Court affirms real-time captioning for 2nd deaf student
By Melissa Pamer, Staff Writer
Editor: Do public school students with hearing loss have a right to a
real time captioner as an appropriate accommodation? According to a judge
in Glendora, CA, they do.
Here's the article as reported by Melissa Pamer, a staff writer for the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune. The article is reprinted with their kind
permission.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The school district last week lost a second battle in its fight to keep
from providing a real-time captioning service for two deaf students at
Glendora High School.
A state judge ordered the Glendora Unified School District to begin
offering the service to Victor Solorzano, 15. In May, Victor's sister
Samantha, 17, won her own case against the district, which dropped its
appeal of that decision in October.
The two siblings say they need the service - in which an aide rapidly
transcribes class discussion onto a laptop seen by the captioning user.
Both deaf from birth, Victor and Samantha have inner-ear implants so
they can hear. But they tend to miss things in fast-paced classrooms.
Now the two will be on equal footing with their fellow students, said
their mother, Jackie Solorzano.
"We're thrilled," she said.
The judge's decision comes after months of litigation that began with
Solorzano's insistence last year that her daughter be provided the
service, Communication Access Real-Time Translation, or CART.
The district refused, and the family filed a lawsuit.
When the Solorzanos won, the district appealed to federal court.
Meanwhile, officials refused to provide CART for Victor Solorzano as well,
and his mother again filed suit on his behalf in September.
Under court order, the district has provided the $60,000 per-year
service to Samantha since the semester began. While officials in
October dropped their appeal in that case, they continued to fight
Victor's suit.
The district is still considering an appeal of last week's decision in
Victor's case, an official said, adding that the cases were different and
the settlement of one didn't impact the other.
"Each case is supposed to be evaluated on its own merits. Even with
twins, you wouldn't necessarily say all the facts are the same," said Ted
McNevin, the district's director of instructional and student support
services.
The district argued in both children's cases that each student was
doing well academically and therefore did not need additional assistance.
"On the other side you have parents and attorneys who want to get the
Cadillac program, and you can't blame them for that," McNevin said. "But
that's where the dispute comes in."
The Solorzanos' attorney opposed the notion that CART was a kind of
educational extravagance.
"The district doesn't have to give them the best education possible.
That's what the law says," lawyer David Grey said. "But here you have a
kid where you give him a car that has two flat tires."
Administrative Law Judge Glynda Gomez agreed.
Victor, she wrote, "had been deprived of the opportunity to access and
participate in the general education curriculum."
The case is a precedent for oral-deaf students - who learn and
communicate without sign language, Grey said.
"I thought it was crystal clear the first time," he said, referring to
Samantha's case.
The district is responsible for the Solorzanos' attorney's fees in both
cases, coming to about $65,000, McNevin said. The district's own fees will
total between $35,000 and $45,000 for both cases, he said.
As to whether is was worth it for the district to combat the second
case, McNevin said, "I don't know. It's hard to assess that."
"Hindsight is always 20/20," he said.