+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding....

Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding....

Date post: 15-Mar-2018
Category:
Upload: doque
View: 222 times
Download: 3 times
Share this document with a friend
19
21 ENHANCING THE QUALITY AND OUTCOMES OF DISABLED STUDENTS’ LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION FINAL REPORT BACKGROUND Widening access and promoting equality in higher education: implications for disabled students Over the past two decades, higher education has transformed from an elite to a mass system, with a significant reduction in per capita funding. At the same time, new public management has grown in influence, reflected in regimes of accountability such as the Research Assessment Exercise and Teaching Quality Assessment. For example, the Quality Assurance Agency’s Code of Practice for Students with Disabilities, published in 1999, specified twenty one precepts of good practice concerning all aspects of activity which institutions must adhere to and which may be subjected to external inspection. Subsequently, a raft of equalities legislation was passed, opening up university processes to much closer scrutiny. Universities are required to return information to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) on the number of disabled students in specific categories and, for the purposes of establishing the level of premium funding paid to an institution, the number of Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA) recipients. Part 4 of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), implemented in 2002, requires institutions to avoid discriminatory practices, and the Disability Equality Duty, which came into effect in December 2006 under the terms of the Disability Act, requires institutions to publish disability equality schemes which chart progress over time. The DDA has far-reaching implications in terms of its requirement for reasonable adjustments to be made to the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, but a number of uncertainties remain, not least in deciding what counts as a ‘reasonable’ adjustment. There are also uncertainties about who is covered by the DDA and how severe the condition has to be before the person receives legislative protection. It is clear, therefore, that whilst there are significant new requirements on universities to demonstrate fair treatment of disabled students, there continues to be much room for institutional discretion and the likelihood of variation in practice. Support for teaching, learning and assessment in higher education Since the mid-1980s, there have been major changes in the nature and mode of operation of higher education in the UK, with major repercussions for learning support, assessment and wider institutional ethos. Whilst the abolition of the binary line was intended to produce greater uniformity between institutions, it appeared that marked differences remained between the academic culture of the pre-92 universities, emphasising the acquisition of knowledge in traditionally defined subject areas, and the post-92 universities, where the acquisition of vocational knowledge and transferable skills was given greater priority. Bennett et al. (1999) noted that attempts to introduce the teaching of core skills into pre-92 universities were met with considerable resistance, since these were seen as alien to the traditional knowledge-based culture (Dunne et al., 1997). There were also major differences between traditional and new universities with regard to the provision of learning support. Wolfendale and Corbett (1997) noted that new universities and FE colleges were far more used to teaching non-traditional students than pre-92 universities. Whereas traditional universities had to establish learning support services to meet the needs of the expanded student population, these were often already in place in new universities and FE colleges. Compared with teaching, assessment practices have arguably been even slower to change. Writing in relation to schools, Simpson (2005) has argued that assessment is regarded as a process which is largely separate from teaching and learning, requiring systems developed by technicians and measurement experts to judge accurately and reliably the learning outcomes achieved in relation to pre-determined knowledge or skills. Assessment remains focused on the learning achieved by the individual student, with little attention to the social context in which learning takes place. Similar arguments apply to higher education, where the standard forms of examination and written assignment have remained largely unchanged for many decades, despite an on-going focus in development and research work on how to improve assessment technologies (Elton, 2004). Leathwood (2005) and Morley (2003) note that some attempts to modernise assessment in higher education, such as a new focus on student self-assessment and criterion-referenced assessment, which may have their roots in student empowerment narratives (Broadfoot, 1999), may in practice be experienced as new forms of regulation and surveillance by students and staff, and may do little to challenge structural inequalities in assessment systems. In response to the requirements of the DDA that reasonable adjustments be made to assessment, the Higher Education Funding Council for England has funded a number of development projects on inclusive assessment practices, such as the SPACE project (Staff-Student Partnership for Assessment Change and Evaluation) at the University of Plymouth. However, such developments have not been without their critics. Sharp and Earle (2000), for example, have argued that the idea of compensation for disabled students is highly questionable. Alternative assessments, they maintain, are only acceptable if they are genuinely equivalent in terms of the skills and knowledge they test, and if this is the case, then all students should be allowed access to adjustments, which might include extra time, the use of enhanced grammar and spell checkers and sheltered conditions. Similarly, the justifications for the use of typical forms of assessment, such as three hour examinations, should be examined much more critically, with a view to establishing whether the knowledge and skills required to succeed in such an activity are intrinsic to the requirements of the course which is being assessed. The To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC
Transcript
Page 1: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

21

ENHANCING THE QUALITY AND OUTCOMES OF DISABLED STUDENTS’ LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION

FINAL REPORT

BACKGROUND

Widening access and promoting equality in higher education: implications for disabled students Over the past two decades, higher education has transformed from an elite to a mass system, with a significant reduction in per capita funding. At the same time, new public management has grown in influence, reflected in regimes of accountability such as the Research Assessment Exercise and Teaching Quality Assessment. For example, the Quality Assurance Agency’s Code of Practice for Students with Disabilities, published in 1999, specified twenty one precepts of good practice concerning all aspects of activity which institutions must adhere to and which may be subjected to external inspection. Subsequently, a raft of equalities legislation was passed, opening up university processes to much closer scrutiny. Universities are required to return information to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) on the number of disabled students in specific categories and, for the purposes of establishing the level of premium funding paid to an institution, the number of Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA) recipients. Part 4 of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), implemented in 2002, requires institutions to avoid discriminatory practices, and the Disability Equality Duty, which came into effect in December 2006 under the terms of the Disability Act, requires institutions to publish disability equality schemes which chart progress over time.

The DDA has far-reaching implications in terms of its requirement for reasonable adjustments to be made to the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment, but a number of uncertainties remain, not least in deciding what counts as a ‘reasonable’ adjustment. There are also uncertainties about who is covered by the DDA and how severe the condition has to be before the person receives legislative protection. It is clear, therefore, that whilst there are significant new requirements on universities to demonstrate fair treatment of disabled students, there continues to be much room for institutional discretion and the likelihood of variation in practice.

Support for teaching, learning and assessment in higher education Since the mid-1980s, there have been major changes in the nature and mode of operation of higher education in the UK, with major repercussions for learning support, assessment and wider institutional ethos. Whilst the abolition of the binary line was intended to produce greater uniformity between institutions, it appeared that marked differences remained between the academic culture of the pre-92 universities, emphasising the acquisition of knowledge in traditionally defined subject areas, and the post-92 universities, where the acquisition of vocational knowledge and transferable skills was given greater priority. Bennett et al. (1999) noted that attempts to introduce the teaching of core skills into pre-92 universities were met with considerable resistance, since these were seen as alien to the traditional knowledge-based culture (Dunne et al., 1997). There were also major differences between traditional and new universities with regard to the provision of learning support. Wolfendale and Corbett (1997) noted that new universities and FE colleges were far more used to teaching non-traditional students than pre-92 universities. Whereas traditional universities had to establish learning support services to meet the needs of the expanded student population, these were often already in place in new universities and FE colleges.

Compared with teaching, assessment practices have arguably been even slower to change. Writing in relation to schools, Simpson (2005) has argued that assessment is regarded as a process which is largely separate from teaching and learning, requiring systems developed by technicians and measurement experts to judge accurately and reliably the learning outcomes achieved in relation to pre-determined knowledge or skills. Assessment remains focused on the learning achieved by the individual student, with little attention to the social context in which learning takes place. Similararguments apply to higher education, where the standard forms of examination and written assignment have remained largely unchanged for many decades, despite an on-going focus in development and research work on how to improve assessment technologies (Elton, 2004). Leathwood (2005) and Morley (2003) note that some attempts to modernise assessment in higher education, such as a new focus on student self-assessment and criterion-referenced assessment, which may have their roots in student empowerment narratives (Broadfoot, 1999), may in practice be experienced as new forms of regulation and surveillance by students and staff, and may do little to challenge structural inequalities in assessment systems.

In response to the requirements of the DDA that reasonable adjustments be made to assessment, the Higher Education Funding Council for England has funded a number of development projects on inclusive assessment practices, such as the SPACE project (Staff-Student Partnership for Assessment Change and Evaluation) at the University of Plymouth. However, such developments have not been without their critics. Sharp and Earle (2000), for example, have argued that the idea of compensation for disabled students is highly questionable. Alternative assessments, they maintain, are only acceptable if they are genuinely equivalent in terms of the skills and knowledge they test, and if this is the case, then all students should be allowed access to adjustments, which might include extra time, the use of enhanced grammar and spell checkers and sheltered conditions. Similarly, the justifications for the use of typical forms of assessment, such as three hour examinations, should be examined much more critically, with a view to establishing whether the knowledge and skills required to succeed in such an activity are intrinsic to the requirements of the course which is being assessed. The

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 2: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

22

higher education establishment has defended the need for clear qualification criteria based on disability status in order to determine which students should be entitled to alternative forms of assessment. The implications of enforcing a binary divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below.

OBJECTIVES

The main aim of the study was to understand how disabled students’ academic performance and experience of teaching, learning and assessment varies by disability, subject studied and by type of institution, how this experience develops during their course and how their learning outcomes compare with those of non-disabled students. Specific objectives, and the element of the research which addressed each objective, are summarised below:

6. Analyse and contrast disabled students’ experiences of barriers and opportunities in teaching, learning and assessment in four selected universities (student survey).

7. Examine the relationship between the quality of learning of disabled students and the learning environments provided by specific departments in four selected universities (institutional case studies and case studies of individual disabled students).

8. Analyse the extent to which disabled students’ learning outcomes differ from those of non-disabled students. (analysis of institutional level aggregated data and case studies of individual disabled students).

9. Document and analyse selected teaching staff understandings of and changes to their teaching, learning and assessment strategies in the light of the legal requirement to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ (case studies of individual disabled students).

10. Promote, disseminate and embed the findings from the project effectively through communication with the academic, educational development, learning support and disability communities (range of dissemination and professional development activities).

Broadly, the central aim and specific objectives of the research have been achieved. However, inevitably in a project of this size and duration, some new interests have emerged. For example, the institutional case studies revealed particular tensions between equalities and managerialism, leading to an expansion of the policy dimension of the study (Riddell et al., 2007). In addition, a focus on educational transitions and their links with identity formation emerged during the course of the research (Weedon and Riddell, forthcoming). Finally, an important theme emerging as the research progressed was the issue of fitness to practise standards imposed by particular professional bodies, and their impact on university experiences, labour market transitions and individual student identity.

METHODS

Policy and statistical analysis In the background section (above), an overview is provided of legislative and policy pressures on the higher education system in relation to widening access and providing fair treatment for disabled students. An additional analysis of HESA statistics was conducted to investigate the extent to which these initiatives had been successful in terms of participation rates of disabled students in higher education over time. The nature of student reported disabilities, using UCAS categories of impairment, was also conducted.

Aggregated data were gathered from each institution on the degree outcomes of graduating disabled students compared with those of other graduates. Data were not available for University 4, although from 2008, in order to comply with the Disability Equality Duty, this University will be publishing the degree outcomes of disabled and non-disabled students.

Institutional case studies Statistics relating to a range of demographic variables were gathered from the four institutions and institutional documents on widening access and provision for disabled students were gathered and analysed. In order to interpret these data, a total of 28 key informant interviews were carried out: 10 in University 1, 6 in University 2, 7 in University 3 and 5 in University 4. Of these, 10 were senior managers, either deans, head of schools or responsible for teaching and learning; 9 were senior support staff such as librarians, IT or estates and accommodation; 2 were involved with student services but with an additional remit for disabled students; and 6 were involved with services for disabled students. To retain confidentiality in the analysis of this work (Riddell et al., 2007), each respondent was only identified by their institution andtheir role as either senior manager (SM), senior support (SUP) or disability support (DIS).

Survey In spring 2004, with assistance from the University Registry in each institution, a survey was conducted of all disabled undergraduate students in the four selected universities. The questionnaire was developed specifically for the survey in consultation with an expert from the Open University. It drew on already developed learning, teaching and assessment

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 3: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

23

questionnaires, but had additional questions with the aim of capturing the experiences of disabled students. A total of 2,572 questionnaires were sent out and 1,171 were returned. The overall survey return rate was 45%, with some variation between the different institutions. Forty percent of respondents were male; 60% were female and 70% of the sample were aged 25 or below.

At University 3, for purposes of comparison, the questionnaire was administered to a 10% sample of non-disabled students (n=272) and a 40% response rate was achieved.

An additional analysis was conducted of the responses of dyslexic students, since these represented by far the largest group and were identified by lecturers as posing particular challenges in terms of adjustments to pedagogical and assessment practices (Weedon and Riddell, 2007). In total, 602 dyslexic students were included in this analysis. Responses are summarised in the Annex.

Individual student case studies We initially hoped to be able to track 48 disabled students throughout the course of their studies. However, some difficulties arose in contacting disabled students in some institutions as a result of confidentiality issues, and there was also some attrition of students who initially agreed to participate in the study but then dropped out as a result of work and social pressures. Three years’ data were obtained for 31 students (see Table 7 for data summary). The distribution across the institutions was as follows:

University 1 (Scottish ancient university): 14 University 2 (English pre-92 university): 4 University 3 (English post-92 university): 8 University 4 (English post-92 university): 5

RESULTS

Statistical analysis: participation and nature of student difficultiesTable 1 shows that an overall increase in student numbers has been accompanied by a rise in disabled students. The statistics in Tables 1 and 2 are based on HES www.hesa.ac.uk/holisdocs/pubinfo/student).

Table 1. A comparison of total numbers of students in higher education and those with a known disability (first degree programmes)

ar mber of students ackets FT)

mber of disabled students rcentage

94 - 95 3011 (273586) 162 (9719) 5%04-05 9150 (320865) 085 (22890) %

The composition of the group has also changed with a considerable rise in the numbers of students with dyslexia now entering higher education (Table 2). In 1994/95 15% of first degree disabled students were known to be dyslexic; in 2004/05 the proportion had risen to 50%; over the same period of time those in the category ‘unseen disability’ decreased considerably (see Table 2); if only full-time students are included this figure rises to 54%. These changes may be attributed to three main factors: earlier identification in the school population, support through the Disabled Student Allowance (DSA) and the increase in mature students through widening access policies (National Working Party on Dyslexia in Higher Education, 1999). It is also likely that some students who were previously included in the ‘unseen’ disability’ category have been reclassified as dyslexic.

Table 2. Categories of disability used by HESA and percentages of first-degree disabled undergraduates as a percentage of total numbers of disabled students 1994/95 and 2004-05

pe of disability 94-95: First degree (in brackonly)

04/05 First degree ackets FT only)

slexia % (16%) % (54%) nd/partially sighted % (4%) 4% (2.4%) af/hard of hearing % (6%) % (3.7%)

heelchair/mobility difficulties % (4%) 8% (2.5%) rsonal care support % (0.2%) % (0.1%)

ental health difficulties % (1.2%) 6% (4%) unseen disability % (57%) % (17%)

ultiple disabilities % (3.3%) 5% (4.8%) her disability % (9%) .5% (10%) tistic spectrum disorder 7% (0.8%)

Statistical analysis: degree outcomes of disabled students compared with the wider student body

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 4: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

24

Earlier analysis of HESA statistics showed that disabled students were slightly less likely to gain first and upper second class degrees and slightly more like to gain third class degrees than non-disabled students (Riddell et al., 2005).

The outcomes from the earlier study still holds for students in Universities 1 and 3. They have poorer outcomes than non-disabled students in the same institution; however, students in University 2 do better in terms of First Class honours degrees, slightly worse in terms of Upper Seconds but overall the non-disabled/disabled results are quite similar. The trends in intakes from 2001-02 to 2004-05 in University 2 suggests that disabled students are now more likely to complete the course and to achieve better results than they did in the past.

Disabled students in Universities 1 and 3 are more likely than non-disabled students to complete their course; in University 2 there are now no such differences. The data for the case study students suggest that in University 1 and 2 dyslexic students do well. In University 3 this less clear cut as one dyslexic student withdrew. However, generally the dyslexic students were well supported and in receipt of DSA which allowed them to access a range of support. This would suggest that support for dyslexic students has improved since the introduction of the new legislation. However, there is an indication that students with other, unseen impairments do not do as well as non-disabled students. More detailed analysis of completion rates and outcomes by impairment at institutional level may allow for more targeted support of students with other, unseen impairments who may be more reluctant to contact the disability services. In addition, cross-variable analysis including factors such as social class and disability may show that more effective support is required for particular groups of students.

Institutional case studies

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 5: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

25

The table below summarises the characteristics of the four institutions which participated in the study, which vary greatly in terms of their size, history and curriculum.

� There are significant differences in the proportion of students from less socially advantaged backgrounds. University 1 has by far the most socially advantaged intake.

� There are also differences in the proportion of students disclosing a disability to the institution.

� In all case study institutions, students with a diagnosis of dyslexia represent by far the largest group.

Table 3 Key characteristics of the four institutions of under-gradutrants

udent Population

stitution pe of institutio

ung

from sthools

low participatghbour-hood

from soss IIIM, IV a

in receiptSA

disclosability03-04*

iversity 1 e-92 85 40.3%

.7 9 .8 8 %*

iversity 2 e-92 55

65.2%

.7 .2 .0 3%

iversity 3 st-92 35 65.3%

.2 .5 .1 2 %

iversity 4 st-92 20 40.8%

.6 .2 .2 2 3% 2002-03

* based on the institutions’ own figures

Table 4. Number of students who have disclosed a disability to the institution by type of disability (UCAS categories) (2003-04)

pairment/learning disability iversity 1 iversity 2 iversity 3 iversity 4 slexia 7 % 1 % 7 % 6* %heelchair/mobility impaired % % % %seen impairment (e.g. asthma) 1 % 5 % 0 % %her impairment (specified) 8 % % 4 %nd/partially sighted % % % %rsonal care % 3% %

ultiple impairments % % % %af/hard of hearing % % % %

ental health difficulty % % % %disability not listed below

tails/not known % %

tal disabled 69 % 9 % 08 3** 9 3%

* students classified as having learning difficulties and dyslexia ** calculated as a percentage of the number of all undergraduate students including part- time students

All of the institutions provide specialised disability support; however, only two of the institutions – Universities 1 and 2– specifically mentioned dyslexia tutors (Table 5 below).

Table 5: Institutional support for disabled students stitution pe of support iversity 1 sability Office, with 6 members of staff, one administrator, includes 2 dysle

ecialists iversity 2 pport network includes Disability Service and a specialist language and learn

pport unit iversity 3 sability Office, 2 full-time advisers, part-time administrator. iversity 4 sability Service Office, 5 part-time advisors, 2 with responsibility for deaf and me

alth

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 6: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

26

Key themes emerging from the institutional case studies, reported more fully in Riddell et al., 2007, are summarised below.

Disabled students and the widening access agenda In the two pre-92 universities, disabled students were only loosely associated with the widening access agenda, and in University 1 a particularly strong focus was on students from socially disadvantaged backgrounds at least in part as a result of Funding Council pressure. In University 4, including students from low participation neighbourhoods was a major focus of activity because this was seen as an institutional strength. Only in University 3, a new university with a relativelyadvantaged social profile, were disabled students seen as being at the forefront of the widening access agenda.

The impact of quality assurance The quality assurance regime was resented by some staff in the two pre-92 institutions, and was characterised as encouraging routine compliance or, alternatively, as an example of unwanted intrusion by the Funding Council on the university’s autonomy. The RAE was seen in the two pre-92 universities as a major policy driver, focusing staff attention on research with the implication that they had less time and energy for supporting individual students. In University 4, the focus was on the drive to improve retention rates, and this was having an impact on admissions policy, with less tolerance for students who might fail to complete the programme.

The DDA and reasonable adjustments to curriculum, pedagogy and assessment All respondents recognised the significance of the Disability Discrimination Act as providing a major impulse to action. Relatively little was said about adjustments to the curriculum, with one institution participating in the Teachability programme, albeit with varied engagement across the university. (Teachability includes assessment tools to be used by academic staff in order to identify the extent to which their teaching and assessment practices are accessible. Suggestions are made for reasonable adjustments to teaching, learning and assessment practices in line with DDA requirements). Respondents in all four institutions were concerned about compromising academic standards, particularly in relation to students with dyslexia.

Relationship between the managerialist and equalities agenda The extensive use of equality audit appears to have had some success in improving the position of disabled students. All institutions saw the DDA as a major shaping influence, and no institution wished to be found in breach of the legislation and publicly shamed through a court case. The downside was that respondents spoke of their fears of frivolous complaints being made, and were anxious about the amount of time they might have to expend in dealing with such cases.

Survey Comparison of disabled and non-disabled students showed that, in general, disabled students experienced greater difficulties with some aspects of university work, although there were specific areas where this did not appear to be the case (see table below). As noted above, the majority of disabled students in higher education have a diagnosis of dyslexia, and this probably accounts for the fact that disabled students report fewer difficulties with oral work and group presentations than non-disabled students.

Table 6. Learning, Teaching and Assessment Experiences of Disabled and Non-Disabled Students

ree/Strongly agree Disabled Non-disabled eas in which disabled studeve greater difficulty (10% + poference) have had physical difficulties wtingave had difficulty with literacy skiave had difficulty in taking notes ave had difficulties with the amo

time required to complsignments

easy to know the standardsrk expected

eas in which non-disabled studeve greater difficulty (5% + poference)

have had difficulties wrticipation in group work

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 7: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

27

have had difficulties with oesentations

To investigate more closely the experiences of the largest group of disabled students with a shared impairment, and to make comparisons across the four institutions, an additional analysis was conducted of students with a diagnosis of dyslexia. The following findings emerged:

� Dyslexic students in these four institutions indicated that they were generally satisfied with the disability support provided and also that they all experienced similar types of literacy-related difficulties. The two older institutionsemphasised dyslexia support to a greater extent (as evidenced in their organisation of the disability support (see Table 5).

� Certain types of support were becoming mainstreamed across the institutions (e.g. extra time in exams).

� In all institutions barriers remained, for example, students reported difficulties in accessing lecture notes.

� Students perceived the support they were being offered somewhat differently. Students in University 4, the least socially advantaged institution with the least dedicated provision for students with a diagnosis of dyslexia, reported poorer access to some support such as lecture notes in advance. These students indicated that they felt that lecturers were at times uncooperative.

� Students in University 1 were the most critical of the support they were given by lecturers, in spite of the fact that aspects of their general level support seemed to be greater than those in University 4.

� Lecturers in University 1 might indeed have a greater focus on research than teaching and therefore less time for student support. On the other hand, greater student dissatisfaction might reflect either heightened or reduced student expectations. Students in University 1, who tended to come from more socially advantaged backgrounds, were more likely to have received a diagnosis of dyslexia, and additional support, at school. Students at University 4, from less advantaged backgrounds, were less likely to have been diagnosed at school, and might therefore have lower expectations of extensive support at university.

Individual student case studies Table 7 provides details of the thirty one student case studies and a summary of findings in relation to some key dimensions of their experience. In the following sections, we summarise findings in relation to particular themes which emerged from the research and which have been written up as published papers.

Students’ and lecturers’ views of reasonable adjustments in teaching, learning and assessment � Healey et al. (2006; 2008) and Fuller et al. (2004a, 2004b) summarise findings in relation to students’ perceptions of reasonable adjustments in teaching, learning and assessment. The experiences of students with a diagnosis of dyslexia is discussed in Riddell and Weedon (2006). The following broad findings emerged from the student case studies:

� The majority of adjustments were formulaic, e.g. provision of a laptop, lecture notes and extra time in examinations for students with a diagnosis of dyslexia. Little account tended to be taken of the precise nature of the individual student’s difficulty or the severity of their condition.

� Particularly in some disciplines, e.g. Geography, there was evidence of a willingness to make adjustments to pedagogy to accommodate different students’ needs, e.g. the use of ‘virtual’ fieldtrips for students with physical impairments. There was very little evidence of any move towards adjustments in modes of assessment, to allow students with a range of impairments to demonstrate the achievement of learning outcomes in different ways.

� Many students were happy with the adjustments which were made, but many were unhappy about having to accept the label of disability which accompanied a request for an adjustment.

� Students found they had to engage in multiple negotiations with different lecturers to ensure that agreements on reasonable adjustments were understood by all.

� Even in the same subject, there were major differences in lecturers’ willingness to make adjustments and the inclusiveness of their teaching style.

� There were also concerns about disclosure of information about a student’s impairment without their permission.

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 8: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

28

� Students with invisible disabilities, particularly those with fluctuating conditions such as mental health difficulties, were least satisfied with the adjustments made.

� Students with multiple difficulties, e.g. mental health difficulties, social and financial difficulties were least satisfied with their university experiences and were least likely to complete their courses.

� Most lecturers were supportive of disabled students and the broad principle of making adjustments to the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. However, there was uncertainty about what counted as a ‘reasonable adjustment’, and the extent to which allowances should be made in marking assignments, for example, whether students with a diagnosis of dyslexia should be penalised for errors in spelling, grammar and structure.

� Linked to the above, there were concerns about standards and fairness, for example, some lecturers felt it was potentially unfair to make adjustments for students with a diagnosis of dyslexia, but not for students for whom English was their second or third language.

� Thinking about inclusive educational practice, i.e. offering a range of approaches to teaching, learning and assessment to meet a wide range of learner styles, was at an early stage in all institutions.

� There were marked institutional differences in awareness of the Postgraduate Diploma in Teaching in Higher Education, which addresses inclusive educational practices. The contrast was most marked between University 1, where most staff had not heard of it and believed it was not an institutional priority, and University 3, where it was prioritised bymanagement.

� Overall, the research concluded that universities should place more emphasis on developing inclusive curricula, incorporating principles of universal design. This would obviate the need to certify students as disabled, would go a long way to resolving the dyslexia controversy and would remove the need for lecturers to make numerous ad hoc adjustments. Some students, however, would continue to need very specific and individualised adjustments.

Issues in particular disciplines: the case of fitness to practise standards Earlier research (Riddell et al., 2005) demonstrated that disabled students are most likely to be found in creative arts and design subjects, and least likely to be found in vocational subjects linked to professions with fitness to practise standards. The research therefore looked closely at students’ experiences in such areas, using Education as a specific example. The following findings emerged:

� The Nursing and Midwifery Council, which regulates the nursing profession in England, Wales and Scotland, maintains that nurses must be of ‘good health and good character’ and operates fitness testing at the point of registration. Entry to teaching, medicine and social work are similarly controlled by regulatory bodies, although the standards are framed differently in the various professional arenas and applied differently in different jurisdictions of the UK.

� The General Teaching Council for Scotland was established in 1965 to regulate the teaching profession and fitness to practise standards were formalized in regulations introduced in 1993. Applicants for teacher training had to satisfy the medical practitioner for the particular institution that they were ‘medically fit to teach’.

� Following a consultation in 2004, it was decided to remove the fitness to practise standards on the grounds that they were anachronistic and ineffective in identifying individuals who might pose a risk to children. Instead, entrants to teaching were required to conform with professional standards specified by the GTCS, with reasonable adjustments for disabled teachers.

� Case studies of students with invisible impairments studying Education in Scotland demonstrated that, whilst they were prepared to identify themselves as disabled within the university in order to benefit from reasonable adjustments, on placement they often chose not to disclose because of the discriminatory attitudes they encountered amongst practising teachers.

� Most teachers, and some university lecturers, believed that fitness to practise standards still applied to teaching in Scotland, and some practising teachers expressed the view that a students with a diagnosis of dyslexia would be unable to teach effectively.

� There was confusion between the university department and the placement provider with regard to the locus of responsibility for making the reasonable adjustment, particularly if there were any financial implications.

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 9: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

29

� Education students who had disclosed a disability whilst at university generally chose not to disclose when moving into employment, since they felt that the risk of discrimination was likely to outweigh the benefit of possibly securing a reasonable adjustment.

Disabled students and educational transitions � Within the context of the learning society and globalisation, citizens are expected to engage in learning throughout the life course (Scottish Executive, 2003, Field, 2006; Weedon and Riddell, 2008 forthcoming), and negotiating transitions into and out of the education system is clearly of vital importance. � All students have to deal with potentially difficult transitions, but longitudinal data gathered during this project indicate that some disabled students experience more transitions or find the transitions harder to cope with as a result of social, academic and identity challenges.

� Over recent years, U.K. universities have had to pay serious attention to student support issues, including those associated with transition as a result of greater diversity within the student population. However, there is a need for an even greater focus on the social and emotional aspects of learning.

Disability and identity � Disability as a social category must be seen as a transitional status, varying between contexts and at different points in an individual’s biography.

� Longitudinal case study data showed that some students, particularly those with visible impairments, come to university with disability as part of their pre-established identity. Some students adopt disability as part of their identity,albeit reluctantly, during their time at university in order to obtain reasonable adjustments. Many students discard disabilityas a component of their identity when they leave university, in order to avoid discrimination in the labour market.

ACTIVITIES

� A dissemination conference was held in Edinburgh on October 24th 2007.

� Sheila Riddell contributed to the ESRC-funded seminar series on learning transitions organised by Kathryn Ecclestone, University of Nottingham, 28th October 2006.

� Elisabet Weedon and Mary Fuller gave presentations at two ESRC TLRP Annual Conferences.

� Elisabet Weedon delivered two papers to the annual conference of the Centre for Research in Lifelong Learning.

� Mick Healey was invited to give keynote presentations related to the project in New Zealand and the UK.

� Jan Georgeson has been invited to contribute a paper on disability, identity and institutional structures to a symposium on Cultural Historical Theory and Higher Education convened by Gordon Wells at the International Society for Cultural and Activity Research Conference in San Diego in September 2008

� Alan Hurst was invited to deliver keynote presentations at international conferences in Leeds, Lund (Sweden), Svedlice (Poland), Oslo (Norway).

OUTPUTS

Among the key publications from the project, including a Routledge book, are the following:

Fuller, M., Healey, M., Bradley, A. and Hall, T. (2004) ‘Barriers to learning: A systematic study of the experiences of disabled students in higher education’ Studies in Higher Education, 29, 3, 303-318.

Fuller, M., Healey, M. and Bradley, A. (2004) ‘Incorporating disabled students within an inclusive higher education environment’ Disability and Society, 19, 5, 455-468.

Fuller, M., Georgeson, J. Healey, M., Hurst, A., Riddell, S., Roberts, H. and Weedon, E. (2008 forthcoming) Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students’ Learning in Higher Education London: Routledge.

Healey M., Fuller M., Bradley A., and Hall T. (2006) Listening to students: the experiences of disabled students of learning at university, in Adams, M. and Brown, S. (Eds) Towards Inclusive Learning in Higher Education: Developing Curricula forDisabled Students. London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp.32-43.

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 10: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

30

Healey, M., Roberts, H., Fuller, M., Georgeson, J. Hurst, A., Kelly, K., Riddell, S. and Weedon, E. (2008) ‘Reasonable adjustments and disabled students’ experiences of learning, teaching and assessment’ TLA Interchange 2www.tla.ed.ac.uk/interchange.

Hurst, A. (2007) ‘Students with disabilities in HE in the twenty first century’ In Barnes, L. et al. (eds.) Deaf Students in Higher Education Coleford, Glos: Douglas McLean.

Hurst, A. (forthcoming) ‘Neurodiversity, Disability and Legislation’ in Pollak, D. (ed.) Neurodiversity in Higher EducationChichester: Wily.

Riddell, S., Weedon, E. Fuller, M., Healey, M., Hurst, A., Kelly, K. and Piggott, L., (2007) ‘Managerialism and equalities: tensions within widening access policies for disabled students in UK universities’, Higher Education, 54, 4, 615-628.

Weedon, E. and Riddell, S. (2007) ‘To those who have shall be given?’ Differing expectations of support among dyslexic students’ in Osborne, M., Houston, M. and Toman, N. (eds) The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning London: Routledge

Weedon, E. and Riddell, S. (2008 forthcoming) ‘Disabled students and transitions in higher education’ in Ecclestone, K. (ed) in Lost in Transition: Change and Becoming Through Education and the Lifecourse London: Routledge.

IMPACTS

� Mary Fuller and Alan Hurst were invited to be members of the Advisory group for the Disability Quality Assurance Agency’s revision of the Code of Practice Section 3 ‘Students with Disabilities’ in 2008. � Sheila Riddell was invited to join the Disability Rights Commission’s expert panel reviewing fitness to practise standards in teaching, social work and nursing, which reported in September 2007. � Alan Hurst was a member of HEFCE’s Disability Policy Review, 1997-2007.

FUTURE RESEARCH PRIORITIES

� The development and limits of inclusive curricula in higher education.

� The experiences and outcomes of disabled graduates in the labour market.

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 11: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

31

References Bennett, N., Dunne, E. and Carre, C. (1999) ‘Patterns of core and generic skills in higher education,

Higher Education, 37, 1, 71-93.

Broadfoot, P. (1999) Empowerment or performativity? English assessment policy in the late twentieth century. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Sussex, 2-5 September.

Dunne, E. Bennett, N. and Carre, C. (1997) ‘Higher education: Core skills in a learning society’ Journal of Education Policy 12, 6, 511-525.

Elton, L. (2004) ‘A challenge to established assessment practice’ Higher EducationQuarterly 58, 1, 43-62.

Field, J. (2006) Lifelong learning and the new educational order. Stoke onTrent: Trentham

Fuller, M., Healey, M., Bradley, A. and Hall, T. (2004) ‘Barriers to learning: A systematic study of the experiences of disabled students in higher education’ Studies in Higher Education, 29, 3, 303-318.

Fuller, M., Healey, M. and Bradley, A. (2004) ‘Incorporating disabled students within an inclusive higher education environment’ Disability and Society, 19, 5, 455-468.

Fuller, M., Georgeson, J. Healey, M., Hurst, A., Riddell, S., Roberts, H. and Weedon,

E. (2008 forthcoming) Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students’ Learning in Higher Education London: Routledge.

Healey M., Fuller M., Bradley A., and Hall T. (2006) ‘Listening to students: the experiences of disabled students of learning at university’ in Adams, M. and Brown, S. (Eds) Towards Inclusive Learning in Higher Education: Developing Curricula for Disabled Students London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp.32-43.

Healey, M., Roberts, H., Fuller, M., Georgeson, J. Hurst, A., Kelly, K., Riddell, S. and Weedon, E. (2008) ‘Reasonable adjustments and disabled students’ experiences of learning, teaching and assessment’ TLA Interchange 2 www.tla.ed.ac.uk/interchange.

Leathwood, C. (2005) Assessment policy and practice in higher education: purpose, standards and equity, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30, 3, 307-324.

Morley, L. (2003) Quality and Power in Higher Education Maidenhead: SRHE and Open University Press.

Riddell, S, Tinklin, T. and Wilson, A. (2005) Disabled Students in Higher Education London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Riddell, S, Weedon, E, Fuller, M, Healey, M, Hurst, A, Kelly, K, Piggot, L. (2007) ‘Managerialism and equalities: tensions within widening access policy and practice for disabled students in UK universities’ Higher Education 54, 4, 615-628.

Riddell, S. and Weedon, E. (2006) ‘What counts as a reasonable adjustment? Dyslexic students and the concept of fair assessment’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 16, 1,

Scottish Executive (2003) Life Through Learning: Learning Through Life.Available from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/lifelong/llsm-00.asp. Accessed 25.03.07

Simpson, M. (2005) Assessment: Policy and Practice in Education Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press).

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 12: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

32

Sharp, K. and Earle, S. (2000) Assessment, disability and the problem of compensation Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 25, 2, 191-199.

Weedon, E. and Riddell, S. (2007) ‘To those who have shall be given?’ Differing expectations of support among dyslexic students’ in Osborne, M., Houston, M. and Toman, N. (eds) The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning London: Routledge.

Weedon, E. and Riddell, S. (2008 forthcoming) ‘Disabled students and transitions in higher education’ in Ecclestone, K. (ed) in Lost in Transition: Change and Becoming Through Education and the Lifecourse London: Routledge.

Wolfendale, S. & Corbett, J. (Eds.) (1996) Opening Doors: Learning Support in Higher EducationLondon: Cassell.

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 13: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

Tab

le 7

. Key

cha

ract

erist

ics/

issu

es fo

r st

uden

ts

33

Stud

ent/

Inst

/C

ours

e

Indi

vidu

al

char

acte

ristic

s/

Impa

irmen

t

Tran

sitio

ns:

Vert

ical

/H

oriz

onta

l

Tran

sitio

ns:

Iden

tity

Iden

tity

DSA

/ D

DA

aw

aren

ess

Rea

sona

ble

Adj

ustm

ents

T

& L

exp

erie

nce

Enga

gem

ent w

ith

inst

itutio

n So

cial

exp

erie

nce

Out

com

e

Jean

ED

Bed

U. 1

Mat

ure

(ear

ly 3

0s),

Wor

king

cla

ss,

Dys

lexi

a, id

entif

ied

on e

ntry

(med

ical

)

Col

lege

(SW

AP

A

cces

s) to

U

nive

rsity

; M

othe

r - s

tude

nt

From

wife

and

m

othe

r to

stud

ent t

each

er;

stru

ggle

d w

ith

dysl

exia

iden

tity

Stru

ggle

d to

co

me

to te

rms

with

dys

lexi

a;

didn

’t se

e he

rsel

f as

dis

able

d

DS

A: c

ompu

ter

softw

are

and

a sc

anni

ng p

en

whi

ch w

as n

ot

usef

ul; l

imite

d D

DA

aw

aren

ess

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sG

ood;

but

di

fficu

lties

with

di

sclo

sure

on

plac

emen

t

Aca

dem

ic s

taff

supp

ortiv

e; D

O s

een

as p

atro

nisi

ng

Mar

ried

with

fam

ily

but m

uch

info

rmal

co

ntac

t with

oth

er

stud

ents

Firs

t;pr

obat

ione

r pl

ace

in

scho

ol

Lesl

ey

BE

d E

D

U. 1

Mat

ure

(late

20s

); m

iddl

e cl

ass,

M

ultip

le: m

obili

ty;

hear

ing;

‘dys

lexi

a’

– no

form

al

diag

nosi

s

Pro

blem

s w

ith

med

ical

(hea

ring)

; but

ac

cept

ed: A

le

vels

Wor

k to

un

iver

sity

; wife

at

hom

e –

stud

ent

Em

ploy

ee to

st

uden

tE

mph

asis

ed h

er

impa

irmen

ts to

en

sure

sup

port

DS

A: l

apto

p,

note

take

r (1st

year

), tra

vel

allo

wan

ce;

know

ledg

e of

D

DA

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s; e

xam

on

com

pute

r in

sepa

rate

room

;

Crit

ical

; esp

ecia

lly

in te

rms

of b

eing

ab

le to

join

in

certa

in g

roup

ac

tiviti

es +

PE

; pr

oble

ms

on

plac

emen

t

Felt

that

sta

ff an

d D

O

did

not f

ully

resp

ond

to h

er n

eeds

; di

fficu

lties

get

ting

in

touc

h w

ith D

O a

t tim

es; s

taff

ques

tione

d he

r su

itabi

lity

as a

teac

her

Mar

ried;

foun

d it

diffi

cult

to e

ngag

e w

ith o

ther

stu

dent

s;

grou

pwor

k w

as

diffi

cult

Year

out

end

of

yea

r 3;

preg

nant

And

rew

ED

Bed

U. 1

18-2

5; w

orki

ng

clas

s; m

othe

r di

sabl

ed &

wid

ow

Mob

ility

(Cer

ebra

l P

alsy

); U

nsee

n:

Ast

hma;

from

birt

h

Col

lege

(HN

C) t

o un

iver

sity

; Son

of

dis

able

d m

othe

r – s

tude

nt

To s

tude

nt –

th

en p

rofe

ssio

nal

teac

her;

stru

ggle

w

ith ‘d

isab

led’

id

entit

y

Did

not

see

hi

mse

lf as

di

sabl

ed; d

id n

ot

wan

t to

be

treat

eddi

ffere

ntly

(h

ence

no

cont

act w

ith D

O

at fi

rst)

DS

A b

ut n

o co

ntac

t with

DO

un

til e

nd y

ear 2

(c

ompu

ter f

rom

co

llege

); lim

ited

DD

A a

war

enes

s

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s fro

m y

ear

3 on

; did

not

w

ant e

xtra

tim

e fo

r ass

ignm

ents

Goo

d an

d st

aff

supp

ortiv

e;pr

oble

ms

on o

ne

plac

emen

t –

dom

estic

issu

es

Aca

dem

ic s

taff

supp

ortiv

e; fi

rst

expe

rienc

e of

DO

ne

gativ

e –

but t

hen

good

Live

d at

hom

e; b

ut

good

gro

up o

f fri

ends

at u

ni a

nd

hom

e

2:2

prob

atio

ner

plac

e in

sc

hool

Fred

ED

Com

m

Ed

U. 1

18-2

5; M

iddl

e cl

ass;

Dys

lexi

a;

iden

tifie

d at

age

9/

10 –

in th

e fa

mily

; m

uch

supp

ort a

t sc

hool

Pub

licsc

hool

/gap

yea

r to

uni

vers

ity;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Lim

ited

iden

tity

trans

ition

?Fr

iend

s fro

m o

ld

setti

ng; r

ugby

pl

ayin

g, n

ot

carr

ying

on

with

in v

ocat

ion

qual

ified

to d

o

No

prob

lem

in

disc

losi

ng h

is

dysl

exia

; did

not

fe

el h

e w

as

disa

bled

but

for

som

e dy

slex

ia

was

dis

ablin

g

DS

A: c

ompu

ter

& s

oftw

are;

lim

ited

DD

A

awar

enes

s

Ent

itled

to e

xtra

tim

e in

exa

ms

– bu

t virt

ually

no

tradi

tiona

l exa

ms

on c

ours

e.

Goo

d ov

eral

l but

in

itial

ly c

ritic

al o

f la

ck o

f tut

oria

ls.

Pla

cem

ents

goo

d,

disc

losu

re n

ot a

n is

sue

Goo

d, s

taff

seen

as

supp

ortiv

e; n

o ne

ed to

co

ntac

t DO

afte

r ini

tial

cont

act.

Sm

all

depa

rtmen

t

Sha

red

flat w

ith

frien

ds, r

ugby

mai

n fo

cus

for

soci

alis

ing;

muc

h he

lp, e

.g.

proo

fread

ing

from

gi

rlfrie

nd

2:2;

not

in

tend

ing

stay

in

Com

m E

d.A

imin

g fo

r m

ore

prac

tical

w

ork

Eua

n

ED

Ast

roph

ysic

s U. 1

18-2

5; M

iddl

e cl

ass;

Men

tal H

ealth

; id

entif

ied

at s

choo

l (s

pent

5th/6

th y

ear

mos

tly a

t hom

e –

with

wor

k fro

m

scho

ol)

Did

not

dis

clos

e in

itial

ly s

o st

arte

d 3

times

;C

omp

scho

ol/h

ome

educ

atio

n to

un

iver

sity

; son

at

hom

e –

stud

ent

Stro

ng fo

cus

on

bein

g an

in

depe

nden

tst

uden

t; fo

cus

on

skill

s of

a

stud

ent

Stru

ggle

d w

ith

disc

losu

re; s

aw

MH

as

a di

sabi

lity

but f

elt

othe

rs w

ould

not

DS

A:

lapt

op, P

A

to a

ccom

pany

to

lect

ures

(initi

ally

); tu

tor

supp

ort

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sS

trugg

led

to w

ork

out h

ow to

tack

le

his

stud

ies;

lim

ited

supp

ort f

rom

ac

adem

ic s

taff;

qu

estio

ned

use

of

lect

ures

; stro

ng

emph

asis

on

tradi

tiona

l exa

ms

Diff

icul

ties

appr

oach

ing

DoS

and

to

eng

age

with

ac

adem

ic s

taff.

Live

d at

hom

e, w

ell

supp

orte

d by

fa

mily

; foc

al p

oint

at

uni

= C

hapl

ainc

y

Faile

d ex

ams

end

of y

ear 3

; no

t allo

wed

to

prog

ress

into

ye

ar 4

; will

get

O

rd. i

f su

cces

sful

; ha

s ha

d jo

b in

terv

iew

s fo

r IT

wor

k K

athr

yn

ED

Che

mis

try

(5 y

ears

)

U. 1

18-2

5; m

iddl

e cl

ass;

Uns

een:

Dia

bete

s;

diag

nose

d w

hen

youn

g

Irish

com

p ed

ucat

ion

to

univ

ersi

ty;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Did

not

see

he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

or a

s re

q’g

any

spec

ial

arra

ngem

ents

; le

arnt

to li

ve w

ith

diab

etes

No

DS

A;

disc

lose

d on

ap

plic

atio

n fo

rm

Non

e; b

ut D

oS/

acad

emic

sta

ff ve

ry s

uppo

rtive

w

hen

ill

Goo

d; re

ally

en

thus

iast

ic a

bout

le

arni

ng a

nd h

er

degr

ee;

Year

out

in S

pain

su

cces

sful

Ver

y go

od c

onta

ct

with

DoS

and

oth

er

staf

f

Sha

red

flat f

rom

st

art;

flatm

ates

v

supp

ortiv

e; s

hare

d fla

t in

Spa

in a

nd

stay

ed a

way

from

E

rasm

us s

tude

nts

On

track

to

com

plet

e in

fiv

e ye

ar

degr

ee

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 14: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

Tere

sa

ED

Bio

scie

nce

U.1

18-2

5 bu

t see

s he

rsel

f as

mat

ure

stud

ent;

Oth

er:

Epi

leps

y; h

ad

seiz

ure

whe

n yo

ung

but e

pile

psy

not c

onfir

med

unt

il 18

; und

iscl

osed

M

H

Wor

king

to

univ

ersi

ty;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Doe

s no

t lik

e la

bel ‘

disa

bled

’ –

but s

ees

that

as

her p

robl

em w

ith

acce

ptin

gdi

sabl

ed p

eopl

e

Did

not

con

tact

D

O in

itial

ly, d

id

at e

nd o

f yea

r 2;

got D

SA

: co

mpu

ter,

reco

rdin

g eq

uipm

ent &

bo

ok a

llow

ance

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s (w

hen

seen

DO

); se

para

te ro

om –

di

dn’t

like

it.

Rea

lly e

njoy

ed th

e co

urse

but

had

se

rious

pro

blem

s w

ith a

ttend

ance

du

e to

mig

rain

es

(par

t of e

pile

psy)

; an

d in

com

plet

ing

asse

ssm

ents

; als

o af

fect

ed b

y un

disc

lose

dde

pres

sion

Goo

d su

ppor

t fro

m

DoS

who

trie

d ha

rd to

su

ppor

t her

and

sta

y in

touc

h w

hen

she

was

not

in c

lass

In H

alls

1st y

ear,

then

sha

red

flat;

desc

ribed

her

self

as a

mat

ure

stud

ent w

ho h

ad

little

in c

omm

on

with

you

ng

stud

ents

but

had

a

smal

l gro

up o

f cl

ose

frien

ds

Yea

r out

afte

r 2nd

yea

r; re

turn

ed in

to

3rd y

ear;

drop

ped

out;

coul

d no

t kee

p up

with

de

man

ds;

wou

ld li

ke to

st

udy

p-t b

ut

finan

ces

don’

t al

low

Fi

ona

ED

BS

c Zo

olog

y

U. 1

18-2

5; w

orki

ng

clas

s (fa

rmin

g)

Oth

er: H

eart

cond

ition

; dan

ger i

n la

b if

she

cut

hers

elf a

s m

edic

ine

redu

ces

bloo

d’s

abili

ty to

clo

t; fro

m

birth

, had

two

big

oper

atio

ns w

hils

t at

prim

ary

scho

ol

Com

p sc

hool

to

univ

ersi

ty;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g;R

ecei

ves

mea

ns

test

edbu

rsar

y

Did

not

see

he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

but

had

no

diff

icul

ties

with

kno

win

g ab

out h

er

cond

ition

No

DS

A;

how

ever

, co

ntac

ted

DO

ab

out p

oss.

D

ysle

xia

in y

ear

3; n

egat

ive

expe

rienc

e

Non

eG

ener

ally

pos

itive

but f

elt f

eedb

ack

poor

ear

ly in

co

urse

; dis

serta

tion

was

hig

h po

int

Aca

dem

ic s

taff

wer

e ap

proa

chab

le; l

ittle

co

ntac

t with

DoS

but

di

d no

t fee

l she

ne

eded

it

Hal

ls 1

st y

ear;

then

sh

ared

flat

with

fri

ends

; goo

d ci

rcle

of

frie

nds

hom

e an

d un

i

2:1;

wor

king

in

rese

arch

lab

(whe

re s

he

did

diss

erta

tion

(test

ing

to s

ee

if sh

e w

ants

to

cont

inue

to

PhD

)

Ann

e

ED

Eng

lish

Lit &

His

tory

U.1

18-2

5; m

iddl

e cl

ass;

Oth

er: D

yspr

axia

; di

agno

sed

whi

lst a

t sc

hool

Pub

licsc

hool

/gap

yea

r to

uni

vers

ity;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Doe

s no

t wan

t to

desc

ribe

hers

elf

as d

isab

led

– to

o m

uch

stig

ma;

w

ants

‘nor

mal

lif

e’

DS

A; c

ompu

ter +

so

ftwar

e;

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s,ex

tens

ions

on

cour

sew

ork

until

ye

ar 3

‘exa

m

essa

y’;

com

men

ted

on

‘leni

ency

with

sp

ellin

g’ a

dvic

e on

LP

– s

pelli

ng

not o

ne o

f her

pr

oble

ms

Gen

eral

ly p

ositi

ve

but f

elt t

hat t

here

w

as a

lack

of

cont

act t

ime

in

year

s 3

& 4

; w

ante

d cl

ear s

teer

fro

m le

ctur

er in

se

min

ars;

mix

ed

feel

ings

abo

ut

grou

pwor

k;

emph

asis

on

essa

y/ex

am

asse

ssm

ents

Eng

lish

Lit s

taff

seen

as

mor

e ap

proa

chab

le th

an

His

tory

Hal

ls 1

st y

ear t

hen

shar

ed fl

at;

prob

lem

atic

in y

ear

2 bu

t cha

nged

and

fo

und

good

gro

up

of fr

iend

s; h

er

dysp

raxi

a m

eant

sh

e ha

d to

wor

k ha

rd =

impa

cted

on

soci

al li

fe

Hop

es fo

r 2:1

, pr

essu

re fr

om

pare

nts

to g

et

at le

ast 2

:1.

Got

a 2

:1 b

ut

is g

radu

atin

g la

te –

Nov

- in

ab

sent

ia

Mic

helle

ED

His

tory

U. 1

18-2

5; w

orki

ng

clas

s bu

t not

st

raig

ht fr

om s

choo

l O

ther

: pro

blem

with

ha

nd; d

iagn

osis

not

cl

ear,

doct

or

thou

ght

arth

ritis

/rheu

mat

ism

as

ther

e w

as

fam

ily h

isto

ry (a

lso

men

tione

d M

E

whi

lst a

t sch

ool)

Col

lege

(Hig

hers

) to

univ

ersi

ty;

daug

hter

at

hom

e –

stud

ent

Con

side

red

hers

elf t

o be

‘s

light

ly

disa

bled

’; be

ing

labe

lled

did

not

wor

ry h

er a

s it

help

ed h

er g

et

extra

tim

e in

ex

ams

No

DS

A (n

ot

sure

how

to

clai

m);

appr

oach

ed D

O

beca

use

of

writ

ing

diffi

culti

es

in le

ctur

es a

nd

exam

s

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sS

uppo

rt fro

m w

ithin

th

e de

partm

ent

varie

d w

ith s

ome

prov

idin

g ex

celle

nt

feed

back

and

ot

hers

not

en

gagi

ng w

ith

stud

ents

Mic

helle

’s m

ain

enga

gem

ent w

as

thro

ugh

stud

ent

polit

ics.

Des

crib

ed

hers

elf a

s a

very

so

ciab

le p

erso

n

Live

d at

hom

e ex

cept

for 3

rd y

ear

whe

n sh

e m

oved

in

to a

sha

red

flat.

Hop

ed fo

r a

2:1;

cons

ider

edgo

ing

into

te

achi

ng(P

GD

E);

got

Th

ird

Kar

rie

ED

Mod

ern

lang

uage

s:S

pani

sh

18-2

5; w

orki

ng

clas

s;W

heel

chai

r use

r: C

ereb

ral P

alsy

Com

p sc

hool

to

univ

ersi

ty;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g du

ring

wee

k; d

augh

ter

Des

crib

edhe

rsel

f as

disa

bled

; but

un

iver

sity

ex

perie

nce

DS

A: C

ompu

ter,

PA

, not

e-ta

ker;

spec

ial

acco

mm

odat

ion

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s;P

robl

ems

whe

n no

te-ta

ker n

ot

able

to

Exc

elle

nt s

uppo

rt fro

m d

epar

tmen

t &

DO

; sta

ff de

scrib

ed

her a

s la

id b

ack

and

able

to e

xpre

ss

Took

full

part

in a

ll te

achi

ng a

ctiv

ities

G

ood

rapp

ort w

ith

othe

r stu

dent

s bu

t lim

ited

cont

act

outs

ide

clas

s;

supp

ort n

eeds

3; a

ccep

ted

to

do a

PG

DE

at

a di

ffere

nt

inst

itutio

n

34

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 15: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

U. 1

at

hom

e at

w

eeke

nds

conf

irmed

her

id

entit

y as

‘not

m

enta

llyde

ficie

nt’

spea

k/w

rite

lang

uage

her n

eeds

; Yea

r ab

road

goo

d bu

t on

ly p

ossi

ble

due

to fa

ther

taki

ng

year

out

from

wor

k

mea

nt s

he w

ent

hom

e at

wee

kend

s

Dav

id

ED

Env

ironm

enta

l Geo

-sc

ienc

e

U. 1

18-2

5; m

iddl

e cl

ass;

Mul

tiple

: cys

tic

fibro

sis,

dia

bete

s,

epile

psy;

had

op

erat

ion

to

rem

ove

brai

n tu

mou

r in

year

3

Com

p. s

choo

l to

univ

ersi

ty;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Acc

epts

his

impa

irmen

t but

di

d no

t wan

t la

belle

ddi

sabl

ed.

Acc

epts

that

he

had

may

be

unde

rpla

yed

impa

ct o

f his

im

pairm

ent

No

DS

A; c

onta

ct

with

DO

end

2nd

year

Ext

ra ti

me,

se

para

te ro

om

for e

xam

(3rd

year

)

Sta

ff su

ppor

tive

but

Dav

id te

nded

to

blam

e hi

mse

lf fo

r no

t wor

king

har

d en

ough

Avo

ided

eng

agin

g w

ith s

taff

over

di

sabi

lity

issu

es b

ut

regr

ets

it at

the

end.

W

ishe

d th

at D

O h

ad a

m

ore

proa

ctiv

e ap

proa

ch w

ith

stud

ents

like

him

self

as h

e w

as re

luct

ant t

o m

ake

cont

act

Mai

n fo

cus

of

soci

alis

ing

is b

ike

club

(was

pre

side

nt

of c

lub)

; did

a lo

t of

cycl

ing

to s

tay

fit

Not

allo

wed

to

prog

ress

to

hono

urs

year

; ge

tting

ordi

nary

de

gree

awai

ting

resu

lts; c

ame

back

(afte

r op)

to

com

plet

e se

mes

ter 2

of

3rd y

ear;

wor

king

te

mpo

rary

inte

ndin

g to

go

into

Lan

d M

anag

emen

tC

onse

rvat

ion

(trai

n on

job)

R

ebec

ca

ED

Arc

hi-

Tect

ure

U. 1

18-2

5; m

iddl

e cl

ass;

Dys

lexi

a;

diag

nose

d ea

rly,

mot

her

inst

rum

enta

l in

ensu

ring

supp

ort a

t sc

hool

and

als

o at

ho

me

Gra

mm

ar S

choo

l to

uni

vers

ity;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g. C

ours

e se

lect

edbe

caus

e of

dy

slex

ia

From

dau

ghte

r to

stu

dent

; tra

nsiti

on to

pr

ofes

sion

alid

entit

y

Did

not

see

he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

;dy

slex

ia b

oth

nega

tive

&

posi

tive.

Arc

hite

ctur

ech

osen

bec

ause

of

dys

lexi

a

DS

A: c

ompu

ter,

softw

are,

ph

otoc

opyi

ng,

dysl

exia

tuto

r; pr

oofre

ader

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sS

taff

very

su

ppor

tive;

depa

rtmen

t sm

all

and

good

con

tact

be

twee

n st

aff &

st

uden

ts, s

taff

appr

oach

able

;te

achi

ng v

arie

d an

d w

ide

rang

e of

as

sess

men

ts

Con

tact

ed D

O a

fter

star

ting

cour

se

Ver

y so

ciab

le m

any

frien

ds h

ome

and

uni;

fam

ily a

nd

chur

ch v

ery

impo

rtant

2:1;

Goi

ng o

n to

the

seco

nd

part

of

Arc

hite

ctur

equ

alifi

catio

n(E

d or

M

anch

este

r)

Jam

es

ED

Geo

-gr

aphy

U. 1

18-2

5; m

iddl

e cl

ass;

Dys

lexi

a;

diag

nose

d ea

rly,

olde

r bro

ther

dy

slex

ic

Pub

licsc

hool

/gap

yea

r to

uni

vers

ity;

inde

pend

ent

livin

g

Did

not

con

side

r hi

mse

lf di

sabl

ed

but n

ot w

orrie

d ab

out t

ellin

g pe

ople

abo

ut h

is

dysl

exia

(nee

d’s

basi

s)

DS

A: c

ompu

ter,

softw

are,

ph

otoc

opyi

ng

allo

wan

ce;

proo

fread

er in

fin

al y

ear f

or

diss

erta

tion

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sS

uppo

rt of

fere

d by

st

aff i

n de

pt. g

ood

if yo

u ap

proa

ched

th

em; T

& L

OK

but

fe

lt th

ere

was

not

en

ough

con

tact

tim

e

Con

tact

DO

afte

r st

artin

g co

urse

, in

itial

ly th

ough

t his

dy

slex

ia w

as to

o m

ild

to w

arra

nt s

uppo

rt

Ver

y in

volv

ed in

vo

lunt

ary

wor

k,

both

dur

ing

term

tim

e an

d al

so in

ho

liday

s (p

roje

ct in

M

exic

o)

Firs

t; st

arte

d tra

inin

g on

Te

ach

Firs

t pr

ogra

mm

e Ju

ne 2

007

Car

a

Edu

catio

nst

udie

sm

ajor

, geo

-gr

aphy

m

inor

U. 2

18-2

5, lo

wer

mid

dle

clas

s, d

ysle

xia,

di

agno

sed

afte

r le

avin

g si

xth

form

, de

pres

sion

diag

nose

d du

ring

sixt

h fo

rm, o

nly

dysl

exia

dec

lare

d to

inst

itutio

n

Non

e;co

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol, w

ent t

o w

ork

in a

su

perm

arke

taf

ter A

’ lev

els,

de

cide

d to

com

e to

uni

vers

ity to

be

tter h

er

empl

oym

ent

pros

pect

s

Ver

y w

ary

of

disc

losi

ngde

pres

sion

, had

se

vera

l bad

ex

perie

nces

th

roug

h si

x fo

rm,

from

bot

h te

ache

rs a

nd

frien

ds

DS

A: c

ompu

ter,

softw

are,

dy

slex

ia tu

tor

(not

arr

ange

d un

til th

e en

d of

ye

ar tw

o), s

ome

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

D

DA

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sH

as e

njoy

ed

univ

ersi

ty b

ut d

oes

not f

eel s

he h

as

been

abl

e to

sho

w

her f

ull p

oten

tial

due

to p

anic

at

tack

s in

exa

ms,

w

ould

hav

e be

nefit

ed fr

om

alte

rnat

ive

asse

ssm

ent

Som

e st

aff m

ore

supp

ortiv

e th

an

othe

rs.

Did

not

feel

ve

ry s

uppo

rted

by

disa

bilit

y of

fice.

Firs

t D

O v

ery

good

, lef

t in

year

3, r

epla

cem

ent

not v

ery

good

Live

d in

hal

ls a

ll th

roug

h un

i, go

t in

volv

ed in

lots

of

soci

etie

s an

d w

as a

co

urse

rep

2:1,

hop

ing

to

purs

ue a

st

age

care

er,

had

lots

of

expe

rienc

e be

fore

uni

35

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 16: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

Cas

sie

Crim

inol

ogy

- cha

nged

fro

m P

sych

-ol

ogy

at

star

t of y

ear

2 U. 2

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

dys

lexi

a,

diag

nose

d du

ring

A’ l

evel

s af

ter

reco

gnis

ing

her

own

prob

lem

s du

ring

a le

ctur

e on

dy

slex

ia

Non

e,co

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol, c

ame

stra

ight

from

si

xth

form

Gla

d of

dys

lexi

a di

agno

sis,

alw

ays

thou

ght

she

was

stu

pid.

Fi

nds

it ha

rd to

as

k fo

r hel

p as

sh

e is

so

used

to

tryin

g to

hid

e he

r di

fficu

lties

DS

A: c

ompu

ter,

dysl

exia

tuto

r (w

hich

the

univ

ersi

ty d

id n

ot

let h

er k

now

she

co

uld

have

), ha

s fo

und

out s

he

shou

ld h

ave

had

mor

e fin

anci

al

supp

ort t

han

she

acce

ssed

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

sE

njoy

ed h

er

cour

se, g

lad

she

chan

ged

cour

se.

Som

e tu

tors

ver

y he

lpfu

l, so

me

not

help

ful a

t all

Ver

y di

sapp

oint

ed

with

the

disa

bilit

y of

fice

for a

num

ber o

f re

ason

s. F

ound

sta

ff in

her

sch

ool o

ffice

ve

ry h

elpf

ul

Live

d in

hal

ls

thro

ugho

ut

univ

ersi

ty,

volu

ntee

red

in

year

s on

e an

d tw

o,

join

ed a

soc

iety

an

d be

cam

e co

urse

rep

in y

ear

thre

e, w

ishe

d sh

e ha

d do

ne b

oth

soon

er

2:1,

goi

ng

trave

lling

for a

ye

ar

Cha

rity

His

tory

U.2

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

dys

prax

ia,

diag

nose

d ag

ed 7

, w

as re

cogn

ised

by

her m

othe

r, w

ho is

a

teac

her

Non

e, p

ublic

sc

hool

, cam

e st

raig

ht to

un

iver

sity

Doe

sn’t

see

dysp

raxi

a as

a

disa

bilit

y, n

ot

wor

ried

abou

t di

sclo

sing

but

pe

ople

don

’t te

nd to

un

ders

tand

and

th

ink

it is

a ty

pe

of d

ysle

xia

DS

A: d

oesn

’t ge

t an

y, is

wro

ng in

ca

se s

tudy

! Not

m

uch

know

ledg

e of

DD

A

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s. F

eels

sh

e w

ould

be

nefit

from

no

tes

in a

dvan

ce

but t

hese

are

not

of

ten

prov

ided

Enj

oyed

her

co

urse

, ten

ded

to

choo

se m

odul

es

with

tuto

rs s

he g

ot

on w

ell w

ith.

Ple

nty

of c

hoic

e of

m

odul

es

Sen

t inf

o ab

out

dysl

exia

dro

p-in

s, b

ut

didn

’t go

bec

ause

di

dn’t

rega

rd h

erse

lf as

dys

lexi

c

Live

d in

hal

ls th

en

a st

uden

t hou

se.

Invo

lved

in lo

ts o

f so

ciet

ies

in fi

rst

year

and

act

iviti

es

thro

ugh

the

chap

el

2:2

Cor

inne

Psy

chol

ogy

in Edu

catio

n

U. 2

18-2

5, h

earin

g lo

ss

from

birt

h N

one,

com

preh

ensi

vesc

hool

and

a g

ap

year

to w

ork

befo

re u

nive

rsity

No

cont

actw

ith

disa

bilit

y of

fice-

re

gard

ed h

erse

lf as

‘ no

t tha

t di

sabl

ed’,

even

th

ough

her

he

arin

g lo

ss w

as

quite

sig

nific

ant

No

DS

A, h

as

neve

r bee

n su

gges

ted

to h

er

that

she

may

be

elig

ible

, kno

ws

abou

t DD

A

thro

ugh

wor

king

w

ith d

isab

led

child

ren

Non

eE

njoy

ed h

er

cour

se, v

ery

capa

ble

stud

ent,

finds

not

e ta

king

ch

alle

ngin

g as

she

re

lies

on li

p re

adin

g an

d ca

nnot

lip

read

an

d w

rite

at th

e sa

me

time

No

cont

act f

rom

di

sabi

lity

offic

e.

Indi

vidu

al tu

tors

he

lpfu

l- tri

ed to

re

mem

ber t

o fa

ce th

e cl

ass

whe

n ta

lkin

g

Com

mut

es fr

om

hom

e, c

hoos

e un

i so

she

cou

ld d

o th

is a

nd k

eep

her

part-

time

job.

Live

d w

ith m

othe

r in

yea

r one

then

m

oved

in w

ith

partn

er.

Has

room

in

hal

ls in

cas

e sh

e w

ants

to s

tay

over

with

drew

Dar

ren

IT a

nd

mul

ti-m

edia

U. 3

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

dys

lexi

a,

diag

nose

d in

pr

imar

y sc

hool

Non

e,co

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol, c

ame

stra

ight

to

univ

ersi

ty

Did

not

see

hi

mse

lf as

di

sabl

ed.

Hap

py

to d

iscl

ose

his

dysl

exia

, fel

t he

had

deve

lope

d go

od c

opin

g st

rate

gies

ove

r th

e ye

ars

so it

di

d no

t wor

ry h

im

too

muc

h

DS

A: c

ompu

ter,

cons

umab

le a

nd

book

allo

wan

ce

and

extra

stu

dy

skill

s tu

ition

du

ring

year

one

. N

o kn

owle

dge

of

DD

A

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s an

d us

e of

a c

ompu

ter i

n a

sepa

rate

room

, au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n fo

r co

urse

wor

k

Enj

oyed

his

cou

rse,

w

ould

hav

e lik

ed to

be

abl

e to

do

mor

e m

ultim

edia

, diff

icul

t as

it is

hea

vy w

ith

pre-

requ

isite

s he

di

d no

t hav

e th

e m

odul

e al

low

ance

to

take

Got

on

wel

l with

tu

tors

, dis

abili

ty o

ffice

al

way

s ar

rang

ed h

is

com

pute

r and

ext

ra

time

for e

xam

s.W

ould

like

mor

e no

tice

of e

xam

dat

es

so h

e ca

n pl

an

revi

sion

. H

ad a

lette

r fro

m s

tude

nt re

cord

s sa

ying

he

did

not

have

the

right

m

odul

es to

gra

duat

e th

ree

mon

ths

befo

re

end

of c

ours

e, s

orte

d no

w b

ut s

tress

ful

Sta

yed

livin

g at

ho

me

and

com

mut

ed to

uni

, ke

pt h

is p

art-t

ime

job

at h

is o

ld

scho

ol u

ntil

year

th

ree.

Has

frie

nds

at b

oth

uni a

nd

hom

e. M

anag

ed to

ge

t thr

ough

uni

w

ithou

t a s

tude

nt

loan

thro

ugh

livin

g at

hom

e an

d w

orki

ng

2:1 36

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 17: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

Dun

can

Com

putin

g

U. 3

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

dys

lexi

a,

diag

nose

d du

ring

GC

SE

s

Non

e,co

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol, c

ame

stra

ight

to

univ

ersi

ty

Did

n’ts

eehi

mse

lf as

di

sabl

ed b

ut

didn

’t m

ind

the

labe

l, gl

ad o

f the

su

ppor

t he

has

had

sinc

e di

agno

sis

DS

A: c

ompu

ter

and

dysl

exia

tu

tor,

thou

gh h

e st

oppe

d us

ing

her a

fter h

er

advi

ce n

early

co

st h

im g

rade

s.Li

mite

dkn

owle

dge

of

DD

A

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s,au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n fo

r co

urse

wor

k

Enj

oyed

his

cou

rse,

de

velo

ped

new

ac

adem

ic in

tere

sts

thro

ugh

univ

ersi

ty,

got o

n w

ell w

ith h

is

tuto

rs

Felt

very

let d

own

by

dysl

exia

tuto

r, no

w

has

wor

k ch

ecke

d by

fri

ends

. D

isab

ility

of

fice

help

ful

othe

rwis

e, a

s ar

e tu

tors

Live

d in

lodg

ings

th

roug

hout

uni

, with

a

frien

d th

e fir

st

year

and

fore

ign

stud

ents

the

follo

win

g ye

ars,

got

on

wel

l with

the

fam

ily h

e lo

dged

w

ith.

Ver

y ac

tive

as c

ours

e re

p an

d on

RA

G c

omm

ittee

, w

ide

grou

p of

fri

ends

from

bot

h un

i and

par

t-tim

e jo

b in

tow

n

Ord

inar

y B

Sc,

if

furth

er w

ork

subm

itted

may

up

grad

e to

ho

nour

s

Daw

n

Geo

grap

hy

U. 3

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

mul

tiple

im

pairm

ents

No

prob

lem

from

un

iver

sity

but

sh

e ne

eded

to

ensu

reap

prop

riate

loca

l m

edic

al c

are.

M

ajor

pub

lic

scho

ol, c

ame

stra

ight

to

univ

ersi

ty

Did

not

see

he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

, tho

ugh

man

y th

ings

she

co

uld

not d

o du

e to

her

hea

lth

prob

lem

s

DS

A: h

ad h

er

own

com

pute

r so

used

allo

wan

ce

to b

uy s

oftw

are,

as

sess

ed a

s el

igib

le fo

r a n

ote

take

r but

did

n’t

feel

she

nee

ded

one

as s

he

wor

ks a

s a

note

ta

ker h

erse

lf.Li

mite

dkn

owle

dge

of

DD

A

Ext

ra ti

me

for

exam

s,au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n fo

r co

urse

wor

k,sm

all r

oom

for

pres

enta

tions

Enj

oyed

her

cou

rse

and

foun

d tu

tors

he

lpfu

l, th

ough

fo

und

one

asse

ssm

ent

uncl

ear a

nd w

as

not h

appy

with

the

supp

ort f

rom

her

tu

tor i

n th

is m

odul

e

Mor

e in

volv

ed w

ith

disa

bilit

y of

fice

thro

ugh

her j

ob th

an

thro

ugh

her d

isab

ility

st

atus

Live

d in

hal

ls th

en

stud

ent h

ouse

, so

me

prob

lem

s w

ith

acco

mm

odat

ion.

Mos

tly s

ocia

lises

th

roug

h th

e ch

apel

an

d w

ith c

lient

s sh

e no

te ta

kes

for.

Lung

impa

irmen

t pr

eclu

ded

man

y ac

tiviti

es

2:1

Dio

nne

Prim

ary

Edu

catio

n

U. 3

18-2

5, C

rohn

’s

Dis

ease

Non

e, G

irls’

gr

amm

ar s

choo

l, st

arte

d a

nurs

ing

cour

se b

ut h

ad

to le

ave

due

to

perio

d of

illn

ess,

w

orke

d fo

r 6

mon

ths

befo

re

star

ting

teac

hing

de

gree

Was

uns

ure

if sh

e cl

asse

d he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

. Fe

lt he

r im

pairm

ent

impa

cted

on

her

iden

tity

as s

he

felt

so d

iffer

ent

whe

n ill

, bot

h ph

ysic

ally

and

em

otio

nally

No

DS

A, o

nly

hear

d of

the

DD

A in

pas

sing

Had

bee

n w

ell a

t un

iver

sity

so

not

real

ly a

n is

sue,

bu

t tut

ors

save

d no

tes

for h

er if

sh

e ha

s to

mis

s an

y te

achi

ng fo

r ho

spita

lap

poin

tmen

ts

Enj

oyed

her

cl

asse

s, h

ad s

ome

troub

le w

ith m

aths

as

sess

men

ts, a

s ha

ve th

e w

hole

cl

ass,

thou

ght

assi

gnm

ent

desc

riptio

ns c

ould

be

cle

arer

No

cont

act w

ith

disa

bilit

y of

fice

desp

ite d

iscl

osin

g on

ap

plic

atio

n fo

rm.

Had

sp

oken

to h

er y

ear

lead

er, w

ho w

as v

ery

supp

ortiv

e an

d as

sure

d he

r the

y ca

n w

ork

out s

trate

gies

sh

ould

she

nee

d tim

e ou

t for

illn

ess

Sta

yed

livin

g at

ho

me

and

com

mut

ed, s

o th

at

she

coul

d st

ay w

ith

her l

ocal

hos

pita

l.H

ad a

goo

d bu

nch

of fr

iend

s at

uni

an

d of

ten

stay

ed

over

to s

ocia

lise

2:2

BE

d P

rimar

y

Der

mot

Com

putin

g

U. 3

18-2

5, e

pile

psy

Non

e,co

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol a

nd N

VQ

Did

not

see

hi

mse

lf as

di

sabl

ed a

s hi

s co

nditi

on c

omes

an

d go

es.

Not

w

orrie

d ab

out

disc

losi

ng b

ut

wou

ld li

ke it

if it

w

ere

labe

lled

in

a di

ffere

nt w

ay

DS

A: l

apto

p,

voic

e re

cord

er,

mon

ey to

war

ds

inte

rnet

at h

ome,

no

te ta

ker.

Mai

nly

unde

rsto

od D

DA

in

rela

tion

to

wor

k

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s an

d au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n on

as

sign

men

ts

Der

mot

enj

oyed

his

co

urse

but

had

a

perio

d of

illn

ess,

w

hich

left

him

ver

y fa

r beh

ind

in h

is

stud

ies.

He

left

the

univ

ersi

ty n

ot lo

ng

afte

r thi

s

Foun

d di

sabi

lity

offic

e ve

ry h

elpf

ul, a

s w

ere

all h

is tu

tors

Live

s at

hom

e an

d co

mm

utes

, rel

ies

on p

ublic

tran

spor

t an

d hi

s pa

rent

s fo

r lif

ts, h

as a

goo

d so

cial

life

and

is o

n a

univ

ersi

ty s

ports

te

am

With

draw

n in

05

/06

(Yea

r 2)

for f

ull t

ime

empl

oym

ent

37

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 18: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

38

Dal

ia

Mul

timed

ia

U. 3

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

whe

elch

air

user

Was

acc

epte

d at

an

othe

run

iver

sity

but

ha

d no

sup

port

in fi

ndin

g ac

cess

ible

ac

com

mod

atio

nso

re-a

pplie

d to

co

me

here

.A

ttend

edco

mpr

ehen

sive

scho

ol, w

ent t

o si

xth

form

co

llege

a y

ear

early

due

to

acce

ss is

sues

at

her s

choo

l

See

s he

rsel

f as

disa

bled

but

do

esn’

t thi

nk th

is

shou

ld s

top

her

from

doi

ng

anyt

hing

she

w

ants

, ver

y po

litic

ally

aw

are

in te

rms

of

disa

bilit

y

DS

A: c

ompu

ter

and

softw

are,

ha

s ha

d a

lot o

f tro

uble

tryi

ng to

ge

t sup

port

from

LE

A a

fter i

nitia

l as

sess

men

t.G

ood

know

ledg

e of

DD

A

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s an

d au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n on

as

sign

men

ts

Tuto

rs h

ave

been

he

lpfu

l, bu

t she

had

to

dro

p a

core

m

odul

e as

the

lift

brok

e an

d sh

e co

uldn

’t ge

t to

the

clas

sroo

m a

nd n

o al

tern

ativ

e te

achi

ng

was

offe

red

Has

had

lots

of

troub

le in

term

s of

ac

cess

ibili

ty, i

n bo

th

halls

and

get

ting

to

lect

ures

whe

n lif

ts

brea

k. H

ad n

ot fe

lt w

ell s

uppo

rted

in

eith

er o

f the

se a

reas

Live

d in

hal

ls th

en

a st

uden

t hou

se.

Ver

y ac

tive

in

term

s of

bot

h sp

orts

and

the

SU

, bi

g gr

oup

of fr

iend

s

Not

yet

gr

adua

ted

– be

lieve

d on

sa

bbat

ical

with

SU

Dai

sy

Her

itage

and

tour

ism

m

anag

e-m

ent

U. 3

18-2

5, m

iddl

e cl

ass,

vis

ual

impa

irmen

t,dy

slex

ia a

nd

dysp

raxi

a. V

isua

l im

pairm

ent f

rom

bi

rth, o

ther

s di

agno

sed

at

scho

ol, n

ot s

ure

exac

tly w

hen

Non

e, c

ame

stra

ight

from

si

xth

form

Did

n’tm

ind

bein

g de

scrib

ed

as a

dis

able

d st

uden

t but

did

n’t

thin

k of

her

self

as d

isab

led.

B

elie

ved

ever

yone

has

ra

nge

of th

ings

th

ey c

an a

nd

cann

ot d

o

DS

A: l

apto

p,

note

take

rs,

dysl

exia

tuto

r.

Gen

eral

un

ders

tand

ing

of

DD

A a

s an

ti-di

scrim

inat

ion

legi

slat

ion

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s an

d au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n fo

r as

sign

men

ts

Enj

oyed

her

co

urse

, par

ticul

arly

he

r maj

or, w

ould

pr

obab

ly h

ave

chos

en a

diff

eren

t m

inor

with

hi

ndsi

ght.

Tut

ors

gene

rally

hel

pful

, on

e in

par

ticul

ar

very

sup

porti

ve.

Foun

d he

r wee

k of

fie

ldw

ork

for a

m

odul

e ha

rd

with

out a

not

e ta

ker.

Had

trou

ble

with

som

e as

sess

men

ts a

nd

has

had

to h

ave

her n

ote

take

r do

mos

t of o

ne fo

r her

Lots

of c

onta

ct w

ith

disa

bilit

y of

fice,

pro

-ac

tive

in a

rran

ging

su

ppor

t for

her

self

but

slig

htly

ann

oyed

that

sh

e ha

d to

do

so

muc

h he

rsel

f Usi

ng

the

libra

ry v

ery

diffi

cult

due

to h

er

impa

irmen

t

Live

d in

hal

ls th

en

a st

uden

t hou

se,

soci

alis

ed a

lot

thro

ugh

her c

ours

e

2:2

Her

itage

M

anag

emen

tan

d To

uris

m

man

agem

ent

Dav

ina

Hos

pita

lity

man

age-

men

t with

sp

orts

tour

ism

man

age-

men

t

U. 3

18-2

5, d

ysle

xia

Mid

dle

clas

s,P

ublic

sch

ool

Non

e, c

ame

stra

ight

from

si

xth

form

.

Des

crib

edhe

rsel

f as

havi

ng

a le

arni

ng

prob

lem

rath

er

than

a d

iabi

lity,

pr

oud

of h

er

dysl

exia

, thi

nks

it m

akes

her

a

bette

r per

son

DS

A: y

es b

ut

uncl

ear w

hat i

t pa

ys fo

r. L

ittle

kn

owle

dge

of

DD

A.

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s an

d au

tom

atic

exte

nsio

n fo

r as

sign

men

ts

Love

d he

r cou

rse,

pa

rticu

larly

enj

oys

the

prac

tical

el

emen

t, en

joye

d he

r yea

r pla

cem

ent

abro

ad

Had

foun

d ev

eryo

ne

very

sup

porti

ve a

nd

help

ful

Live

d in

hal

ls th

en

a st

uden

t hou

se,

play

s on

a

univ

ersi

ty s

ports

te

am

With

draw

n se

mes

ter 2

07

/08

(Yea

r 3)

Bar

ry

BA

Cer

am-

ics

Mat

ure

(ear

ly 4

0s).

wor

king

cla

ss,

dysl

exia

iden

tifie

d du

ring

first

yea

r

Non

e; n

ight

cl

asse

s in

ce

ram

ics;

left

wor

k th

roug

h

Lack

edco

nfid

ence

-low

be

caus

e of

re

med

ial l

abel

at

DS

A: c

ompu

ter.

Ace

tate

s,S

ome

DD

A

awar

enes

s fro

m

Per

sona

ldy

slex

ia tu

tor;

stic

kers

on

essa

ys.

Enj

oyed

mos

t as

pect

s bu

t fin

ds it

ha

rd to

join

in

disc

ussi

ons

Sup

port

from

dys

lexi

a tu

tor w

as g

ood

but

subj

ect s

taff

didn

’t ha

ve a

nyth

ing

to d

o

Live

d w

ith p

aren

ts

whe

n ill

, but

live

d al

one;

out

side

in

tere

sts

(mar

tial

Rep

eate

dye

ar; n

ot y

et

com

plet

ed;

expe

cted

to

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC

Page 19: Disabled students in higher education: experiences and ... · PDF filein per capita funding. ... divide between disabled and non-disabled students are considered below. ... rates of

U. 4

illne

ss a

nd

appl

ied

to U

.4

Illne

ssdi

agno

sed

durin

g co

urse

bu

t not

dis

clos

ed

scho

ol; d

ysle

xia

com

poun

ded

with

illn

esse

s

job

(sec

ure

hosp

ital)

(no

exam

s on

co

urse

so

time

not a

n is

sue)

with

dys

lexi

a su

ppor

t ar

ts, v

olun

teer

ing

at s

choo

ls)

finis

h in

200

8

Ben

BS

c C

omp-

uter

Gam

es

Dev

elop

-m

ent

U. 4

18-2

5.M

iddl

e cl

ass.

D

ysle

xia.

Iden

tifie

d

by a

unt –

but

pr

imar

y sc

hool

, on

ly a

ccep

ted

this

on

ce i

ndep

ende

nt

asse

ssm

ent (

Bat

h)

carr

ied

out

Cho

se c

ours

e fir

st, t

hen

attra

cted

to

UC

Lan

afte

r “F

lyin

g S

tart”

pr

og. (

+ di

stan

ce

from

hom

e!)

Saw

him

self

as a

‘b

orde

rline

dysl

exic

’. A

ccep

tanc

e of

&

insi

ght i

nto

his

parti

cula

rdy

slex

ic

diffi

culti

es –

(co-

ordi

natio

n,m

emor

y,

spel

ling)

but

re

cogn

ises

stre

ngth

s to

o

DS

A: n

ot a

pplie

d fo

r

DD

A k

now

ledg

e no

t exp

licit

but

good

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

ne

ed to

get

as

sess

ed a

s D

ysle

xic

to b

e ab

le to

get

re

ason

able

adju

stm

ents

Dys

lexi

c al

ert

stic

kers

for

writ

ten

wor

k (in

c ex

ams)

. Ext

ra

time

for e

xam

s bu

t not

co

urse

wor

k

Goo

d. F

irst y

ear

that

cou

rse

has

run.

Mos

t exa

ms

on c

ompu

ter.

Had

de

vise

d ow

n st

rate

gies

to “g

et

roun

d” d

iffic

ultie

s w

ith

mem

ory/

read

ing/

sp

ellin

g. O

ften

rece

ived

not

es in

ad

vanc

e (p

oste

d on

web

)

Wel

l sup

porte

d. A

ble

to a

ppro

ach

teac

hing

st

aff f

or h

elp

– th

ough

th

is is

gen

eral

hel

p no

t dis

abili

ty-r

elat

ed

help

. Fel

t his

cou

rse

was

wel

l sui

ted

to h

is

patte

rn o

f stre

ngth

s an

d w

eakn

esse

s

Live

d in

sha

red

hous

e w

ith m

ates

. E

njoy

ed b

eing

par

t of

gro

up –

incl

udin

g w

hen

wor

king

. Te

ased

for h

is

spel

ling

but n

ot

both

ered

by

this

‘Eve

ryon

e’s

teas

ed

for s

omet

hing

!’

Upp

er s

econ

d

Bel

la

BA

Hon

s A

ctin

g

U. 4

18-2

5W

orki

ng c

lass

D

ysle

xia.

Iden

tifie

d so

me

time

at

scho

ol.

Rea

sses

sed

on

entry

BTe

c N

at D

ip in

P

erfo

rmin

g A

rts

in c

olle

ge. T

hen

gap

year

in

Am

eric

a

Acc

epte

dth

atsh

e ha

d di

fficu

lties

with

re

adin

g sp

ellin

g an

d m

emor

y bu

t w

ould

pre

fer i

f pe

ople

did

n’t u

se

this

to a

ffect

de

cisi

ons

abou

t as

sign

ing

task

s to

her

DS

A: c

ompu

ter

(but

it a

rriv

ed

late

). D

DA

aw

aren

ess

very

ha

zy

Som

etim

esgi

ven

note

s du

ring/

afte

rle

ctur

e (m

ore

so

as c

ours

e pr

ogre

ssed

)P

erso

nal t

utor

on

ce a

wee

k

Gen

eral

ly g

ood

but

diffi

culti

es w

ith

sigh

t rea

ding

&

lear

ning

scr

ipts

(p

oor m

emor

y).

Cou

rse

has

no

writ

ten

exam

s

Aca

dem

ic s

taff

gene

rally

sup

porti

ve

but s

he fe

lt sh

e so

met

imes

mis

sed

out o

n bi

g pa

rts

beca

use

of h

er

dysl

exia

Live

d in

sha

red

acco

mm

odat

ion

with

oth

er s

tude

nts.

S

tude

nt re

p in

fina

l ye

ar

Low

er s

econ

d

Bra

ndon

BS

c C

omp-

uter

-aid

eden

gine

-ee

ring

U. 4

18-2

5. S

kille

d w

orki

ng c

lass

. D

ysle

xia

iden

tifie

d at

age

6

FE c

olle

ge th

en

Rus

sell

Gro

up

uni b

ut le

ft –

cour

se d

idn’

t sui

t

Pra

gmat

ic(b

utcy

nica

l) ab

out

disa

bled

labe

l bu

t cle

arly

saw

hi

mse

lf as

so

meo

ne w

ith

read

ing/

writ

ing

diffi

culti

es

DS

A –

com

pute

r fro

m p

revi

ous

uni.

DD

A

know

ledg

e sk

etch

y

Ext

ra ti

me

in

exam

s (in

a

sepa

rate

room

); su

ppor

t tut

or;

flexi

bilit

y w

ith

subm

issi

on o

f as

sign

men

ts(ti

min

g, d

ysle

xia-

aler

t lab

els)

.

Gen

eral

ly p

ositi

ve.

Stil

l fou

nd re

adin

g ph

ysic

ally

ex

haus

ting.

Han

dout

s us

eful

(n

ote-

taki

ngdi

fficu

lt)

Som

e ac

adem

ic s

taff

supp

ortiv

e, o

ther

s m

ore

diffi

cult

to

enga

ge w

ith, n

ot

sym

path

etic

/und

erst

and

ing

Live

d on

his

ow

n.

Sm

all g

roup

of

supp

ortiv

e fri

ends

; sp

ent w

eeke

nds

away

on

stea

m

engi

ne w

ork

Rep

eate

dye

ar s

o no

t fin

ishi

ng ti

ll 20

08

Bill

y

BA

(hon

s)

Mul

timed

ia&

Son

ic

Arts

U. 4

30s.

Wor

king

cla

ss

– pa

rent

s dr

ug

addi

cts.

Mob

ility

im

paire

d(p

rost

hetic

leg,

da

mag

ed h

ands

). In

jurie

s oc

curr

ed a

s a

resu

lt of

dru

g ad

dict

ion

15 y

ears

of

hero

in a

ddic

tion

(now

reco

verin

g - n

ot d

ecla

red)

. H

ad tr

ied

to g

et

on m

usic

co

urse

s in

FE

co

llege

but

un

succ

essf

ul

Acc

epte

dhi

sm

obili

ty

limita

tions

and

hi

s st

atus

as

an

ex-u

ser.

Pre

ferr

ed to

be

inde

pend

ent –

di

dn’t

like

to b

e di

ffere

nt –

foun

d th

e la

bel o

f di

sabl

ed‘a

mus

ing’

DLA

& D

SA

(h

elp

with

buy

ing

com

pute

r,ph

otoc

opyi

ng,

ink

cartr

idge

s vi

a di

sabi

lity

offic

e –

didn

’t no

w th

is

was

DS

A)

No

know

ledg

e of

D

DA

Som

ene

gotia

tions

ove

r fie

ldw

ork

– us

ing

bike

to g

et to

si

tes,

hel

p w

ith

carr

ying

eq

uipm

ent i

n th

e be

ginn

ing.

Oth

erw

ise

no

adju

stm

ents

need

ed

Gen

eral

ly p

ositi

ve

– pr

oble

ms

with

on

e le

ctur

er w

ho

mad

e no

co

nces

sion

s to

kn

owle

dge

of

stud

ents

but

sam

e fo

r all

stud

ents

not d

isab

ility

re

late

d

Had

foun

d st

aff –

ac

adem

ic a

nd li

brar

y,

stor

es –

sup

porti

ve –

lik

ed th

e fa

ct th

at th

ey

treat

ed h

im th

e sa

me

as o

ther

stu

dent

s –

foun

d it

easy

to a

sk

for h

elp

whe

n he

ne

eded

it b

ut

pref

erre

d th

is to

pe

ople

mak

ing

him

a

spec

ial c

ase

Sin

gle

(now

). Li

ved

in a

flat

by

him

self

but “

Nee

ds to

be

arou

nd p

eopl

e” –

go

ing

to u

ni h

as

help

ed h

ere

– pr

evio

usly

qui

te

isol

ated

. In

volv

ed

in v

olun

tary

wor

k ar

ound

dru

g ad

dict

ion

Upp

er s

econ

d

39

To cite this output: Fuller, Mary et al (2008). Enhancing the Quality and Outcomes of Disabled Students' Learning in Higher Education: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-139-25-0135. Swindon: ESRC


Recommended