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

1
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
instructors 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 Gartins (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 facultys 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 AM University System disability
services offices) needs to ensure that
appropriate training and support are available to
the Texas AM 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
AM 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 Participants A systematically selected
sample of 900 faculty members, representing 10
of the total teaching faculty of the Texas AM
University System, were electronically invited to
participate in the anonymous online survey. The
final sample consisted of 206 respondents.
Instrument The 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, a 0.86 Perceived Institutional
Support, a 0.79 Comfort Level with Students
with Disabilities, a 0.79 and Provision of
Accommodations, a 0.87. Analysis Structural
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 206 100.0
Rank
Professor 58 28.2
Associate Professor 53 25.7
Assistant Professor 57 27.7
Others 38 18.4
Total 206 100.0
Gender
Female 68 33.0
Male 138 67.0
Total 206 100.0
Discipline
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