Curiouser and Curiouser
In this complaint, Adrian Zachariasewycz, a graduate of the University of Michigan law school, and his wife accuse the school of discriminating against students who can’t type as fast as others.
Upon information and belief, the system of course examination and grading at the Law School in certain exams disadvantaged students that could not type at a sufficient speed to produce the volume of text required to produce competitive examination responses.
The Law School made no generally adequate accommodation to students with deficient typing skills that would allow them to compete on a level playing field with their manually more dexterous peers with better-developed keyboarding skills.
Had an editor been involved in this complaint, it might have turned out like this:
Upon information and belief, the system of course examination and grading at the Law School disadvantages students who cannot type as quickly as others, simply because they cannot produce the volume of text required for written examinations.
The Law School makes no accommodation for students with disabilities that limit their typing speed. This puts them at a competitive disadvantage. The school’s policy means that students with such disabilities will be economically disadvantaged throughout their careers, since students rated at the top of their class (those who can type fast enough to do well on written exams) earn more than those at the bottom of their class.
Is that not an improvement?
