Excerpt from Interpretation for Disabled Visitors in the National Park System Our nation's heritage is preserved through our rich natural, cultural and recreational resources. These resources represent the very essence of our nation and serve as a source of strength, pride and continuity of purpose for our nation's citizens. Park interpretation represents the mechanism whereby the park visitor may receive an understanding of and appreciation for the importance of these national treasures and the need for preserving them. This publication has been written to provide suggestions on how this interpretation can be extended to park visitors who are disabled. The National Park Service has significantly improved accessibility for disabled visitors over the past few years. However, we realize there is much left to accomplish before we achieve our goal of full accessibility. Our efforts to improve access are evidenced by the number of architectural barriers that have been identified and eliminated. This publication represents our efforts to identify and eliminate programmatic barriers to participation as well. Whereas policy can be developed and guidelines and standards written to implement policy, words on paper have little meaning if they are not put into action. The degree to which we achieve our goal to provide the highest level of accessibility possible and feasible to disabled visitors is determined solely by the efforts of the park staff and the significance that is placed on these words. Therefore, we rely on you to translate the words in this publication into action to meet the challenge of providing meaningful park experiences that are accessible to all visitors. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

This thesis illustrates the accomplishments and challenges of enhancing accessibility across the national parks, at the same time that great need to diversify the parks and their interpretation of American disability history remains. Chapters describe the administrative history of the NPS Accessibility Program (1979-present), exploring the decisions from both within and outside the federal agency, to break physical and programmatic barriers to make parks more inclusive for people with sensory, physical, and cognitive disabilities; and provide a case study of the Home of Franklin D. Roosevelt National Historic Site (HOFR) in New York. The case study describes the creation of HOFR as a house museum and national historic site, with a particular focus on the history of the site's accessibility features; considers existing barriers; and makes recommendations for programmatic changes to improve the experience for disabled and nondisabled visitors. By collaborating with and learning from nearby organizations by and for people with disabilities, HOFR can serve as a model for other historic house museums in how to effectively interpret "disability stories." Contemplating how the National Park Service has interpreted the histories and heritage of other historically marginalized communities through theme studies, on-site interpretation, and public history scholarship yields lessons for how best to interpret disability history and depict nuanced representations of the varied disability communities living in the U.S. The inclusion of "disability stories" and representation of people with disabilities in the past will help foster deeper connections with and welcome diverse visitors to the parks.

The National Park Service (NPS) works to protect natural and cultural landscapes for the American people. Part of achieving their mission includes providing the best possible services to visitors, including interpretive services. The goal of interpretation is to increase the visitor's enjoyment and understanding of the parks (National Park Service, Interpretive Development Program). It is stated that the "NPS will ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that persons with disabilities receive the same interpretive opportunities as non-disabled persons, in the most integrated setting possible" (National Park Service, 2005-2011, section VIII.I, para. 1). About 7.6 million people in the U.S. (3.1%) experience a hearing difficulty, "defined as experiencing deafness or having difficulty hearing a normal conversation, even when wearing a hearing aid" (Brault, 2012, p. 8). Many national park units experience high visitation, yet provide varying levels of accessibility offered for interpretive services. This study provides an overview of the interpretive accommodations currently provided to NPS visitors who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (HoH) through a survey of national park units. Results show that most park units do provide some form of interpretive accommodations for visitors who are d/Deaf or HoH. Many park units have also completed accessibility assessments, which have been used to guide the provision of accommodations for visitors with disabilities, including visitors who are d/Deaf or HoH. Still, results also indicated that many park units perceived their unit was not sufficiently meeting the needs of visitors who are d/Deaf or HoH, and many respondents felt that their unit should be doing more. This along with a high overall survey response rate suggests something other than an attitudinal barrier to ensuring non-hearing visitors and hearing visitors have similar interpretive experiences. Respondents indicated that barriers to providing interpretive accommodations included budget and staffing constraints, competing priorities for general and interpretive budgets and staff time, lack of knowledge or familiarity with possible services used by visitors who are d/Deaf or HoH, and limited knowledge of legal responsibilities or guidelines pertaining to visitors who are d/Deaf or HoH.