No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

<p>  </p> <p>There is a deficiency in scholarly research on higher education service animal policy that has created definitive gaps in how disability service office (DSO) directors approach policy development and how higher education institutions (HEIs) ensure access for service animal handlers. Through a three-paper model, this dissertation addressed the intersection between federal and state civil rights legislation and the leadership qualities needed in developing higher education service animal policies. The first academic law review paper, titled “Service Animals in the Higher Education Environment: How the Law Guides Institutions in Supporting Disabled Student Handlers” laid a foundation for higher education service animal policy through a review of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which is federal civil rights legislation that grants protections and access for students with disabilities using service animals in higher education. The second academic law review paper, titled “State Legislation Regarding Service Animals: Informing Big Ten Higher Education Disability Policy” provided a comprehensive overview of six Midwest state’s service animal legislation and the legal application to higher education policy. The third paper is a qualitative research study, titled “A Big Ten Leadership Approach to Service Animal Policy Development in Higher Education” that explored how Big Ten Academic Alliance HEI DSO directors lead when developing institutional policy related to service animals.</p>

Federal and state policies affecting higher education, like the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1832, Brown vs. Board of Education, and Higher Education Act of 1965 have posited change regarding the proliferation of diversity and expansion of access (Thelin, 2011). I analyzed BOT policies for enrollment and conducted a socio-diagnostic CDA on the implementation of admission policy to understand the impact of the policies’ implementation. I focused on 1) exploring how open enrollment (OE) policies were constructed, 2) how institutions adopt and interpret these policies, and 3) how individuals at the institution enact these policies, by conducting a discourse-historical analysis (DHA). Open enrollment has been extensively studied at junior colleges. However, the impact of open admissions (OA) at 4-year institutions has not been intensely engaged despite its use at these types of institutions. This has left professionals to draw implications for practice from universities and colleges that are different than the ones in which they work. There are conditions that could inhibit the effectiveness of education policy implementation to include: “a lack of focus on the implementation processes when defining policies at the system level; a lack of recognition that the core of change processes require engaging people; and the fact that implementation processes need to be revised to adapt to new complex governance systems” (Viennet & Pont, 2017, p. 6). I conducted a case study investigation of open enrollment policy at a 4-year public university to understand its implementation and impact on the student experience. I used discourse-historical analysis to guide my analysis of the data. Implications were creation of a student profile, resource support matrix, and rethink of policy implementation.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.