# DoJ Takes On Kindle On Campus



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Government Run Amok - If everyone can't use it, then no one can use it!


> The U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Education are taking on eReaders in universities, claiming that the Kindle DX may violate the "Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990" and Section 504 of the "Rehabilitation Act of 1973" in the classroom, because the eReaders are not designed for students that are blind or have low vision abilities. ...


More @ MediaBistro.com


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

Amazing!


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

And a standard printed book, is any different?

Heck... the Knidle versions, coudl be adabted to be on larger screens to help those with low vision ability... and probably there is a straight translator to a brail generator.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

What's wrong with this? The Kindle shouldn't be endorsed by colleges until it's properly designed for blind students. Blind students deserve the ease of use Kindle provides.

How can anyone disagree with the action?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And a standard printed book, is any different?


They are because they are sold in campus book stores where schools get a %.

This is nothing more than universities seeing a lucrative revenue stream dry up fast.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> What's wrong with this? The Kindle shouldn't be endorsed by colleges until it's properly designed for blind students. Blind students deserve the ease of use Kindle provides.
> 
> How can anyone disagree with the action?


Blind and Vision challenged people already need special editions of the text that the classes use.

So what is the problem with Kindle (or any other eReader) being the standard option for those that don't have those issues?

As I noted in my other reply.

Technologically speaking, the Kindle (eReader) data, could be easily adapted to large display systems for those are low vision problems... and an brail generator for those that are completely blind.

The argument in the link, discussing "if technology is used"....
Just going back to when I was in College... most of my class work would have been extremely difficult for those that had vision difficulties. And we used "technology" in just about any class.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Blind and Vision challenged people already need special editions of the text that the classes use.
> 
> So what is the problem with Kindle (or any other eReader) being the standard option for those that don't have those issues?
> 
> ...


That's what the DoJ wants..."the universities provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use."


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> That's what the DoJ wants..."the universities provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use."


That is now I interpretted it.

I read it as, they don't want the Kindle used or advanced at all in the education sector at all.

Going back to your point about the MONSTER $$$$ stream that the paper versions of books generate.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> That is now I interpretted it.
> 
> I read it as, they don't want the Kindle used or advanced at all in the education sector at all.
> 
> Going back to your point about the MONSTER $$$$ stream that the paper versions of books generate.


The DoJ letter said,
- the universities agreed not to purchase, require, or recommend use of the Kindle DX, or any other dedicated electronic book reader
- In order to do so, the schools must:
- be sure the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision
- provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use.​


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Nothing stops a student with the handicaps they're talking about from using the same ways they do today. This endorsement from the DoJ and DoE gives the universities the ability to put a lot of pressure on publishers to not release e-book versions. Which is exactly what they want because people like google, amazon, apple will give the publishers a larger cut of the sale to help them sell more hardware.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Doesn't the Kindle have a 'read-to-me' feature? Wouldn't that satisfy the requirement for blind or vision impaired people?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Do my tax dollars really need to pay for this? :nono:

What do the visually impaired to now? The standard textbook has to be a problem so what do they do now. 

Why isn't the DOJ taking on the textbook publishers? 

Not to mention the Kindle has text to speech built in, although you have to be able to see to activate it.

Mike


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Traditional, hard-copy printed books don't meet ADA requirements either. So, do we burn books, or just ban their use?

And what about children's playgrounds? Just because some children with disabilities cannot fully avail themselves of such facilities, should we have workers rip swings and sliding boards out of the ground?


This is nuts...the libs and their limp-wristed agenda have finally won. Fifty years of fighting liberal socialism and social liberalism has come down to this. I give up!


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> The DoJ letter said,
> - the universities agreed not to purchase, require, or recommend use of the Kindle DX, or any other dedicated electronic book reader
> - In order to do so, the schools must:
> - be sure the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision
> - provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use.​


So in other words... forget using the advantages of technology... until the full chicken is there before the egg.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for those that work hard at overcomming and adapting to their handicaps. But, in this case....

I just see it as nothing more then a $$$$ thing. There is absolutely no reason why the universities shouldn't be adapting to an electronic version of the material. Just makes sense. I have thrown out so many $75+ text books, that I thought I would keep... Electronic versions can be updated and corrected in "moments". Distributed to everone, and there is no "out of stock", wait for the second print.

This just smells and reeks of $$$ that someone is loosing out on at the bookstores... and they are using the handicap as their angle to get the trend reversed.
Thinking back to my college days (mid 90's)... some of the most important material, were the copies of the lecture presentations that were done on the overhead projectors.
I have no idea on how these would have been provided to blind and vision impared students in a respectable time frame.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Nick said:


> Traditional, hard-copy printed books don't meet ADA requirements either. So, do we burn books, or just ban their use?


They get books on tape. Many schools have departments set up to do this for disabled students. I have physical trouble turning pages and opening textbooks due to a muscle disease. Audio textbooks on tape were available if I asked.



> And what about children's playgrounds? Just because some children with disabilities cannot fully avail themselves of such facilities, should we have workers rip swings and sliding boards out of the ground?


They have adaptive playgrounds, now. It's great that the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, playgrounds must have equipment that is usable by children with disabilities. In 1998, these regulations were updated to reflect specific requirements for people under twelve years of age.



> This is nuts...the libs and their limp-wristed agenda have finally won. Fifty years of fighting liberal socialism and social liberalism has come down to this. I give up!


:lol: You're mad that society cares about disabled people? Yeah, us "limp-wristed" libs actually want equality...how socialistic! I guess you hated how 50 years ago you fought liberal socialism and social liberalism having to give blacks "liberal" rights? Then, that Title IX was horrible huh? Then, that stupid Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 was another socialistic agenda, huh?  How about we treat you elderly folks a little less special? No more senior citizen discounts, AARP, etc.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

It seems to me that this us just another one of those stories which seem to pop up that get a rise out of people without giving all the facts. Sadly these stories have become much more common in recent years.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> So in other words... forget using the advantages of technology... until the full chicken is there before the egg.
> 
> I have nothing but respect and admiration for those that work hard at overcomming and adapting to their handicaps. But, in this case....
> 
> ...


Look at this idea...A school says, "We're doing all texts on Kindle DX with an exclusive deal....no more books. You buy one here or on-line, then download books you need."

Great idea! Ok, but Kindle isn't adaptive for visual impaired students. The DoJ, which enforces the ADA, says, "The schools can do this IF the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. Or, the schools provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use."

Pretty simple, IMO.

As for asking about the copies of the lecture presentations that were done on the overhead projectors...Schools have Office of Disability Accommodations that hire note takers or get notes from profs then convert them for the students in need.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> They get books on tape. Many schools have departments set up to do this for disabled students. I have physical trouble turning pages and opening textbooks due to a muscle disease. Audio textbooks on tape were available if I asked.


So, then what's the problem with the Kindle? Can't they still get those same books on tape? This is laughable.

Nobody is preventing those with handicaps from having access to the material are they? They just can't use a Kindle. There's other means available.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> Look at this idea...A school says, "We're doing all texts on Kindle DX with an exclusive deal....no more books. You buy one here or on-line, then download books you need."
> 
> Great idea! Ok, but Kindle isn't adaptive for visual impaired students. The DoJ, which enforces the ADA, says, "The schools can do this IF the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. Or, the schools provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use."
> 
> ...


Look at it this way:

Hey, we are only making text books that are in standard print.
We are not making any brail editions or audio editions.

What is the difference?

Pretty simple, IMO.

Have there really been instances, where there is ONLY the kindle/ebook edition... and absolutely no other edition available for those that can't use those?
What stops there from being a brail/audio tape edition of a book and a eBook edition....

Again, on the surface... to me, this has aboslutely nothing to do with the handicap issue of the statement.
That is the just the avenue that was found to make the argument, to protect the $$$$ that is involved.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> So, then what's the problem with the Kindle? Can't they still get those same books on tape? This is laughable.
> 
> Nobody is preventing those with handicaps from having access to the material are they? They just can't use a Kindle. There's other means available.


Not every book is readily on tape. Plus, electronic media is more likely to have extra features that textbooks don't have. Again, the DoJ isn't saying no to Kindle DX...it's saying schools can use the Kindle DX idea IF the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. Or, the schools provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Look at it this way:
> 
> Hey, we are only making text books that are in standard print.
> We are not making any brail editions or audio editions.
> ...


Not every book has a braille or audio edition, so ODA at the school has to use $$$ & resources to get those converted.

School bookstores suffer as it is. Most students get books on-line, unless on scholarship.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> Not every book is readily on tape. Plus, electronic media is more likely to have extra features that textbooks don't have. Again, the DoJ isn't saying no to Kindle DX...it's saying schools can use the Kindle DX idea IF the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. Or, the schools provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use.


Ok, but if not every book is readily available on tape, then what's the difference? Are those books banned?

How can you provide blind students with the same interactions and ease of use? They don't have that with standard books either.

Guess what? A display tablet is never going to be fully accessible to blind students.

A student play is never going to have the same interactions with deaf people either. I guess no more theater department.

No more hackey sack on campus either, because it's not fully accessible to those in wheelchairs.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> Ok, but if not every book is readily available on tape, then what's the difference? Are those books banned?


Who said ban books? The Office of Disability Accommodations (ODA) would convert those books.



> How can you provide blind students with the same interactions and ease of use? They don't have that with standard books either.


You can get close. It's easier with simple text books.



> Guess what? A display tablet is never going to be fully accessible to blind students.


Ok, but it should come close.



> A student play is never going to have the same interactions with deaf people either. I guess no more theater department.


The ODA can provide a sign language interpreter if the student needs to see a play.



> No more hackey sack on campus either, because it's not fully accessible to those in wheelchairs.


Hackey is not required.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> Who said ban books? The Office of Disability Accommodations (ODA) would convert those books.


I guess I just don't understand the argument then. The kindle is more or less just a type of book. You have hardcover, softcover, digital readers, audio books, braile books.

Saying schools can't use the Kindle, because it's not as easy to use for blind people is no different than saying schools can't use books.

As you mentioned, there's books on tape. Problem solved.

I know, not all books are available on tape. But that's not a Kindle issue. That would be an issue for hardcover and softcover books too, would it not?

It has nothing to do with the delivery method (in this case, the Kindle). If they're going to ban the Kindle, because it's not as easy to use for blind people, then they should ban books too (because last I checked, they're not as easy to use for blind people either).

From the article:

*because the eReaders are not designed for students that are blind or have low vision abilities.*

Either are books, right?

Are they trying to say that the material is exclusive to the Kindle? If so, then I understand, but the article doesn't say that. Here's my interpretation of the article:

"Yes, the information is probably available in other formats (braile, audio), but it's not the same thing. Those aren't as easy to use as a Kindle"

Also from the article:

*until the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision*

See, they're not saying that until the material is available to blind students via other means, they're saying unitl the Kindle can be used by blind people.

Why? Why do they have to use the Kindle? They can't use braile books or audio tapes and receive the same information like they have been?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> It seems to me that this us just another one of those stories which seem to pop up that get a rise out of people without giving all the facts. Sadly these stories have become much more common in recent years.


You are astute Stuart. That is, of course, the case here. Another source explains:


> Last year, the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and the American Council of the Blind (ACB) lodged complaints on this basis against four universities that had adopted the Kindle DX as part of a pilot study with Amazon.com.
> 
> ...The principal difficulty, the letter goes on to say, is that some e-readers lack features that would make them "accessible" as per the requirements of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. For example, in the Justice Department's view, an e-reader without a text-to-speech equivalent of touchscreen menu and navigation controls would be all but useless to a blind user in a classroom.


So, first of all, the issue is the development of policy surrounding the introduction of a new technology in schools, all of which take taxpayer money. The letter is cautionary, not prohibitive.

The Kindle and the Kindle DX both have what Amazon terms an experimental feature "read-to-me" described as follows:


> With the Text-to-Speech feature, Kindle can read English newspapers, magazines, blogs, and books out loud to you, unless the book's rights holder made the feature unavailable. You can switch back and forth between reading and listening, and your spot is automatically saved. Pages automatically turn while the content is being read, so you can listen hands-free. You can choose from both male and female voices which can be sped up or slowed down to suit your preference. In the middle of a great book or article but have to jump in the car? Simply turn on Text-to-Speech and listen on the go.


Cool, but that is not "a text-to-speech equivalent of touchscreen menu and navigation controls." And while the DX has a large screen, Amazon brags:


> Unlike backlit computer or LCD screens, Kindle DX's display looks and reads like real paper, with no glare. Read as easily in bright sunlight as in your living room.


Backlit computer or LCD screens tend to be easier to read for people with low vision.

There is nothing inherently wrong with the Kindle except that it is a truly single purpose computer, a reader, with a b/w screen that was never designed for the visually impaired. It has a physical keyboard. Whether with some software modifications, it could meet the criteria I don't know.

I do know that the iPad has both a microphone and speakers, so obviously with the right Apps it could become the replacement for books on tape that could have a voice menu structure. And since the iPhone already has several approaches for the visually impaired, it seems like the iPad simply can use them. From Apple's web site:


> Using iPhone OS 3.0 and later, VoiceOver is available to help users with visual impairments use their iPhone OS-based devices. The UI Accessibility programming interface, introduced in iPhone OS 3.0, helps developers make their applications accessible to VoiceOver users. Briefly, VoiceOver describes an application's user interface and helps users navigate through the application's views and controls, using speech and sound. Users familiar with VoiceOver in Mac OS X can leverage their experience to help them quickly come up to speed using VoiceOver on their devices.


Another related interesting piece on another web site is Programming The iPhone For Accessibility By The Visually Impaired.

The advantage Apple has over Amazon is that Apple has been in the hardware business for a long time and has been involved in the education field a long time. The advantage both the iPad and the Kindle already have is they would not require that the books actually be recorded since they can use a text-to-voice reading system.

I'm sure this will work itself out, but right now the advantage goes to the company that has been putting computers in schools for many years.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

trh said:


> Doesn't the Kindle have a 'read-to-me' feature? Wouldn't that satisfy the requirement for blind or vision impaired people?


In the past, and I think still now, a lot of publishers disabled the text to speech function because they were afraid it would hurt audiobook sales. Even though they are two completely different experiences, and I seriously doubt Amazon would want to hurt Audible.com sales.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

From Phrelin's link to the 'Print CEO' publication:


> it's easy to forget that these devices can seem anything but revolutionary to those who can't see well enough to discern what's on their screens.


The same can be said of my tv displays, and even my computer screens. They're certainly not ADA compliant! I'm sitting here in my rocking chair with a double-barrel shotgun across my lap, just waiting for the ADA police.

Yet another example of a communist or Nazi style, controlling government micro-managing our lives. Screw them, and screw those whining gimps who want to take my God-given rights away! Now, where did I put those shotgun shells?

And because of this revoltin' development, 3D technology is dead since blind people can't see 3D either. If all new technology has to pass some ridiculous and highly arbitrary ADA test, then we might as well go back to banging clams with rocks!

/rant


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I have physical trouble turning pages and opening textbooks due to a muscle disease. Audio textbooks on tape were available if I asked.


Then a Kindle would have been great for you. Press a button and the page turns.

We got my dad a Kindle specifically because he could enlarge the print to the size he needed.


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

The government sponsored dumbing down of America continues.
Lowest common denominator will prevail.
Sad, very sad.


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> So, then what's the problem with the Kindle? Can't they still get those same books on tape? This is laughable.
> 
> Nobody is preventing those with handicaps from having access to the material are they? They just can't use a Kindle. There's other means available.


Perfect response. I agree completely. Nothing has changed from books vs books on tape other than the introduction of the Kindle. Low/no vision students still have the same access they always had. :nono:


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

From the Dept of Ed website:


> It is unacceptable for universities to use emerging technology without insisting that this technology be accessible to all students.


http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100629.html

and



> The Department of Justice recently entered into settlement agreements with colleges and universities that used the Kindle DX, an inaccessible, electronic book reader, in the classroom as part of a pilot study with Amazon.com, Inc. In summary, the universities agreed not to purchase, require, or recommend use of the Kindle DX, or any other dedicated electronic book reader, unless or until the device is fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision, or the universities provide reasonable accommodation or modification so that a student can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students with substantially equivalent ease of use.


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> :lol: You're mad that society cares about disabled people?


No, I'm sure that's not it at all. There are other means -- perfectly acceptable means to accomodate visually impared individuals instead of preventing the sighted from using a Kindle. The disabiliteis act is in place to make sure accomodations are in place for the disabled (as well they should be). In this case, they are in place! What's the difference between having books vs books on tape, etc and Kindle vs Books on tape, etc?


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

I'm not blind, and at 71, my eyesight is still very good, thank God, but I have limited physical abilities on my left side due to the effects of a stroke four years ago. I read a lot, and over 95 percent of my reading is done on a screen of some type. I read .pdf versions of legal briefs and a plethora of newspapers, zine articles and blogs. I even dl'd the 'Kindle for pc' software so I could read books on my laptop screen. I don 't have a Kindle or an iPad because they must be held in the hand, and that one single shortcoming would make it impossible for me to hold an e-reader of any type and drink coffee at the same time.

Speaking of the iPad, why would anyone want a computer that has to be held, with no tactile keyboard and a screen that won't even stand up by itself. How on Earth can anyone hold an iPad, drink coffee, txt msg , talk on a cell and eat a whopper, all while driving a vehicle? I'm just askin. :shrug:

And, yes, I still drive. Deal with it.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Nick said:


> Speaking of the iPad, why would anyone want a computer that has to be held, with no tactile keyboard and a screen that won't even stand up by itself. How on Earth can anyone hold an iPad, drink coffee, txt msg , talk on a cell and eat a whopper, all while driving a vehicle? I'm just askin. :shrug:


You can prop your iPad up on your dash just above the steering wheel and just tap it quickly with a finger on your right hand to change the page on the book you're reading, all the while holding the Whopper in your left hand, using a hands free bluetooth cellphone for a conference call, occasionally picking up with your right hand your steaming hot coffee out of the center console cup holder, while steering with your left knee as you travel down the road at 75 mph. Texting I can't figure out.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

So let me see if I get this straight.

The Kindle is "inaccessible" - yet paper is just as inaccessible. If a paper-edition book isn't on tape or in braille, the school's ODA will convert the book. But they won't do this for a Kindle edition?

Now, they say the Kindle should have a touchscreen. Ummm. How does that help blind people?

Here's a clue to the clueless - there is a Kindle app for the iPad. If e-ink isn't good for whatever vision problem one might had and a backlit screen is BETTER for them, then they can HAVE the Kindle app on the iPad - or a laptop. Or a smartphone.. Plenty of options.

And before anyone thinks I'm a heartless, ignorant bigot - let me inform you of something. I spent the first several years of my childhood in wheelchairs, casts, crutches, braces - you name it. I was born with my legs looking like pretzels and growing up in the 1960s and early 70s meant you didn't have so much as curb cuts for a wheelchair. My adoptive mother made all kinds of sacrifices that today's parents expect the government to do for them (or pay for). And she did it as a SINGLE MOTHER with no support structure.

So, along the same lines, is the college forbidden from having a computer lab because the screens aren't "accessible" on the PCs? A friend of mind dated someone who was blind and he had a device that hooked up to networks or serial lines and translated text to braille. That seemed to be good enough "back then" in the 1980s. Seems to me an electronic copy of a book would translate to braille much easier than a paper copy since OCR software DOES make mistakes.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

phrelin said:


> You can prop your iPad up on your dash just above the steering wheel and just tap it quickly with a finger on your right hand to change the page on the book you're reading, all the while holding the Whopper in your left hand, using a hands free bluetooth cellphone for a conference call, occasionally picking up with your right hand your steaming hot coffee out of the center console cup holder, while steering with your left knee as you travel down the road at 75 mph. *Texting I can't figure out*.


Speech Recognition...between bites of Whopper. 

Mike


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Do some of you still not get it? *They're not banning Kindles, taking away any technology, or saying no students can use it. The DoJ is simply enforcing the ADA technology guidelines, saying if money's spent on getting technology like Kindles and readers, then the technology must be accessible.* It is unacceptable for universities to use emerging technology without insisting that this technology be accessible to all students. For example, if a school builds a new computer lab, then disabled students must have access to the computers. Track balls, large mice, adjustable tables, etc. must be available.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

IMHO....taking the "if everyone can't get it, no one can have it" mentality to the college campuses....continues the "dumbing down of America" mindset as well.

You would think a place of higher learning would promote "higher learning".


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> Do some of you still not get it? *They're not banning Kindles, taking away any technology, or saying no students can use it. The DoJ is simply enforcing the ADA technology guidelines, saying if money's spent on getting technology like Kindles and readers, then the technology must be accessible.* It is unacceptable for universities to use emerging technology without insisting that this technology be accessible to all students. For example, if a school builds a new computer lab, then disabled students must have access to the computers. Track balls, large mice, adjustable tables, etc. must be available.


We get it, we just think it's stupid. There's no logical reason that a Kindle should be accessible by everyone.

University's spend money on audio equipment. it's not accessible to the deaf, is it? But the deaf can get the information in print.

The blind can't use the Kindle. So what? They can get the information via audio.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Let's see, everyone seems to want to compare the machine to books when in fact the machine requires one to buy a book to be of any use. And it is about the legal system and the taxpayer supported education system, not about the freedom of individuals.

This is about the schools jointly sponsoring the machines with Amazon, not about the students use of the machine. No one is prohibiting Amazon from offering the machine to students for free or at a substantial discount. All the DOJ did is caution the schools not to step in a big regulatory cow pie which apparently some did and the DoJ had to deal with it.

Again, Jeff Bezos and his crew are new to this particular game. Steve Jobs and his crew are not. So the iPad OS comes with the solution for the visually impaired built in and the Kindle - a far less sophisticated machine - does not.

If the textbook publishers put out versions that can be read on the Kindle and are not blocked from the text-to-speech function, students will be able to access the books on their iPads using the Kindle App. All Jeff has to do, if he wants to support schools, is make sure all textbooks are open to the text-to-speech function and that the visually impaired have similar access to iPads.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> We get it, we just think it's stupid. There's no logical reason that a Kindle should be accessible by everyone.


Yes there is. If a school says everyone *must *use it, then it must be accessible.



> University's spend money on audio equipment. it's not accessible to the deaf, is it? But the deaf can get the information in print.


Yes, deaf can "feel" sound. They can then get descriptions of the audio.



> The blind can't use the Kindle. So what? They can get the information via audio.


That's fine, as long schools don't require a Kindle or spend money to convert to the Kindle. Students can choose to use ebooks & such.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

phrelin said:


> Let's see, everyone seems to want to compare the machine to books when in fact the machine requires one to buy a book to be of any use. And it is about the legal system and the taxpayer supported education system, not about the freedom of individuals.
> 
> This is about the schools jointly sponsoring the machines with Amazon, not about the students use of the machine. No one is prohibiting Amazon from offering the machine to students for free or at a substantial discount. All the DOJ did is caution the schools not to step in a big regulatory cow pie which apparently some did and the DoJ had to deal with it.
> 
> ...


Precisely! Thank you for summarizing.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

This is one of those problems that crops up with government programs all the time... they try to make them black & white instead of applying common sense... which should be no surprise as I am unsure if there is anyone left with any common sense in this country.

Many years ago when the video business was pre-BlockBuster, I was a partner in a 28 store video chain in the Southeast. We were large enough to purchase VHS video tape as a private label item... we were purchasing 3M tape at bulf prices which were about 60% lower.

The Feds were buying case loads of tapes from us. We sold it to them, billed it, got paid.. end of transaction. Orders came once a month... good business.

One day after about a year a gentlemen showed up from the Procurement office and said we need to file a bunch of EEO paperwork in order to be a government vendor. I told him NO, we did not... he started quoting the law to me.. I interrupted and repeated NO. He then said well, that they couldn'e buy anymore tape from us..I said fine. He just stood there and looked at me. I told him that I was selling the tape to him on razor thin margins and there certainly wasn't enough money in to hire a compliance officer, so they could take their business elsewhere, I didn't give a dam. He was flabbergasted.

They stopped buying tapes from us about 2 years later.

Being handicapped myself I see a lot of good that comes from ADA regs, but they need some common sense behind them.


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

Go get a copy of Kurt Vonnegut's old short story Harrison Bergeron.

It's about the literal interpretation that "All Men Are Created Equal", so the government tries to do exactly that.


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

phrelin said:


> Again, Jeff Bezos and his crew are new to this particular game. Steve Jobs and his crew are not. So the iPad OS comes with the solution for the visually impaired built in and the Kindle - a far less sophisticated machine - does not.
> 
> If the textbook publishers put out versions that can be read on the Kindle and are not blocked from the text-to-speech function, students will be able to access the books on their iPads using the Kindle App. All Jeff has to do, if he wants to support schools, is make sure all textbooks are open to the text-to-speech function and that the visually impaired have similar access to iPads.


It 'solves' a problem that really doesn't exist -- and it makes someone foot the bill for the much higher cost iPad. I guess that's OK if the someone doesn't mind. But....


----------



## lflorack (Dec 16, 2006)

LarryFlowers said:


> Being handicapped myself I see a lot of good that comes from ADA regs, but they need some common sense behind them.


We certainly agree. But, the government have common sense? :lol:


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> That's fine, as long schools don't require a Kindle or spend money to convert to the Kindle.


OK, I agree with your first statement. They can't require the Kindle any more than they could require text books only (not audio books), but I don't think that's the issue they have and I don't think any school has done that.

As far as spending money, schools spend lots and lots of money on things that aren't accessible or fit for everyone. This is no different.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> OK, I agree with your first statement. They can't require the Kindle any more than they could require text books only (not audio books), but I don't think that's the issue they have and I don't think any school has done that.


Exactly, the DoJ is just reminding them not to if they were considering it due to ADA guidelines.



> As far as spending money, schools spend lots and lots of money on things that aren't accessible or fit for everyone. This is no different.


Yes, it's different because it involves new technology. 


> *Requiring use of an emerging technology *in a classroom environment when the technology is inaccessible to an entire population of individuals with disabilities - individuals with visual disabilities - is discrimination prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) unless those individuals are provided accommodations or modifications that permit them to receive all the educational benefits provided by the technology in an equally effective and equally integrated manner.


Source: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100629.html


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

but that says REQUIRING.

Why didn't the article or the DoJ just say "schools can't require the Kindle"?

To me, it doesn't seem like that's what they're saying at all. They're saying schools can't USE the Kindle at all unless it can be used by all. There's quite a difference there.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

spartanstew said:


> but that says REQUIRING.
> 
> Why didn't the article or the DoJ just say "schools can't require the Kindle"?
> 
> To me, it doesn't seem like that's what they're saying at all. They're saying schools can't USE the Kindle at all unless it can be used by all. There's quite a difference there.


No, that's not what the DoJ said. The letter said schools can't *require *using a Kindle or similar. Did you read the letter? It says:


> we ask that you take steps to ensure that your college or university *refrains from requiring* the use of any electronic book reader, or other similar technology, in a teaching or classroom environment as long as the device remains inaccessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision.


http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100629.html


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

lflorack said:


> It 'solves' a problem that really doesn't exist -- and it makes someone foot the bill for the much higher cost iPad. I guess that's OK if the someone doesn't mind. But....


Yes and no, depending on timing. When the iPad first came out, I noted that the 4GB Kindle DX cost:








while the wi-fi only 16GB iPad cost $10 more.

Now, of course, the retail price on the new and improved Kindle DX is $379 and it has free 3G access. You've got to love the effect of competition. This article today discusses the upgrades Amazon Punches Up Kindle DX noting:


> Among the new features touted for the new DX are improved screen contrast (up by 50 percent), zoom capability for PDF files, a Collections tool that allows users to better organize their reading materials, and the ability to share selections from books and periodicals via social networks using the free 3G service that the unit provides.


I'm not too worried about this whole thing as today's college student is certainly tech savvy enough to want something to replace a ton of textbooks. According to this May 2009 (well before the iPad) Cnet article headlined E-textbooks vs. Kindle DX: What will college kids pick?:


> ...the words "e-textbook" and "Netbook" have created a buzz around campus.
> 
> E-textbooks have been available for some time now, and are currently purchased for use on a laptop or desktop for about half the price of the print book version. Electronic textbooks are an excellent alternative to print books since with them, a student can search for a specific word or topic, copy/paste text into their coursework, comment within the textbook, and enjoy a lighter backpack.
> 
> ...Unlike the Kindle, students can take notes on their laptop or Netbook in class, while referencing the textbook in another window. We (college students) are overwhelmed by school supplies, technology, and a busy class schedule, so when it comes to getting our life organized, we consolidate. This means keeping a calendar on our phone or laptop instead of a paper planner, taking electronic notes instead of carrying binders, and (if we are lucky enough) using our phone as an MP3 player. This leaves little room for yet another device, like the Kindle.


The iPad is the ideal reader, means of keeping the calendar, note taker (that can record the lecture), iPod, video player, email access, browser, etc. weighing even less than the laptop or netbook. And you can use Skype with it, though it's not a great phone. Once the multitasking version of the iPhone OS is made available on the iPad, it should be an ideal solution for the college environment.

And the OS already has dealt with serving the visually impaired.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> No, that's not what the DoJ said. The letter said schools can't *require *using a Kindle or similar. Did you read the letter? It says:
> 
> http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100629.html


That's a different link than what's in the OP. The article that was first linked never uses the word require, in fact it almost states the opposite:

*According to the Act, if universities have technology in classrooms, then they must be accessible to individuals with disabilities.*

That sentence basically says that Kindles (and the like) are to be banned from classrooms unless they can be used by all.

If it's bad reporting and the case is really about schools requiring Kindle use, then I would agree with them, although I can't imagine a school actually requiring Kindle usage.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

"spartanstew" said:


> That sentence basically says that Kindles (and the like) are to be banned from classrooms unless they can be used by all.
> .


I don't think they will be banned. If a student wants to buy their books on a Kindle they can, but the school can't make the required text available only on the Kindle.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The letter (available in full here) is unnecessarily long a full of institutional bureaucratese. But the core statement is:


> As officials of the agencies charged with enforcement and interpretation of the ADA and Section 504, we ask that you take steps to ensure that your college or university refrains from requiring the use of any electronic book reader, or other similar technology, in a teaching or classroom environment as long as the device remains inaccessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision.


It also contains the following astute observation:


> With technological advances, procuring electronic book readers that are accessible should be neither costly nor difficult.


In other words, don't step in the regulatory cow pies and that should be relatively easy to avoid.


----------

