No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Using data from an Association on Higher Education And Disability (AHEAD) survey, this study of 424 postsecondary disability services (DS) administrators examines how campus and office characteristics may vary with disability services placement in academic or student affairs. The results of this survey suggest that only modest differences exist, and that disability service offices provide opportunities for collaboration across units, and may serve as a model for collaboration in higher education. Despite a common mission of ensuring disability access on campuses, disability services (DS) offices are as diverse as the educational institutions they serve. These offices may be found in almost any campus unit, including health services or counseling, business offices or human resources, or departments of general counsel, but the most common placement is in student affairs or academic affairs (Harbour, 2004). These administrative units have different philosophical foundations and campus roles, as well as a traditionally dualistic relationship. This article will explore whether there is any relationship between institutional placement of DS offices in academic affairs and students affairs, administrative features of the DS offices, and campus characteristics. The Development of Disability Services It is interesting to note that although disability access is a campus-wide concern, and a primary responsibility of DS providers is to ensure access to academics, academic affairs has had a peripheral role in the history of disability services. Even in recent decades, as higher education administrators complied with new laws like Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), they recruited DS personnel from across campuses. Most DS directors, however, continued to come from student services or counseling backgrounds because they seemed most qualified to provide direct services to students and understand (or learn about) any disabilityrelated needs (Blosser, 1984; Madaus, 2000). Since 2000, the field of disability services has reached a critical point. The Association on Disability And Higher Education (AHEAD) has developed program standards and professional indicators and started to define critical knowledge and skill bases for DS professionals, as a first step towards developing a national DS certification process (R. Allegra, personal communication, November 9, 2007; Shaw & Dukes, 2005), but considerable variability exists among DS offices, professional backgrounds of DS staff, and the availability (or lack thereof) of professional development opportunities (Blosser, 1984; Madaus, 1998). Adding to the complexity of the issue, DS offices are becoming more diverse and are required to provide increasing numbers of educational services and accommodations (Tagayuna, Stodden, Chang, Zeleznik, & Whelley, 2005). Offices may also serve disabled undergraduates and graduate students, faculty and staff (Harbour, 2004).1 Disabilities that were once considered rare, like autism, Asperger’s Syndrome, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and psychiatric disabilities, are becoming commonplace (although there is still debate about whether 1Person-first language is conventional when writing about people with disabilities (American Psychological Association, 2001). For example, authors typically write “people with disabilities” instead of “disabled people.” In this paper, I will use people-first language and disability-first language interchangeably to reflect a growing awareness that some people use the term “disability” to refer to their identity or as a neutral descriptor. For further discussion, see Linton (1998).
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.