257 Research Article 2021 39(3): 257-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Published by the UFS http://journals.ufs.ac.za/index.php/pie © Creative Commons With Attribution (CC-BY) FACULTY FAMILIARITY WITH INCLUSIVE PRACTICES FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES AT NAJRAN UNIVERSITY ABSTRACT Inclusive practices are essential determinants of academic success for students with learning disabilities (LD) in university education. The current study examined the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive practices for students with LD in a university in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A quantitative survey design was employed with 264 faculty members who had inadequate familiarity with inclusive practices for students with LD. Differences were noted in the inclusive practices provided to the students as Saudi faculty members were inadequately familiar with instructional, classroom and assignment practices. The study also showed that Saudi faculty members were unfamiliar with examination practices provided to students with LD. Demographic variables showed statistically insignificant differences in Saudi university education. Implications and suggestions for future research were also highlighted. Keywords: Inclusive practices; learning disabilities; university; students; higher education; familiarity; Saudi Arabia. 1. INTRODUCTION The inclusive experiences of students with learning disabilities (LD) in higher education vary among universities worldwide (Abed & Shackelford, 2019, Lombardi et al., 2015). This variation is attributed to many factors, including the effectiveness of transition planning, which the students are provided within secondary school and the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive educational practices (Trainor et al., 2016). Therefore, a summary of performance portfolio can help enhance transition planning programmes and faculty members› familiarity for students with learning disabilities (Davis & Southward, 2021). This study proposed that understanding the factors contributing to university students’ satisfaction and academic success with LD may positively contribute to enhancing their learning experiences in the university environment (Stage & Milne, 1996). These factors were AUTHOR: Dr Turki Alqarni1 AFFILIATION: 1Najran University, Saudi Arabia DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39. i3.19 e-ISSN 2519-593X Perspectives in Education 2021 39(3): 257-276 PUBLISHED: 16 September 2021 RECEIVED: 11 June 2021 ACCEPTED: 28 July 2021 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=11341 http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/Overcoming-Poverty-and-Inequality-in-South-Africa-An-Assessment-of-Drivers-Constraints-and-Opportunities https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3413-7307 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2582021 39(3): 258-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) divided into three categories: institutional, dispositional and coping strategies (Stage & Milne, 1996). Institutional factors included facilities and services provided by the university, which can facilitate or impede the development of goals of post-secondary students with learning disabilities (Stage & Milne, 1996). Equipping the students with beneficial strategies, such as self-accommodation and providing them with coaching programmes focused on developing organisational, time management and self-advocacy skills can positively reinforce their university experience (Lightfoot et al., 2018). Additionally, dispositional factors including attitudinal or behavioural traits of the students also influence their academic progress and were found to be the most significant contributors to the academic success of post-secondary students with learning disabilities (Ekelman et al., 2013; Greenbaum et al., 1995; Perry & Franklin, 2006; Lightfoot et al., 2018). Furthermore, coping strategies included management techniques that the students developed to deal with inadequacy in skill areas and specific subjects that were impacted by their learning disabilities (Stage & Milne, 1996, Gustems-Carnicer et al., 2019). Decision- makers in universities should stress the importance of disability service providers in educating students with learning disabilities and equipping them with an adequate understanding of their disability, which will help them identify their accommodation requirements and strengths (Lightfoot et al., 2018, Hadley, 2019). 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 The concept of familiarity The term familiarity has different meanings depending on the contexts in which it is used. In this study, it is defined as the knowledge of someone or something or having exposure to someone or something (Pozzulo et al., 2019). Encouraging familiarity with inclusive practices significantly influences the academic progress of students with learning disabilities. A prime reason for increasing faculty members’ familiarity with learning disabilities is that it can help reduce the stigmatisation of students with learning disabilities in communities and schools (Pelleboer-Gunnink et al., 2020). In addition, it can also promote the inclusion and belonging of students with learning disabilities within their societies (Pelleboer-Gunnink et al., 2020). 2.2 The concept of inclusive practices Inclusive practices refer to arrangements that teachers or faculty members follow to attain presence, involvement and achievement for all learners, particularly those who are at risk (Marchesi et al., 2009). Increasing involvement in classrooms accepts differences as a fact, including many learners participating together with various learning styles, prior information and abilities (Finkelstein et al., 2021). Furthermore, in order to ensure effective inclusive practices delivered to students, a series of factors has to be represented that can influence the higher education system. These factors are grouped into three classifications; including, alterations in the system, operations of inclusive schools and applications of inclusive practices in classrooms (Guasp et al., 2016). 3. LITRETURE REVIEW The majority of the students with LD expressed positive attitudes towards taking alternative courses and obtaining academic accommodations and emphasised the importance of http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2592021 39(3): 259-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities self-advocacy skills in their academic success (Sigafoos, 2019, Skinner, 2004). When students with LD progress to college, more focus should be on the self-disclosure process, including legal accommodations, self-determination and self-advocacy skills (Newman et al., 2019). Thus, the preparatory curriculum of high schools and colleges for post-secondary students with LD should help build students› self-advocacy skills and ensure competency in using academic strategies. In addition, it should reinforce the students’ social skills to help them confidently interact with their instructors and peers without learning disabilities and educate students about disability laws (Skinner, 2004, Barton, 2018). Moreover, increasing the awareness of students with LD on the university campus may help educate students without learning disabilities about the characteristics of students with learning disabilities and promote positive attitudes towards them (Hadley, 2019). Students with LD are hesitant to request their academic accommodations due to the apprehension among their peers without learning disabilities (Barga, 1996). Students without learning disabilities often understand the academic accommodation process, but they cannot understand the reasons behind it (Meyer et al., 2012, Slee, 2018). Therefore, Alqarni et al. (2019) suggested that it is vital to educate students without learning disabilities about the types and characteristics of learning disabilities as it may help them partake in positive and non-judgemental interactions with their peers without learning disabilities. It is essential to emphasise the importance of disability service providers in raising awareness to counter misunderstandings among students without learning disabilities about the perceived “unfairness” in requesting accommodations for students with LD (Meyer et al., 2012). Consequently, it is essential to investigate university students’ attitudes without learning disabilities in integrating with students with learning disabilities. Moreover, examining the attitudes of the faculty members towards providing accommodation services is critical to facilitate inclusive practices for students with LD in higher education (Hansen et al., 2017). 3.1 Faculty members› attitudes towards university students with learning disabilities Generally, faculty members have positive attitudes towards the inclusion of students with learning disabilities, but they have inadequate knowledge of disability inclusion in terms of legislation and providing appropriate accommodations (Abu-Hamour, 2013; Rao & Gartin, 2003; Khansa, 2015; Lombardi et al., 2015; Jensen et al., 2004; Khouri et al., 2019). However, faculty members have recently expanded their knowledge of disability in higher education compared to past years and categorically exhibited positive perceptions of integrating individuals with learning disabilities in universities (Leyser & Greenberger, 2008). The level of confidence in teaching and perceptions of students with learning disabilities vary among faculty members (Rao & Gartin, 2003). When faculty members are confident and positive about educating students with learning disabilities in higher education, the students can be better included within the university environment and receive the most appropriate accommodations (Abu-Hamour, 2013). To facilitate successful inclusion of students with LD, instructors are required to change their attitudes towards students with learning disabilities and provide them with appropriate accommodations (Khansa, 2015). However, prior research has shown that faculty members and staff who provide accommodating services to students are uncertain about their ability to efficiently meet accommodation requests of students with learning disabilities (Murray et al., 2011; Taylor et al., 2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2602021 39(3): 260-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) Some faculty members avoid or are hesitant to accommodate students with learning disabilities. They believe that providing accommodations might burden them with additional duties and cause them further stress. Skinner (2007) pointed out that some faculty members are unwilling to use extra credit as a reasonable accommodation for students with learning disabilities because it presents an unfair advantage and should not be used for a specific group of students while excluding the others. This type of accommodation was least likely to be provided by faculty members in universities, particularly in engineering and law departments (Rao & Gartin, 2003). However, most faculty members are generally willing to provide accommodations for students with learning disabilities assigned by universities (Murray et al., 2008; Khouri et al., 2019; Jensen et al., 2004; Murray et al., 2011; Leyser et al., 2011; Abu-Hamour, 2013; Rao & Gartin, 2003; Khansa, 2015; Lombardi et al., 2015; Skinner, 2007; Hindes & Mather, 2007; Bourke et al., 2000). Khouri et al. (2019) mentioned that a high willingness to provide accommodations to students with LD is associated with substantial knowledge of the importance of assisting students with LD. It was presumed that such knowledge might help students with LD pursuing post-secondary education to get accepted in media (Ben-Yehudah & Brann, 2019), along with increasing the awareness of university deans towards the necessity of educating faculty members about accommodating practices provided to students with LD (Khouri et al., 2019). Awareness of the characteristics of students with LD is not sufficient to exhibit a willingness to accommodate those students in the university; faculty members are required to be willing to advocate for students with LD to receive the most appropriate accommodating practices in higher education (Murray et al., 2008; Harris & Lee, 2019). Murray et al. (2008) believed that faculty members could effectively advocate for students with LD if they had opportunities to improve their skills in helping the students. These skills can be acquired through disability- focused training, which has a positive relationship with the faculty members› willingness to support and advocate for students with LD (Murray et al., 2011). Skinner (2007) conducted a study focusing on examining the faculty›s willingness to provide accommodations and alternative courses for students with LD. In a survey delivered to institutions in the south-eastern United States, 253 faculty members participated. The results indicated a variation in the faculty’s willingness to provide accommodations and alternative courses based on some variables, including schools, academic ranks and types of accommodations requested (Skinner, 2007). In conclusion, faculty members were either very willing to provide four of the eight accommodations, including calculators, alternative locations, extended time and computers or laptops to accommodate students with LD (Skinner, 2007; Shea et al., 2019). The favourability of providing accommodation types can also vary among faculty members within universities (Lipka et al., 2020). Faculty members are highly willing to use accommodations for extended time on tests and extended deadlines on class assignments (Khansa, 2015). The use of alternative exams and providing extended time on examinations are substantially considered by instructors because of the ease in understanding and implementing them (Bourke et al., 2000). In some instances, faculty members prefer assisting in copying lecture outlines and preparing drafts of projects (Leyser et al., 2011). A study conducted by Rao and Gartin (2003) showed that most faculty members preferred to allow students with learning disabilities extra time on examinations. As can be noted from previous http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2612021 39(3): 261-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities studies, providing extended time is a preferred accommodation (Khansa, 2015; Bourke et al., 2000). Although students normally do their assignments with little to no assistance, faculty members are required to change their attitudes and beliefs of post-secondary students with LD by discussing their involvement in teaching those students (Jensen et al., 2004; Moriña Díez et al., 2015; López Gavira & Moriña, 2015). Similar studies that have been conducted across different cultures present varying aspects of faculty members’ practices of inclusive instructions for post-secondary students with LD in global universities (Agrawal et al., 2019; Shecter-Lerner et al., 2019). For instance, an interesting study conducted among faculty members in the United States, Canada and Spain, investigated the differences in faculty members’ attitudes towards disability-related topics and inclusive instructions using the inclusive teaching strategies inventory (ITSI). The ITSI measures attitudes and actions across seven subscales: (a) inclusive teaching practices, (b) accommodations, (c) inclusive classrooms and lectures, (d) inclusive assessment, (e) disability laws and concepts, (f) course modifications and (g) accessible course materials (Lombardi et al., 2015). A questionnaire was prepared and interactive workshops were organised in which 102 faculty members from the three countries participated. The findings of the study indicated that participants had different attitudes and actions across the seven subscales. Concerning attitudes, the US faculty members’ responses were the highest across the seven subscales, except for their knowledge of disability laws and concepts. In contrast, the attitudes of Spanish faculty members were consistently the lowest compared to the two other countries (Lombardi et al., 2015). 3.2 Learning disabilities in Saudi higher education Factually, Saudi Arabia started educating students with disabilities in 1985 with deaf and blind students in schools known as scientific institutions (Al-Mousa, 2010). After that special education services and support in Saudi Arabia improved with the development of special education programmes all over the world, especially in the United States of America (Alquraini, 2013). During the years 1962 and 1992, a significant development was noticed in the field of special education in Saudi Arabia, which resulted in mainstreaming in the primary schools and institutions (Al-Mousa, 2010). This development was apparent as establishing special schools and institutions for individuals with disabilities, especially for those with visible disabilities (Battal, 2016). However, these institutions were commonly built in cities more than rural areas of Saudi Arabia (Al-Jadid, 2013) The main contributor to the development of Saudi special education, especially learning disabilities, was the law of individuals with disabilities education act (IDEA, 2014) (Aldabas, 2015). After this law emerged, invisible disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities) were recognised and stated in the disability law of Saudi Arabia (Aldabas, 2015). Students with mild learning disabilities were educated in the general education classroom with resource room support, whereas students with moderate, profound and severe learning disabilities in special day schools (Aldabas, 2015). However, those students were integrated in 1987 by the legislation of disability in Saudi Arabia (Al-Jadid, 2013). The legislation of disability supported the equal rights of individuals with learning disabilities by assuring access to «free and appropriate medical, psychological, social, educational, and rehabilitation services through public agencies» (Al-Jadid, 2013:458). Consequently, students with learning disabilities have only been slightly included in Saudi higher education due to many reasons. Firstly, they are not engaged in effective transition http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2622021 39(3): 262-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) planning during their high or post-secondary schools, which creates more learning challenges for them in colleges (Almalki, 2017). Secondly, even though faculty members were aware about the nature, characteristics and needs of students with learning disabilities within universities, they lack awareness of endorsement programmes and learning environment provided to students with LD in Saudi higher education (Aldhuibi, 2009). Therefore, training can not only support faculty members› knowledge, but also it can change their attitudes towards the inclusion of students with LD in higher education (Alhaznawi & Alanazi, 2021). Moreover, faculty members working in Saudi emerging universities, believed that these universities had a low degree in the availability of quality standards for the programmes and services of students with learning disabilities (Hijab & Arab, 2017).Therefore, there was a lack of appropriate special education services provided to students with learning disabilities that had to be reformed by special education departments at some universities under the United States› special education legislations including, the IDEA (Alquraini, 2013). Due to the educational inclusion of students with LD in general education schools, high numbers of students with LD graduated from secondary schools which led the policymakers in the government to take action to the education future of those students (Maajeeny et al., 2009). Therefore, the Saudi government passed a decree in 1999, empowering students with LD and other disabilities to continue their learning at Saudi universities and colleges. Students with learning disabilities and other disabilities faced admittance issues at Saudi universities. These issues were summarised by Maajeeny et al. (2009) including (1) lack of legislations, ensuring the rights of students with learning disabilities at Saudi universities and receiving the specialised care (Alquraini, 2013, Maajeeny et al., 2009). (2) Students with learning disabilities could not reach the admittance requirements and entry of Saudi universities, especially in specialisations with high requirements such as sciences and medicine. (3) Admitted students with learning disabilities encountered unavailable and inappropriate accommodations due to the lack of faculty awareness about the necessary accommodations for those students (Alhossein, 2016; Maajeeny et al., 2009). (4) The attitudes of leaders at Saudi universities and higher education increased the acceptance of students without disabilities due to the excessive numbers of those from secondary schools (Almalki, 2017). (5) The inability of students with learning disabilities to adapt to the differences of instructions between the university and high schools. (6) Finally, the lack of collaboration between decision-makers and faculty in providing the appropriate accommodation to students with learning disabilities at universities (Maajeeny et al., 2009). Increasingly, Saudi universities realised the issues surrounding post-secondary students with learning disabilities and stated some suggestions to overcome them by establishing disability units directed by the deanship of student affairs in the majority of universities (Almalki, 2017). These universities attempted to supply the necessary accommodations to facilitate post-secondary students with disabilities, especially for students with visible and learning disabilities. Saudi universities such as King Saud University, Majmaah University and King Faisal University were continuously contributing to the education of post-secondary students with learning disabilities (Mohammed & Arafa, 2015). However, King Saud University was the leading university that included different resources to develop the engagement of students with disabilities on the university campus (Aldabas, 2015). Moreover, due to the increase in the number of students with disabilities entering the King Saud University (KSU), the university administration of KSU implemented global standards of http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2632021 39(3): 263-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities all support services for students with disabilities (Aldabas, 2015). Therefore, a development project of services established and included programmes, adaptation of assistive technology, academic and educational development, professional development and universal access programme (Mohammed & Arafa, 2015). Additionally, Alhossein (2016) suggested that more studies need to be conducted about Saudi faculty members› awareness related to accommodating practices provided to students with ADHD or LD in Saudi universities. The need of the current study is that few studies are focusing on the faculty attitudes of students with LD at Saudi universities. However, previous studies did not investigate the faculty›s familiarity with inclusive practices for university students with LD at Saudi universities. 3.3 Purpose of the Study Although various countries have attempted to make strides in the global movement towards inclusion (MacFarlane & Woolfson, 2013), students with learning disabilities still face several challenges in higher education (Reed et al., 2011). One such challenge is implementing inclusive practices; many teachers lack quality preparation for teaching students with learning disabilities (Al-Ahmadi, 2009). Binmahfooz (2019) indicated that many teachers have limited or no experience working with students with learning disabilities. One way to help students with learning disabilities at the university level is to ensure that instructors have adequate capability and experience to deal with students with LD and to teach them and help integrate them into university life. While previous studies highlighted the crucial role of the skills and experiences that instructors should acquire to effectively teach students with learning disabilities, there is limited research on university faculty›s familiarity with inclusive educational practices for students with LD in Saudi Arabia and worldwide (Alnahdi & Schwab, 2020). Therefore, it was vital to research the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities. In essence, this study sought to contribute to the knowledge base on teacher education and inclusive practices implemented globally, especially for students with learning disabilities and countries still in the early stages of developing and implementing inclusive educational practices. 3.4 Research questions Given the importance of providing educational support and accessibility to post-secondary students at universities, the primary aim of the present study was to examine the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive practices for students with LD in university education. Saudi faculty members at a public university addressed several significant research questions. Specifically, there were three main questions that the study focused on. First, how familiar are faculty members with inclusive practices for students with LD? Second, did the level of familiarity differ for different types of inclusive practices? Third, was there a difference in familiarity with inclusive practices depending on academic ranks and the number of years of teaching experience? 4. METHOD 4.1 Participants A survey was sent to over 1500 faculty members from Najran University (NU) in Saudi Arabia. A total of 264 faculty members, having different years of teaching experience and academic ranks, participated in this study. Najran University is an emerging university that was previously known as The Community College of King Khalid University. The university http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2642021 39(3): 264-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) includes 14 colleges, 3 research centres and supporting deanships. Table 1 displays the demographic characteristics of the study participants. Table 1: Background information on faculty members Demographic variables Total (N=264) Gender Male Female Teaching Experience (years) 1–3 4–7 8+ Previous teaching of (students with LD) Yes No Academic Rank professor associate professor assistant professor lecturer 191 73 12 118 134 122 142 90 98 75 1 4.2 Questionnaire A descriptive research design was used to collect the data. More specifically, the researcher used a survey method to investigate participants’ familiarity with large populations. Therefore, the researcher designed a study instrument that included a questionnaire that was based on the Likert scale. It was created online using Qualtrics, a web-based software used to conduct surveys, with a shareable link. The questionnaire also consisted of demographic questions, including gender, academic ranks, teaching experiences, previous experiences teaching students with LD and inclusive practices. The questions on inclusive practices were generated based on standards of accommodating post-secondary students with LD underlined by the DO-IT Centre of the University of Washington on their website. Apart from the accommodations, this website also includes information and media related to the concept of Universal Design (UD), which means designing and compositing environments, products or buildings to be greatly used and accessible by all individuals regardless of their disability, age and size (Burgstahler, 2008). Furthermore, the study questions were divided into three aspects: instructional practices, classroom and assignment practices, and examination practices. Each aspect contained multiple questions and responses. The researcher used a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (very familiar) to 5 (very unfamiliar); in which, 1 = very familiar, 2 = familiar, 3 = inadequately familiar, 4 = unfamiliar, and 5 = very unfamiliar. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2652021 39(3): 265-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities 4.3 Validity and reliability The questionnaire items were translated into Arabic and proofread to preserve their intended meanings. The five experts who measured the validation of the questionnaire’s contents had majored in special education. Several revisions were made to the questionnaire based on the reviewers’ suggestions and the approval of research ethics was then obtained from NU. Thirty randomly selected participants from NU undertook a pilot study. The survey asked whether they wanted to participate in the study. Thereafter, the questionnaire’s internal reliability was measured using Cronbach’s alpha; all scales indicated excellent reliability (0.98). 4.4 Procedure and data analysis After testing the study instrument in terms of validity and reliability and obtaining the approval of research ethics from NU, the researcher, who worked in the Department of Special Education at NU, sent an official letter along with the survey link of the questionnaire to the dean of the College of Education via the online portal of NU. Next, the dean forwarded the survey link to the Vice President of Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, who then issued a letter with the survey link to all deans of colleges. The deans forwarded the questionnaire to the chairs of departments at NU. Lastly, the chairs of departments submitted the questionnaire to all faculty members via the university’s online portal. The responses were converted into numerical data. SPSS 23.0 was used to produce means and standard deviations for measuring faculty members familiarity. After that, a two- way ANOVA was used to determine significant differences in familiarity levels of faculty members concerning types of inclusive practices, academic ranks and years of teaching experience. Lastly, hierarchical regression analysis was used to reveal the best predictor of faculty members’ familiarity among the study variables. 5. FINDINGS The current study aimed to examine faculty members’ familiarity with inclusive practices for students with LD using a quantitative survey. The mean overall score of faculty members’ familiarity was 2.8 (SD = 1.2) on a five-point Likert-type scale, indicating inadequate familiarity with inclusive practices for post-secondary students with LD, as shown in Table 2. Table 2: Average familiarity of inclusive practices N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Total of Inclusive Practices 264 1.00 5.00 2.8519 1.20012 Valid N (listwise) 264 The second research question addressed the mean differences among the three types of inclusive practices. Three categories were measured: instructional practices, classroom and assignment practices and examination practices. Overall, the faculty members expressed inadequate familiarity with inclusive practices for post-secondary students with LD. The mean differences were as follows: instructional practices (M= 2.82), classroom and assignment practices (M= 2.86) and examination practices (M=3.63). However, it was noted that Saudi faculty members have low familiarity with examination practices, as presented in Table 3 below. These results suggest that most Saudi faculty members are unfamiliar with examination practices for students with LD in Saudi university education. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2662021 39(3): 266-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) Table 3: Average familiarity for types of inclusive practices Instruction Assignment and classroom Examination N Valid 264 264 264 Missing 0 0 0 Mean 2.8291 2.8699 3.6390 Std. Deviation 1.21810 1.23314 1.48463 Variance 1.484 1.521 2.204 Minimum 1.00 1.00 1.17 Maximum 5.00 5.00 5.83 As shown in Table 4, the one-way ANOVA results revealed that faculty’s familiarity with inclusive practices across their teaching experiences of students with LD in post-secondary education was not statistically significant, F (1.26) = 1.90, p = .169, denoting similarities in familiarity across the (Yes) group (taught students with LD) (n = 122, M = 2.74, SD = 1.35) and (No) group (n = 142, M = 2.94, SD = 1.04). The one-way ANOVA comparing faculty’s familiarity of inclusive practices across their academic rank showed that the lecturer group contained only one case and would not permit post-hoc comparisons. The results were not statistically significant, F (3.26) = .74, p = .526, indicating similarities in familiarity across professors (n = 90, M = 2.71, SD = 1.37), associate professors (n = 98, M = 2.90, SD = 1.12), and assistant professors (n = 75, M = 2.93, SD = 1.06). Finally, the one-way ANOVA comparing faculty’s familiarity of inclusive practices across the number of years of experience was not statistically significant, F (2.26) = 1.57, p = .209), denoting similarities in familiarity across the 1–3 years group (n = 12, M = 3.28, SD = 1.66), 4–7 years group (n = 118, M = 2.73, SD = 1.12), and 8+ group (n = 134, M = 2.91, SD = 1.21). Overall, the one-way ANOVA results found that teaching students with LD in post-secondary education, academic ranks and the number of years of teaching experience did not have a significant impact on the faculty’s familiarity with inclusive practices provided to students with LD in higher education. Table 4: Differences in faculty members’ demographics for inclusive practices N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper Bound Yes 122 2.7421 1.35487 .12266 2.4993 2.9849 1.00 5.00 No 142 2.9462 1.04491 .08769 2.7728 3.1195 1.00 5.00 Total 264 2.8519 1.20012 .07386 2.7064 2.9973 1.00 5.00 Professor 90 2.7107 1.37370 .14480 2.4230 2.9984 1.00 5.00 Associate Professor 98 2.9074 1.12853 .11400 2.6812 3.1337 1.00 5.00 Assistant Professor 75 2.9386 1.06595 .12309 2.6933 3.1838 1.00 5.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2672021 39(3): 267-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper Bound Lecturer 1 3.6071 . . . . 3.61 3.61 Total 264 2.8519 1.20012 .07386 2.7064 2.9973 1.00 5.00 1-3 years 12 3.2887 1.66009 .47923 2.2339 4.3435 1.00 5.00 4-7 years 118 2.7334 1.12758 .10380 2.5278 2.9389 1.00 5.00 8+ 134 2.9171 1.21149 .10466 2.7101 3.1241 1.00 5.00 Total 264 2.8519 1.20012 .07386 2.7064 2.9973 1.00 5.00 6. DISCUSSION The findings of the current descriptive and quantitative survey study may reveal beneficial effects for the education of students with learning disabilities in Saudi higher education. The first finding of this study indicates that faculty members are inadequately familiar with inclusive practices appropriate for students with LD in Saudi universities. Secondly, the examination practices were the least familiar among the three types of inclusive practices given to students with LD in Saudi university education. In addition, faculty characteristics including teaching students with LD in post-secondary education, academic ranks and the number of years of teaching experience have no significant impact on their familiarity towards students with LD in Saudi university education. To begin with, faculty members are inadequately familiar with inclusive practices given to Saudi post-secondary students with LD in university education. This suggests that it is essential to increase the adequacy of faculty members in terms of their familiarity with the inclusive practices provided to students with LD in higher education. Leyser et al. (2011) and Slee (2018) affirm that it is vital to increase the awareness and knowledge of faculty members to benefit students with LD in university education. However, previous studies indicate that faculty members who did not receive training had inadequate familiarity and knowledge about the inclusive practices for students with LD (Murray et al., 2011). Similar findings were also observed in the study by Leyser and Greenberger (2008), that more than half of the faculty members had insufficient to minimal familiarity with the types of inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities. The current research also suggests that Saudi faculty members must develop their knowledge of the three types of inclusive practices used to accommodate students with LD in higher education. This study also revealed that, among the three types of inclusive practices, faculty members were unfamiliar with the examination practices provided to students with LD. However, this is not consistent with several other studies that suggest that most faculty members understand and are familiar with the alternative examination practices provided to students with LD in university education (Khansa, 2015, Bourke et al., 2000). Apart from examination practices, the current study’s findings also suggest that Saudi faculty members are required to develop their knowledge and familiarity with other inclusive practices, as they http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2682021 39(3): 268-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) are inadequately familiar with inclusive instructional practices and inclusive classroom and assignment practices of students with LD in university education. The present research findings agree with previous studies that the faculty’s experiences teaching university education make insignificant differences to their familiarity with inclusive practices provided to students with LD. Notably, the results of Leyser and Greenberger (2008) indicated that the differences in the number of years of teaching were found to have no significant influence on faculty’s familiarity with accommodating practices provided to university students with LD. However, Leyser et al. (2011) noticed a relationship between teaching in university education and faculty’s attitudes toward providing inclusive practices for students with LD. It was clear that faculty members with less than five years of experience displayed more positive attitudes than faculty members with more experience (Leyser et al., 2011, Abu-Hamour, 2013). Consequently, it can be assured that faculty’s experiences of teaching university students with LD may change their attitudes towards inclusive practices for students with LD, but it does not influence their familiarity with inclusive practices. The current findings are inconsistent with previous studies on how the faculty’s experiences of teaching students with LD influence their familiarity with inclusive practices. The current study suggests that teaching university students with LD makes no significant difference to their familiarity with inclusive practices for students with LD. This finding contradicts the Leyser and Greenberger’s (2008) study, which reported a significant increase in knowledge and influenced attitudes towards inclusive practices among faculty members who had previous experience teaching students with learning disabilities. Therefore, this study raises an interesting question for educators about whether they should consider previous teaching experiences when organising training sessions for faculty members to increase their familiarity with inclusive practices for university students with LD. Additionally, this current finding also suggests that having previous experiences of teaching students with LD does not necessarily make faculty members familiar with inclusive practices provided to them. Lastly, the findings of this study also reveal that no differences were found in faculty’s familiarity with inclusive practices for students with LD concerning their academic ranks. The results showed that being a professor, associate professor, assistant professor or lecturer makes no difference to their familiarity with inclusive practices provided to students with LD. The current findings may result from recent trends that help integrate students with LD in university education in Saudi Arabia (Aldabas, 2015). However, previous studies contradict these findings. For instance, studies conducted by Rao and Gartin (2003) as well as Leyser and Greenberger (2008) found a strong relationship between faculty members’ ranks and their knowledge and attitudes towards inclusive practices provided to students with LD in university education (Rao & Gartin, 2003). In another study conducted by Abu-Hamour (2013), it was found that assistant professors possessed more knowledge about inclusive practices provided to university students with learning disabilities (Abu-Hamour, 2013). 7. CONCLUSION To ensure the successful provision of inclusive practices to students with LD in university campuses, increasing the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive practices is the highest priority of university decision-makers to promote the inclusion of students with LD in university programmes and specialisations. Despite the present-day significance of faculty members› familiarity with inclusive practices, the current study’s findings revealed the clear lack of http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2692021 39(3): 269-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities familiarity with inclusive practices, especially in examination practices, among the Saudi faculty members at Najran University. In conclusion, the study proposes that given the lack of faculty members› familiarity with inclusive practices, it becomes vital to implement training programmes aimed at enhancing the familiarity and capability of faculty members concerning the use of inclusive practices for students with LD at Saudi universities. 8. IMPLICATIONS As indicated in the present study, there is an obvious requirement to improve Saudi faculty’s familiarity with the inclusive practices provided to students with LD in Saudi universities. Faculty members and administrators can be adequately educated through in-service programmes (Bourke et al., 2000). Training sessions would benefit faculty members by enhancing their knowledge of inclusive practices used in classrooms and assignments, examinations and instructional practices (Hindes & Mather, 2007). The current findings indicate that faculty members are unfamiliar with examination practices. Furthermore, as more students with LD are pursuing a university education, faculty members need to understand their requirements and traits better and increase their knowledge of the inclusive practices used in examinations. Providing ongoing workshops and training with actual models of exams specifically designed for students with LD may help faculty members draw an ideal picture of instructional and examination accommodations given to students with LD (Khouri et al., 2019). 9. LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Although the current study examined the familiarity of faculty members with inclusive practices provided to university students with LD in Saudi Arabia, the findings mostly corroborate the results of previous studies conducted on faculty members› familiarity with inclusive practices in universities globally. These findings reveal a profound requirement for better support and practices granted by Saudi laws, despite the legislation mandating appropriate accommodations to university students with LD in Saudi universities. Institutions providing university education must do more to improve the provision of accommodations to students with LD. Moreover, this research proposes the requirement for faculty members to assess their willingness to support students with LD in Saudi Arabia, a fact that needs to be addressed in future research. In addition, it is supposed that university students without learning disabilities may also reveal similar findings concerning their knowledge of inclusive practices compared to faculty members. This supposition is another opportunity for future research. An explicit limitation of the present study is the relatively small sample of faculty members that participated in the survey. Although the current research incorporated a demographic approach, when comparing faculty›s familiarity with inclusive practices across their academic ranks, only one lecturer participated in the survey, making it difficult to compare faculty members› ranks. Additionally, since the study investigated the faculty members› responses of only one public Saudi university, it represents the faculty members› familiarity of only a specific area in Saudi Arabia and does not amount to conclusive evidence. It should be noted that the current results may not be generalised to faculty members working in different regional universities across Saudi Arabia. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2702021 39(3): 270-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) 10. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICES The current findings revealed inadequate familiarity of Saudi faculty members with inclusive practices, especially examination practices. Therefore, providing the faculty members with practical tools would support them when dealing with university students with LD. It is essential to emphasise the importance of incorporating the principles of universal design (UD) to teach university students with LD (Burgstahler, 2008). Moreover, the engagement of UD in the education of students with learning disabilities in universities is beneficial because it is equitable to use, simple and intuitive, provides flexibility in use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical effort and appropriate size and space for use (Burgstahler & Cory, 2010). Another recommendation in favour of providing inclusive practices for university students with LD is increasing the awareness of learning disabilities within the university campus and adopting inclusive learning practices. Experts must create a campaign targeting the university experiences of students with learning disabilities and share their experiences with faculty members regardless of their position, titles and abilities. 11. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Financial support from the Deanship of Scientific Research at Najran University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (NU/-/SEHRC/10/1158) is gratefully acknowledged. REFERENCES Abed, M.G. & Shackelford, T.K. 2019. Educational support for Saudi students with learning disabilities in higher education. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 35(1): 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12214 Abu-Hamour, B. 2013. Faculty attitudes toward students with disabilities in a public university in Jordan. International Education Studies, 6: 74–81. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n12p74 Agrawal, J., Barrio, B.L., Kressler, B., Hsiao, Y.-J. & Shankland, R.K. 2019. International policies, identification, and services for students with learning disabilities: An exploration across 10 countries. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 17: 95–113. Al-Ahmadi, N.A. 2009. Teachers’ perspectives and attitudes towards integrating students with learning disabilities in regular Saudi public schools. Ohio: Ohio University. AL-Jadid, M.S. 2013. Disability in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Medical Journal, 34: 453–460. AL-Mousa, N. 2010. The experience of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in mainstreaming students with special educational needs in public schools (a success story). Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: UNESCO. Aldabas, R.A. 2015. Special education in Saudi Arabia: History and areas for reform. Creative Education, 6: 1158–1167. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.611114 Aldhuibi, M. 2009. The need for support programs for students with learning difficulties at the undergraduate level: A survey study of the opinions of faculty members at King Saud University. Riyadh: Master King Saud University http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12214 https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n12p74 https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.611114 2712021 39(3): 271-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities Alhaznawi, A.A. & Alanazi, A.S. 2021. Higher education faculty staff members› attitudes toward students› inclusion with high incidence disabilities in Saudi Arabia. World Journal of Education, 11, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v11n1p51 Alhossein, A. 2016. Willingness of university faculty members to provide accommodations for students with AD/HD in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation, 37: 1–41. Almalki, N. 2017. Perspectives of Saudi special education teachers towards secondary and post-secondary transition services for youth with multiple disabilities. International Journal for Research in Education, 41: 304–337. Alnahdi, G.H. & Schwab, S. 2020. Inclusive education in Saudi Arabia and Germany: students’ perception of school well-being, social inclusion, and academic self-concept. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1823163 Alqarni, T., Algethami, R., Alsolmi, A. & Adhabi, E. 2019. College students› knowledge and attitudes toward the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the university. Education, 9: 9–18. Alquraini, T. 2013. Legislative rules for students with disabilities in the United States and Saudi Arabia: A comparative study. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1: 1–14. Barga, N.K. 1996. Students with learning disabilities in education: Managing a disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29: 413–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949602900409 Barton, L. 2018. Sociology and disability: Some emerging issues. Disability and society. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315841984 Battal, Z.M.B. 2016. Special education in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Technology and Inclusive Education, 5: 880–886. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijtie.2047.0533.2016.0113 Ben-Yehudah, G. & Brann, A. 2019. Pay attention to digital text: The impact of the media on text comprehension and self-monitoring in higher-education students with ADHD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 89: 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2019.04.001 Binmahfooz, S. 2019. Saudi Special Education Preservice Teachers’ Perspective towards Inclusion. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Florida: University of South Florida. Bourke, A.B., Strehorn, K. & Silver, P. 2000. Faculty members› provision of instructional accommodations to students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33: 26–32. https://doi. org/10.1177/002221940003300106 Burgstahler, S. 2008. Equal access: Universal design of instruction, DO-IT. Washington, DC: University of Washington. Burgstahler, S.E. & Cory, R.C. 2010. Universal design in higher education: From principles to practice. Harvard: Harvard Education Press. Davis, M.T. & Southward, J.D. 2021. Summary of performance portfolio: Supporting post- secondary transition for students with learning disabilities. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2021.1891 016 Finklstein, S., Sharma, U. & Furlonger, B. 2021. The inclusive practices of classroom teachers: A scoping review and thematic analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25: 735– 762. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1572232 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v11n1p51 https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1823163 https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949602900409 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315841984 https://doi.org/10.20533/ijtie.2047.0533.2016.0113 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2019.04.001 https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300106 https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300106 https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2021.1891016 https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2021.1891016 https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1572232 2722021 39(3): 272-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) Gusap, J.J.M., Ramón, M.R.R. & De la iglesia mayol, B. 2016. Buenas prácticas en educación inclusiva. Educatio siglo XXI, 34: 31–50. https://doi.org/10.6018/j/252521 Gustems-Carnicer, J., Calderón, C. & Calderón-Garrido, D. 2019. Stress, coping strategies and academic achievement in teacher education students. European Journal of Teacher Education, 42: 375–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1576629 Hadley, W. 2019. What college presidents need to know about college students with learning disabilities. Journal of Research on the College President, 3(1): 3. Hansen, K.D., Dawson, D.L. & Specht, J.A. 2017. Faculty preparedness to teach students with learning disabilities: Developing an instrument to assess faculty perceptions. Exceptionality Education International, 27: 99–115. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v27i1.7748 Harris, T.M. & Lee, C.N. 2019. Advocate-mentoring: A communicative response to diversity in higher education. Communication Education, 68: 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523 .2018.1536272 Hijab, A. & Arab, K. 2017. Developing a quality standards of programs and services of students with disabilities in University Of Tabuk in light of international standards. Global Institute for Study & Research Journal, 3: 14–32. Hindes, Y. & Mather, J. 2007. Inclusive education at the post-secondary level: Attitudes of students and professors. Exceptionality Education Canada, 17: 107–128. Jensen, J.M., Mccrary, N., Krampe, K. & Cooper, J. 2004. Trying to do the right thing: Faculty attitudes toward accommodating students with learning disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17: 81–90. Khansa, R. 2015. Faculty attitudes toward students with learning disabilities in higher education institute in Lebanon. Journal of Psychological Sciences, 1: 88–97. Khouri, M., Lipka, O. & Shecter-Lerner, M. 2019. University faculty perceptions about accommodations for students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1658812 Leyser, Y. & Greenberger, L. 2008. College students with disabilities in teacher education: Faculty Attitudes and Practices. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23: 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250802130442 Leyser, Y., Zeiger, T. & Romi, S. 2011. Changes in self-efficacy of prospective special and general education teachers: Implication for inclusive education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 58: 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/103491 2X.2011.598397 Lightfoot, A., Janemi, R. & Rudman, D.L. 2018. Perspectives of north american postsecondary students with learning disabilities: A scoping review. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 31: 57–74. Lipka, O., Khouri, M. & Shecter-Lerner, M. 2020. University faculty attitudes and knowledge about learning disabilities. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13603116.2019.1658812 Lombardi, A., Vukovic, B. & Sala-Bars, I. 2015. International comparisons of inclusive instruction among college faculty in Spain, Canada, and the United States. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28: 447–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 https://doi.org/10.6018/j/252521 https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1576629 https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v27i1.7748 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1536272 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1536272 https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1658812 https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250802130442 https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2011.598397 https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2011.598397 https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1658812 https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1658812 2732021 39(3): 273-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities López Gavira, R. & Moriña, A. 2015. Hidden voices in higher education: Inclusive policies and practices in social science and law classrooms. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19: 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.935812 Maajeeny, Al-Thobiti, A., Al-Khuriji, F.S., Al-Qaddoumi, K.M. & Howedi, M.A. 2009. The reality of students with special needs in universities and institutions of higher education in the states of the Council Gulf Arab Cooperation 160 Macfarlane, K. & Woolfson, L. M. 2013. Teacher attitudes and behavior toward the inclusion of children with social, emotional and behavioral difficulties in mainstream schools: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29: 46–52. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.006 Meyer, A., Myers, K., Walmsley, A. & Laux, S. 2012. Academic accommodations: Perceptions, knowledge and awareness among college students without disabilities. Education, 2: 174– 182. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.edu.20120205.10 Mohammed & Arafa, M. 2015. Evaluating the supporting services provided to students with special needs at Majmaah University. Journal of Educational Science. Moriña Díez, A., López, R.G. & Molina, V.M. 2015. Students with disabilities in higher education: A biographical-narrative approach to the role of lecturers. Higher Education Research & Development, 34: 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934329 Murray, C., Flannery, B.K. & Wren, C. 2008. University staff members› attitudes and knowledge about learning disabilities and disability support services. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21: 73–90. Murray, C., Lombardi, A. & Wren, C.T. 2011. The effects of disability-focused training on the attitudes and perceptions of university staff. Remedial and Special Education, 32: 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510362188 Newman, L.A., Madaus, J.W., Lalor, A.R. & Javitz, H.S. 2019. Support receipt: Effect on postsecondary success of students with learning disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 42: 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143418811288 Pelleboer-Gunnink, H.A., Van Oorsouw, W., Van Weeghel, J. & Embregts, P. 2020. Familiarity with people with intellectual disabilities, stigma, and the mediating role of emotions among the Dutch general public. Stigma and Health, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000228 Pozzulo, J., Pica, E. & Sheahan, C. 2019. Familiarity and conviction in the criminal justice system: Definitions, theory, and eyewitness research, Oxford University Press. https://doi. org/10.1093/oso/9780190874810.001.0001 Rao, S. & Gartin, B.C. 2003. Attitudes of university faculty toward accommodations to students with disabilities. Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 25: 47–54. Reed, F.D.D., Mcintyre, L.L., Dusek, J. & Quintero, N. 2011. Preliminary assessment of friendship, problem behavior, and social adjustment in children with disabilities in an inclusive education setting. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 23: 477–489. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10882-011-9236-2 Shea, L.C., Hecker, L. & Lalor, A.R. 2019. From disability to diversity: College success for students with learning disabilities, adhd, and autism spectrum disorder. USA: Stylus Publishing, LLC. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.935812 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.006 https://doi.org/10.5923/j.edu.20120205.10 https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934329 https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510362188 https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143418811288 https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000228 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190874810.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190874810.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-011-9236-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-011-9236-2 2742021 39(3): 274-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) Shecter-Lerner, M., Lipka, O. & Khouri, M. 2019. Attitudes and knowledge about learning disabilities: A comparison between Arabic-and Hebrew-speaking university students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 52: 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419836397 Sigafoos, L.L. 2019. A case study of perspectives pertaining to academic accommodations for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Unpublished dissertation. Austin, Texas: University of Texas. Skinner, M. E. 2004. College students with learning disabilities speak out: What it takes to be successful in postsecondary education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17: 91–104. Skinner, M.E. 2007. Faculty willingness to provide accommodations and course alternatives to postsecondary students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 22: 32–45. Slee, R. 2018. Inclusive education isn›t dead, it just smells funny. London: Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9780429486869 Stage, F.K. & Milne, N.V. 1996. Invisible scholars: Students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Higher Education, 67: 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780268 Taylor, M.J., Duffy, S. & England, D. 2009. Teaching students with dyslexia in higher education. Education Training, 51(2): 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910910941291 Trainor, A.A., Morningstar, M.E. & Murray, A. 2016. Characteristics of transition planning and services for students with high-incidence disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39: 113– 124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948715607348 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419836397 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429486869 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429486869 https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1996.11780268 https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910910941291 https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948715607348 2752021 39(3): 275-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Alqarni Faculty familiarity with inclusive practices for students with learning disabilities APPENDIX A The study questionnaire Participants’ characteristics FemaleMale Gender 8+4–7 1–3 Teaching Experience (years) No Yes Previous teaching of (students with LD) lecturer assistant professor associate professor professor Academic Rank Instructional practices very unfamiliarunfamiliar inadequately familiar familiar very familiar Clearly define course requirements and announce exam dates and assignments Provide printed materials ahead of time to allow students enough time to read and understand the course content Use multimedia methods to present class materials to address diversity in learning styles and strengths (eg auditory, visual, kinesthetic) Provide important information by oral and written formulas Set goals and review and summarize previous lectures periodically Use more than one method to clarify the information Read aloud what I’m writing on the board Use short, uncomplicated instructions and repeat them more than once Allow sufficient time for students to provide directions and necessary information Use written commentary videos Submit study guides or review papers Design distance learning materials with accessibility in mind Classroom and assignment practices Help the student find effective peer bloggers for lectures in class Provide the student with a copy of the lecture notes or the lecture outline Allow the student to record the lecture. Allow the student extra time to complete assignments in class, especially written assignments Provide notes and help students plan the workflow for assignments. Offer assistance in correcting written work. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 2762021 39(3): 276-276 http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19 Perspectives in Education 2021: 39(3) Examination practices Allow students with learning disabilities to have an extension in test time. Perform tests in a low-dispersion room Use of assistive reader, writer, or word processor technology in exams Allow oral tests Use assistive technology to check grammar and spelling for writing tests. Use a calculator for the tests. http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i3.19