Search results

The purpose of this paper is to assess student perceptions of their engagement in tangible and intangible higher education services using the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ).

The research draws on a random sample of students without disabilities and all students with disabilities in a public university in Qatar. Group comparison analysis is conducted to find differences between the two groups by adapting the CSEQ to assess student perceptions of engagement with the services.

The findings showed that students with disabilities were less satisfied with intangible services in learning systems. Students with and without disabilities felt that the campus facilities were below average; students with disabilities rated university services lower than students without. All students felt that the learning systems were above average, with higher ratings among students without disability.

Considerable work needs to be done in capacity and professional development with faculty to deal with learning and teaching methods with students with disabilities.

In general, this study compares students with disabilities with non-disabilities. Both groups confront barriers to access learning and to the assessment of their learning. They both were satisfied with services but with higher perceptions of engagement among those with non-disabilities. Higher education institutions must consider those services in unison to both groups treating both equally, recognizing that a discourse of differences may pit one group over another in infrastructure and the institutional services provided.

The purpose of this paper is to show how personalisation of learning resources and services can be achieved for students with and without disabilities, particularly responding to the needs of those with multiple disabilities in e‐learning systems. The paper aims to introduce ONTODAPS, the Ontology‐Driven Disability‐Aware Personalised E‐Learning System, which has the mechanism for such personalisation.

This paper reviews current e‐learning systems that provide personalisation for students, including their strengths and weaknesses. The paper presents personalisation and its techniques and then presents ONTODAPS, which personalises learning resources and services to students. In total, three case studies are considered to show how personalisation is achieved using ONTODAPS.

This paper shows that it is possible to use automated ontology‐based agents intercommunicating to provide an effective personalisation for disabled students. The results reveal that ONTODAPS is flexible enough to provide enough control and freedom to drive their learning. The results also suggest that ONTODAPS has the ability to provide appropriate levels of learner control by allowing them to self‐direct learning through personalising learning resources and then allowing them to choose which resources they wish to access. This thus gives them a sense of ownership and control.

This research reveals that it is possible for e‐learning systems to personalise learning for users with multiple disabilities. Thus, by considering the needs of such users and consulting them in the design and development process, developers of e‐learning systems can produce systems that are both accessible and usable by students with disabilities.

The inclusion of multiple formats of learning resources and personalisation of their presentation to students means students will have increased access to such resources, with the potential of consuming and assimilating the information. This also has the potential of improving understanding and hence and improvement in results.

This research shows that ONTODAPS is a medium where disabled students can have equivalent learning experience with their non‐disabled peers. This could potentially increase access to learning for disabled students and possibly help improve their results due to an increase in accessibility of learning resources and usability of the system. This system thus complies with contemporary legislation which requires “reasonable adjustments” or “reasonable accommodations” to be made to meet the needs of disabled people.

Although personalisation has been applied in e‐commerce systems, making them very successful, such personalisation is still a wish for e‐learning systems which struggle to catch up. This research proposes a solution in the e‐learning domain and its novelty is in its application to disabled students, including those with multiple disabilities.

The purpose of this paper was to understand what disability-related curriculum (DRC) looked like in the middle school Language Arts classroom. DRC refers to any curricular material and related pedagogical approach intended to address students’ understanding of disability. The authors drew on the experiences of three in-service middle school Language Arts teachers to understand what disability-related texts they selected, and why they chose to incorporate DRC into their classrooms.

The authors used a qualitative, exploratory multi-case design to understand the what and why underlying three middle school language arts teachers’ use of DRC.

Findings from this study revealed that teachers leveraged DRC to broaden students’ understanding of diversity, increase empathy and provide exposure to disabilities; teachers gathered resources both online and within existing curriculum; and DRC varied in curricular and pedagogical structure.

The results of this study are exploratory. Although the aforementioned findings are promising, they are limited, due to the small sample size and relatively homogeneous participant demographics. Additional research that incorporates a larger and more diverse sample of participants would serve to broaden, or potentially confirm, the results of this study.

The results of this study provide insight into current practice around DRC while illustrating some of the limitations that teachers may encounter when integrating this practice.

While Language Arts curriculum often explores diversity in relation to race or class, it rarely focuses a lens on disability. This study fills a void in current research by providing empirical data on how educators approach the design and implementation of disability programming in their respective classrooms.

Key drivers that influence space design in today's higher education environment are technology, changing demographics, increased focus on student engagement, and carbon footprint. Just as important, but not typically on the list, is the growing population of students with Learning Disabilities (LD) for which the physical environment plays an increasingly important role in successful learning outcomes. The research goal was to examine the role of “place” as a component of academic success for those students with LD. Methodology included both literature review and the development of a case study analysis of three post-secondary institutions in the United States. The universities were chosen based on the size of the university, the campus setting, and the mission of the Disabilities Services team. The conclusion of the research surfaced three specific components of the physical environment that hold an increased value for a student with LD. These components are wayfinding, formal learning spaces, and disability services spaces. The key to integrating a sense of place with the needs of students with LD is moving beyond meeting the minimum standards of the legal mandates and bridging the principles of universal design to the built environment.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and critique current approaches of higher education (HE) community concerning stakeholder engagement in the development of information and communications technology (ICT) related accessibility practice.

The approach taken to this examination is to draw on presentations, panel discussions and World Café reflections from an international symposium held in Montreal where researchers and practitioners debated two key questions as follows: have all the relevant stakeholders really been identified? Are there some stakeholders that the HE community has ignored? And what factors influence successfully distributed ownership of the accessibility mission within HE institutions?

A number of “new” internal and external stakeholders are identified and it is argued that if they are to be successfully engaged, effort needs to be invested in addressing power imbalances and developing opportunities for successful strategic silo-crossing.

The value of this paper is in critiquing the argument that all stakeholders in the development of accessible ICT in HE need to be involved, identifying a gap in the argument with respect to whether all relevant stakeholders have actually been engaged and offering insights into this omission might be rectified.

The Government of Canada is adopting the pedagogical practice of Work Integrated Learning (WIL) to help youth develop the career ready skills needed to transition from school to work. As a result, colleges and universities are receiving funding to grow academic programs that link theoretical learning with practical work experience. However, there is limited research about the resources available to students with disabilities who engage in WIL. From an environmental scan of disability supports for WIL on 55 Canadian post-secondary institutions’ websites and survey results from WIL professionals we ask: Do post-secondary institutions in Canada help students with disabilities become career ready? The data reveals that 40% of schools have no reference to disability services for any career related activities and only 18% refer to disability supports for WIL. Survey respondents report they are not being trained nor have access to resources to support students with disabilities in WIL. The authors therefore recommend changes to public policy and resource allocation to ensure colleges and universities provide disability services for all WIL programs, train practitioners about career related disability management, and hire professionals who specialize in supporting students with disabilities in WIL.

The authors conducted an environmental scan of 55 Canadian post-secondary schools with a student population of 10,000 or more and identified services and resources publicly advertised online for students with disabilities in relation to employment and/or WIL activities. From this broad search, codes were developed based on general themes found in the recorded information, such as the location of information and the type of resources and services advertised for students with disabilities. During the environmental scan, the authors also collected names and emails of people listed as working in career and/or WIL departments who received an anonymous survey about their experiences working with students with disabilities.

As the Government of Canada expands WIL to improve labour market outcomes for youth, the research findings of the authors provide valuable evidence that post-secondary institutions are not supporting youth with disabilities to become career ready. Surprisingly, 40% of post-secondary institutions have no reference to disability supports for career related activities and only 18% reference supports available for engaging in WIL on their websites. In addition, WIL practitioners are not receiving the resources nor training to support this demographic to transition from school to work. This research can provide direction on resource allocation; specifically, the need for disability related supports and dedicated professionals for students who engage in WIL programs in higher education.

A limitation of the methodology in scanning public sites is that universities and colleges could have services or supports advertised on sites that can only be viewed by the faculty, staff and students from that school. Thus, it is possible that employment information for students with disabilities is available for those with login privileges. The authors attempted to mitigate this limitation by collecting survey responses about programs and services from WIL practitioners who work at the schools. The authors also did not measure marketing of services on social media platforms (e.g. Facebook, Instagram). Another limitation is that the WIL practitioner survey results are based on their perceptions. The sample size was not randomized, nor can the authors confirm it is a representative sample of all WIL practitioners in Canada.

As countries continue to grapple with how to deal with the intersectionality of disability on an already disadvantaged demographic in the labour market, they must ensure that students with disabilities have access to career ready activities while in school. The authors therefore recommend public policy and resource allocation, not only in Canada but at a global level, that ensures post-secondary institutions: (1) create disability management programs and resources for all WIL and career activities; (2) hire dedicated professionals who specialize in working with students with disabilities in WIL; and (3) provide mandatory training for WIL practitioners on how to support students with disabilities in programs that develop their career ready skills.

Preparing students with disabilities to be career ready when they graduate will benefit the Canadian economy. This wasted human capital not only negatively impacts a labour market with an aging demographic, it affects social service programs as Canadians with disabilities are one-third times more likely to live in poverty compared to Canadians without disabilities (Canadian Survey on Disability, 2017). The G20 report also stated that if employment rates for people with disabilities who are able to work were the same as for people without disabilities, economies around the world could increase their GDP by 3–7% (ILO and OECD, 2018).

There is no research in Canada to date that provides a national overview of the services in higher education advertised to support students with disabilities in WIL.

There has been very little empirical research for the need to identify the importance of an inclusive territory of commonality for “invisible” students with disabilities in Australian education testing, such as the National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The research methodology used a cross-sectional mixed methods, deductive quantitative, an inductive qualitative, functionalist perspective and interpretivist perspective from internet secondary data analysis. This was undertaken to investigate the government functionalist macrosociology of Australian education to the detriment of the microsociology debate of students with disabilities, for inclusive education and social justice.

This finding showed vastly underestimated numbers of students with disabilities in Australian schools experienced through “gatekeeping”, non-participation in NAPLAN testing and choices of schools, resulting in poor educational outcomes and work-readiness.

The research findings showed that functionalism of Australian education is threatening not only social order, well-being and resilience of an innovative Australian economy through welfare dependency; but also depriving people with disabilities of social equality and empowerment against poverty brought about by a lack of education and of the human right to do a decent job.

The study provided a critical evaluation of the weaknesses of government functionalism; specifically the relationship between the dualism of macro and micro perspectives, which promotes the existence of “invisible” students with disabilities in education, despite government legislation purporting an inclusive education for all students.

This article aims to analyze the impact that the inclusion of students with disabilities has on the achievement of their schoolmates and to analyze the impact that this inclusion has on the achievement of the students with disabilities themselves.

The author begins investigating how the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular schools affects achievement of schoolmates. To answer this research question, the author explores the natural variation in time in the number of students with disabilities and use data from National Exam of Upper Secondary Education (Enem). Then, the author investigates how the inclusion affects achievement of the students with disabilities themselves and uses propensity score matching methodologies and, again, data from Enem.

The results show that an additional percentage point in the proportion of students with disabilities would reduce schoolmates' writing scores by a 0.0031 standard deviation. In other subjects, the author finds weak or none evidence of a significant peer effect. In addition, using Propensity Score Matching methodologies, the results show that the mean scores are up to 44% of a standard deviation, which is higher among students with disabilities enrolled in regular schools compared to those who are enrolled in special schools. In summary, the evaluation is that inclusion policies achieve the goal of improving the performance of students with disabilities but such policies have a small and adverse side effect.

For this reason, the present study proposes to fill this gap in the literature by analyzing the impact of the inclusion of students with disabilities on both groups. In addition, this paper contributes to the empirical literature of peer effect with an analysis of the peer effect of students with disabilities per competency. Finally, the article is important given the existence of few articles in Brazil on the topic of education and people with disabilities.

This study aims to investigate the differences in spatial ability between students with a math learning disability and their normal peers.

To investigate these differences two groups, (60 students with a math learning disability) and (60 normal students) from fifth grade with a mean age (10.6 years) were administered with spatial ability test along with an IQ test. Students with a math learning disability were chosen using measures of the following: math learning disability questionnaire developed from learning disability evaluation scale – renormed second edition (LDES-R²) (McCarney and Arthaud, 2007) and the Quick Neurological Screening Test (Mutti et al., 2012), in addition to their marks in formal math tests in school.

Comparison between the two groups in four aspects of spatial ability resulted in obvious differences in each aspect of spatial ability (spatial relations, mental rotation, spatial visualization and spatial orientation); these differences were clear, especially in mental rotation and spatial visualization.

This paper contributes to gain more insights into the characteristics of pupils with a math learning disability, the nature of spatial abilities and its effect on a math learning disability. Moreover, the results suggest spatial ability to be an important diagnose factor to distinguish and identify students with a math learning disability, and that spatial ability is strongly relevant to math achievement. The results have significant implications for success in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics domain.

Reviews the current social policy and its application as it relates to the education of students with learning disabilities attending US institutes of higher education. Attempts to differentiate between the legal rights and these students in primary and secondary settings versus those in higher education. Reviews the definition of learning disabilities and eligibility criteria in colleges and universities and gives an overview of common services provided to college studetns with learning disabilities. Summarizes the results of several follow‐up studies on students with learning disabilities who attend post‐secondary institutes.