The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1 - 188

Jo M. Hendrickson • Amy Vander Busard • Derek Rodgers • Bethany Scheidecker

and do not represent views of the Office
of Postsecondary Education or the U.S.
Department of Education. The authors
wish to acknowledge and thank Ernie
Pascarella, director of the Center for
Research in Undergraduate Education at
the University of Iowa, and data analysis
team members, Jana Hanson, Teniell
Trolian, and Dustin Weeden.

To date the bulk of postsecondary education endeavors on behalf of students with intellectual
disabilities (ID) (e.g., Down syndrome, Autism
Spectrum Disorder, pervasive developmental
delay, traumatic brain injury) have focused on
vocational preparedness and the transition of
secondary students to paid employment and
greater independence (e.g., Moon, Simonsen,
& Neubert, 2011). Following the recommendations of the National Council on Disability
and Social Security Administration (2000) to
expand secondary programs to two- and fouryear college and university campuses and with
the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004, a
multitude of postsecondary transition programs
developed nationwide (Neubert & Redd, 2008).
Participation of students with ID in postsecondary education programs is positively correlated with competitive employment (Moon
et al., 2011; Zafft, Hart, & Zimbrich, 2004),
an improved sense of independence (Neubert
& Redd, 2008), and increased satisfaction in
such domains as emotional well-being and
personal development (Hughson, Moodie, &
188

Uditsky, 2006). In spite of this knowledge and
the development of a widening range of postsecondary options for students with ID, adult
outcomes for these individuals are disheartening in comparison to those for typically developing students (Kochhar-Bryant, 2007; Ludlow,
2012) and even students with other disabilities
such as learning disabilities (Wagner, Newman,
Cameto, Levine, & Garza, 2006).
The vision of providing opportunities for
students with ID to receive quality postsecondary education is not new. Although some
programs (e.g., the Pace Program at National
Louis University-Skokie; the Mason LIFE
Program at George Mason University) have
existed for years, comprehensive college experiences for students with ID have been limited
in number and unavailable to most families
(Grigal, Hart, & Paiewonsky, 2010). With the
passage of the Higher Education Opportunity
Act of 2008 (HEOA), some of the barriers to
students on college and university campuses
have been removed. For example, students
with ID enrolled in institutions with Comprehensive Transition Program status, as defined
by the Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 2008, are now able to (a) apply
for federal support (e.g., Pell grants, federal
work-study programs, federal supplemental
education opportunity grants) that had previously been available only to students in degreeearning programs; (b) be admitted to college
without high school diplomas, due to a continuation of their IEP from high school; (c)
participate in college coursework; and (d) be
provided with the individualized supports to
maximize their educational experience. These
changes in federal law encourage institutions
of higher education to offer students with ID

The JourNal of College aNd uNiVersiTy sTudeNT housiNg
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1
