View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Learning Disabilities and the Adult Learner

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Learning Disabilities and the Adult Learner
Language: English
Authors: Jovita M. Ross-Gordon
Source: New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 2024 (184):46-55.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 10
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: Adult Education
Descriptors: Learning Disabilities, Adult Learning, Self Disclosure (Individuals), Adult Education, Continuing Education, Access to Education, Inclusion, Knowledge Level, Adult Programs, Teachers, Knowledge Base for Teaching, Disabilities, Compliance (Legal), Academic Accommodations (Disabilities), Accessibility (for Disabled), Educational Legislation, Federal Legislation, Students with Disabilities, Equal Education, Civil Rights Legislation
Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Americans with Disabilities Act 1990, Rehabilitation Act 1973 (Section 504)
DOI: 10.1002/ace.20542
ISSN: 1052-2891
1536-0717
Abstract: Approximately one-quarter of the adult population self-reports having one or more disabilities. Expanding adult and continuing education access for individuals with disabilities is an important dimension of striving to make our programs more inclusive. Thus, it is crucial that adult and continuing educators have a basic understanding of the types of disability that relate most directly to adult learning. This article reviews key definitions, models of disability, and legal requirements related to adult disability. It also takes a more focused look at the literature on several types of disabilities, along with approaches that have been taken over time to develop the learning skills and strategies of individuals with these disabilities and restructure learning environments to make them more accessible. This information should be considered a starting point. Making needed changes will require continuing commitment from teachers, trainers, and program administrators.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1454890
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFVHGbce456MJB1frVN1ax4AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDDXMZRwre5y7ftCJ_wIBEICBmyEkH5pJPYBefHf-b5gaVU_W1ET9kuUTGbqK3-o6yycN-O7RpCy9m_4lI6zl3xXp3LdqJsFeIzkQG_FIITAbS_0SJDbSdiPAM5-KKijqDYUI3NDbhqYz2gEyZW8sXrpYq413uMVPUQ7Ke7S-XbwweJE2Ur533yYE9QUmkMJczwWGhQ5qbJyTcW0CVcj-sSVf6h7c_WkS9cMDUsTr
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0181847786;nda01dec.24;2024Dec27.02:30;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0181847786-1">Learning Disabilities and the Adult Learner </title> <p>Approximately one‐quarter of the adult population self‐reports having one or more disabilities. Expanding adult and continuing education access for individuals with disabilities is an important dimension of striving to make our programs more inclusive. Thus, it is crucial that adult and continuing educators have a basic understanding of the types of disability that relate most directly to adult learning. This article reviews key definitions, models of disability, and legal requirements related to adult disability. It also takes a more focused look at the literature on several types of disabilities, along with approaches that have been taken over time to develop the learning skills and strategies of individuals with these disabilities and restructure learning environments to make them more accessible. This information should be considered a starting point. Making needed changes will require continuing commitment from teachers, trainers, and program administrators.</p> <p>Keywords: ADHD in adults; autism in adults; disability accommodations; learning strategies; models of disability; neurodiversity; specific learning disabilities in adults; universal design for learning</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-2">Introduction</hd> <p>With approximately one‐quarter of the adult population self‐reporting one or more disabilities (CDC [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref1">14</reflink>]), it is imperative that adult educators in various settings have a basic understanding of the types of disability that most frequently impact adult learning, disability‐related mandates for programs serving adults, conceptual models of disability, and practices aimed at disability inclusion in adult and higher education. As such, this article will address each of these areas.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-3">Disability Definitions, Legal Mandates, and Related Governmental Agencies</hd> <p>Although models of disability that eschew equating disability with impairment will be discussed later in this article, it is important to acknowledge that a number of the mandates aimed at avoiding discrimination based on disability in educational settings are framed around the identification of a condition seen as an impairment. It is also important to understand that disability is defined differently across various agencies providing legal protection or resources.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-4">Legal Mandates: Comparing IDEA, Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), and Section 504 of the...</hd> <p>Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref2">38</reflink>] (IDEA), first implemented as the Education for All Handicapped Children's Act of [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref3">26</reflink>] (Public Law 94–142), provides federal guidance and assistance to state and local education agencies to guarantee education and related services to eligible children and youth ages 3–21. A list of specific disabilities is delineated. Publicly educated children, as well as toddlers and youth, receive services, including the development of a transition plan to post‐secondary school or work.</p> <p>Most adult learners with disabilities are beyond the scope of eligibility for IDEA. However, they are under the protection of the ADA ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>]) and Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref5">57</reflink>]). Unlike IDEA, ADA does not provide benefits or services, but rather it is a civil rights law designed to prohibit discrimination based on disability in employment, public services, and accommodations. A person with a disability is defined as someone who (a) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, (b) has a history or <emph>record</emph> of an impairment (such as cancer that is in remission), or (c) is <emph>regarded</emph> as having such an impairment by others even if the individual does not have a disability (ADA National Network [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>]).</p> <p>ADA does not delineate a list of included disabilities; however, a list of <emph>possible</emph> physical or mental impairments is included: "Any mental or psychological disorder such as intellectual disability, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disability." Pertinent to learning in adult education settings, among the major life activities that may be substantially limited are "cognitive functions like thinking and concentrating" and "tasks like working, reading, learning, and communicating" (ADA National Network [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref7">1</reflink>]). Unlike IDEA, ADA does not specify or pay for evaluation and placement procedures. However, ADA does specify the provision of reasonable accommodations for eligible activities and settings (e.g. work and educational settings) as a legal requirement. Regarding the workplace, ADA indicates a "reasonable accommodation is any modification or adjustment to a job or the work environment that will enable an applicant or employee with a disability to participate in the application process or to perform essential job functions" (ADA National Network [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref8">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act operates similarly in providing legal protection from discrimination based on disability and uses a definition of disability virtually identical to the ADA. It applies to any program receiving federal financial assistance, though it is most often referenced relative to postsecondary education settings. Unlike with IDEA or ADA, individuals are typically required to provide recent documentation of their disability to obtain services or be approved for accommodations. For example, students legally may not be required to report a disability as part of admissions procedures; however, if they request accommodations for pre‐admissions testing or GED administration, testing organizations typically require documentation of a disability.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-5">The Division of Vocational Rehabilitation</hd> <p>For many adults who lack recent documentation of a disability, the cost of private evaluation services may be prohibitive. One agency that may be of assistance is the local Office of Vocational Rehabilitation. However, this introduces yet another set of legal definitions, given the federal Division of Vocational Rehabilitation supports educational services and programs <emph>only</emph> insofar as the individual is verified as facing employment barriers without such services. For instance, according to the Vocational Rehabilitation Program within the Texas Workforce Commission, you may be eligible for vocational rehabilitation services if you (a) have a disability that results in barriers to employment, (b) need services to prepare for employment, (c) need services to find new employment, or (d) need services to keep or advance in employment (Texas Workforce Commission [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref9">71</reflink>]). Educational and employment services available through the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation that may be of interest to readers of this article include (a) evaluations for diagnosis, (b) vocational assessments, and (c) on‐the‐job supports such as training on the job or a job coach.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-6">Prevalence of Disabilities Most Pertinent to Adult Learning Settings</hd> <p>Incidence data based on the number of children receiving services through IDEA cannot be relied upon in estimating the prevalence of disabilities among adults. At the same time, reliable incidence data from adult education programs are hard to obtain. Hence, I will rely on prevalence estimates based on several large‐scale studies of adults in the general population.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-7">Disabilities Overall</hd> <p>According to the disability and health data system (DHDS) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref10">14</reflink>]), more than one in four adults (28.7%) have some disability (CDC [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref11">14</reflink>]). CDC defines disability in both medical and functional terms, as "any condition of the body or mind (impairment) that makes it more difficult for the person with the condition to do certain activities (activity limitation) and interact with the world around them (participation restriction)" (CDC [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref12">14</reflink>]). Although the common conception of disability focuses on mobility impairments, data collected by DHDS indicate that cognitive impairments, those associated with difficulty in concentrating, remembering, or making decisions, affect 13.9% of the adult population—a larger percentage of adults than those with mobility impairments (12.2%). Lower percentages are reported for those with hearing impairments (6.2%), vision impairments (5.5%), and impairments impacting independent living (7.7%) or self‐care (3.6%). Individual disability percentages total more than the 28% reported for disabilities in general due to co‐occurrence of disabilities (CDC [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref13">14</reflink>])</p> <p>Given the focus of this article on disabilities impacting the learning of adults participating in adult education or training programs, I will focus primarily on those disabilities that, while invisible, often have an impact on learning. This includes cognitive conditions such as specific learning disabilities (LDs), attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism. Due to space limitations, I will not discuss mental health conditions such as bipolar disorders, anxiety, and depression, except as they co‐occur with cognitive conditions. Readers are encouraged to consult pertinent resources for further information (e.g., see Ross‐Gordon and Procknow [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref14">62</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-8">Specific LDs</hd> <p>For years, LDs were assumed only to impact children. The general definition of LD provided by the [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref15">48</reflink>] (NCLD) is indeed tied to academic subjects, similar to criteria currently used to diagnose LDs in students attending public schools: "An SLD is a brain‐based disorder that affects an individual's ability to read, write and do math (e.g. dyslexia dysgraphia, and dyscalculia)" (NCLD [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref16">48</reflink>]). But the website of the Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA) acknowledges that LDs may either persist into adulthood and affect life beyond school settings and features a wepage dedicated to support and resources for adults that notes:</p> <p>The impact of learning disabilities is lifelong. The issues that made school work so challenging as a child crop up again in the workplace, in social situations, and in our homes. Paperwork and reports at work; keeping up with the bills; and helping our children with their homework can be a struggle (LDA).</p> <p>In addition to the reading, writing, and math‐based LDs recognized by the NCLD, LDA also acknowledges two other categories of LDs. Non‐verbal LDs can impact physical coordination, learning of social cues, and executive functioning (e.g., planning, organizing, emotional regulation). Although descriptions of dyscalculia and dysgraphia point to the expressive side of language usage, SLDs may also independently affect the understanding of oral and written language, impacting the understanding of conversations and reading comprehension.</p> <p>Prevalence estimates for adult LDs, have varied widely across age cohorts and educational settings, as well as due to differences in definitions and assessment criteria (Vogel [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref17">74</reflink>]). Data collected as part of the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), an assessment program collecting data on literacy, numeracy, and technology‐related skills of adults in 24 countries, have provided some insight into the possible prevalence of LDs among adults globally. Of US adults participating in the PIAAC assessments between 2011 and 2012, 8% reported having been diagnosed at some point as having a learning disability (Patterson and Paulson [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref18">53</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-9">ADHD</hd> <p>According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), "Attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common childhood disorders and can continue through adolescence and into adulthood. Characteristics include difficulty staying focused and paying attention, difficulty controlling behavior, and hyperactivity (over‐activity)" (NIH n.d.). A recent large‐scale study based on diagnostic interview data of adults 18–44 estimated the lifetime prevalence of ADHD among adults in the United States to be 8.1% (Kessler et al. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref19">41</reflink>]). Similarly, a meta‐analysis of studies conducted globally estimated the prevalence of adult ADHD at 8.25% (Song et al. [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref20">68</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-10">Other Cognitive Conditions Impacting Adult Learning</hd> <p>While it is typically evident during childhood, particularly for boys (Bargiela, Steward, and Mandy [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref21">5</reflink>]; Ochoa‐Lubinoff, Makol, and Dillon [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref22">51</reflink>]), autism persists among adults. Drawing on multiple sources of national and state data, Dietz et al. ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref23">23</reflink>]) estimated that 2.21% of adults aged 18–84 were living with autism spectrum disorder, with a higher prevalence among males (3.62%) than females (0.85%). Rubenstein et al. ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref24">63</reflink>]) analyzed Medicaid data, suggesting that its prevalence among younger adults is rising, but similar to Dietz et al. ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>]), they found an overall prevalence rate of only 2.2%. Like autism, intellectual disabilities (ID) are developmental, meaning they become apparent during childhood. According to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), "intellectual disability is a condition characterized by significant limitations in both functioning and adaptive behavior that originates before the age of 22" (AAIDD [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref26">3</reflink>]).</p> <p>The intelligence referred to here is general intellectual ability, measured by overall scores on an IQ test, as compared to the discrepancies across specific areas of cognitive functioning associated with SLDs, measured in several ways, including sub‐tests of IQ tests. Although educators in basic, postsecondary, and employment‐related programs may encounter adults with intellectual disabilities, a study of ID among age cohorts born in the 1980s and 1990s reports a prevalence of just under 1% (Benevides et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref27">8</reflink>]). Autism and intellectual disability will not be discussed in detail in this article due to their low prevalence figures, suggesting they are not as likely to be encountered in most adult learning settings as SLD and ADHD.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-11">Models of Disability</hd> <p>Conceptual models of disability can be viewed as underlying the sense of identity held by disabled individuals and communities, approaches to disability exhibited by various organizations and professional groups, and perceptions of disability held by the larger society. Although disabilities were earlier viewed from tragic or religious perspectives (Engelman, Valderama‐Wallace, and Nouredini [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref28">28</reflink>]), two paradigms have prevailed during the late 20th century and early 21st century—the <emph>medical (or individual</emph>) <emph>model</emph> and the <emph>social model</emph> (Emery, Louick, and Sabrowsky [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref29">27</reflink>]; Haegele and Hodge [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref30">34</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-12">Medical and Social Models of Disability</hd> <p>The individual/medical model underlies many of the definitions, assessment criteria, and legal protections discussed thus far and is reflected to a significant degree in the historic scholarly literature of several fields of practice, including educational psychology (Emery, Louick, and Sabrowsky [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref31">27</reflink>]), nursing (Engelman, Valderama‐Wallace, and Nouredini [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref32">28</reflink>]), and vocational rehabilitation (Kulnik and Nikoletou [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref33">42</reflink>]). The social model of disability evolved out of the disability rights movement in the 1970s and was subsequently articulated by professional advocates in, some of whom were disabled (Barnes [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref34">6</reflink>]; Davis [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref35">20</reflink>]; Rocco and Delgado [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref36">58</reflink>]). In Table 1 below, Haegele and Hodge ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref37">34</reflink>]) summarize the distinctions typically drawn between these two dominant models.</p> <p>1 TABLE Comparisons between the medical and social models of disability discourse.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Topic</th><th>Medical model</th><th>Social model</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>What is disability?</td><td>An individual or medical phenomenon that results from impairments in body functions or structures; a deficiency or abnormality</td><td>A social construct that is imposed on top of impairments by society; a difference</td></tr><tr><td>Access to treatment or services</td><td>Referral by diagnosis</td><td>Self‐referral, experience‐driven</td></tr><tr><td>Targets of interventions</td><td>"Fixing" the disability to the greatest extent possible; "normalizing"</td><td>Social or political change in an effort to decrease environmental barriers and increase levels of understanding</td></tr><tr><td>Outcome of interventions</td><td>Normalized function; functioning member of existing society</td><td>Self‐advocacy, changes in environment and understanding, social inclusion</td></tr><tr><td>The agent of remedy</td><td>The professional</td><td>Can be the individual, an advocate, or anyone who positively affects the arrangements between the individual and society</td></tr><tr><td>Effects on individuals who are typically functioning</td><td>Society remains the same</td><td>Society evolves to be more inclusive</td></tr><tr><td>Perceptions toward individuals with disabilities</td><td>The individual is faulty</td><td>The individual is unique</td></tr><tr><td>Cognitive authority</td><td>Scientists and doctors</td><td>Academics and advocates with disabilities</td></tr><tr><td>Perception of disability</td><td>Being disabled is negative</td><td>Being disabled, in itself, is neither positive nor negative</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Source</emph>: Haegele, J. A., & Hodge, S. (2016). Disability Discourse: Overview and Critiques of the Medical and Social Models. <emph>Quest</emph>. © National Association for Kinesiology in Higher Education (NAKHE), reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis Ltd, https://<ulink href="http://www.tandfonline.com">www.tandfonline.com</ulink> on behalf of National Association for Kinesiology in Higher Education (NAKHE).</p> <p>Shakespeare ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref38">64</reflink>]) contrasts his framing of the social model of disability, also referred to as a critical realist model, with the "strong" social model of Barnes ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref39">6</reflink>]) and Davis ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref40">20</reflink>]), which he describes as a materialist approach. He suggests that disability is always an interaction between individual and structural factors, maintaining that "the experience of a disabled person results from the relationship between factors intrinsic to the individual, and extrinsic factors from the wider context in which she finds herself" (Shakespeare [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref41">64</reflink>], 74–75). Shakespeare is not alone in viewing an interactional model favorably.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-13">Alternatives to Medical and Social Models of Disability</hd> <p>Other alternative approaches to medical and social models of disability include the affirmation approach presented by Swain and French ([<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref42">70</reflink>]) and the strengths‐based approach presented by Wehmeyer ([<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref43">77</reflink>]). These approaches share an interest in what those with disabling conditions are <emph>capable of</emph> rather than in their limitations.</p> <p>In proposing the <emph>affirmation</emph> model of disability, Swain and French ([<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref44">70</reflink>]) argue that both non‐disabled and disabled individuals who are accepting of the social model of disability may adhere to tragic notions of disability, evoking sympathy for people with disabilities. On the other hand, they maintain the affirmative model is built upon a positive individual and collective identity, borne out of the Disabled People's movement, and in particular, the Disability Arts Movement.</p> <p>Wehmeyer ([<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref45">77</reflink>]) situates his argument for a <emph>strengths‐based approach</emph> within the <emph>person‐environment fit</emph> or <emph>socio‐ecological</emph> model underlying the World Health Organization's IFO classification of disability:</p> <p>The focus of these new models ...shifted from an emphasis on disability as deficits and disability as residing within the person to a focus on the fit between a person's capacities, their strengths, and the demands of the context in which he or she might live, learn, work or play. Disability resides only in this gap and the degree to which we can reduce the gap between a person's capacity and the demands of the environment....(Wehmeyer [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref46">77</reflink>], 3–4).</p> <p>Wehmeyer points out that it is the person‐environment fit model that underlies the universal design for learning (UDL), which will be discussed later.</p> <p>The alternative approaches discussed above can be seen as paving the way for an approach to disability that has emerged more recently—<emph>neurodiversity</emph>. Although numerous authors credit Singer ([<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref47">65</reflink>]), a sociologist, with coining the term neurodiversity and Blume ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref48">9</reflink>]), a journalist, with popularizing the term, Botha et al. ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref49">10</reflink>]) maintain that the concept arose in the mid‐1990s in discussions among autistic activists. Dwyer ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref50">25</reflink>]) suggests that neurodiversity is best viewed as a range of approaches rather than as a single theory, Among the alternative approaches he explicates are those aligned with (a) the "<emph>strong"</emph> social model of disability (disability arises <emph>entirely</emph> from society's responses to individual impairments), (b) <emph>social‐relational</emph> models (disability arising from society coexists with restrictions arising from individual impairments), and (c) <emph>ecological or interactionist</emph> approaches (disability is the product of an interaction between the characteristics of a person and their environment). What neurodiversity approaches share is a refutation of negative language emphasizing deficits in favor of positive language and recognition of the strengths manifested by those viewed as neurodivergent (Dwyer [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref51">25</reflink>]). The concept of neurodiversity is also expanding to inform about other conditions associated with brain function impacting learning. Conditions to which the term has been applied include ADHD (Crook and McDowall [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref52">19</reflink>]), dyslexia (de Beer et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref53">21</reflink>]), and developmental language disorder (Hobson, Toseeb, and Gibson [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref54">36</reflink>]).</p> <p>A final model of disability is situated in the concept of intersectionality. Crenshaw ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref55">18</reflink>]) first articulated this concept with reference to the combined and interactive effects of racism and sexism in the lives of Black women. During the early 2000s, this concept was implored to examine intersections of disability with gender (Smith and Hutchinson [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref56">66</reflink>]); race (Bell [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref57">7</reflink>]), gender and race (Clark [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref58">16</reflink>]; Erevelles and Minear [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref59">29</reflink>]), and sexual orientation (McRuer [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref60">45</reflink>]). More recently, intersectional frameworks have been applied to study the combined impacts of ableism and racism on employment (Fuentes et al. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref61">31</reflink>]) and the impact of race, gender, sexuality, class, and other constructs on disability identification within the field of critical autism studies (Mallipeddi and VanDaalen [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref62">44</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-14">Practices Aimed at Disability Inclusion in Higher and Adult Education and the Workplace</hd> <p>This section will describe practices aimed at individuals with disabilities in adult education and higher education in two strands.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Strategies Focused on "Fixing" or Equipping Individual learners</item> <p></p> <item> ∘ Direct (remedial) instruction</item> <p></p> <item> ∘ Learning strategies and strengths‐based approaches</item> <p></p> <item> ∘ Psychosocial and psychoeducation approaches</item> <p></p> <item> Strategies Aimed at Modifying the Learning Environment to Reduce Barriers</item> <p></p> <item> ∘ Accommodations</item> <p></p> <item> ∘ UDL (and its derivatives)</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0181847786-15">Strategies Focusing on Individuals</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0181847786-16">Direct (Remedial) Instruction</hd> <p>Early interest in the education of adults with SLDs can be seen in the literature on adult basic and secondary‐level programs emerging in the last quarter of the twentieth century (Jordan [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref63">40</reflink>]; Ross‐Gordon [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref64">61</reflink>]). Suspecting that a large proportion of students in their programs might have LDs in the years soon after K‐12 education began to implement special education, literacy instructors observed that few adults who were struggling with literacy arrived with documentation of such disabilities (Ross and Smith [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref65">60</reflink>]; Travis [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref66">73</reflink>]). These educators sought to learn instructional strategies to assist such students within the context of open enrollment programs, typically serving students with varied histories and needs. Covington ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref67">17</reflink>]) cited a 5‐year project funded by the National Institutes for Literacy culminating in a five‐volume guide titled "Bridges to Practice" ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref68">56</reflink>]). Due to the paucity of research available on adults with LDs, the authors of the guide acknowledged that many recommendations were based on research with younger learners. Elsewhere, Vogel and Reder ([<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref69">75</reflink>]) and colleagues reported on the use of explicit instructional strategies in reading (Podhaski [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref70">55</reflink>]; Wilson [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref71">78</reflink>]) and mathematics (Patton, Cronin, and Bassett [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref72">54</reflink>]). Based on their review of the extant research at the time, Covington ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref73">17</reflink>]) recommended a two‐pronged approach—combining direct instruction with strategy instruction.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-17">Learning Strategies and Strengths‐Based Instruction</hd> <p>Based on findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NLTS2), Newman and Madaus ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref74">50</reflink>]) reported that while 68% of secondary students with disabilities received support from a staff member in monitoring progress and workload, and 43% received support in learning strategies and study skills, only 2% of postsecondary learners received similar support. Consequently, they stressed that it was vital for students to learn study skills and learning strategies as part of the transition process to work and postsecondary education. James et al. ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref75">39</reflink>]) co‐authored a chapter on learning supports and programs for neurodivergent students with ADHD or specific LDs (e.g., dyslexia, dyscalculia, or executive function challenges). The essential elements they suggest include: (a) <emph>building a sense of belonging, (b) creating connections to campus resources, (c) paying attention to the emotional aspects of learning,(d) designing a well‐timed parallel curriculum (e.g., courses and seminars developing metacognitive awareness), (e) building structured learning environments, and (f) providing direct support with study techniques</emph>.</p> <p>Farmer, Allsopp, and Ferron ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref76">30</reflink>]) present the findings of a personal strengths program (PSP) relying on cognitive strategy instruction, rooted in self‐determination and positive psychology to assist students with LD or ADHD use their strengths to achieve class‐related goals. Notably, participants included undergraduate and graduate students, with nontraditional‐age students constituting the majority of the undergraduate participants. Despite mixed results, the authors reported the PSP program had noticeable effects on self‐determination. One learning strategy that allows ADHD students who thrive with visual and kinesthetic learning but who may struggle with notetaking, outlining, and summarizing strategies to capitalize on their strengths is mind mapping, also called concept mapping. Hannon ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref77">35</reflink>]) describes mind mapping as follows: "Shapes, lines, and colors may be used to link ideas, differentiate ideas, or otherwise organize thoughts. Mind maps can take the form of charts, graphic organizers, tables, flowcharts, Venn diagrams, timelines, or T‐charts" (p. 94). Mind maps can either be created by hand or using software designed for this purpose. They help students see the big picture, starting with a general topic and then exploring specific ideas that relate to the topic.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-18">Psychosocial and Psychoeducational Strategies</hd> <p>Although the literature on learning strategies focuses largely on developing cognitive strategies among those with LDs or ADHD, an additional segment of literature, generated largely by psychological and behavioral sciences professionals, focuses on assisting learners in developing psychosocial strategies to manage executive function challenges and co‐occurring psychological distress. Although a number of studies have examined the effectiveness of pharmaceutical interventions commonly prescribed for adults with ADHD, some adults disdain relying on this medical approach. Two recent studies have separately reviewed a large number of studies examining the results of using psychosocial or psychoeducational strategies as an alternative to medication. Fullen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref78">32</reflink>]) scanned more than 20,000 results from database searching to identify 53 studies that met their criteria for inclusion in their systematic literature review. Although a range of interventions were reported to have positive results, cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), mindfulness training, dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT, a form of group coaching), and neurofeedback were reported to have the greatest empirical support. After screening 184 articles located through four databases, Wakelin, Willemse, and Munnik ([<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref79">76</reflink>]) determined that only 44 studies both focused on adult ADHD and met their criteria for study quality. Similar to Fullen's findings, DBT, CBT, and interventions focused on mindfulness were deemed most effective.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-19">Strategies Focused on Achieving Inclusion by Modifying the Learning Environment</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0181847786-20">Accommodations</hd> <p>The Rehabilitation Act of [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref80">57</reflink>] and ADA ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref81">4</reflink>]) provide the legal basis for eligible adults to access "reasonable" accommodations in postsecondary and employment settings.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-21">Adult Basic Education and Secondary Level Programs</hd> <p>In writing about appropriate accommodations, Gregg ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref82">33</reflink>]) described four types of accommodations in Adult Basic Education and GED programs: (a) presentation—accessing information by alternative means (e.g., alternative media), (b) response—producing information by alternative means (e.g., by oral response or using assistive technology), (c) scheduling—adjusting the time to complete a task (e.g., allowing extended time or frequent breaks), and (d) setting—adjusting the location where the task must be located (e.g., in a quiet room). Gregg also offered suggestions for accommodations in ABE and GED programs organized by subject area: (a) reading instruction: reading aloud, color filters; (b) reading testing: read aloud, extended time; (c) writing instruction: speech to text technology; (d) writing tests: word processing, extended time; (e) math instruction: extra time, calculators, advance organizers; and (f) math tests: read aloud extended time.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-22">In the Workplace</hd> <p>Although information on accommodations as a part of job training and human resource development is scarce, the importance of such accommodations is underscored by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in the 2017 Condition of Education:</p> <p>Overall, 27 percent of 25‐ to 64‐year‐olds with disabilities were employed in 2015, compared to 77 percent of those without disabilities. On the other hand, 70 percent of those with disabilities were not in the labor force, compared to 19 percent of those without disabilities (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref83">47</reflink>], 4)</p> <p>Writing about workers with developmental dyslexia, de Beer et al. ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref84">21</reflink>]) suggest employers may either lack knowledge about accommodations or workers may be reluctant to disclose a disability to seek accommodations. They elaborate: <emph>"</emph>Whether to disclose or not depends on many factors: the worker's character and confidence, environmental safety, the line manager's attitude and knowledge, the desire for accommodations, and a fear of bullying, stigmatization, and discrimination" (de Beer et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref85">21</reflink>], 15, 17).</p> <p>Doyle ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref86">24</reflink>]) discusses what he calls four "neurominorities" in the workplace (ADHD, autism, dyslexia, and developmental coordination disorders [DCD]). He notes that despite some differences in presentation, these conditions all share intra‐individual diversity across areas of neurocognitive ability, or what he calls a "spiky profile," often characterized by executive function challenges (e.g., memory, self‐regulation, organizing) along with neurocognitive strengths in areas such as comprehension and creativity. Informed by a biopsychosocial model of neurodiversity, he suggests <emph>"</emph>understanding work‐related intervention and treatment becomes more about adjusting the fit between the person and their environment than about treating a disorder," and the "aim of occupational accommodations for neurominorities is to access the strengths of the spiky profile and palliate the struggles" (Doyle [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref87">24</reflink>], 114, 115).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-23">Higher Education</hd> <p>An educational setting where accommodations have become more widely promoted is that of higher education. A report by Snyder, de Brey, and Dillow ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref88">67</reflink>]) indicates that 11% of undergraduates enrolled in 2011–12 reported a disability, with 8.5% reporting a cognitive disability. Myers, Lindburg, and Nied ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref89">46</reflink>]) found that undergraduate students reporting disabilities are more likely to be over 24 years of age, to be financially independent, and to be veterans. Oslund ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref90">52</reflink>]) reports that after The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 provided a legal prohibition against discrimination in institutions receiving federal funds, campuses began to hire specialists to direct offices for disability services. Among the key tasks undertaken by such offices is the evaluation of documents submitted to confirm students' disability status and hence eligibility for accommodations, followed by the recommendation of appropriate testing or classroom‐based accommodations. Yet, a relatively small proportion of students receive accommodations at the postsecondary level.</p> <p>Based on data from NLTS2, Newman and Madaus ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref91">50</reflink>], 173) report that <emph>"</emph>within 8 years of leaving high school, 67% of students with disabilities who received special education services in the K–12 system had enrolled in postsecondary education, yet only 28% disclosed that they had disabilities in college and less than one in five received accommodations." Additionally, although accommodations are intended to address the specific needs of students with disabilities, a relatively limited range of accommodations appears to be recommended. Newman and Madaus report that testing accommodations, including extended time and different settings for test taking, were the most frequent form of accommodations at both the secondary and postsecondary levels, with almost 88% receiving this accommodation in high school, compared with 21% in postsecondary school. Additional time to complete assignments was the second most frequently reported accommodation (72% in high school vs. 6% in postsecondary education). Yet, Hannon ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref92">35</reflink>], 94) made the following observation regarding evidence of the helpfulness of extended testing time: "Research shows offering students with attention deficits extended testing time, or frequent breaks does not appear to help them perform better on standardized tests than other students with ADD or ADHD who do not receive such accommodations."</p> <p>Aside from the possible misfit between student needs and accommodations, there are several reasons students may not receive the accommodations they are entitled to. Burgstahler ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref93">11</reflink>], 6) suggests that "fewer than one‐third of students may report disabilities because they do not need accommodations or because they fear potential discrimination, are embarrassed about their disability, or don't understand accommodations are available and how they might benefit them." Another reason may be the barrier presented by the need to demonstrate eligibility through submitting acceptable documentation. The process required can vary across settings, and as noted by Housel ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref94">37</reflink>]), without sufficient insurance or income, the cost of the psychoeducational evaluation necessary to obtain current documentation of impairment can be prohibitive.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-24">UDL</hd> <p>Given adult learners may have undiagnosed disabilities, may choose not to disclose their disability, or may find it challenging to secure the documents needed to demonstrate eligibility for accommodations, it is important that instructors of adults and program administrators seek ways beyond accommodations to eliminate or reduce barriers to learning. Strategies employed across education settings in recent decades have been referred to variably as UDL, universal design for instruction (UDI), and universal design for teaching (UDT) (Burgstahler [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref95">12</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-25">Universal Design (UD) Origins</hd> <p>The origins of these models for increasing access have frequently been traced to Ronald Mace, a wheelchair user and recognized architect widely credited with coining the term UD. The broad reach of this concept today is apparent in the ubiquitousness of curb cuts and automatic door‐openers, in the ADA, and on the website of the International Centre for Excellence in UD, where the scope of UD is explained:</p> <p>If an environment is accessible, usable, convenient, and a pleasure to use, everyone benefits. By considering the diverse needs and abilities of all throughout the design process, universal design creates digital and built environments, services and systems that meet peoples' needs. Simply put, universal design is good design (CEUD [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref96">15</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the 1980s, a movement emerged incorporating the UD concept into learning settings, supported by centers such as the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) and the Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology (DO‐IT) Center at the University of Washington.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-26">Application of UDL Within Higher Education Settings</hd> <p>Sheryl Burgstahler, who founded the DO‐IT center in 1992, notes that embracing UD in higher education requires a paradigm shift moving from (a) a medical or individual to a social model of disability; (b) viewing disability as a deficit to viewing disability as a diversity characteristic; and (c) a reactive accommodation‐only approach to providing access to students with disability to a proactive UD approach (Burgstahler [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref97">12</reflink>], 20). Reflecting a different emphasis, Finn (2022) explains that the efforts of CAST have framed UDL in relationship to neural networks. The three UDL principles and associated brain networks are:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Engagement focusing on the "why" of learning; the affective network</item> <p></p> <item> Representation of the "what" of learning; the recognition network</item> <p></p> <item> Action & Expression addressing the "how" of learning; the strategic network (Finn 2022, 104)</item> </ulist> <p>Despite differing emphases, each of these centers has had a significant impact on the integration of UD concepts into higher education, many of which have been incorporated recently in online and hybrid instructional design (Rogers‐Shaw, Carr‐Chellman, and Choi [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref98">59</reflink>]; Thomson et al. [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref99">72</reflink>])</p> <p>After listing separately UDL strategies specifically designed to target the strengths and challenges of three groups of neurodiverse college students—students with autism, dyslexia, and ADHD—Dickter and Burk ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref100">22</reflink>]) point out that a number of these strategies will benefit all three of these groups as well as other neurodiverse students. These strategies include (a) well‐organized courses with clear explanations of class expectations; (b) presenting course materials in different formats that include audio, visual, and digital components; (c) including different types of assignments such as written exams, oral exams, group work, and online assessments; and (d) setting up the physical classroom with accessibility in mind.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-27">Application of UDL Beyond Higher Education Settings</hd> <p>In addition to higher education, UDL has been increasingly embraced in the context of ABE and GED programs. For example, in an article focused on accommodations and learning strategies instruction for students with LDs in the ABE setting, Gregg ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref101">33</reflink>], 57) suggested that in the future, "the best solution to provide ABE learners with access to equal opportunities for learning and work would be UTD [Universal Teaching Design] and universal design learning (UDL) environments that would make accommodations unnecessary." Stewart ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref102">69</reflink>]) encourages adult literacy instructors adopting UDL to think about who their learners are as well as likely barriers to learning, then proceed to remove the obstacles. Offering a succinct explanation of UDL for this audience, they summarize, "There are three basic guidelines for UDL: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref103">1</reflink>) provide students with multiple means of engagement, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref104">2</reflink>) provide students with multiple means of representation, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref105">3</reflink>) provide students with multiple means of expression" (p. 136). Advocating for enhanced preservice training and professional development to serve the varied needs of adults in literacy, English Language Learning (ELL), and other settings, Housel ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref106">37</reflink>]) encourages the integration of UDL principles with principles of andragogy and culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP). Looking at disability through both social justice and diversity lenses, these recommendations support efforts to address ableist and culturally biased assumptions.</p> <hd id="AN0181847786-28">Conclusion</hd> <p>Expanding access for individuals with disabilities in adult and continuing education is an important dimension of striving to make our programs more equitable and inclusive. This article reviews key definitions, models of disability, and legal requirements for adult disability for those unfamiliar with them. It also takes a more focused look at the literature on several types of disabilities adult educators are likely to encounter, as well as approaches that have been taken over time to develop the learning skills and strategies of individuals with disabilities as well as to restructure learning environments to reduce barriers and make them more inclusive. Making needed changes will require continuous commitment from teachers, trainers, and program administrators.</p> <ref id="AN0181847786-29"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref6" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> ADA National Network. 2024a. How Is Disability Defined in the Americans With Disabilities Act? https://adata.org/factsheet/ada‐definitions.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref8" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> ADA National Network. 2024b. " What is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)? " https://adata.org/learn‐about‐ada.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref26" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD). 2024. Criteria for Intellectual Disability. https://<ulink href="http://www.aaidd.org/intellectual‐disability/definition">www.aaidd.org/intellectual‐disability/definition</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–336, 104 Stat. 328. 1990. https://<ulink href="http://www.ada.gov/law‐and‐regs/ada/">www.ada.gov/law‐and‐regs/ada/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref21" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bargiela, S., R. Steward, and W. Mandy. 2016. " The Experiences of Late‐Diagnosed Women With Autism Spectrum Conditions: An Investigation of the Female Autism Phenotype." Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 46, no. 10 : 3281 – 3294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803‐016‐2872‐8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref34" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Barnes, C. 2012. " Understanding the Social Model of Disability Past, Present and Future." In Routledge Handbook of disability studies, edited by N. Watson, A. Roulstone, and C. Thomas, 3 – 11. New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref57" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bell, C. M., ed. 2011. Blackness and Disability. Lit Verlag.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref27" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Benevides, T. W., B. Datta, J. Jaremski, and M. McKee. 2024. " Prevalence of Intellectual Disability Among Adults Born in the 1980s and 1990s in the United States." Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 68, no. 4 : 377 – 384. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.13119.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref48" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Blume, H. 1998, September. Neurodiversity: On the Neurological Underpinnings of Geekdom. The Atlantic. https://<ulink href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/09/neurodiversity/305909/">www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/09/neurodiversity/305909/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Botha, M., R. Chapman, M. G. Onaiwu, S. K. Kapp, A. S. Ashley, and N. Walker. 2024. " The Neurodiversity Concept was Developed Collectively: An Overdue Correction on the Origins of Neurodiversity Theory." Autism 2, no. 6 : 14. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241237871.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burgstahler, S. E. 2015. Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. Harvard Education Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burgstahler, S. E. 2020. Creating Inclusive Learning Opportunities in Higher Education: A Universal Design Toolkit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CDC Disability and Health Data System. 2024a July. " Disability and Health Overview." https://<ulink href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/disability.html">www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/disability.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CDC Disability and Health Data System. 2024b July. Disability Impacts All of Us. Retrieved June 29. 2024 https://<ulink href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/infographic‐disability‐impacts‐all.html">www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/infographic‐disability‐impacts‐all.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CEUD. 2024. About Universal Design. Center for Excellence in Universal Design. 2024. https://universaldesign.ie/about‐universal‐design.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, M. A. 2005. "I am BlackDeaf Man": Deconstructing the Interplay of Multiple Identities in Theory and Reality. In Adult Education Research Conference. Athens, GA. https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2005/papers/49.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Covington, L. E. 2004. " Moving Beyond the Limits of Learning: Implications of Learning Disabilities for Adult Education." Adult Basic Education: An Interdisciplinary Journal for Adult Literacy Educational Planning 14, no. 2 : 90 – 103.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw, K. 1989. " Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics." University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989, no. 1 : 139 – 167. <ulink href="http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8">http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crook, T., and A. McDowall. 2024. " Paradoxical Career Strengths and Successes of ADHD Adults: An Evolving Narrative." Journal of Work‐Applied Management 16, no. 1 : 112 – 126. https://doi‐org.libproxy.txstate.edu/10.1108/JWAM‐05‐2023‐0048.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis, L. J. 2013. " Introduction: Normality, Power, and Culture." In The Disability Studies Reader, edited by L. J. Davis, 4th edition., 1 – 14. New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> de Beer, J., Y. Heerkens, J. Engels, and J. van der Klink. 2022. " Factors Relevant to Work Participation From the Perspective of Adults With Developmental Dyslexia: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies." BMC Public Health [Electronic Resource] 22, no. 1 : 1 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889‐022‐13436‐x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dickter, C. L., and J. A. Burk. 2021. " Classroom supports." In Supporting Neurodiverse College Student Success: A Guide for Librarians, Student Support Services, and Academic Learning Environments, edited by E. M. H. Coghill and J. Coghill, 71 – 88, Rowman & Littlefield.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dietz, P. M., C. E. Rose, D. McArthur, and M. Maenner. 2020. " National and State Estimates of Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder." Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 50, no. 12 : 4258 – 4266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803‐020‐04494‐4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Doyle, N. 2020. " Neurodiversity at Work: A Biopsychosocial Model and the Impact on Working Adults." British Medical Bulletin 135, no. 1 : 108 – 125. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldaa021.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dwyer, P. 2022. " The Neurodiversity Approach(es): What Are They and What Do They Mean for Researchers?." Human Development 66 : 73 – 92. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1159/000523723">http://doi.org/10.1159/000523723</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Education for All Handicapped Children's Act of 1975, Public Law 94–142, U.S. Code 20, § 1401. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA‐History#1975.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Emery, A., R. A. Louick, and J. Sabrowsky. 2022. " Moving Beyond the Ableist Roots of Educational Psychology: Audit of the Field and a Path Forward." Educational Psychology Review 34, no. 3 : 1517 – 1540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648‐022‐09673‐6.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Engelman, A., C. Valderama‐Wallace, and S. Nouredini. 2019. " State of the Profession: The Landscape of Disability Justice, Health Inequities, and Access for Patients With Disabilities." Advances in Nursing Science 23, no. 3 : 231 – 241.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erevelles, N., and A. Minear. 2013. " Unspeakable Offenses: Untangling Race and Disability in Discourses of Intersectionality." In The Disability Studies Reader, edited by L.J. Davis, 4th edition, 354 – 368. New York : Taylor Francis.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Farmer, J. L., D. H. Allsopp, and J. M. Ferron. 2015. " Impact of The Personal Strengths Program on Self‐Determination Levels of College Students With LD and/or ADHD." Learning Disability Quarterly 38, no. 3 : 145 – 159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714526998.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fuentes, K., S. Hsu, S. Patel, and S. Lindsay. 2024. " More Than Just Double Discrimination: A Scoping Review of the Experiences and Impact of Ableism and Racism in Employment." Disability and Rehabilitation 46, no. 4 : 650 – 671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2023.2173315.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fullen, T., S. L. Jones, L. M. Emerson, and M. Adamou. 2020. " Psychological Treatments in Adult ADHD: A Systematic Review." Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 42, no. 3 : 500 – 518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862‐020‐09794‐8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gregg, N. 2012. " Increasing Access to Learning for the Adult Basic Education Learner With Learning Disabilities: Evidence‐Based Accommodation Research." Journal of Learning Disabilities 45, no. 1 : 47 – 63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411426855.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haegele, J. A., and S. Hodge. 2016. " Disability Discourse: Overview and Critiques of the Medical and Social Models." Quest (00336297) 68, no. 2 : 193 – 206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2016.1143849.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hannon, R. 2022. " Combating Attention Deficits With Mind‐mapping Tools." COABE Journal: The Resource for Adult Education 11, no. 1 : 91 – 100.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hobson, H. M., U. Toseeb, and J. L. Gibson. 2024. " Developmental Language Disorder and Neurodiversity: Surfacing Contradictions, Tensions and Unanswered Questions." International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 59, no. 4 : 1505 – 1516. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460‐6984.13009.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Housel, D. A. 2020. " When Co‐Occurring Factors Impact Adult Learners: Suggestions for Instruction, Preservice Training, and Professional Development." Adult Learning 31, no. 1 : 6 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159519849910.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA), Public Law. 2004. U.S. Code 20, § 1400, 108 – 446. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA‐History#1975.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> James, M., A. Gray, E. Johnson, and S. Williams. 2021. In Supporting Neurodiverse College Student Success: A Guide for Librarians, Student Support Services, and Academic Learning Environments, edited by E. M. H. Coghill and J. Coghill, 122 – 140. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jordan, D. R. 1996. Teaching Adults With Learning Disabilities. Malabar, FL : Krieger Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kessler, R. C., L. Adler, R. Barkley, et al. 2006. " The Prevalence and Correlates of Adult ADHD in the United States: Results From the National Comorbidity Survey Replication." American Journal of Psychiatry 163, no. 4 : 716 – 723.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulnik, S. T., and D. Nikoletou. 2017. " A Qualitative Study of Views on Disability and Expectations From Community Rehabilitation Service Users." Health & Social Care in the Community 25, no. 1 : 43 – 53. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12180.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Learning Disabilities Association of America. n.d. Support and Resources for Adults with LD. https://ldaamerica.org/audience/adults/.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mallipeddi, N. V., and R. A. VanDaalen. 2022. " Intersectionality Within Critical Autism Studies: A Narrative Review." Autism in Adulthood: Challenges and Management 4, no. 4 : 281 – 289. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2021.0014.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McRuer, R. 2013. " Compulsory Able‐Bodiedness and Queer/Disabled Existence." In The Disability Studies Reader, edited by L.J. Davis, 4th edition., 368 – 378. New York : Taylor Francis.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Myers, K. A., J. J. Lindburg, and D. M. Nied. 2014. " Allies for Inclusion: Disability and Equity in Higher Education." ASHE Higher Education Report vol. 39, no. 5.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics. 2017. Disability Rates and Employment Status by Educational Attainment. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Learning Disabilities. 2023. Federal State Snapshots of Learning Disabilities. https://ncld.org/?resources=the-ld-checklist.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Institutes of Mental Health. n.d. Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). https://<ulink href="http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/attention‐deficit‐hyperactivity‐disorder‐adhd">www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/attention‐deficit‐hyperactivity‐disorder‐adhd</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newman, L. A., and J. W. Madaus. 2015. Reported Accommodations and Supports Provided to Secondary and Postsecondary Students With Disabilities: National Perspective. Career development and transition for exceptional individuals 38, no. 3: 173‐181. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143413518235.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ochoa‐Lubinoff, C., B. A. Makol, and E. F. Dillon. 2023. " Autism in Women." Neurologic Clinics 41, no. 2 : 381 – 397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncl.2022.10.006.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oslund, C. M. 2015. Disability Services and Disability Studies in Higher Education: History, Contexts, and Social Impacts. New York: Palgrave.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patterson, M. B., and U. G. Paulson. 2016. " Adult Transitions to Learning in the USA: What Do PIAAC Survey Results Tell Us?." Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education 5, no. 1 : 5 – 27.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patton, J. R., M. E. Cronin, and D. S. Bassett. 1998. " Math Literacy." In Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education, edited by S. A. Vogel and S. Reder, 237 – 252. Paul H. Brooke Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Podhaski, B. 1998. " Professional Development for Learning Disabilities for Adult Literacy Providers." In Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education, edited by S. A. Vogel and S. Reder, 199 – 212. Paul H. Brooke Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Practice, B. 1999. " A Research‐Based Guide for Literacy Practitioners Serving Adults With Learning Disabilities." Washington, D.C.: Academy for Educational Development. (ED 426 237). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED426237.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Pub. L. No. 93–112, 87 Stat. 355 1973. https://<ulink href="http://www.ssa.gov/OP%5fHome/comp2/F093‐112.html">www.ssa.gov/OP%5fHome/comp2/F093‐112.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rocco, T. S., and A. Delgado. 2011. " Shifting Lenses: A Critical Examination of Disability in Adult Education." New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 132 : 1 – 12.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers‐Shaw, C., D. Carr‐Chellman, and J. Choi. 2018. " Universal Design: Guidelines for Accessible Online Instruction." Adult Learning 29, no. 1 : 20 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159517735530.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ross, J. M., and J. O. Smith. 1990. " Adult Basic Educators' Perceptions of Learning Disabilities." Journal of Reading 33, no. 5 : 340 – 347.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ross‐Gordon, J. M. 1998. " Literacy Education for Adults With Learning Disabilities: Perspectives From the Adult Education Side of the Mirror." In Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education, edited by S. A. Vogel, and S. Reder. Towson, MD : Paul H. Brookes Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ross‐Gordon, J. M., and G. Procknow. 2021. " Adult Education and Disability." In The Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education, edited by T. S. Rocco, M. C. Smith, R. C. Mizzi, L. R. Merriweather, and J. D. Hawley, 2020 edition., 392 – 400. Sterling, VA: Stylus.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubenstein, E., S. Tewolde, A. Michals, M. Fox, and N. Wang. 2023. " Prevalence of Autism Among Medicaid‐Enrolled Adults." JAMA Psychiatry 80, no. 12 : 1284 – 1287. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.370.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shakespeare, T. 2014. Disability Rights and Wrongs Revisited (2nd). New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Singer, J. 1999. " Why Can't You be Normal for Once in Your Life? From a 'Problem With No Name' to a New Category of Disability." In Disability Discourse, edited by M. Corker and S. French, 59 – 67. London : Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, B. G., and Hutchison, B. eds. 2004. Gendering Disability. New Brunswick, NJ : Rutgers University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snyder, T. D., C. de Brey, and S. A. Dillow. 2016. Digest of Education Statistics 2015, (NCES 2016‐014). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics : Washington, DC. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2016014.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Song, P., M. Zha, Q. Yang, Y. Zhang, X. Li, and I. Rudan. 2021. " The Prevalence of Adult Attention‐Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Global Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis." Journal of Global Health 11 : 1 – 9. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.11.04009.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stewart, C. 2022. " Universal Design for Learning in Adult Literacy Education Increasing Outcomes for all Learners." COABE Journal: The Resource for Adult Education 11, no. 1 : 135 – 139.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Swain, J., and S. French. 2000. " Towards an Affirmation Model of Disability." Disability & Society 15, no. 4 : 569 – 582. https://doi‐org/10.1080/09687590050058189.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Texas Workforce Commission. 2024. Vocational Rehabilitation—Adults. https://<ulink href="http://www.twc.texas.gov/programs/vocational‐rehabilitation/adults">www.twc.texas.gov/programs/vocational‐rehabilitation/adults</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomson, R., C. S. Fichten, A. Havel, J. Budd, and J. Asumcion. 2015. In Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice, edited by S. E. Burgstahler, 275 – 284. Cambridge, MA : Harvard Education Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Travis, G. Y. 1979. " An Adult Educator Views Learning Disabilities." Adult Literacy and Basic Education 3 : 85 – 92.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vogel, S. A. 2007. How Many Adults Really Have Learning Disabilities? LD Online. https://<ulink href="http://www.ldonline.org/ld‐topics/research‐reports/how‐many‐adults‐really‐have‐learning‐disabilities">www.ldonline.org/ld‐topics/research‐reports/how‐many‐adults‐really‐have‐learning‐disabilities</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vogel, S. A., and Reder, S. eds. 1998. Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education. Paul H. Brooke Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wakelin, C., M. Willemse, and E. Munnik. 2023. " A Review of Recent Treatments for Adults Living With Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder." South African Journal of Psychiatry 29 : a2152. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v29i0.2152.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wehmeyer, M. 2020. " Strengths‐Based Approaches to Disability, the Supports Paradigm, and the Importance of the Supports Intensity Scales." Revista Educação Especial 33 : 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X48249.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson, B. A. 1998. Learning Disabilities, Literacy, and Adult Education, edited by S. A. Vogel and S. Reder, 213 – 235. Towson, MD: Paul H. Brooke Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jovita M. Ross‐Gordon</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref102"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1454890
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Learning Disabilities and the Adult Learner
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jovita+M%2E+Ross-Gordon%22">Jovita M. Ross-Gordon</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22New+Directions+for+Adult+and+Continuing+Education%22"><i>New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education</i></searchLink>. 2024 (184):46-55.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 10
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Adult+Education%22">Adult Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Disabilities%22">Learning Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adult+Learning%22">Adult Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Disclosure+%28Individuals%29%22">Self Disclosure (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adult+Education%22">Adult Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Continuing+Education%22">Continuing Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Access+to+Education%22">Access to Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Knowledge+Level%22">Knowledge Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adult+Programs%22">Adult Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teachers%22">Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Knowledge+Base+for+Teaching%22">Knowledge Base for Teaching</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disabilities%22">Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Compliance+%28Legal%29%22">Compliance (Legal)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Accommodations+%28Disabilities%29%22">Academic Accommodations (Disabilities)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accessibility+%28for+Disabled%29%22">Accessibility (for Disabled)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Legislation%22">Educational Legislation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Legislation%22">Federal Legislation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Equal+Education%22">Equal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Civil+Rights+Legislation%22">Civil Rights Legislation</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Individuals+with+Disabilities+Education+Act%22">Individuals with Disabilities Education Act</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Americans+with+Disabilities+Act+1990%22">Americans with Disabilities Act 1990</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Rehabilitation+Act+1973+%28Section+504%29%22">Rehabilitation Act 1973 (Section 504)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/ace.20542
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1052-2891<br />1536-0717
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Approximately one-quarter of the adult population self-reports having one or more disabilities. Expanding adult and continuing education access for individuals with disabilities is an important dimension of striving to make our programs more inclusive. Thus, it is crucial that adult and continuing educators have a basic understanding of the types of disability that relate most directly to adult learning. This article reviews key definitions, models of disability, and legal requirements related to adult disability. It also takes a more focused look at the literature on several types of disabilities, along with approaches that have been taken over time to develop the learning skills and strategies of individuals with these disabilities and restructure learning environments to make them more accessible. This information should be considered a starting point. Making needed changes will require continuing commitment from teachers, trainers, and program administrators.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1454890
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1454890
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/ace.20542
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 46
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Learning Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adult Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Disclosure (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adult Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Continuing Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Access to Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inclusion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Knowledge Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adult Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Knowledge Base for Teaching
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Compliance (Legal)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Accommodations (Disabilities)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Accessibility (for Disabled)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Legislation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Federal Legislation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Equal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Civil Rights Legislation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Americans with Disabilities Act 1990
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rehabilitation Act 1973 (Section 504)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Learning Disabilities and the Adult Learner
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jovita M. Ross-Gordon
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1052-2891
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1536-0717
          Numbering:
            – Type: issue
              Value: 184
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1