How would your classmates react if you were one of the students inside the room described here? One Western Canada law school formerly had the practice of setting up a special room for examinations in the law school, for those who were given extra time. Their names were noted on the door. The amount of extra time that students were receiving was also announced on the door.

Examination accommodations promote fairness by alleviating disadvantage, levelling the playing field so that examinations are written under conditions that permit students an equal opportunity to succeed (University of Victoria Guidelines on Examination Accommodation). While all Canadian law schools have an informal or formal policy directed at examination accommodations, or at accommodations for other kinds of evaluation, there is no universally applicable standard or blanket policy to which schools adhere. Law schools appear generally to apply individualized consideration of accommodations needed by the student, though students with disabilities are encouraged to follow the normal procedure for writing examinations (University of Ottawa Policy Statement on Access to and Equity in Education for Students with Disabilities). Although all students are expected to comply with course and evaluation requirements, law schools also recognize that existing evaluation mechanisms may sometimes impose undue hardship on a student with a disability.

The type of evaluation accommodation provided by a school will probably need to meet the approval of both the academic instructor and either a law school committee or a senior officer such as the Dean or Associate Dean. Usually the student is expected to raise concerns initially with the instructor to discuss exam or other evaluation accommodations. As was said earlier in this book, however, the student may want to learn first about possible options by speaking with the law faculty’s equity contact person and/or the university’s Disability Services Office. It is generally incumbent on the student to demonstrate that it is unfair for him or her to write an examination or otherwise to be evaluated under the same conditions as other students. Assistance in making this case could be obtained from the Special Needs Office or the faculty of law disability liaison person.

Students may be required to register with the Special Needs Office before requesting accommodations for exams or other kinds of evaluation. Failure to register may mean that the requested accommodations cannot be provided in a timely manner. Ideally, the student, the professor, and the Disability Services Office/Special Needs Office will jointly develop an accommodation strategy responsive to individual requirements.

Where a student meets with resistance from a professor or Dean, or the request for accommodation has been denied, the Disability Services Office/Special Needs Office or law faculty contact may advocate for the student and ensure that his or her needs are pursued and given adequate consideration. There may be an informal or official appeal process for students to pursue their requests.

A law graduate interviewed for our Guide said that while in law school he appealed the failing grade he received for an examination. As accommodations for his learning disability, he had been allowed him to write the exam on a computer and in a room separate from where most other students were writing the exam.. The exam questions were extraordinarily long (2-3 pages), which added extra difficulty because of the student’s particular learning disability. Moreover, there were ambiguous aspects that, in the student’s view, required interpretation. The law professor who had prepared the exam was not present in the separate exam room. and there was no practical way for a student in that room to get ambiguities cleared up in time to learn exactly what he was supposed to address on the exam. The law school’s Grades Review committee ruled that he could rewrite the examination. But the original "F" would appear on his transcript of grades, along with whatever new mark he received and an explanation of why the student had two marks appearing on the transcript. The student sought a further review, because of the stigma attached to receiving a failing grade. Faculty procedures called for review by a special panel of law professors. At the hearing, the student was surprised that the panel of four wanted to review all the facts and not just the legal and procedural arguments he had prepared on such issues as reasonable accommodation. Fortunately, he had all necessary documentation in his files. The decision of the panel was threefold. He was given a second chance to pass the course. If he passed, the "F" mark would be removed from his transcript. He would not be required to write a standard exam. Regarding the latter point, he had sought a decision allowing him to write a take home exam or a research paper. The panel decided that he could write a take home exam.

At most law schools, the grounds of accommodation are not rigidly defined but are considered on a case-by-case basis. With some possible exceptions at individual law faculties, students may request accommodation on the basis of any physical or mental disability, learning disability, illness or medical condition, as well as other life factors that may have an adverse impact on examination performance or on other ties of performance that are assessed. Requests for accommodation will usually require support from appropriate medical documentation. Where the request is made on the basis of disability, the student may also be required to provide, at his or her expense, professional assessments or recommendations.

Almost all survey respondents were aware that they could request exam and other evaluation accommodations, though one student had not known this was possible.

Students who completed our surveys or found other ways to contribute to project data reported that faculty members and law schools willingly made every reasonable effort to accommodate regarding exams, while ensuring that course requirements were satisfactorily met. Two denied requests for examination accommodation were brought to the editor’s attention, one of which was eventually resolved in the student’s favour.

As with other kinds of accommodation requests, the general advice for examination accommodations is that requests be made as soon as possible and that supporting documentation be provided in a timely manner, to ensure that the needs are given sufficient consideration and that there is time to secure required assistance.

Most frequently, exam accommodation takes the form of a schedule change, additional time for writing the exam, special equipment, a separate room, the use of a computer, assistance of scribes or an alternative format exam. Alternative evaluation measures, such as take home assignments or essays, or an oral examination, may also be an option to replace the formal written examination.

Not all students with disabilities requested exam accommodations. Most did take advantage of this option and experienced little, if any, difficulty having the request accommodated. The most common form of accommodation reported by survey respondents was extra time or the use of a computer to type answers. Scribes and the use of a separate room were also mentioned by several students. No student indicated that he or she was administered a different examination or that the examination requirement was waived. Generally, faculty members and law schools willingly made every reasonable effort to accommodate while ensuring that the course requirements were satisfactorily met and that the evaluation process was not compromised.

Problems are often encountered regarding protection of anonymity when a student who has a disability writes an accommodated exam. There are advantages to having examinations accommodated through a central university Special Needs Office. That way students need to produce only one set of medical, psychological or other documentation justifying the need for the accommodations. Often the central campus Disabilities Services Office will have a facility for writing an examination privately.

Problems for anonymity may arise if a professor has a sign-up list related to an examination, or receives one examination booklet later than the others. A student writing an exam based on a large-print text, may lose anonymity because of the code numbering system used or for other reasons. One solution would be if the examiners gave the students a separate, large print version of the questions but allowed the student to write the exam in the regular booklets so that the markers could not tell the difference between these booklets and those submitted by other students.

There are a number of ways in which teachers could know that an exam was written by a student with a disability. For example, if a part-time instructor works in a downtown law office or for the government, the exam of the student with a disability might arrive later than the others by courier (as has occurred).

If only one of the exams is typed, it is pretty obvious which of the students prepared that one. "It would be advantageous if that typed exam could be turned into a hand-written exam by a scribe." said one student respondent. Another alternative would be to allow the student with a disability to start the exam early so that all the examinations are handed in together at the same time.

Some law schools are more rigid about anonymous grading than others are. Students are assigned a different exam number each time. Exams must be deposited with the Director of Studies. Exams are rated by two teachers. The Director of Graduate Studies breaks the student’s code only at the very end of the process.

In some cases, assessment of their oral participation in classes may be waived for hearing impaired students. Or written assignments may be replaced by oral presentations for students with learning disabilities or those whose disability otherwise causes difficulty with writing. It is generally unfair to evaluate students on class participation if a student needing materials in an alternate format does not have satisfactory access to the materials.

A common mandatory requirement of the upper year law school curriculum is successful completion of the Moot Court program. Students are also required to attend classes to prepare for the moot and compile supporting documentation.

During the mooting process, there are special considerations for some students who have disabilities. The extensive preparation time required may be particularly burdensome. The need to present oral argument can put certain students at an unfair disadvantage. The student with a hearing or speech impairment may have difficulty responding to questions from those acting as judges, or "cross-examining" opposing parties. Depending on how these factors are assessed and/or accommodated, the student with a disability may have difficulty attaining a fair evaluation. One student effectively addressed one key problem by requesting permission to "approach the bench" for questioning, having informed participants in advance that she was "hearing impaired".

A consideration for students with mobility disabilities is the physical accessibility of the Moot Court room. There may be steps leading to the room or to the "judges’ bench", which could present a challenge for those with visual or mobility disabilities. Students have reported, however, that if notified of special needs in advance, coordinators of mooting programs have made alternative room arrangements for those who required them.

While all students are expected and encouraged to participate in Moot Court programs, a particular student’s disability may make it impossible to do so without experiencing disadvantage. In such circumstances, it may be possible to make alternative evaluation arrangements.

The following recollections and recommendations by law students and lawyers with disabilities were gathered from surveys, interviews, and focus group discussions across Canada in 1999 - 2000.

According to our survey and focus group respondents, exams posed particular problems for students with disabilities. For instance, although they might be able to write an examination later than the bulk of the students, they felt there was no advantage in this. Psychologically the student was not likely to be in "exam mode" at the later time. For that reason, and to avoid being labelled, a student might choose to write an exam at the regular time, even though disadvantaged by his or her disability.

An exam held later and separately is likely to be different from that written by the bulk of the students, for security reasons. Usually this examination will be based on older examinations and it may not be as closely reflective of the content that was taught in the course during the current year. It will also be harder for the professor to mark that exam on an individual basis since it is not part of a wider group of examinations.

"I would never make it a practice to tell people in law school that I had extra time to do exams or assignments. I would also be reluctant to tell people that I was able to dictate assignments."

Subtle bias can work against students who need accommodations, including those who must study part-time because of circumstances such as a disability. In the mid-1990’s, a law student who was forced by health considerations to study part-time was told by a member of the law faculty that the student’s marks might normally be good enough to win an academic award. The student was initially told that anyone studying part-time was not eligible to win. The student was taking two years to complete a one year course load. The student protested, stating that needing to study part-time should not make a candidate ineligible for the award. The faculty decided that the student was indeed eligible. The student won the relevant academic prize that year, along with a scholarship attached to it.

"Although a student with a disability might need to accept the need to work three times as hard as their classmates, there is no reason to accept an unfair testing format."

"A test should examine how much you know, not how much you can convey by mechanical means such as a pencil or pen."

A professor or an exam invigilator may not realize that it is not just the disability itself that causes problems justifying an accommodation. One student had this revelation: "Because I was hunched over to read and write, it produced headaches and I needed extra time, not just because of the visual impairment but because of the pain ... For me an important gain was achieved when I was able to do exams orally because I do not encounter the same problems as when I am handwriting."

Table of Contents