Cited by 122Disability Education and EmploymentDisability Rights and RepresentationHigher Education Practises and Engagement

Policy and provision for disabled students in higher education in Scotland and England: the current state of play

Tinklin, Teresa, Riddell*, Sheila, Wilson, Alastair·2004·Studies in Higher Education

Abstract

Higher education in the UK has been through a period of major change since the mid‐1980s. A massive expansion in the number of students has been coupled with a reduction in the unit of resource, increased inter‐institutional competition and greater accountability. Within this demanding context, pressure has also been applied to institutions to improve accessibility for disabled people, through funding council mechanisms, quality assurance procedures and, more recently, changes in legislation. Drawing on the findings of an ESRC‐funded research project, Disabled students and multiple policy innovations in higher education, involving a survey of higher education institutions, the article describes and discusses the current state of policy and provision for disabled students in higher education in Scotland and England. It concludes that, while there are definite signs of progress in the development of provision for disabled students, many areas need much further attention. A particular area of concern is teaching and learning. Effecting real change in this area means addressing questions which challenge conventional notions of effective teaching and learning practice. It is argued that improvements in provision for disabled students in this area would mean improvements for all students. Disability is still seen as a fairly distinct policy area, mainly addressed by student support services. Further significant progress can only be made if disability is embedded into all institutional policies and procedures. Its relocation, particularly in the area of teaching and learning, however, will demand a significant commitment on the part of all institutions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0307507042000261599

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 15 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tinklin, T., Riddell*, S., & Wilson, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
Corresponding author
Tinklin, Teresa
Venue
Studies in Higher Education
Published
2004-10
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
637-657
ISSN
  • 0307-5079 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-174X
OpenAlex
W2013204029
Cited by
122
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 1
FWCI
15.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Studies in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
Keywords
students with disabilities, disability in higher education, accessibility, higher education policy, teaching-learning process, student support services, disability law, quality assurance, higher education funding, Scotland, England

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review