NEADS Logo - Home
Find us on: Facebook YouTube Twitter

Quick Question:
How do I find out if a group of students with disabilities exists on my campus?


Upcoming Events

More Events

Link of the day

More Links

Donate Now to support NEADS! We need your support!
Donations are tax deductible and you will receive a charitable tax receipt for 100% of your gift.

Donate Now Through CanadaHelps.org!

Projects

Working Towards a Coordinated National Approach To Services, Accommodations And Policies For Post-Secondary Students With Disabilities

Chapter 3: Service Provider Assessments

Service Providers were asked to rate the facilities and services available at their institution - as either 'excellent', 'good', 'fair', 'poor', or as 'not available' or 'do not know'. Nonresponses were coded as 'not stated'. Some service providers directly identified the missing category in the scale: 'not applicable', while others described how the categories and/or features were not applicable to their campus (see Appendix Two). To see the original version of the questions, see Appendix Four.

Facilities and services were grouped according to various features of accessibility: physical accessibility (main buildings, adaptive equipment, safety and emergency features, as well as accessibility to labs, on-campus housing and transportation etc.); educational accessibility (entrance examinations, preparation and orientation, athletic programs and facilities, assistance with course work and materials, support for instructors, student services, as well as examinations and course requirements); accessibility program and administration (administrative support and policies, volunteer services); and external community (liaison and transportation). Within each of these categories, respondents were asked to rate a series of 199 specific facilities and services in terms of accessibility - see Charts 3.1 to 3.19 at the end of this section.

As well, service providers were asked to provide any written comments on these features of accessibility, allowing them to elaborate on a rating, or to describe unique situations at their institution. These comments are itemized in Appendix Two.

The present chapter provides a review of these institutional self-ratings of the various features of accessibility, and is grouped into the following sections: Physical Accessibility of Buildings; Physical Accessibility of Equipment and Labs; Physical Accessibility of Safety, Housing and Transportation; Educational Accessibility and Program Intake; Educational Accessibility and Special Programs; Educational Accessibility and Materials/Coursework Accommodations; Accessibility Programs, Administration and Volunteers; and Accessibility of External Community.

A. Physical Accessibility of Buildings

Service providers were asked to rate specified features of 'typical' main campus buildings: main student services building; main administration building; main library building; main food services building; and book store. A very common response in the open-ended comment sections was to indicate that one or more of these building categories were either combined in a single building, or that they were not housed in a single building - this likely accounts for much of the nonresponse to these questions.

Respondents were asked to rate each main campus building according to a series of common features: identified parking spaces; low grade ramps; low pressure doors; wing door handles; wide doorways; automatic doors; accessible washrooms; handrails on walkways; wide aisle areas; accessible service counters; special services for customers; with disabilities; elevators in all areas; braille/large print floor; elevator numbers; braille/large print elevator buttons; floor bells in elevators; coloured strips on stairs; outside lighting, according to a scale including the ratings: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, and Not available - see Charts 3.1 to 3.86. In the open-ended portions of the building physical accessibility questions, service providers often commented on the variations in buildings on and across campuses. For instance, some campuses provide all services in a single building, while others provide all or most services in many buildings (which are interconnected in various ways):

† Bookstore, food services, student services, health, counseling, employment same building. University, Atlantic Canada

† The college is all under one roof! College, AB

† Brand new building. Note: all [The University's] buildings are interconnected so questions related to handrails, ramps, and parking are not really applicable to specific buildings. University, BC

In the case of the ratings, service providers tended to rate the facilities of buildings as Good or Excellent, however, they tended to include more ratings of Poor or Not Available in the case of some features. For example, the majority of service providers rated accessible washrooms as either Good or Excellent: Main Student Services Building - 78% (54170) ( Chart 3.7); Administration Building - 66% (46170) (Chart 3.18); Library - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.41); Food - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.59); Book Store - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.76).

† Service providers also described, in open-ended responses, numerous successes, and plans for future buildings (see Appendix Two). For example:

† [Main Student Services Building] Stairways textures, contrasting colours. Flooring has contrasting colours and blocks. One elevator is hands-free. Hands-free water fountains. University, SK [Main Library Building] I1 y a une borde contrastante de I'entree jusqu' au local de travail adapte reserve aux etudiants handicapes visuels. Universitk, QC [Main Library Building] The main adaptive technology lab campus is located on the ground floor of [one] Library. The coordinator for special readers' services is also located in this building; an adaptive lab for students with disabilities is located in [another] library. University, ON

† [Main Student Services Building] New Building - just opened this year. Many improvements. College, A tlantic Canada

† [Main Student Services Building] Please note - a new student services building is currently under construction ... open fall 1999. University, QC

On the other hand, some building accessibility features were rated lower, or as Not Available by some service providers (i.e. coloured strips, wing door handles, and accessible elevator features). Note, for example, a higher proportion of service providers rated Automatic Doors as Not Available in the case of some buildings: Main Student Services Building - 26% (18170) (Chart 3.6); Administration Building - 24% (17170) (Chart 3.23); Library - 27% (19170) (Chart 3.40); Food - 24% (17170) (Chart 3.58); Book Store - 40% (28170) (Chart 3.75).

Service providers also tended to describe problems or gaps in building accessibility features. For example:

† [Main Student Services Building] Elevator is claustrophobic; student in wheelchair would have to back out and turn; on special services offered, however, assistance provided when obvious or needed. University, ON

† [Main Student Services Building] Accessible washroom has to be backed into. University, ON a The primary residence's main dining hall has to be reached by an elevator that requires the customer student to travel through the kitchen. Many commercial food outlets are accessible; others are not. University, AB

† [Book Store] Part of the store is inaccessible and their solutions for this are OK but not great. The store should be ramped. University, SK

A common comment in the open-ended sections of the building accessibility features rating questions was the contrast between new buildings with better accessibility features, and older buildings that have been renovated or require renovations. For example: [Main Student Services Building] Older buildings with lots of idiosyncrasies. University, ON

† [Main Student Services Building] Ancienne bgtisse mais les nouvelles constructions tiennent compte des normes. College, QC

† The Arts (Annex) was built in 1991. There are excellent floor bells in the elevators in the Annex; there are none in the older section of the Administration Building (constructed in the 1960s). There are Braille elevator buttons in the Annex, and large print floor elevator numbers in the older section of the Administration Building. University, Atlantic Canada

B. Physical Accessibility of Equipment and Labs

Service providers were asked to rate the accessibility of: Special Equipment (scanner, CCTV, brailler, 4-track recorder, TDD/TTY, phonic ears/FM amplifier, acoustically treated rooms, talking calculator, wheelchairs, specialized software for students with learning disabilities); Adaptive Computer Equipment (voice recognition, internet access, loaner lap-tops, braille printers, brailler displays, real-time captioning, screen reading software, adapted computer keyboards, hearing assistance software, adaptive technology training, and separate adaptive technology resource centre); and Labs (accessible counters in physical science labs, accessible computer labs, and adaptive computer technology in computer labs). See Charts 3.87 to 3.109 and 3.115 to 3.118. Chart 3.98). Similarly, 52% (36170) rated accessible computer labs (Chart 3.117), and 53% (37170) rated screen enlarging software as either Excellent or Good (Chart 3.105). These types of equipment were also described favourably in the open-ended responses. For instance:

† [Special Equipment] Voice recognition; speech output systems; training in use of assistive technology; formal assessments for assistive technology. College, AB

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Adaptive technology training is available on all software and hardware. University, ON

On the other hand, some features were rated low or Not Available. For instance, 47% (33170) of service providers rated acoustically treated rooms as Not Available. Similarly, while 20% (14170) rated acoustically treated rooms as Fair or Poor, only 12% (8170) rated them as Excellent or Good (Chart 3.93). Also, a full 41% (29170) of service providers rated specialized technology in physical science labs as Not Available (Chart 3.116). These types of gaps are also described in the open-ended responses:

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Students get their own equipment normally College, BC

† [Access to Labs] Labs are not specifically designed to be accessible, but individual arrangements are made to accommodate each individual student. University, ON

† [Access to Labs] Lorsque nous avons des eleves en fauteuil roulant dans un lab, nous faisons adapter un espace de travail. College, QC

Again, a common pattern in the open-ended responses was the description of plans to improve accessibility to these types of adaptive equipment: [Access to Labs] Lab accessibility being implemented over time and as needed. University, ON

† [Special Equipment] Regarding software: We are presently investigating for purchase of several programs. College, AB

† [Special Equipment] We've just put in a request to upgrade and expand our equipment to the tune of $90,000 - there is a good chance we will get some of this. University, A B

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Regarding hearing-impaired software: Under investigation for purchase. College, AB

Service providers also described some sources of funding for adaptive equipment, such as grants and government programs. For example:

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Most of the adaptive computer equipment/technology has been acquired through grant writing, fund raising and donations. University, Atlantic Canada

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] All adaptive equipment is arranged for, provided and maintained by SET/BC and is provided to students individually through SOG and provincial funds. College, BC [Adaptive Computer Equipment] We have no budget. Our equipment has been purchased through provincial access grants. University, MB

In the case of Cegeps, regionally-based, but provincially administered, equipment sharing programs are in place:

† [Special Equipment] Les equipements specialises sont fournis par un organisme parapublic aux eleves qui en ont besoin. Colltege, QC

† [Special Equipment] Tous ces equipements peuvent nous sont fournis par

† [Cegep ...I lorsque le besoin est exprime par un etudiant. Cegep, QC

† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] specialiste a louer par le biais de l'equipement provincial. Nous sommes toujours rattaches au [Cegep ...I a ce sujet. Cegep, QC

C. Physical Accessibility of Safety, Housing and Transportation

Service providers were asked to rate a series of non-academic service features, i.e.: Safety, Emergency Features (safety policies, refuge alarms, flashing alarms, emergency procedures, and emergency assistance); Access to On-Campus Housing (identified parking spaces, low grade ramps, low pressure doors, wing door handles, wide doorways, automatic doors, accessible washrooms, handrails on walkways, accessible rooms, and attendant care); and Adapted On-Campus Transportation (on-campus transportation, convenient hours of service, and affordable cost). See Charts 3.110 to 3.114 and Charts 3.120 to 3.131.

With respect to Safety and Emergency procedures, service providers tended to rate their campuses high. For instance, over 50% of service providers rated Safety Policies (Chart 3.11O), Emergency Procedures (Chart 3.113), and Emergency Assistance (Chart 3.114) as either Excellent or Good.

In terms of open-ended responses, service providers described a range of levels of service provision (or lack thereof). For instance: Security knows where each disabled student is when in class. College, QC

† The main campus is connected almost entirely by a series of tunnels and skywalks as well as mini-wheelchair elevators and lifts. The university has a 24-hour telephone service for reporting on-campus physical accessibility concerns (e.g. snow clearing, elevator repairs, light bulb replacements). Univevsity, Atlantic Canada

† Aucune measure specifique pour les etudiants handicapes. College, QC

However, the most common description included plans to improve safety and emergency services. For instance:

† Starting to get organized in this area. University, BC

† Flashing alarms are gradually being installed in the 90-year old buildings on our campus. University, A B

† We don't have a safety officer; Safety committee is presently inactive but hopefully operational again soon. College, AB

† Regarding flashing alarms: will be shortly. University, BC

Similarly, while a good proportion of service providers do not provide on-campus housing, and do not rate the facilities, those that do rate the facilities, tend to rate them favourably (see Charts 3.1 19 to 3.128). As well, large proportions of service providers do not rate on-campus transportation. However, those that do rate the services, tend to rate them favourably (see Charts 3.129 to 3.131).

In terms of open-ended responses, service providers tended to describe a range of facilities, and, again, plans to improve facilities. For instance:

† Varies from building to building; some are very good others are completely inaccessible. University, BC

† Low-grade ramps; depends on building; accessible washrooms depends on building. University, ON

† New accessible dorms are planned. College, BC

Similarly, a range of on-campus transportation services were described, ranging from not necessary, to a time-limited service of varying cost. For instance:

† Our campus is small and we don't need "on-campus transportation". Our local Handi-Transit Co. drives right onto the campus. University, ON

† Rarely necessary. Sometimes our security people have transported or we use taxis. University, ON

† No charge for service. Earliest ride is at 8:15 am. Last possible ride is at 3:45 pm. Service Mon-Fri only. University, MB

† Community Handidart doesn't run after 4:30. College, BC

D. Educational Accessibility, Intake and Athletic Programs

Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to educational accessibility and program intake, i.e.: Entrance Examinations (adaptations for exams and alternative test procedures); Preparation, Registration and Orientation (registration assistance, pre-registration for students with disabilities, TTY registration, study courses, orientation workshops, tours, mobility orientation, and classroom relocation); as well as Athletic Programs and Facilities for PWDs (adapted athletic/fitness programs, adapted athletic/fitness equipment, athletic/fitness specialists assistance with course materials).

Service providers tended to rate entrance examination services high. Adaptations for Exams, and Alternative Test Procedures, for instance, were both rated Excellent or Good by 60% (42170) of service providers (Chart 3.133). These high ratings were also reflected in the open-ended responses:

† Available upon receipt of documentation. University, BC

† Have a clear policy with the Test Centre and Admissions regarding Accommodations for entrance exams. College, ON

† Enlarged print available for mature student-testing. Individual testing and extended time are offered for the mature-student testing. No braille version but oral testing an option. College, ON

† Nous mettrions en oeuvre les mesures si des cas particuliers en necessitaient. Cigep, QC

Some aspects of preparation and orientation were also rated highly by service providers. For instance, a full 91% (64170) of service providers rated registration assistance as either Excellent or Good (Chart 3.134). Similarly, 68% (47170) rated orientation workshops (Chart 3.138), 80% (56170) rated tours (Chart 3.139), and 59% (41170) rated classroom relocation as either Excellent or Good (Chart 3.141). On the other hand, some features were rated low, or as Not Available. For instance, a full 51% (36170) of service providers rated TTY registration as Not Available (Chart 3.136), and 19% (13170) rated Mobility Orientation as Not Available (Chart 3.140).

Service providers again described a range of services and assessment in open-ended responses with respect to registration and orientation. For example:

† Students wishing to register using TTY may get help from Services for Students with Disabilities or directly from departments or registration office. Orientation is individual for all students coming to Services for Students with Disabilities followed by group orientation at beginning of term. University, AB

† [Registration] Done by CNIB. University, BC

† These areas would be improved by having our consultants on campus over the summer. College, A B

Greater than 25% of service providers rated each of the athletic programs as not available on their campus (see Charts 3.142 to 3.144). On the other hand, where these programs were rated, they tended to be rated highly. Descriptions of these programs in the open-ended responses also tended to be favourable:

† Recreation staff give 1: 1 attention to disabled students to customize recreational programming to individual needs. College, AB

† Rely on self-initiated requests for fitness programs - equipment available for those who can exercise only certain parts of their body. College, ON

E. Educational Accessibility and Academic Accommodation

Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to educational accessibility and academic accommodation: i.e. Assistance with Lecture Notes, Assignments and Research Papers (note takers, photocopy pass, computer access, library assistance, on-campus readers, editing help, peer tutoring service, proof reading, sign interpreters, oral interpreters, remediating skills, NCR paper, lap-top computer, and other specialized note-taking services); Text-Book Access (on-campus large print texts, braille texts, talking books, page turners, CCTV, and assistance retrieving special texts); Support for Instructors (assistance with alternate teaching strategies, in-service training, case-by-case representation to instructors, and notification to instructors by administration); Student Services for Persons with Disabilities (vocational assessment, psycho-educational assessments, counseling, assistance with job placement, and tutoring); Course Requirements (oral examinations, extended exam time, formula to calculate extended time, private rooms for writing, alternative formats, exam study assistance, writers, readers, and modification of course/program requirements).

The ratings of these programs varies considerably across features (see Charts 3.145 to 3.18 1). Many of the features are rated high by service providers: e.g. 90% (63170) rated extended exam time (Chart 3.175), 86% (60170) rated library assistance (Chart 3.148) and 80% (56170) rated counselling (Chart 3.171) as either Excellent or Good. On the other hand, a number of features were rated as Not Available by a sizeable proportion of service providers. For instance, 66% (46170) rated page turners (Chart 3.162), 40% (28170) rated braille texts (Chart 3.160), and 5 1 % (3 6/70) rated on-campus large-print texts (Chart 3.159) as Not Available.

In the open-ended responses, service providers identified the provision of assistance with lecture notes, assignments and research papers, where available, as based largely on the use of volunteers:

† Students are asked to help. A very small fee is paid to these students. We get $5.00 for note-taker during one semester. College, BC

† Students may audiotape lectures using their own equipment. Students may be able to access instructor's notes and prepared overheads in some instances. Notetakers are volunteer (student picked and screened). Instructor or Disability Services staff may assist with recruiting volunteer notetaker. Student may photocopy notetakers notes at no charge in Disability

† Small population, sometimes difficult to match peers with appropriate tutors. College, A B

However, in the case of Cegeps, support for certain services is paid for by government agencies and often accessed through a larger Cegep.

† Preneur de notes, interpretes, ordinateurs portatifs, papier NCF - finances par le Ministere de l'education. Service de tutorat - non-disponible -> a developper. Universzte, QC

† #45-7: CAF centre d'aide en francais pour les etudiants. #45.9, 10: Interpretes envoyes par [Cegep ...I pour tous les etudiants malentendants. Cegep, QC

† [alternate text-book formats] Lorsque le besoin est exprime, nous pouvons offrir ce service grCce a la collaboration du [Cegep ...I. Cigep, QC

In the case of alternative text-book formats, however, other provincial governments provide similar support. For example:

† Where resources are needed, we work through Provincial Education Department to obtain. College, MB

† All transcription services and requests ordered through other agencies. i.e. W.R.M., recording for blind, PALS, etc. In-house brailling available for classroom handouts and documents. Must be ordered 2 months before class starts. College, ON

† Braille dictionaries available; many English novels, plays, poetry (classics) available on tape; Inter-library Loans Division of the campus library assists students to order special texts. University, A tlantic Canada

Service providers tended to rate instructor support features low. For instance, 42% (29170) of service providers rated in-sewice training of instructors (Chart 3.166) as either Fair or Poor, and 19% (13170) rated it as Not Available. In the open-ended responses, service providers described some shortcomings. For instance:

† Training is good, but few take advantage. University, BC

† Area has been neglected recently. Need to focus on in-service training for faculty. College, QC

† Certainly there is room for improvement here, in that there has not been an active PD approach in recent years. However, the attitude of most faculty is in keeping with the intent of the Ontario Human Rights Code. College, ON

Regarding service for students with disabilities such as vocational assessment, job placement and tutoring, service providers described a range of practices, including outside referrals and in-house services:

† [Vocational assessment] Usually referred out for assessments. College, AB

† Regarding vocational assessment - [Not available] Except for assessment to determine suitable adaptive technology. Regarding assistance with job placement - We work closely with our career and placement services. Regarding tutoring - Tutoring is offered through the student's union. University, AB

† Tutors charge anywhere from $1 0-1/hour. English Department provides free peer tutoring. SIFC provides free tutoring. University, SK

Service providers also described shortcomings in the provision of alternate examination times, formats and locations:

† Understaffed to provide complete support for exams. College, AB

† Modifications of course/program requirements are rarely done in terms of diploma credit requirements and consideration of alternative credits. The approach taken is to provide accommodations to allow people to obtain the required credits. College, ON

† Nos eleves handicapes ne sont pas lourdes. Nous n'avons pas eu, jusqu'a present, a mettre en place des services mais si tel cas se presentait, mon r81e serait de mettre en place les services appropries. Cegep, QC

F. Accessibility Programs, Administration and Volunteers

Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to Accessibility Programs (human resources, required budget for services/programs, program administration, senior administrative commitment, an overall policy on access for students, a policy that covers specific disabilities (eg. learning disabled), in-service training for all employees, and faculty/departmental cooperation); and Volunteer Services.

Service providers tended to rate the provision of administrative support and policies highly, with the possible exception of required budget for service; while 50% (28170) of service providers rated required budget (Chart 3.183) as either Fair or Poor, only 43% (23170) rated it as either Excellent or Good. On the other hand, 49% (34170) rated policy on specific disabilities (Chart 3.187) as Not Available, and 43% (30170) rated in-service training for all employees as Not Available (Chart 3.188).

Service providers provided a range of assessments of administrative support and policies, and, once again, described plans to improve in the future:

† Some faculty departments are great; others are sometimes difficult. There is no one who has adequate time. Coordinating services in an add-on to my role as Dean and Registrar. There is no budget. University, MB

† We are writing a general policy. Draft #1 submitted. We have had few seriously disabled students so no programs, in-service have been developed. College, AB

† Faculty have been cooperative for the most part in providing accommodations. A draft policy regarding ALL disabilities is in progress. College, ON

† Le college a une certain expertise professionnelle pour qu'ils dispose la formation technique en education specialisee. ColEge, QC

Service providers tended to emphasize the importance of volunteer-supported programs, for instance:

† Readings onto tapes are completed in a timely manner; two notetakers per student per class, exam writing support, etc. We never have a shortage of volunteers - they are very dedicated. University, A B

G. Accessibility of External Community

Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to External Community Accessibility Liaison with public schools, Cegeps, other post-secondary institutions, other service providers and agencies, government agencies, and other resources); and Transportation (transit on campus, accessible public transit, and the cost of accessible public transit).

Service providers tended to rate liaison with other post-secondary institutions and service providers and agencies highly - a full 78% (54170) rated liaison with other service providers and agencies (Chart 3.194), 70% (49170) rated liaison with governmental agencies (Chart 3.195), and 63% (44170) of service providers rated liaison with other post-secondary institutions (Chart 3.193) as either Excellent or Good. These high ratings were also reflected in the open-ended responses (e.g.):

† Meet with Regional Special Education Advisory Committees from school boards, have an External Community Advisory Committee and a Learning Disability Advisory Committee. College, ON

† [The Centre] has an excellent working partnership with the disability-related community agencies in [The Province] . Many of these groups are represented on our Advisory Committee (i.e. the Dean of Student Affairs Advisory Committee for Students with Disabilities). University, Atlantic Canada

However, government agencies in some cases were the subject of criticism (e.g.):

† Vocational Rehabilitation Services in BC, and in particular our area, has undergone significant changes in the past couple of years - in general their service is extremely inadequate. College, BC

In terms of public transportation, service providers tended to rate accessibility to public transit more highly than the cost of public transit. 47% (33170) (Chart 3.198) rated the accessibility of public transit as either Excellent or Good, while only 38% (27170) (Chart 3.199) rated the cost of public transit as either Excellent or Good. Interestingly, however, 16% (1 1170) of service providers did not know the cost of accessible public transit in their communities. In terms of open-ended responses, service providers described the arrangement and cost of accessible public transit:

† Adapted transport organized by handicapped association. College, BC

† Bus pass at same rate as everyone else. College, QC

H. List of Charts

  • Chart 3.1: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.3: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.2: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.4: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.5: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.6: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.7: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.8: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.9: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Wide Aisle Areas
  • Chart 3.10: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Accessible Service Counters
  • Chart 3.11: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Special Services for PWDs
  • Chart 3.12: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Elevators in All Areas
  • Chart 3.13: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Braillenarge Print Elevator Numbers
  • Chart 3.14: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Braillenarge Print Elevator Buttons
  • Chart 3.15: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Floor Bells in Elevators
  • Chart 3.16: Service Provider Ratings of: Main Student Services Building: Coloured Strips on Stairs
  • Chart 3.17: Service Provider Ratings of Main Student Services Building: Outside Lighting
  • Chart 3.18: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.19: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.20: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.21: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.22: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.23: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.24: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.25: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.26: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Wide Aisle Areas
  • Chart 3.27: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Accessible Service Counters
  • Chart 3.28: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Special Service for PWDs
  • Chart 3.29: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Elevators in All Areas
  • Chart 3.30: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Braille/Large Print Elevator Numbers
  • Chart 3.31: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Braille/Large Print Elevator Buttons
  • Chart 3.32: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Floor Bells in Elevators
  • Chart 3.33: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Coloured Strips on Stairs
  • Chart 3.34: Service Provider Ratings of Main Administration Building: Outside Lighting
  • Chart 3.35: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.36: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.37: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.38: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.39: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.40: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.41: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.42: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.43: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Wide Aisle Areas
  • Chart 3.44: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Accessible Service Counters
  • Chart 3.45: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Special Services for PWDs
  • Chart 3.46: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Elevators in All Areas
  • Chart 3.47: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Braille/Large Print Elevator Numbers
  • Chart 3.48: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Braille/Large Print Elevator Buttons
  • Chart 3.49: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Floor Bells in Elevators
  • Chart 3.50: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Coloured Strips on Stairs
  • Chart 3.51: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Outside Lighting
  • Chart 3.52: Service Provider Ratings of Main Library Building: Adapted Library Stations
  • Chart 3.53: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.54: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.55: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.56: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.57: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.58: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.59: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.60: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.86: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Outside Lighting
  • Chart 3.61: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Wide Aisle Areas
  • Chart 3.62: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Accessible Service Counters
  • Chart 3.63: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Special Services for PWDs
  • Chart 3.64: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Elevators in All Areas
  • Chart 3.65: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Braillekarge Print Elevator Numbers
  • Chart 3.66: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Braille/Large Print Elevator Buttons
  • Chart 3.67: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Floor Bells in Elevators
  • Chart 3.68: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Coloured Strips on Stairs
  • Chart 3.69: Service Provider Ratings of Main Food Services Building: Outside Lighting
  • Chart 3.70: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.71: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.72: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.73: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.74: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.75: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.76: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.77: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.78: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Wide Aisle Areas
  • Chart 3.79: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Accessible Service Counters
  • Chart 3.80: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Special Services for PWDs
  • Chart 3.81: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Elevators in All Areas
  • Chart 3.82: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Braille/Large Print Elevator Numbers
  • Chart 3.83: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Braille/Large Print Elevator Buttons
  • Chart 3.84: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Floor Bells in Elevators
  • Chart 3.85: Service Provider Ratings of Book Store: Coloured Strips on Stairs
  • Chart 3.87: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Scanner
  • Chart 3.88: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: CCTV Enlargement System
  • Chart 3.89: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Brailler
  • Chart 3.90: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: 4-Track Tape Recorder
  • Chart 3.91: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: TDD/TTY
  • Chart 3.92: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Phonic Ears/FM Amplification
  • Chart 3.93: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Acoustically Treated Rooms
  • Chart 3.94: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Talking Calculator
  • Chart 3.95: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Wheelchairs
  • Chart 3.96: Service Provider Ratings of Special Equipment: Specialized LD Software
  • Chart 3.97: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Voice Recognition
  • Chart 3.98: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Internet Access
  • Chart 3.99: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Loaner Lap-Tops
  • Chart 3.100: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Braille Printers
  • Chart 3.101: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Braille Displays
  • Chart 3.102: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Real-Time Captioning
  • Chart 3.103: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Screen Reading Software
  • Chart 3.104: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Refreshable Braille System
  • Chart 3.105: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Screen Enlarging Software
  • Chart 3.106: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Adapted Computer Keyboards
  • Chart 3.107: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Hearing Assistance Software
  • Chart 3.108: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Adaptive Technology Training
  • Chart 3.109: Service Provider Ratings of Adaptive Computer Equipment: Separate Adaptive Technology Centre
  • Chart 3.110: Service Provider Ratings of Safety, Emergency Features: Safety Policies
  • Chart 3.111: Service Provider Ratings of Safety, Emergency Features: Refuge Areas
  • Chart 3.112: Service Provider Ratings of Safety, Emergency Features: Flashing Alarms
  • Chart 3.113: Service Provider Ratings of Safety, Emergency Features: Emergency Procedures
  • Chart 3.114: Service Provider Ratings of Safety, Emergency Features: Emergency Assistance
  • Chart 3.115: Service Provider Ratings of Access to Labs: Accessible Counters in Science Labs
  • Chart 3.116: Service Provider Ratings of Access to Labs: Specialized Tech in Science Labs
  • Chart 3.117: Service Provider Ratings of Access to Labs: Accessible Computer Labs
  • Chart 3.118: Service Provider Ratings of Access to Labs: Adaptive Tech in Computer Labs
  • Chart 3.119: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Identified Parking Spaces
  • Chart 3.120: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Low Grade Ramps
  • Chart 3.121: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Low Pressure Doors
  • Chart 3.122: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Wing Door Handles
  • Chart 3.123: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Wide Doorways
  • Chart 3.124: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Automatic Doors
  • Chart 3.125: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Accessible Washrooms
  • Chart 3.126: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Handrails on Walkways
  • Chart 3.127: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Accessible Rooms
  • Chart 3.128: Service Provider Ratings of Access to On-Campus Housing: Attendant Care
  • Chart 3.129: Service Provider Ratings of Adapted On-Campus Transportation: On-Campus Transportation
  • Chart 3.130: Service Provider Ratings of Adapted On-Campus Transportation: Convenient Hours of Service
  • Chart 3.131: Service Provider Ratings of Adapted On-Campus Transportation: Affordable Cost
  • Chart 3.132: Service Provider Ratings of Entrance Examinations: Adaptations for Exams
  • Chart 3.133: Service Provider Ratings of Entrance Examinations: Alternative Test Procedures
  • Chart 3.134: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Registration Assistance
  • Chart 3.135: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Pre-Registration for SWDs
  • Chart 3.136: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: TTY Registration
  • Chart 3.137: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Study Courses
  • Chart 3.138: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Orientation Workshops
  • Chart 3.139: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Tours
  • Chart 3.140: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Mobility Orientation
  • Chart 3.141: Service Provider Ratings of Preparation, Registration, Orientation: Classroom Relocation
  • Chart 3.142: Service Provider Ratings of Athletic Programs, Facilities For PWDs: Adapted Athletic/Fitness Programs
  • Chart 3.143: Service Provider Ratings of Athletic Programs, Facilities For PWDs: Adapted AthleticIFitness Equipment
  • Chart 3.144: Service Provider Ratings of Athletic Programs, Facilities for PWDs: AthleticIFitness Specialists
  • Chart 3.145: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Note Takers
  • Chart 3.146: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Photocopy Pass
  • Chart 3.147: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Computer Access
  • Chart 3.148: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Library Assistance
  • Chart 3.149: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: On-Campus Readers
  • Chart 3.150: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Editing Help
  • Chart 3.151: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Peer Tutoring Service
  • Chart 3.152: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Proof Reading
  • Chart 3.153: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Sign Interpreters
  • Chart 3.154: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Oral Interpreters
  • Chart 3.155: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Remediation Skills
  • Chart 3.156: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: NCR Paper
  • Chart 3.157: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Lap-Top Computers
  • Chart 3.158: Service Provider Ratings of Notes, Assignments, Papers Assistance: Other Note-Taking Services
  • Chart 3.159: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: On-Campus Large Print Texts
  • Chart 3.160: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: Braille Texts
  • Chart 3.161: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: Talking Books
  • Chart 3.162: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: Page Turners
  • Chart 3.163: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: CCTV
  • Chart 3.164: Service Provider Ratings of Text-Book Access: Assistance Retrieving Special Texts
  • Chart 3.165: Service Provider Ratings of Support for Instructors: Alternate Teaching Strategy Assistance
  • Chart 3.166: Service Provider Ratings of Support for Instructors: In-Service Training
  • Chart 3.167: Service Provider Ratings of Support for Instructors: Case-by-Case Representation
  • Chart 3.168: Service Provider Ratings of Support for Instructors: Instructor Notification by Admin
  • Chart 3.169: Service Provider Ratings of Student Services for PWDs: Vocational Assessment
  • Chart 3.170: Service Provider Ratings of Student Services for PWDs: Psycho-Educational Assessments
  • Chart 3.171: Service Provider Ratings of Student Services for PWDs: Counselling
  • Chart 3.172: Service Provider Ratings of Student Services for PWDs: Assistance with Job Placement
  • Chart 3.173: Service Provider Ratings of Student Services for PWDs: Tutoring
  • Chart 3.174: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Oral Examinations
  • Chart 3.175: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Extended Exam Time
  • Chart 3.176: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Formula to Calculate Extended Time
  • Chart 3.177: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Private Rooms for Writing
  • Chart 3.178: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Alternative Formats
  • Chart 3.179: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Exam Study Assistance
  • Chart 3.180: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Writers, Readers
  • Chart 3.181: Service Provider Ratings of Exams, Course Requirements: Course/Program Modifications
  • Chart 3.182: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Human Resources
  • Chart 3.183: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Services/Programs Required Budget
  • Chart 3.184: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Program Administration
  • Chart 3.185: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Senior Administrative Commitment
  • Chart 3.186: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Overall Access Policy
  • Chart 3.187: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Policy on Specific Disabilities
  • Chart 3.188: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: In-Service Employee Training
  • Chart 3.189: Service Provider Ratings of Administrative Support, Policy: Faculty/Departmental Cooperation
  • Chart 3.190: Service Provider Ratings of Volunteer Services: Volunteer Services
  • Chart 3.191: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: Public Schools
  • Chart 3.192: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: CEGEP
  • Chart 3.193: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: Other Post-Secondary Institutions
  • Chart 3.194: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: Service Providers, Agencies
  • Chart 3.195: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: Government Agencies
  • Chart 3.196: Service Provider Ratings of Liaison with External Community: Other Resources
  • Chart 3.197: Service Provider Ratings of Transportation - External Community: Transit on Campus
  • Chart 3.198: Service Provider Ratings of Transportation - External Community: Accessible Public Transit
  • Chart 3.199: Service Provider Ratings of Transportation - External Community: Cost of Accessible Public Transit



Top

All contents copyright ©, 1999-2018, National Educational 
Association of Disabled Students. All rights reserved.