PROFICIENCY AND ATTITUDES OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AS REGARDS INCLUSION

Abstract

The world is moving toward building an increasingly inclusive society that aims to ensure all individuals, regardless of their limitations, have access to quality education. Signs of this progress are becoming more evident in schools. Law No. 13.146/2015, known as the Brazilian Inclusion Law (LBI), guarantees the fundamental rights and freedoms of people with disabilities or long-term impairments—whether physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory—in all areas of life, including education, healthcare, employment, and cultural participation. In higher education, the issue of accessibility has gained prominence as the number of students with disabilities (PWD) in universities has increased. However, research has revealed several challenges, including limited teacher training on inclusive approaches, lack of adaptation of materials to individual needs, and attitudinal barriers. These factors make inclusion a significant challenge for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). This study aimed to understand, through qualitative research, the perceptions of 21 students with disabilities regarding the attitudinal, communicational, and physical barriers they face at the university. In addition, an opinion survey was conducted with 115 Dentistry students (60 from the evening shift and 55 from the daytime shift) to evaluate their knowledge and attitudes toward peers with disabilities. Among the 21 students assisted by the Inclusion Support Center (NAI), the main issue identified was attitudinal barriers, especially difficulties in group work and feelings of exclusion, leading 66.5% to consider dropping out or suspending their studies. Communication barriers accounted for 23.2%, including issues with lecture-based teaching methods, inadequate educational materials, inaccessibility of digital platforms, and discomfort in speaking in large groups. These challenges often led to the need to seek extra content, a learning gap, and negative effects on subsequent coursework. Physical barriers were mentioned by 10.4% of the students, who reported dependency on peers and staff to move around the campus. Regarding the Dentistry students' survey, a lack of preparedness and knowledge about inclusion was evident. In the evening group, 41.7% did not know the meaning of the term "ableism," while in the daytime group, this percentage was lower at 14.5%. Despite this, most students acknowledged the importance of inclusive training: 85% of the evening students and 90.9% of the daytime students suggested the need for educational programs on inclusive practices. However, 100% of the evening students and 87.3% of the daytime students reported never having received any information about classmates with disabilities in their cohorts. When asked about their readiness to support peers with different needs, 73.3% of evening students and 78.2% of daytime students said they felt prepared to collaborate. However, only 5% of evening students and 18.2% of daytime students were actually aware of any specific needs of their peers supported by NAI. The findings show that while students generally express willingness to be inclusive, there is still a significant gap in knowledge and preparedness. HEIs must invest in more effective inclusive policies, including ongoing teacher training and student awareness, while also ensuring adequate resources and accommodations. The study highlights the urgent need for measures that guarantee truly accessible, equitable, and inclusive higher education for all.