Introduction
Abuse is one of the factors considered to have discouraged physically challenged students from pursuing their academic careers.
They keep off from school activities because they are unable to support themselves physically and emotionally. Following these difficulties, college students have taken an initiative of ensuring that they consult with courts in order to enjoy their freedoms in institutions of high learning, such as colleges.
Disabled students have a number of rights owing to their physical conditions. Statistics show that an approximated 140142 students are disabled, which represents nine percent. Disable students have launched complaints successfully, which have allowed them to force colleges to conform to the provisions of the court.
In 1973, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act was passed, which empowered the disabled students to exercise their rights without the fear of retribution. In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed into law.
The passage of the bill forced all institutions of high learning to implement policies aimed at bettering the lives of the disabled (Borich, 2007).
Legal Protection of Students with Disabilities
The Fourteenth Amendment was the only bill that catered for the interests of the disabled in society.
Disabled individuals were treated in the same way as minorities.
In 1973, the law was enacted, which allowed the disabled students to launch a complaint with the federal court in case the school administration failed to provide sufficient support to the physically challenged.
However, the law provides that the claimant should be qualified to be termed as a disabled person.
In 1979, the Supreme Court ruled that a student should not be admitted into a nursing program since she was not qualified to take part in the program.
In the Southern Community College v. Davis, 1979, the school administration claimed that the student who had hearing impairment could not be admitted because there were no specified accommodations for deaf students.
The student had requested that the college provides specialized services, including hiring a full-time tutor for her.
The college complained that it would be forced to compromise with quality before admitting the student into the program.
In the County of Los Angeles v. Kling, 1985 case, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the college because there were no affirmative action plans in the 1973 law.
However, there were some developments in 1985 because the court ruled that disabled students could participate in programs in which they qualified.
On the other hand, the standards governing the program could not be changed.
Admissions
Some preadmission activities regulate students from taking a particular course. These activities include completion of admission forms, payment of necessary fees, and undergoing preliminary testing.
All students are expected to submit their forms after completing them accurately and honestly. However, the law demands that all disabled students be excused from some activities that may complicate their process.
Nonetheless, students are expected to qualify for the courses before seeking for admission, irrespective of whether the student is impaired or not.
All students should prove that they have the capacity to undertake the course before being allowed to apply.
Disabled students provide information regarding their status simply because they might need specialized accommodation.
In the University of Minnesota, 1995 case, the Supreme Court ruled that all students must meet the academic requirements before being admitted. This is aimed at ensuring sustainability of quality (Weeden, Winter, & Broadfoot, 2002).
One of the courts in the use ruled that allowing students to be admitted to courses without taking them through tests would be one way of tolerating mediocrity in the academic system.
In the Price v. National Board of Medical Examiners, 1997 case, the court observed that students should not be given due advantage because their disabilities. Any favor extended to a disabled student should be aimed at accommodating the disability but not the interests of the applicant.
In 1995, the Seventh Circuit arbitrated a case that involved issues related to quality. The examiner provided exams to students without considering the physical challenges of students.
In the Mallett v. Marquette case, disabled students had been provided with substandard accommodations that could not help them undertake the exam successfully. The examiner recommended that students be provided with aiding equipments that would help them perform well exams.
However, the school authorities neglected this advice. It was unfortunate that the court found the complainant unqualified to sit for law exams.
Conclusion
Students with disabilities have the freedom to undertake courses of their interests, as long as they qualify.
However, students with special interests are admitted after considering their performance in various levels.
In other words, it means that the law recognizes the physical conditions of students, but not their individual interests.
A number of cases have been ruled in favor of school administrations because students do not qualify to undertake such courses.
References
Borich, G. (2007). Effective Teaching Methods: Research-Based Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Weeden, P., Winter J., & Broadfoot, P. (2002). Assessment: What is in it for Schools? London: Routledge.