Attitudes as a predictor of college students requesting ... - IOS Press

189

Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 31 (2009) 189–198 DOI:10.3233/JVR-2009-0488 IOS Press

Attitudes as a predictor of college students requesting accommodations Lucy Barnard-Brak∗ , Tonya Davis, Allison Tate and Tracey Sulak Baylor University, School of Education, Waco, TX, USA

Revised/Accepted: June 2009

Abstract. The purpose of the current study was to examine those variables that we postulated as predicting whether a registered college student with a disability would request accommodations in higher education. To achieve this purpose, a variety of predictor variables were considered as predicting whether a student with a disability would decide to request accommodations and analyzed using logistic regression analyses. Results indicate two significant predictors of a college student with a disability requesting accommodations, which were a student’s university characteristics (e.g. being large public versus small private) and student attitudes toward requesting accommodations. Results indicate the importance of both personal and environmental factors as influencing a student’s behavior of requesting accommodations. Keywords: College students with disabilities, accommodations in higher education, student attitudes

1. Introduction Each year, increasingly more individuals with disabilities enter institutions of higher education in the United States [7, 10]. The number of first-time fulltime students with disabilities has tripled between 1978 and 1994 [3]. In a 2000 report, the National Council on Disability informed that as many as 17% of students attending institutions of higher education are identified as having a disability [6]. Despite this increase in enrollment every year, many students with disabilities fail to successfully complete their education [20]. The U.S. Census Bureau echoes this finding indicating that persons with disabilities are less likely to graduate from college than persons without disabilities [25]. Institutions of higher education have an important role to play in achieving positive educational outcomes for persons with disabilities as a non-traditional student population. The purpose of the current study was to examine those variables that we postulated as predict∗ Address

for correspondence: Lucy Barnard-Brak, Ph.D., Baylor University, School of Education, One Bear Place #97301, Waco, TX 76798, USA. E-mail: Lucy [email protected].

ing whether a college student with a disability would request accommodations in higher education. 1.1. Importance of higher education The lack of educational attainment among persons with disabilities is problematic for society as a whole. Persons with disabilities are two to five times more likely to live below the poverty line as compared to persons without disabilities depending upon the severity of disability and other demographic characteristics [23]. As such, 62.4% of persons receiving cash assistance have a disability along with 48.2% of those receiving food stamps and 30.7% of those living in public housing have disabilities [15]. Additionally, persons with disabilities are often among the poorest of the poor in every part of the world due to a lack of healthcare, hazardous working conditions, malnutrition, and poor sanitation that often creates disabling conditions [34]. Even when controlling for income and other socioeconomic related factors (i.e. healthcare, malnutrition, etc.), “disability remains an important determinant of material hardship” ([23], p. 1). Socially exclusive policies have been noted as contributing to the creation

1052-2263/09/$17.00 © 2009 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

190

L. Barnard-Brak et al. / Attitudes towards accommodations

of ‘a poverty trap’ for many persons with disabilities ([24], p. 1). As such, the Task Force on Postsecondary Education and Disabilities [28] has indicated that educational attainment is the most effective means for persons with disabilities to achieve financial independence and equality with able-bodied peers. Thus, we should note that a variety of variables can contribute to less positive, material outcomes for individuals with disabilities such as societal, intellectual, and physical barriers. We assert that higher education for individuals with disabilities may be considered a powerful means of changing these outcomes for persons with disabilities.

form or denying them full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, and advantages or accommodations that they provide (42 U.S.C. § 12182(a)). Essentially, ADA ensures that students with disabilities are provided equal access to educational programs [9]. It should be noted that Section 504 and the ADA do not mandate higher education for individuals with disabilities but rather eliminate discriminatory policies and practices by institutions of higher education.

1.2. Educational attainment

Gil [9] points out several examples of how the experiences and procedures associated with IDEA in high school are vastly different from the experiences and procedures associated with Section 504 and ADA in postsecondary education. There are several critical differences. Specifically, during high school, the public school system is primarily responsible for identifying and evaluating students with disabilities; however in college students are expected to self-identify and provide documentation. Furthermore, while students were enrolled in high school, the school was considered responsible for making modifications, even if this included program alterations. In contrast, while colleges will provide accommodations, these accommodations cannot alter program and course requirements. Third, while in high school, education plans, such as the individualized education plan, were created by school personnel with input from other stakeholders, while in college, disability service professionals provide letters informing professors of accommodations only on student request. Finally, while in high school, the student’s parent(s) typically served as the primary advocate, but in college, this role is assumed by the student. Essentially, the transition from high school to college is marked by the transfer of responsibility, with the majority of the responsibility previously placed on the public schools in K-12, to the bulk of the responsibility now being placed with the student, including responsibility for “initiating, designing, and ensuring their own educational accommodations” ([26], p. 190). This transition of responsibility has proven to be problematic for some students with disabilities. Disability service providers and coordinators in higher education have expressed, “dissatisfaction with how well high school staff informed students of the services available for students with disabilities at the college level” ([12], p. 466). While appropriate accommodations can

Many reasons have been cited as to why students with disabilities have difficulty entering and succeeding in higher education. The transition from high school to college itself is often difficult for students with and without disabilities, as it entails many changes for students regardless of disability. For students with disabilities, the transition from high school to college can be particularly tumultuous. One of the most significant reasons for this is the differing legislation governing students with disabilities in secondary and postsecondary educational systems along with the services provided by each system under these differing legislative mandates. While the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act [11] governs and oversees the education of students with disabilities in the public school system from Kindergarten through 12th grade, services for students with disabilities at the postsecondary level are provided by both Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-122, Section 504) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (Public Law 110-325). According to Section 504, no otherwise qualified person may be denied participation in, the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance (29 U.S.C. § 794(a)). Essentially, Section 504 is responsible for ensuring that academic adjustments provide students with disabilities access into programs [9]. Title II of the ADA prohibits public entities from denying qualified individuals with disabilities the right to participate in or benefit from the services, programs, or activities as well as from subjecting such individual to discrimination if the exclusion or discrimination is due to the person having a disability (42 U.S.C. § 12132). Additionally, Title III of ADA prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in the

1.3. High school vs. higher education


be critical to students’ postsecondary success, it has been reported that approximately two-thirds of students with disabilities in postsecondary education settings are not receiving accommodations [32].

1.4. Lack of accommodations The explanations for why students are not receiving accommodations vary. First, many college students with disabilities are simply not informed about their rights and are unaware of the procedures for requesting accommodations [4, 33]. While some students simply are unknowledgeable about the changes in procedures at the postsecondary level, others opt not to utilize the services available to them. The National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 found that 53% of students who received special education services in high school, no longer consider themselves to have a disability once they have entered postsecondary education and therefore believe that they no longer require specialized services [32]. Finally, another set of students with disabilities appears to believe that they continue to have a disability, yet opt not to disclose this information. Wagner et al. [32] found that 7% of students with disabilities identified themselves as having a disability, but opted not to disclose this information to the college or university. Students have identified several explanations for nondisclosure. Some students with disabilities report the desire for a new start without a label in an educational setting [31]. Other students with disabilities prefer to postpone disclosure until they experience academic difficulty [8]. Conversely, some students with disabilities have reported that requesting accommodations resulted in feelings of fear, nervousness or anxiety that ultimately resulted in avoidance of making the appropriate requests [13]. Students opting not to take advantages of services and accommodations may be making decisions that could be associated with less positive academic outcomes. For example, the National Organization on Disability [18] found that only 12% of individuals with disabilities graduate from college, as opposed to 23% of individuals without disabilities. Moreover, in a study of students with learning disabilities, Murray et al. [17] found that of students who attended postsecondary education institutions, 80% had not graduated 5 years after high school, compared to 56% of students without disabilities. Furthermore, 56% of students with a learning disability had not graduated from postsecondary educa-

191

tion ten years after completing high school, compared to 32% of their counterparts without disabilities. A lack of ability to adapt to managing one’s own academic program has been cited as a potential contributor to these statistics [4]. Jefferson-Wilson [13] compared two groups of college students with learning disabilities, those with academic success, and those with without success, finding that the successful group had overcome fears and anxieties to ultimately request accommodations from professors, while the unsuccessful group did not ask for the assistance they wanted and/or needed. Due to this apparent association between a student’s decision to request necessary accommodations for postsecondary educational success, it is important to understand what demographic, attitudinal, and institutional characteristics are associated with students who opt to disclose their disability and request accommodations. It should be noted that there is no evidence to indicate that there is a causal relationship between a lack of accommodations and less positive academic outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to examine those variables that we postulated as predicting whether a registered college student with a disability would request accommodations in higher education. Using logistic regression analyses a variety of covariates were considered as predicting whether a student with disability would decide to request accommodations.

2. Method 2.1. Sample A sample of college students registered with their on campus offices of disability accommodations at two universities located in the Southwestern United States were solicited to volunteer to participate in the study. The first university was a large, public university with an enrollment of approximately 27,000 students. Approximately 700 students (2.9% of the student body) were currently registered with the on-campus disability support services office for accommodations at this institution. The second university studied was a smaller, private university with an enrollment of approximately 14,000 students. Approximately 800 students (5.7% of the student body) were registered with the on-campus disability support services office for accommodations. Those students who are registered may or may not request accommodations. Additionally, an unknown number of students with disabilities are not registered

192


with the on-campus disability support services accommodations and thus do not request accommodations through any official or formal channel. As a result of our recruitment at these two universities, the study comprised 156 registered students with disabilities who self-selected to participate- 83 volunteered to participate from the large, public university and 73 volunteered from the smaller, private university. In completing the online survey, participants were assured of the confidentiality of their responses. Approximately sixty-five percent of the participants identified themselves as female (n = 93) and 90.8% as white (n = 128). A total of 23 different academic degree programs were represented. There was a roughly even distribution of participants by level of study (i.e. freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, and graduate). The majority of participants reporting have one disability (67.8%, n = 97) followed by two disabilities (24.5%, n = 35). The disability category with the highest frequency reported by participants was learning disability (37.1%, n = 53) followed by emotional disorders (22.4%, n = 32). The average age was 21.02 years old (SD = 9.37) with values ranging from 18 to 55 years old in the sample.

2.2. Measures A variety of covariates were hypothesized as predicting whether a college student with a disability would request accommodations. For the purpose of the current study, we examined eighteen of those variables as possibly predicting a student’s decision to request accommodations in higher education. With the exception of attitudes toward requesting accommodations, each of these variables was measured as the result of student self-report. Table 1 contains a description of all predictor variables. To measure attitudes among college students with disabilities, Attitudes towards Requesting Accommodations (ATRA) was utilized. The ATRA is a 35-item, Likert-type scale constructed to measure attitudes toward requesting accommodations with values ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5) [2]. Higher total scale scores on this scale indicate more negative attitudes toward requesting accommodations while lower total scale scores indicate more positive attitudes. In a previous study, this scale revealed an acceptable internal consistency of scores for the data obtained from the scale with a Cronbach alpha value of α = 0.907 [2]. In the current study, the scale revealed a

Table 1 Description of predictor variables for requesting accommodations Variable

Description

Gender Ethnicity

Male vs. Female Dummy-coded into the four dichotomous variables of: African American Asian American White Hispanic Continuous variable Self-report of disability as hidden vs. visible Student self-reported current, cumulative GPA Attitudes toward requesting accommodations Dummy-coded into the eight dichotomous variables of: Learning Disability Emotional Disorder Hearing Impairment Neurological Impairment Physical Disability Speech Disorder Visual Impairment Health Related Large Public vs. Small Private

Age Visibility of Disability Grade Point Average (GPA) Accommodation Attitudes Disability

University Characteristics

similar acceptable level of internal consistency of scores for the data obtained from the scale with α = 0.912. Evidence toward the content and construct validity of the scale were also obtained. Evidence toward the content validity of the scale was achieved in the construction of the scale with the assistance of five college students with disabilities along with three trained researchers. We have included the entire scale in Appendix A. The dependent variable of a registered student’s decision to request accommodations consisted of a dichotomous, yes versus no response format. Among these registered students with disabilities, approximately 53.8% (n = 77) report requesting accommodations while approximately 46.2% (n = 66) reported not to request accommodations. Approximately 85.2% (n = 121) of students reported that they perceived their disability as hidden while the remaining 14.8% (n = 21) of students reported that they perceived their disability as visible. The mean GPA reported in the sample was 3.06 (SD = 0.64). 2.3. Procedure Students were contacted via list servs for registered students with disabilities at a small, private university


and a large, public university. However as described previously, not all students with disabilities register with their university’s disability support services accommodations. The results of the current study are limited in their application to those students with disabilities who choose to register with their university’s disability support services accommodations and who volunteered to participate in the study. Participants then completed an online questionnaire in which they reported their GPA, whether or not they requested accommodations, and then completed the instrument measuring their attitudes towards requesting accommodations. A conservative estimate of response rate would be 10.4%, which would indicate a low response rate. As we recruited participants via e-mail list serv messages, we do not know how many students actually opened the e-mail messages to even consider the study. Additionally, the messages may have been sent to a junk or spam e-mail folder. We then summed the total score for the ATRA scale for each individual. All analyses were performed in SPSS (v. 16.0). Values for missing data were handled using a linear trend at point as the method of imputation among the continuous independent, predictor variables. Multivariate outliers were examined by calculating Mahalanobis distance indicating that such outliers were minimal and were retained in the analyses as logistic regression requires no assumptions about the distributions of the predictor variables to be made [16, 27]. 2.4. Analyses Given the dichotomous nature of the dependent variable, a student’s decision to request accommodations, logistic regression was the primary method of analysis for both models using the predictors outlined in Table 1. Values for four statistics reflecting model fit are reported: chi-square (χ2 ), −2 log likelihood, Cox and Snell R2 , and Nagelkerke R2 are reported. In the examination of individual predictor variables, regression coefficients (B) and estimates of their standard errors (S.E.) are presented along with their respective levels of statistical significance (p) using the Wald test statistic. Odds ratios (e.g. Exp(B) ≈ eB ) for each predictor variable are also reported.

193

ability to request accommodations, model fit statistics were small indicating evidence toward a well-fitting model with a low −2 log likelihood value of 24.49 (a value of zero suggesting perfect fit). Our model was also significantly different from the constantonly model, χ2 (1) = 56.74, p < 0.01 with an estimated 83.2% of the participants being correctly classified based upon predicted values of the dependent variable, a student requesting accommodations. Altogether, values for these statistics indicate that our model may be considered statistically reliable in distinguishing between registered college students with disabilities who requested accommodations and those registered college students who did not. Values for both the Cox and Snell R2 along with the Nagelkerke R2 were 0.352 and 0.469, respectively indicating a moderate to high proportion of the variability in a college student’s decision to request accommodations may be accounted for by the predictor variables. In examining individual regression coefficients, it appears that only two predictors (i.e. university characteristics and attitudes toward requesting accommodations) were statistically significant at the 0.05 level or less. The odds ratios for university characteristics (large public vs. small private) was eB = 7.108 and attitudes toward requesting accommodations was eB = 2.037 for an increase in the likelihood of a student’s decision to request accommodations when the predictors increased by 1. In other words, college students with disabilities were 7.108 times more likely to request accommodations when attending a small, private university versus a large, public university. This result suggests a strong, statistically significant relationship between a student requesting accommodations and university characteristics. Additionally, college students with disabilities were 2.037 times more likely to request accommodations whenever their attitudes toward requesting accommodations increased by 1 on the scale. This indicates a two to one relationship between a student’s decision to request accommodations and their attitudes toward requesting accommodations. Summary statistics for each individual predictor in modeling a student’s decision to request accommodations are presented in Table 2.

4. Discussion 3. Results In evaluating those variables we hypothesized as predicting the decision of a college student with a dis-

The results of the current study indicate two significant variables in predicting whether a college student with a disability registered with their on-campus dis-

194

L. Barnard-Brak et al. / Attitudes towards accommodations Table 2 Summary statistics predicting students with disabilities requesting accommodations Variable Gender African American Asian American White Hispanic Age Visibility of Disability Grade Point Average (GPA) Accommodation Attitudes Learning Disability Emotional Disorder Hearing Impairment Neurological Impairment Physical Disability Speech Disorder Visual Impairment Health Related University Characteristics Constant

B

S.E.

Wald

p

Odds Ratio

0.400 0.066 2.946 −19.621 −17.576 −0.011 0.481 0.039 0.036 0.051 −0.690 0.390 0.798 −0.342 −0.741 0.958 −0.103 1.961 13.486

0.505 0.642 3.176 × 104 2.318 × 104 2.318 × 104 0.026 0.771 0.071 0.014 0.640 0.694 0.980 0.667 0.808 1.040 0.944 0.723 0.586 2.318 × 104

0.628 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.169 0.390 0.308 7.292 0.006 0.990 0.159 1.433 0.179 0.507 1.031 0.020 11.205 0.000

0.428 0.374 1.000 0.999 0.999 0.681 0.532 0.579 0.007 0.936 0.320 0.690 0.231 0.672 0.476 0.310 0.886 0.001 1.000

1.492 1.069 19.032 0.000 0.000 0.990 1.618 1.040 2.037 1.053 0.501 1.478 2.222 0.710 0.477 2.607 0.902 7.108 7.195 × 105

ability support services office accommodations would request accommodations in the college classroom. Students registered with their on campus offices of disability accommodations may or may not choose to request accommodations. These students registered with their university’s office of student disability services have provided appropriate documentation indicating that they have legitimate disabilities, which may require accommodations. This is both a limitation and strength of the current study. While the results of the current study may not be generalizable beyond students with disabilities who register with their on-campus offices of disability accommodations, these students are guaranteed to have legitimate disabilities. In examining the results of the current study, the two significant predictors of a student requesting accommodations were university characteristics (e.g. large public versus small private) and attitudes toward requesting accommodations. 4.1. University characteristics University characteristics being a significant predictor of a college student with a disability requesting accommodations; however may be attributable to a certain degree of self-selection bias on the part of students. In interpreting the results of the current study, a student with a disability with more positive attitudes about requesting accommodations may be more likely to choose a smaller, private university that would provide more personalized or direct services than a larger,

public university. Results of the current study may also be viewed alternatively as negating this interpretation of findings. In the current study, we examined two universities with approximately 700 to 800 registered students with disabilities. The smaller, private university had a disability services staff of seven individuals and approximately 700 registered students with disabilities thus every one disability service provider served approximately 70 students with disabilities. The larger, public university had a disability services staff of seventeen individuals and approximately 800 registered students with disabilities thus every one disability service provider staff member served approximately 47 students with disabilities. It would not appear that students with disabilities attending a smaller, private university would actually receive more personalized or direct services than at a larger, public university. This interpretation may be limited to the particular characteristics of the universities sampled in the current study. Future research should survey disability service providers across institutions of higher education to examine the utilization of staffing and services as there is, “a great deal of institutional variation in the way that services are provided” ([14], p. 32). We suggest that these students who have more positive attitudes about requesting accommodations would appear to demonstrate more willingness to seek help. This willingness to seek help has been indicated as being an important subset of self-regulatory learning skills [21, 35]. Structuring and choosing one’s environment appropriately has also been indicated as being


another important subset of self-regulatory learning skills [21, 35]. In view of the results of the current study, students with disabilities who attend smaller, private universities may do so intentionally to learn in what they may perceive to be a more intimate and caring environment. The smaller, private university in the study is also religiously-affiliated, which also may play a part in students who are more likely to request accommodations choosing their university. While future research should further examine college choice as a function of university characteristics among students with disabilities, it should be noted that the results of the current study may not be considered generalizable to universities with differing characteristics (e.g. smaller public vs. larger private universities). 4.2. Attitudes toward requesting accommodations Attitudes towards requesting accommodations appear to be another logical predictor of a student’s decision to request accommodations. The idea that cognitive factors influencing behavior is not all that surprising or unexpected [5, 19]. As such, the results of the current study also indicate further evidence toward the external validity of the ATRA scale. In providing transition services, this scale can be employed at the secondary level to gauge how likely a student will request accommodations when entering postsecondary education. To provide some scale for interpretation, those students with disabilities who requested accommodations had a mean scale score of 94.35 (SD = 17.58) while students with disabilities who did not request accommodations had a mean scale score of 109.52 (SD = 22.46). 4.3. Future research In addition to those topics of future research already mentioned, future research should also consider the examination of those factors that influence how a student with disability selects his/her institution of higher education. We suggest that these analyses examining college choices among students with disabilities also take into account their attitudes toward requesting accommodations. For example, future research could question how students’ attitudes toward requesting accommodations influence their decisions in considering and selecting a college or university. What other factors may be considered influential when students with disabilities select an institution of higher education? Of particular interest is whether a student visited

195

with the disability accommodations offices of their prospective institutions of higher education prior to making his/her postsecondary school decision, especially in relation to their attitudes toward requesting accommodations. If so, in what capacity would those visits impact the student’s decision? These questions are particularly important in studying the differences in the number of students registered with the two universities in the present study. As indicated above, the large, public university’s disability accommodation office consisted of 2.9% of the school’s population, whereas the small, private university’s disability accommodation office consisted of 5.7% of the school’s population. Future research should also explore the origin of this gap in the number of registered students across institutions while taking into account their attitudes toward requesting accommodations. 4.4. Implications for practice As discussed above, the present study yields two important findings. First, that a student’s attitudes toward requesting accommodations and, second, the institution in which he/she attends both play a role in whether accommodations will be requested. These findings also reveal implications for disability service providers and professionals in higher education as well. Most importantly, regardless of race, gender, GPA, or disability, it is the student’s attitudes toward requesting accommodations that will be the most telling indication of whether he/she is requesting accommodations and utilizing the services available. Therefore, when working with a struggling student who is not taking full advantage of services, the disability services professional should focus on identifying the nature of the negative attitudes toward accommodations, and then on how to make the student’s attitudes toward accommodations more favorable. Disability service professionals can begin to focus efforts on attitudes toward requesting accommodations rather than being concerned with a student’s specific disability, gender, past achievement, or ethnicity. The majority of research concerning college students with disabilities has been qualitative rather than quantitative in nature [8, 13, 31]. The results of the current study provide quantitative evidence to support what disability service providers may already be inclined to think with regard to the importance of attitudes toward requesting accommodations. While qualitative research can prove invaluable, the current study is the first to quantitatively measure and examine student attitudes toward requesting accommodations.

196


Additionally, disability services professionals can use the empirically-based quantitative evidence to make their disability services offices at their campuses as inviting and positive as possible for students to engage with them. Students who view the disability services office as a positive place may be more likely to view accommodations in a positive light. 4.5. Limitations Several limitations have emerged as part of the current study. One major limitation of the current study is the low response rate of 10.4%, yet this is a conservative estimate. To reiterate, we recruited participants via e-mail list serv messages, thus we do not know how many students actually opened the e-mail messages to even consider the study. Additionally, e-mail messages may have been sent to a junk or spam e-mail folder. Future research should consider alternate means of contacting this low incidence population of students in higher education such as by posting information in disability support services offices. Another limitation in the current study is the homogeneity of the sample with respect to the variable of race with 90.8% of the sample identifying themselves as white. This homogeneity, however, is not a function of the sample but more the student bodies of the universities in the current study, which were predominantly white. Another major limitation of the current study concerns that it appears that the majority of students with disabilities who fail to seek accommodations also would not register with their disability support services office. Thus, there is an unknown number of students with disabilities who fail to seek accommodations that is precluded by these students who do not register with their disability support services office. Our final limitation concerns that our sample was collected across two universities, which may make our results not very generalizable. Future research should expand the current study to a variety of institutions of higher education. 5. Conclusion

student’s university. Students with disabilities who attended larger, public universities were significantly less likely to request accommodations as compared to their peers at smaller, private universities. The second of these significant predictors pertains to attitudes toward requesting accommodations on the part of the student with a disability. While disability service providers and other higher education professionals may be unable to change the size or public vs. private nature of their institution, disability service providers may be able to influence student attitudes. The current study quantitatively measures and examines these attitudes toward requesting accommodations. Using logistic regression analyses, a variety of covariates were considered as predicting whether a student with disability would decide to request accommodations. While qualitative research can provide invaluable information, the results of the current study highlight how quantitative methods may be utilized to compare and contrast predictors. Acknowledgement This study was supported in part by funds from the Baylor University Research Committee and the Vice Provost for Research. References [1] [2]

[3]

[4]

[5] [6]

In conclusion, the current study examines those variables considered as predicting whether a registered student with a disability would request accommodations using quantitative techniques. With regard to students registered as having legitimate disabilities, the results indicate two significant predictors of a student’s decision to request accommodations. The first of these predictors concerns the characteristics of the

[7]

[8]

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. L. Barnard, W.Y. Lan and D. Lechtenberger, How Student Attitudes Toward Requesting Accommodations are Related to Academic Achievement in Postsecondary Education, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, 2008. R. Black, G. Smith, T. Harding and R.A. Stodden, Provision of educational supports to students with disabilities in a two year postsecondary programs, Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education 24 (2002), 3–17. L.C. Brinkerhoff, J.M. McGuire and S.F. Shaw, Postsecondary Education and Transition for Students with Learning Disabilities (2nd ed.), Austin, TX: Pro-Ed., 2002. J.S. Bruner, Acts of Meaning, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990. T.W. Christ and R. Stodden, Advantages of developing survey constructs when comparing educational supports offered to students with disabilities in postsecondary education, Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 22 (2005), 23–31. S. Eckes and T. Ochoa, Students with disabilities: Transitioning from high school to higher education, American Secondary Education 33(3) (2005), 6–20. E.E. Getzel and C.A. Homa, Experiences of college students with disabilities and the importance of self-determination in higher education settings, Career Development for Exceptional Individuals 31(2) (2008), 77–84.

L. Barnard-Brak et al. / Attitudes towards accommodations [9]

[10]

[11] [12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19] [20]

[21]

[22] [23]

L.A. Gil, Bridging the transition gap from high school to college: Preparing students with disabilities for a successful postsecondary experience, TEACHING Exceptional Children 40 (2) (2007), 12–15. HEATH, Update on College Freshmen with Disabilities, Washington, DC: American Council on Education, HEATH Resource Center, 1999. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004). S.J. Janiga and V. Costenbader, The transition from high school to postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A survey of college service coordinators, Journal of Learning Disabilities 35(5) (2002), 462–468. P. Jefferson-Wilson, Community college students with learning disabilities: Percept of emotional self-efficacy (Doctoral dissertation, George mason University, 2000), Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences 60(10-A) (2000), 3611. J.W. Madaus, Navigating the college transition maze: A guide of students with learning disabilities, Teaching Exceptional Children 37(3) (2005), 32–37. J. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1994–95. Current Population Reports, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C., Retrieved June 23, 2006 from, http://www.census.gov/prod/ 3/97pubs/p70-61.pdf, 1995. C.A. Mertler and R.A. Vannatta, Advanced and Multivariate Statistical Methods: Practical Application and Interpretation (3rd ed.), Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2005. C. Murray, D.E. Goldstein, S. Nourse and E. Edgar, The postsecondary school attendance and completion rates of high school graduates with learning disabilities, Learning Disabilities Research 15 (2000), 119–127. National Organization on Disability, The N.O.D./Harris 2000 Survey of Americans with Disabilities, Washington, DC: Author, 2001. S. Pinker, The Blank Slate. New York: Penguin Group, 2002. D. Quick, J. Lehman and T. Deniston, Opening doors for students with disabilities on community college campuses: What have we learned? What do we still need to know? Community College Journal of Research and Practice 27 (2003), 815–827. D.H. Schunk and B.J. Zimmerman, Self-Regulated Learning: From Teaching to Self-Reﬂective Practice, New York: London, 1998 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq. P. She and G. Livermore, Material Hardship, Disability, and Poverty among Working-Age Adults: Research Brief, Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Employment Policy for Persons with Disabilities, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 2006.

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27] [28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

197

D.C. Stapleton, B. O’Day, G.A. Livermore and A.J. Imparato, Dismantling the Poverty Trap: Disability Policy for the 21st Century, Rehabilitation Research and Training Center for Economic Research on Employment Policy for Persons with Disabilities, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Retrieved June 21, 2006 from, http://digitalcommons. ilr.cornell.edu/edicollect/124, July 2005. E. Steinmetz, Americans with Disabilities: 2002, Current Population Reports, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC. Retrieved June 22, 2006 from, http://www.census.gov/prod/ 2006pubs/p70-107.pdf, May 2006. R.A. Stodden, T. Whelley, Chang, Chuan and T. Harding, Current status of education support provision to students with disabilities in postsecondary education, Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 16 (2001), 189–198. B.G. Tabachinick and L.S. Fidell, Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.), Harper Collins, New York, 2006 Task Force on Postsecondary Education and Disabilities, Postsecondary Education and Individuals with Disabilities: Recommendations to New York State for Strategies to Increase Access and Opportunity. Retrieved May 27, 2006 from, http://www.suny.edu/disabilities/taskforce/, 2000. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-122, Section 504, Retrieved June 18, 2009, from Lexis/Nexis Congressional, 1973. The American with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 110-325, Retrieved June 18, 2009, from Lexis/Nexis Congressional, 1990. R. Torkelson Lynch and L. Gussel, Disclosure and selfadvocacy regarding disability-related needs: Strategies to maximize integration in postsecondary education, Journal of Counseling and Development 74 (1996), 352–357. M. Wagner, L. Newman, R. Cameto, N. Garza and P. Levine, After High School: A First look at the Postschool Experiences of Youth with Disabilities. A Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 (NLTS2). Available from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 Web site, http://www.nlts2.org/reports/2005 04/nlts2 report 2005 04 complete.pdf, 2005. G.W. White and Y.T.H. Vo, Requesting accommodations to increase full participation in higher education: An analysis of self-advocacy training for postsecondary students with learning and other disabilities, Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal 14(1), (2006) 41–56. R. Yeo, Chronic Poverty and Disability, Action on Disability and Development, Chronic Poverty Research Centre, Somerset, United Kingdrom. Retrieved June 21, 2006 from, http://www.chronicpoverty.org/pdfs/04Yeo.pdf, 2004. B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk, Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives (2nd ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2001.

198


Appendix A ATRA scale items 1. I can’t get documentation of my disability to request accommodations. 2. Accommodations are unfair to other students. 3. I don’t have the time to go through the process of registering with Student Disability Services. 4. I do not have the money right now to get my disability documented to request accommodations. 5. I don’t like to admit that I have a disability. 6. I don’t like talking about my disability. 7. I don’t want professors to know that I have a disability. 8. I don’t want friends to know that I have a disability. 9. My family and friends doesn’t think I am disabled enough to need accommodations. 10. I don’t think I am disabled enough to need accommodations. 11. The Student Disability Services office was unhelpful. 12. The Student Disability Services office was unapproachable. 13. The Student Disability Services office did not assist me. 14. I don’t know sometimes whether I am really all that disabled. 15. People don’t think I am disabled. 16. I have never felt like I needed accommodations. 17. I don’t like people knowing private and personal information about me such as my disability. 18. I don’t trust Student Disability Services to keep my information confidential. 19. I don’t trust professors to keep my information confidential. 20. I prefer to be treated as a non-disabled person. 21. I want to be like other college students. 22. I want to have a normal college experience. 23. There’s nothing wrong with me. 24. I have a right to privacy regarding my disability. 25. I didn’t know anything about disability accommodations when I started college. 26. I was afraid of being labeled. 27. I want to prove I can do college. 28. Accommodations are for academically weaker students. 29. I want to stand on my own two feet. 30. Going to Student Disability Services is awkward. 31. Accommodations are for lazier students. 32. Requesting accommodations from professors can be awkward. 33. Student disability services were not discussed at my new student or transfer orientation. 34. Students should try to get along without accommodations. 35. The cost of talking about my disability to get accommodations outweighs the benefits.