A US model for inclusion of disabled students in higher education settings: The social model of disability and Universal Design

Abstract

At a time when the consumer-student is choosing an education based on valuefor-money, disabled students will want to know that they have been considered in the campus design and included in the approach to learning. The new discourse of inclusion coming from disability service providers in higher education (HE) in the US centres on a 'universal design' (UD) approach. The cutting edge of service provision in the US focuses on incorporating the philosophy of the social model of disability and the tool for implementing it: universal design. Service providers are beginning to call themselves 'Resource Centres'; resources for students but also faculty, advising and collaborating on instructional methods that design students with disabilities into the classroom instead of directing them to write exams and receive accommodations in a separate location. This paper presents research undertaken in 2008 that explored the motivations and intentions of five universities in the US that claimed to be using a social model of disability service provision approach. It also examines the concept of universal design, and its relationship with the social model in this process, because it emerged as the dominant characteristic of these services. A qualitative questionnaire was distributed to the institutions, which explored the philosophical underpinnings to their service models and investigated the practical implications of those commitments. It focused on the tools that they used for implementation, particularly universal design, and the changes they made to their services in order to be consistent with the social model. An analysis of their responses highlighted emerging themes and key characteristics and identified problematic issues. The philosophy of UD encompasses diverse populations, benefits everyone in the classroom and aims for an inclusive learning environment. The model promotes inclusion and is, simultaneously, a selling point for consumers with diverse learning styles because it goes beyond the 'sage on a stage' approach.Key terms: inclusive education; higher education; disability; social model of disability; universal design; diversity. IntroductionHigher education (HE) establishments around the world have different policies for providing accommodations to disabled students (Hurst, 1998). In the UK institutions for higher education are bound by the Equality Act 2010 to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled students, likewise in the United States they are bound by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Students must selfidentify as disabled and provide evidence to be eligible for the support services. This approach to service provision for disabled students assumes that environments will always have to be adapted and accommodations provided, rather than targeting the automatic incorporation of these elements into all aspects of the design of campus life. This can lead to alienating practices for these students. For example, in a study done on the perceptions of the accommodation process of disa...

Critical disability studies and socially just change in higher education

“…This is an important goal, for it highlights the real universality of this effort which is not limited to a specific group of individuals. A generic UD curriculum can provide the springboard for the adoption of a reflective and critical process of providing a proactive rather than a reactive and specialised approach to meeting all students' needs across disciplines and different working environments (Mole, ).…”

“…Consequently, a more pronounced emphasis should be placed on incorporating a critical approach to designing UD curricula. The latter, for instance, should focus on the role of language and its material effects on the creation of accessible and non‐discriminatory social and educational spaces for all (Mole, ). As pointed out earlier, the lexicon of ‘reasonable accommodations’ frequently stipulated in anti‐discrimination legislation, runs the danger of placing the focus on an individual's presumed ‘pathology; rather than on a host of organization pathologies’ (Guillaume, ) that need to be eradicated through critical UD approaches.…”

Institutional change for improving accessibility in the design and delivery of distance learning – the role of faculty accessibility specialists at The Open University

“…This case study has shown how the work of faculty AS has made an important contribution to improving accessibility. The shift from a reliance on retrofitting adjustments to a more inclusive design from the outset of new module production represents a move towards a more social model of disability (Mole, 2013). However, these changes are still evolving and remain a work in progress, particularly with regard to legacy materials.…”

“…It is also in keeping with a move towards a 'social' model of disability (Barnes, 2000;Mole, 2013) where student needs are included at the design, production and implementation stages, rather than retrofitting an adjustment to redress an exclusive design. Fully realising the OU's commitment and legal anticipatory duties in practice requires developing more inclusive curriculum design in production.…”

Accessibility of MOOCs: Understanding the Provider Perspective

“…Disability can appear as an old fashioned term that is focussed on deficits, activity limitations and participation restrictions, including negative aspects of the interaction of the individual in their health. Alternative views, of which the social model (Shakespeare, 2006) is a common example, consider that a disability should not be limited to physical problems (medical model); it also depends on the social and cultural environment of the individual, their age or economic difficulties (Mole, 2013). An example of the transforming potential of a change in society view can be seen in the evolution of the Paralympics movement to demonstrate how able the "super-humans" can be once the correct adjustments are made.…”