Students with disabilities and higher education

College Student Journal, Sept, 2003 by Delar K. Singh

This paper reports the findings of a national survey that collected data describing the selected facilities and services of 137 randomly selected institutions of higher learning. The survey was sent to the Directors of services for disabled students of the sample institutions. The findings indicate that only 7% of the institutions of higher leaming offer complete accessibility to the students with orthopedic disabilities. In other words, it is only a very small proportion of the institutions of higher learning which offer structural, academic, recreational and residential life accessibility to students with orthopedic disabilities.

**********

Individuals with disabilities are a valuable resource. However, in today's society, their human potential still needs to be fully recognized, nurtured, and developed. The fullest realization of their potential requires investment of time and effort. It requires educational programs that are designed to allow them pursue various avenues to reach their individual goals (Stilington, Clark, & Kolstoe, 2000).

It is gratifying to know that as a society we recognize that our responsibility towards individuals with disabilities does not end with the culmination of high school. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, PL 101-476) identifies postsecondary education and vocational training as transition outcomes. However, research shows that high school graduates with disabilities are much less likely to be enrolled in postsecondary education programs than their non-disabled counterparts. Fairweather and Shaver (1991) have reported that only 21 % of the students with disabilities attend postsecondary institutions as compared to 64 % of the non-disabled learners.

Further, the participation of students with disabilities in postsecondary education varies by the type of disability. The students with visual disabilities represent 43% of the postsecondary population with disabilities; the students with learning disabilities represent 17%; students with mental retardation 6%; students with emotional disturbance and behavior disorders 12%; and students with orthopedic disabilities 29% (Fairweather & Shaver, 1991).

For individuals with disabilities, immersion into a university environment and attainment of a college degree can have life long benefits (Page & Chadsey-Rusch, 1995). However, for successful outcomes, it is important to ascertain the availability and quality of post-secondary environments. There is sufficient anecdotal evidence to support the assertion that some institutions tend to be more "friendly" for students with disabilities than others. The present study was conducted to meet the pressing needs of current knowledge base. It collected empirical data on selected facilities and services of 137 universities and colleges. The study addressed the following specific research questions:

1. To what extent do institutions of higher learning offer structural accessibility to students with orthopedic disabilities?

2. To what extent do institutions of higher learning provide academic accessibility to students with orthopedic disabilities?

3. To what extent do institutions of higher learning facilitate dorm living for students with orthopedic disabilities?

4. To what extent do institutions of higher learning provide recreational opportunities to students with orthopedic disabilities?

5. Do institutions of higher learning differ in accessibility (structural, academic, recreational, and dorm) on the basis of size of student body and type of institution (private vs. public)?

Definitions

Structural Accessibility: For the purposes of this study, structural accessibility was measured by the availability of ramps on all of the campus buildings, automatic doors, "Press Buttons", elevators in each of the buildings, curb cuts, wheelchair accessible restrooms, wheelchair accessible pay telephones, wheelchair accessible classrooms, wheelchair accessible libraries, wheelchair accessible computer centers, wheelchair accessible cafeterias, reserved parking spaces within 40 feet of entrances to buildings, adaptive on-campus transportation service, and permission to bring service dogs in the classrooms.

Academic accessibility: Academic accessibility was measured by the on campus availability of help in note taking, extended time for tests and course assignments, and flexibility of time and place for test taking.

Accessibility of dorm living: Accessibility of dorm living was measured by the availability of wheelchair accessible dorm rooms through residence halls, accessible laundry facilities, accessible bathrooms, accessible dining rooms, accessible fire exits, availability of 24 hour nurse on call in the residence halls, on-campus repair of mobility equipment such as wheelchairs and crutches, and help in the recruitment and training of personal care assistants.

Availability of recreational opportunities: Availability of recreational opportunities was determined by the provisions of on-campus wheelchair sports such as tennis and basketball, integrated social clubs, and accessibility of all recreational areas such as television rooms and fitness centers.