2What is owed
Week two, the same day. Before the reply to Rowan is written.
- The Duty to Accommodate in Learning Design — the procedural duty and the substantive one, the unified test for a standard, and accommodation to the point of undue hardship, in the Canadian frame.
- The Case Law Behind Accommodation in Education — six decisions in plain language. Three carry this stop: Renaud, which makes the search for accommodation a shared responsibility in which the person seeking it must also take part (source 2); Meiorin, which sets the test a standard must meet and places on the institution the burden of showing that further accommodation would be undue hardship (source 1); and Moore, in which the Supreme Court of Canada described the service owed as meaningful access to education (source 6).
- How a University Accommodation Policy Works — the university’s own policy, read as the brief: who is eligible, who decides, what an instructor is responsible for, and how a disagreement is resolved.
- The Interactive Process in Learning Settings — what good faith requires on each side, and the points at which the process stalls: no response, an unworkable offer, or a request handled as a complaint.
The reply to Rowan opens a process rather than issuing a ruling. It says what the office will do and by when, what it needs from Rowan, and that the instructor will be part of it. The duty it answers is the duty to accommodate under the provincial Human Rights Code (source 7), and it is a positive duty: equal access to a public service can require the institution to take measures, not only to refrain from excluding (source 4). The existing letter for extended time settles nothing about the three new requests. A blanket rule is no answer to a person; the duty calls for individual assessment (source 3), so each barrier is looked at on its own terms, with the focus on needs and limitations rather than on the diagnosis (source 9).
Where practice disagreesWhether the laboratory already missed in September can be covered by an accommodation granted in week two. Accommodation after a deadline, test, or course has already passed is treated in human rights guidance as a question of its own rather than as the ordinary case (source 9), and the shared responsibility that Renaud describes includes bringing a need forward in time for it to be met (source 2). This path treats the September absence under the course’s own rule and the instructor’s discretion, runs the accommodation forward from the request, and writes down why. Others would reach back. Either way, the reasoning belongs in the record.