Implementing the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 in higher education.

The purpose of this paper is to provide educators and administrators in higher education with a greater understanding of how the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (Public Law 101-336) may affect institutions of higher education and to suggest ways that occupational therapists can assist institutions of higher education to comply with the ADA. When educators attempt to comply with the ADA in systems of higher education, the complexity of universities calls for a model reflective of that complexity. The systems approach to higher education, a model based on the general systems theory, is suggested as such a model. The three essential components of the model--input (i.e., applicants to a university), throughput (i.e., enrolled university student), and output (i.e., the student being graduated)--are acted on by many subsystems of the university. Some of those likely to be affected are application procedures, transportation, housing, dining facilities, and curricula. In planning ways to comply with the ADA, educators in higher education may find that many of these subsystems are required to adapt and make reasonable accommodations for the student with a disability. The model can be used to help identify those subsystems that will be affected by the law and to facilitate planning to comply with the law. Although occupational therapists most often work with persons to help them adapt to change in their lives, they can also work in systems of higher education and help the systems to plan and implement programs related to the ADA. The most effective programs are usually those that are well planned and designed from a holistic perspective, rather than those that are developed as a reaction to a specific situation or incident, that is, programs that are proactive rather than reactive. By using the systems approach to higher education, occupational therapists can focus on those components and subsystems within a university that may be affected by the ADA and meet the individual needs of a university.

The effects of socioeconomic status on hand size and strength, vestibular function, visuomotor integration, and praxis in preschool children.

Differences in hand size and strength, vestibular function, visuomotor integration, and praxis in preschool children as a function of socioeconomic status were investigated. Twenty-two children of lower socioeconomic status, aged 3 to 5 years, were each matched with a child of higher socioeconomic status on the basis of race, sex, hand dominance, age, height, and weight. Measures used were the Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration (Beery, 1982), hand size and strength, the Standing Balance subtests of the Southern California Sensory Integration Tests (Ayres, 1972), the Bowman Unilateral Hopping Test (Flannigan, 1987), the Southern California Postrotary Nystagmus Test (Ayres, 1975), the praxis tests of the Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests (SIPT) (Ayres, 1984), and the Bowman Quality of Prone Extension Scale (Etheredge, 1987). Analyses with two separate Hotelling's T2 for correlated samples (Huck, Cormier, & Bounds, 1974) revealed significant differences in hand size and strength as well as praxis, and subsequent post hoc analyses revealed better scores for the higher socioeconomic status group on right hand strength and on the Praxis on Verbal Command subtest of the SIPT. A paired t test also revealed that the higher socioeconomic status group scored better on visuomotor integration. Analysis with Hotelling's T2 revealed no significant differences between the two groups on the vestibular measures. The results of this study suggest that on certain tests used by occupational therapists, children from a higher socioeconomic status group may function at a higher developmental level than those from a lower socioeconomic status group. When interpreting clients' test results, therefore, therapists should consider the possible influence of socioeconomic status.

Hand strength and prone extension in right-dominant, 6 to 9 year olds.

A stratified random sample of 153 right-dominant children (6 to 9 years of age) with normal or above intelligence was selected to study the development of hand strength, and the quality and duration of prone extension as a function of age, sex, height, and weight of the child. The Jamar hand dynamometer was used to measure hand strength, and a new scale for rating the quality of prone extension was presented. Both right- and left-hand strength increased monotonically with age, with the right being significantly higher than the left. Duration of prone extension increased monotonically with age, but quality of prone extension did not correlate with age. Sex differences were found only on the variable left-hand strength (males greater than females). Hand strength demonstrated weak correlation with duration of prone extension. Both height and weight exhibited strong positive correlations with hand strength, weaker positive correlations with duration of prone extension, and no correlation with quality of prone extension. The results suggest hand strength can be an index of normal development, and children ages 6 to 9 can attain the prone extension position; however, the meaning of duration greater than 30 seconds needs to be researched further.