Search

Drawing on the findings of a unique longitudinal qualitative study, this article investigates the experiences of 32 young people with visual impairment (VI) in higher education (HE) in the United Kingdom (UK) to explore how well they were able to participate on their courses. We propose and apply a Bioecological Model of Inclusive HE to interpret these experiences and examine how accommodations were made to facilitate participation. Focusing specifically on ‘curriculum access’, the results highlight the importance of accommodations that are progressive and mutual. The accommodations come in many forms and include: the provision of resources through nationally based schemes (e.g. the Disabled Students Allowance in the UK); the support, adjustments and anticipatory adjustments HE institutions should provide; and the study skills and independence skills individual students should be able to act upon. The findings showed that while the majority of participants reported that their HE institution made s...

Objectives To examine the experience of infants, children and their parents, the role of ophthalmologists and other health, social care and education professionals in the certification and registration processes and examine the relationship between certification and referrals and pathways to support. Design Qualitative study. Setting Telephone interviews with health and, social care professionals, qualified teachers of children and young people with vision impairment (QTVIs) and parents of infants/children in England. Participants 52 health, social care and education professionals who are part of the certification or registration process. 26 parents of infants and children with vision impairment. Results Referrals to education do not require a Certificate of Vision Impairment (CVI); however, the majority of parents received support from education and social services only after an offer of the CVI, which was often dependent on having a formal diagnosis. Parents stated they wanted support sooner, particularly parents of children with additional complex needs who experienced longer delays. Areas with multidisciplinary teams and support roles such as eye clinic liaison officers (ECLOs) appeared to have more reliable referral pathways. Conclusions For infants and children with vision impairment, there should be a consistent mechanism for triggering education and social care support even with uncertainty about diagnosis and/or prognosis. All professionals involved in the certification and registration processes (ophthalmologists, optometrists, ECLOs, orthoptists, social workers, QTVIs) can better communicate the value and benefits of certification and registration.