Experiences of Students
with Disabilities in Selected Community and Technical Colleges
Sean Lancaster, Daryl Mellard, & Lesa Hoffman
University of Kansas
Center for Research on Learning
Division of Adult Studies
February, 2001
This document was supported in whole or in part by the US Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, (Cooperative Agreement No. H324M980109). However, the opinions expressed herin do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of the US Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, and no official endorsement by the Department should be inferred. Note: There are no copyright restrictions on this document, however please credit the source and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material. This report is also available on the web for printing at: http://das.kucrl.org/iam.html
Student questionnaires were administered to 61 students with disabilities currently enrolled in community colleges in Kansas (n=20), Minnesota (n=23), and California (n=18). This information was collected through the course of 2 campus visits during the spring and fall of 1999. Unless otherwise noted, all summaries are of students completing the questionnaire for the first time. The students were nominated by college staff and paid an incentive for their participation.
The data in Table 1 indicates the students varied in age (mean age=30.45), with only one-third of the “typical” college age of 18-21. The sample was predominantly white, non-parents, with both genders represented equally. The data in Table 2 indicates that one-third were employed (of those, mostly part-time), and about one-third were financially independent. According to Table 3, about half of the sample was enrolled in 9 to 13 credit hours, with one quarter enrolled in less than 9 and the final quarter enrolled in more than 13. The majority stated an AA or AS degree as their current goal, with plans to transfer to a four-year college.
Students reported an average of 1.3 disabilities per person, ranging from 1-6 (Table 5). The most frequently reported disability type was learning disabilities (n = 29), affecting approximately half of the students (Table 4). Given this high proportion of LD, additional analyses (Tables 12 and 13) were conducted to compare the students with LD with students with other disabilities. Orthopedic or mobility-related disabilities affected about one-third. The students’ greatest difficulties were with concentration, distraction, frustration, test anxiety, remembering, and mathematics (Tables 5 and 6). The most frequent accommodations and services mentioned were notetakers, extended testing time or quiet testing rooms, and tutors (Tables 7 and 8). The tutors were available for all of the students such as through the college’s learning center or library. They were not tutors specifically designated for students with disabilities. Students rated several issues in selecting and using accommodations as "very" important, such as the amount of training required, task appropriateness, personal cost, availability, ease of use, independence, and disability specificity (Table 9). Overall, students appeared satisfied with the accommodations they were receiving (Table 10), although the extent of their satisfaction was somewhat related to the type of disability they experienced. In general, a small, mostly nonsignificant (underpowered) trend was observed for students with physical disabilities to report greater satisfaction than students with non-physical disabilities.
Additionally, 19 students completed the instrument twice, and these students were compared across several of the items. Nine of these students were employed at Time 1 (Spring 1999), and two more were employed at Time 2 (Fall 1999). The number of credit hours taken by the students stayed constant for 4, increased for 2, and decreased for 11. Twelve of the students reported the same education goal at both times (AA/AS degree for 11, completion of general education requirements for 1), while 4 (20%) reported a different goal. The reported number of disabilities remained constant for 15 of the students, and decreased for 4. The reported number of academically related difficulties stayed constant for 4 students, increased for 6, and decreased for 8. Finally, the reported number of accommodations currently used was constant for 8 students, increased for 5, and decreased for 4.
The high frequency of student participants with learning disabilities allowed for more detailed analyses of this group of students. Our analyses included comparing the students with learning disabilities (n = 29) with the students with other types of disabilities. These analyses are summarized in Table 12. While statistical tests did not reveal statistically significant results (p-values > .05), the trends suggested that students with LD were younger and had corresponding less college experience (e.g., fewer credits and fewer hours enrolled). They were also likely to work fewer hours per week in a job and were less likely to have children. They were also likely to report more disabilities.
In Table 13 the percentages of each group are reported who responded “yes” to a variety of questions. The calculated chi-square and associated p-value is also tabled. The data show differences between these groups on several variables, even those variables for which the calculated p-value was not statistically significant. Congruent with the finding that students with LD are less likely to have children is the finding that they are less likely to be married. They were also less likely to be involved in clubs or organizations outside of the college setting (25% vs. 53%), which may have implications for their feelings of connection to the community and social support. They may also be less involved because of higher rates of employment or their sense of need to focus on their academic pursuits because of their higher percentage of attention (89% vs. 60%) and cognitive difficulties (96% vs. 73%).
One difference, however, was that the students with LD reported that they were employed (46%) at a higher rate than the other students with disabilities (28%). An interesting contrast is that they worked fewer hours per week in those jobs. Since their employment rates were higher, they were also less likely to receive benefits from social security, either supplemental security income (3% vs. 53%) or social security disability income (20% vs. 37%). Their access was also less limiting than for students with other disabilities (13% vs. 60%).
In summary our limited data on these students did provide some statistically significant differences between students with LD and those students with other disabilities. A very important comparison not available in this data set is how these students compare to the general student population and to students with disabilities who had not self-identified themselves as students with disabilities to the college’s office for student services. Such comparative information seems very important to targeting the resources for improving the recruitment, retention, and completion.
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Age, Gender, Ethnicity, & Parental Status .............................................................. 5
2 Financial and Employment Background................................................................. 6
3 Enrollment Status and Education Goals................................................................... 7
4 Documented Disabilities............................................................................................ 9
5 Number of Disabilities Reported.............................................................................. 10
6 Reported Attentional, Emotional, & Verbal Difficulties...................................... 11
7 Reported Accessibility & Cognitive Difficulties.................................................... 13
8 Reported Testing Accommodations, Service, & Equipment Use......................... 14
9 Reported Auditory, Visual, Transportation, & Access Accommodation Use.................................................................................................................................. 16
10 Frequency (%) for Accommodation Issues Importance Ratings.......................... 18
11 Frequency (%) for Accommodation Selection Issues Opinions .......................... 19
12 LD and non-LD comparisons..................................................................................... 21
13 Comparisons of Students With and Without Learning Disabilities Reporting “Yes”........................................................................................................... 22
Table 1
Age, Gender, Ethnicity, & Parental Status
______________________________________________________________________________
|
Age (mean=30.45; sd = 11.32) |
Count
|
Valid %
|
Cumulative %
|
|
18-21 |
20 |
33.3 |
33.3 |
|
22-25 |
10 |
16.7 |
50.0 |
|
30-35 |
11 |
18.3 |
68.3 |
|
36-44 |
8 |
13.3 |
81.7 |
|
45-52 |
11 |
18.3 |
100.0 |
|
Missing |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gender
|
Count
|
Valid %
|
|
|
Male |
30 |
49.2 |
|
|
Female |
31 |
50.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ethnicity
|
Count
|
Valid %
|
|
|
White |
45 |
75.0 |
|
|
Black |
6 |
10.0 |
|
|
Asian |
3 |
5.0 |
|
|
Hispanic |
3 |
5.0 |
|
|
White & Hispanic |
2 |
3.3 |
|
|
Amer. Ind., Black, & White |
1 |
1.7 |
|
|
Missing |
1 |
|
|
(table
continues)
Parental Status
|
Count
|
Valid %
|
Cumulative %
|
|
None |
43 |
72.9 |
72.9 |
|
1 child |
4 |
6.8 |
79.9 |
|
2 children |
8 |
13.6 |
93.2 |
|
3 children |
1 |
1.7 |
94.9 |
|
4 children |
2 |
3.4 |
98.3 |
|
6 children |
1 |
1.7 |
100.0 |
Missing
|
2 |
|
|
______________________________________________________________________________
Table 2
Financial and Employment Background
__________________________________________________________________
|
|
Yes |
No |
Missing
|
||
Financial Status
|
Count |
Valid% |
Count |
Valid% |
Count
|
|
Financially Independent |
22 |
37.9 |
36 |
62.1 |
3 |
|
Vocational Rehabilitation Client |
25 |
43.1 |
33 |
56.9 |
3 |
|
Has Social Security Disability |
18 |
29.5 |
43 |
70.5 |
0 |
|
Has Social Security |
18 |
29.5 |
43 |
70.5 |
0 |
|
Has Lost Benefits |
7 |
11.7 |
53 |
88.3 |
1 |
|
Has Financial Aid for College |
32 |
54.2 |
27 |
45.8 |
2 |
(table continues)
|
|
Yes |
No |
Missing
|
||
|
|
Count |
Valid% |
Count |
Valid% |
Count
|
Currently Employed
|
22 |
36.7 |
38 |
63.3 |
1 |
|
Part-Time |
19 |
90.5 |
|
|
|
|
Full-Time |
2 |
9.5 |
|
|
|
__________________________________________________________________
Table 3
__________________________________________________________________
Enrollment
|
Count |
Valid % |
Cumulative% |
|
3 to 8 hours |
17 |
27.9 |
27.9 |
|
9 to 13 hours |
29 |
47.5 |
75.4 |
|
14 to 19 hours |
15 |
24.6 |
100.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Current Goal
|
Count |
Valid % |
|
|
AS/AS degree |
37 |
64.9 |
|
|
Vocational Certificate |
5 |
8.8 |
|
|
College Experience |
4 |
7.0 |
|
|
Finish General Requirements |
9 |
15.8 |
|
|
Don't Know |
1 |
1.8 |
|
|
Become a Self-Advocate |
1 |
1.8 |
|
Missing
|
4 |
|
|
(table continues)
|
|
|
|
Educational Plans
|
Count |
Valid % |
|
Other 2-year College |
3 |
5.7 |
|
4-year University |
37 |
69.8 |
|
Independent/Specialized Training |
6 |
11.3 |
|
Don't Know |
7 |
13.2 |
Missing
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Future Work Plans
|
Count |
Valid % |
|
Professional |
22 |
75.9 |
|
Clerical |
2 |
6.9 |
|
Don't Know |
5 |
17.2 |
Missing
|
32 |
|
__________________________________________________________________
Table 4
__________________________________________________________________
|
Disability |
Response Count |
% Responses |
% Cases |
|
Visually Impaired/Blind |
6 |
6.5 |
10.2 |
|
Hard of Hearing/Deaf |
8 |
8.7 |
13.6 |