Culminating Thoughts

Initial Assumptions

The initial assumptions that I had about students with disabilities may be the very assumptions that negatively affect the campus environment for those students. Without an understanding of the needs of students, campuses will not be prepared to give the services that they need. Strange (2000) explains that the expanding enrollment of students with disabilities at institutions of higher education provides a challenge for not only the students with disabilities but also those who seek to include them (p. 19). Initially I sided with students with mental illness and physical disabilities, assuming that some people with learning disables tend to receive more help from services that they need. With the research I have done, I have found that these are the very assumptions that create an unwelcoming campus environment for students with disabilities. Regardless of whether or not my assumptions are true, thinking this way will only create an environment in which all students with learning disabilities may want to hide their disability and not receive the services they need. Disability is a socially constructed term that is reinforced by the physical environment, the human aggregate, and the organizational structure of the institution. These factors add up to create the overall campus culture that is either perceived as welcoming or unwelcoming. In terms of students with disabilities, it tends to stray towards the latter. The number of students with disabilities entering higher education will only continue to grow with veterans from the war returning to school, and technological, and health advancements that will allow students to go further in school. It is important to work with institutions of higher education and rid them of the negative assumptions that I carried, and work to create an inclusive environment that has the services needed by students with disabilities.

General Information

For this project, I defined students with disabilities as those with a physical disability, a learning disability, and/or mental illnesses. In 1996, roughly six percent of undergraduate students reported having a disability (Hurst & Smerdon, 1996). With this number only increasing, the need to an inclusive campus environment and services is only become more important. The data of Hurst and Smerdon (1996) includes students with physical and learning disabilities with the highest percentage (29%) having learning disabilities, followed closely by physical disabilities (23%) (p. 55). The average age of people with disabilities is higher and there tend to be more services provided by public institutions rather than private. The number of students with mental illness enrolling in higher education is also on a rise (Eudaly, 2002). With only 10% reporting having a mental illness, as high as 64% of students report feeling emotionally exhausted (Eudaly, 2002, p. 2). Eudaly (2002) gave several factors for why we are seeing an increase: mental illness is more popular in the general population and advancement in pharmacological treatment is allowing more people with serious mental illness to embark on college careers (p. 2)

Physical

The physical environment is the very first thing that a student interacts with upon coming to a campus. Although I believe the human aggregate and campus culture play the largest role in how welcome and included a student feels on a campus, the physical environment, especially with students that have physical disabilities, plays an essential role of feeling safe on campus. The physical environment can send symbolic non-verbal messages and can encourage or limit the interactions within an environment (Strange & Banning, 2001). Strange (2000), cites Maslow’s model of human development and motivation stating “the basic needs of all humans form a hierarchy, beginning with physical, safety, belonging and love needs, and progressing upwards towards needs of self esteem” (p. 23).

The physical environment is the first step in ensuring a basic need of physical safety, especially in those with physical disabilities. However, the physical environment also plays a role in students with mental illness, and learning disabilities as well. For example, environmental accommodations for students with panic/anxiety disorders and allowing them preferential seating in a certain area of the class room and be the difference between feeling safe or out of place (Eudaly, 2002). Low (1996) explains that students with visual impairments may use landmarks to navigate an area and when these landmarks change, it can be detrimental for the student. From my personal communications with students, Kathy mentioned flyers around campus that advertised for free mental health screenings (K. Smith, email communication, November 12, 2011). Having something as simple as flyers in the physical environment gives a nonverbal message to the students that the institution cares about students with mental illness.

Human Aggregate

The human aggregate is the collective characteristics of people in an environment and the quality of a person’s experience in the environment is related to how congruent they are with the majority of the group (Strange, 2000). When an individual is in an incompatible environment they are less likely to be positively reinforced and is more likely to leave. As I stated with the physical environment, safety and inclusion is extremely important for the individual to thrive in a particular environment. According to the minority group paradigm (Jones, 1996) those who are of the numerical minority usually feel less welcome on campus. Jones (1996) explains that the social construction perspective is based on understanding that what is believed about people with disabilities is based on meanings given to disabilities by those who do not. The attitudes that are formed about the disabled by the human aggregate of the institution are what turn characteristics in to handicaps.

In regards to students with physical disabilities the visible nature of the disability itself causes people that are a part of the institution to avoid interacting with them (Low, 1996). During my personal communication with Rob, I found that I was interacting with his interpreter more than I was interacting with him and he found that this was a trend with many people (R. Smith, personal communication, September 20, 2011). As I continue College Student Personnel program and through this project, I hope that I will gain tools to help me to better interact so I am more inclusive and inviting. As for the students I communicated with that had learning disabilities, there were two oppositional themes: faculty were extremely accommodating or they were unhelpful and condescending (E. Smith, email communication, October 19, 2011; L. Smith, email communication, October 19, 2011). When Eric talked to his instructors about his learning disability he stated they he felt they looked down on him (E. Smith, email communication, October 19, 2011). From that moment on Eric chose to hide his disability, which can be detrimental to the student because they are not receiving the services they need. However, Lindsey was able to be open about her disability and has been able to receive the services she needs, giving a much more positive view of her institution (L. Smith, email communication). Students with mental illness run into yet another set of unique ways that the human aggregate interacts with them. When teachers are informed about certain mental illness, they may become fearful for classroom safety, because they are misinformed (Eudaly, 2002). Learning disabilities and mental illness are often invisible and students need to prove themselves to be sick or disabled; a process that his demeaning and stressful for some students. For example, Kathy had to prove her mental illness to a teacher before she was able to make up an assignment (K. Smith, personal communication, October 19, 2011). I believe that the human aggregate is the key components in how a student with disabilities perceives the environment. If a student has a negative experience with another person in the environment, this negativity will overpower the services that the school provides. Again, disability is socially constructed, and without the human aggregate to socially construct it, the campus climate would be very different. The human aggregate is a key component to making a student feel safe and included on campus.

Organizational

A main element of the organizational structure is governance, or “structures and processes through which institutional participants interact with and influence each other and communicate with the larger environment” (Birnbaum, 1988, p. 4). Birnbaum (1998) explains that the main element of the organizational structure is governance, or “structures and processes through which institutional participants interact with and influence each other and communicate with the larger environment” (p. 4). When looking at the organizational structure of an institution, the most important aspect is to understand the institutional mission. If the institutional mission is inclusive then the rest of the services and programs will likely follow because the mission guides the decision making of the members within the institution (Barr, 2000, p. 26).The mission guides how resources within the institution are utilized, what programs are implemented, and is the guiding force in all decision making processes within the institution (Stemler, Bebell, & Sonnabend, 2010, p. 384). Wilson, Getzel, and Brown (2000) emphasized the importance of selecting a disability friendly campus. When the organizational structure chooses to emphasize the importance of programs and services geared towards students with disabilities, one would assume that the campus climate would be more supportive. However, this was found to not always be the case. Just because institutions are providing programming and services for students with disabilities, this does not mean that the human aggregate at the institution is any more inform or inviting (Wilson, Getzel, and Brown, 2000, p. 37).

Campus Climate

Culture is understood as a way of thinking and behaving that is common among all that a part of that culture, and holds it together (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 9-10). When I think of campus culture, especially when trying to understanding how students with disabilities perceive this environment, I believe it is influenced in most part, but the human aggregate. If the mission of the institution is inclusive to students with disabilities, organizational structure will operate under this assumption and follow suit. If an institution’s goal is to be all inclusive, the physical environment will follow. However, whether this is successful comes down to whether the human aggregate is made up of people that are accepting of students with disabilities. Strange (2000) explains that "socially constructed components reflect the subjective views of social constructions of environmental participants" (p. 22). The perceptions are what guide the behaviors of those within the environment. There are three levels of culture: artifacts, values, and basic assumptions and beliefs (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 16). The third level of culture, basic assumptions and beliefs is often referred to as “the core of culture” (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 23) Kuh and Whit (2006) explain that these assumptions are “learned responses to threats to institutional survival” and influence “what people think about, what they perceive to be important, how they feel about things, and what they do” (pp. 23-24). I believe that the third level is the guiding force that shapes the campus culture, and if it is accepting and understanding of students with disabilities, the other two levels will follow. According to Strange (2000), weak social climate relationship might create an unperceptive environment for anyone who requests special care and concern" (p. 25).

Future Implications

A new way of understanding students with disabilities is needed in higher education. We need to challenge the assumptions upon which the current definition exists and broaden our perspectives to the experiences of those with disabilities (Jones, 1996). To better understand students with disabilities we must use a social constructivist perspective. Much of the research about students with disabilities has been done by those who do not have a disability. Upcraft and Schuh (1996) explain that environmental assessment determines and evaluates how the various elements and conditions of the college campus affect student learning and growth. It is important to continue to assess how students with disabilities perceive the campus environment and make efforts to improve their experiences. Much of the research on students with disabilities is qualitative, which can yield rich data, but cannot be quantified. Student affairs professionals must work on creating scales that are more quantifiable to reach a larger representative sample of the population (Upcraft & Schuh, 1996). Another aspect that student affairs professionals should focus on is exploring disability as a social construction rather than a characteristic of the individual. By choosing to view disabilities in that manner, it encourages inclusive theory building and values the experiences of these individuals (Jones, 1996). Through the personal communications I had with students with disabilities I was able to see the broad range of experiences each individual has. Much of these experiences were based on the interactions they had with others. These interactions will give a basis for how each student will react in a similar situation. If a student was given inclusive treatment, they will feel more comfortable asking for help in the future, but if their experience was negative they will be less likely to try to receive in the future. In the end, it is in the hands of student affairs professionals to try to understand students with disabilities through a social constructivist perspective to try to create more positive interactions, thus creating a more inclusive environment.

Complete Reference List

References

Barr, M. J. (2000). The importance of the institutional mission. In M. J. Barr & M. K. Desler (Eds.), The handbook of student affairs administration (2nd ed.; pp. 25-36). San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and
leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Ch. 1-3, pp. 1-81).

Dolson, J. (2002). AHEAD: Association of higher education and disability. Retrieved from
http://www.ahead.org/.

Durham College. (2011, August 11). Durham College: Center for Students with Disabilities
(CSD) [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvqRxvmxZg0&
feature=player_embedded

Edmonds, C.D. (2004). Providing access to students with disabilities in online distance
education: Legal and technical concerns for higher education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18, 51-62.

Eudaly, J. (2002). A rising tide: Students with psychiatric disabilities seek services in record
numbers. Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://www.heath.gwu.edu/files/active/0/
psychiatric_ disabilities.pdf

Hurst, D., & Smerdon, B. (2000). Postsecondary students with disabilities: Enrollment, services,
and persistence. Educational Statistics Quarterly, 2(3), 55-58.

Jones, S. R. (1996) “Toward Inclusive Theory: Disability as Social Construction.” NASPA
Journal, 33, 347–354

Kelderman, E. (2010). Technology gives blind students a better view of music. The Chronicle of
Higher Education. Retrieved from http://0chronicle.com.maurice.bgsu.edu/article/
Technology-Gives-Blind/125434/

Kuh, G. D., & Witt, E. J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and
universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D. C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education. pp. 9-27, 41-52, 75-94.

Low, J. (1996). Negotiating identities, negotiating environments: an interpretation of the
experiences of students with disabilities. Disability & Society, 11, 235-348.

Museus, S. D. (2008). Focusing on institutional fabric: Assessing campus climates to enhance
cross-cultural engagement. In S. R. Harper (Ed.), Creating inclusive campus climates for
cross-cultural learning and student engagement (pp. 205-234). Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrator

National Dissemination Center (2011). IDEA: Individuals with disabilities education
act. Retrieved from http://nichcy.org/laws/idea

Pacer Center. (2011, January 19). College & disability services: Student feud. [Video file].
Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v
=dYlIRKyKRAo

Sharp, M. N., Bruininks, B. D., Blacklock, B, Benson, B., & Johnson, D. M. (2004). The
emergence of psychiatric disabilities in postsecondary education. Examining Current Challenges in Secondary Education and Transition, 3(1), 1-6.

Stemler, S. E. , Bebell D. & Sonnaned, L. A. (2010). Using school mission statements for
reflection and research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47 (2), 383-420.

Strange, C. (2000). Creating environments of ability. In H. Belch, Serving Students with
Disabilities. (New Directions in Student Services, no. 91, pp 19-30) San Francisco:
Jossey

Strange, C. C., & Banning, J. H. (2001). Ch 1: Physical environments: The role of design and
space. In Educating by design: Creating campus learning environments that work (pp. 9-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Upcraft, M. L. & Schuh, J. H. (1996). Assessment in student affairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
(Chapter 2 – Key questions to ask in assessment, pp. 32-51, & Chapter 8 – Assessing campus environments, pp. 166-188).

U.S. Department of Justice (2011). ADA homepage. Retrieved from http://www.ada.gov/pubs/
ada.htm

Wilson, K. Getzel, E., & Brown, T. (2000). Enhancing the post-secondary campus climate for
students with disabilities Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 14, 37-50.

Personal Communications: Eight college students and one professional staff who is hearing impaired.

Online Courses

http://0-chronicle.com.maurice.bgsu.edu/article/Technology-Gives-Blind/125434/

This video gives an interesting perspective of a visually impaired student and how technology helps him daily.  Looks like he runs into the same computer glitches that we ran into for our online class


"As institutes of higher learning shift the delivery of courses from more traditional methods to asynchronous online methods, students with disabilities may be overlooked" (Edmonds, 2004, p. 51).  Edmonds (2004) explains that depending on the disability, full participation may be difficult.  For example a student who is blind may need to use an alternative text program where as a student who is deaf could benefit from captioned videos.

Positives
Having online accessible courses can be a tool that is easier to use not only for the student but also for the instructor   For example, students with a hearing impairment could use captioned videos and students with learning disabilities may be able to use texts where they have the ability to look for key words and phrases.  In addition to providing new services, online courses may also be more accessible.  Students with physical disabilities that may not be able to attend class can now take classes online because they are much more accessible   These same benefits couldn't help instructors with disabilities who may have a hard time physically going to class but can how teach over the internet.

Legal/Federal Consideration
At this time there is no low that requires higher education institutions to provide online classes (Edmonds, 2004).  However, I believe doing so would give a non-verbal message that they value the students that need to use these services to succeed.

Vocational Rehabilitation Act:
-(1973) requires that institutions with federal funding not exclude or discriminate against people with disabilities 
-(1998) federal departments of agencies must ensure, absent an undue burden, that the electronic information technology they acquire is accessible to individuals with disabilities who are federal employees or members of the public who are seeking information or services.

Americans with Disabilities Act:
-(1990) applies to services offered by both public and private institutions: prohibit institutions from discriminating against students with disabilities or excluding them from equal access to services. (What bothers me about this is that even if it is equal access... there are many more barriers that a student with disabilities may have to cross to receive the same services as someone who does not have a disability   When you make someone go through too many loops they give up)

Federal Section 508: This offer suggestions for tools to use when someone encounters various problems.
List of some tools:
-WAVE online accessibility tool
-MAGpie Media Access Generator
-Lynx Viewer
-Bobby validator.

Negatives:There is a primary concern on the accessibility of webpages because they are generally presented in HTML.  Many of the webpages of institutions of higher education are not running smoothly.  This proves as an extra hurdle for students that are blind because many webpages do no hate alternative text.

Online learning is still in the very beginnings of the process to be successful.  These problems became even more apparent when we had out online class and the technology was sub-par for students in a class that did not have students' with disabilities. I believe these advancements needs to become more of a priority so we can service the growing population of students with disabilities.


Edmonds, C.D. (2004).  Providing access to students with disabilities in online distance education: Legal and technical concerns for higher education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18, 51-62.

Assessment

In my search to understand how universities and practitioners have gone about exploring how the experiences of students with disabilities have been assessed I emailed Disablities Services at both Owens and BGSU.

I heard back from BGSU and they referred me to http://www.ahead.org/.  I was told that any assessment tools that were used could be found there.  Unfortunately, to look at these assessment I had to pay to become a member, and assessment tools cost upwards of $300 to gain access... something I could not afford (but I would hope/assume an institution could).  I tried to find assessment measures gear specifically to students with disabilities through the Bowling Green Library and other Scholarly search engines and I was unable to come across any assessments that were specific to students with disabilities and campus environments.  I found this extremely frustrating. Upcraft and Schuh (1996) explain that it isn't always best to use previously developed instruments because it is hard to find an instrument that meets local needs (as seen in my troubles), can be expensive (again, as seen in my experience), and can become out of date (something, I didn't run into... because I didn't find anything) (p. 45)

The assessment that I happened across numerous times in my search was the NSSE. Upcraft and Schuh (1996) emphasize the importance of collecting data from a representative sample.  From the research I did, much of the research focuses on entire populations of the institution and more recently focuses on cultural differences (Musseus, 2008).  Though Musseus's (2008) data can be applied to other minority groups, investigative assessment with a focus on students with disabilities would be most beneficial.  From out discussion and evaluation of the NSSE in class, this isn't a very inclusive survey.  Students with disabilities have different needs from the general student population that need to be assessed more thoroughly

Much of the research conducted on students with disabilities is conducted by those without (Jones, 1996) and in spite of the prevalence of disabilities, there is still little known about the experience of those with disabilities.  That being said, there aren't many easily accessable instruments used to assess the experiences of students with disablilties.  Of the reaserach articles I've found, most used qualitative dataa experience and interviewed students individualally.  Although qualitative data can yeild richer results with a more purposeful sample, quantitative data is easier to measure (Upcraft and Schuh, 1996).  As institutions continue to a more business-like perspective, the numbers gathered from quantitative data are what institutions are looking for, which undermines the detailed information we can gather from qualitative data.  Institutions want numbers and results... and the time it takes to gather qualitative data isn't always respected.

Studies on students with disabilities are increasing but still aren't as high as I'd like.  With the numbers of students with disabilities increasing, I believe it's time to start increasing our assessments so we can adequately meet the needs of our emerging students populations.  Assessments now are either the same assessments that are used for the entire campus community, or are small sample sizes using qualitative measures.  Again, qualitative yields rich results, but isn't always the most practical.   Students with disabilities may often been harder to get to participate depending on the disability so qualitative measures are the best way to collect data.

Jones, S. R. (1996). “Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction.” NASPA Journal, 33, 347–354.

Museus, S. D. (2008). Focusing on institutional fabric: Assessing campus climates to enhance cross-cultural engagement. In S. R. Harper (Ed.), Creating inclusive campus climates for cross-cultural learning and student engagement (pp. 205-234). Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrator

Upcraft, M. L. & Schuh, J. H. (1996). Assessment in student affairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Chapter 2 – Key questions to ask in assessment, pp. 32-51, & Chapter 8 – Assessing campus environments, pp. 166-188).

Research: Campus Climate

Most research about campus climate perception of students with disabilities tends to be qualitative data with small sample sizes.  Although quantitave analysis is growing, the richest answers still tend to come form the qualitative data.  Upcraft and Schuh  (1996) explain that environmental assessment determines and evaluates how the carious elements and conditions of the college campus affect student learning and growth.  With the high rise in the number of students with disabilities attending school, it doesn't necessarily mean that institutions are ready and have the services in place to support these students (Wilson, Getzel, & Brown, 2000).  And, with that being said, even with these services in place, it doesn't mean that the campus climate it welcoming or a good learning environment for students with disabilities.

According to Wilson et al. (2000) the selection of a disability friendly campus is critical  to their long term success.  Research suggests that students with disabilities find than even on campuses where there is a deliberate focus on providing better services with disabilities and protect their well-being are actually viewed by students with disabilties as unwelcoming (Wilson et al., 2000).  There is something more important that just providing services.  The important questions is whether or not the campus environment is support of learning ... and not just overall learning, but learning geared to all  individuals (Upcraft & Shuh, (1996).

From qualitative interviews with the students I communicated with as well as qualitative interviews conducted by Jacqueline Low (1996) students, depending on the institution and the disability, do not always seen the campus culture as inviting.  I think this depends less on the institution type (though public tend to have more services...) and more on the institutional mission and who the institutional is choosing to serve.  Of the students I interviewed with mental illness, most felt that the campus was inviting to students, but hinted at the worry to tell their friends about their illness because of what they might think.  I think this shows that there is still a definite stigma on students with mental illness that is starting to become diluted with services becoming easily access sable and readily advertised.  The environment at Kent State, tends to be more open to students with mental illness than BGSU and UT.   There was also a definite focus on the students' interaction with faculty, and when it was a positive one, their overall view of the campus culture seemed to be more positive (again, the importance of an accepting human aggregate as part of the faculty and staff is very important. (B. Smith, email communication, November, 2011; K. Smith,  email communication, November, 2011; S. Smith, email communication, November, 2011). Eudaly (2002) also reported that there faculty are often scared when they find that they have students with mental illness in their classes.  That being said, faculty needed to be better informed on mental illness because this stereotype causes a unwelcoming campus climate.  

Interviews with students with learning disabilities tended to be more on the negative side.  Although some felt they received the services they needed.  For Ashley, she wasn't aware of the services given at Owens Community College.  Although she didn't have any negative stereotypes connected to have a learning disability (at least at this time, she is very new to the institution) the fact that the people that met with her before me never referred her to disability services showed that they didn't have a conversation with her to figure out what her interests and needs were.  Eric on the other hand talked about the negative feelings he got when he told people he had a learning disability and he felt judged when going in and asking for help.  This type of climate isn't good because he isn't going to receive the help he needs, and feels judged by the outside community which may hinder his self worth and self esteem.  Lindsey on the other hand seems to be getting everything she needs from her institution and doesn't feel out of place. She feels that people may view her as stupid, much like Eric, but because of the services and help she receives, I don't think is negatively affecting her as much as it affects Eric.  For me, I'm think it was great to get answers from people at 3 different institutions, Lourdes, being the smallest, seemed to help the students the most rather than BGSU and Owens which are bigger public institutions.  For people with learning disabilities, it is more about hiding the disability from others which may come with its own set of problems (not receiving the help if they don't make it apparent) where as students with physical disabilities are pointed into the direction of disability services as soon as they get to the institution.  (A. Smith,personal communication, October, 2011; E., Smith, email communication, October, 2011; L., Smith, email communication, October, 2011)

 Students with physical disabilities experience the campus culture/climate differently than those with learning disabilities and mental illness because their disability is visible, or becomes apparent quickly (deaf or blind).  Low (1996) explains that the visible nature of a student's disability can constrain relationships that they have with others.  In my communication with Rob, I found myself making eye contact with the interpreter more-so than the student.  I found myself feeling uncomfortable talking with Rob, because to communicate with me, he had to speak with the interpreter.  Perhaps because he made eye contact with the interpreter, I choose to do the same... but I don't think that's the case.  Rob was so used to other people speaking through the interpreter and making eye contact... to feel safe, he did the same.   With students with physical disability, they want to appear as normal as possible and may often want to be treated normal so much that they forget about their disability (Low, 1996). But it isn't always productive to do this and can be detrimental to the student.  

Wilson, K. Getzel, E., & Brown, T. (2000).  Enhancing the post-secondary campus climate for students with disabilities   Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 14, 37-50.  
A. Smith (personal communication, October, 2011)
B. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)
E. Smith (email communication, October, 2011)
K. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)L. Smith (email communication, October, 2011)R. Smith (personal communication, September, 2011)
S. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)

Mental Illness: Brooke, Sarah, Kathy Interview 5, 6, 7

Once again, I was able to find students with mental illness via Facebook and interview them for my project

Brooke
1. Have you used answer services provided by UT for help with your biopolor disorder? If so, were they helpful/ easy to obtain etc.?

"I attempted to go to the UT medical center to discuss problems I initially started to notice with my mood and depression my junior year of college. Unfortunately, I found the psychiatrist to be extremely rude and standoffish (I think you'll find that many people say this. I have discussed this matter with at least 5 other people who I know go and talk to her). This led me to feel negative towards the way people received mental disorders, especially is the supposed psychiatrist wasn't even helpful."

2. If applicable, are your teachers willing to work with you if you run into problems with classwork because of your biopolar disorder?

"My professors at UT were so understanding and helpful at this terrible time in my life, that it honestly still makes me want to cry out of thankfulness and appreciation. They understood what I was going through and were willing to work with me every step of the way, giving me extra time with homework if needed, talking to me, and being especially caring. There was a time that I was having pretty severe reactions to my medication, and my professors always understood if I had to get up and leave. IN addition, on Monday's a certain professor always let me leave 10 minutes early so I could make it to NAMI meetings on time, which was a very helpful support group.
I think what impressed them (and myself) is that I never took advantage of this. I didn't let this "disability" hinder me, instead, I let it empower me and strengthen me as a student and a person. As odd as it sounds, I don't think I would be where I am today if I hadn't been diagnosed with bi-polar disorder. All of the above mentioned professors wrote letters of recommendation for me, some of them mentioning my strength and passion for literature and school despite my "disability". Here I am getting paid to teach Composition and going to Grad school for free!"

3. What would you feel others don't understand about having a mental illness (bipolar disorder) and what would you like them to know?

"I do feel at times that people do not understand bi-polar disorder, primarily because there is a negative connotation and misunderstanding about it. A lot of people will make jokes towards each other, saying "you're so bi-polar!" when they are mad about something, when honestly, it's not so black and white as people make it out to be. However, I have found that when I explain to people what it really is, they understand, and often confess that they had no idea that I have it. I then explain to them that I don't let it take over my life, and that's why they don't notice."

4. OVERALL, to you think that UT is accepting and accommodating of students with mental illnesses? If so, HOW? If not, WHAT WOULD YOU CHANGE?

"I DO think the faculty and students are accommodating to students with "disabilities" however, I think that the health campus could do more to make it known that it's okay to come talk about your problems, and perhaps hire a new psychiatrist"

A. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)

Sarah1. Have you used answer services provided by BGSU for help with your mental illnessr? If so, were they helpful/ easy to obtain etc.?

I have indeed. When I was diagnosed last spring, I utilized the counseling center (as I met with a counselor weekly starting late fall semester last year), and in addition, I also saw my psychiatrist weekly starting in Feb or so of last year, to make sure my meds were agreeing with me-and it took a bit for that to happen so I am VERY happy that he was able to meet with me so often, if only for 10 mins because it is why I finally found a med that actually agreed with my neurochemistry and helped me to cope with my mental illness-OCD (the more obsessive side of it versus the compulsive side of it).

2. If applicable, are your teachers willing to work with you if you run into problems with classwork because of your mental illness?

Actually, this happened to me. I was taking the second semester of ochem last spring when I was diagnosed and maybe like in late March, early April or so, I met with my prof and told him about my situation, and although it took a lot of work and effort on both our parts, he was able to give me an Incomplete in the course so I could retake it in the summer because two of my major OCD triggers were in that class and it made it very hard to concentrate on material taught in class as well as material that I reviewed/studied in my apartment. That was really the only class that I was really struggling with in terms of my illness, as like I said before, two of my triggers were in that class, but I kinda wished I would've talked to my other professors about it because of my struggles with ochem, it kinda fed into my other classes and I assume based upon how my professors last spring semester were, they would've allowed me to do that. I was very surprised at how my former ochem prof took the fact that I was trying to get an Incomplete in the course, as this prof had a reputation for being a hard ass in the class, but was actually extremely nice outside of the class and was extremely accommodating to my needs.

3. What would you feel others don't understand about having a mental illness and what would you like them to know?

That we're not crazy or weak or whatever. I mean, when my psychiatrist told me that I had OCD, I was crushed (and partially relieved because I was worried that I had schizophrenia of some sort) because I was worried by how my parents, and close friends would say so they would know if I acted differently, as that was one of the side effects on both meds I was on (both the one that didn't work and the one that did work), and while said friends did make fun of me (in a kinda sorta playful way), they understood. In addition, they may not understand the fact that having OCD (and I also suffered from visual hallucinations as well, so I had-as my psychiatrist told me-a very special and interesting case of OCD as I didn't suffer from auditory ones, just visual ones) that I was actually seeing things that weren't there; I wasn't making it up that I would see little black orbs floating in my apartment, or see spiders run across the floor in my apartment, or birds flying the sky that weren't actually there, or a very tall, black figure actually physically touch me on the shoulder). I was worried that friends would think that I was just attention seeking, which therefore caused me more paranoia, which therefore became another obsession, which just started a never ending cycle. What the general population needs to know is that people with mental illnesses are just like everyone else in that we wear the same clothes, we have friends, we still feel emotion, but it is just that something inside our brain, a part of our neurochemistry is out of wack and that's it; we shouldn't be shunned, or made fun of because of whatever. It also kinda bugged me when I would hear people in the union or in class or at work say something to the extent of "Oh…man, I totally have OCD." It bugged me because while they may have obsessive tendencies, chances are they don’t (or will never) suffer from the psychological side effects that I had ie paranoia, panic attacks, hallucinations, severe crippling obsessions/intrusive thoughts, like the fact that I just wanted to literally kill people, or cause great devastation-like trying to derail a train or have powerful extreme lusts over people that I just saw walking around campus, etc.

4. OVERALL, to you think that BGSU is accepting and accomodating of students with mental illnesses? If so, HOW? If not, WHAT WOULD YOU CHANGE?

I think, to an extent, BGSU is indeed accepting to students who suffer from a mental illness. I mean, the counseling center and the health clinic literally saved my life because I got the medical attention that I needed so I could cope with my mental illness and get through that literally hell on Earth spring semester. Those two resources, especially the former, is something that should be brought to attention more often than it should be. In addition, maybe having some sort of mental health awareness week with screenings for people who think they might be suffering from depression, general anxiety disorder, or OCD, or bipolar disorder (as the latter two is what I, to an extent was suffering from as I would experience very intense and sudden periods of mania and depression). In addition, to the screenings having people who suffer (or suffered) from the mental illness to talk about the fact that you're still a person when you have a mental illness to erase the stigma about mental illness and how some people who may indeed suffer from one doesn't want to talk to anyone about it because they would feel out of place, or awkward, or weak, etc. Maybe have some sort of organization that is anonymous so students could come and talk about their problems as well (kinda like a life support group).

S. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)

Kathy

1. Have you used answer services provided by BGSU/Kent for help with your mental illness? If so, were they helpful/ easy to obtain etc.?

No, I have not. Though as a counseling student at Kent, I do have access to Akron's student counseling center if I would need it. It is also stressed in our program that we are very conscious of our own mental health, as a part of being a professional. While it is not required by the program, nearly all of the professors suggest that all counseling students see a counselor at least once while they're in the program. Also, with some classes you are both in a counselor position and in a client position. (i.e. Our group therapy class is an actual working group that is created and counselor roles are alternated weekly.) There is a lot of introspection throughout your time in the program.

2. If applicable, are your teachers willing to work with you if you run into problems with classwork because of your mental illness?

I would say that 90% of them would, if I asked. A couple professors have even said (to the class as a whole) that if something occurs out of the blue on exam day that would cause severe anxiety or emotional distress, to call them to reschedule. Of course, it does help that I'm in the mental health field, so all of my professors are licensed professionals with a certain level of empathy for their students.

The only time I ever had to ask a professor to excuse missed work was in my undergrad. I had an anxiety attack an hour before a band concert. (This was brought on by several issues, but not the concert itself) I ended up not being able to attend. Later, the professor asked if I was being treated for my anxiety, and I said yes including medication. To make up for the performance, I wrote a 10-page paper. I thought this to be reasonable. However, it did seem as though if I weren't being treated, he would not have allowed me to make up the class points.

I should also mention that anxiety attacks for me are extremely rare, so my anxiety normally doesn't get in the way of my school work at this point in my life. If anything, my school work is what keeps me from having anxiety problems. It's normally the worst in the summer when I'm not in school. It's almost like I feel better when there are things to be stressed about, instead of sitting around being anxious about nothing and there is no beginning or end.

3. What would you feel others don't understand about having a mental illness and what would you like them to know?

I think that often times people who do not understand mental illness will believe that you can simply will your way through it. They don't have a mental illness so when they feel sad, stressed, angry, etc. they can brush it off and get on with their day. Secondly, when someone has a "mental illness" that doesn't automatically mean they have something severe which would make them dangerous or "crazy". It also doesn't mean that it's long-term, or that they've always had this illness. It also doesn't mean that their illness is a part of their personality, but part of a bigger picture of their identity. (Unless of course, said mental illness is a personality disorder. See statement about being dangerous or crazy.)

4. OVERALL, to you think that BGSU/Kent is accepting and accomodating of students with mental illnesses? If so, HOW? If not, WHAT WOULD YOU CHANGE?

I think Kent is more visible in their acceptance of those with mental illness than BG. It has at least two mental health centers on campus, and the psych department flyers for free screening weeks for the students. It is hard for me to judge the scope of a university, since I have no connection to it outside my classes in my department. I would say though, that there seems to be more acceptance between graduate students than between undergrad students, regardless of university. I would guess that this is a maturity issue over anything else though. It's the idea that you've come out of your drunken college haze to realize that the other adults around you each have their own problems too, and some of them may be in the form of a mental illness.

K. Smith (email communication, November, 2011)

Again, just like with learning disabilities, it is evident that the campus climate and culture make up a large amount of how accepted a student feels on campus.  It seems that faculty play a large role as well as the institutions way of helping students with disabilities.  For example a student at BGSU believes that the counseling center needs to be better publicized where as a person at Kent (who went to BG) has a campus that does that, and she feels that is an inclusive environment (even the physical environment...advertisement... can make the difference.

Campus Climate

Culture is understood as a way of thinking and behaving that is common among all that a part of that culture, and holds it together (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 9-10) According the Kuh and Whitt (2006), culture has four main purposes: it “conveys a sense of identity,” “facilitates commitment to an entity,” “enhances the stability of the groups social system,” and is a “sense making device that guides and shapes behavior” (p. 10).  When considering students with disabilities the culture, like the human aggregate plays a large role in how safe and accepted a person feels on campus.  Strange (2000) explains that "socially constructed components reflect the subjective views of social constructions of environmental participants" (p. 22).  This basically means that environments are understood best by the perceptions of the people within them which is understood as the campus culture or climate.  The perceptions of what the environment is like are what guide the behaviors of those within it (Strange, 2000).

There are three levels of culture: artifacts, values, and basic assumptions and beliefs (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 16).

The first level, artifacts, is understood as the symbols of the culture and are represented by rules, customs, rituals, and ways of interacting (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 16). For students with disabilities this may be what they looks at and try to understand to fit in within the culture of the institution.  If there are shared rules, customs, rituals, and ways of interacting, students with disabilities must become aware of these and make sure to interact using these tools.   Something as simple as going to class or using the rec center or going to a football game are not going to be easy for someone with a physical disability or a person with a mental illness that may not feel comfortable being in large crowds.  From this sense, students with disabilities may not be able to be a part of the first level of culture.

The second level of culture, values, is “widely health beliefs of sentiments about the importance of certain goals, activities, relationships, and feelings” (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 23). On a campus where student activities are viewed as important, students with disabilities may feel out of place.  Depending on the emphasis of the importance of different activities, if there isn't a way for students with disabilities to participate, they will feel left out.  If the campus doesn't value inclusion (like I have spoken about during emphasis on the important of mission) then students with disabilities will not feel a part of the overarching campus culture.

The third level of culture, basic assumptions and beliefs is often referred to as “the core of culture” (Kuh & Whitt, 2006, p. 23). Kuh and Whit (2006) explain that these assumptions are “learned responses to threats to institutional survival” and influence “what people think about, what they perceive to be important, how they feel about things, and what they do” (pp. 23-24).  According to Strange (2000), "weak social climate relationship dimensions might create an unperceptive milieu for anyone who requests special care and concern" (p. 25).   This level is the level I believe to be the most important.  If the core of the culture works to be inclusive of students with disabilities, the rest of the levels will follow suit.  Once again, I believe this has a lot do do with the campus mission and what the overall goals of the institution are.  If students with disability feel the need to try to blend in, the campus culture is devaluing individual differences.  I believe this happens when people choose to ignore disabilities completely OR they view people with disabilities as totally different.  There's a fine line between the two.

Like I wrote about with the human aggregate (which I believe is the driver of the campus culture), it all comes down to the social construction of disability on each campus.  The physical environment, human aggregate, and organizational structure are all a piece of the campus climate.  What boils down to how a student with a disability feels on a campus is how the social environment feels and treats them.  Disability is a social construction with a negative denotation (the DIS).  Jones  (1996) explains that it is the attitude of those who are non-disabled even MORE so than the biological characteristics of the disabled that turn a handicap into a handicap.

Jones, S. R. (1996). “Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction.” NASPA Journal, 33, 347–354.
Kuh, G. D., & Witt, E. J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D. C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education. pp. 9-27, 41-52, 75-94.
Strange, C. (2000). Creating environments of ability. In H. Belch, Serving Students with Disabilities. New Directions in Student Services, Number 91. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 19-30.