Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Implementing disability policy in teaching and ...

Electronic data

  • Wray and Houghton 2018

    Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Teaching in Higher Education on 28/6/2018, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2018.1491838

    Accepted author manuscript, 406 KB, PDF-document

    Embargo ends: 31/12/19

    Available under license: CC BY-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Implementing disability policy in teaching and learning contexts: shop floor constructivism or street level bureaucracy?

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>19/05/2019
<mark>Journal</mark>Teaching in Higher Education
Issue number4
Volume24
Number of pages17
Pages (from-to)510-526
Publication statusPublished
Early online date28/06/18
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Since 1995 the UK higher education sector has been required to implement national disability related legislation. This paper reports on a study which explored the role that policies play in
influencing how staff support disabled students. In particular the extent to which staff in HE behave in similar ways to those described as street level bureaucrats by (Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-
Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation). Semi-structured interviews undertaken with 34 staff in the case study university provided the substantive data. Although there was little evidence to show that policy had a direct influence on practice, it was clear that staff made considerable efforts to support disabled learners and these efforts were based on values associated with providing an equitable experience for all students. Additionally, staff were able to exercise discretion in the way they responded to disabled
students and constructed responses to policies without significant influence from institutional managers, national legislation or broader policy discourse.

Bibliographic note

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Teaching in Higher Education on 28/6/2018, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2018.1491838