Joan M. McGuire

Universal Design and Its Applications in Educational Environments

Universal design (UD), a concept from the field of architecture, is increasingly evident in discussions of approaches to enhance educational access for students with disabilities. Several emerging models of educational applications of UD—Universal Design for Learning, Universal Design for Instruction, and Universal Instructional Design—are discussed, with a call to the field for a collaborative approach to examine the efficacy of applications of UD to educational environments. Several critical areas for a research agenda are articulated, with caveats that the promise of UD for enhancing access not be undermined because of premature promotion of the concept before its validity is thoroughly examined.

Universal Design for Instruction A New Paradigm for Adult Instruction in Postsecondary Education

Postsecondary education has experienced rapid change in its student population. College students with learning disabilities (LD) represent a growing presence on college campuses across the country. Traditional means of meeting the learning needs of college students with LD through retrofitted changes and accommodations to classroom instruction have proven limited. Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) offers a new paradigm for approaching equal educational access. This article will describe UDI and discuss its implications for enhancing learning for students with learning disabilities and other diverse learners.

Promoting Access, Accommodations, and Independence for College Students with Learning Disabilities

This article focuses on the four primary issues that directly affect service delivery to students with learning disabilities in postsecondary settings, including (a) How are high school and postsecondary settings different? (b) How are eligibility and access determined? (c) How are reasonable accommodations determined? and (d) How can the independence level of college students with learning disabilities be fostered? Each of these issues will be discussed within the context of the students transition from high school, where Public Law 94-142 is in effect, to college, where Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 applies.

Case Studies of High-Ability Students with Learning Disabilities Who Have Achieved

We used qualitative methods to study 12 young people with learning disabilities who were successful at the college level. The participants reported negative school experiences, verified by their parents and school records, such as social problems, difficulty with teachers, and frustration with certain academic areas. The interaction of their high abilities and their learning disabilities produced a number of negative consequences since their talents were not usually addressed by the school system they attended. However, despite these experiences, participants were able to integrate specific personal traits and special compensation strategies and environmental modifications to succeed in a challenging university setting.

The Differential Impact of Academic Self-Regulatory Methods on Academic Achievement Among University Students With and Without Learning Disabilities

Although research on academic self-regulation has proliferated in recent years, no studies have investigated the question of whether the perceived usefulness and the use of standard self-regulated learning strategies and compensation strategies provide a differential prediction of academic achievement for university students with and without learning disabilities (LD). We developed and tested a model explaining interrelationships among self-regulatory variables and grade point average (GPA) using structural equation modeling and multiple group analysis for students with LD (n = 53) and without LD (n = 421). Data were gathered using a new instrument, the Learning Strategies and Study Skills survey. The results of this study indicate that students with LD differed significantly from students without LD in the relationships between their motivation for and use of standard self-regulated learning strategies and compensation strategies, which in turn provided a differential explanation of academic achievement for students with and without LD. These paths of influence and idiosyncrasies of academic self-regulation among students with LD were interpreted in terms of social cognitive theory, metacognitive theory, and research conducted in the LD field.

Compensation Strategies Used by High-Ability Students With Learning Disabilities who Succeed In College:

To investigate how high-ability students With learning disabilities succeed in postsecondary academic environments, 12 young adults with disabilities who were successful at the university level were studied. Extensive interviews with these young adults provided examples of the problems faced by high-ability students with learning disabilities, as well as the specific compensation strategies the used to address and overcome these problems. Four of the participants had been identified as having a learning disability in elementary school; six were identified in junior or senior high school; and two were not diagnosed until college. The participants believed that having a learning disability was considered by elementary or secondary school personnel as synonymous with below-average ability. They reported that content remediation, rather than instruction in compensatory strategies, was usually provided in elementary and secondary school learning disability programs. In this article, the compensation strategies used by academically gifted students who succeeded in college are discussed. These include: study strategies, cognitive/learning strategies. compensatory supports, environmental accommodations, opportunities for counseling, self-advocacy, and the development of an individual plan incorporating a focus on metacognition and executive functions.

Universal Design for Instruction: A Framework for Anticipating and Responding to Disability and Other Diverse Learning Needs in the College Classroom

The student population in postsecondary education has become increasingly and undeniably diverse (American Council on Education, 2000; The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1999). One aspect of this diversity is the growing presence of college students with disabilities. In a longitudinal study of full-time, first-time college freshmen, Henderson (1999) reported that student self-report of the presence of a disability rose from 2.3% in 1978 to 9.8% in 1998. Within the category “disability,’’ a range of conditions includes speech, orthopedic, hearing, and health-related disabilities; the largest category of disability, however, is learning disabilities, representing 41% of college students with disabilities. Across categories of disability, this group is still far from homogeneous. These students also represent various ages, ethnicities, genders, and levels of income (Henderson, 1999). As professionals in higher education increasingly acknowledge the educational value of diversity on our college campuses (American Council on Education, 2000; American Council on Education and American Association of University Professors, 2000), faculty must recognize the implications of student diversity for the design and delivery of instruction. As Upcraft (1996) noted, “in classes with great diversity . . . there must be great diversity of instruction’’ (p. 34). Traditionally, instructional needs of college students with disabilities have been addressed within the context of legal mandates for nondiscriminatory treatment. Legislation including the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 established that qualified students with disabilities are entitled to equal educational access to postsecondary education. Typical approaches to nondiscrimination consist of accommodating the regular class procedures for

Operationalizing a Definition of Learning Disabilities

Past, present, and future concerns regarding the definition of learning disabilities (LD) are documented. Research on efforts to clarify the LD label is discussed, with a focus on the questionable utility of the discrepancy model. Finally, an approach to operationalizing the NJCLD definition of LD is presented and applied.

Employment Self-Disclosure of Postsecondary Graduates with Learning Disabilities Rates and Rationales

One hundred thirty-two graduates with learning disabilities (LD) of a large, public, competitive postsecondary institution were surveyed to determine if they had self-disclosed their LD to their current employer and to provide the reasons for choosing to self-disclose or not to self-disclose. Based on a response rate of 67.4% (n = 89), the results indicated that 86.5% of the respondents were employed full time. Although nearly 90% of the respondents stated that their LD affected their work in some way, only 30.3% self-disclosed to their employer. Of those who had not self-disclosed, the majority reported that there was no reason or need to self-disclose. However, 46.1% reported not self-disclosing due to fear of a potentially negative impact in the workplace or due to a concern for job security. Specific rationales for disclosure and information related to the use of self-reported accommodations and strategies are presented.

First-Year Teacher Knowledge of Phonemic Awareness and Its Instruction.

Converging evidence has identified phonemic awareness (PA) as one of five essential components of beginning reading instruction. Evidence suggests that many teachers do not have the recommended knowledge or skills sufficient to provide effective PA instruction within the context of scientifically validated reading education. This study examines the knowledge of PA instruction of 223 first-year teachers initially certified in special education, early childhood education, and elementary education. Results indicate that significant numbers of beginning special and general education teachers in this sample appear to be inadequately prepared with respect to PA instruction. They have limited knowledge of PA, confuse PA with phonics, are generally unable to select task-appropriate materials or activities, and lack skill in analyzing written words into phonemes. Special educators did not have significantly more knowledge or skills than their general education counterparts. These findings suggest that university teacher education programs may not be providing future teachers with sufficient content or practice with respect to PA instruction.