Main | November 2005 »

October 31, 2005

More International Attention

A blog run by Australian librarian, Lynette Reville, notes:

"It’s thought-provoking to look at how many web standards are in place for users who have physical disabilities, and then to think about the lack of guidelines for users with other disabilities. Particularly with commercial learning management software, where end users don’t really have a lot of choice in the way the courses or the communication/assessment tools within them are accessed are constructed: you have to take what they give you, for better or worse."

Another blog, Avalúo y Tecnologías de Aprendizaje (Peru) states:

"Capella University ha sido demandada por uno de sus estudiantes por utilizar un sistema para manejar cursos en línea (WebCT) que no cumple supuestamente con los requisitos de accesibilidad para personas con problemas de aprendizaje. (Ley ADA) . Esta será la primera de muchas demandas a las que se enfrentarán no solo las universidades virtuales sino las compañías que manejan estos sistemas para manejar cursos en línea. "

A rough translation of this statement is:

"Capella University has demanded that one of its students use an online system (WebCT) that supposedly does not comply with the accessibility requirements of those with learning problems (Law ADA). This will be the first of many demands of virtual universities and the companies that make these systems for online courses."

Additional comments regarding the lawsuit against Capella will be posted as they are located. We salute those in the international educational community who are focusing on the real issues of the lawsuit - the lack of accessibility of WebCT to those with disabilities.

Enlightened Ones

The lawsuit against Capella University has been gaining international attention since a story about it first appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education. While those criticizing it range from the uniformed to the out-and-out bigoted (for example, a white supremacist group came out in support of Capella's positions), there are also those who have exhibited very enlightened views. Interestingly, many of these are coming from outside of the United States. (Now what does that say about disability rights in the US?)

Two of the most enlightened posts that we have found, so far, include:

FLOSSE Posse (Finland)
Non-accessible e-learning: lawsuit against an institution using WebCT

"The technology used in the Capella was WebCT.

I think the student has a point in here. I am not an expert of WebCT, but colleague of mine was lately using it and wrote pretty good review about the poor support for web standards in the WebCT. The use of JavaScript and frames seems to be a hack to “protect” the content inside WebCT, so saving it locally would be more difficult. Read the content and remember it!"

Teach and Learn Online (Australia)
Lawsuit forces Web2 learning strategies

"Hardly surprising news, but very significant in my view. . .Surely it is only a matter of time before the same activism happens here in Australia. Many of us have argued til blue in the face that Learning Management Systems are unusable and inaccessible, and place unnecessary pressure on a student."

October 30, 2005

The Clueless and the Ignorant

The amount of naivety and ignorance regarding the rights of those with disabilities is extremely disturbing. Take, for example, a recent post that appeared at DigitalStakeholders.org.

"As I read it I had to laugh. The student who is filing the lawsuit wants to get a degree in Information Technology Systems Design! If the student can not figure out WebCT how is he going to make it in the real world?"

The individual who posted the comment is, obviously, completely oblivious to the facts surrounding the case as well as the needs of real "Digital Stakeholders" to be provided with fully accessible web applications. One can only feel sorry for the individual making these remarks as he/she is completely clueless. Let's set the facts straight:

  1. The student who filed the lawsuit was just three (3) courses away from completing a second master's degree in system design and programming.
  2. The student had earned a 4.0 (e.g., "straight A's") in all courses being applied to that degree up until the time that WebCT was implemented at Capella.
  3. The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with "figuring out WebCT" - it has to do with the incompetent design of WebCT that makes it inaccessible to those with disabilities. There is a vast distinction between the two.
  4. The question "If the student can not figure out WebCT how is he going to make it in the real world?" is completely moot. It certainly makes one question the competence of someone who claims to represent "digital stakeholders." The fact is that large numbers of students, including other graduate students in Capella's Information Technology programs where also pointing out the incompetence of Capella's implementation of WebCT, along with its horrendous design flaws, is significant. So is the that fact that many of the instructors were also complaining.

Most of remaining portion of the DigitalStakeHolders post discusses whether or not college is a "right or a privilege."  Again, that's a moot issue pertaining the Capella lawsuit. As noted in the Chronicle of Higher Education, the student already holds one master's degree (from a real university). Accessibility issues have, in the most literal sense, nothing to do with any student's intelligence and/or ability to do well in an academic program, assuming adequate accommodations are provided. Of course, nothing is mentioned about the quality of programs, like those at Capella, either.

Interestingly, the Chronicle article failed to mention several other facts pertaining to the case. Some of these include, but are not limited to:

  • The "instructor" at the center of the lawsuit is Diane Stottlemyer - who is a complete charlatan. To date, very few are commenting on the fact that Stottlemyer literally purchased her "graduate degrees" from a diploma mill, Lacrosse University. She has claimed that she holds master's and doctorate degrees in "Computer Science." Furthermore, Stottlemyer acted with callous disregard to her ethical and contractual obligations as an instructor - she literally refused to communicate to the student.
  • Diane Stottlemyer's lack of competence is also demonstrated by those commenting on her book, "Automated Web Testing Tool Kit" on Amazon.com, as well as on a very recent (October 22, 2005) post at RateMyProfessors.com. Assuming that post is true (which we have every reason to believe it is), it now looks like Stottlemyer continues to retaliate against students who complain about her incompetence. The only difference between her actions against the student who filed the lawsuit and those who continue to complain about her is that she now changes their grades from "F's" to "A's." Previously, she merely had students thrown out of Capella.
  • Capella University refused, in the most literal sense of the term, to provide that student with any due process rights. Interestingly, Capella has an army of cronies who actively scour the Internet to post otherwise. Some of these include: Shawn Ambrose, an individual who has been relentless in his attacks (his posts may be found all over the Internet, most of them using the nickname of "CapellaRocks"); Robert Evans, who committed defamation against the plaintiff by contacting the plaintiff's part-time employer to "warn them"; and Corrie Bergeron, an individual who apparently worked (maybe still does) for Capella University and has stated that "Capella followed their policies to the letter. . ." The plain and simple fact of the matter is that  these people are all liars - the student was literally denied all due process rights. Capella University refused to follow any of their written policies.
  • Even now, more than a full year after Capella University locked the student out of all of his classes, Capella University has refused to turn over all that student's records as required under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). In fact, Capella University refused to turn over ANY of their records pertaining to their retaliatory actions against the student until just a few months ago when they were forced to by the United States Department of Education. Of course, they again refused to turn over everything as required under FERPA and they are still under investigation for that matter.

These are just a few issues that will be examined, in much greater detail, during the trial against Capella University. Of course, there are many, many more matters that have not been discussed here. It's really sad to think that there are those who claim to be interested in "Digital Stakeholders" can twist the facts, based upon mere speculation, and change the focus from the rights of those with disabilities to whether or not their participation in education is a "right or a privilege." Sad, really sad.

Capella University Discrimination

Articles about the discrimination lawsuit against Capella University are popping up all over the Internet. It's a good thing too because it appears as if Capella's propaganda machine is working overtime to hide their abusive practices. If anything, the international attention being received by the lawsuit is indicative of the importance that enlightened ones in the educational community place upon genuine accessibility. 

October 25, 2005

Former Student Claims Capella University Discrimination

At the moment (that is, at the time this was posted), there is one lawsuit against Capella University alleging:

• Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act – failure to accommodate (due to the incompetent design of WebCT)
• Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act – retaliation
• Unruh Civil Rights Act
• Violation of California Education Code, Section 94367

Some of the officials mentioned in this lawsuit include Capella’s:

• Provost (Karen Viechnicki)
• Chief Counsel (Greg Thom)
• Dean for the School of Technology (Kurt Linberg)
• Disabilities Service Coordinator (Lisa Bromenshenkel)
• TS5150 Instructor (Diane Stottlemyer)

Details of this lawsuit are currently posted on the web site of the plaintiff’s attorney at:

The Law Offices of Thomas & Associates

October 24, 2005

Welcome to the Official Capella University Lawsuits Blog!

Capella University exists for one reason - to make money and lots of it. Regardless of what Capella University's spin doctors, marketing department, and propaganda machine would have you believe the fact is that Capella University has been, and continues to be, subject to lawsuits by those who have been scammed. This blog is designed to bring these lawsuits to the attention of consumer so that they can make informed decisions before spending thousands of dollars on an "education" at Capella.

Caveat Emptor - Let the Buyer Beware!