ADA leads to death of UC Berkeley free online courses

[HurricaneDitka]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/berkeley-goes-offline/article/2007153
A lawsuit against UC Berkeley for discrimination against the disabled in their free online offering has resulted in all of the content being removed. This seems like a great tragedy to me, and one of liberal’s making, but I’m curious to hear thoughts on why I might be mistaken on either opinion.

1. Is this a tragedy, or a victory for equal rights for the disabled?

2. Is this somehow the fault of evil conservatives?

[Jonathan_Chance]

Rarely have I seen a well so thoroughly poisoned. That’s positively Borgian.

To the Pit.

[Bryan_Ekers]

This site might be a better source. The OP’s cite is more about railing against the ADA than about Berkeley specifically.

[PastTense]

Wouldn’t the faculty/students generating this stuff just put it directly on various sites such as Youtube?

[HurricaneDitka]

Here is Berkeley’s statement on the matter from last September:

…
we have attempted to maximize the accessibility of free, online content that we have made available to the public. Nevertheless, the Department of Justice has recently asserted that the University is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act because, in its view, not all of the free course and lecture content UC Berkeley makes available on certain online platforms is fully accessible to individuals with hearing, visual or manual disabilities.
…
In many cases the requirements proposed by the department would require the university to implement extremely expensive measures to continue to make these resources available to the public for free. We believe that in a time of substantial budget deficits and shrinking state financial support, our first obligation is to use our limited resources to support our enrolled students. Therefore, we must strongly consider the unenviable option of whether to remove content from public access.

[Ike_Witt]

I couldn’t really follow what the link in the OP was saying. Did Berkeley pull the courses because Closed Captioning wasn’t reasonable accommodation for deaf people?

[Bryan_Ekers]

shrinking state financial support

Clearly the fault of evil conservatives. Glad we cleared THAT up.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Ike_Witt

I couldn’t really follow what the link in the OP was saying. Did Berkeley pull the courses because Closed Captioning wasn’t reasonable accommodation for deaf people?

Sort of. Some of their courses didn’t have closed captioning.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Bryan_Ekers

Clearly the fault of evil conservatives. Glad we cleared THAT up.

In California? I don’t think there are any conservatives in a position to make a decision on budgets anywhere in California’s state government. I’d be delighted to be wrong though.

[Bryan_Ekers]

I’m delighted that you’re delighted.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Anyhoo, Berkeley’s FAQ on the matter suggests the issue is considerably more complicated and nuanced than the OP’s cite suggests.
Well, than the OP’s cite whines, to be more accurate.

[Skywatcher]

@HurricaneDitka

In California? I don’t think there are any conservatives in a position to make a decision on budgets anywhere in California’s state government. I’d be delighted to be wrong though.

[T]he state is projected to run a $1.6-billion deficit by next summer — a noticeable shift in the state’s fiscal stability that could worsen under federal spending cuts championed by President-elect Donald Trump … a change in the state’s fortunes that could stifle [Gov. Brown’s] fellow Democrats’ call for additional spending and give fuel to Republican demands for additional cuts.

[John_Mace]

Not seeing the nuance. The legacy lectures have been taken down to prevent a lawsuit from the DOJ. Can you quote what you think the nuance is?

UC Berkeley stopped posting course lecture videos publicly through webcast.berkeley.edu in 2015 as a way to reduce costs and increase adoption. However, we left legacy content from 2006-2015 in place. The Department of Justice letter indicates that they believe our legacy Course Capture content from webcast.berkeley.edu and located on YouTube and iTunesU is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. We are removing the legacy webcast.berkeley.edu content from public access to focus on making future public content more accessible.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Skywatcher

[T]he state is projected to run a $1.6-billion deficit by next summer — a noticeable shift in the state’s fiscal stability that could worsen under federal spending cuts championed by President-elect Donald Trump … a change in the state’s fortunes that could stifle [Gov. Brown’s] fellow Democrats’ call for additional spending and give fuel to Republican demands for additional cuts.

So we agree that the problem is the California state budget (decided by Democrats), right?

[Ambivalid]

@HurricaneDitka

Sort of. Some of their courses didn’t have closed captioning.

Is there info available that would put a price tag on correcting alll of these online issues? Who determines what “reasonable” means?

[Ambivalid]

At what point does it become more important to save money than to provide an equal opportunity for education for all? Is there a certain dollar amount?

[running_coach]

@Ambivalid

Is there info available that would put a price tag on correcting alll of these online issues? Who determines what “reasonable” means?

I’m going to guess that since some of the lectures were closed-captioned, they should have done them all.
The videos only go back to 2006, long after the ADA took effect. Circles back to my first point.

[Skywatcher]

@HurricaneDitka

So we agree that the problem is the California state budget (decided by Democrats), right?

Any federal funding cuts by the Trump Administration will also have an effect.

BTW, the California state budget is only decided by Democrats if the state legislature of California is comprised entirely of Democrats.

[octopus]

The good ol’ law of unintended consequences. And why is this in the pit?

[Skywatcher]

@octopus

And why is this in the pit?

See mod comment in post #2.