 DO-IT resources
|
DO-IT programs
|
DO-IT search
|
DO-IT home page
|
![[DO-IT Home]](/doit/doitlogo.gif)
As a result of federal legislation such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1997) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, young people with disabilities are being encouraged and better prepared to pursue higher education (Gajar, 1998; Henderson, 2001, Horn & Berktold, 1999; National Council on Disability, 2000). The number of students with disabilities enrolled in higher education continues to grow. Approximately 6% of people in postsecondary programs report a disability (Horn & Berktold, 1999). According to Henderson (2001), the majority of these students reported a learning disability (40.4%). Percentages of students with other disabilities include mobility and orthopedic impairments, 7.1%; health impairments, 15.4%; hearing impairments, 8.6%; blindness or partial sight, 16.1%; speech impairments, 2.9%; and other impairments, 16.9%. Despite their increased percentage of college enrollment, individuals with disabilities are still underrepresented in postsecondary education when compared to their non-disabled peers (Blackorby & Wagner, 1996; Stodden & Dowrick, 2000). One study found that two years after high school, 63% of students with disabilities were enrolled in some form of postsecondary education compared to 72% of students without disabilities. Of those enrolled in postsecondary education, 42% of students with disabilities and 62% of those without disabilities were enrolled in four-year schools (Horn & Berktold, 1999).
Students with disabilities are less likely than their counterparts without disabilities to stay enrolled in postsecondary education or to earn a postsecondary degree or credential. Regarding degree attainment, Horn & Berktold (1999) found that after five years, 53% of students with disabilities and 64% of those without disabilities attained a degree or certificate or were still pursuing their degree. Of the students with disabilities, 16% earned a bachelor's degree and 25% earned an associate's degree or vocational certificate. These percentages are low compared to students without disabilities, where 27% attained a bachelor's degree and 25% earned an associate's degree or vocational certificate (Horn & Berktold, 1999). Clearly, postsecondary educational outcomes for students with disabilities are not as positive as they are for those without disabilities.
People with disabilities, as with other minority groups, face challenges in gaining employment. They are also negatively and disproportionately affected by changes in general employment trends (Stodden & Dowrick, 2000; Trupin, Sebesta, Yelin, & LaPlante, 1997; Yelin & Katz, 1994a, 1994b; Zemsky & Odel, 1994).
The completion of some type of postsecondary education significantly improves the chances of men and women with disabilities to secure satisfactory and meaningful employment (Gilson, 1996; Reskin & Roos, 1990; Stodden, 1998; Stodden & Dowrick, 2000; Yelin & Katz, 1994a, 1994b). A postsecondary education is highly correlated with vocational options, financial success, and high quality adult life. In fact, for people with disabilities, there is a stronger positive correlation between level of education and rate of employment than there is for the general population (Stodden, 1998; Stodden & Dowrick 2000). The poor employment figures for people with disabilities coupled with the positive impact of postsecondary education makes increasing their postsecondary success an important goal (Benz, Doren, & Yovanoff, 1998; Blackorby & Wagner, 1996; Gajar, 1998; Gilson, 1996; National Council on Disability, 2000; Phelps & Hanley-Maxwell, 1997; Reis, Neu, & McGuire, 1997; Reskin & Roos, 1990; Stodden & Dowrick, 2000).
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in programs and services that receive federal funds. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 reinforces and extends the requirements of Section 504 to programs and services, regardless of whether or not they receive federal funds. These laws apply to postsecondary institutions. For qualified students who disclose their disabilities and present appropriate documentation, postsecondary institutions must provide reasonable accommodations to assure equal access to program offerings (Frank & Wade, 1993; Heyward, 1998; McCusker, 1995; West, Kregel, Getzel, Zhu, Ipsen, & Martin, 1993).
Many factors impact the academic success of students with disabilities. They include physical access, campus support services, and faculty willingness to make accommodations. Although students are generally pleased with their accommodations (Hill, 1996) and negative experiences are not widespread, some students have difficulty acquiring accommodations, and some faculty members project negative attitudes toward students with disabilities (Anderson-Inman, Knox-Quinn & Szymanski, 1999; Blackhurst, Lahm, Harrison & Chandler, 1999; Burgstahler, Duclos, & Turcotte, 1999; Yucker, 1994). Faculty attitudes influence behavior toward students, which in turn influences student performance (Alexander & Strain, 1978). Prejudicial treatment, whether intentional or not, creates obstacles for students with disabilities in higher education that can be more disabling than the physical or cognitive impairments themselves (Fichten, 1995).
When considering accommodations for students with disabilities, faculty are often concerned about maintaining academic integrity (Nelson, Dodd & Smith, 1990).
Many support the integration of students with sensory and physical disabilities in higher education but are less supportive of integrating students with learning disabilities and psychiatric disabilities (Burgstahler et al., 1999; Hannah & Pliner, 1983; Leyser, 1989). There are also certain accommodations that faculty members are less willing to provide, such as alternative assignments, copies of lecture notes, tape-recorded assignments, and proofreaders (Nelson, et al., 1990). Additionally, the willingness to provide accommodations varies by academic discipline. For example, education faculty have been found to be more willing to accommodate than business faculty, and business faculty have been found to be more willing to provide accommodations than science faculty (Leyser; Leyser, Vogel, Wyland & Brulle, 1998; Nelson, et al., 1990).
Some instructors feel uncomfortable talking to students with disabilities. Similarly, students with disabilities are sometimes reluctant to ask for accommodations. They express concern that instructors may have negative attitudes about them, and that they may not respect their privacy regarding their disabilities (Burgstahler, et al., 1999; Moore & Nye, 1986; National Center on the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports, 2000). Faculty members with more knowledge about and experience with students who have disabilities have more positive attitudes about them than those with less experience and knowledge (Aksamit, Levenberger & Morris, 1987; Fichten, Amsel, Bourdon, & Creti, 1992; Fonosch & Schwab, 1981; Yuker, 1994).
Overall, despite ever-growing course loads, committee assignments, research responsibilities, and community work, professors are receptive to receiving training in teaching students with disabilities (Norman, Caseau, & Stefanich, 1998). College administrators also acknowledge the need to provide training for faculty regarding the capabilities and unique needs of students with disabilities (Nelson, et al., 1990). Both faculty and students have expressed the need for faculty development so that instructors can better understand their legal obligation to provide academic accommodations, learn about typical accommodation strategies, improve communication skills, and become aware of available resources (Burgstahler et al., 1999; Leyser et al., 1998; Vogel, et al., 1999). Faculty members and administrators report interest in multiple presentation delivery methods including short printed publications, on-line resources, and short presentations that include case studies or student panels (Burgstahler, et al., 1999). Including disability-related content in training programs and orientations for teaching assistants (TAs) is also important, since many TAs have primary teaching responsibilities (Burgstahler & Jirikowic, 2002).
Training opportunities regarding accommodating students with learning disabilities and psychiatric disabilities are of particular interest to postsecondary faculty (Henderson, 2001). These types of disabilities are especially challenging for instructors to understand and accommodate (Burgstahler, et al., 1999; Houck, Asselin, Troutman, & Arrington, 1992; Vogel et al., 1999). Since faculty members play a key role in the learning of all students, professional development for this audience has the potential to improve the postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities (Burgstahler, 2003; Cafferella & Zinn, 1999).
Faculty members, teaching assistants, and administrators need information about legal issues, accommodation strategies, and resources for working with students who have disabilities. Training should be provided in multiple ways to address differences in schedules, interests, knowledge, experience, and information needs. Short printed publications, Internet-based resources, and both short and extended presentations should be considered. Follow-up support to address specific needs should also be provided.
It is best to tailor professional development sessions to the needs of instructors in specific academic disciplines, giving examples of accommodations that are likely to be provided in each of those fields. Seek to educate instructors in academic disciplines that tend to be less willing to accommodate students with disabilities. Faculty members in academic areas where advancing technology increases opportunities for participation of students with disabilities should also be targeted for training in order to correct faulty assumptions about what students with disabilities can accomplish. For example, faculty members in information technology fields may not be aware of assistive technology that allows individuals with a wide range of disabilities to access computers. In addition, instructors of Internet-based learning courses may not be aware of the technical issues and legal obligations to design courses that are accessible to students with disabilities (Patrick, 1996).
Keep in mind that faculty members may feel uncomfortable when working with students who have disabilities. Their attitudes may be based on faulty assumptions and stereotypes. Use faculty training as opportunities to allow instructors to openly discuss fears and concerns, to dismiss incorrect assumptions and stereotypes, and to provide accurate information. Model an attitude of respect for the rights and responsibilities of the institution, students with disabilities, and instructors. Avoid generalizations about people with disabilities and highlight similarities instead of differences between students with and without disabilities. Emphasize that academic accommodations do not need to be elaborate; creativity and common sense can lead to practical solutions for access problems.
When delivering training to faculty and administrators, assume your audience has varying levels of experience, knowledge, and a wide range of interests represented. Some faculty and administrators are eager to learn about disability-related issues; others are interested in only the minimum amount of information they need to perform their jobs. Leave time to discuss issues of special interest to audience members.
Based on a review of research, DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) developed six models of professional development for faculty and administrators that may be adapted for a wide range of schedules and interests. The presentation models include a short overview, a comprehensive workshop, tailor-made workshops on specific topics, self-paced Web instruction, and a distance learning course (Burgstahler, 2003). In addition to materials provided in this handbook, information can be found in The Faculty Room Web site at http://www.washington.edu/doit/Faculty/.
Professional development can help educators more fully include students with disabilities in their courses. Ultimately, increased knowledge and skills of faculty members and administrators regarding legal issues, accommodations, and resources can lead to more positive postsecondary and career outcomes for students with disabilities.
|
Next
|
Previous
|
|
Team Notebook
|
DO-IT search
|
DO-IT home page
|
