Staff Editorial | Physical barriers to education missing from access debate

Imagine that you have a physical disability that prevents you from walking up stairs. How would you get your room or your classes? Students who have physical disabilities, in addition to those recovering from broken limbs or major surgery during the semester, are well aware that many dorms and campus buildings at Vassar are inaccessible to individuals without complete mobility.

Since the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) passed in 1990, Vassar has often struggled to meet its responsibilities to increase accessibility on campus. As the College plans to break ground on new senior housing and science buildings, The Miscellany News urges the College to prioritize full accessibility for individuals with disabilities over campus beautification and other aesthetic concerns.

Associate Dean of the College and Director of Disability and Support Services Belinda Guthrie said, “In 1997, the College was just beginning to develop programs for students with disabilities. Vassar had a long history of providing opportunities for students with disabilities, but it was based on good will, not policy. Students were unaware of what resources were available…it all began with trying to raise awareness.”

While awareness of accessibility issues has been steadily increasing, Vassar has had a huge obstacle to overcome: its age. Older buildings, designed years (or centuries) before the ADA was a consideration, often have steep staircases, poorly designed bathrooms, and lack elevators. The library, New England Building, Cushing House, Davison House,and Lathrop House, to name a few, all present a challenge to people with limited mobility.

Only renovations can solve these issues. The priority for the College should be accessibility to all buildings, and there should be a concerted effort in construction plans to make existing buildings amenable to all individuals—and there is no reason for further delay. Furthermore, increased accessibility can go hand in hand with campus beautification; there is no reason a ramp cannot be designed in an aesthetically pleasing way.

Some might argue that because there are a small number of individuals with physical disabilities at the College, an intense overhaul of all of the dorms and academic buildings is unnecessary. This argument is flawed in two ways: first, regardless of the number of individuals with physical disabilities, it is intolerable that there are buildings that any student cannot access. Second, the argument seriously overlooks the fact that there are many more individuals with temporary disabilities due to recent injury, illness or surgery.

Furthermore, Vassar cannot expect to attract prospective students who have physical disabilities. This is a loss on various levels, since potential students are excluded from the Vassar community even before they fill out an application. At a school where classroom lessons frequently seek to expose social marginalization, the College should work to attract rather than alienate disabled prospective students.

The Office of Disabilities and Support Services has been pushing for renovations that help those with special needs. Jewett House, for example, is now more accommodating of students with disabilities. Blodgett Hall has been equipped with a central elevator and wheelchair-accessible auditorium. Additionally, the College Center has an entrance that is wide enough for those using wheelchairs, and the library has an elevator that makes upper and lower floors wheelchair-accessible. After renovations, all of the Quad dorms will also be fully accessible. This is an admirable start, but such renovations must be pursued for all buildings on campus.

Last year, the main refrain on campus among students, faculty and administrators was accessibility to higher education. As a result of these conversations, Vassar has returned to a need-blind policy. In conversations about need-blind, “accessibility” meant financial accessibility. We now urge the College community to look at accessibility from multiple angles—specifically, while maintaining momentum for financial reforms, we should devote attention to the physical accessibility of the College as well.

The staff editorial represents at least two-thirds of the 15-member editorial board.