Abstract The number of students with a disability matriculating into institutions of medical education, including physician assistant programs, is increasing. Educational institutions must develop procedures with regard to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) including the provision of reasonable accommodations to provide equal opportunities for all. These procedures must be compliant with federal and state laws while protecting academic integrity, maintaining technical standards, and successfully navigating the institutional and individual faculty barriers. Knowledge of the ADA and the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 as well as some familiarity with the legal precedent regarding these laws will facilitate planning and decision-making for students with disabilities. This is imperative for educating not just those with specific disabilities but also the evolving learners of today. Such knowledge, coupled with the continued prioritization of technical standards and student outcomes, will assist in the curricular development of the future.

<h4>Background</h4>Disability disclosure and accommodation requests among US medical students have increased significantly, yet gaps in support persist. Disability resource professionals (DRPs) are one essential support in bridging these gaps, but only 9% of medical schools employ a dedicated DRP, leaving institutions potentially underprepared to address the needs of students with disabilities.<h4>Objective</h4>This study explored the roles, qualifications, and challenges of DRPs in US medical schools to identify barriers to job performance and inform strategies for strengthening and supporting this role in medical education.<h4>Methods</h4>An exploratory, cross-sectional survey was conducted in July to August 2023. A 27-question online survey was distributed through convenience and snowball strategy via social media and listservs. Questions addressed institutional structures, the size of DRP student caseloads, job satisfaction, mentorship, and barriers to managing caseloads. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and χ² tests, qualitative responses were thematically analyzed. The University of Michigan IRB approved this study.<h4>Results</h4>Seventy-nine DRPs from 72 US MD and 7 DO programs participated. Most respondents reported excessive workloads, with 30% managing caseloads exceeding 100 students. Less than half of DRPs (45.6%) indicated that their workload was manageable. Inadequate professional development, lack of mentorship, and low salary satisfaction emerged as common challenges. Respondents also reported institutional barriers, including stigma, faculty resistance to accommodations, and the complexity of coordinating disability accommodations across didactic, clinical, and testing environments.<h4>Discussion</h4>DRPs are critical to fostering accessible and inclusive medical education, yet systemic barriers undermine their effectiveness and place institutions at risk of increased student attrition, legal liability, and resource strain. Addressing these challenges requires investments in manageable caseloads, professional development for DRPs, faculty training, and institutional prioritization of the DRP role.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Systemic investments in staffing, training, and institutional culture are necessary to support DRPs and the growing population of US medical students with disabilities (MSWDs).

<h4>Introduction</h4>Dyslexia can be defined as a neurodevelopmental learning difficulty characterised by issues with phonological awareness, affecting performance and progression within medical education. There is a need to identify how to provide effective support for medical students and postgraduate doctors with dyslexia. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the experiences of, and identify strategies for, undergraduate medical students and postgraduate medical doctors with dyslexia within existing literature.<h4>Methods</h4>A search strategy was undertaken on databases relevant to medical education. Included studies concerned either medical students or postgraduate medical doctors with dyslexia. A quality appraisal was undertaken and narrative synthesis employed to produce a final report.<h4>Results</h4>Thirty-one articles were included in the final synthesis, with seven deemed high-risk of bias. Four overarching themes were identified. There are largely negative experiences, such as stigma, reported. Furthermore, dyslexia can impact assessment performance, with reasonable adjustments effective for written examinations. Moreover, strategies employed to reduce difficulties include peer support, organisational inclusivity and interactive educational methodologies. Additionally, dyslexia impacts the career trajectory of doctors.<h4>Discussion</h4>Training programmes should promote an inclusive environment through raised awareness and provision of reasonable adjustments. A range of potential strategies have been identified to improve the educational experiences of students with dyslexia, but these should be flexible according to individual needs. Further research is warranted within postgraduate medical training and experiences in the United States.

This study examines the underlying mechanisms of ableism and disablism in the assessment of student learning in higher education. Globally, higher education institutions rely strongly on assessment accommodations (e.g., extra time in tests) to ensure disabled students' participation in assessment. This is also the case in Finland. Even though research on disabled students' experiences of assessment has repeatedly shown that both assessment and assessment accommodations cause barriers for disabled students' inclusion, critically oriented research on this topic has been scarce. In this study, the frameworks of ableism and disablism are used to unveil how assessment is predominantly designed for "the ideal, able student" and how disabled students are framed as "the Other" through assessment. This work is based on an analysis of 139 disabled students' experiences of assessment and assessment accommodations as collected through an open-ended, institution-wide survey at a Finnish university. The findings reveal the profound role of assessment in excluding and marginalizing disabled students as unfit to take part in the testing cultures of academia. The accommodation model is shown to hold disabled people responsible for their own exclusion. Disablism is identified in students' experiences of outright discrimination, such as teachers denying access to assessment accommodations when they are officially granted. This study offers a novel, critical means of discussing assessment from the viewpoints of diversity and inclusion. It also proposes future trajectories for anti-ableist assessment approaches that understand diversity as enriching, rather than obscuring, assessment.

Higher education has evolved in ways that may increase the challenges life science faculty face in providing accommodations for students with disabilities. Guided by Expectancy-Value Theory, we interviewed 34 life sciences faculty instructors from institutions nationwide to explore faculty motivation to create disability-inclusive educational experiences. We found that faculty in our sample perceive that providing most standard accommodations is a manageable but often challenging task. Further, faculty in our sample feel that improving accommodations necessitates additional support from their institutions. Most faculty had high attainment value for providing accommodations, in that they strongly believed that supporting students with disabilities is the fair and right thing to do. However, faculty did not perceive much utility value or intrinsic value in their task of providing accommodations, and most reported that providing accommodations can be a substantial burden on faculty. These findings imply that current approaches to providing inclusive educational experiences for students with disabilities rely primarily on the personal belief that providing accommodations is the right thing to do, which likely results in a flawed and inequitable system given that not all faculty equally share this conviction.

Faculty have reported a significant increase in the number of nursing students with disabilities; however, misinformation regarding legislated changes in the definition of a disability , as enacted in 2008 under the American with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, has contributed to faculty confusion when working with students with disabilities. This article identifies the circumstances under which nursing faculty are legally required to provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities, as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended in 2008, and the strategies faculty may use to assist students to successfully complete core requirements. When this knowledge is integrated into a nursing program’s culture and curriculum, students with sensory loss, paralysis, mental illness, learning disabilities, limb differences, chronic illnesses, or other disabilities associated with impaired bodily functions can successfully complete nursing programs and provide excellent care to clients, the profession, and their communities.