1 / 35

Studying Our Inclusive Practices: Course Experiences of Students with Disabilities

Studying Our Inclusive Practices: Course Experiences of Students with Disabilities. Katherine Deibel Computer Science and Engineering University of Washington, Seattle. This is a Methodology Paper. More about: Research Challenges Data collection methods Analysis methods Less about:

shiloh
Télécharger la présentation

Studying Our Inclusive Practices: Course Experiences of Students with Disabilities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Studying Our Inclusive Practices:Course Experiences of Students with Disabilities Katherine Deibel Computer Science and Engineering University of Washington, Seattle ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  2. This is a Methodology Paper • More about: • Research Challenges • Data collection methods • Analysis methods • Less about: • Presenting findings • Interpreting findings How to best study the course experiences of CS students with disabilities ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  3. Outline • Motivation: Inclusive Education • Methodology • Research challenges • Interview study design • Implementation and Early Findings • Implementation Details • Early findings • Conclusion and Future Work ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  4. Inclusive Education • Incorporate accommodations into one’s educational practices [Loreman, 2005] • Minimizes accommodation requests • Proactive instead of reactive • Focus on all forms of disabilities Support allstudents of all abilities in all learning situations ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  5. What about Computing Education? How successful are we at including students with disabilities? How do we answer that question? ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  6. Approach Go straight to the source: Students with disabilities in CS courses ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  7. Definition Challenges • Disability is medically and legally defined • Not all “disabled” people identify as having a disability • To avoid stigmatization (e.g., depression, learning disabilities, etc.) • Cultural beliefs (e.g., Deaf culture) • Implications: • Study should explore all disabilities • Calls for participants need to be carefully worded ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  8. Call for Participation Do you have a physical, mobility, psychiatric, or learning disability? Are you Deaf or hard of hearing? Do you have ADD/HD, depression, or anxiety issues? ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  9. Visibility Challenges • Not all disabilities are readily visible • Disability services keep lists of students registered as having a disability: • Students must request accommodations • Students with invisible disabilities tend to delay requesting accommodations [Cory, 2005] • Implications: • Cannot rely solely on students registered with disability services ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  10. Recruitment of Participants • Do not rely on list of students from disability services • Recruit from the entire course • Course mailing lists • Course webs • Course bulletin boards ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  11. Population Challenges • Only 9.8% of U.S. college freshmen have a disability [Scott et al., 2004] • CS undergraduates: 7.2% [NSF, 2004] • Represents a wide diversity of disabilities • Implications: • Expect a small number of participants • Participants will have different disabilities ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  12. Achieving a Large Sample • Recruit from multiple courses • Recruit from multiple terms • Recruit across multiple institutions ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  13. Summary of Challenges • Difficulty in recruiting participants • Small number of participants • Unlikely to have multiple participants with the same disabilities • Multiple iterations of the study necessary to collect a large sample • Data validity is a concern ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  14. A Qualitative Approach Semi-Structured Interviews Illustrative Case Study Grounded Theory Analysis ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  15. Illustrative Case Study • In-depth investigation of a phenomenon • Looks at only a few instances • Develop theories to illustrate what is occurring in those instances • Theories generated can be explored in further studies ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  16. Semi-Structured Interviews • One-on-one interviews • Prepared questions are only a guide • Subject drives the conversation • Multiple interviews can be conducted • Captures changes over time • Allows exploration of a wide variety of topics ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  17. Sample Interview Questions • How does your instructor run the course? What do you like? Not like? • How does your disability affect your education? How will it affect you in this course? • Assuming that your instructor(s) knew about your disability, how would you want them to respond to you as a student? ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  18. Grounded Theory • Analysis approach for qualitative data [Taylor & Bogdan, 1998] • Inductively develop themes from data • Occurs throughout the data collection process • Themes evolve as more data is analyzed • Interview questions are adapted to further explore and challenge themes ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  19. Previous Disability Studies • Students with dyslexia [Edwards, 1994] • Invisible disabilities & accommodations [Cory, 2005] • Disability and Queer Women [Whitney, 2006] ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  20. Implementation Details • Student interviewed twice • Two iterations have been completed • First Iteration (in paper): • Two participants • Second Iteration (recently conducted): • Two participants ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  21. Observations • Many participants not registered with disability services • Richness of conversations • Many themes arise out of the data ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  22. Identified Themes • Self-Advocacy • Family Support • Not Registering With Disability Services • Multimodal Presentation • Benefits of Online Course Artifacts • Access Breakdowns • Podcasting ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  23. Theme: Course Artifacts Online • Availability of course slides, textbooks, and code produced in class noted as helpful: • Seth: bypasses hearing problem • Alan: reduces need for note taking • Pam: less anxiety if gets lost • Dave: less anxiety if misses lecture or gets behind in course ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  24. Sub-Theme: Podcasting • Several courses at UW are now audio recorded and available as podcasts • Desirability of podcasts noted: • Seth: beneficial in other courses • Alan: alternative to notetaking and limited access tutorials • Dave: Never used podcasts in other courses Would have used for CS1 ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  25. Conclusions and Future Work • Research challenges for this are exist • Methodology addresses the challenges • Rich data set to be analyzed further • For the future… • More interviews? • Helping researchers at other universities? ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  26. Acknowledgements • The participants • Sheryl Burgstahler and Rebecca Cory, DO-IT, University of Washington • British Computer Society • Graduate & Professional Student Senate, University of Washington ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  27. Thank you Questions? ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  28. Extra Slides ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  29. Implementing Inclusion • Implemented and studied with success at many schools [Clough & Corbett, 2000]. • Numerous inclusion guides exist: • K-12: Loreman et al., 2005. • College: Burgstahler, 2005; Strange, 2000. • Involves good pedagogical practices: • Reflective learning, collaborative learning, attention to different learning styles, etc. ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  30. Participants ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  31. Theme: Self-Advocacy • All participants viewed themselves as responsible for managing their disabilities • Alan: contacting faculty before start of term • Seth: sitting in best places for hearing, selecting study locations • Pam: monitoring anxiety, attending to deadlines ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  32. Theme: Family Support • Families involved Alan and Seth in K-12 accommodation discussions • Alan: Parents intervened after accommodations fell through • Exceptions do exist: • Dave: Family denies existence of psychological conditions ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  33. Theme: Disability Services • All participants had invisible disabilities • Three not registered with disability services: • Seth is able to self-accommodate • Pam and Dave do not view selves as disabled • Similar to findings by Cory, 2005 • Alan does register with disability services: • Accommodations: books on tape, electronic text • Has realized he needs the support ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  34. Theme: Multimodal Presentation • Beneficial if instructor presents material both orally and visually • Seth: bypasses hearing problem • Alan: potentially overwhelming if too much text is presented ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

  35. Sub-Theme: Access Breakdowns • Access breakdowns are problematic: • Pam: TA never passed on password to textbook; Lost access to exercises • Alan: Course textbook decided at last minute Most lectures were software tutorials DVD tutorials available only at limited times in a specific lab ITiCSE 2007, Dundee, Scotland, UK

More Related