Instructors’ Accommodation Discourse on the First Day of Class
Full Title
Author(s)
Centering Voices
Year of Publication
Media Type
Media Access
Educators and learners can experience discomfort discussing academic accommodations. This study indicates few educators broach the subject on the first day of class when they review syllabi, policy and other course-structuring topics. This paper includes the transcript of one standout educator who takes a relational and inclusive approach to discussing accommodation, as opposed to the typical transactional talk, e.g., you must submit your paperwork.
Usefulness to Educators
Premise
- the authors posit that the first day of class is an “opportune time” for educators to invite learners with disabilities to disclose their disabilities. They have therefore designed this study to assess how educators initiate and structure those conversations.
Purpose
- to collect data about instructors’ discourse when discussing disability accommodations on the first day of the class
- to observe, document, and analyze via communication theory instructor discourse as it naturally occurrs on the firstday of class.
- RQ1: What goals were most relevant in the instructors’ ‘talk’ about disability accommodations on the first day of class?
Research Methods
- text analysis from transcripts of recordings taken on the first day of class
Conceptual or Theoretical Frameworks
- multiple goals theoretical framework
Reference with Published Abstract (when available)
Points of Connection
The literature review supports research findings that academic accommodations support learning outcomes.
a national longitudinal study of factors that influenced first- to second-year performance for SWD, Mamiseishvili and Koch (2011) showed that various types of accommodations (e.g. readers, classroom notetakers,course substitution, and extended time) were associated with improved student performance.
Sessional instructors and graduate students are teaching a higher and higher % of courses.
These precariously employed educators are not provided with training (or paid time for professional development) about teaching and learning with students with disabilities, or about accessibility and accommodations. This paper found that the majority of educators in their study were graduate students and posits:
in the current sample, over half of the instructors were graduate students, which may have accounted for the lack of attention to disability accommodation talk in the results. It is likely that graduate students have less training about disability accommodations and less experience in facilitating accommodations, which may have contributed to their lack of talking about them.
Educator bias against learners who request accommodations:
faculty, administrators, and staff were sometimes hesitant and had questions about working with students who needed accommodations, and some faculty explicitly questioned whether SWD could handle college work or should even be in college (Collins and Mowbray 2005)
The refrain “if they can’t hack it they don’t belong here” is still sadly all too common nearly 20 years since Collins and Mowbray’s study. The inherent ableism in this thinking often goes unchallenged because the assertion is mistaken for fact. The sentiment can be particularly pervasive in faculties that pride themselves on doing things the way things have always been done (the ways that benefit /enable the dominant culture of the faculty.)
it is plausible that instructors play an important role in shaping students’decisions to disclose their accommodation eligibility (Hartman-Hall and Haaga 2002; Hindes and Mather2007; Leyser et al.1998).
Themes in the discourse
Most educators did not discuss accommodations on the first day, themes from those who did:
- instructors demonstrated a willingness to accommodate learners who were eligible for academic accommodations
- discourse focused on the task goal – e.g. get your paperwork in. “If you need extra time, I will individually set your time for exams, but I need your paperwork.”
- some discourse was disrespectful, using language that is outdated e.g., “special needs”
- some sounded authoritative while providing incorrect information “You cannot file for disabilities in the middle of the semester; you need to do it now or never. I had this situation before. It is on you to do this.”
Only one “high-quality” example from 30 video-recorded mentions of accommodation from 17 educators.
One instructor’s disability policy discussion stood out as particularly high-quality basedon the acknowledgement of all three of the goal-types posited in multiple goals theories ( Clark and Delia1979). This instructor spent roughly 4 min talking about accommo-dations, compared with less than 65 seconds for every other instructor [emphasis added]. There are other reasons you may need to miss class.
“If you are a student with a disability, please let me know. Disability and accommodations come in all shapes and sizes. Let me give you an example. I had a student that was deaf in one ear and went the entire semester without telling me. Well, let me just tell you, when I lecture, I am animated, and I move all over the place. So oftentimes I would stand behind him. On the last day, he said, “You know I can’t hear you when you stand behind me, I am deaf in my left ear.” I was like,“Why didn’t you tell me, that is such an easy thing to accommodate? I just needed to stand in front of you! I can do that.” Now, I realize it can be intimating to come ask me about accommodations. I don’t want to be intimidating. I will meet with you before class, after class, in office hours if you want. Tell me what you need. I am happy to do that, especially if I see you working hard. I want to do whatever I can to see you be successful. If you do have DRC [Disability Resource Center] accommodations, we do have contracts and policies that we have to file, but let’s have that conversation. OK?”
Points of Contention
I have to question the premise that the first day of class is an “opportune time” for either the educator or the learner to discuss disclosure and accommodations.
- Zero trust exists on the first day of class, making it something of a leap to suggest it is an opportune time for learners to trust their disclosure to the instructor.
- Not all learners are disabled on the first day of class. Disability doesn’t occur on a timetable. Learners can become disabled at any point in time and need to know that they can get the support they need at any point in the term.
- Educators regularly lament that they don’t find out about learners with disabilities until the first week of class. Some express feelings of frustration that they have no time to learn about learners’ needs at that point in the semester and it is very challenging to pivot if they have to make changes to their assessment design or course materials to accommodate learners.
“Passing” in the sense of passing as non-disabled
Invisible disability passing involves actions by the individual aimed at upholding a sense of normality and disguising their disability to avoid a stigmatized identity or experience (Brune and Wilson 2013; Samuels 2003). Unlike individuals with physical or more pronounced disabilities, students with invisible disabilities can sometimes choose to reveal or conceal their disability…
The discussion of “passing” for learners with “invisible disabilities” is important here but perhaps needs to be problematized further. Not all learners with invisible disabilities feel the need to “pass.” Passing is a privilege that some learners with disabilities have, and some enjoy, but it is not an experience common to all learners with disabilities.
The very notion that there are advantages to “passing” for someone without a disability reveals the ableism and disableism in the environment and culture. The practice of passing could be said to be a factor in the perpetuation of ableism and disableism because it reinscribes the narrative that people with disabilities don’t exist or belong in the Academy. This paper lacks critical engagement with notions of ableism and disableism.
Some researchers have argued that the same freedom and control awarded to students by the ADA in allowing them to decide whether they want to disclose their disabilities and access accommodations in college also contributes to their feelings of alienation, stigmatization, marginalization, and social oppression when requiringthem to disclose to receive support, such as accommodations (Kearney 2005).
This paper makes an unsupported (uncritical) recommendation to incorporate UDL
Further, in recent years, attention to universal design principles in higher education has been encouraged. Instructors should take seriously opportunities to equip themselves with instructional universal design knowledge and should willingly and actively incorporate these inclusive principles into their teaching and grading. In doing so, many students who have invisible disabilities may find that they can receive the support they need without having to disclose their disability because the course is already designed in a way that accounts for their needs.
This problematically assumes educators can imagine and mitigate all learners’ accessibility needs.
Findings
Few educators elect to discuss accommodations on the first day of class:
Accommodations were discussed in only 8 of the 30 first-day-of-class videos collected forthis study. As a result, there were very few exemplars to code, which is itself an important and potentially concerning finding. In this sample, only 3 out of 7 professors and 1 out ofthe 10 graduate student instructors spoke specifically about disability accommodations intheirfirst-day classes.
Leave a Reply