2004
DOI: 10.1080/03075070410001682592
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Barriers to learning: a systematic study of the experience of disabled students in one university

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
188
1
17

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 245 publications
(246 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
9
188
1
17
Order By: Relevance
“…The stigma of dyslexia and disability revealed here in the context of technology use; supports the findings of other non-technology related research, where disabled students have expressed concerns about other students' perceptions of the allowances that were made for them (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006;Fuller et al 2004;Shevlin et al 2004).…”
Section: Network Of Face-to-face and Online Technological Contactssupporting
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The stigma of dyslexia and disability revealed here in the context of technology use; supports the findings of other non-technology related research, where disabled students have expressed concerns about other students' perceptions of the allowances that were made for them (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006;Fuller et al 2004;Shevlin et al 2004).…”
Section: Network Of Face-to-face and Online Technological Contactssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…Research reveals for example, that disabled students are using general and specialised technologies to support their learning (Mortimore & Crozier, 2006) but that there are difficulties including: barriers to using publicly available computing facilities due to poor location or lack of specialised software (Fuller et al 2004); frustrations with the bureaucracy and speed of the funding and assessment procedures for obtaining assistive technology (Shevlin et al 2004;Goode, 2007) and lack of support or training to enable disabled learners to become "fluent users" of assistive technologies (Shevlin et al 2004). Whilst these studies reveal some insights into the technological relationships that disabled students have with their universities and associated funding and support mechanisms, they tell us little about the digital nativity of the disabled students and the relationships they have with technologies.…”
Section: Disabled Students and Their Relationship With Technologies Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast to these attitudinal barriers, and again echoing existing literature (e.g., Fuller, Healey, Bradley, & Hall, 2004;Jacklin et al, 2007), several of our participants also referred to, or exemplified, attitudes that might be seen as facilitators of accessibility, such as being sensitive to disability and willing to accommodate students. The "flipside" of each of the attitudinal barriers noted above were also found in our data.…”
Section: Attitudescontrasting
confidence: 43%
“…As in previous research (Cook et al, 2009;Fuller et al, 2004;Tinklin et al, 2005b), a general lack of knowledge about disabilities and differences was a barrier mentioned by individuals across all participant categories. Administrators, instructors, staff members, and a student without disabilities displayed this knowledge gap or attributed it to themselves in their interview comments, while representatives of all five stakeholder groups suggested that others on campus were lacking knowledge in this regard.…”
Section: Knowledgementioning
confidence: 70%
“…Seeing inclusive education for disabled students as the process of identifying and removing barriers is common in HE literature in developed (West et al, 1993;Fuller et al, 2004;Weedon & Fuller, 2004;Konur, 2006;Denhart, 2008) and less developed contexts (Matshedisho, 2007;Chataika, 2010). As with other structures of inequality, enrolling more disabled students in HE does not automatically lead to full participation in university life or equality.…”
Section: Conceptualising Disability In Higher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%