Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Learning disabilities – South Africa – Ekurhuleni.
Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Learning disabilities – South Africa – Ekurhuleni“
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-33 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Learning disabilities – South Africa – Ekurhuleni" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Maboe, Motlhabane Jacobus. „Comparison of Students Using Electronic Learning Website of the University of South Africa“. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments 10, Nr. 1 (Januar 2020): 24–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijvple.2020010102.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
It is almost impossible to perform academic activities, such as accessing study material or contacting lecturers and other teaching and learning processes, at an open distance learning institution without the use of computers and the internet. This article investigates and reports on the time taken by students with and without disabilities to complete certain tasks using the University of South Africa's learning management systems (LMS). The findings of the study indicate that the time taken by students with disabilities to finish tasks is much longer compared to the students without disabilities. The study established that well-developed e-learning platforms guarantee efficient and effective use by both students with and without disabilities. The study suggests that it is significant for all LMS stakeholders to be involved in the development of e-learning websites. This is to ensure that accessibility and usability of these websites are adhered to during the development of e-learning websites.
2
Manase, Ndakaitei. „Disguised Blessings amid Covid‑19: Opportunities and Challenges for South African University Students with Learning Disabilities“. Journal for Students Affairs in Africa 9, Nr. 1 (31.05.2021): 107–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v9i1.1431.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Covid‑19 pandemic has led to changes from traditional face-to-face teaching and learning to online systems. These changes have resulted in a concerted focus by local and international scholars on how some students are disadvantaged from accessing pedagogy due to a lack of resources and supportive living conditions that enable meaningful off‑campus learning. Simultaneously, disabilities in higher education is getting international attention, too, highlighting how students with disabilities are vulnerable to further exclusions and mental health problems. This article focuses on the pedagogical arrangements during the Covid‑19 pandemic and the challenges and opportunities associated with online and remote learning for university students with learning disabilities. The article draws on the narratives of fifteen students with learning disabilities from a university in South Africa. An analysis of students’ narratives within the Capability Approach’s concept of conversion factors revealed how circumstances could enable or constrain students’ abilities to achieve what they value in higher education. Students’ narratives show that they engage better with online and remote learning despite some notable challenges. In conclusion, the pedagogical arrangements aimed at alleviating the disruptions caused by the Covid‑19 pandemic can address the unmet educational needs of students with learning disabilities even though they have to overcome specific barriers.
3
Lange, Samantha Louise, Tobias George Barnard und Nisha Naicker. „Effect of a simple intervention on hand hygiene related diseases in preschools in South Africa: research protocol for an intervention study“. BMJ Open 9, Nr. 12 (Dezember 2019): e030656. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030656.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
IntroductionHand hygiene (HH) related illnesses such as diarrhoea and respiratory diseases, contribute to the burden of disease and are included in the top five causes of mortality in children under 5 years in South Africa. Children attending preschools are more susceptible to these infections due to the higher number of children in preschools. HH interventions have shown to reduce HH-related diseases by improving HH practices. In South Africa, there are no documented HH interventions or studies in children under 5 years. The purpose of the study is to determine whether an HH intervention can reduce HH-related diseases among 4–5-year-old preschool children and to improve HH practices in these children, their caregivers and their parents.Methodology and analysisThis is a protocol for a controlled intervention study to be conducted at preschools in Kempton Park, City of Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, South Africa. Preschools will be randomly distributed into control and experimental groups (n=70). The intervention includes interactive simulation learning, educational emails and education and poster reminders obtained from the WHO and the Global Handwashing Day website. Data collection, including the intervention, will take place during the calendar year as this coincides with the school year. Data will be analysed both preintervention and postintervention in the experimental group as well as between the experimental and control group. Data collected by means of questionnaires, observations, disease registers, hygiene inspections, semi-structured interviews and hand swabs will be analysed to determine these outcomes.Ethics and disseminationPermission has been obtained from the University of Johannesburg Ethics Committee and Ministerial Consent for Non-Therapeutic Research on Minors from the Department of Health National Ethics Research Council. Permissions for use of copyright protected materials has been obtained. Results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, and feedback within relevant structures through conference proceedings.
4
Dickman, Beverley Jo, und Amanda Jane Roux. „Complainants with learning disabilities in sexual abuse cases: a 10-year review of a psycho-legal project in Cape Town, South Africa“. British Journal of Learning Disabilities 33, Nr. 3 (September 2005): 138–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3156.2005.00355.x.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
5
Ngubane-Mokiwa, Sindile A., und Simon Bheki Khoza. „Using Community of Inquiry (CoI) to Facilitate the Design of a Holistic E-Learning Experience for Students with Visual Impairments“. Education Sciences 11, Nr. 4 (29.03.2021): 152. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040152.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools provide an ideal mechanism by which students can interact closely with their lecturers in an open distance learning (ODL) context. This is especially true for students with disabilities who require access through alternative formats. This paper demonstrates teaching and learning practices in an ODL institution in South Africa, with a focus on the indispensable role of lecturers and tutors in an online learning setting. The paper employs the Community of Inquiry, which sees the effective online learning environment through three elements: cognitive, social, and teaching presence. The findings shed light on the use of vision-based approaches in course design; limited implementation of open-access policies, and the academic faculty’s lack of knowledge on how to facilitate inclusive learning. The paper concludes by presenting a proposed student-centred framework that seeks to facilitate inclusive teaching and learning towards positive and inclusive learning experiences for students. The proposed framework could be beneficial during pandemic situations.
6
Subrayen, Roshanthni, und Rubby Dhunpath. „A snapshot of the chalkboard writing experiences of Bachelor of Education students with visual disabilities in South Africa“. African Journal of Disability 8 (24.07.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.523.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: South African higher education policy frameworks highlight renewed interest in equity, access and participation imperatives for students with disabilities (SWDs). However, students with visual disabilities continue to face barriers in their teaching practice school placements.Objectives: This article aims, firstly, to provide early insights into the barriers experienced by students with visual disabilities in their teaching practice school placements in under-resourced schools in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Secondly, it introduces learning communities and a teaching practice pre-placement booklet to enhance equity, access and participation in teaching practice school placements.Method: This study adopted a qualitative methodology using semi-structured interviews to elicit data from two Bachelor of Education students with visual disabilities, who were part of a teaching practice learning community managed by the Disability Unit at the University. Thematic analysis was used, using Tinto’s Learning Community Model which generated valuable evidence to argue for institutional commitment to achieve equity, access and participation for students with visual disabilities.Results: Through engagement with a teaching practice learning community and a teaching practice pre-placement booklet, two students with visual disabilities responded to and managed the chalkboard in ways that promoted teaching and learning in the classroom. These retention support trajectories provide evidence to support enhanced equity, access and participation. Given the stigma associated with disability and the need for equity at policy level, higher education institutions should seriously consider systemic mechanisms for access, participation and success outcomes in the teaching practice school placements of students with visual disabilities.Conclusion: Barriers to participation signal the need for accessible teaching and learning strategies for use by students with visual disabilities in their teaching practice school placements. Teaching practice assessors should be alerted to contextual differences in resourced and under-resourced school settings and the diverse ways in which SWDs navigate these differences.
7
Ndlovu, Sibonokuhle. „Access into professional degrees by students with disabilities in South African higher learning: A decolonial perspective“. African Journal of Disability 8 (10.06.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.514.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Former historically disadvantaged social groups such as women, black people and those with disabilities are expected to participate in the skilled labour force that South Africa has pledged to produce for the 21st century. However, in the South African context, research widely neglects access of those into professional degrees in higher learning. There is a need for such an exploration because people with disabilities have been found to be excluded from professional employment.Objectives: Using decolonial theory, this empirical study sought to explore obstacles confronted by students with disabilities at entry in a specific institution of higher learning in South Africa. The aim was to unveil the invisible obstacles and their causes for an effective intervention.Method: A qualitative research design was adopted and in-depth interviews were conducted to collect data from the participants. This particular dimension of research method was chosen to enable dialogue and development of partnership, which is important for collecting rich data.Results: While policies of inclusion still enabled access of all students into professional degrees, there were however inequitable practices, alienation and inequality that excluded students with disabilities at entry. Obstacles seen at surface level were not the real ones; the real ones were the deep-seated issues of coloniality.Conclusion: If the underlying causes of obstacles at entry are not visible to students with disabilities themselves and the responsible stakeholders, students might continue to be oppressed on entry into the professional degrees and in higher learning generally. Obstacles can only be dismantled when there is an awareness about their deep-seated causes.
8
Van Reenen, Coralie, und Catherine Karusseit. „Classroom acoustics as a consideration for inclusive education in South Africa“. South African Journal of Communication Disorders 64, Nr. 1 (08.09.2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v64i1.550.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: It can hardly be disputed that a school environment should be conducive or, at the very least, not prohibitive to effective learning. The provision of fair, equal and barrier-free access to education is referred to as inclusive education. South Africa supports a policy of inclusive schooling, striving to accommodate all children, including those with disabilities, in mainstream schools. This article sets out to prove that noise control in classrooms is a relevant, yet neglected, aspect of inclusive classroom design in South Africa and requires specific attention.Objectives: The objectives of this study are to: (1) establish the impact that noise has on learners with sensory, language or learning impairments; (2) establish the preferred listening conditions for these learners by examining prior research and guidelines available in other countries; and (3) outline the current South African regulations pertaining to classroom acoustics and assess them against the preferred listening environment.Method: This research was conducted as a systematic review with reference to the South African context. Local and international research and guidelines were used as references, providing an overview and evaluation of data concerning noise and learning.Results: Noise is disadvantageous for learners, particularly those with sensory, language or learning impairments. Research and international guidelines show that the ideal ambient level is 30 dBA – 35 dBA, allowing the achievement of an ideal signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +15 dB, and the ideal reverberation time is 0.4 s – 0.6 s. Various South African regulations discussed are inconsistent regarding ambient noise level (ranging from 35 dBA – 50 dBA) and say little about reverberation time for classrooms.Conclusion: South African regulations regarding classroom acoustics require revision to ensure inclusion of all learners with disabilities. The current status does not enforce barrier-free environments in mainstream schools for children with sensory, language or learning impairments.
9
Hove, Nilford. „The Effectiveness of Special Schools in the Teaching of Children with Learning Disabilities in South Africa“. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 01.09.2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n20p1903.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
10
Ngubane-Mokiwa, S. A., und J. N. Zongozzi. „Exclusion Reloaded: The Chronicles of Covid-19 on Students with Disabilities in a South African Open Distance Learning Context“. Journal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment, 26.02.2021, 137–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2021.09.01.17.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Students with disabilities have been going through different forms of discrimination and exclusion. These include inaccessible learning materials and learning platforms, negative attitudes from lecturers, fellow students and more. This paper comes from a qualitative study that sought to explore how Covid-19 deepened these educational inequalities at an Open Distance Learning institution in South Africa. The results of the study reveal that institutions of higher learning had to quickly adjust their teaching and assessment to online mode. This led to heightened exclusion of students with disabilities as their examinations had to be postponed to second semester due to lack of preparations for special examinations. Students also reported experiencing extra pressure as they had to write double the examinations at the end of the year. Some students reported lack of access to assistive technologies which they normally borrow from the library, this was because the Post Office was not operating during the National Lockdown Level 5. The novel nature of Covid-19 is such that the real barriers it caused on people and students with disabilities in particular and it will keep revealing itself gradually. This paper ends by making recommendations on how an ODL institution could accommodate the needs of students with disabilities to enhance their learning experiences during pandemics or natural disasters.
11
Ndlovu, Sibonokuhle, und Elizabeth Walton. „Preparation of students with disabilities to graduate into professions in the South African context of higher learning: Obstacles and opportunities“. African Journal of Disability 5, Nr. 1 (19.02.2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v5i1.150.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Persons with disabilities continue to be excluded from professions in South Africa despite legislation on non-discrimination and equity. Objectives: We sought to identify both the opportunities and obstacles that students with disabilities face in professional degrees. Method: Selected texts from the South African and international literature were analysed and synthesised. Results: Students with disabilities are afforded opportunities to graduate into professions through the current climate of transformation, inclusion and disability policies, various support structures and funding. These opportunities are mitigated by obstacles at both the higher education site and at the workplace. At university, they may experience difficulties in accessing the curriculum, disability units may be limited in the support they can offer, policies may not be implemented, funding is found to be inadequate and the built environment may be inaccessible. Fieldwork poses additional obstacles in terms of public transport which is not accessible to students with disabilities; a lack of higher education support extended to the field sites, and buildings not designed for access by people with disabilities. At both sites, students are impacted by negative attitudes and continued assumptions that disability results from individual deficit, rather than exclusionary practices and pressures. Conclusion: It is in the uniqueness of professional preparation, with its high demands of both theory and practice that poses particular obstacles for students with disabilities. We argue for the development of self-advocacy for students with disabilities, ongoing institutional and societal transformation and further research into the experiences of students with disabilities studying for professional degrees.
12
Dalton, Elizabeth M., Marcia Lyner-Cleophas, Britt T. Ferguson und Judith McKenzie. „Inclusion, universal design and universal design for learning in higher education: South Africa and the United States“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.07.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.519.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Around the world, institutions of higher education are recognising their responsibilities to achieve the full inclusion of individuals with differing needs and/or disabilities. The frameworks of universal design (UD) and universal design for learning (UDL) offer unique ways to build inclusiveness in our systems. The role of UD and UDL to strengthen successful inclusion of persons with differing needs in higher education programmes is presented from literature, inclusive of national and international policies and resources. Examples from South African and US institutions of higher learning are shared. Discussions of online accessibility, environmental issues, professional development, barriers to inclusion and recommendations for future development in an international context provide a vision for developing inclusive learning environments in higher education.
13
Vergunst, Richard, Judith McKenzie und Anthea Hansen. „Capacity building for quality care and education for children with severe to profound intellectual disabilities in South Africa“. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 16.06.2021, 174462952110185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17446295211018584.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the South African context, children with severe to profound intellectual disabilities are not accommodated in the compulsory education system, although steps are being taken in this direction in acknowledgement of their right to education. Critical to this development is the training of educators and caregivers. There is a paucity of studies from South Africa addressing the training of educators and caregivers. The Teacher Empowerment for Disability Inclusion (TEDI) project developed a course on the education and care of children with severe to profound intellectual disabilities to facilitate and empower teachers to provide quality education for these learners. This paper explores, through a qualitative analysis, the ways in which 30 participants attending this course developed professionally and personally. The findings show that there was personal as well as professional learning in the areas of disability approaches, collaboration, advocacy, self-care, and confidence. These findings are discussed and future implications are addressed.
14
Tekane, Rethabile, und Marietjie Potgieter. „Insights from training a blind student in biological sciences“. South African Journal of Science 117, Nr. 5/6 (28.05.2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2021/8607.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Higher education institutions have a constitutional obligation to provide reasonable accommodation to students with disabilities. Although the teaching and learning of students with blindness and low vision in STEM disciplines are well documented abroad, to date, there are no published studies in South Africa on successful teaching and learning strategies for students with blindness and low vision in STEM fields, specifically in science disciplines. Therefore, in this paper, we report on how teaching, learning, and assessment were adapted to make science disciplines accessible to John, a blind student enrolled in a biological sciences degree at a research-intensive university in South Africa. Several factors contributed towards the successful completion of John’s bachelor’s degree. These factors include the availability of tutors who committed a large amount of time to help John understand content presented in lectures, tutorials, and practical sessions; a well-resourced and effective Disability Unit; lecturers who ensured that John was well accommodated in lectures, tutorials, and practical sessions; and, finally, John’s commitment and dedication towards learning.
15
MacLachlan, Mac, Mutamad Amin, Gubela Mji, Hasheem Mannan, Joanne McVeigh, Eilish McAuliffe, Elina Amadhila, Alister Munthali, Arne H. Eide und A. Kudakwashe Dube. „Learning from doing the EquitAble project: Content, context, process, and impact of a multi-country research project on vulnerable populations in Africa“. African Journal of Disability 3, Nr. 2 (06.10.2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v3i2.89.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: The ‘EquitAble’ project carried out content analyses of policies and collected and analysed qualitative and quantitative data concerning access to health services in Sudan, Malawi, Namibia and South Africa. Our particular concern was to address the situation of people with disabilities, although not in isolation from other marginalised or vulnerable groups.Objectives: This article reports on the content, context, process and impact of project EquitAble, funded by the European Commission Seventh Research Framework Programme, which brought together researchers from Ireland, Norway, South Africa, Namibia, Sudan and Malawi.Method: After the 4-year project ended in February 2013, all members of the consortium were asked to anonymously complete a bespoke questionnaire designed by the coordinating team. The purpose of the questionnaire was to capture the views of those who collaborated on the research project in relation to issues of content, context, process and impact of the EquitAble project.Results: Our results indicated some of the successes and challenges encountered by our consortium.Conclusion: We identified contextual and process learning points, factors often not discussed in papers, which typically focus on the reporting of the ‘content’ of results.
16
Mosito, Cina P., Albert M. Warnick und Emmanuel E. Esambe. „Enhancing reading abilities of learners with intellectual impairments through computer technology“. African Journal of Disability 6 (24.07.2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v6i0.206.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Developments in the teaching of children with disabilities support pedagogy that emphasises learners’ strengths as opposed to their assumed deficiencies. Educators and mediators who advocate this view continually strive for tools and methodologies that enhance learner participation in academic environments. Computer technology is one of the tools recognised for its potential to enrich learning experiences of learners with an intellectual impairment.Objectives: We sought to assess the influence of text-to-speech stories on the reading ability of intellectually challenged learners.Method: A qualitative action research study that involves learners at a special school in Cape Town, South Africa. Pre- and post-test data of the reading performance of learners are analysed with a focus on how they demonstrate change.Results: Although no claims can be made about the explicit influence on reading performance, computer-assisted learning has the potential in isolating reading processes that classroom-based interventions can address. In addition, computers enhance motivation and enthusiasm to learn.Conclusion: A need for education based on inclusion and positive differentiation remains the key driver in any educational interventions.
17
Mbuvha, Tshifhiwa. „Kinds of Support Offered by the Disability Unit to Students with Disabilities at Institutions of Higher Learning in South Africa: A Case Study of the University of Venda“. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa 7, Nr. 2 (18.12.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.24085/jsaa.v7i2.3825.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
18
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v4i1.602.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
19
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v5i1.563.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
20
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v6i0.591.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
21
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v6i0.610.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
22
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v7i0.518.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
23
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v7i0.546.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
24
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v7i0.555.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
25
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v7i0.598.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
26
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v7i0.616.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
27
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.336.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
28
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.491.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
29
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.503.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
30
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.561.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
31
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.612.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
32
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.690.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.
33
Chiwandire, Desire, und Louise Vincent. „Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities“. African Journal of Disability 8 (29.01.2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v8i0.691.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Background: Historically, challenges faced by students with disabilities (SWDs) in accessing higher education institutions (HEIs) were attributed to limited public funding. The introduction of progressive funding models such as disability scholarships served to widen access to, and participation in, higher education for SWDs. However, recent years have seen these advances threatened by funding cuts and privatisation in higher education.Objectives: In this article, the funding mechanisms of selected developed and developing democratic countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, South Africa and India are described in order to gain an insight into how such mechanisms enhance access, equal participation, retention, success and equality of outcome for SWDs. The countries selected are often spoken about as exemplars of best practices in relation to widening access and opportunities for SWDs through government mandated funding mechanisms. Method: A critical literature review of the sample countries’ funding mechanisms governing SWDs in higher education and other relevant government documents; secondary academic literature on disability funding; online sources including University World News, University Affairs, newspaper articles, newsletters, literature from bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Disabled World and Parliamentary Monitoring Group. Data were analysed using a theoretically derived directed qualitative content analysis.Results: Barriers which place SWDs at a substantial educational disadvantage compared to their non-disabled peers include bureaucratisation of application processes, cuts in disability funding, means-test requirements, minimal scholarships for supporting part-time and distance learning for SWDs and inadequate financial support to meet the day-to-day costs that arise as a result of disability.Conclusion: Although the steady increase of SWDs accessing HEIs of the sampled countries have been attributed to supportive disability funding policies, notable is the fact that these students are still confronted by insurmountable disability funding-oriented barriers. Thus, we recommend the need for these HEIs to address these challenges as a matter of urgency if they are to respect the rights of SWDs as well as provide them with an enabling environment to succeed academically.