| Creator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Language |
|
| Publisher |
|
|
|
| Date |
|
| Source Title |
|
| Vol |
|
| First Page |
|
| Last Page |
|
| Publication Type |
|
| Access Rights |
|
| JaLC DOI |
|
| Rights |
|
|
|
| Abstract |
Since the enforcement of the Act for Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, the number of students applying for reasonable accommodation has increased at the university, and the...ir support needs have become more diverse. To speed up and simplify the flow of support and ensure constructive dialog, the university introduced a written constructive dialog system. The faculty members decide whether or not the request for reasonable accommodation can be implemented in the written request, and if the request is “Negotiable” or “Impossible,” the reason for the response will be noted in the remarks column. After confirming the answer, the student decides whether to conduct an additional constructive dialog. As a result of organizing the current situation in the remarks column for the purpose of facilitating the provision of constructive dialog and reasonable accommodation in writing, it was shown that the faculty members basically responded to the written request with the understanding of consensus building through constructive dialog. However, to facilitate written constructive dialogs and provision of reasonable accommodations, the faculty members needed to include alternative solutions along with the reasons for their responses, universities and supporters were required to provide information on specific support, and support systems for teachers and staff needed enhancement.show more
|
Export Mendeley
008_p155