ADA-Based Accommodations in Higher Education

Abstract

The expansion of the number of students requesting accommodations in postsecondary settings compels clinicians to become knowledgeable about the legal definitions and documentation requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because the law is relatively new, courts and regulatory agencies have only recently begun to clarify what constitutes a disability. In this study, 147 clinicians completed a questionnaire developed to assess their understanding of the law and the diagnostic approaches they used to justify claims of learning disability (LD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and psychiatric disability. Whereas the clinicians agreed on certain points (e.g., the right of institutions to formulate specific policies regarding documentation), they substantially disagreed on several fundamental issues. Clinician consensus was lowest on items that asked about the basic intent of the law, the metrics for assessing impairment, and the criteria for assessing ADHD in adulthood. Judged against the legislative history of the ADA and the body of regulatory rulings and legal decisions, many clinicians' responses showed a need for clarification regarding the distinction between special education law and the antidiscrimination intent of the ADA. The respondents also expressed a nearly uniform wish for more training in this fast-growing area of clinical practice.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adelman, H.S. (1992). The next 25 years. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 17—22.

American Council on Education. (1999). College freshmen with disabilities: A biennial statistical profile . Washington, DC: Cathy Henderson .

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.

Barkley, R.A. (1998). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment. New York: Guilford Press.

Barkley, R.A. , & Biederman, J. (1997). Toward a broader definition of the age-of-onset criterion for attention-deficithyperactivity-disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 1204—1210.

Brinkerhoff, L.C. , Shaw, S. , & McGuire, J. (1993). Promoting postsecondary education for college students with learning disabilities: A handbook for practitioners. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Gonzalez v. National Board of Medical Examiners, 225 F.3d 620, 629 (6th Cir. 2000).

Gordon, M. , & Keiser, S. (Eds.). (1998). Accommodations in higher education under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA ): A no-nonsense guide for clinicians, educators, administrators, and lawyers. New York: Guilford/GSI.

Gregg, N. , Scott, S.S. , & McPeek, D. (1999). Definitions and eligibility criteria applied to the adolescent and adult population with learning disabilities across agencies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 213—223.

10.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.

11.

McGuire, J.M. , Madaus, J.W. , Litt, A.V. , & Ramirez, M.O. (1996). An investigation of documentation submitted by university students to verify their learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 297—304.

12.

Murphy, K. , & Gordon, M. (1997). ADHD as a basis for test accommodations: A primer for clinicians. The ADHD Report, 5(1), 10—11.

13.

Ofiesh, N.S. , & McAfee, J.K. (2000). Evaluation practices for college students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 14— 25.

14.

Price v. the National Board of Medical Examiners, 966 F. Supp. 419 (S.D. W. Va. 1997).

15.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.

16.

Siegel, L.S. (1999). Issues in the definition and diagnosis of learning disabilities: A perspective on Guckenberger v. Boston University. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 304—319.

17.

Sutton v. United Airlines, 527 U.S. 471 (1999).

18.

Vogel, S.A. , Leyser, Y. , Wyland, S. , & Brulle, A. (1999). Students with learning disabilities in higher education: Faculty attitude and practices. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 173—186.