Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability Volume 22, Issue 2

Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability Volume 22, Issue Executive Editor James Martin, University of Oklahoma Managing Editor Richard Allegra, AHEAD Editorial Associate John W Graham, University of Oklahoma Editorial Review Board Manju Banerjee; University of Connecticut Joan Bisagno; Stanford University Ron Blosser; Green River Community College Loring Brinckerhoff; Educational Testing Service Connie Chiba; University of California, Berkeley Justin Cooper; Eastern Kentucky University Lyman Dukes III; University of South Florida at St Petersburg Stephanie Gaddy, Lincoln College Elizabeth Evans Getzel; Virginia Commonwealth University Christie L Gilson; University of Illinois Sam Goodin; University of Michigan Wendy S Harbour; Harvard University Cheri Hoy; University of Georgia Charles A Hughes; The Pennsylvania State University Michael John Humphrey; Boise State University Kristina Krampe; Eastern Kentucky University Tracy Knight Lackey; Jackson State University Ruth C Loew; Educational Testing Service Pamela Luft; Kent State Joseph W Madaus; University of Connecticut Elaine Manglitz; Calyton College & State University Joan McGuire; University of Connecticut Janet Medina; McDaniel College Deborah Merchant; Keene State University Ward Newmeyer; Dartmouth College Christine O’Dell; University of California, Davis Nicole Ofiesh; Notre Dame de Namur University David Parker; Washington University in St Louis Betty Preus; College of St Scholastica Kelly Drew Roberts; University of Hawaii at Manoa Frank R Rusch; The Pennsylvania State University Daniel Ryan; SUNY at Buffalo Charles Salzberg; Utah State University Mary Catherine Scheeler; Pennsylvania State Univ Green Valley Sally Scott; Longwood University Stuart S Segal; University of Michigan Stan Shaw; University of Connecticut Sharon K Suritsky; Upper St Clair School District Colleen A Thoma; Virginia Commonwealth University Susan A Vogel; Northern Illinois University Ruth Warick; University of British Columbia Kristine Webb; University of North Florida Marc Wilchesky; York University Lee Woods; Boise State University Practice Brief Review Board Doris A Bitler; George Mason University Melinda S Burchard; James Madison University Trey J Duffy; Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Alberto Guzman; University of Illinois, Chicago Andrea Henry; Massasoit Community College Andrew Jason Kaiser; St Ambrose University Angela S Mooneyham; University of Alabama, Birmingham Lori R Muskat; Georgia School of Professional Psychology, Argosy - Atlanta Jack Trammell; Randolph-Macon College Mary Lee Vance; University of Wisconsin, Superior Margaret P.Weiss; Virginia Tech AHEAD Board of Directors Michael Shuttic, President; Oklahoma State University Jim Marks, President-Elect; University of Montana Kathleen McGillivray, Secretary; Bethel University Michael Johnson, Treasurer; Monroe Community College - Damon City Campus Jean Ashmore, Director; Rice University Bea Awoniyi, Director; Florida State University Karen Saracusa, Director; Mount Union College Emily Singer, Director; Catholic University of America Jose Soto, Director; Southeast Community College Mary Lee Vance, Director; University of Wisconsin - Superior Stephan J Hamlin-Smith, (ex-officio); AHEAD The Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability is available in accessible formats Please contact AHEAD to discuss accessibility requests All members of the Association on Higher Education And Disability receive the Journal © 2009, The Association on Higher Education And Disability, 107 Commerce Centre Drive #204, Huntersville, NC 28078 USA Table of Contents Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability: Volume 22, Number 2, 2009 From the Editor James Martin Parent Perceptions of the Anticipated Needs and Expectations for Support for Their College-Bound Students with Asperger’s Syndrome Julie Q Morrison Frank J Sansosti Wanda M Hadley Relentless Optimism: Inclusive Postsecondary Opportunities for Students with Significant Disabilities Julie Causton-Theoharis Christine Ashby Nicole DeClouette Postsecondary Students and Disability Stigma: Development of the Postsecondary Student Survey of Disability-Related Stigma (PSSDS) Jack Trammell Promoting University Faculty and Staff Awareness of Students with Learning Disabilities: An Overview of the Productive Learning u Strategies (PLuS) Project Christopher Murray Carol Wren Edward B Stevens Christopher Keys Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS): A Multidimensional Service Delivery Model for College Students with Learning Disabilities and ADHD David R Parker Cheri White 77 78 - 87 88 - 105 106 - 116 117 - 129 130 - 136 Laura Collins Manju Banerjee Joan M McGuire Book Review Rebecca Daly Cofer 137 - 138 Author Guidelines Inside Back Cover FROM THE EDITOR JAMES MARTIN Welcome to the Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability (JPED), Volume 22, Issue This issue brings you four timely and unique research studies, one practice brief about an emerging new practice, and a book review about a topic of interest to many JPED readers Because increasing numbers of students with Asperger’s Syndrome are attending postsecondary educational programs, a paper on this topic begins the issue Morrison, Sansosti, and Hadley explore parental perceptions of the support needs of college-bound students with Asperger’s Syndrome, and the type of self-advocacy skills needed to increase students’ success Read this paper to learn some useful information In the second study, Causton-Theoharis, Ashby, and DeClouette present the results of a qualitative investigation into two programs that support students labeled with significant disabilities (i.e., cognitive disabilities, intellectual disabilities, traumatic brain injury, and autism) to attend college classes in inclusive settings Read this paper to learn the benefits of this type of program and the obstacles it faces The third study in this issue examines the degree of stigmatization experienced by college and University students with disabilities Jack Trammell’s unique research suggests that disability stigma does indeed seem to impact students with disabilities This paper raises more questions than it answers, but this is what research is supposed to Read this paper to look at some very unique findings Murray, Wren, Stevens, and Keys, in the fourth study of this issue, describe a five-year model demonstration project that increased disability awareness, understanding, and responsive action by faculty and staff at a large private University Their experience may be useful to other colleges The expanded practice brief by Parker, White, Collins, and Banerjee describe the Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS), which they piloted for two years The authors use examples to demonstrate how to use the five components of this system Rebecca Daly Cofer from Texas Tech University provides a review of Paul Wehman, Marcia Datlow Smith, and Carol Schall’s new book, Autism and the Transition to Adulthood: Success Beyond the Classroom Cofer said, “I especially appreciated the introductory chapter about the characteristics of autism and how they affect the individual.” The sections devoted to students with autism in higher education helped Cofer better understand what to to provide access and support for these students This book may assist you too Enjoy this issue Parent Perceptions of the Anticipated Needs and Expectations for Support for Their College-Bound Students with Asperger’s Syndrome Julie Q Morrison University of Cincinnati Frank J Sansosti Kent State University Wanda M Hadley Central State University Abstract Many students with Asperger’s Syndrome have the cognitive ability and specific interests to be successful academically at the college level However, these students often have difficulties navigating social systems, and higher education presents great challenges The purpose of this study was to explore parent perceptions regarding the: (a) supports or accommodations college-bound students with Asperger’s Syndrome need at the postsecondary level to successfully adjust to the academic and psycho-social expectations of the college experience, and (b) self-advocacy skills or strategies needed to increase the likelihood that students with Asperger’s Syndrome be successful in college Parents reported a variety of strategies that colleges can use to support students with Asperger’s Syndrome within postsecondary settings and provided insights into their expectations for college-level supports Implications for practice and recommendations for future research are discussed Asperger’s Syndrome (AS) is a lifelong disability that is characterized by impairments in social interactions and restricted, repetitive, or stereotyped patterns of behaviors, interests, and activities (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000) In addition to formal diagnostic characteristics, many individuals with AS demonstrate a host of challenges that make everyday functioning difficult For example, individuals with AS often demonstrate limitations with functional communication, or the use of language for communicative purposes (Landa, 2000; Sansosti & Powell-Smith, 2006) Moreover, individuals with AS often have difficulty recognizing and expressing emotions (Frith, 2003); responding to distracting sensory stimuli within the environment (Kern et al., 2006); and engaging in a host of executive function tasks such as setting goals; initiating a plan; and monitoring performance (Killiany, Moore, Rehbein, & Moss, 2005) As a result of such impairments, individuals with AS often not interact with peers comfortably, possess poor appreciation of social cues, make socially and emotionally inappropriate responses (e.g., laughing loudly when another student gets hurt), and are at-risk for depression and other affective disorders It is not surprising then, that only 12% of individuals with AS are employed fulltime (Barnard, Harvey, Prior, & Potter, 2001) Despite a myriad of impairments and a poor longitudinal outcome, individuals with AS often display average to aboveaverage cognitive abilities and structural language strengths (Klin, Volkmar, & Sparrow, 2000) The presence of elevated cognitive abilities combined with the propensity of individuals with AS to have areas of special interest (e.g., computer science, geology, horticulture) may lead an individual with AS to demonstrate exceptional abilities and/or great expertise in a particular area Because of these strengths, individuals with AS have incredible potential to be successful, productive members of society Yet, realizing their full potential is hampered by challenges in meeting the more basic academic and social demands of college Although great advances have forwarded our understanding of the transition and adjustment of first-year college students with specific learning disabilities (Hadley, Twale, & Evans, 2003; Thomas, 2000), there has been only minimal discussion regarding the unique needs of college-bound students with AS (Dillon, 2007) Successful Transition to College One of the greatest challenges for students with AS and their families is transitioning from the familiar model of special education services at the high school level to a very different system of services at the college level (Madaus, 2005) Not only does the scope of services change, but also the means by which these services are provided For example, student support in college is no longer guided by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) but rather by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) A primary focus of ADA is to provide accessibility and promote anti-discrimination (Rothstein, 2003), not offer an array of academic supports Although many colleges and universities have begun providing more supports for students with academic learning difficulties (e.g., study skills, writing workshops), services that address the unique difficulties that confront students with AS transitioning to college are virtually non-existent Furthermore, college-bound individuals with AS are required to be more independent and responsible for self-advocacy Specifically, students with AS are expected to deal with increased levels of personal freedom (Brinckerhoff, 1996); the unique challenges of their disability (Conyers, Schaefer Enright, & Strauser, 1998); the performance of acceptable social skills (Mellard & Hazel, 1992); and other variables such as organizational skills, time management, budgeting, and transportation Students with AS in college settings also are responsible for securing services (i.e., augmentative equipment) on their own volition Although these challenges present opportunities to practice and master independent living skills and self-advocacy, many individuals with AS are no longer entitled to resources and accommodations with the college setting that promote or enhance the development of such skills (e.g., teaching of functional living skills or social skills) Students with AS may need to seek additional support outside of the postsecondary setting, such as local rehabilitation agencies Such agencies often have expertise for working with individuals with AS, yet their services tend to focus on vocational challenges and not college transition (Dillon, 2007) From this perspective, individuals with AS may be less successful in their college endeavors because they may not receive the specific services they need Without considerable supports and accommodations to assist these students with their diverse talents, interests, and perspectives, their successful integration into the college environment may be in jeopardy Previous research has highlighted several strategies that are critical for college-bound students with disabilities that may translate into successful approaches for individuals with AS For postsecondary students with disability-related needs for accommodations, effective disclosure of their disability and self-advocacy strategies are viewed as valuable contributions to success (Lynch & Gussel, 1992) For example, stating one’s disability and identifying instructional accommodations with instructors are two strategies related to successful transition (Durlak, Rose, & Bursuck, 1994) To assist with this, Carroll and Johnson Brown (1996) proposed training in self-advocacy skills to enable students with disabilities to become more autonomous adults and avert social isolation Regardless of the strategies that are employed, students with disabilities, and individuals with AS in particular, will need to develop a skill set that emphasizes not only self-advocacy, but also self-control and functional communication in a clear and concise manner in order to navigate successfully the transition to college A Model for College Student Development Working knowledge of how students develop during their college years is important for understanding the skills needed for success in higher education Chickering (1969) and Chickering and Reisser (1993) provided the major theoretical framework for understanding student development as it relates to successful development of skills and provides a framework for how supports should be aligned for college-bound individuals with AS Specifically, Chickering’s first three vectors of college student development describe the movement of the entering undergraduate toward greater competence, selfadvocacy, and autonomy The first vector, Achieving Competence, relates to the student’s ability to develop intellectual competence and acquire new information and to expand interpersonal competence and work cooperatively with others Development of skills in the first vector allows the student to manage a variety of social situations from talking in class to managing group activities Managing Emotions, the second vector, involves focusing on the development of self-control and expression of oneself appropriately to a variety of circumstances (Reisser, 1995) It is within this stage that a student develops skills to recognize his or her own feelings and how to handle emotional circumstances (e.g., roommate conflict, excessive academic anxiety) The third vector, Moving Through Autonomy Toward Interdependence, entails the student’s developing freedom from the need for constant reassurance and approval from parents, peers, and others That is, a student learns to trust his or her own abilities and feelings as valid sources of information Within the first three vectors is the foundation for successful transition A student cannot simply progress through these vectors Rather, the student requires stimulation through challenge and positive support In order to provide challenges and support, Chickering and Reisser (1993) suggest that colleges and universities encourage student development by: (a) clarifying institutional objectives and ensuring consistency of policies and practices, (b) disallowing institutional size to restrict opportunities for student participation, (c) providing frequent student-faculty relationships, and (d) providing varied instructional styles that encourage active student engagement It is within these suggestions that the foundation for college success for individuals with AS is forged However, it remains unclear as to whether these suggestions align with perceptions of how to best support and accommodate students with AS on the college campus Understanding Parent Expectations The role of parents in advocating for their college-bound student with AS is notably absent in the literature regarding the need to support students with disabilities at the college level Parents frequently serve as powerful advocates for their students with AS at the elementary and secondary school levels Yet, like the parents of non-disabled college students, the active, overt role of parents in their students’ education is diminished severely at each level as the expectations for student autonomy increases Parent expectations are highly influential and an understanding of these expectations is particularly important when fostering support for college students with AS Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to explore parent perceptions regarding the: (a) supports or accommodations collegebound students with AS need at the postsecondary level to successfully adjust to the academic and psycho-social expectations of the college experience, and (b) self-advocacy skills or strategies needed to increase the likelihood that students with AS obtain the supports and accommodations they need to be successful in college To this end, parents from a local chapter of the Autism Society of American (ASA) provided their perceptions of the supports and strategies needed for college-bound students to increase competence, manage emotions, and develop autonomy As awareness of the number of students living with the AS diagnosis increases, so does the need to provide meaningful supports to ensure they have every opportunity to realize their potential in the college setting The findings from this study are intended to inform and guide professionals in the fields of special education, college student development, school psychology, and school counseling who advocate for full participation of students with AS in higher education Method Focus group (qualitative) methodology was used to investigate parent perceptions of the supports and accommodations that college-bound students with AS need at the postsecondary level to be successful Focus groups are defined by the use of participants who have a specific experience with or opinion about the topic under investigation, the use of an explicit interview guide, and the exploration of subjective experiences of participants in relation to predetermined research questions (Gibbs, 2007) A focus group approach was selected because of the exploratory nature of the study coupled with the desire to uncover common themes and opinions (Krueger & Casey, 2000; Vaughn, Schumm, & Sinagub, 1996) Participants and Setting Potential participants for this study were recruited through a network of professionals associated with a local chapter of the ASA A total of four parents of sons with AS expressed interest in this preliminary study and agreed to participate in a focus group The participants included: (1) Ms Peters, (2) Ms Harrison, (3) Ms Clark, and (4) Ms Vincent Ms Peters’ son was 16-years-old and in the tenth grade at a college-preparatory, public high school Ms Harrison’s son was 15-years-old and in the tenth grade at the same college-preparatory, public high school Despite their children attending the same school, Ms Peters and Ms Harrison had not met before their participation in the focus group Ms Clark’s son was 14-years-old and in the eighth grade at a Montessori, public middle/high school Ms Vincent was the mother of two sons with Asperger’s Her older son was 12-years-old and in sixth grade at a Catholic elementary school Ms Vincent’s younger son was 8-years-old and in the second grade in a special program for students with Asperger’s located in an urban, public elementary school All of the parents participated equally and without reservation, expressing interest and empathy through their spoken words In addition to the parent participants, one professional from the Student Services Program of a local, private, four-year liberal arts University hosting the focus group was a participant and one faculty member from the Department of Counselor Education of another local, private, four-year liberal arts University served as the facilitator of the focus group The focus group was conducted in a meeting room of the student union on the campus of a private, Catholic University located in a city in the Midwest All of the participants were residents of the city and its surrounding suburbs The focus group lasted approximately one and a half hours and beverages and snacks were provided Data Collection and Procedures A questioning route (see Appendix) was developed by the authors to examine information related to two specific research questions: What supports or accommodations college-bound students with AS need at the postsecondary level to successfully adjust to the academic and psycho-social expectations of the college experience, and What self-advocacy skills or strategies will increase the likelihood that students with AS obtain the supports and accommodations they need to be successful in college? Specific prompts for the focus group were based on Chickering’s (1969) and Chickering and Reisser’s (1995) initial three vectors of college student development: (a) Achieving Competence, (b) Managing Emotions, and (c) Moving Through Autonomy Toward Interdependence Each focus group session was recorded using a digital audio recorder Following each focus group, the audio file on the recorder was downloaded onto a computer as a wav file In an effort to keep files small, each wav file was converted to mp3 format In all cases, the audio recording from the recorder was used for transcription The transcription involved creating a written record of all words spoken throughout the session Data Analysis The method used to identify themes was adapted from Jehn and Doucet (1996) Two reviewers independently reviewed the transcript from the focus group and identified segments from the focus group that pertained to each of Chickering’s three vectors (Achieving Competence, Managing Emotions, and Moving Through Autonomy Toward Interdependence) Segments were coded as either an area of need or potential support Statements representing similar themes were grouped and counted to show the concept’s weight relative to other less common themes evident in the transcripts After independently analyzing the data from the transcripts, the two reviewers compared their findings Themes agreed by both reviewers to be general themes were reported in the final analysis Two primary themes were defined as (a) supports and accommodations, and (b) self-advocacy needs and supports Supports and accommodations included services that could be provided by an external agent (i.e., a college’s Student Services Program, a high school’s guidance department) to assist a family seeking a smooth transition to college Self-advocacy needs and supports involved a description of skills a student with AS would need to demonstrate in college and included services that would increase the probability of the student performing these skills Representative quotes from various categories were selected and presented to exemplify the descriptive summary of the qualitative data Results Matching Students with Accommodating Professors The parents of students with AS participating in the focus group identified a need for careful consideration when scheduling college courses Ms Harrison described a role for a professional in a college’s Student Services Program in which that person could: …look at the schedule and they can say, well we know that this particular Latin teacher is not going to tolerate a kid that, you know, doesn’t look at him, doesn’t make eye contact, won’t take notes You know, that won’t work for the teacher But this teacher is very concrete, has handouts, he can follow along with the handouts, that kind of thing The parents identified professors that permit alternatives to group work, are open to independent study arrangements, and provide accommodations for note-taking to be better able to meet their students’ needs Parents also discussed a need for professors who have an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of students with AS The mode of instruction preferred by the students with AS varied, according to their mothers, with some of the students preferring independent, hands-on activities and others preferring instructor-led lectures Advocacy Related to support for scheduling courses, the parents of students with AS identified a need for a professional in a college’s Student Services Program who would serve as an advocate for their college-age child This professional would gather information from other students with disabilities regarding the professors’ willingness to provide accommodations and tolerance for individual differences in learning and communicating In recommending this course of action, these parents drew on experiences attaining positive outcomes when working one-on-one with individual instructors to meet the needs of their student, rather than trying to affect change through broader-reaching efforts, such as staff development Information such as this could be compiled to assist all students with disabilities, not just the students with AS As articulated by Ms Clark, this professional would serve as “a resource person … the interpreter for the student You know, and can also be the advisor and go-between and so when that student is starting to struggle, is having trouble working things out with the professor …” this college-based advocate could provide support A college-based advocate might also assist students with AS identify intramural clubs and activities that are well suited to their interests (e.g., band, chess club, video gaming) Alternative Routes Parents of students with AS discussed the possibility that alternative routes to a four-year college education may be the best avenue for their college-bound child A student with AS may pursue a successful transition to college at a two-year college or community college setting prior to attending a four-year college For some students with AS, a technical institute might provide the best match The parents’ voiced considerable consensus regarding the need for their sons to live at home and commute to college or possibly live in a dormitory room designed for a sole occupant Self-Advocacy Needs and Supports: Disclosure All of the parents agreed that their sons would be most successful in college in an environment where they feel understood and supported by professors and peers Developing this level of understanding will require students with AS to disclose their need for supports and accommodations and to advocate for themselves The parents participating in the focus group expressed considerable concern that their sons did not have the self-advocacy skills needed to obtain supports in the college setting In the words of Ms Harrison: “I know he knows that he perceives the world in a different way And I’ve tried pretty hard not to put a value judgment on it – it’s not a good thing or a bad thing, it just is But um, I don’t know I think at least he’s more open to talking about it occasionally But he’s not somebody who wants to really disclose it.” In response to the need for strengthening their sons’ self-advocacy skills, the parents identified supports a college’s Student Services Program could provide to help develop these self-advocacy skills Specifically, the parents identified the need for: (a) prompts for their sons to seek support from a professional in the college’s Student Services Program, (b) time engaged in training was predictive of positive perceptions (Murray et al., in press-a, in press-b) These findings are instructive because they suggest that faculty development efforts should attempt to provide in-depth experiences but should also provide multiple opportunities to develop knowledge and skills Strategies such as the one outlined here that incorporate opportunities to develop such skills through direct training experiences, web site materials, print materials, and video materials are potentially valuable in this regard Conclusions A growing number of innovative approaches for promoting access to higher education among students with disabilities are being implemented in colleges and universities Such efforts should begin with ensuring that colleges and universities are accessible and supportive learning environments University faculty and staff are the primary conduits through which such accessibility and support will be realized and providing these individuals with the knowledge, attitudes, and skills to create such environments is critically important Future efforts that build upon and expand efforts such as the one described here will help to ensure that faculty and staff within postsecondary environments are prepared to meet this challenge Allsopp, D H., Minskoff, E H., & Bolt, L (2005) Individualized course-specific strategy instruction for college students with learning disabilities and ADHD: Lessons learned from a model demonstration project Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 103-118 Balcazar, F.B., Keys, C.B., Lardon, C., Jones, C., and Davis, M (2005) Strengths and challenges of intervention research in vocational rehabilitation: An illustration of agency-University collaboration, Journal of Rehabilitation, 71, 40-48 Bax, S (2002) The social and cultural dimensions of trainer training Journal of Education for Teaching, 28, 166-178 Bourke, A B., Strehorn, K C., & Silver, P (2000) Faculty members’ provision of instructional accommodations to students with LD Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 26-32 Boxall, K., Carson, I., and Docherty, D (2004) Room at the academy? People with learning difficulties and higher education Disability & Society, 19, 99-112 Burgstahler, S & Doe, T (2006) Improving postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities: Designing professional development for faculty Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 18, 135-147 Cook, B G., Rumrill, P D., Camarata, J., Mitchell, P R., Newman, S., Sebaly, K P., Steuernagel, G A., Cook, L., & Hennessey, M L (2006) The impact of a professional development institute on faculty members’ interactions with college students with learning disabilities Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 14, 67-76 Debrand, C C., & Salzberg, C L (2004) A validated curriculum to provide training to faculty regarding students with disabilities in higher education Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 18 (1), 49-62 Dowrick, P.W., Anderson, J., Heyer, K., & Acosta, J (2005) Postsecondary education across the USA: Experiences of adults with disabilities Journal of Vocational Rehabilition, 22, 41-47 Farone, M C., Hall, E W., & Costello, J J (1998) Postsecondary disability issues: An inclusive identification strategy Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 13, 35-45 Gregg, N (2007) Underserved and unprepared: Postsecondary learning disabilities Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 219-228 Hayes, D (2000) Cascade training and teachers’ professional judgment ELT Journal, 54, 135-45 Horn, L., & Nevill, S (2006) Profile of undergraduates in U.S postsecondary education institutions: 2003-2004; With a special analysis of community college students (NCES2006-184) U.S Department of Education Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics Houck, C K., Asselin, S B., Troutman, G C., Arrington, J M (1992) Students with learning disabilities in the University environment: A study of faculty and student perceptions Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 678-684 Hurn, J., Kneebone, I and Ropley, M (2006) Goal setting as an outcome measure: A systematic review Clinical Rehabilitation, 20, 756-772 Jacobs, R L (2002) Institutionalizing organizational change through cascade training Journal of European Industrial Training, 26, 177-182 Krampe, K M., & Berdine, W H (2003) University of Kentucky engaging differences project: Providing information about accommodations on line and just in time Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17(1), 21-32 Kurth, N., & Mellard, D (2006) Student perceptions of the accommodation process in postsecondary education Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 19(1), 71-84 Madus, J W., & Shaw, S F (2004) Section 504: Differences in the regulations for secondary and postsecondary education Intervention in School and Clinic, 40, 81-87 Madaus, J.W., & Shaw, S (2006) The impact of the IDEA 2004 on transition to college for students with learning disabilities Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21, 273-281 McGuire, J M., Scott, S S., & Shaw, S F (2003) Universal design for instruction: The paradigm, its principles, and products for enhancing instruction Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17(1), 10-20 Mull, C., Sitlington, P L., Alper, S (2001) Postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the literature Exceptional Children, 97-118 Murray, C., Flannery, B., Wren, C (2008b) University staff members’ attitudes and knowledge about learning disabilities and disability support services Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21, 73-90 Murray, C., Goldstein, D E., Nourse, S & Edgar, E (2000) The postsecondary school attendance and completion rates of high school graduates with learning disabilities Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 119-127 Murray, C Lombardi, A., & Wren, C T (in press-b) The effects of disability-focused training on the attitudes and perceptions of University staff Remedial and Special Education Murray, C Lombardi, A., Wren, C T., & Keys, C (in press-a) Associations between prior disability focused training and disability-related attitudes and perceptions among University faculty, Learning Disability Quarterly Murray, C Wren, C T., & Keys, C (2008a) University faculty attitudes regarding students with learning disabilities Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 31, 95-113 Reed, M.J., Lund-Lucas, E., & O’Rourke, K (2003) Standards of practice in postsecondary special needs programming: Student and administrator opinion The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 2, 27-56 Roer-Strier, D (2002) University students with learning disabilities advocating for change Disability and Rehabilitation: An International Multidisciplinary Journal, 24, 914-924 Rohland, P., Erickson, B., Mathews, D., Roush, S E., Quinlan, K., & Smith, A D (2003) Changing the culture (CTC): A collaborative training model to create systematic change Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17, 49-58 Shaw, S F., & Scott, S S (2003) New directions in faculty development Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 17, 3-9 Sowers, J & Smith, M R (2004) Evaluation of the effects of an inservice training program on nursing faculty members’ perceptions, knowledge, and concerns about students with disabilities Journal of Nursing Education, 43, 248-252 Thomas, K W., & Velthouse, B A (1990) Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681 U.S Department of Education (2008) Demonstration projects to ensure students with disabilities receive a quality higher education Retrieved November 3, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/disabilities/awards.html Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, N., and Levine, P (2005) After High School: A First Look at the Postschool Experiences of Youth with Disabilities A Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) Menlo Park, CA: SRI International Zimmerman, M (2000) Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational and community levels of analysis In Rappaport J., & Seidman E., (Eds.), Handbook of community Psychology (pp 43-63) New York: Kluwer Acade About the Authors Christopher Murray, Ph.D is an Associate Professor of special education at the University of Oregon His research interests include developing further understanding about how individual, social and ecological factors influence the longterm outcomes of individuals with disabilities Carol T Wren is an Associate Professor of language, literacy, and specialized instruction at DePaul University Her current interests include learning disabilities in college students and adults, particularly issues of mental health Edward Stevens, is a doctoral student in Psychology at DePaul University Christopher Keys, Ph.D is a Professor of Psychology at DePaul University His research interests include the positive psychology of disability, the empowerment of people with disabilities and their families, and cross cultural attitudes toward people with disabilities Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS): A Multidimensional Service Delivery Model for College Students with Learning Disabilities and ADHD David R Parker Washington University in St Louis Cheri E White Linfield College Laura Collins Brock University Manju Banerjee Joan M McGuire University of Connecticut Abstract Today’s college students are expected to utilize a variety of learning technologies to succeed in higher education Students with learning disabilities (LD) and/or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorders (ADHD) can encounter barriers to equal access and effective learning in this new digital environment, including the development of proficiency with technology tools and self-regulation of attention while processing online information Recognizing these trends, a research University team developed and piloted the Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS) Service providers can implement the Principles of Universal Design for Instruction (UDI)© when providing academic supports with LiTMS This new model is presented and illustrated with a hypothetical but increasingly common vignette A concluding discussion articulates ways in which LiTMS can be used with all students in a variety of campus offices and can serve as the focus of future research The intent of this article is to describe a service delivery model based on the Principles of Universal Design for Instruction© (Scott, McGuire, & Shaw, 2001) that disability and academic support professionals can use to help students with learning disabilities (LD) and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) develop strategic proficiency with a range of learning technologies The Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS) model (see Figure 1) was piloted by the authors during a two-year period in a University office with a model program for serving undergraduates with LD and ADHD (Brinckerhoff, McGuire, & Shaw, 2002) Program staff and Learning Specialists, (i.e., graduate assistants who provide individualized services focusing on learning and compensatory strategies), participated in a dynamic process of conceptualizing, piloting, and refining the model Each component is described using examples from a vignette involving “Susan.” Implications including guidelines for applying the LiTMS model in campus offices that serve all college students and areas for future research are addressed Figure Learning Technologies Management System (LiTMS) Model Rationale for Developing the Model Learning Technologies Learning technologies, defined as “any application of technology, particularly computer and information technology, which contributes to the learning process” (Finnis, 2004), are dramatically altering college instruction (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996) According to the U.S Department of Labor: Most college and University faculty extensively use computer technology, including the Internet; e-mail; CD-ROMs; and programs, such as statistical packages They may use computers in the classroom as teaching aids and may post course content, class notes, class schedules, and other information on the Internet (http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos066.htm) While effective learning is not guaranteed by the use of technologies, learning can be hindered by the inappropriate application of these pedagogical tools by faculty and/or students (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000) A Need to Close the Gap Preparedness for college studies now requires proficiency in the use of learning technologies Yet, given the gaps in skill levels of high school students with disabilities reported in literature, it is predictable that some students will enter postsecondary education with limited knowledge and fluency in the use of these technologies and will seek assistance to develop these skills (Marino, Marino, & Shaw, 2006) The National Council on Disability (2000) reported that “the rapid acquisition of educational technology has not sufficiently addressed the needs of students with disabilities Access for students with disabilities is just beginning to be identified as an important factor when purchasing educational technology” (p 25) A recent survey of college students with LD and ADHD and students without disabilities found that both groups reported high threshold levels of comfort and fluency with learning technologies (Parker & Banerjee, 2007) However, notable differences in specific skills were found Students with disabilities indicated a lower level of comfort with e-mail and multitasking on a computer (i.e., online literature searches including reading online) than did their peers without disabilities A key focus of the LiTMS model emanated from the gap our students identified and their need to become more adept in technology skills relating to course demands LiTMS: A Service Delivery Model for Technology Mediated Instructional Support This section provides details about the five components of the LiTMS model (see Figure 1) A vignette involving a hypothetical student, “Susan,” is used to illustrate each component Consider the following scenario in which a freshman introduces herself to the disability service provider during the first week of classes Hi, I’m Susan It’s nice to meet you I know this is our first session but I have to tell you that I’m already overwhelmed by all my assigned readings this semester My British Lit professor decided to replace her textbook with several articles She said the readings and other resources are online, but it’s taking me forever to log onto the course web site! I’ve heard of text-to-speech software Would that be faster for me to try now rather than having your office order CD’s or tapes of all those articles? Oh, and after we take care of my accommodations, can we work on some reading strategies for finding main ideas? I’m a visual learner and started working with concept maps over the summer Is there a way I can turn those maps into study guides? Component 1: Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) The boundary encompassing the LiTMS model is the conceptual framework of Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) (Scott, McGuire, & Foley, 2003) and its nine Principles© (Scott et al., 2001) adapted from the concept of universal design (UD) in the field of architecture UD comprises proactive ways to incorporate accessibility features into spaces and product designs from inception to completion (Center for Universal Design, n.d.) UDI is a paradigm for proactively designing and using inclusive instructional strategies that benefit a broad range of learners including those with disabilities (Scott et al., 2003) To implement this paradigm, the Principles of UDI©, illustrated in a clockwise format in the boundary in Figure 1, delineate considerations that are important in creating accessible learning environments and inclusive elements of instruction The LiTMS model extends this approach to disability services where service providers offer instruction (e.g., learning strategies, rubrics for using assistive technology) or help students access information from textbooks, web sites, e-mail exchanges, class notes, and other sources Just as the Principles provide college faculty with a decision-making framework to create accessible courses (see www.facultyware.uconn.edu), UDI is the backdrop and foundation of the LiTMS model for service providers who offer one-on-one, individualized academic assistance to students Component 2: Authentic Learning Need As illustrated in Figure 1, the impetus for a student’s interaction with service providers is often a genuine need for learning assistance or accommodation To begin the conversation and set a welcoming, non-judgmental tone (UDI Principle 9, Instructional Climate), the service provider might ask, “What authentic need does this student want help with that either involves technology or could be addressed by learning technologies?” Susan asked her service provider if concept maps could be turned into study guides, which becomes one of her authentic learning needs The disability service professional might consider Inspiration® software as a viable solution Exploration of this software with Susan could address Principle (Perceptible Information) if the concept maps would allow her to quickly see key points from her British Literature readings and how these ideas relate to one another Responding to authentic needs provides a timely and relevant focus on technology without requiring busy students to find additional time for stand-alone training in the use of digital tools Component 3: Preferences As a student and the OSD service provider clarify authentic learning needs, other elements of the LiTMS model come into play Service providers should consider the student’s preferences, once again drawing upon the UDI principles Susan described herself as a visual learner While considering a process for helping Susan learn how to use mapping software, the service provider asked, “How would you like to remember the steps for using this software?” In doing so, the service provider extended the application of Principle (Instructional Climate) and Principle (Flexibility in Use) by presenting information according to Susan’s stated learning preference Susan indicated that she would prefer to see a list of simple steps to prompt her recall while exploring the new technology The service provider decided to write a brief version of each step on a whiteboard near the desk as they continued working together (UDI Principle 5: Tolerance for Error) Component 4: Learning Technologies In our setting, learning technologies, broadly categorized as “mainstream,” personal, and assistive (see Figure 1), are present in many contexts Increasingly, all students require proficiency with mainstream technologies, those used by the institution and faculty to deliver coursework and communicate with students, to succeed in today’s postsecondary environments Examples of mainstream technologies include course management systems such as WebCT/Vista, Internetbased search engines, and presentation software such as PowerPoint ® and Inspiration® (Allen & Seaman, 2005) Undergraduate students continue to outpace other demographic groups on campus in the use of personal technologies (“Freshmen arrive,” 2006) such as iPods®, smart phones, and personal digital assistants (PDA’s) These digital tools allow students to download professors’ podcasts, create weekly calendars in electronic formats, and schedule study group meetings via text messaging Some college students with LD and ADHD also use assistive technology (AT) to access learning AT has been defined as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities” (http://www.section508.gov/docs/AT1998.html, n.d.) Common examples of assistive technologies include audio books, screen readers (i.e., voice output systems that read back text displayed on the computer screen), and speech recognition systems (i.e., systems that allow the user to operate the computer by speaking to it) (Day & Edwards, 1996) What learning technologies are required or available to meet a student’s authentic learning needs? Consideration of this question shifts the implementation of the LiTMS model from Component (preferences) to Component (learning technologies) The service provider introduces Inspiration® software at this stage to explore its potential for addressing some of Susan’s authentic learning needs While demonstrating relevant features of the software, the service provider also asks Susan how she remembers new steps or procedures when working by herself Susan quickly reaches into her backpack and retrieves a sleek red cell phone Smiling, she confidently announces that she “never leaves home without it.” In consideration of Susan’s preferences and the various types of learning technologies that might address her authentic learning needs, the disability service provider demonstrates Principle (Flexibility in use) in finalizing a plan for demonstrating new strategies Susan’s cell phone will take on the function of a memory prompt, allowing Susan to tap into her preferences and building on Principle (Perceptible Information) Component 5: Individualized Strategies for Learning Technology Proficiency When developing new academic strategies, students with LD and/or ADHD have demonstrated deficits in the ability to self-regulate their attention to task (Ruban, McCoach, McGuire, & Reis, 2003) Given the importance of self-regulation skills in digital learning environments, service providers can help students develop individualized procedural and metacognitive strategies for using technologies to address their authentic learning needs Procedural strategies are adapted from the concept of “procedural scaffolding” (Hannafin, Land, & Oliver, 1999) and can be thought of as the steps one uses to complete a process or activity The service provider proceeds to model and then have Susan practice steps for creating a map with Inspiration® software and inserting review questions into the map with the software’s “post-it” note feature Once Susan demonstrates some proficiency with this new learning technology, the service provider might address UDI Principle (Minimizing physical effort) by asking her, “Can your cell phone remind you later of the steps you follow to use Inspiration®?” To ensure equitable use and accessibility to this information (Principle 1), the service provider helps Susan record and save a brief version of the steps in her cell phone’s List file They also send a copy of the list to Susan’s e-mail account so that she has access to another version of these self-guiding directions Metacognitive strategies can be thought of as the underlying process for planning and monitoring the effectiveness of one’s use of procedural and other cognitive strategies Metacognitive strategies allow learners to identify what they want to know, reflect upon their learning style to choose effective approaches to new learning activities, monitor whether those approaches are working, and redirect their behavior when new learning approaches are needed (Hannafin et al., 1999) For a series of steps on how to provide instruction in learning strategies, see Beckman (2002) With direct instruction or modeling, students can adopt a problem-based approach to applying the new technology in a self-determined manner that addresses their authentic learning need (Knowles, 1990) Discussion Increasingly, college students like Susan are expected to be proficient in the use of “mainstream” technologies or already use personal technologies that hold the promise of helping them learn more efficiently While they may be eligible for assistive technology such as audio books, students may be able to derive greater benefit from these access tools with the development of personalized procedural and metacognitive strategies Many colleges and universities are now moving beyond the legal compliance model of disability access to a support model by offering strategy instruction to promote greater independence and learning self-efficacy (Harding, Blaine, Whelley, & Chang, n.d) The LiTMS model can be applied in the numerous OSD offices that currently offer these services or strategically plan to so in the future In this way, the model extends the literature on Universal Design by providing a piloted framework that disability service providers can use in their own work with students including examples of the nine Principles of Universal Design for Instruction© In addition to OSD settings, the LiTMS model can be adapted by a range of student services professionals Writing Centers and Academic Skills Centers are two examples of offices that routinely provide individualized assistance to any student taking courses at that institution Staff members are often trained in facilitation and instructional methods and help students enhance their writing or study skills while working on current course assignments College technology labs and libraries also provide individualized assistance involving technologies such as Internet search engines, course web sites, and PowerPoint software to a wide variety of students who request assistance with research and presentations Disability service providers can play an important new consulting role by helping campus colleagues learn about and adapt the LiTMS model, beginning with an understanding of the nine Principles of Universal Design for Instruction © Such collaborations hold the promise of widening institutional access in and out of the classroom With consideration of the OSD program evaluation literature (Casey, 2006; Goodin, Parker, Shaw, & McGuire, 2004), the LiTMS model provides a new opportunity to extend the research base on efficacious support services The model was developed and piloted at a single research intensive institution with a limited number of students Replication is warranted, and empirical evidence of “best practices” relating to service delivery models such as LiTMS holds promise for postsecondary personnel who increasingly are called upon to develop and evaluate universal approaches to accessible education that involve the use of learning technologies References Allen, E.I., & Seaman, J (2005) Growing by degrees: Online education in the University States, 2005 The Sloan Consortium Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.sloan-c.org/resources/growing_by_degrees.pdf Banerjee, M., & Parker, D.R (2005) The Learning Strategies Management System (LiTMS) Model Storrs: University of Connecticut, Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability Beckman, P (2002) Strategy instruction Retrieved August 5, 2008, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/de/99.pdf Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R (Eds.) (2000) How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school committee on developments in the science of learning Washington, DC: National Academy Press Brinckerhoff, L.C., McGuire, J.M., & Shaw, S.F (2002) Postsecondary education and transition for students with learning disabilities Austin, TX: PRO-ED Casey, D (2006, December) Don’t let fear of assessment stymie DS office improvements Disability Compliance for Higher Education Horsham, PA: LRP Publications Center for Universal Design (n.d.) Universal design history Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/udhistory.htm Chickering, A., & Ehrmann, S.C (1996) Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever AAHE Bulletin, October, pp 3-6 Day, S.L., & Edwards, B.J (1996) Assistive technology for postsecondary students with learning disabilities Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(5), 486-492 Finnis, J (2004) Myths and facts of learning technology TechLEARNING Retrieved March 6, 2006, from http://www.techlearning.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=22101447 Freshmen arrive bearing gadgets and great expectations (2006, September 22) The Chronicle of Higher Education, p A30 Goodin, S.G., Parker, D.R., Shaw, S., & McGuire, J.M (2004) Program evaluation of postsecondary student services: From theory to practice Waltham, MA: Association on Higher Education and Disability Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K (1999) Open learning environments: Foundations, methods and models In C Reigluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional technology (pp 118-140) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc Harding, T., Blaine, D.D., Whelley, T., & Chang, C (n.d.) A comparison of the provision of educational supports to students with disabilities in AHEAD versus non-AHEAD affiliated institutions Retrieved August 26, 2008, from University of Hawaii, National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports Center on Disability Studies web site: http://www.rrtc.hawaii.edu/documents/products/phase2/pdf/021d(2)-H01.pdf Knowles, M (1990) The adult learner: A neglected species (4th ed) Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Marino, M., Marino, E.C., & Shaw, S.F (2006) Making informed assistive technology decisions for students with high incidence disabilities TEACHING Exceptional Children, 38(6), 18-25 National Council on Disability (2000) Transition and postsecondary outcomes for youth with disabilities: Closing the gap to postsecondary education and employment Retrieved April 20, 2008, from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2000/transition_11-01-00.htm Parker, D.R., & Banerjee, M (2007) Leveling the digital playing field: Assessing the learning technology needs of college-bound students with LD and/or ADHD Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33(1), 5-14 Ruban, L.M., McCoach, D.B., McGuire, J.M., & Reis, S.M (2003) The differential impact of academic self-regulatory methods on academic achievement among University students with and without learning disabilities Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 270-289 Scott, S.S., McGuire, J.M., & Foley, T.E (2003) Universal design for instruction: A framework for anticipating and responding to disability and other diverse learning needs in the college classroom Equity & Excellence in Education, 36(1), 2003 Scott, S.S, McGuire, J.M., & Shaw, S (2001) Principles of universal design for instruction Storrs: University of Connecticut, Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability U.S Department of Labor (2008) Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational outlook handbook, 2008-09 Edition Retrieved August 11, 2008, from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos066.htm About the Authors David R Parker received his B.S in Special Education and an M.S in Counseling from Indiana University and his Ph.D from the University of Connecticut His experience includes LD strategy instruction, ADHD coaching, and program administration at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Connecticut and management of a National Science Foundation grant at Washington University in St Louis His research interests include executive function (ADD) coaching and self-determination, non-faculty applications of Universal Design for Instruction, and technology-infused strategy instruction He can be reached at drdparker@gmail.com Cheri E White received her B.A in communication studies from Marylhurst University and her M.A in special education from the University of Connecticut Her experience includes working as a disability service coordinator and a learning specialist Her research interests include technology, learning strategies and coaching She is currently the Assistant Director of Learning Support Services at Linfield College She can be reached at chwhite@linfield.edu Joan M McGuire received her B.A degree in Humanistic Studies from St Mary’s College, Notre Dame, IN and Ph.D from the University of Connecticut where she is Professor Emerita of Special Education and Associate Director of the Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability She was the 2005 recipient of the AHEAD Communication Award, and the 2009 recipient of the Oliver P Kolstoe Award from the Council for Exceptional Children, Division for Career Development and Transition She has more than 80 published refereed journal articles and with her colleagues has generated more than $5 million in federal and state grants including $3 million for universally designed instructional strategies for college teaching Her research interests include Universal Design for Instruction (UDI); postsecondary disability program development, administration, and evaluation; adults with learning disabilities; and independent program evaluation including impact analysis Laura Collins is a Learning Disability Specialist at Brock University in St Catharines, Ontario She received her M.A in Special Education at the University of Connecticut Her experience includes working as a Disability Coordinator at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and York University in Toronto Her areas of interest include teaching learning strategies to postsecondary students with learning disabilities and AD/HD She can be reached at laura.l.e.collins@gmail.com Manju Banerjee received her M.A degree in special education from Pennsylvania State University and her Ph.D from the University of Connecticut Her experiences include working as a vocational rehabilitation counselor, disability service provider, research and disability consultant, and a faculty member She is currently Associate Director of the Center for Students with Disabilities and Associate Research Scholar for the Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability at the University of Connecticut Her research interests include learning technology and universal design, transition to high school, disability documentation, and high-stakes testing She can be reached at manju.banejee@uconn.edu Book Review Rebecca Daly Cofer Texas Tech University Academic Counselor - Student Disability Services Paul Wehman, Marcia Datlow Smith, & Carol Schall (2009) Autism & the Transition to Adulthood: Success Beyond the Classroom Baltimore: Paul H Brooks Publishing, 285 pp., $34.95 As Paul Wehman, Marcia Smith, and Carol Schall’s text argues, autism is a fairly new and very much undiscovered disability The amount of research and materials devoted to this particular disability has increased in recent years, as the number of people diagnosed with this disability has also seemed to increase recently The preface to this text states in its first sentence, “There has been an explosion of new information about autism in American society since the 1990s, perhaps… as the media begins to provide dramatically increased coverage on the issues and challenges” (P xiii) Whether this is because of more media focus on autism or because of a real increase in the frequency of those with autism, the need for information is definitely real and true Autism and the Transition to Adulthood, while it admits throughout its pages that the disease is still a mystery in many ways, attempts to educate the lay person on autism and how it affects all aspects of a student’s life, including postsecondary options for these individuals Wehman, Smith, and Schall’s book uses examples of three individuals with varying degrees of autism spectrum disorders to explain many aspects of the life of a student with autism While they also provide basic and visual information, each piece of information is supported by a follow-up example from the lives of Jeff, Maria, and Craig, three young people with autism Having been someone who struggles with the definition of autism and its effects on higher education, I especially appreciated the introductory chapter about the characteristics of autism and how they affect the individual In addition, the editors, who write some of the chapters themselves, compiled sections devoted to autism in higher education, which proved incredibly helpful to me, a beginner in the field of autism and Disability Services as a whole In their chapter titled “Postsecondary Options for Students with Autism”, Lori Briel and Elizabeth Getzel take the reader through the process of choosing a school for the student with autism and how this will change from secondary education They even discuss the changing role of the family, which shows that this book is not only useful for the Disability Services professional, but also for the family members of the student with autism Much of this book, in general, focuses on allowing the individual with autism and the family members to become prepared about what to expect from various situations, like higher education Even though I did see that the authors lean more towards the student attending a two-year college than a four-year college, I understand the reasoning behind this and also found the information useful and new to me Included in Briel and Getzel’s specific chapter is an example of an assessment form for services through one disability office in higher education These authors want to make family members involved and prepared for the changes that may occur Speaking about this preparation for change, the authors write, “It is important that students with autism and their families work together to better understand these differences and to begin shifting the responsibility of … the student’s education more to the student before entering college” (p 203) The chapter goes so far as to provide a list of questions for both the student and the family to consider when discussing, for example, a foreign language requirement within a college The strength in this book, and in this chapter as well, lies in its details about higher education and what to expect The editors clearly believe, and rightly so, that one of the key elements to transitioning to higher education for the student with autism is the abundance of preparatory knowledge about the transition that will soon take place in the life of the student Although I did find particular chapters, like the one discussed above, very helpful and informative for the Disability Services professional, there also seems to be some repetition of information in this book and some very obvious general information For instance, during an earlier chapter about integrated employment for the student with autism, the authors of the chapter comment that for a student with limited or no verbal skills, more support will need to be provided Certain points throughout the text, I found such obvious statements being reiterated over and over again I understand that much of the knowledge about autism is still speculative and maybe even undiscovered, but the repeated obvious information became a bit frustrating at times As stated before, chapters in the text cover employment options beyond college for the individual with autism For employment to occur, many times a job coach is required However, I was not sure how useful this information is, generally, for people with autism Autism and the Transition to Adulthood may take a somewhat biased approach to helping the student with autism that has the financial means to hire such resources as a job or life coach The reader may question if the tools that the text suggests are possible for all students with autism After all, Targett and Wehman state about the level of support for these individuals in the work environment, “Most workers with autism will need some type of job coaching or assistance on the job, even if it is only on an occasional basis” (p 183) In the final paragraph of Autism and the Transition to Adulthood, the editors sum up the entire book in one sentence Wehman, Smith, and Schall write, “In conclusion, the future is brighter than ever but the challenges are also greater than ever” (p 252) In the same way, the benefits of this book are great in its basic knowledge of autism, but due to the age of this disorder, the questions about autism that this book presents are equally as large Overall, I feel this book gives a good base knowledge, but it can be too basic at points If nothing else, this text has provoked me to seek out even more books about autism so I can begin to answer the many questions I have After the final paragraph, the book then goes on to provide its readers with a reference guide for resources across the country Autism and the Transition to Adulthood has noble goals in its writing, but still leaves the reader with many questions and a very basic knowledge of autism Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability Author Guidelines The Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability welcomes submissions of innovative and scholarly manuscripts relevant to the issues and practices of educating students with disabilities in postsecondary educational programs Manuscripts must be submitted electronically via e-mail to jped@ahead.org Guidelines for authors: Content Manuscripts should demonstrate scholarly excellence in at least one of the following categories: • • • Research: Reports original quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method research Integration: Integrates research of others in a meaningful way; compares or contrasts theories; critiques results; and/or provides context for future exploration Innovation: Proposes innovation of theory, approach, or process of service delivery based on reviews of the literature and research Policy Analysis: Provides analysis, critique and implications of public policy, statutes, regulation, and litigation • Format All manuscripts must be prepared according to APA format as described in The Publication Manual (6 th ed.), American Psychological Association, 2010 For responses to frequently asked questions about APA style, consult the APA web site at http://www.apastyle.org/faqs.html • Manuscript length typically ranges between 25 and 35 pages including figures, tables, and references Exceptions may be made depending upon topic and content • Write sentences using active voice • Authors should use terminology that emphasizes the individual first and the disability second (see pages 72-73 of APA Manual) Authors should also avoid the use of sexist language and the generic masculine pronoun • Manuscripts should have a title page that provides the names and affiliations of all authors and the address of the principal author • Include an abstract that does not exceed 250 words Abstracts must be double spaced on a separate page, or placed in an e-mail request • Provide a cover letter asking that the manuscript be reviewed for publication consideration and that it has not been published or is being reviewed for publication elsewhere Tables and figures must conform to APA standards, and must be in black and white only All tables and figures should be vertical and fit on the page, no landscape format Manuscripts must be submitted as e-mail attachments in either Microsoft Word or RTF format to jped@ahead.org Upon acceptance for publication For manuscripts that are accepted for publication, the following items must be provided to the Executive Editor: • • • An electronic copy of the final manuscript as an e-mail attachment A 40-50 word bibliographic description for each author A signed and completed Copyright Transfer form Manuscript submissions by AHEAD members are especially welcome The JPED reserves the right to edit all material for space and style Authors will be notified of changes Practice Brief Manuscripts JPED will devote a few pages of general issues to a Practice Brief Section to expand the pool of innovative ideas Practice Briefs will consist of practical strategies and programs used to support postsecondary students with disabilities The body of the Practice Brief papers will be four pages long (excluding title page, abstract, reference page, Tables, and Figures) The Practice Briefs will not replace the regular research-based JPED papers They will provide an opportunity for Postsecondary Disability Service staff to share their best practices To write a Practice Brief for publication consideration, use the following to develop the paper: • • • • • • • • • • Title page Abstract (no more than 60 words) Literature Review (no more than two paragraphs, cite references using APA 5th edition style) Problem (one paragraph) Students and Location Information Strategy Observed Outcomes Implications References Tables and Figures (if needed) If any questions, contact the JPED Editor James Martin at 405-325-8951 or e-mail to: jemartin@ou.edu Send your finished papers via e-mail to: jped@ahead.org for publication consideration Each Practice Brief will be sent to three postsecondary disability direct service staff for review ... the Journal © 20 09, The Association on Higher Education And Disability, 107 Commerce Centre Drive #20 4, Huntersville, NC 28 078 USA Table of Contents Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability: ... the Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability (JPED), Volume 22 , Issue This issue brings you four timely and unique research studies, one practice brief about an emerging new practice, and. .. name of the Project Director(s) of these 71 projects as the search term (i.e., author) and we reviewed the table of contents of all issues of the Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability