Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579

International conference Education, Reflection, Development, ERD 2015, 3-4 July 2015,
Cluj-Napoca, Romania

A preliminary investigation of Romanian university teachers

attitudes towards disabilities A premise for inclusive interaction
with students with disabilities
Carmen Costea-BUOXLXa, Alina S. Rusua,b *

a
Department of Special Education, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences%DEH-Bolyai University, Sindicatelor 7, Cluj-Napoca,
400059, Romania
b
'RFWRUDO6FKRRO(GXFDWLRQ5HIOHFWLRQ'HYHORSPHQW%DEH-Bolyai University, Sindicatelor 7, Cluj-Napoca, 400059, Romania

Abstract

Attitudes of higher education teachers play a significant role in the inclusion process of students with disabilities. Our
investigation of the attitudes of the academic personnel of Babes-Bolyai University (Romania) indicates an overall positive
attitude towards disabilities, a low level of knowledge regarding the special needs of students and a low level of familiarity with
the national and university laws and regulations concerning accessibility in higher education. The need for extensive training
regarding disabilities was identified in our sample, as well as a high level of availability of the academic personnel to take part in
such type of programs.

2015
2015TheTheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd. Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ERD 2015.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ERD 2015
Keywords: disability office, inclusive interaction, students with disabilities.

1. Introduction

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +40746566311.

E-mail address: alina.rusu@ubbcluj.ro

1877-0428 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of ERD 2015
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.289
 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579 573

According to the most common definitions promoted by the UN Convention for the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (UN-CRPD; www.un.org/disabilities) and the literature in the area of inclusion, disability refers to the
interaction between the environment (physical and social) and various conditions affecting an individual, including
visible and invisible, chronic or temporary conditions. The Word Health Organization (www.who.int) defines
disability as an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. An
impairment is a problem in body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an
individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in
involvement in life situations (WHO, 1980).
The Social Model of Disability (Oliver, 1996) emphasizes that social barriers, especially the attitudes people tend
to have towards disability, are significant causes of disability. Thus, most of the disability-related problems, such as
discrimination or a low level of preparedness for the inclusion of disabled persons, lie not within the person, but
they might arise from the negative attitudes toward disability and people with disabilities, that can create barriers to
their acceptance and participation as significant members of the community. In this light, the attitudes of non-
disabled persons are considered the most important barriers that people with disability face (Anastasiou &
Kauffman, 2013, WHO, 2011). As it is well known that attitudes direct behavior, negative attitudes tend to feed
discriminatory behaviors and stereotypical responses of non-disabled population towards persons with disabilities,
limiting the proper implementation of inclusive policies as well as the opportunities of the latter in society (Barr,
2013, Runceanu & Costea-%UOXLX  Therefore, the issue of access to various support systems in order to
equalize the physical and social opportunities of the persons with disabilities has become the focus of professionals
in the field of disabilty.
Stemming from developments in the field of disability studies, as well as the progress of society and the
development of models such as the Social Model of Disability, people with disabilities have more access to various
services that the state offers to general population, including higher education (Griffin et al., 2012). Providing access
to higher education is a form of equalizing the opportunities of the population with various disabilities and also a
means for increasing the inclusion in the professional life (Murray et al., 2009). Even though the Social Model of
Disability is highly promoted by academics in the field of education and special education in the EU space,
Romanian higher education institutions (HEIs) are still in the stage of defining and constructing their level of
prepardness for the inclusion of students with disabilities, i.e. offering resonable accommodation and accessibility in
all the educational aspects in relation to their specific needs. An important element to be taken into account when
designing programs and elaborating policies aiming to increase the level preparedness of HEIs for inclusion policies
regarding the students with disabilities is represented by the attitudes of the academic personnel towards disabilty.

1.1. The role of attitudes in the inclusion process

Inclusion of persons with disabilities begins with the early years, continues during the schooling period and
adult age. With respect to education, as the process of inclusion of children with mild and moderate disabilities has
become more and more efficient over time, the number of students with various disabilities in higher education has
also increased in the last period (Hong & Himmel, 2009). Though the number of college students with disabilities is
higher, their academic success is dependable on many factors and it has been reportedly lower than for their non-
disabled peers (Hong & Himmel, 2009). Teachers negative attitudes hold significance influence on the students
educational outcomes (Good & Brophy, 1997, cited by Campbell, Gilmore & Cuskelly, 2003), making a significant
difference between success and failure of students with disabilities in postsecondary education (Lombardi &
Murray, 2011). Faculty attitudes are considered one of the main factors contributing to academic success and
completion of university education for students with disabilities and for their willingness to ask for help during the
process (Rao, 2004, Reynolds & Hitchcock, 2014).
Research on attitudes towards students with disabilities and the inclusion of persons with disabilities in
educational settings was mostly focused on investigating these issues in teachers and peers of students at the primary
and secondary school levels. During the years of schooling, children and highschoolers with disabilities are provided
several specialized services, adapted to their needs, but this situation changes dramatically when the students enters
the university system, where they are expected to be self-determined and advocate for their needs (Lombardi &
Murray, 2011). The availability of support for college students with disabilities is also an important issue related to
their inclusion in higher education, as well as the teachers attitudes towards students with disabilities, including
their willingness to offer the needed support.
574 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579

The issue of accessibility has consequently become important for both people with disabilities studying in
higher education institutions and for the actors involved in their education, especially teachers (Sachs & Schreuer,
2011). Various services have been developed and implemented in universities in order to assist the process of
inclusion: offices for students with disabilities, counselling services, expertise by specialized professionals, that
become useful for students with disabilities (Becker et al., 2002), either visible or invisible in the case that faculty
members and students have positive and open attitudes, beliefs and willingness to use these resources.
The teachers willingness to provide accommodations differs and teachers manifest higher willingness to
offer minor rather than major accommodations for students with learning disabilities (Murray, Wren & Keys, 2008),
and in turn the reactions that the teacher have on the students with disability influence the students decision to seek
further assistance (Murray, Wren & Keys, 2008). Teachers with negative attitudes towards disability tend to have
low expectations of their students with disabilities, which might lead to a reduction of learning opportunities and
various curricular decisions that do not favour students with disabilities (Logan & Wimer, 2013). Teachers often
considered themselves unprepared to meet the special needs of the students with disabilities and they considered
their training as insufficient (Logan & Wimer, 2013).

1.2. Factors that contribute to differences in the nature of attitudes toward persons with disabilities
Various authors found contradictory results regarding the attitudes that the teachers and peers of college students
with disabilities have on persons with disabilities. Some authors found positive attitudes towards students with
various disabilities, including mental illnesses (Reynolds & Hitchcock, 2014, Abu-Hamour, 2013, Griffin et al.,
2012, Murray et al., 2009, Becker et al., 2002), their learning potential and their inclusion in university life, but
others identified lack of appropriate information about disabilities and negative attitudes towards students with
disabilities (Farone, Hall & Costello, 1998, cited by Murray et al., 2009). Some of the authors that found positive
attitudes among faculty members also reported that their respondents lacked information about resources and
benefits available to students with disabilities and, moreover, they believed that students with disabilities can be
dangerous for other students while in class and reported certain discomfort and insecurity around students with
mental illnesses (Becker et al., 2002).
Demographic characteristics were related to differences in attitudes towards persons with disabilities. Thus,
gender was found to be related to significant differences in attitudes, female students and teachers holding a more
positive attitude than male students and teachers towards persons with disabilities (Abu-Hamour, 2013, Griffin et al.,
2012, Lombardi & Murray, 2011, Miller, 2010).
Age was identified as an important factor related to differences in the college teachers attitudes towards students
with ADHD: older faculty members considered the condition as responsible for students behavior during courses
and they reported the need for special accomodations during exams (Buchanan et al., 2010). The authors interpreted
these results within a life-course framework and considered the developmental changes that occur in time as
responsible for higher tolerance and acceptance that older faculty members may have towards students with
disabilities.
The level of contact with persons with disabilities was also a significant factor related to differences in attitudes
towards persons with disabilities. Personal contact was found to be related with more positive attitudes. For example,
Murray et al. (2009) found that college teachers that had prior trainings in the field of disabilities had more positive
attitudes and perceptions on students with learning disabilities, while Lombardi & Murray (2010) found significant
differences in the willingness to adopt and implement the Universal Design principles between teachers who had
prior training in the field of disabilities and those who did not have. Still various researches found conflicting results
regarding the issue of personal contact with persons with disabilities and psychiatric disorders. Brockelman,
Chadsey & Loeb (2006) found that faculty viewed university students with psychiatric disorders in a more positive
light if they had a friend, knew a student or themselves received treatment for a psychiatric disorder, but many of the
university teachers considered that they did not have enough training in working with these students. Barr (2013), in
a study investigating the attitudes of student-teachers towards people with disabilities, found that more important
than the level of personal contact with persons with disability is the level of empathic functioning of the person.
While more frequent contacts with persons with disabilities leads to better understanding of disabilities, higher
empathy supports positive interactions and attitudes.
 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579 575

The type and severity of disability is another important factor that influences attitudes, negative attitudes are
found to be directed to more severe disabilities, especially with regards to the inclusion of persons with disabilities in
education (Campbell, Gilmore & Cuskelly, 2003).
The social desirability bias is also a significant variable to be considered when investigating the level and type of
attitudes towards sensitive topics, i.e. disability and accessibility. Social desirability is a concept referring to the
tendency to respond to questions in a socially acceptable direction (Fisher, 1993). Several authors consider that the
most common source of the social desirability bias is the respondents lack of comfort to disclose his/her honest
attitude towards a specific topic (Fischer & Fick, 1993). Because Romania is a country that has relatively recently
adhered to the UN-CRCD (2007), we might expect that questions on personally and socially sensitive topics such as
the interaction with persons with disabilities might tempt people to respond to them in a manner that will be viewed
favorable by others.
The need to investigate the attitudes of higher education professionals becomes a necessary step in the process of
including students with disabilities in higher education in Romanian universities. The current study addresses the
differences in attitudes towards persons with disabilities of higher education professionals, in relationship with the
level of social desirability and several demographic characteristics, including the level and nature of contact with
persons with disabilities. Our investigation targets the attitudes of the academic personnel of Babes-Bolyai
University (UBB; www.ubbcluj.ro, Cluj-Napoca, Romania), which is one of the highest ranked Romanian HEIs in
terms of quality of research and education and that has the largest number of enrolled students, i.e. 65.000 students.
Also, in premiere at national level, UBB has founded in 2013 an Office for Students with Disabilities (OSD;
centre.ubbcluj.ro/bsd), which functions within the organizational structure of the Rectors Office. In line with the
values and procedures promoted and implemented by other Disability Offices around the world, the mission of OSD
of UBB is to facilitate and support the inclusion of students with disabilities and increase the awareness of students
and academics without disabilities towards disability and diversity.Thus, the findings of our investigation may be
helpful in setting the priorities in the case of services for university teachers with respect to the assistance of their
students with disabilities.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants
The participants were members of the 21 faculties of Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca (www.ubbcluj.ro),
which is one of the main universities in Romania and the largest one regarding the number of currently enrolled
undergraduate and postgraduate students. Of the total number of faculty members, holding various academic jobs
(teaching and research) in the university system, only a small number of 41 completed our online survey (Table 1).
The age range was from 23 to 60 years (mean 36.5, SD 9.4). Of the total number of participants, only 5.3% declared
they had a type of disability. As shown in Table 1, with regard to gender the sample is relatively homogenous, but
most of our respondents had a lower academic degree (lecturers and university assistants). The participants were
members of various departments of the university and most of them were teaching in the field of social sciences.

Table 1. Demographic characteristic (gender, academic positions and professional field) of the participants to the
online survey of the attitudes towards disability of the Babes-Bolyai University academic personnel (N = 41).

Demographic characteristic Percentage

Gender
Male 42.1%
Female 57.9%
Rank
Professor 7.9%
Associate Professor 18.4%
Lecturer 34.2%
Assistant 23.7%
PhD Student 15.8%
Field
576 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579

Exact sciences 26.3%

Humanities 7.9%
Social Sciences 65.8%

2.2. Instruments and procedure

In order to assess the attitudes towards persons with disabilities of faculty members, we used in the current
study the Romanian version of the Attitudes Towards Disable People, Form O (ATDP, Yuker, Block & Younng,
1970). Even though this assessment instrument was developed in the 1960s (Yuker, Block & Campbel, 1960), it is
still considered the most reliable, widely used and valid instrument for the measurement of attitudes towards persons
with disabilities in the general population (Lam et al., 2010).
ATDP Form O is an unidimensional measure of global attitudes towards disability, which was translated
and validated cross-culturally (Martin & Arregui, 2013). The scale invites the respondents to assess 20 statements
referring to persons with various disabilities on a six-point Likert scale expressing degrees of agreement and
disagreement (Yuker, Block & Younng, 1970). Higher scores reflect more positive attitudes and lower scores more
negative attitudes towards persons with disabilities. In general, the scale approaches differences between disabled
and non-disabled persons and the statements suggest that disability has an altering effect on the general functioning
of the person (Gosse & Sheppard, 1979). A positive attitude would mean that, although a person with disabilities has
some limitations in abilities, the differences are not significant when compared to non-disabled persons.
The social desirability bias was assessed using the Social Desirability Scale 17 (SDS-17, Stober, 1999,
2001). The scale proved to be a valid and reliable measure of social desirability, a distortion of self-presentation in
order to obtain an impression upon others, thus presenting oneself in a favourable light, one that is protective of a
positive self-esteem, in agreement with the social standards.
The participants also completed a demographic questionnaire and several questions regarding the nature
and intensity of contact they had and are having with persons with disabilities, as well as the self-perceived level of
knowledge of national laws and university regulations regarding the special needs of persons with disabilities. Also,
the participants opinions about the necessity of training programs on the needs of students with disabilities were
also inquired.
Participants were invited to participate to the research via e-mail and they received the link to the
questionnaires. The Ethical Committee of the University approved the investigation and the participants were
informed about the purpose of the study: the investigation of the faculty members perspective on the present
situation of the students with disabilities in the university. The participants were motivated to participate by
receiving the message that their answers would bring a significant contribution in the process of insuring optimum
conditions for the interaction between the personnel and the students with disabilities from the university, as well as
the inclusion process of these students. The announcement of the online research was posted on the website of the
University Office for Students with Disabilities (centre.ubbcluj.ro/bsd) and the information about the online survey,
as well as the link to the questionnaire, was send to the academic personnel through all the secretarial offices of the
faculties of Babes-Bolyai University.

3. Results

Regarding the personal contact that the participants reported with persons with disabilities, most of them
had no first-degree relatives with disabilities (97.4%) and very few had some contact with second-degree relatives
with disabilities (21%). Some participants had either frequent or occasional contacts with neighbours (44.7%) and
some with friends with disabilities (47.4%). At the same time, a high percentage declared they had occasional and
frequent contacts with unknown persons with disabilities (92.1%) and with beggars with disabilities (86.8%).
With respect to the professional contacts, the respondents declared they had occasional or frequent contact
with their colleagues with disabilities (39.5%) and a high percentage reported they had occasional and frequent
contacts with students with disabilities (92.1%). Thus, as personal contact with persons with disabilities is reportedly
quite rare, as most of the participants were not in close proximity with persons with disabilities (close relatives and
friends), the contact with strangers with disabilities and beggars that have disabilities was reported to be quite high
in our sample. Also, 10.5% of the participants reported they had daily contacts with students with disabilities.
Overall, the participants appreciated they were not familiar with the laws concerning the population with
 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579 577

disabilities. Of the total number, 73.7% reported that they did not know the legislation at all or to a small extent. At
the same time, a high percentage (71%) considered they did not know at all or they knew to a small extent the
University regulations referring to students with disabilities.
Most of the participants considered that the academic personnel of Babes-Bolyai University would need
awareness programs and information regarding the special needs of students with disabilities (86.8%). A high
percentage of the respondents would also participate to such disability-awareness training programs (76.3%).
Consistent with results found by other authors, the participants in our investigation reported that they lacked
information about persons with disabilities and they signalled the need of trainings concerning the special needs of
students with various disabilities, as well as their willingness to be included in this type of trainings.
Overall, the attitudes of the participants in our study were positive, as shown by their mean scores obtained for the
attitude scale (74.76, SD 20.44), a value close to the norms given for the authors (Yuker, Block & Young, 1970), but
the score ranged from very low to very high values (from 26 points to 112 points), showing a high variation in the
respondents attitudes, from very negative to very positive. We found no significant differences in the nature of
attitudes towards persons with disabilities between male and female respondents and between those with and those
without reported disabilities. Also, there were no significant differences in attitudes depending on the field in which
the respondents were teaching and no significant differences depending on the intensity and type of contact, either
personal or professional (Table 2). No significant differences in attitudes towards disabled persons were found
between respondents who stated they had knowledge on the legislation in the area of disability and those who
considered they did not have this type of knowledge, i.e. regulations of the University and national laws.

Table 2. Preliminary data on the levels of attitudes towards disabled persons and social desirability of the academic
personnel included of Babes-Bolyai University.
Gender Disability Field
Variable
M F Yes No Exact sciences Humanities Social sciences
Attitudes 71.5 77.1 68.5 75.1 73.4 87.3 73.8
(25.3) (16.3) (30.4) (20.3) (14.8) (5.9) (23.2)

Social 10.3 11.4 13.0 10.8 12.1 12.0 10.3

desirability (3.8) (3.7) (2.8) (3.8) (3.2) (4.4) (3.9)

We found no significant association between attitudes and social desirability and between latency time and
attitudes. The mean score for social desirability was above average (10.92, SD 3.76, N=41), which proves that in
general the academic staff who participated in our investigation tended to demonstrate some social desirability bias,
which can affect their answers. No significant association were found between attitudes towards disability and the
level of social desirability of the respondents. Our data indicate a negative, but not significant, association between
the latency time (the amount of time spent completing the questionnaire) and the level of attitudes towards persons
with disabilities (r=-.17, p>.05, N=41).

4. Conclusions
Overall, the academic staff of Babes-Bolyai University demonstrated a low interest in participating to the
investigation of attitudes towards persons with disabilities. However, those persons who completed the
questionnaires on attitudes towards disabled persons and on social desirability bias, tended to have an overall
positive attitude towards persons with disabilities and declared their availability to participate in training activities
regarding the needs of university students with various disabilities. These results represent an important baseline for
planning the future activities of the Office for Students with Disabilities of Babes-Bolyai University in the direction
of increasing the levels of knowledge and awareness towards disabilities of the academic personnel.
The faculty members included in our sample, even though they had a low level of personal contact with
relatives and friends with disabilities, most of them reported frequent professional contacts with unrelated persons
with disabilities, especially students. Therefore, one might interpret their expressed willingness to gain knowledge
578 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579

on disabilities as a proof for their motivation to facilitate and optimize the inclusion process of students with
disabilities in Romanian higher education institutions. These promising results on the level of preparedness of
academic personnel to gain better knowledge on disabilities indicate that the inclusion process of the students with
disabilities in this particular Romanian university (i.e. Babes-Bolyai University) fits the directions predicted by the
Social Model of Disability.

References

Abu-Hamour, B. (2013). Faculty Attitudes toward Students with Disabilities in a Public University in Jordan. International Education Studies,
6(12):74-81.
Anastasiou, D., Kauffman, J.M. (2013). The Social Model of Disability: Dichotomy between Impairment and Disability. Journal of Medicine and
Philosophy, 38: 441-459.
Barr, J.J. (2013). Student-Teachers Attitudes Toward Students with Disabilities: Associations with Contact and Empathy. International Journal
of Education and Practice, 1(8): 87-100.
Becker, M., Martin, L., Wajeeh, E., Ward, J., Shern, D. (2002). Students with Mental Illnesses in a University Setting: Faculty and Student
Attitudes, Beliefs, Knowledge, and Experiences. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(4): 359-368.
Brockelman, K.F., Chadsey, J.G., Loeb, J.W. (2006). Faculty Perceptions of University Students with Psychiatric Disabilities. Psychiatric
Rehabilitation Journal, 30(1):23-30.
Buchanan, T., St. Charles, M., Rigler, M., Hart, C. (2010). Why are Older Faculty Members More Accepting of Students with Attention-deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder? A Life-course Interpretation. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 57(4):351-369.
Campbell, J., Gilmore, L., Cuskelly, M. (2003). Changing student teachers attitudes towards disability and inclusion. Journal of Intellectual &
Developmental Disability, 28(4):369-379.
Fischer, D., Fick, C. (1993). Measuring social desirability: short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Education and
Psychological Measurement, 53:417-423.
Fisher, Robert J. (1993). Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning, Journal of Consumer Research, 20:303-315.
Gosse, V.F., Sheppard, G. (1979). Attitudes Toward the Physically Disabled Persons: Do Education and Personal Contact Make a Difference?
Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 13(3):131-135.
Griffin, M.M., Summer, A.H., McMillan, E.D., Day, T., Hodapp, R.M. (2012). Attitudes toward Including Students with Intellectual Disabilities
at College. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 9(4):234-239.
Hong, B.S.S., Himmel, J. (2009). Faculty Attitudes and Perceptions Toward College Students with Disabilities, College Quarterly,
12(3) http://www.collegequarterly.ca/2009-vol12-num03-summer/hong-himmel.html (accessed on the 18th of July, 2015).
Lam, W.,Y., Gunukula, S.K., McGuigan, D., Isaiah, N., Symons, A.B., Akl, E.A. (2010). Validated instruments used to measure attitudes of
healthcare students and professionals towards patients with physical disability: a systematic review. Journal of NeuroEngineeering and
Rehabilitation, 7:55-61.
Logan, B.E., Wimer, G. (2013). Tracing Inclusion: Determining teacher attitudes. Research in Higher Education Journal, 20:1-10.
Lombardi, A.R., Murray, C. (2011). Measuring university faculty attitudes toward disability: Willingness to accommodate and adopt Universal
Design principles. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 34: 43-56.
Martin, A.R., Arregui, E.A. (2013). Development and validation of a scale to identify attitudes towards disability in Higher Education.
Psicothema, 25(3):370-376.
Miller, S.R. (2010). Attitudes toward Individuals with Disabilities: Does Empathy Explain the Difference in Scores between Men and Women?
Annals of Behavioral Science and Medical Education, 16(1): 3-6.
Murray, C., Lombardi, A., Wren, C.T., Keys, C. (2009). Associations Between Prior Disability-Focused Training and Disability-Related
Attitudes and Perceptions Among University Faculty. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32:87-100.
Murray, C., Wren, C., Keys, C. (2008). University Faculty Perceptions of Students with Learning Disabilities: Correlates and Group Differences,
Learning Disability Quarterly, 31:95-113.
Rao, S. (2004). Faculty attitudes and students with disabilities in higher education: a literature review. College Student Journal,
38(2), http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/College-Student-Journal/119741925.html (accessed on the 19th of July, 2015).
Reynolds, S., Hitchcock, J. (2014). Faculty Attitudes Toward Teaching Adults with Learning Disabilities, in Journal of Research and Practice for
Adult Literacy. Secondary and Basic Education, 3(1):35-48.
Runceanu, L.E., Costea-BUOXLX&(2006). Special Education Student Attitudes Towards Persons with Disabilities. Studia Universitatis Babe-
Bolyai, Psychologia-Paedagogia, LI, 2:97-106.
Sachs, D., Schreuer, N. (2011). Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education: Performance and participation in students
experiences. Disability Studies Quarterly, 31(2), http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1593/1561 (accessed on the 19th of July, 2015).
Stober, J. (1999). The social desirability scale-17 (SDS17): Development and first results on reliability and validity, Diagnostica, 45:173177.
Stober, J. (2001). The social desirability scale-17 (SDS17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European
Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17:222232.
World Health Organization (2011). World Report on Disability, WHO Press, Geneva.
Yuker, H.E., Block, J.R., Campbell, W. (1960). A scale to measure attitudes toward disabled persons. Human Resources Center, New York.
Yuker, H.E., Block, J.R., Younng, J.H. (1970). The Measurement of Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons, Human Resources Center, New York.
 Carmen Costea-Brlut iu and Alina S. Rusu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 209 (2015) 572 579 579

Strunk, W., Jr., & White, E. B. (1979). The elements of style (3rd ed.). New York: MacMillan.
Mettam, G. R., & Adams, L. B. (1999). How to prepare an electronic version of your article. In B. S. Jones & R. Z. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to
the electronic age (pp. 281304). New York: E-Publishing Inc.
Fachinger, J., den Exter, M., Grambow, B., Holgerson, S., Landesmann, C., Titov, M., et al. (2004). Behavior of spent HTR fuel elements in
aquatic phases of repository host rock formations, 2nd International Topical Meeting on High Temperature Reactor Technology. Beijing,
China, paper #B08.
Fachinger, J. (2006). Behavior of HTR fuel elements in aquatic phases of repository host rock formations. Nuclear Engineering & Design, 236,
54.