DARE Students and the First Year Experience2012

Alison Doyle

Disability Service

Trinity College Dublin

June 2012

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

Sample population

Ethical Considerations

Research Method

FINDINGS

Survey results

Interview results

CONCLUSION

APPENDICES

ABSTRACT

The objective of this mixed methods study was to examine the first year experience of students who accepted a college place on reduced points under the DARE scheme (n=74). Quantitative data from a survey examined ease of transition from school to college, the registration and orientation process, quality of human support provided pre and post-transition, access to disability supports, and experience of the DARE process. Qualitative data from interview transcripts explored knowledge of College structure and organization, pre-registration / pre-entry initiatives, registration and orientation, connecting with other students, provision of advice and support, campus ethos and environment, level of academic ‘readiness’ and skills, diversity and inclusiveness of college population, and the overall First Year Experience.

Key findings indicate that 50% of students found registration problematic / confusing, and 90% did not have the appropriate academic skills required for third level study, 12% felt that this was not provided to them by College. 77% of students have a clear understanding of College structures and procedures, Most students indicated ease of transition was related to appropriate course choices, and60% identifieda positive message of ‘can do’ that made a distinct difference to success and engagement. 20% of students reportedly were unaware of who to contact for assistance or where to locate helpful information. Overall students indicated that the transition process was a positive experience, with 99.9% of students stating that College is an open, inclusive and welcoming place.

Results suggest that future pre-entry work should focus on providing accurate and in-depth knowledge about college systems and structures, and course specific information that permits students to make more appropriate choices. Critically, academic and study skills need to be embedded within programmesin the first semester, in order to bridge the skills gap. The process of student / institutional engagement has to begin atpre-entry, prior to the orientation period.

INTRODUCTION

The First Year Experience has been the focus of research for the past twenty years, principally in the US, Australia and the UK. The first year of college or university is observed to be central to student retention, and identifying effective ways of assimilating new students is a conundrum that exercises institutions annually. Tinto in particular (1997, 2000) makes a clear statement about the necessity to ‘consider ways to change our institutionsto better fit our students, rather than change the student to fit the institution’ (Nutt Calderon, 2009, p. 4). However this is not simple to achieve in practice. HEIs have flirted with a range of initiatives such as summer camps, shadowing days, orientation programmes, open days, information packs and websites, with varying degrees of success.

In the Republic of Ireland, students study for the Leaving Certificate examination, an extremely competitive points-based examination taken at the end of the senior cycle of education in which students must present a minimum of five subjects, and which must include Mathematics, English and Irish, the latter including aural, oral and written assessment. In practice students usually study seven subjects and points are achieved on their best six results. Thus there are significant educational targets that must be achieved in order to qualify for post-secondary opportunities, which may also constitute an additional hurdle for disabled students who have experienced disadvantage during their school career. Such disadvantage is recognized by the Disability Access Route to Education (DARE), a third level admissions scheme for secondary school students who have the ability to benefit from and succeed in HE, but who may not be able to meet the points for a third level course due to the impact of their disability. Fourteen HEIs currently participate in the scheme which identifies Leaving Certificate students who are eligible to compete for an offer of a college place on reduced points.

All HEIS participating in the DARE scheme have a responsibility to ensure that DARE students are provided with the supports they need to successfully transition into college, and to remember their first year experiences as a positive stage in their life.

METHODOLOGY

The objective of this study was to examine the first year experience of students who accepted a college place on reduced points under the DARE scheme. The principal aims of the research were:

To examine practical and personal variables involved in the process of transitioning from school to college;
To compare experiences of support in school to experiences of support and assistance in college;
To acquire a detailed view of the first year experience for students with disabilities;
To identify areas for improvement and factors that will inform pre-entry activities in the future.

Research Design

This study uses an emancipatory approach which provides students with an opportunity to voice their experiences of reasonable accommodations as they relate to formal examinations. A mixed methods approach was adopted, enabling a clearer understanding of the data collected in relation to the research questions (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007), using a concurrent-convergent design with triangulated data collection(Creswell, 2003). Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered via an online survey and in-depth interviews.

The survey was designed to capture quantitative data about ease of transition from school to college, registration and orientation process, quality of human support provided pre and post-transition, access to disability supports, and experience of the DARE process. Qualitative data was collected by providing an opportunity to submit free responses in comment boxes for each question.

Semi-structured interview questions were themed into the following strands: College structure and organization, pre-registration / pre-entry initiatives, registration and orientation, connecting with other students, provision of advice and support, campus ethos and environment, level of academic ‘readiness’ and skills, assistance with the transition process, diversity and inclusiveness of college population, and the overall First Year Experience. Responses were collated under each theme and a content analysis conducted to identify codes to be used as the basis for quantitative analysis of the text corpus. An inductive coding approach was used with each narrative segment permitted to have several codes attached.

Sample population

The purposive sample population was identified as TCD entrants who had applied for entry to College via the DARE scheme, and who were approaching the conclusion of their first year in college (n74). Whilst there was an assumed probability that this population would also include all disabilities, the actual distribution is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Profile of purposive sample

Ethical Considerations

An explanation of the purpose of the study was provided in the email invitation and also on the first page of the Internet survey. Participants were assured that data collected would be anonymised. They were not asked to submit any identifying data. For the interview process participants were randomly allocated to interviewers within DS with whom they had no service relationship.

Students who did not attend their appointment were subsequently contacted by telephone to re-arrange an interview time. Where students did not attend the second appointment, they were not contacted again. Non-attendance was considered to be an indication that students did not wish to engage. It was felt that pursuing participants at this point would be indicative of coercion and thus unethical. Interview notes were anonymised and labelled by interviewer initials and interview number, for example AD2. Data was stored in a password protected folder within the DS intranet.

Research Method

This research study uses a mixed methodology. The intent was to add depth to quantitative results using qualitative data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). No priority was given to either quantitative (QUAN) or qualitative (QUAL) data collection or analyses, both were integrated into the research process from the beginning and were collated and analysed concurrently. The findings of both data sets were converged during the interpretation phase, and integrated into the discussion.

Quantitative and qualitative data was collected via1) survey, and 2) semi-structured interviews. The survey was designed in Surveymonkey and pilot questionnaires were distributed to students and staff and subsequently revised on the basis of feedback. Similarly semi-structured interview questions were identified, discussed and subsequently modified. Students were sent an email on 6th March 2012 which asked them to indicate a convenient date and time for interview within a two week period (26th March 2012 to 6th April 2012). After a lapse of one week non-respondents were contacted by telephone and invited to make an appointment.

Students were randomly allocated to one of nine interviewers working within DS with whom they had had no previous contact. Interviewers were provided with an interview process guide and a copy of the semi-structured questions. Interviews lasted between 20 – 30 minutes and took place in the interviewer’s office. These locations were private and did not permit identification of any of the participants.

FINDINGS

Response rates were as follows: survey n = 30 (40.5%), interviews n = 40 (54%). Full and complete quantitative and qualitative results are available.

Survey results

A profile of survey respondents is provided in Figure 2. The SpLD group accounted for the highest number of respondents (n = 12) which was not unexpected as they represented 30% of the target population. Whilst there was an 80% response rate for the ASD (n = 5) and ADHD (n = 4) groups, only 13% (n = 15) of students with SOI responded. Of note is that none of the students with sensory disabilities (Blind / VI, Deaf / HI) elected to complete the survey.

Figure 2 Profile of student respondents

Students were asked to rate their transition experience (Figure 3), with 80% indicatinga positive transition to college ranging from Manageable to Very Easy. However 20% state they found the process very difficult, which is an unacceptably high rate, and 19 students submitted comments on the reason for the quality of their experience. An analysis of which indicates that positive experiences were a function of timely and effective pre-entry information / programmes, supports from College staff and services, and course choice.

Figure 3. Experience of transition from second to third level

“I think it was due to the course I got as I enjoyed going into college every day and learning something new on that subject. Also everyone was very helpful around college with any small problems I had and I met nice friends which also contributed to a fairly easy transition from second level to college for me.”

Negative experiences were attributed to distinct differences between second and third level structures and academic expectations, and the degree of freedom and independence expected of students.

“High level of freedom in relation to attendance etc made it difficult for me to be strict with myself about punctuality. The scale of the difference between school and college life caused a surge in new compulsions for me (OCD).”

Registering with DS and, perhaps surprisingly, organising accommodation were not areas of concern. However there was a particular difficulty with technical processes. Registering on their course, obtaining a student card and activating email were all areas described as confusing, complicated or problematic,

“Signing up for Webct and my Myzone account was very tedious”.

“Registration was problematic as the college had lost results of my

Pre reg blood tests and my registration was delayed”.

“Dealing with student records and IS Services which was drawn out and caused

un-needed stress.”

College friends or knowing someone in college, parents and family andDisability Service supports were identified as making the transition to college easier (Figure 4). Only one respondent mentioned a teacher, no other school-related support was stated. Students indicated that these individuals or providing information, explaining options and assisting with decisions were major factors in ease of transition, as were discussing and advising ondisability-related supports (53.3%), and having an understanding of the student’s disability (46.7%). Significantly, 60% of students stated that being provided with encouragement was an important feature of the transition process.

“It was nice that there was someone there who understood that things weren't easy for me and that I was struggling at times. At one time in particular during the college year I was having a particularly hard time but Unlink was there for me and helped me through it.”

Figue 4. Human support in the transition expereince

Which of these people made transition to college easier? You can choose more than one answer.

Answer Options

Response Percent

Response Count

Unilink Service

26.7%

Parents

53.3%

Family support

30.0%

College friends

56.7%

School friends

20.0%

Knowing someone in college

40.0%

College Tutor

26.7%

Disability Service

36.7%

College Lecturers

23.3%

Nobody

3.3%

The next two questions compared levels of support experienced in college and in school (Figure 5).Levels of satisfaction with support in college were high with 76% of students stating they were well supported, 83% know where to go and whom to contact to source help, 80% of students felt that they had been provided with the opportunity to discuss problems, and 67% have a key person that they can reply on for support and guidance. It is of concern that approximately 20% of students did not know where to source help or whether they had a key person to support them. Seven students submitted additional comments, three of whom identified the Unilink Service as being of significant benefit, and one student described their college tutor as being ‘wonderful’.

Figure 5. Quality of support provided in College

Two comments stated that the differences in support style and availability to be challenging:

“I just find it weird how it’s not like school where if you’re stressed you go up to a teacher and they advise you but if you want advice it seems like such a process like emailing them, having to meet them.”

“It took me a while to work out who to go to, and what I needed to ask for. For example, it wasn't till the 2nd term that I linked in the academic support.”

Students were then asked to describe the quality of support in college compared to their experience of support at school (Figure 6).

Figure 6.Level of support in college compared to level of support experienced in school

Results indicated an overall improvement in areas of: understanding of needs (60%), increase in available support (63%), ease of locating supports (50%), increased professionalism (63%), helpfulness of staff (53%), better and more practical advice (60%), and ease of sourcing information (46%). Although only a small number of students identified these factors as being worse than their school experience, understanding of needs (20%) andease of locating supports (20%) and sourcing information (23%), were identified as being particularly poor.

The final question in the support section asked students to indicate their engagement with a range of technological and academic supports available through DS (Table 1).

Frequently / Often / Sometimes / Rarely / Never
Assistive Technology (Texthelp / Dictaphone etc.) / 2 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 20
Disability Service (ATIC) room in libraries / 5 / 6 / 2 / 4 / 14
Learning support / 1 / 4 / 7 / 4 / 16
Skills4Study Campus / 0 / 1 / 6 / 4 / 20
Photocopy cards / 7 / 3 / 5 / 3 / 13
Unilink / 4 / 2 / 5 / 4 / 15
Extended library borrowing / 4 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 18

Table 1 Engagement with academic supports

For the purposes of this analysis, results for ‘Never’ and ‘Do not use’ options were combined. Although 60% of students indicated that they never used Assistive Technology, 53% did not use learning support and 50% did not use Unilink, these are idiosyncratic supports so should not be considered as an area for development. However 47% also stated that they never used the ATIC room, 60% did not use special library borrowing, 43% did not use photocopy cards, and 67% had not used Skills4Study Campus, which may indicate a lack of awareness of these supports.

Three students submitted comments:

“I wasn't aware of the extended library borrowing.”

“I haven't engaged in any of these services because i just haven’t had time and the study skills weren't at a convenient time for me and I haven't used the extended library borrowing as I have some text books at home and the books were already checked out.”

“I don’t like using the internet as I get carried away with it and go on social networks.”

Students were asked to reflect on the usefulness of targeted transition initiatives for disabled students that could be included in Transition Year (TY). Results indicate that potential strategies were in general viewed positively.

Figure 7.Transition initiatives for inclusion in the TY programme

College application workshops, advice clinics and disability specific information were considered to be essential / useful by 73% of students, as were visits to disability services in colleges (66%), a transition website (63%) and curriculum time dedicated to transition planning (63%). With respect to overall experience of the DARE process, (77%) of students stated this was a positive experience (27% Very Easy, 50% Simple Enough). However the remaining 23% students described it as confusing, which is concerning given the transparency of the scheme, the levels of publicity, and availability of online and print materials.

Figure 8. Student perceptions of the DARE process

Two students left comments about this confusion: “It was confusing but when it was explained to me it became simple to understand”, and “I started panicking when filling in the forms that I might have missed something.” This would support the idea that students need a transition ‘partner’, be that a parent, carer, teacher, Guidance Counsellor or other stakeholder.

Finally students were invited to submit advice about transitioning to college to future disabled students completing the Leaving Certificate. The full transcript is available in the Appendices. Of particular note is the general tone of the comments submitted by 29 students which was positive and enthusiastic. Statements were coded into themes and ranked by frequency as: importance of course choice (57%), asking for help (47%), applying to DARE (40%), participating in college social life (30%), using Disability Service supports (23%), the importance of developing independence skills such as self-determination and self-awareness (15%), course preferences (6%), and future career and opportunities (3%). Students were emphatic about the importance of selecting not just the right course, but one that would be of sustainable interest and play to the strengths of the student: