university is representative of many other comprehensive large public universities across the nation. In fact, findings reported here corroborated data collected on faculty attitudes and practices in many other universities. Second, responses by in the classroom. Other data collection methodologies such as interviews and classroom observations, as well as input from students about faculty behavior, should be used to verify data that are based on faculty self reports. Third, although the sample size in this study was quite large, about one half of the faculty contacted did not respond. Tests of goodness of fit indicated that while on some demographic variables no differences were found between respondents and the faculty population, on others differences were observed. In future studies, larger samples and/or slightly different representations of the total faculty are desirable. Ways of reaching this goal may include asking deans or department chairs to encourage faculty to respond or sending out additional follow-up reminders after the deadline. Finally, the authors would like to note again that very few comparisons of faculty attitudes and practices over time, regarding students with disabilities, are reported in the literature. The present study has addressed this need. Future researchers may wish to pursue this line of research.
1Actual probabilities are given for readers who may wish to use their judgment in deciding whether or not the null hypothesis should be rejected.
Age (in years)
Years College Teaching