Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
Support and Inclusion of students with
disabilities
at
Higher
Education
Institutions in Montenegro
WP2
Improvement of institutional frameworks for inclusion of
students with disabilities
DEV 2.1
Analysis of legislative framework and human resources at
partner institutions
Final Report
Prepared by
Enes Banda (UDG), enes.banda@udg.edu.me
September 2012
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication
reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use
which may be made of the information contained therein.
Tempus Project 516758-TEMPUS-1-2011-1-GR-TEMPUS-JPGR
1
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
CONTENTS
Executive summary
1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….. 4
2. Method……………………………………………………………………………………..5
2.1. Target population…………………………………………………………...5
2.2. Instrumentation……………………………………………………………...7
2.3. Research procedure………………………………………………………..8
2.4. Data analysis…………………………………………………………………..9
3. Results………………………………………………………………………………………11
4. SWOT……………………………………………………………………………………….17
5. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….....20
2
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
Executive summary
The following report forms the first deliverable of Work Package 2 of the project “Support
and Inclusion of Students with Disabilities at Higher Education Institutions in Montenegro”SINC@HE. It maps the existent resources, both from a legislative and human resources point
of view in HEI in Montenegro, to support students with disabilities and identifies the gap that
exists between the present situation and the expected (future) situation with regard to
inclusion of students with disabilities at HEI in Montenegro.
The main data for the report was provided through focused semi-structured interviews with
academic and administrative staff of University of Donja Gorica and University
Mediterranean, which are partner institutions in the project “Support and Inclusion of
Students with Disabilities at Higher Education Institutions in Montenegro”- SINC@HE.
The interviewer’s guide, which was developed to implement the interviews, comprised
questions that were developed using information provided in WP1 of the project, specifically
DEV1.3. This deliverable produced a benchmarking framework enable the situation in
Montenegro to be compared with the EU situation.
There are 5 major sections in the report:





Section 1: Introduction. This briefly outlines Work Package 2 and its relationship to
the preceding Work Package 1.
Section 2: Method, summaries the methodology used for this report; explains the
target population, research tool and research procedure as well as data analysis
method
Section 3: Results, provides an insight into academic and administrative staff own
practices, current behaviors and beliefs with regards to inclusion of students with
disabilities at HEI in Montenegro
Section 4: SWOT, provides an insight into current strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats
Finally, the Conclusion, gives an overview of the main results obtained by the
research procedures presented in the report.
The main gaps in current provision that were identified focus on to the need for a policy
framework at a university level, ICT and HR improvements. Further sections provide more
detailed insight into gaps and the procedures used for identifying them.
3
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
1. INTRODUCTION
Work package number 2 of the SINC@HE project-Improvement of institutional frameworks
for inclusion of students with disabilities- is designed to “identify the gap between the
present situation and the expected (future) situation with regard to inclusion of students
with disabilities in HEI in Montenegro. New regulatory documents to be adopted by HEI in
order to make possible from a formal point of view will be also drafted and delivered.” It
comprises three deliverables:



Dev 2.1 - “report”
Dev 2.2 - “methodology”
Dev 2.3 – “other products”
The analysis presented in following pages represents an outcome of deliverable 2.1, and it is
the first of two documents that will be delivered within this work package. According to the
WP2 work plan, the outcomes related to deliverables 2.2 and 2.3 can be integrated in one
document that will provide the necessary guidelines on how to manage institutional issues
addressed in dev. 2.2 with a focus on human resources (roles, responsibilities and support
procedures activated) in order to implement a new organizational structure of services for
students with disabilities.
The data collected in WP1, specifically DEV1.3, which integrates the materials collected in
DEV1.1. and 1.2 and apply a benchmarking framework to enable the situation in Montenegro
to be compared with the EU situation, provided the basis for conducting focused semistructured interviews with academic and administrative staff at partner universities from
Montenegro. Analysis of the information gathered during the interviews resulted in
identifying the gap between the current and future situation regarding the legislative, human
resource and technological capacities needed to enhance and facilitate the process of
inclusion of students with disabilities in HEI in Montenegro. The results obtained through the
interviews were subsequently analyzed and synthesized in the form of a SWOT analysis.
The results of this deliverable will further be used to develop a ‘’roadmap” and specific
guidelines for the implementation of support services for students with disabilities: ”the
guidelines will be the reference document for further steps, and will explain the regulatory
framework needed to achieve successful outcomes, as well will point out the involvement of
human resources.”
The structure of the document is as follows:
4
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro

Following this Introduction, Section 2 sets out the method for carrying out the
analysis
Section 3 presents the results of the research
Section 4 provides the SWOT analysis
The final section – section 5 – sets out the main conclusions of this analysis.



2. METHOD
The data gathering method involved carrying out focused semi-structured interviews with a
sample of 41 key stakeholders in two higher education institutions in Montenegro. Prior to
the interview, each participant was informed about the details of the project as well as the
use of data. The interviews were recorded and carried out using an interviewer’s guide
consisting 17 descriptive and structural questions that focused on gathering data on the
current level of support to students with disabilities at HEI in Montenegro. After being
collected, data was analyzed using Content Analysis. The content analysis procedures is
described below in Section 2.4.
2.1. TARGET POPULATION
The target population for the interviews included 41 academic and administrative staff
participants from two partner universities in the SINC@HE project - University of Donja
Gorica (n=25) and University Mediterranean (n=16), both from Podgorica, Montenegro.
From the total of 41 participants, 26 academic staff (n=13 professors, n=13 teaching
assistants) and 15 administrative staff were selected for the interview. As a percentage of
total number of staff employed at both HEI, this sample represents 10.1% of the population
(404 staff members). The interviewees were professors, teaching assistants and
administrative staff. The criteria for their selection were that they are employed on a full
time basis and that they have at least one year of working experience.
The breakdown of the sample by staff category is shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Participants’ position
Professors
Teaching
assistants
Administrative
staff
Univerisity of Donja Gorica
7
10
8
University of Mediterranean
6
3
7
Total
13
13
15
Institution
5
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
A more detailed profile of respondents is given in following table:
Table 2
Description of the sample
N
%
Female
Male
23
18
56
44
22-30
31-40
40-…
15
12
14
36.5
29.3
34.2
Academic staff
Administrative staff
26
15
63.4
36.6
25
16
61
39
23
9
9
56
22
22
Gender
Age
Position
Institution
UDG
UNIM
Years
of
experience
2-10
11-20
21-…
professional
As the table shows, the respondents were broadly equally represented across the key staff
categories. Similarly, the respondents were broadly equally distributed by gender, age and
tenure, in line with the representation of the universities as a whole. The mean age is 38,
years, while the mean for the years of experience is 13,65.
6
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
2.2. RESEARCH TOOL
The main research tool was an interviewer’s guide designed to elicit structured information
from respondents during the interviews. It comprised 17 key questions that were addressed
to the academic and administrative staff from University of Donja Gorica and University of
Mediterranean. Those questions were divided into two groups. The first group of 8 questions
was addressed to academic and administrative staff, while second group of questions was
addressed only to general managers of the aforementioned HEIs alongside with the first
group of questions. The interviewer was the person that is directly involved in the project,
and conducted interviews at both HEIs asking the same questions listed in the interviewers
guide.
The interviewer’s guide was structured to reflect the key outputs and conclusions of sinc@he
Work Package 1, and in particular the results of Deliverable 1.3. of Work Package 1.
Deliverable 1.3 reflects the results of a ‘benchmarking’ exercise that compared the situation
in Montenegro in terms of support for disabled students in HEIs with the situation in the EU.
It considered aspects such as the prevailing policy and legislative background; the level of
support ‘enablers’ (for example accessibility infrastructure; ICTs; specialized staff); the
‘practices’ developed to deliver support, and the actual quality of provision (‘performance’).
On the basis of the benchmarking exercise, three key ‘Priority Areas’ were identified for
future support provision for disabled students in Montenegro:

Priority area 1- Definitions and awareness

Priority area 2- Financing

Priority area 3- Systematic support
These three Priority Areas were then used to structure the main themes for the interviewer’s
guide and shaped the content of the questions posed to interviewees. The structure was as
follows:

What is your perception of the term “inclusion”/ disability?

How do you see the current process of inclusion of students with disabilities at this HEI?

What do you see as the key obstacle to inclusion of students with disabilities in this HEI?

How much experience do you have when it comes to seminars, programs or projects that
concern students with disabilities or persons with disabilities in general?

What is your opinion regarding good practices in work with students with disabilities in
your working environment?

How can you describe the current legal framework- policies and strategies- that concern
7
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
persons with disabilities on a national level?

What are the current capacities at this HEI dedicated to inclusion of students at this HEI?

What additional capacities do you think this HEI needs in order to enhance the inclusion?
In order to get a clear image on current resources, in addition to the aforementioned
questions, several others were added to the guide, and they were addressed at general
managers only. Those questions included:
-
Total number of employees at the University?
Total number of students with disabilities?
Are there any employees with disabilities working at the University?
Are students with disabilities represented in HEI governance?
Total number of faculties within University and their location?
Are there any special policies regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities at
the University and faculty level?
Are there any special services offered to students with disabilities in order to
facilitate their inclusion?
Are there any special trainings, courses or seminars related to inclusion of students
with disabilities at HEI organized for staff members?
What are the current capacities dedicated to students with disabilities?
2.3. RESEARCH PROCEDURE
Following final completion of the interviewer’s guide design, both of the aforementioned
universities were tasked to notify academic and administrative staff that they would be part
of the interview process.
Due to timing issues (end of school year and the beginning of the process of enrolling new
students at both universities) and practical reasons it was not possible to interview all the
academic and administrative staff. Instead, based on criteria such as their full-time
engagement within one of the aforementioned HEIs, their availability and interest to
participate in such interview and work experience, a small sample was selected (n=41) and
interviewed.
Prior to the interview, each respondent was informed about the project, project activities,
the purpose and content of the interview, the fact that the interviews will be recorded and
about the use of data.
Once the interview started, each respondent was asked questions from the interviewer’s
guide, one question at a time. Interviews lasted 10 minutes, on average.
Once the interviews were finished and recorded, the data analysis started.
8
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
2.4. DATA ANALYSIS1
The content analysis procedure was based on the ‘realist review’ approach developed in
Work Package 1 of the project. Technically, this approach follows established content
analysis procedures (Stemler, 2001) using “a systematic, replicable technique for
compressing many words of text into fewer content categories based on explicit rules of
coding” 2 . These explicit rules of coding entailed constructing a coding frame that enables
the text derived from the interviews to be systematically analyzed using common constructs
(Thorndike, 1971; Nuendorf, 2002).
The analysis used a “manual inspection” method. This entails scanning each item of material
manually, using a classification framework and coding constructs to map the occurrence of
particular items, and the relationships between them. This classification frame and set of
constructs are then modified and added to as the analysis develops. The coding frame is
divided into two sections.



A Thematic dimension, reflecting the key themes and research questions of the
project
Each theme is broken down into a number of ‘constructs’ that should be searched for
within each item being analyzed
Codes and Examples or descriptors of how each construct is treated (described) in
the textual material derived from the interviews.
1
WP1: Background analysis for inclusion of disabled students for inclusion of disabled students in
Higher Education, Briefing paper, Arcola Research LLP, 7th December 2011
2
Stemler, S (2001) An introduction to content analysis
9
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
3. RESULTS
Overview
The University of Donja Gorica and the University Mediterranean are both young private
universities in Montenegro. They count 270 and 134 full-time employees respectively (404 in
total). Both of these have students with disabilities among their students, and therefore
necessity to build capacities in order to enhance their inclusion. There are two of them at the
UDG and five at the University of Mediterranean. All of them are with mobility and physical
impairment. Neither one of the Universities has any employees with disabilities working at
there.
Although the total number of disabled students in the two universities is currently small
(N=7), both in absolute terms and as a proportion of the student population, the justification
for building capacity to enhance the inclusion of with disabilities in the two universities
reflects not just the need to cater for the current student population but also reflects the
need to build capacity for future generations.
University of Donja Gorica has seven faculties, and they are all located in one building. As it
regards University of Mediterranean, it has 5 faculties, and they are located in two different
buildings. However, there is no need for students to go from one building to another for
classes.
Neither one of the aforementioned HEIs has any specific policies dedicated to the inclusion
of students with disabilities. Also, neither of the universities has any services specially
dedicated to students with disabilities in order to facilitate their inclusion nor have they
organized any trainings or seminars related to inclusion of students with disabilities.
As it regards the current resources, both Universities possess modest capacities when it
comes to inclusion of students. These are mainly infrastructural capacities such as access
ramps and elevators dedicated to students with mobility and physical impairments. In
addition to that, several good practices could be identified as useful capacities. For example,
professors when planning their classes always take into consideration where the class will be
held so the students with disabilities could access the classroom easily. For example, if the
class is initially scheduled for the room where students with physical impairments are not
able to access, the professor will change that and hold the class in the room that is
accessible. One of good practices at the University of Mediterranean could be their tuitionfree studying for students with disabilities. Other than that, there are no other significant
capacities which would facilitate the process of inclusion of students with other types of
disabilities in a systematic manner.
10
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
Further details on the situation, based on the data collected during the interviews, results
are presented in following paragraphs.

What is your perception of the terms “inclusion” and “disability”?
When it comes to defining the term “inclusion” the results of the analysis have shown that
majority (N=32) of interviewees mentioned the words “Equality”, “Equal rights” and “Equal
treatment”. They believe that the process of inclusion means that students with disabilities
are getting more and more engaged in University’s academic and social life. Out of 32 staff
members that answered like this, 13 of them were professors, 13 teaching assistants and 6
were administrative staff. They comprise 78% of the interviewees. Some of the most
common answers were that an accessible physical environment is necessary but not a
sufficient condition for inclusion, and that students with disabilities should be treated equally
as other students in terms of involvement in student activities- curricular and extracurricular,
and standards should be equal when assessing their knowledge.
The rest of interviewees have a different perspective on inclusion. They (N=7) believe
inclusion means only improvement of certain technological conditions and built environment
which will lead to a better accessibility. So, the 17% of the total answers collected was mainly
focused on the term “Access”. The third group are those that were not able to define the
term (N=2) or 5%.
When it comes to the term disability, most (N=38) of interviewees, or 92.6%, defined it as a
certain kind of “condition of an individual that is significantly impaired”. The rest of them
were not able to define the term. Instead they only mentioned types of disabilities they
know, and while doing that they mentioned only physical and sensory impairment. These
were administrative staff members.

How do you see the current process of inclusion of students with disabilities at this
HEI?
When speaking about the current process of inclusion, all participants (n=41) were aware of
the number of students with disabilities at their university. Also, all of them were aware of
the kind of disability these students have.
A significant number of interviewees (N=35 or 85%) believe that government and HEIs “are
not as supportive” when it comes to the inclusion of students with disabilities as they could
and should be, and therefore they think that current support in not satisfactory. The main
reason for such a situation, all of them agreed, is the lack of awareness of the importance of
this issue which has prevailed in past years and was characterized by a lack of initiatives for
improvement of conditions for students with disabilities in Montenegro. According to the
interviewees support is lacking in policy framework, physical environment, finances, human
11
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
resources and technology, both at national and HEI level.
The rest of the interviewees (N=6) were not able to characterize the current process of
inclusion due to the lack of information and interest on this topic in the past. However, they
were able to mention the resources that the HEI they work at possesses, but they couldn’t
say if they are more or less convenient for students with disabilities.

What do you see as the key obstacle to inclusion of students with disabilities in this
HEI?
There are many obstacles that were identified and they can be grouped in following
categories:
-
Mentality
-
Finances
-
Initiative
-
Pedagogy
-
Policies
-
Infrastructure
-
Statistics
The frequency each item was mentioned by the participants indicates the importance of
these categories:
Table 3
Item name
N
%
Mentality
18
44
Initiative
15
36.5
Infrastructure
14
34.1
Pedagogy
11
26.8
Finances
7
17
Statistics
5
12.2
Policies
4
0.1
Majority of the participants (N=18 or 44%) identified mentality as a key obstacle for inclusion
of students with disabilities in HEI. By that they mean the prejudices that exist in their
12
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
environment such as disabled people “cannot be productive members of society, and
therefore they do not need higher education”.
A number of interviewees (N= 15 or 36.5%),believed that this perception gives rise to
another challenge, which is a lack of initiatives to contribute to a better inclusion of students
with disabilities in HEI.
Also, infrastructure was identified as a burning issue. A significant number of interviewees
(N=14 or 34%) believe that infrastructure is not at a satisfying level. Currently, both of the
aforementioned universities satisfy minimum requirements as regards the accessibility of
built environment. However, current infrastructure support is mainly provided only for
students with mobility and physical impairments, while there still are no infrastructural
capacities that would support sensory impairment, such as vision and hearing disability.
In addition to these two key issues, a certain number of interviewees (N=11 or 26.8%)
believe that the level of pedagogical education related to working with students with
disabilities is not at a high level, which represents a difficulty when it comes to preparing and
delivering lectures and materials for them, and therefore limits the level of their inclusion.
The issue of finances is ambivalent. Out of 7 interviewees (17%) that mentioned it, 4
believed that financial issues are an obstacle to inclusion of students with disabilities
because they cannot afford to study, while the rest of interviewees believed finances are a
problem because implementation of capacities that facilitate the inclusion of students with
disabilities in HEI is expensive.
The term statistics refers to the low number of students with disabilities in Montenegro. As
can be noted, this issue is mentioned 5 times, or by 5 interviewees (12 %). They believe that
the low number of persons with disabilities that graduates from elementary and high-school
and decides to enroll in an HEI is too low to incentivize HEI management and government
institutions to take a more active role when it comes to the inclusion of students with
disabilities in HEI. However, the interviewees regard the low number of current students with
disabilities in Montenegrin HEIs as an excuse for government as HEI’s inertia on support
provision, and a convenient excuse for not providing the necessary environment to support
students with disabilities generally, regardless of the current level of students with
disabilities.
When it comes to policies as an obstacle to inclusion, this issue was by only 4 (9.7%)
interviewees, but what is interesting is that they characterized it as a burning issue, and one
that has to be solved prior to resolving other challenges, for example accessibility and
financial challenges. Once the right policies are adopted, it is argued, other issues will be
easier to solve. The key characteristic used to describe current policy framework was
“inadequate”.

How much experience do you have when it comes to seminars, programs or projects
that concern students with disabilities or persons with disabilities in general?
As it is noted at the beginning of this report, neither one of the universities currently
provides its employees with the opportunity to attend seminars, conferences or trainings
regarding working with students with disabilities and their inclusion at HEI (not including this
13
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
project, of course). Out of 41 interviewed academic and administrative staff, 36 of them
(88%) said that they never had the chance to attend any training or seminar disability issues.
Only 4 (9.7%) of respondents said that they had chance during their engagement within
various youth NGOs during their high-school (those are mainly younger teaching assistants
from both universities), and only 1 of total number (2.4%) had the chance to participate in a
project regarding these issues.
The bright side of this part of the interview was that each of the 41 respondents recognized
this as their weakness and suggested that training should be organized and that all
employees should attend in order to support the process of inclusion of students with
disabilities at HEI in the most effective manner.

What is your opinion regarding good practices in work with students with disabilities in
your working environment?
As it is already noted, neither one of the aforementioned universities have legal frameworks
dedicated to the inclusion of students with disabilities. All respondents agreed that this
situation needs to change. In the meantime, they have invested effort to develop certain
good practices that can facilitate the process of inclusion of students with disabilities in HEIs.
Since students with disabilities enrolled at both universities have physical impairments, all
academic staff (N= 26) said that they, whenever the situation requires, “facilitate the
mobility” of those students carefully choosing the room for lectures so these students can
access them easily. Also, all of them said that they are supportive when it comes to
“facilitating the lectures”. For example, sometimes academic staff help disabled students by
allowing them to record lectures or making an appointment for private individual
consultations.
In addition, the University of Mediterranean has developed a “Distance Learning” platform,
which allows students to attend classes from their home. Most of the course literature is in
electronic form, therefore they do not have to come to the University very often. Also, based
on the recommendation of Youth With Disabilities of Montenegro, they provide students
with disabilities the opportunity to study on a tuition-free basis.
As noted above, however, these practices are mainly dedicated to students with physical
impairments.

How can you describe the current legal framework- policies and strategies- that
concern persons with disabilities on a national level?
As it regards national policies, the majority of respondents (N=37 or 90%) said that they are
not aware of any policy regarding this matter, and that they are not competent to talk about
that.
14
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
Only 4 respondents (10%) were able to discuss the current legal framework that regards
students with disabilities in Montenegro. According to them, the current legal system that
covers people with disabilities in Montenegro is “inadequate”, “not harmonized with
international standards and criteria”, and “lacks implementation”. All four respondents
referred to articles 6 and 7 from the Higher Education Law- the section on Availability of
Higher Education as the only legal framework with regard to the inclusion of students with
disabilities at HEI:
Article 6
Higher education is available to everyone, in accordance with this law and statute of the
institution.
Article 7
In exercising the right to higher education, it is not allowed to discriminate on the
following basis: gender, race, marital status, color, language, religion, political or other
beliefs, national, ethnical or other origin, association with national community, property
ownership, disability or other similar grounds, position or circumstances.
An important thing to point out is that a significant number of respondents (N=34 or 83%)
identified the Montenegrin accession process to the European Union as a crucial
“opportunity” for improvement of Montenegrin legal system. During that process, they
hope, the inclusion of students with disabilities will have its own place in Montenegrin
regulatory framework and will be “in accordance with international standards and criteria”.

What are the current capacities at this HEI dedicated to inclusion of students at this
HEI?
As regards the current capacities, as already noted, most of them are dedicated to students
with some kind of physical disability.
At the University of Donja Gorica, besides the built environment that facilitates the
accessibility, such as access ramps and elevators, as well as specially designed toilets for
students with disabilities, respondents interviewed at that institution (N=25) did not identify
any other capacities especially dedicated to facilitate the process of inclusion of students
with disabilities at that HEI.
At the University Mediterranean, 16 respondents that were interviewed there also identified
capacities dedicated to accessibility, such as access ramps and elevators. In addition to these
they also highlighted the specially designed web-site of the University of Mediterranean,
which is adjusted for student with partial visual disparity, as well as tuition-free based
education for students with disabilities.

What additional capacities do you think this HEI needs in order to enhance the
inclusion?
15
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
There are three types of capacities that are recognized as crucial by both groups of
interviewees. The first is “technological capacities”, mentioned 25 times. These include
equipment necessary for the inclusion of students with hearing and visual impairment. The
second is “HR capacities” which include trainings for staff, and which was mentioned by 10
interviewees. Finally a certain number of interviewees (N=6) identified adoption of
“standards and policies” on a university level as a key need.
As can be noted, there are no major differences in opinion between the two groups of
employees. This could be explained by a fact that both universities are located in the same
municipality- Podgorica, at a distance of 6-8 kilometers from each other. They employ people
from a same geographical area- Montenegro, with similar educational and professional
backgrounds, therefore the chances for some drastic differences in opinion on questions
asked are small.
4. SWOT
This section of the report will summarize the results obtained by a Content Analysis into 4
different categories: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT). A SWOT
analysis is designed to identify the positives and negatives inside and outside of the
organization. Developing a full awareness of a current situation can help with both strategic
planning and decision-making. It can offer helpful perspectives at any stage of an effort and
might be used to:

Explore possibilities for new efforts or solutions to problems.

Make decisions about the best path for your initiative. Identifying your opportunities for
success in context of threats to success can clarify directions and choices.

Determine where change is possible. If you are at a juncture or turning point, an
inventory of your strengths and weaknesses can reveal priorities as well as possibilities.

Adjust and refine plans mid-course. A new opportunity might open wider avenues, while
a new threat could close a path that once existed.
Listing internal factors: Strengths and Weaknesses (S, W)
Internal factors include resources and experiences. General areas to consider are:
16
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro

Human resources - staff, volunteers, board members, target population

Physical resources - location, building, equipment (Does the building have a prime
location? Does it need renovations?)

Financial - grants, funding agencies, other sources of income

Activities and processes - programs run, systems employed

Past experiences - building blocks for learning and success, reputation in the community
Listing external factors: Opportunities and Threats (O,T)
Cast a wide net for the external part of the assessment. No organization, group, program, or
neighborhood is immune to outside events and forces.
Forces and facts that are not controled include:

Future trends - in your field (Is research finding new treatments?) or the culture (Do
current movies highlight your cause?)

The economy - local, national, or international

Funding sources - foundations, donors, legislatures

Demographics - changes in the age, race, gender, culture of those you serve or in your
area

The physical environment (Is your building in a growing part of town? Is the bus company
cutting routes?)

Legislation (Do new government requirements make your job harder...or easier?)

Local, national or international events
17
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
The table below summarizes the results of the SWOT analysis.
Table 4
Results of the SWOT analysis
Strengths



Strong awareness of academic and
administrative staff regarding current
weaknesses in technological,
legislative, and hr support to
students with disabilities
Full support of administrative and
academic staff to improvement of
current capacities for support to
students with disabilities
Infrastructural capacities which
enhance the accessibility and thus
facilitate inclusion of students with
disabilities
Weaknesses








Opportunities
Absence of any policy framework at
University level which would
facilitate the inclusion of students
with disabilities at HEI
Absence of systematic support which
will facilitate the process of inclusion
of students with disabilities
Lack of specialized administrative
and academic staff trained to give
proper support to students with
disabilities in order to enhance their
inclusion in HEI
Low level of technological capacities
intended to facilitate the inclusion of
students in HEI
Low number of students with
disabilities in HEIs
There is no pedagogical support for
guidance and counselling
The pre-entry and post-graduation
support at HEI is not existent
Lack of financial resources to build
systematic capacities for inclusion of
students with disabilities in HEI
Threats
18
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro


Accession to the EU as an
opportunity to make a regulatory
environment in compliance with
international standards and criteria
EU Instruments for Pre-Accession
Assistance as a source of funding for
projects related to inclusion of
students in HEI



Failure to meet EU requirements in
the EU accession process
Implementation of necessary
capacities to become even more
expensive for HEI to implement
them on their own
Insufficient funds for financing all
necessary improvements that will
facilitate the process of inclusion of
students with disabilities in HEIs.
19
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
5. Conclusion
The main aim of this report was to identify the gap between the present situation and the
expected (future) situation with regard to inclusion of students with disabilities in HEI in
Montenegro.
The results of the analysis of data collected through the focused semi-structured interviews
conducted at University of Donja Gorica and University of Mediterranean, two partner
universities, have shown that there are numerous significant gaps in the process of inclusion
of students with disabilities at HEI.
The key gaps in the current process of inclusion are:
1. The absence of an adequate legal framework for inclusion of students with
disabilities in HEI that is in compliance with international standards and criteria at
national and HEI level
2. The absence of systematic support which will facilitate the process of inclusion of
students with disabilities
3. The lack of specialized administrative and academic staff trained to give proper
support to students with disabilities in order to enhance their inclusion in HEI
4. A low level of technological capacities intended to facilitate the inclusion of students
in HEI
5. The absence of pedagogical support for guidance and counselling for students with
disabilities
6. The pre-entry and post-graduation support at HEI is not existent
7. The lack of financial resources to build systematic capacities for inclusion of students
with disabilities in HEI
The majority of respondents from both the HEIs participating in the interview process believe
that the key to bridging these gaps is the process of accession to the EU where Montenegro
will have to adopt new regulatory documents in accordance with international standards and
criteria.
When regard to the current resources, both institutions are fully accessible to students with
disabilities that have mobility or physical impairments. However, as has been already said,
more attention needs to be focused on policy framework at a university level, ICT and HR
improvements. To be specific, universities need to adopt policies that will set certain
standards with regard to the inclusion of students with various types of disabilities. Once
these policies and standards are in place, the ICT element of the HEI needs to be adjusted to
20
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR
Support and Inclusion of students with disabilities at higher
education institutions in Montenegro
help students with disabilities such as hearing and visual impairments. In turn, more
attention needs to be dedicated to human resources that all staff members, both academic
and administrative, can go through a program of seminars, training and workshops in order
to be able to facilitate the process of inclusion of students with disabilities.
Despite the fact that academic and administrative staff lack adequate knowledge on how to
adapt their courses to meet the needs of students with disabilities, their willingness to
contribute to the more efficient and effective inclusion of students with disabilities at HEI
shows that the identified gaps are not impossible to bridge. The main obstacles to the
process are likely to be financial in nature, because, both aforementioned institutions are
young and privately owned, and thus are not able to finance the establishment of all those
capacities by themselves.
Following this document, next report, which will be an outcome of the final two deliverables
(2.2. and 2.3.) of this Work Package, will comprise more detailed focus on the data collected
so far. In order to enrich the quality and the depth of data, focus groups will be used in each
partner institution in Montenegro. Besides academic and administrative staff, participants in
the focus groups will be students with disabilities as well.
21
516758 – TEMPUS – 1 – 2011 – 1 - GR – TEMPUS - JPGR