A response on behalf of President Lynn Mahoney to the All-University Committee on Disability’s open letter lists four steps of a plan for disability justice to create an institutional shift in how disability is perceived. 

The AUCD, a subcommittee of the Academic Senate, published an open letter to Mahoney in April, calling for disability justice to be supported as a culture rather than simply meeting accommodations. 

Bobby King, the university’s director of communications, provided a statement regarding a course of action on behalf of Mahoney.

These steps include integrating disability into existing campus equity centers and collaborating with the Division of Equity and Inclusion, having Associate Vice President for Disability Access and Student Well-being Dai To join the extended cabinet, creating a campus-wide survey on the campus’s accessibility, and incorporating disability justice in curricula. 

According to King, “the AUCD will update the president regularly about the collaboration with the Division of Equity and Inclusion, including its impact on the integration of disability justice into the university’s structure.”

This aims to integrate disability throughout campus culture instead of siloing it into the Disability Programs and Resource Center, which assists students with academic accommodations. Katie Murphy, chair of the AUCD, said a rights-based approach isn’t a cultural approach to disability. 

“Disability justice was brought in to address the limits of rights as a framework, as a way of applying intersectionality and broader lessons of social justice movement for equality for disabled people,” Murphy said. “It’s not just something you can cure with a ramp.”

Julie Chronister, a professor in the department of counseling, spoke about how San Francisco State University needs to move away from the framework of services and accommodations.

“If we want to create a campus that’s fully accessible and anti-ableist, we have to think about integrating these principles in all aspects,” said Chronister, a member of the AUCD. “Whether it’s admissions, campus surveys, events, we can’t silo disability into one service.” 

Chronister also noted that while the DPRC is a valuable resource at SFSU, there is still a need for medical documentation to prove that a student has a disability. 

“It’s not something that happens to one particular group, it cuts across the entire population,” Chronister said. “We can’t relegate [disability] to a certain service that does not uplift the lived experiences.” 

The second item on the list is that the associate vice president for Disability Access and Student Well-being, Dai To, will be joining the extended cabinet. 

Reina Howell, a fourth-year mechanical engineer student and current president of Disability Rights, Education Activism and Mentoring, said they didn’t realize that SFSU already had formal committees and positions focused on disability, like the AUCD or the Division of Disability Access and Student Well-Being. 

“It’s honestly good to hear that those structures exist, and I’m glad the school wants to elevate the role of Dr. Dai To by adding him to the extended cabinet,” Howell said. “That feels like a step in the right direction.” 

Next in the course of action is a campus-wide survey on the university’s disability services. King did not provide details on the survey, but the idea sounds “promising” to Howell. 

“I do wonder what kind of questions will be on it, who’s actually writing the survey and what they plan to do with the results,” Howell said. “What’s the actual goal? Transparency and student involvement would make a big difference here.” 

Hannah Wilson, former president of DREAM, would like more than a survey to get voices from the disabled community involved. 

“All the steps that the university will be taking is a great start to improving the quality of education disabled students receive, but it is essential that at least some disabled students get to directly have a say in what exactly integration looks like,” Wilson said.

In an email from both Murphy and Chronister, they said that while the survey is a necessary step to addressing ableism, disability services like the DPRC and HR Employee Accommodations are not the only units that require evaluation.

“As we said in our letter, ‘Disability isn’t just about services and accommodations.’ It’s frustrating, but not surprising, that the President’s Office perceives our request for gathering disability data as referring solely to disability services,” they said. “The university’s current practice on focusing solely on services and accommodations hinders the creation of a vibrant, empowered campus disability community.”

The final step is to incorporate disability justice training into the university’s training curriculum. King did not provide details on the contents of the curriculum.

“We [instructors] think about how students learn in so many different ways,” Chronister said. “So if we can create classrooms that are fully accessible to a person, we’re creating a classroom that’s fully accessible for all different learning styles.” 

At the time of publication, there is no timeline for this course of action. 

Emily Beitiks, interim director of the Paul K. Longmore Institute on Disability and AUCD member, said that within the university, “there is not the investment we need that goes beyond compliance.”According to Beitiks, allocating more resources and funds for accommodations can pave the way for increased enrollment, as people with disabilities prioritize accessibility when choosing schools. 

Additionally, Beitiks advocates for more representation of people with disabilities on campus to show that there is a strong community that would welcome incoming students. 

“We try to reframe disability as not a financial burden but a great opportunity,”  Beitiks said. “We could be enrolling disabled students at a far greater number. We could be attracting students. We’re leaving tuition dollars on the table because we’re not seeing disability as something cultural, that disability is a disadvantage and that it’s going to take money.” 

Howell looks forward to seeing SFSU move toward an approach where systematic services and culture work together. 

“Disability justice isn’t just about changing the systems or checking boxes, it’s also about creating a culture that’s inclusive and supportive,” Howell said. “It’s not enough to just have services like the DPRC.”