Practices and Predictors of the Use of Accommodations by University Faculty to Support College Students with Disabilities

Leena Jo Landmark, M.Ed., and Dan Dalun Zhang, Ph.D.

Interpretation

Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities was the variable that accounted for the largest amount of variance in the Provision of Accommodations. Personal beliefs included beliefs pertaining to the efficacy of accommodations, the need for accommodations, the integrity of the course, an instructor’s academic freedom, and the efficacy of students with disabilities in college. Personal Beliefs have been related to the Provision of Accommodations in other studies (Bourke, Strehorn, & Silver, 2000; Kalivoda & Higbee, 1998; Nelson, Dodd, & Smith, 1990), also. The model tested also showed that Personal Beliefs were predicted by Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities and Perceived Institutional Support, indirectly predicting variance in the Provision of Accommodations. This finding is consistent with Rao & Gartin’s (2003) study in which they found that faculty who were knowledgeable about the laws regarding accommodations were more likely to be willing to provide accommodations.

Implications for the DTN

In order to have the greatest impact on facilitating faculty’s provision of reasonable accommodations to college students with disabilities, the DTN needs to focus on changing the Personal Beliefs of faculty regarding the education of students with disabilities. Because Personal Beliefs can be predicted by Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities and Perceived Institutional Support, the DTN (in collaboration with the Texas A&M University System disability services offices) needs to ensure that appropriate training and support are available to the Texas A&M University System faculty. To meet this goal, the DTN provides four levels of training that include disability awareness trainings at new faculty orientations, mini-grants to facilitate innovative teaching, quarterly practice and policy updates for administrators and staff, and online and instructor-led trainings.

Overview

Although Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act guarantee access to postsecondary education through reasonable accommodations for qualified students with disabilities, college students with disabilities still do not graduate at commensurate levels as students who do not have disabilities (National Center for Education Statistics, 1999). The Disability Training Network (DTN) for the Texas A&M University System was developed to address this discrepancy. The DTN provides training, technical assistance, and materials to postsecondary faculty to support and enhance instructional practices (including the provision of accommodations) regarding college students with disabilities.

To obtain a better understanding of the variables that are related to the provision of accommodations by faculty, one of the initial tasks of the DTN was to review the literature on this topic. Based on the findings from the literature review and anecdotal experiences, the DTN team felt that there were four interrelated constructs, or variables, (i.e., Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities, Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities, Perceived Institutional Support, and Comfort Level with Students with Disabilities) that predicted the Provision of Accommodations by postsecondary faculty.

The purpose of this study was two-fold: 1) to investigate the relationship between the variables and faculty demographics and 2) to determine how well the data fit the proposed model.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the different groups based on the demographic variables.

Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities, Perceived Institutional Support, and Level of Comfort with Students with Disabilities did not have any direct effects on the Provision of Accommodations.

Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities and Perceived Institutional Support had direct effects on Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities and the Level of Comfort with Students with Disabilities.

8% of the variance in Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities and 4% of the variance in Comfort Level with Students with Disabilities was accounted for by Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities and Perceived Institutional Support.

Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities had a direct effect the Provision of Accommodations.

16% of the variance Provision of Accommodations was accounted for by Knowledge of Legal Responsibilities, Perceived Institutional Support, and Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities. Only 8.5% of the variance in Provision of Accommodations was uniquely accounted for by Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities.

Method

ParticipantsA systematically selected sample of 900 faculty members, representing 10% of the total teaching faculty of the Texas A&M University System, were electronically invited to participate in the anonymous online survey. The final sample consisted of 206 respondents.

InstrumentThe survey instrument was developed by modifying and combining instruments from other studies (Baggett, 1994; Bourke, Strehorn, & Silver, 2000; Fichten et al., 1990; Hill, 1996; Rao & Gartin, 2003; Thompson & Bethea, 1996) that investigated the provision of accommodations by postsecondary faculty. The survey instrument consisted of two sections. Section I collected data about the variables and Section II collected demographic information.

Factor analysis was used to examine and verify the construct structure of the survey instrument. Cross validation generated the following internal reliabilities: Personal Beliefs Regarding the Education of Students with Disabilities, α = 0.86; Perceived Institutional Support, α = 0.79; Comfort Level with Students with Disabilities, α = 0.79; and Provision of Accommodations, α = 0.87.

AnalysisStructural Equation Modeling was used to test the relationships between the variables simultaneously.

Respondent characteristic Number %Role Faculty 202 98.1 Staff 4 1.9 Total 206 100.0Rank Professor 58 28.2 Associate Professor 53 25.7 Assistant Professor 57 27.7 Others 38 18.4 Total 206 100.0Gender Female 68 33.0 Male 138 67.0 Total 206 100.0Discipline Agriculture & life science 27 13.1 Health and medical 15 7.3 Science 22 10.7 Architecture, Arts, Liberal Arts & Library

58 28.2

Business 14 6.8 Education 25 12.1 Engineering 25 12.1 Missing 20 9.7 Total 206 100.0

Knowledge of Legal

Responsibilities

Perceived Institutional

Support

Provision of Accommodations

Personal Beliefs Regarding

Education of SWD

Level of Comfort with SWD

0.15

0.12

0.20

0.03

0.04

0.96

0.33

0.10

0.13

0.21

0.92

0.840.37