CASE ANALYSIS #3 1

Equity Case Analysis Process #3

Matt Runyan

Lipscomb University – Nashville

The Diverse Learner

Dr. Vanessa Garcia

July 21, 2021

 CASE ANALYSIS #3 2

Questions

1. Ms. Thurston was frustrated to find that the learning “accommodation” for Justin consisted of

sitting inside the center and watching a film while his classmates were on the hike. In your estimation,

does this constitute an equitable accommodation? If not, what sorts of accommodations might have

been more equitable?

This situation is very frustrating, as people have different ideas of what an “acceptable

accommodation” can be. I would say that it is not equitable, as people drive miles out of their way to see

actual nature, not a (likely very poorly produced) video about nature. And while it’s obvious that the park is

trying to avoid lawsuits, it should have been made clearer beforehand. Instead, a park-approved wheelchair

that they could borrow or rent would have made everything smoother.

2. Is it Ms. Thurston’s responsibility to provide the hike experience to most of her students even if

one was to be excluded from any sort of parallel learning opportunity at the park? Should she look

for a different learning opportunity that could include all of her students, even if she feels that

opportunity may not generate the same level of enthusiasm for most of her student as hiking in

Meadow Creek Park?

Giving the hiking experience was her goal, and a good one at that. But she should expand her

repertoire of viable outings even if they are lesser. Plus, she should keep in mind that “levels of enthusiasm”

are highly relative, and students may find some other activity just as engaging. It is likely that she has put

too much pressure on herself and relied too much on her notion of Meadow Creek Park being “the best”

experience available.

3. How, as she approaches her students after talking with Ms. Parsons, might Ms. Thurston use this

situation as a teachable moment for all of her students? Can she do so without risking making Justin

uncomfortable?
 CASE ANALYSIS #3 3

I feel it would be best not to engage the students with this head-on, as it is a teachable moment for

the teacher, not for the students who are there to simply learn about nature. If she indulged in complaining

about the accommodations, the best that could happen would be student outrage and perhaps even a mini-

rebellion against the park’s administrators, and the worst would be bullying against Justin for “ruining the

whole day” with his disability. Instead, she should inform them of the revised plans for the day.

4. Now that the class is at the Park, prepared to begin the hike while Justin watches a film, how

might Ms. Thurston make the best of what she interprets as an inequitable situation?

The best way to handle this would be to have everyone experience what Justin does, but in shifts.

While half the class goes out to hike the trail, the other half stays with Justin and watches the film. Then,

when they switch out, Justin stays with the video group. While it’s not the best solution, as the park

providing an approved wheelchair would have been optimal, it does keep Justin from being embarrassed

while the whole class gets the full park experience.

Equity Case Analysis Process

Step 1: Identify biases and inequities presented in the case.

This case is less about personal prejudices and more about thoughtless accommodations for the

physically disabled. Well-bodied people simply don’t think about having ramps or paved surfaces until they

are somehow disabled themselves.

Step 2: Take stock of various perspectives, trying to remember the full variety of community

members, including those who are involved directly and those who are involved at more of a distance.

This is largely an oversight and poor planning on behalf of the committees that run the park. They

had a checklist of items required to open the park to the public and were likely relieved when someone

came up with the idea of “just putting on a video” as a cheap solution. Ms. Parsons likely had nothing to do

with the solution, but still must bear the brunt of the frustration and anger caused by the policies.
 CASE ANALYSIS #3 4

Step 3: Consider possible challenges and opportunities, paying special attention to biases and

inequities and how the situation presents an opportunity for dialogue and positive change, not just

for those immediately involved, but for the institution.

When these sorts of problems arise, they are normally famed as a financial problem. The Park did

not want to risk having a lawsuit from someone having a tragic accident on their grounds. They also did not

want to spend the money required to install ramps, bridges, or handrails on their trail, as those costs

compound quickly and require regular maintenance. They instead opted for the far cheaper option of

commissioning a video series to be made, likely for pennies on the dollar by using student labor.

Step 4: Imagine equitable and just outcomes, remembering that equity requires a fair distribution of

opportunity and access-a resolution of the bias or inequity, not just a resolution of interpersonal

conflict.

In order to address this completely, changes must be made to the park’s infrastructure to

accommodate students like Justin. Changes such as installing ramps, bridges, and handrails will open the

park up without limiting or distracting from other peoples’ experiences.

Step 5: Brainstorm Immediate-term responses, thinking specifically about how you might respond

immediately in order to overcome challenges and maximize opportunities.

Ms. Thurston can help prevent this from happening again by going directly to the park’s overseers

and explaining her experience. It would likely take an effort spanning years to get any actionable changes

met, but it would be worth it to everyone if possible. Unless someone sheds light on this issue in the right

way, the public will remain blissfully ignorant about the issue, and the park will continue to be a disservice

to the differently abled.

Step 6: Brainstorm longer-term policy and practice adjustments, keeping in mind that school and
 CASE ANALYSIS #3 5

classroom conflict usually are symptoms of bigger structural inequities.

To prevent this going forward, the park should provide the public with free park-approved amenities

such as an off-road wheelchair. Small bridges could also be installed to traverse small creek beds, even if

limited to just one section of the hiking trail. Even if just part of the hiking trail was made safe for the most

rugged types of wheelchairs, it would be more equitable than none at all.

Step 7: Craft a plan of action, including both immediate-term and long-term components.

Ms. Thurston could explain the situation to her students after their field trip and use it as a jumping-

off point to start a group project to campaign for equitable amenities in the park. She could have the

students write letters about how they wanted their friend Justin to go with them on the hiking portion of the

field trip and were heartbroken that he could not. These letters could then be presented to the local city

council and state parks board to drum up public approval for a sizable financial investment in Meadow

Creek Park’s accessibility features. The Park could then use this as an opportunity to advertise and boast

about their new features, thus potentially increasing their foot (and wheelchair) traffic.