1. 1 Impact of Campus Climate and Disabilities Assessment on Institutional Change Susan A. Vogel, Ph.D. Northern Illinois University Steven Sligar, Ed.D. East Carolina University

2. 2 Topics included in Questionnaires  Concerns regarding physical safety  Knowledge about legal mandates  Knowledge about accommodations and willingness to provide them  Practices regarding classroom and institution environment

3. 3 Topics included in Questionnaires (cont.)  Fairness of providing teaching, examination, and policy accommodations  Topics of interest  Preferred methods for acquiring information  Barriers to academic success  Strategies to reduce or eliminate barriers

4. 4 Impact at NIU  Classroom environment  Increased awareness of disability and the law  Increase in availability of assistive technology  Information and training of computer lab staff regarding assistive technology

5. 5 Impact at NIU (continued)  Provision of information (formal and informal)  Architectural accessibility  Enforcing Section 508  State legislative changes and Section 508

6. 6Susan A. Vogel, Ph. D.6 Direct Impact at Northern Illinois University Provided a unique assistive technology environment, workshops, speakers, improved signage, a Handbook and 1-on-1 training for computer lab assistants on use of assistive technology for students with disabilities Developed comprehensive Web site on disabilities in higher education (http://www.niu.edu/success)

7. 7 Indirect Impact at NIU Revision of NIU’s web presence and enforcement of Section 508 (all institution’s Web sites, online information, distance education, etc).

8. 8 Indirect impact at NIU Provided data that contributed to passage of the Illinois Information Technology Accessibility Act (www.dhs.state.il.US/IITAA/IITAAStandar ds.html) to ensure that university Web sites, information systems, and information technologies are accessible to those with disabilities.

9. 9Susan A. Vogel, Ph. D.9 Other possibilities Increased awareness and knowledge about disabilities, accommodations, Disability Services, and legal mandates A more welcoming and safe environment for all Services, strategies, procedures, and policies if students’ behavior might be harmful to themselves and/or others Identification and reduction/elimination of barriers Enhanced compliance with newest legal mandates Increased support services, space, staff, resources, etc. Increased retention and graduation rate

10. 10 Characteristics of Change  Narrow vs. far-reaching  Single vs. multi-faceted  Direct vs. indirect  Rate (immediate vs. slow process)

11. 11 Characteristics of Change (cont.)  The “Ripple Effect”  The “River Effect”  Anticipated vs. unexpected  A process  Stick with it!

12. 12 Factors that contribute to change  Highest level administrative support  Available resources  Campus leadership team  The leadership team members  Responsibilities of each

13. 13 Factors that contribute to change …  Rate of response  Protection against unforeseen changes  Dissemination plan from the inception  Making CCD an institution priority  Making campus climate all-inclusive

14. 14 Relevant Research to Date  Vogel, S. A. (2011). Campus Climate and Disabilities Questionnaires: Faculty, Administrators and Staff, Students without Disabilities, and Students with Disabilities. Lincolnshire, IL: Campus Climate and Disabilities, LLC.  Vogel, S. A. (2010). Using Campus Climate and Disabilities. Lincolnshire, IL: Campus Climate and Disabilities, LLC.  Eitola, C., Fishman, K., Greenberg, A., Moore, C. D., Schrijver, A., & Totino, J. (2011). Success with ACCESS: Use of Community-based participatory research for implementation. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, (24)1, 61-65.  Vogel, S. A., Holt, J. K., Sligar, S., & Leake, E. (2008). Assessment of campus climate to enhance student success. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21(1), 15-31.  Vogel, S. A., Leyser, Y., Burgstahler, S., Sligar, S., & Zecker, S. (2006). Faculty knowledge and practices regarding students with disabilities in three contrasting institutions of higher education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 18(2), 109-123.  Vasek, D. (2005). Assessing the knowledge base of faculty at a private, four-year institution. College Student Journal, 39(2), 307-315.  Vogel, S. A., Vogel, G., Sharoni, V., & Dahan, O. (2003). Learning disabilities in higher education and beyond: An international perspective. Baltimore, MD: York Press. (Available from Campus Climate and Disabilities, LLC)  Leyser, Y., Vogel, S. A., Wyland, S., Brulle, A., Sharoni, V., & Vogel, G. (2000). Students with disabilities in higher education: Perspectives of American and Israeli faculty members. International Education, 29(2), 47-67.  Leyser, Y., Vogel, S. A., Brulle, A., & Wyland, S. (1998). Faculty attitudes and practices regarding students with disabilities: Two decades after implementation of Section 504. Journal of Postsecondarv Education and Disability, 13(3), 5-19.  Vogel, S. A., Leyser, Y., Wyland, S., & Brulle, A. (1999). Students with learning disabilities in higher education: Faculty attitude and practices. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14(3). 173-186.

15. 15Susan A. Vogel, Ph. D.15 For more information about GO TO: www.campusclimateanddisabilities.com Fill out and submit the Contact Us page on the Web site OR e-mail ccdq2010@gmail.com OR call toll free (855) CCD-2010