(2) Auxiliary aids may include taped texts, interpreters or other effective methods of making orally delivered materials available to students with hearing impairments, readers in libraries for students with visual impairments, classroom equipment adapted for use by students with manual impairments, and other similar services and actions. Recipients need not provide attendants, individually prescribed devices, readers for personal use or study, or other devices or services of a personal nature.

Of all the individual paragraphs within Subpart E, it seems that this is the one that probably is going to need the most changes/additions/updating. We very much need for the reference to auxiliary aids and services to reflect the realities of new technology and the incorporation of technology into all of higher education (and thus the need for its accessibility to/for students with disabilities). Note, however, that logically those changes are going to reflect the need for things to be provided in accessible format for students with disabilities. That is not the same as mandating that all things be created in accessible format. There has never been a legal mandate requiring Universal Design of Learning, and I don’t see it being incorporated now. We also need the regulations to clarify what “other devices or services of a personal nature” might mean in our technology-infused environment.

There are other places within Subpart E that could benefit from an update to reflect all that has changed since 1977. For example, the Housing section (104.45) reads (in part):

(a) Housing provided by the recipient. A recipient that provides housing to its nonhandicapped students shall provide comparable, convenient, and accessible housing to handicapped students at the same cost as to others. At the end of the transition period provided for in subpart C, such housing shall be available in sufficient quantity and variety so that the scope of handicapped students' choice of living accommodations is, as a whole, comparable to that of nonhandicapped students.

When that regulation was written, probably 95%+ residence halls were made up as double rooms with a bathroom down the hall. Reference to providing disabled students “comparable, convenient, and accessible housing” meant making it possible for students with disabilities to be fully integrated into those standard residence hall settings. Discussing the scope of the students’ choice referred to making sure that there wasn’t only one residence hall on campus that was wheelchair accessible (and thus available to kids in wheelchairs) while everyone else could choose to live in any one of half a dozen halls on campus.

That is NOT the reality of Residence Life options on college campuses today. From the availability of single rooms to anyone (for a price), to the possibility of suite or apartment-style living within the residence hall, to private or semi-private bathrooms, to kitchens… many institutions have a host of Res Life options available to all students. Determining what it means to provide “comparable, convenient, and accessible housing” at the same cost is… daunting. We’ve been struggling with that for some time. It will be interesting to see how the Department of Education struggles