counsellors are so swamped with students that they rarely have time to dedicate care to their patients beyond a surface level interaction. Mental health problems often run a lot deeper than what therapists are able to deal with because of their volume of patients.

Since there are many students floundering for mental health care outside of the SWC and PSL, more pressure has been put on the MSU peer support services: Women and Gender Equity Network, the Pride Community Centre, Student Health Education Centre and Maccess. These services, like PSL, are run by students who have entry level peer support training and are not compensated for their work. They are not equipped to handle the volume of students coming to them for help, let alone the degree of mental distress some of their space users are in. These students are not trained therapists.

Additionally, the majority of students that volunteer for these services are marginalized, which leads to the issue of marginalized students taking on all the mental health work on campus. These students, because of the pressures in their own lives and the added pressures of dealing with the mental health crises of others that they can’t always handle, often develop their own mental health problems and also need support or therapy. This system is unbalanced and unsustainable.

We need a balance of both therapists and peer support services. Therapists can provide specialized care to those who need it, but they are at capacity at McMaster University right now. We need more therapists; specifically therapists who have experiences with marginalization. It’s super weird talking about institutionalized transphobia with a cisgender, heterosexual person. This needs to change. 

In addition, the MSU peer support services need more funding and volunteers should be compensated for their work. They put hours of unpaid labour into an unforgiving system that does not support them.

McMaster needs to rework its mental health support systems, and it needs to do this as urgently as possible. Everyone suffers when mental health services are limited, not just mentally ill folks. 

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Photo by Cindy Cui / Photo Editor

By Ember, Contributor

Every day, I am faced with choices that others may perceive as rather trivial or inconsequential. I choose whether to take the stairs or elevator, whether to take the bus or walk to campus or whether to watch a required video for class from 2010 on YouTube that only has auto-generated captions or turn closed captioning off.

What people may not realize is how often I must make these choices, how they can make or break my day and how McMaster University’s campus contributes to and reinforces the issues that I and many other disabled students deal with every day.

 

For starters, I use a mobility aid and I have auditory processing issues — neither my brain nor my body can keep up with what society demands from me. When I choose to take the stairs instead of the ramp or elevator, it doesn’t mean my disability magically disappears. By taking the stairs, I’m further crippling myself, because I unfortunately do not have the time to wait for the elevator. When I have to get to class quickly, I take the stairs because I’m either running behind, or because the elevator is overrun by able-bodied people who have decided that taking the stairs was too inconvenient. 

When I turn off the auto-generated captions on a nearly decade-old YouTube video, it’s because I've decided that incorrect words and sentences popping up on the screen will confuse me more than my delayed processing abilities. Having to make this decision in the first place is very strange, since McMaster University is supposed to abide by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act which requires that all videos be closed captioned.

According to AODA requirements, “any video added to a [McMaster] website AFTER 2014, or being used in a class, presentation, public talk, or online course MUST be properly closed captioned – either as part of the production process, or retroactively.”

Now, take a second to think about how many times you’ve had to watch a video in lecture that used auto-generated captions. If it’s been more than one occurrence, then it’s already too many. 

To add insult to injury, it is stated in McMaster’s own Academic Accommodation of Students with Disabilities Policy that they are actively choosing not to follow the social model of disability.

“It is our institutional aspiration to work towards a campus community that adopts the social definition of disability … However, this Policy acknowledges, upholds, and aligns itself with the medical definition of disability to be in accordance with the OHRC’s definition of disability and accompanying policies and statements,” states the policy.

For those who don’t know, the social model of disability refers to the idea that environments (physical, auditory, visually, etc.) are inaccessible and require accommodations. The medical model of disability refers to the belief that disability itself is the problem and needs to be solved. 

McMaster’s policy is painfully performative: it acknowledges that the social model of disability exists and is favoured by literal disabled people but then contradictorily states that the university abides by and reinforces the medical model of disability. This does nothing for me and other disabled students on campus except let us know that we cannot rely on the university to support us, as they are too busy playing respectability politics and listening only to the disabled people who don’t cause a rukus.

My own education, as well as the education of copious other disabled students, is constantly under the control of our professors and Student Accessibility Services (for those lucky enough to qualify for accommodations since the university lives and breathes by the medical model). Our success in academia is equivalent to if you had to flip a coin, roll a die, and play Russian roulette simultaneously — it’s essentially impossible.

There’s also the issue of being a “good disabled person” — you have to be proactive, be able to predict when your disability will incapacitate you from completing assignments, contact your instructor immediately when an issue arises and be amicable and apologetic about your existence and inconveniencing your instructor (as well as the rest of the student body) with your accommodations.

I will not apologize for pursuing education — if I have to pay to be here like anyone else then I should be given opportunities to succeed like everyone else.

If your syllabus doesn’t account for disabled students, then your syllabus is garbage. You can’t just slap the word “accessible” wherever you want and then do nothing to achieve accessibility. Accessibility is an ideal to strive for and needs active participation and effort to be implemented. It is not a buzzword to be thrown around just because you don’t want to be called out on your complacent violence.

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

On Jan. 11, McMaster Daily News published an article by Catherine Munn, an associate clinical professor from McMaster University’s psychiatry and behavioural neurosciences and lead psychiatrist at the McMaster Student Wellness Centre.

Titled ‘Why are so many students struggling with mental health?’, the article discusses the factors that may lead to why students are struggling with mental health and the support systems in place, both on and off-campus, for those who find themselves struggling. It also demonstrates that students are in severe need for better mental health support on campus.

From inadequate funding for Student Accessibility Services, severely long wait times to see a counsellor and over 23,000 students accessing support from SWELL, it’s interesting to see that candidates in the McMaster Student Union presidential election aren’t prioritizing mental health in their campaigns.

Out of the four candidates in this year’s race, only three of them have a single platform point related to mental health support on campus. Out of these three, only one platform is feasible in theory, while still remaining financially unclear.

Generally, once these platform points are simmered down, they don’t amount to anything more than a relatively ambitious and opportunistic points to gain your vote. Each platform that has a talking point about mental health support has no plan that is feasible or realistical to implement structures that support students on and off-campus.

Sure, there is only so much that can be done within a year’s term. But within a year’s term, the MSU president’s role is to advocate on behalf of students and to bring your concerns to higher levels of governments and to university administration.

We can turn these talking points into feasible opportunities to support those who are struggling on campus by prioritizing their needs over self-indulgent platforms from our presidential candidates.

So let’s be clear, we can do a whole lot better for the many students who are struggling with mental health.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo by Kyle West

By: Steffi Arkilander

Content Warning: Contains mentions of sexual assault

McMaster University has a strong reputation among Ontario universities for offering a variety of diverse student-oriented resources and supports. However, McMaster has consistently failed in making support for sexual violence survivors accessible and effective.

On Aug. 19, I was sexually assaulted by someone I trusted, just a few weeks before I started my second year at McMaster. I decided to give university resources a chance and reached out to the sexual violence response coordinator, Meaghan Ross, in October.

I needed academic accommodations to support the extensive and difficult emotional turmoil I was experiencing. My grades were falling and I was not ready to write any tests. To receive academic accommodations, I had to use Ross in my letter for Student Accessibility Services, which meant disclosing my sexual assault to numerous administrative individuals.

Unfortunately, getting registered with SAS is a long process and often my deferred midterms fell on days where I had other assessments or midterms. As a result, instead of my work being manageably spread out, my work and emotional distress were compounded together.

In December, I decided to report my assault to the university. Not only was it unfair to me to have to constantly interact with my perpetrator, but it was also unfair to other students that had to interact with him. But when I contacted the McMaster Students Union and the Residence Life Office, I learned that undergoing the reporting processes is an extensive and exhausting endeavour.

The process forces you to disclose your story to multiple organizations, to staff and non-survivors and brings your sexual assault to the public forefront. Even if my perpetrator is removed from positions without contact from me, he will know I caused his removal and that I decided to take action. Moreover, people will be able to piece my story together. While I am personally okay with this, many others are not.

Thus, to receive accommodations,such as an apology or to remove him from a position, I took the informal route that is offered through the McMaster University sexual violence protocol. To my disappointment, this route requires survivors to detail the incident. This creates an incredibly re-traumatizing experience and gives your perpetrator access to your disclosure, allowing them to reject the requested accommodations.

This process has clearly become incredibly legal, despite pursuing the university route in order to avoid legal involvement. As this process is painfully slow, my perpetrator continues to hold positions of power and interact with the student body without consequence. My perpetrator is free to roam campus while I am forced to anxiously avoid him.

My story is not uncommon. In fact, in comparison to other survivors, the university has responded well. Students generally don’t report their sexual assaults because of the university’s response; the survivor often feels interrogated and is led to hope for an unsatisfactory compromise with their perpetrator.

Survivors need to be prioritized. MacLean’s nationwide survey found that 29 per cent of McMaster students were not educated on how to report a sexual assault and 24 per cent of students weren’t educated on McMaster’s services that support survivors. This needs to change.

The system should be more navigable and transparent, so that survivors are more likely to reach out for help. Reporting assaults needs to be standardized university-wide so that survivors do not need to recount their experience to multiple organizations.

Training does not teach perpetrators not to assault people. My perpetrator has attended over five trainings on anti-oppressive practices and sexual violence throughout university.

Instead, training needs to emphasize on supporting survivors, and tangible means by which we can all work to dismantle the barriers impeding support mechanisms. The fact that only three in 1000 assaults results in conviction only becomes horrifyingly real when you have to support a survivor or become one yourself.

Survivors have nothing to gain from reporting, only lots to lose. So please believe us.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

By Alex Wilson

As many people reading may already know, McMaster Student Accessibility Services facilitates a notetaking programing for students who experience disability to receive notes for their classes. This voluntary program relies on students registering to be a notetaker and regularly uploading their notes. However, with a lack of resources dedicated to the program and the issues of accessibility on campus, the system is sets up students for failure.

While the ability to request a notetaker is a very common accommodation provided through SAS, the supply is nowhere close to meeting the increasing demand. This was demonstrated through the past three Student Accessibility Forums as well as Maccess’s (In)accessibility Week last year. Students have been saying there is a problem for years, yet no one has taken accountability. When students do have notetakers, they may stop posting throughout the year, and because there are no contingency plans in place, the students requiring these notes are left with no support. Additionally, once students have selected a notetaker they can’t see any other notes provided by other notetakers in the class.

Who has access to these resources, as limited as they may be, is a continuous concern for students. Only students registered with SAS are able to request a notetaker. While this may make sense to those who immediately jump to conversations of “leveling the playing field” or people “taking advantage of the system”, having certain conditions diagnosed and receiving necessary documentation can take several years and cost upwards of $1,000.

Additionally, ongoing violence and associations of eugenics by medical systems against certain communities prevents individuals from reaching out to these systems in the first place. What we’ve created is a note taking system that rarely works, and when it does only for a select few.

This is unacceptable. When we look at the numerous financial, social and physical barriers as well as medical gatekeeping that already bars so many disabled students from attending post-secondary education, conditions like these only further the message that post-secondary education has not been developed with disabled people in mind and that we are undesirable. Accommodation services, being afterthoughts and band-aid solutions to an inaccessible environment that will never allow for universal access, we all need to start thinking about accessibility from the beginning.

However, with a lack of resources dedicated to the program and the issues of accessibility on campus, the system is sets up students for failure.

The current system fails because it relies on certain people in certain roles being responsible for accessibility, allowing others to remain passive. It is also awkward and disconnected from the rest of the teaching environment relying on students to continually offer labour for no compensation. So where do we go from here?

One solution not only addresses problems with the current system, works to create a culture of accessibility and is pedagogically supported. Offer a portion of participation grades to those who upload notes regularly to Avenue. This system incentivizes the provision of notes, integrates it into the classroom environment, removes the need for systems of gatekeeping and normalizes accessibility. Additionally, we know that diversity in assessment allows students to excel and better meet educational outcomes.

This is one potential solution, of what are literal thousands that could drastically improve accessibility in McMaster classrooms. Other solutions include podcasting more courses, posting lecture notes for all students to access and providing multiple ways to engage with class material.

When it comes to accessible pedagogy, my point is that none of us are exempt. The siloing of accessibility to certain people in certain roles allows for bystanders. Frequently we have conversations about better resourcing SAS (and while that is important), we also need to ask why so few individuals have a role in creating an accessible campus in the first place.

Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Reza Moridi, came to McMaster this afternoon to announce an additional $6-million investment in accessibility programs at Ontario Universities.

“McMaster University is a fitting place for today’s announcement. This is an institution committed to creating and supporting a learning environment, and has put a lot of thought and planning into ensuring that students with disabilities have access to the services and support they need to thrive and prosper,” said Moridi.

The province will be investing $4.5 million to help students with disabilities through an Accessibility Fund for Students with Disabilities, and a Summer Transitions Program. Similar to McMaster’s Shifting Gears program, the Transitions Program will offer workshops and courses for high school students with disabilities coming into postsecondary education.

“It’s very hard for students sometimes to transfer from high school to university without this kind of support, because often, students with disabilities are not taught to self-advocate and speak up for themselves.

“Programs like this, and funding like this, will teach students that they matter, that they belong here, and that there is a space for them and a voice for them at McMaster,” said Sarah Jama, McMaster student and Ontario Director of the National Educational Association of Disabled Students.

This announcement comes on the heel of Jama’s recent presentation to the Student Representative Assembly’s June 21 meeting, on a proposed increase to the services provided for students with both visible and invisible disabilities. Jama, also a member of the SRA’s Social Sciences Caucus and Abilities Ad Hoc Committee, addressed the need for a peer-based program that will allow students with disabilities to help one another, at this past Sunday’s meeting. Today’s announcement will hopefully lead to meeting the clear need and demand for increased accessibility services on campus.

The remaining $1.5 million of the investment will be going towards a variety of programs including: note-taking services for students with visual impairments; interpreter services for deaf, deafened and hard of hearing students; learning assessment services; and computer and tablet applications that change text-to-speech and vice versa.

Previous investments in accessibility on campus have lead to the creation of the Accessible Campus website, the Innovative Design for Accessibility, or IDeA, competition for students, among other campus-based initiatives across the province.

Moridi explained that Ontario universities and colleges have seen close to a doubling of students with disabilities since the first implementations of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act in 2003, thus making accessibility on campus an even more pressing issue.

“Your success matters to all of us. Together we can build a more accessible, more enlightened, more inclusive, and more economically prosperous Ontario.”

Aurora Coltman

Silhouette Intern

samples of cialis

McMaster University has quite a few services designed to help students navigate their school, career options, and career paths. Distinguished among them is Student Accessibility Services, now celebrating its 25^th year in action.

The program has dedicated itself to providing students with the tools they need to navigate their school environment. For some students, that encompasses physical disabilities; for other students it is a service that offers them support with mental illnesses or learning disabilities.

These programs first appeared on the McMaster University campus 25 years ago, and have since transformed under names such as the Office of Ability and Access. In May of 2011, the title changed to become Student Accessibility Services.

Much of SAS’s earlier campus work targeted how to make the campus accessible to the physically disabled. That included adding ramps or elevators to buildings, ensuring doors were automated, and making washrooms available. Now, although SAS still handles such issues as they arise, they are also focusing their efforts on other projects.

“Probably the most dramatic changes that will take place now [is with] technology, the use of technology in classes to help teach students – the use of video displays, and other technologies that are useful to help gather and create things,” Tim Nolan, the director of SAS said.

Nolan explained that they cater to the needs of the students, but also attempt to comply with what the individual wants. For example, if a student with a writing or sight disability wanted to “write” their work themselves, they could speak to a digitized system that would then transfer their words onto a digital platform. Likewise, if the student felt uncomfortable with such technology, they could have their work scribed by someone else.

“Or if they are prepared to learn [to use the technology],” Nolan said, “then we will train them on it. We will work with them [to better their academic experience].”

Nolan and the rest of SAS have worked towards fulfilling the needs of students for 25 years now, and shall continue to do so for many yet. “We’ve hopefully touched a lot of students, and helped make a difference to them,” Nolan said. SAS will continue to operate to achieve its goals and help fundamentally increase the livelihoods and academic experiences of those who wish to take advantage of SAS’s services.

Life as we know it. It's a term used to start up sic-fi novels, generalize an undefinable aspect of human society, and shrug off a topic we'd prefer not to discuss. Life as we know it. But aside from our own, whose lives do we really know?

Disability Awareness Coordinator, Cassie Liviero, hopes to use her upcoming campaign with Student Accessibilty Services to address this question. Inspired by the television documentary series, "Life Story Project", the film campaign, entitled "Life as I know it", is set around creating an open environment for discussion, and allowing participants to express their thoughts and beliefs in a safe and welcoming space.

"It's a film and interview campaign. It involves students passing by on campus, sitting down for three to five minutes, and having genuine conversations on topics that affect us all. It comes from personal experiences… and as the narrative unfolds we see questions to do with disability, accessibility and perception," sys Liviero, relating the concept back to the principles and topics that shape SAS.

Some of the topics that will be used as discussion points include: inclusion, stereotyping, independence, values, recreation and leisure. In addition to these points, the notion of a "genuine conversation" is something that Liviero stresses during the interview. Unlike quick and easy conversations often said in passing, the campaign hopes to use this series of topics to engage participants and develop ideas full of depth and emotion.

"I found this type of approach has really become helpful, because it shows people that they can make a difference and they do count. And this project is not so much about making a difference, but we're trying to show that everybody's voice matters. And when you go this way, through experiences that everyone has had, they feel that their voice fits in," says Liviero.

In addition to working at SAS, Liviero is a fourth-year Sociology student living with a disability. And when it comes to supporting a cause that has affected her personally, she is determined to ensure that a strong and reliable message is sent across campus, and students with disabilities are able to express their feelings accurately and appropriately.

"We want to have the people who are actually experiencing disability be in the driver's seat. Instead of having someone telling us how we feel, people can say, now I have learned what you feel as individuals instead of making assumptions," she adds.

"Often times, we think that being in higher education, professors need to educate us, or parents, or someone higher than us, but really, we're our own educators. Through this campaign, people with disabilities know themselves, and really just people in general. They know themselves more than they think they do."

The film will involve active contributions from fellow students and on-campus partners. The video will be shot and edited by McMaster Multimedia students, and the hosts for each of the segments will be volunteers from CFMU. The video will be shot on Sept. 23, Oct. 3 and Oct. 10. A couch will be set up in the arts quad where students will be able to sit down and take part in discussions.

"I really feel that this event can also help anybody, not just people with disabilities. It helps anybody increase his or her awareness about themselves. And if you start increasing awareness about yourself, you can have a greater impact on people working with you. If you know more about yourself, you can have more positive interactions with others," says Liviero.

As Liviero and her team work towards building the campaign, they hope to bring discussion about disability to the forefront of the McMaster community along with a true understanding of this life as we know it.