Research to Practice Brief Promising Practices for Accommodating Students with Disabilities in Post-Secondary Education Programs By Megan A. Conway, Margo Izzo, Kelly Chang, & Margarita Cholymay Introduction and Statement of the Problem Students with disabilities face many obstacles in postsecondary institutions, including negative attitudes by others, lack of knowledge about effective accommodations, and little experience with self-advocacy skills (Izzo, Hertzfeld, Simmons-Reed, & Aaron, 2001). The Office of Postsecondary Education in the U.S. Department of Education has sponsored promising practices projects to help improve postsecondary educational programs and climates for students with disabilities. This brief summarizes a study that identified promising practices within these 21 projects (Izzo, et al.). Description of Project and Findings Izzo et al. (2001) reviewed promising practices that were being implemented across 21 projects that aimed to address the quality of postsecondary education for students with disabilities. Practices were deemed "promising" if they met five criteria: 1. The practice was well-grounded in theory; 2. The practice was supported empirically through studies that were internally and externally valid; 3. The practice had some underpinnings in existing literature; 4. The practice was associated with meaningful outcomes, and 5. The practice was socially valid. The authors also conducted a focus group of ten students with disabilities that, along with the literature, helped to guide the selection of promising practices. Focus group members were asked questions such as, "From your experience, were faculty knowledgeable and understanding about common accommodations related to your disability?" and "What should the university administration, as a whole, do to better support students with disabilities?" Table 1 describes promising practices in postsecondary education for students with disabilities identified within the 21 projects. They are categorized into three areas of improvement, including (a) practices that assess the climate of the institution, (b) practices that deliver professional development activities to administrators, faculty and students, and (c) practices that build capacity for institutional change. Table 1: Promising Practices (Adapted from Izzo et al., 2001) Assessing the Climate Focus groups, surveys, advisory committees: Collect information from faculty and/or students to gain an understanding of their needs, frustrations, and recommendations for improving the teaching-learning climate for students with disabilities. Focus groups are usually conducted with 8-10 participants, who address questions together. Surveys are questionnaires on paper or the internet that students and/or faculty can fill out and return anonymously. Advisory committees, usually made up of a mix of invited potential users and supporters, give input to project staff on a more regular basis. Professional Development for Administrators, Faculty and Students On-site training such as workshops for faculty, administrators and teaching assistants (TA): Conduct interactive workshops on topics identified as high interest and needed by faculty and administrators to convey in-depth information on instructional strategies, accommodations, resources, and supports to better teach students with disabilities. Self-advocacy training for students: Teach self-advocacy skills to students with disabilities to empower them to disclose/negotiate accommodations appropriately, thereby building a positive working relationship with faculty and improving the quality of their education Technology-based training: Provide information using an on-line format to increase faculty awareness of instructional strategies, accommodations, resources and supports for educating students with disabilities. Provide technology and training to students to improve their educational success. Web accessibility and distance education: Deliver training to faculty for making web-enhanced courses accessible to students with disabilities Building Capacity for Institutional Change Administrative directives: Distribute written notices across campus that describe the policies, guidelines, and practices that enhance the education of students with disabilities Student attrition/retention studies: Create a database pertaining to student retention/attrition and compare/contrast retention figures among students in diverse groups and different programs Table 2 shows the percentage of the 21 projects that were applying each practice. Table 2: Percent of reviewed projects (N=21) using selected promising practices. (Adapted from Izzo et al., 2001) Function: Assessing the institutional climate Practice Focus groups-- 50% of projects using this practice. Surveys-- 43% of projects using this practice. Advisory committee-- 15% of projects using this practice. Function: Professional Development for administrators, faculty and students On-site training for faculty Practice On-Site training for faculty-- 52% of projects using this practice. Student orientation or self-advocacy training-- 19% of projects using this practice. Technology-based training--100% of projects using this practice. Distance education-- 42.9% of projects using this practice. Web Accessibility-- 58% of projects using this practice. Function: Building capacity for institutional change Practice Administrative and faculty directives-- 33% of projects using this practice. Student retention studies-- 15% of projects using this practice. Examples of Promising Practices: Two Case Studies Creating an Accessible Learning Environment Dr. Bruce W. Tuckman has created and directs a technology-enhanced motivation and learning strategies course that over 1000 students complete each year. Students spend the majority of their time in class completing assignments on-line. In an effort to improve the quality of the course for students with disabilities, Dr. Tuckman asked the disability specialist to conduct two focus groups: the first with students with disabilities, and the second for students without disabilities. Based on feedback gained from both focus groups, Dr. Tuckman made several changes to his course. Previously, after students submitted their assignments they could not go back and review their work. During the focus group with students with disabilities, they explained that students with short-term memory deficits needed to review their previously submitted on-line assignments, in order to complete their current assignments. Although all of the course content on the web site was “Bobby Approved” – that is it was in an accessible format, students could not review previously submitted assignments. So the course was changed so all students could have access to all their submitted assignments. This proved to benefit both students with and without disabilities. The second change that Dr. Tuckman made was to install Assistive Technology (AT) Programs in five computers within the computer lab. The most common AT Programs used on campus were installed and the instructors and teaching associates were invited to attend a training on the purpose and use of the AT Program. Currently, when a student with a visual impairment or learning disability needs to use AT to access the course content, s/he has a variety of AT programs already loaded on the computers. The environment is already accessible so that all students have access to the course without retrofitting. Further research is needed to examine the effects of these practices on student outcomes. Practices that are linked with positive student outcomes (i.e. academic achievement, employment in a chosen field, satisfaction with quality of on-campus and post campus life) could then be widely applied and sustained beyond the demonstration phase in order to provide long lasting improvements in the postsecondary education of individuals with disabilities. Innovative practices Ohio State University Partnership Grant http://www.osu.edu/grants/dpg/index.html This project is involved in faculty development through publications, such as "Fast Facts for Faculty" brochures and training aimed at improving faculty awareness about students with disabilities, and creating an accessible syllabi and curriculum. The Nisonger Center 257 McCampbell Hall 1581 Dodd Dr. The Ohio State University Campus Columbus, OH 43210 Phone: 614-292-9920 Fax: 614-292-3727 DO-IT Program (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) http://www.washington.edu/doit/ DO-IT serves to increase the participation of individuals with disabilities in challenging academic programs and careers, such as science, engineering, business, and technology. It promotes the use of computer and networking technologies to increase independence, productivity, and participation in education and employment for students with disabilities. DO-IT University of Washington Box 355670 Seattle, WA 98195-5670 doit@u.washington.edu 206-685-DOIT (3648) -- voice/TTY 888-972-DOIT (3648) -- voice/TTY, from Washington only 206-221-4171 (FAX) Web Resources Center on Disability Studies, Research Rehabilitation and Training Center Web site www.rrtc.hawaii.edu The Office of Postsecondary Education under the U.S Department of Education: Information for students and institutions on financial aid, postsecondary programs, OPE sponsored projects, etc. http://www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/ Suggested Reading Brinkerhoff, L.C. (1994). Developing effective self-advocacy skills in college bound students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 29, 229-237. National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports. (2000). Postsecondary education and employment for students with disabilities: Focus group discussions on supports and barriers in lifelong learning. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i at Manoa. Wilson, K., Getzel, E.E., & Brown, T. (2000). Enhancing the postsecondary campus climate for students with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 14, 37-50. References Izzo, M, Hertzfeld, J., Simmons-Reed, G., & Aaron, J. (2001). Promising practices: Improving the quality of higher education for students with disabilities. National Center for Postsecondary Educational Supports, Center on Disability Studies. Available on-line: http://devtest.cds.hawaii.edu/rrtc/products/phaseII/pdf/022d(1)-H01.pdf