Students with print disabilities continue to face inaccessible information and information technologies in higher education institutions despite federal and state legislation and local policies. Although most individuals responsible for making their course materials accessible often express support for the egalitarian principles of such policies, their actions suggest otherwise. Deal's (2007) theoretical construct of aversive disablism can be defined as incongruence between implicit and explicit attitudes toward people with disabilities and represents a plausible explanation for the problem. The current study utilizes a multidimensional exploratory survey delivered to a group of students and faculty at two campuses in the California State University system. The exploratory study is designed to answer two questions. 1) Is there evidence that would support or disconfirm the theoretical construct of aversive disablism? 2) Is there evidence that would support or disconfirm a negative relationship between aversive disablism and faculty decisions to use accessible information and information technologies for students with print disabilities in courses at an institution of higher education? The exploratory survey method used in the current study found correlational evidence that tentatively supported Deal's (2007) theoretical construct of aversive disablism. The survey method in the current study also found evidence that tentatively supported validation of the aversive disablism construct by using two other techniques--examining scatterplots and using tables to identify individuals with the characteristic aversive disablism response pattern within groups. The survey method in the current study did not prove to be successful for determining whether aversive disablism was related to faculty decisions to use accessible information and information technologies for students with print disabilities at an institution of higher education; some faculty responses on the survey indicated socially desirable response bias may have affected some answers to the questions. Findings are tentative due to the small number of responses received from a large pool of subjects, suggesting that individuals have an aversion to speaking about or addressing disability issues. Further research is needed to validate the construct of aversive disablism, and to continue to understand the gap between equity goals and actions as they relate to people with disabilities in higher education. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]