Search

This study examines policy and procedure documents related to Disability at 3 U.S. institutions of higher education over a 25-year time frame. Policy and procedure documents are the foundation that govern how institutions "handle" Disability, outlining expectations and guidelines for providing services and establishing bureaucratic channels used to determine who has access to those services. This research employs a comparative case study mixed methods approach. The found documents and their online contexts are analyzed according to four qualities: findability, cohesion, consistency, and transparency. A document's findability refers to the ability of a user to locate the original document, and a document's cohesion, consistency, and transparency, refer to respectively where, what, and how these documents persist from their original creation date. As I collected these documents, I constructed comparative matrices to track these qualities within and across three different universities. The initial findability of documents demonstrates two key results: 1) during the overall 1990– 2015 time frame, there was a marked change in the availability of materials in a digital format, and 2) the emergence of a way to describe documents via the phrase "Does Not Exist." These materials definitively did not exist prior to a given time frame, but later versions of such documents included an earlier start date. Cohesion results indicate that the documents most likely to be presented in a single source were broadly usable to a large portion of the university population: the general student body. Consistency results address a major issue with the document search: while these materials were likely to exist, at each of these institutions and time frames (barring the DNE documents), they are very difficult to track down. Transparency across found, single-source documents was ubiquitous; if it could be found, it had searchable text. Beyond the findings of my document collection, I created two major products as a result of this dissertation work: key recommendations for different stakeholder groups and a curated exhibit of VT-specific materials collected for this study. Doctor of Philosophy This study examines policy and procedure documents related to Disability at 3 U.S. institutions of higher education over a 25-year time frame. Policy and procedure documents are the foundation that govern how institutions "handle" Disability, outlining expectations and guidelines for providing services and establishing bureaucratic channels used to determine who has access to those services. This research employs a comparative case study mixed methods approach. The found documents and their online contexts are analyzed according to four qualities: findability, cohesion, consistency, and transparency. A document's findability refers to the ability of a user to locate the original document, and a document's cohesion, consistency, and transparency, refer to respectively where, what, and how these documents persist from their original creation date. As I collected these documents, I constructed comparative matrices to track these qualities within and across three different universities. The initial findability of documents demonstrates two key results: 1) during the overall 1990– 2015 time frame, there was a marked change in the availability of materials in a digital format, and 2) the emergence of a way to describe documents via the phrase "Does Not Exist." These materials definitively did not exist prior to a given time frame, but later versions of such documents included an earlier start date. Cohesion results indicate that the documents most likely to be presented in a single source were broadly usable to a large portion of the university population: the general student body. Consistency results address a major issue with the document search: while these materials were likely to exist, at each of these institutions and time frames (barring the DNE documents), they are very difficult to track down. Transparency across found, single-source documents was ubiquitous; if it could be found, it had searchable text. Beyond the findings of the document collection, there are two major products as a result of this dissertation work. First, key recommendations for different stakeholder groups (SEEKERS, WRITERS, and KEEPERS) are outlined; these recommendations are intended for the entire audience as practices that they can incorporate within their own documents. Second, the work undertaken to create a repository using materials from my document collection, utilizing the Qualitative Data Repository (based in Syracuse University) as the host for a curated exhibit of VT-specific materials, is described.

One of the barriers to investigating Disability within higher education is that institutional discussion of Disability is often non-existent, even within larger discussions of diversity and inclusion. This is also true within institutional policy documents, in terms of their development, organization, and maintenance. Using methods that center accessibility, affordability, and feasibility, an intensive document collection process was undertaken at three separate institution of higher education. The poster will present the results of this search - the findings at those institutions across a time frame of 25 years following the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Highlights include the definition of a "digital wall" as well as the accessibility of the resulting document collection.

One of the barriers to investigating Disability within higher education is that institutional discussion of Disability is often non-existent, even within larger discussions of diversity and inclusion. What is a researcher to do when they are trying to pay attention to multiple sites without creating an undue burden on themselves or others? This project outlines an alternative approach; instead of conducting surveys or interviews with individuals, the institutions themselves are the source of information. Using methods that center accessibility, affordability, and feasibility, an intensive document collection process was undertaken at three separate institution of higher education to elucidate barriers in performing research across time and space, focusing on the concept of research methods and results that would be truly "open access" in a manner that goes beyond financial consideration. I myself am persistently aware of the privilege of performing this research, as research around Disability is so frequently performed “on” or “for” as opposed to “by” or “with”. The methods discussed in this paper utilize the motto of Disability activism, “Nothing about us, without us” as a guiding principle, leading to strategic methodological choices that will enhance the reproducibility of both the methods and the research findings.

Slides from a panel discussion on the experience of disability in higher education. What is [dis]ability? What does and does not "count" as disability in the classroom and on campus? What programs and supports does Virginia Tech have in place? How frequently are these supports actually implemented? What are some of the gaps in supports? Panelists discuss stereotypes of disability, experiences of disability and technology on campus, and the barriers to participation in higher education for individuals with intellectual disabilities.