Accessibility in the Postsecondary Classroom:
Health Education Faculty Perspectives
(2006-2007)
Summary: This CSUN 2007 session reports on the March 2007 preliminary findings of an accessible-by-design Institutional Review Board-approved survey of
primarily U.S.-based postsecondary faculty teaching in health education and public health programs concerning attitudes toward accessibility and teaching students
with accessibility needs.
Paper:
Postsecondary health education faculty members are primary mentors for the future professionals with whom people with accessibility needs
(class members) have frequent contact throughout the lifespan (Trupin & Rice, 1995, p. 2). The accessibility-related values, attitudes, and knowledge that these health educators
impart to their students may have a significant future impact, not only on the lives of class members, but also on successful adoption within academia and elsewhere
of a culture in which accessibility, universal design, and assistive technology use are ubiquitous standards.
Foss (2002) examined the attitudes of postsecondary occupational therapy faculty toward providing academic modifications
( a/k/a accommodations) to students
with learning differences. In contrast to the findings of prior research, Foss found that participants demonstrated both a strong willingness to provide certain
modifications, as well as a supportive attitude concerning the occupational therapy career plans of the students (p. 49-54).
Occupational therapy's raison d'ętre and curriculum specifically include training in and use of assistive technology and interaction with
people with accessibility needs (American Occupational Therapy Association, 2006). May occupational therapy faculty sensitivity to accessibility concerns be
generalized to attitudes of all health education faculty?
1. What have been health education faculty members' life and classroom experiences and level of comfort regarding interaction with
people/students with accessibility needs?
2. What is faculty members' level of confidence in class member academic abilities in the health education profession?
3. What do health education faculty members know about accessibility, universal design, and universal design for learning?
4. Are health education faculty members interested in learning [more] about these concepts?
5. Do prior experience and/or comfort level in interactions with class members, and/or otherwise-acquired knowledge about accessibility have a
predictable impact on:
a. faculty attitudes toward students with accessibility needs;
b. faculty confidence in class member success in health education programs; and/or
c. faculty confidence in class member successful entry into the profession?
Health educators and public health professionals are on the front line of assessing community needs, planning,
implementing, and
evaluating health programs, coordinating provision of health education services, communicating health and health
education needs, and
:"assur[ing] the conditions in which people can be healthy:"
(American Public Health Association, 2007;
National Commission on Health Education Credentialing, 2007).
Accessibility-related expertise is a natural competency to require of health educators and public health professionals,
particularly due to the current global aging crisis (Guerette & Anthony, 1999, p. 17-18), war/terrorism (Bilmes & Stiglitz, 2006;
U.S. Department of Defense Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program, 2007), and recurring natural disasters
(U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2007; U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2007).
According to the 2003 National Health Interview Survey (National Center for Health Statistics, 2003),
approximately 70 million people in the United States have daily accessibility concerns.
:"[C]oncern for accessibility/usability for all should be
'automatic" (Schmetzke, 2006).
Education statistics point to the same reality. The number of the students with accessibility needs in higher education tripled between 1978 and
1998 (American Council on Education, 1998). In the late 1990s, 98% of public institutions of higher education reported having such students in their programs
(Lewis & Farris, 1999). In 2006, virtually all medium and large postsecondary institutions reported having enrollment of students with accessibility needs
(U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics, 2006a). Within just five academic years, from 1999-2000 to 2003-2004, the
frequency of class representation rose from 9% to 11% of the undergraduate student population (Foss, 2002, p. 1; U.S. Department of Education.
National Center for Education Statistics, 2006b, p. 133-134). Students with accessibility needs are in higher education classrooms, both in person and virtually,
and, as Johnson (2003) implies by the title of her book, not going away.
U.S. federal legislation governing primary and secondary level education may be given justifiable credit for advancing integration of accessibility and
assistive technology provision into American culture (see, in particular: IDEA, P.L. 94-142
(U.S. Department of Justice, 2005), amended by P.L. 108-446 (U.S. Congress, 2004), and the
1988 and subsequently reauthorized Technology Related Assistance Act (Campbell, 2004, p. 168)).
Today's primary and secondary students are tomorrow's college freshmen. In the years to come, tomorrow's college
freshmen become this nation's elders.
With age comes accessibility needs. Most people who use assistive technology are 65 years of age or older
(Guerette & Anthony, 1999, p. 18). In 2000, this age group represented 12.4% of the U.S. population and is expected to grow to be 20% of the
population by 2030 (U.S. Department of Human Services. Administration on Aging, 2006).
Higher education also is paying more attention to older adults. A confluence of factors, including a decline in U.S. birth rates, an increase in life expectancy,
the growth of online learning, and concern for the [financial] bottom line, have intensified postsecondary institutions' focus on
lifelong learning and student recruitment of older adults. Older Americans' return to the classroom, whether in person or virtually,
whether full-time or part-time, also has been fueled by the loss (in the United States) of
the "one life-one career assumption." To retain marketability, older employees have found that retraining and learning new skills, either to keep
one's position or to find a new position, have become a necessity. Although relatively small percentage-wise (0.04% of the total student population), and for
a variety of motivational reasons, the older student population in higher education is increasing proportionately (Kressley & Huebschmann, 2002, p. 837-840;
Silverstein, Choi, & Bulot, 2001, p. 13).
Individuals' value priorities often are cited as predictors of attitudes and behaviors (Rohan, 2000, p. 255). Based on the research discussed above,
accessibility and universal design appear to be "the right thing to do" for all the right practical reasons.
Should accessibility also be "the right thing to do" in terms of moral, cultural, and spiritual values?
Culture has been described as "the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one
human group from another" (Hofstede, 1980, p. 260; Srite & Karahanna, 2006, p. 680). Educational experiences have a
significant impact on creating cultural transference and in shaping individuals' moral values and resulting attitudes and beliefs (Colby, Ehrlich, Beaumont, & Stephens, 2002, p. 26; Rohan, 2000, p. 255).
College students have been shown to expect that their academic experiences will lead to personal value development (Higher Education Research Institute. (2006, p. 1). Building a culture of accessibility thus is
facilitated by students' interaction with educators who positively, proactively, and holistically value and practice accessibility.
Educators' attitudes toward people with accessibility needs and, particularly students in their classes, play a major role in whether accessibility
and assistive technology appear on society's radar screens. In turn, educators' attitudes toward people with
accessibility needs are
determined by diverse factors, such as the nature of prior life experience and prior interaction with members of the class, both in and outside the classroom.
Following the recommendation of a relatively recent review of the literature (Rao, 2004),
through examination of postsecondary health education faculty attitudes, this current research study seeks to discover
new avenues to foster successful adoption of a culture of accessibility in higher education.
Replication of this study with participating faculty in library and information science, as well as in other academic disciplines, is being considered.
References
American Public Health Association [APHA]. (2007). About APHA. Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.apha.org/about/
American Occupational Therapy Association. (2007). What is occupational therapy? Retrieved March 10, 2007, from
http://www.aota.org/featured/area6/index.asp
Bilmes, L., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2006, January). The economic costs of the Iraq War: an appraisal three years after the beginning of the conflict.
Harvard University. John F. Kennedy School of Government (Faculty Research Working Paper, RWP06-002). Retrieved March 10, 2007, from
http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-002/$File/rwp_06_002_Bilmes_SSRN.pdf
Campbell, D. M. (2004, June). Assistive technology and universal instructional design: a postsecondary perspective.
Equity & Excellence in Education, 37(2), 167-173.
Carlson, D., & Ehrlich, N. (2006). Sources of payment for assistive technology:
findings from a national survey of persons with disabilities. Assistive Technology, 18, 77-86.
Colby, A., Ehrlich, T., Beaumont, E., amp; Stephens, J. (2002, Summer). Moral and civic development during college. Peer Review, 4(4), 23-26.
Foss, J. J. (2002). Attitudes and accommodation practices of university health professions faculty toward students with learning disabilities
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64, no. 03A, 737.
Guerette, P. & Anthony, P. (1999, April). Assistive technology for older adults: opportunities for advocacy.
Home Health Care Management Practice, 11, 17-24.
Higher Education Research Institute. (2006). Spirituality and the professoriate: a national study of faculty beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.spirituality.ucla.edu/reports/spirit%5fprofessoriate.pdf
Hofstedt, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Johnson, M. (2003). Make them go away: Clint Eastwood, Christopher Reeve, and the case against disability rights. Louisville, KY: Advocado Press.
Kressley, K. M. & Huebschmann, M. (2002). The 21st century campus: gerontological perspectives. Educational Gerontology, 28, 835-851.
Lewis, L. & Farris, E. (1999). An institutional perspective on students with disabilities in postsecondary education.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics.
Educational Statistics Quarterly, 1(3). Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_1/1_3/4-esq13-b.asp
National Commission on Health Education Credentialing. (2007). Areas of responsibility for health educators.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.nchec.org/becomeches/eligibility.asp
Rao, S. (2004). Faculty attitudes and students with disabilities in higher education: a literature review. College Student Journal, 38(2), 191-198.
Rohan, M. J. (2000). A rose by any other name?: the values construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(3), 255-277.
Schmetzke, A. (2006, September 25). E-mail communication.
Silverstein, N. M., Choi, L. H., & Bulot, J. J. (2001). Older learners on campus. Gerontology and Geriatrics Education, 22(1), 13-30.
Srite, M., & Karahanna, E. (2006, September). The role of espoused national cultural values in technology acceptance. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 679-704.
Trupin, L., & Rice, D. P. (1995, September). Health status, medical care use, and number of disabling conditions in the United States.
Disability Statistics Abstract, 9. ED/OSERS959. Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://dsc.ucsf.edu/view_pdf.php?pdf_id=7
U.S. Congress. (2004). The Individuals with Disabilities Education [Improvement] Act [IDEA] of 2004.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ446.108
U.S. Department of Defense. Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program. (2007). Wounded service members.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://tricare.osd.mil/cap/initiatives/WSM.cfm
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2006a, June).
Postsecondary education information system: enrollment of students with disabilities.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/peqis/publications/1999046/3.asp
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2006b, June).
Profile of undergraduates in U.S. postsecondary education institutions: 2003-04, with a special analysis of community college students.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006184
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2006, September 6).
Homeland Security and national groups join forces to help older Americans and individuals with disabilities prepare for emergencies [press release].
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1158338188083.shtm
U.S. Department of Human Services. Administration on Aging. (2006). Statistics on the aging population. Retrieved March 10, 2007, from
http://www.aoa.gov/prof/Statistics/statistics.asp
U.S. Department of Justice. (2005, September). A Guide to Disability Rights Laws: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/cguide.htm#anchor65310
U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2007). Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.fema.gov/
U.S. National Center for Health Statistics. (2003). National Health Interview Survey, years 1997-2001.
Retrieved March 10, 2007, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm#1997%20NHIS
===============================
Ellen Perlow, Ph.D. CHES, a career academic librarian and certified health educator,
has degrees in elementary education, library and information science, educational technology, law, and a Ph.D. in health studies with a focus on accessibility.
Dr. Perlow also is a graduate of the California State University at Northridge [CSUN] Assistive Technology Applications Certificate Program (September 2000)
and CSUN Symposium Series advanced accessibility training (2001-2003), and a regular AT conference participant and presenter on accessibility and
assistive technology at conferences and to university classes.
Her dissertation, A for Accessibility: Descriptor Preferences of People with Accessibility Needs (2006), was a participatory research study
by and for self-identifying adults with accessibility needs.
The research examined the impact of accessibility-related terminology on accessibility advocacy success and class self-empowerment.
As with the 2006-2007 study being discussed at CSUN 2007, provision of alternative formats and accessible venues were a fundamental given for the dissertation research,
keeping with the study’s theme of accessibility to the research process.
Ellen Perlow - CSUN 2006 presentation
| Return to a4access.org home page |
This page last updated Saturday, March 10, 2007, 10 pm CST
