Priorities and Understanding of Faculty Members regarding College Students with Disabilities
Saved in:
| Title: | Priorities and Understanding of Faculty Members regarding College Students with Disabilities |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Cook, Lysandra, Rumrill, Phillip D., Tankersley, Melody |
| Source: | International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 2009 21(1):84-96. |
| Availability: | International Society for Exploring Teaching and Learning. Web site: http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 13 |
| Publication Date: | 2009 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education |
| Descriptors: | College Students, Educational Experience, Faculty, Teacher Attitudes, Attitudes toward Disabilities, Special Needs Students, College Faculty, Legal Responsibility, Student Rights, Academic Accommodations (Disabilities), School Policy, Access to Education, Individual Characteristics, Educational Environment, Federal Legislation, Student Characteristics, Racial Differences, Gender Differences, Employment Level, Tenure, Nontenured Faculty |
| Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: | Americans with Disabilities Act 1990, Rehabilitation Act 1973 |
| ISSN: | 1812-9129 |
| Abstract: | As a result of legal protections and the effects of inclusive reforms (e.g., improved academic skills, heightened expectations), more students with disabilities are entering higher education than ever before. The priorities and understanding of university faculty members directly shape the educational experiences and success of the rapidly growing group of college students with disabilities. Previous research in this area has focused primarily on faculty members' knowledge of legal issues, general attitudes toward students with disabilities attending college, and willingness to make accommodations. This study expands the extant knowledge base by examining the priorities and understanding of 307 faculty members at an 8-campus university system regarding university students with disabilities in the following areas: "Legal," "Accommodations-Willingness," "Accommodations-Policy," "Universal Design for Instruction," "Disability Characteristics," and "Disability Etiquette." Participants' ratings indicated that (a) accommodation policies and disability etiquette were viewed as highly important and were being addressed satisfactorily; (b) issues related to law, Universal Design for Instruction, and disability characteristics were important but were not being addressed satisfactorily; and (c) issues related to willingness to provide accommodations were neither highly important nor being addressed satisfactorily. Implications for faculty training are discussed. (Contains 5 tables.) |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 35 |
| Entry Date: | 2010 |
| Accession Number: | EJ896246 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | As a result of legal protections and the effects of inclusive reforms (e.g., improved academic skills, heightened expectations), more students with disabilities are entering higher education than ever before. The priorities and understanding of university faculty members directly shape the educational experiences and success of the rapidly growing group of college students with disabilities. Previous research in this area has focused primarily on faculty members' knowledge of legal issues, general attitudes toward students with disabilities attending college, and willingness to make accommodations. This study expands the extant knowledge base by examining the priorities and understanding of 307 faculty members at an 8-campus university system regarding university students with disabilities in the following areas: "Legal," "Accommodations-Willingness," "Accommodations-Policy," "Universal Design for Instruction," "Disability Characteristics," and "Disability Etiquette." Participants' ratings indicated that (a) accommodation policies and disability etiquette were viewed as highly important and were being addressed satisfactorily; (b) issues related to law, Universal Design for Instruction, and disability characteristics were important but were not being addressed satisfactorily; and (c) issues related to willingness to provide accommodations were neither highly important nor being addressed satisfactorily. Implications for faculty training are discussed. (Contains 5 tables.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1812-9129 |
