The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 44, No. 3 - 38

Amy N. Miele * Justin W. Kelley * Florence A. Hamrick

Consistent with uDl, when educators provide
flexible options for learning instead of applying
largely uniform approaches, even if the flexibility is targeted to help a specific student or
population of students, more students benefit.
Closed captioning of video broadcasts is one
example of uDl; while it was initially targeted to the hearing impaired, everyone benefits
from closed captioning in a noisy environment,
if the speech patterns or accent are difficult to
understand, or if the volume control is set too
low for hearing or otherwise muted.

cODes Of cOnDUcT
AnD sTUDenTs WITH AsD
students with asD can violate the student code
of conduct without intention. for example, a
student following another student on campus
can be regarded as stalking. refusing to evacuate during a fire alarm or drill-or potentially
disrupting other residents or impeding their
evacuation-is a serious safety concern. in
practice, educators and mental health professionals do not always agree on whether college
students with mental or developmental disabilities should be subject to the same disciplinary procedures following code of conduct
violations or depending on the circumstances
be allowed to withdraw from the institution
in lieu of going through the conduct process
(Kaplin & lee, 2015). one overarching obligation of campus officials is to warn possible
victims of violence if any student is potentially dangerous. however, campus officials
may violate the family educational rights
and privacy act (ferpa, 1974) and state
privacy laws by routinely "warn[ing] students'
families or others of medical or psychological

. . . many of the . . . behaviors and
characteristics of ASD are not
limited to people with ASD . . . .
when educators provide flexible
options for learning instead
of applying largely uniform
approaches, even if the flexibility
is targeted to help a specific student
or population of students, more
students benefit.

conditions" (Kaplin & lee, 2015, p. 584). the
presence of a disability is not automatically a
relevant or mitigating consideration.
in Bercovitch v. Baldwin School (1998), the
parents of a student with attention deficit
disorder filed a lawsuit under aDa's title iii
when their child was suspended following behavioral disruptions in the classroom and numerous unsuccessful efforts made by school
staff to control or eliminate the behaviors. the
appellate court determined that the student's
disability did not qualify him for protection
under the aDa because the disability did not
substantially limit his ability to learn. however,
the court also noted that a pattern of disruptive
behaviors may be inconsistent with the aDa's
"otherwise qualified" standard. according to
Kaplin and lee (2015), "if a court determines
that following the rules is an essential function of being a student then the student may
not be 'otherwise qualified' and thus would

T h e J o u r n a l o f C o l l e g e a n d U n i v e r s i t y St u d e n t H o u s i n g

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 44, No. 3

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 44, No. 3