LEADER 03540nam  22006735  450 
001 9910151579603321
005 20230810144104.0
010   $a1-137-59020-3
024 7 $a10.1057/978-1-137-59020-6
035   $a(CKB)3710000000951894
035   $a(DE-He213)978-1-137-59020-6
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4745975
035   $a(PPN)259472867
035   $a(EXLCZ)993710000000951894
100   $a20161118d2017      u|         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aurnn|008mamaa
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aNeuroethics in Higher Education Policy /$fby Dana Lee Baker, Brandon Leonard
205   $a1st ed. 2017.
210  1$aNew York :$cPalgrave Macmillan US :$cImprint: Palgrave Macmillan,$d2017.
215   $a1 online resource (XI, 183 p.) 
311   $a1-137-59019-X 
320   $aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
327   $aNeuroethics and Higher Education  -- History of Higher Education and Capacity Difference Admissions Process  -- Tending the Gate: Admitting Students  -- Teaching and Learning  -- Learning Evaluation  -- Peer Interactions  -- Combat Acquired: Veterans and Neurological Difference  -- Circumstance of Difference: Socioeconomic Status  -- Conclusion.
330   $aThis book focuses on neuroethics in higher education in the United States. After introducing readers to the philosophical and policy foundations of the neuroethics of higher education, this book explores essential conundrums in the neuroethical practice of higher education in modern democracies. Focusing on neuroethics from the perspective of universally designed learning and policy design sets this project apart from other work in the field. Advances in neuroscience and changes in attitudes towards disability have identified mechanisms by which higher education infrastructures interact with both individuals considered neurotypical and those with identified disabilities to diminish students? capacity to enter, persist, and complete higher education. Policy to date has focused on identified disabilities as a requirement for accommodations. This strategy both underestimates the effect of ill-fitting infrastructures on those considered neurologically typical and serves to stratify the student body. As a result, neuroethical gaps abound in higher education. .
606   $aPolitical planning
606   $aEducation and state
606   $aAmerica$xPolitics and government
606   $aEducation, Higher
606   $aEducational psychology
606   $aNeuropsychology
606   $aPublic Policy
606   $aEducation Policy
606   $aAmerican Politics
606   $aHigher Education
606   $aEducational Psychology
606   $aNeuropsychology
615  0$aPolitical planning.
615  0$aEducation and state.
615  0$aAmerica$xPolitics and government.
615  0$aEducation, Higher.
615  0$aEducational psychology.
615  0$aNeuropsychology.
615 14$aPublic Policy.
615 24$aEducation Policy.
615 24$aAmerican Politics.
615 24$aHigher Education.
615 24$aEducational Psychology.
615 24$aNeuropsychology.
676   $a320.6
700   $aBaker$b Dana Lee$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0943544
702   $aLeonard$b Brandon$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910151579603321
996   $aNeuroethics in Higher Education Policy$92129467
997   $aUNINA