The Experiences of Postsecondary Students with Learning Disabilities in Summer

Transition Programs: A Multi-case Study of Six Programs in Ontario

by

Diliana Peregrina-Kretz

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree Of Doctor of Philosophy

Graduate Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education Ontario Institute for Studies in Education

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Diliana Peregrina-Kretz (2015)

 

The Experiences of Postsecondary Students with Learning Disabilities in Summer Transition Programs: A Multi-case Study of Six Programs in Ontario

Doctor of Philosophy 2015 Diliana Peregrina-Kretz

Graduate Department of Leadership, Higher, and Adult Education University of Toronto

Abstract

Students with Learning Disabilities (LD) are the largest and fastest growing sub group of

students with disabilities in postsecondary education. Despite their increasing enrollment,

students with learning disabilities remain an under-represented group, and are categorized at risk

due to the low graduation rates compared to their peers, specifically at the university level. The

first year is a critical year for all students entering postsecondary education as it is this year

where students are most likely to drop-out. For students with learning disabilities, the first year is

particularly important as they must adjust to a new academic environment and accommodations

from what they are accustomed to in high school. Understanding what supports and influences

improve these experiences for students with learning disabilities at the onset of their

postsecondary education is a crucial step in augmenting their persistence and graduation

prospects.

Using a multi-case study design, I examine the experiences of students with learning

disabilities in six summer transition programs in public universities in Ontario, Canada, and how

these programs prepared students in making the transition from high school to university. The

summer transition programs under investigation resulted from the recommendations made by

Ontario’s Learning Opportunity Task Force to the Ministry of Training Colleges and Universities

                                       

  iii  

to fund transition programs to increase the retention and graduation of students with learning

disabilities.

Findings from this study show that students with learning disabilities who participate in

transition programs gain academic tools and strategies that help them transition into their first

year of university (and beyond) such as time-management, note taking, and seeking disability

related support services and accommodations; learn about the importance of self-advocacy and

communicating with faculty, staff, and peers regarding their disability; and learn how to navigate

the university and the services available to help them succeed. In addition, participants noted that

attending the transition program helped them find new confidence in themselves and find a sense

of community amongst other participants in the program.

                                       

  iv  

Acknowledgments

   

There are so many wonderful individuals who have supported me throughout my educational journey. From my elementary school teacher, Mr. Carrico, who gave me my first Citizen of the Month Award in third grade, to the countless teachers, counselors, professors, and mentors (Dr. Locks, Dr. Haviland, Dr. O, Dr. Portnoi, Dr. Lewis, Dr. Levey, and Dr. Oseguera) who have always believed in my ability to accomplish more than I could dream. In every step of my journey, I have been blessed to have the unconditional love, support and encouragement of my wonderful family and without them I could not have accomplished this milestone.

To my family: This year marks my twelfth year in post-secondary education and you have been instrumental in helping me achieve my goals. Liz: You have been there for me more times than I can count, and without your love and support, encouragement, and always telling me “you can do this,” “you are almost there” (even though I was still really far away from being done) I could not have achieved this goal. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your unconditional support and love, it means more than you can ever imagine. Adry: You used to give me rides to Santa Monica on your days off so that I could finish my first semester in college. Every time we were stuck in traffic for one, two, or three hours, I could not help to think how selfless you were to give me your time off just so that I could go to school. Thank you for always believing in my dreams and for always being a great big sister. Omar: Thank you for your encouragement and love. Mom and Dad: Thank you for all of your love, your support and encouragement, and most importantly for believing in me. I love you with all of my heart and I am so thankful for all that you have done for me. Abueilto: Mil gracias por darme tu amor y tu apoyo – te quiero mucho. Leslie, Omar, Lupita, and Rosie: Thank you for warming my heart with your sweet smiles, for making laugh, but most importantly for being YOU! I love you and I dedicate this degree to you.

Andrew: Thank you for being an amazing life (and academic) partner. You have not only supported me, encouraged me, and believed in my ability to accomplish all of the goals I have set for myself, but continually push me to be better, to dream bigger. I cannot wait to see where we go now that we move onto to a new phase in our lives. I love you. Lola and Diego: While you cannot read this, it would be a crime not to acknowledge you, as you have been so instrumental in my life. Your love and kisses (well, licks), your wagging tails, and your sweet and gentle souls have given me so much support and happiness. You are the best little companions Andrew and I could have.

Thesis Committee: I could not have accomplished this study without the guidance of my

amazing thesis committee composed of Dr. Tricia Seifert, Dr. Linda Muzzin, Dr. Jean-Paul Restoule, Dr. Tony Chambers, and Dr. Jennifer Keup. Thank you for all of your support, encouragement, and most importantly for pushing me time and time again to expand my thinking and be a better scholar. I could not have asked for a more thoughtful, encouraging, and incredibly talented group of scholars to guide me through this project.

Supporting Student Success (SSS) Research Team: THANK YOU! Tricia: Thank you

for bringing us together and for supporting our scholarship, expanding our thinking and

                                       

  v  

creativity, and for always believing in each of us. The best academic experiences I had at OISE have been with you and this wonderful team and I cannot thank you enough for your mentorship and support. Kim, Kathleen, Jeff, Christine, Jacquie, and Wincy (our honorary SSS team member): You are all amazing individuals and I have learned so much from each of you. I could not have asked for a better group of friends to go on this Ph.D. journey with. I have amazing memories with all of you at all the conferences, road trips, presentations, meetings, and days of learning we had together. Thank you for all of the laughter, for all of the support and love, and most importantly, for being such great friends and partners in crime.

                                       

  vi  

 Table of Contents

Page Abstract ............................................................................................................. ii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................... iv List of Tables ..................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................... 1 Statement of the Problem............................................................................ 2 Significance and Purpose ............................................................................ 6 Research Questions...................................................................................... 8 Theoretical Lens........................................................................................... 9 Summary....................................................................................................... 10 Organization of the Study ........................................................................... 11 Definitions .................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 2: Literature Review........................................................................... 13 Theoretical Lens........................................................................................... 13 Critical Disability Theory ........................................................................... 13 Institutional Models Supporting Student Success .................................... 15 The Intersection of CDT and Institutional Models................................... 21 Defining Learning Disabilities .................................................................... 22 Assessment of Learning Disabilities ........................................................... 24 A Profile of Students with Learning Disabilities in Canada and Ontario 26 Learning Disabilities and Grade Retention............................................... 28 Learning Disabilities and Self-esteem ........................................................ 29 Learning Disabilities and Interactions with Others ................................. 30 Transition to Postsecondary Education..................................................... 31 Disclosing Disability .................................................................................... 32 The Role of Faculty and Staff ..................................................................... 34 Institutional Support and Accommodations ............................................. 34 Summary....................................................................................................... 37 Chapter 3: Research Design.............................................................................. 39 Selection of Cases ......................................................................................... 41 Recruitment of Institutions ......................................................................... 42 Recruitment of Students.............................................................................. 47 Instrumentation ........................................................................................... 49 Data Collection............................................................................................. 55 Data Analysis................................................................................................ 58 Trustworthiness and Credibility ................................................................ 60

                                       

  vii  

Study Propositions ....................................................................................... 61 Researcher Role ........................................................................................... 62 Summary....................................................................................................... 64 Chapter 4: Results ............................................................................................. 65 Case 1: 2-Day Summer Transition Program............................................. 66 Case 2: 3-Day Summer Transition Program............................................. 76 Case 3: 5-Day (Optional) Summer Transition Program ......................... 94 Case 4: 5-Day (In-residence) Summer Transition Program ................... 105 Case 5: 5-Day (Non-residential) Summer Transition Program............... 122 Case 6: 8-Week Transition Program ......................................................... 137 Chapter 5: Discussion........................................................................................ 154 Research Question 1 .................................................................................... 155 Research Question 2 .................................................................................... 164  Chapter 6: Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations..................... 175 Theoretical Framing .................................................................................... 178 Implications for Practice and Recommendations ..................................... 180 Study Limitations......................................................................................... 188 Recommendations for Future Research .................................................... 190  References........................................................................................................... 195 Appendix A......................................................................................................... 206 Appendix B ......................................................................................................... 210 Appendix C......................................................................................................... 211 Appendix D......................................................................................................... 213 Appendix E ......................................................................................................... 215 Appendix F ......................................................................................................... 217 Appendix G......................................................................................................... 218

                                       

  viii  

List of Tables

Table 1 Transition Programs Across Universities in Ontario…………………… 42 Table 2 Participating Universities........................................................................ 45 Table 3 Pseudonyms of Participating Institutions and Programs ........................ 46 Table 4 List of Cases, Institutions, and Participants............................................ 48 Table 5 Bridge to Success Program Participants ................................................. 70 Table 6 Headway to Transition Program Participants ......................................... 83 Table 7 One-step Ahead Program Participants.................................................... 98 Table 8 On Your Mark Program Participants ...................................................... 109 Table 9 Prepare for Success Program Participants .............................................. 126 Table 10 Transition to Success Program Participants ........................................ 143 Table 11 Transition Program Matrix ................................................................... 167

 

                                       

1    

Chapter 1: Introduction

In recent decades there has been an influx in postsecondary enrollment of students with

disabilities, particularly in developed countries like Canada (OECD, 2003). Federal and

provincial legislation and human rights commissions have pressed institutions of higher

education to support enrollment and provide support for students with disabilities to ensure

that they have equal opportunity to attain a postsecondary degree (Chambers, Sukai, & Bolton,

2011). Although more students with disabilities are entering postsecondary education, these

numbers remain low relative to the number of the overall population of people with disabilities

(Eckes & Ochoa, 2005). Of those students with disabilities who enroll in postsecondary

education, the number completing a degree is even lower (NEADS, 2013; Stodden, 2005;

Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Garza, & Levine, 2005.) The disproportion of enrollment and

degree attainment of students with disabilities has serious implications for several actors in

society, primarily the students. Implications include limited prospects in the labor force, lack

of financial security, possible reliance on government assistance, and opportunities associated

with attaining a postsecondary education (Baum & Payea, 2005; Smith, 2005).

In Canada, over 14% (4.4 million) of the population report having a disability

(Statistics Canada, 2006). The Canadian government defines people with disabilities as having

“ […] long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments, which in interaction

with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal

basis with others" (Government of Canada, 2006). Students with documented disabilities

represent six percent of the total postsecondary student population, making them an

underrepresented group. The six percent of students with disabilities who enroll in

postsecondary education is compared against the number of the overall Canadian population

      2

   

who report having a disability, which is over 14% percent (Canadian College Student Survey

Consortium, 2003).

Several studies have examined the experiences and academic outcomes of students with

disabilities in postsecondary education and the findings often portray a bleak reality for this

student population (Denhart, 2008; Gregg, 2007). Research shows that students with disabilities

are less likely to persist year to year (Wolanin & Steele, 2004), are more likely to take longer

periods of time to graduate (Chambers, Sukai, & Bolton, 2011), experience difficulties

navigating the institution and finding community on campus (Sachs & Schreuer, 2011), and

ultimately are less likely to graduate (OECD, 2011; Wolanin & Steele, 2004). These realities

require that institutions provide adequate support for students with disabilities to successfully

integrate them academically and socially to their new environment and ameliorate these

conditions to improve their chances of graduating.

Statement of the Problem

A particular sub-group of students with disabilities that has grown significantly in post-

secondary education is students with learning disabilities (LDs) (Learning Disabilities

Association of Ontario, 2014; McCloy & DeClou, 2013). Learning disabilities encompass an

array of disorders that include “acquisition, organization, retention, and the understanding or use

of verbal or nonverbal information” (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 2002).

Learning disabilities do not necessarily reflect an individual’s intellectual ability; rather they

impede certain aspects of their learning that require an individual to “compensate” with

additional training and or tools, such as assistive technology. Over the last decade the enrollment

of students with LDs in Canadian postsecondary institutions has risen, but the degree attainment

remains low compared to students with other types of disabilities and students without a

      3

   

disability (Chambers, Sukai, Bolton, 2011). In 2006, Statistics Canada reported that

approximately 11% of students with learning disabilities, ages 25-44, had earned a university

degree compared to nearly 31% of students without a learning disability in the same age range.

The numbers are more promising in the college sector, where 32% of students with a learning

disability in the same age range (25-44) had earned a college degree compared to 36% of

students without a disability. The increase of students with learning disabilities enrolling in

postsecondary education and the gap between those who earn a degree, particularly at the

university level has implications at the student, institution, and policy levels. At the student level,

the low probability of attaining a university degree limits the students’ employment and earning

prospects, graduate school prospects, and personal gains associated with postsecondary

education (e.g. higher income, health related benefits, and overall quality of life) (Denhart, 2008;

Gregg, 2007). At the institutional level, the implications of enrolling increasing numbers of

students with learning disabilities (or any other under-represented group) who do not graduate

impacts retention and graduation rates, which are increasingly utilized by governmental agencies

as measures of institutional success and funding (Council of Ontario Colleges and Universities,

2009). At the policy level, the increasing call from the public to support the success of students

with disabilities in postsecondary education has pushed governments to develop or increase

funding envelopes that meet these needs (Nichols, Harrison, McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002).

Research has shown that students with learning disabilities face crucial challenges

transitioning to postsecondary education and that these challenges have implications for retention

and graduation (Izzo, Hertzfeld, Simmons-Reed, & Aron, 2001). These challenges may include

adjusting to the new academic environment and expectations, learning how their disability

impacts their learning in a new setting, and their socialization with peers and the broader

      4

   

community (Carrol & Lles, 2006; Hadjioannou, Shelton, Fu, & Dhanarattigannon, 2007;

Mellard, 2005). Transitioning to postsecondary education is a disruptive (and exciting)

experience for many students, but it can be particularly daunting for students with learning

disabilities who need to re-adjust their learning strategies to meet new academic demands in a

new environment (Janiga & Constanbader, 2002). Several research studies document the

transition to the first year of postsecondary education is the most vulnerable year for all students

and that it is during the first year where the largest proportion of students withdraw from the

institution (Johnson, Stodden, Emanuel, Luecking, & Mack, 2002; Shogren, & Plotner, 2012).

Ensuring that students with learning disabilities are supported through the transition process

augments their opportunities to succeed academically and increases their prospect to successfully

persist at the institution (Milsom, Akos, & Thompson, 2004). As more students with learning

disabilities enter postsecondary education, educators, administrators, and policy makers need to

be intentional about how they support the persistence and degree attainment of this under-

represented group to increase the number of students who complete their postsecondary degree.

Institutions must be intentional regarding the development and improvement of programs and

services that meet the unique needs of students with learning disabilities.

In Canada, the province of Ontario has been at the forefront developing policies and

mandates that support students with learning disabilities in postsecondary education. In 1997,

Treasurer Ernie Eves (who later became Ontario’s Premier from 2002-03), delivered an

important message in a speech:

Too few students with learning disabilities get the help that they need to transition to college or university. To help these students realize their potential, we will establish pilot projects at the college and university level, to provide real help to learning disabled students in a meaningful way.

      5

   

This recognition that students with learning disabilities require specialized support to transition

to postsecondary education by providing real and meaningful assistance marked what was to

become one of the most impactful initiatives for students with learning disabilities in the country.

Less than a year after Ernie Eves’ speech, the Learning Opportunity Task Force (LOTF) was

enacted to examine the challenges faced by students with learning disabilities transitioning to

postsecondary education (Nichols, Harrison, McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002). Specifically the

LOTF’s mandate was to examine how:

1. to improve the transition for students with specific learning disabilities from secondary school to postsecondary education, and

2. to enhance the services and supports that students with learning disabilities receive within the postsecondary educational sector, such that they can complete their education successfully. (LOTF Final Report, p.1)

By 1998 the LOTF had requested proposals from colleges and universities across the province to

participate in a pilot project that would highlight the “best practices” for supporting students’

with learning disabilities transition and succeed in postsecondary education. A total of ten

institutions participated in the pilot projects in 1998 and in the evaluation of their programs over

a four-year span informed the recommendations of the LOTF to the Ministry of Training

Colleges and Universities (MTCU) in Ontario. The pilot projects included a variety of programs

and services for students with learning disabilities; two of these pilot projects were summer

transition programs at two institutions, Cambrian College and York University. The Cambrian

College program called Expanding Horizons: Transition to College for Students with Learning

Disabilities offered students an eight day summer orientation program that included information

about how to adjust to the new academic demands of postsecondary education, promoting the

importance of accessing programs and services at the institution to support students’ needs, and

      6

   

to help students begin building a community on campus. The transition program at York

University called Project ADVANCE operated over six weeks in the summer and offered services

to any student with a learning disability planning to attend any postsecondary institution in

Ontario. Project Advance participants were surveyed in subsequent years and students attributed

much of their academic success during first year and beyond to their participation in the

program.

Based on the pilot program results, the LOTF made several recommendations to the

MTCU, and one of the critical recommendations was for all colleges and universities across the

province to provide summer transition programs (STP) for students with learning disabilities.

Today, summer transition programs for students with learning disabilities are mandated and

funded by the MTCU and exist across all public colleges and universities in Ontario. Each

institution was given the freedom to develop their own program format that best fit with their

institution and the students that they served. As a result, an array of programs emerged across

public postsecondary institutions in the province. The most notable differences in the programs is

the length and mode of delivery, ranging from one day to eight weeks, and ranging from

residential to online.  I identified five models of transition programs, these are: 1 day, 2-3 days, 4-

6 days, 2- week, and 8-week programs.

Significance and Purpose

The enrollment of students with learning disabilities is expected to continue growing in

postsecondary education in Canada (and across countries represented in the OECD) (OECD,

2011). Increasing this population’s persistence and degree attainment in postsecondary education

will require that institutions make intentional efforts to support the success of students with

learning disabilities. Transitioning from high school to university is one of the most disruptive

      7

   

experiences for any student, but especially for students with learning disabilities who are

learning to cope and thrive in a new environment; one where parents and teachers no longer have

a primary role in ensuring accommodations and supports are in place1 (Nichols, Harrison,

McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002). Preparing students’ with learning disabilities transition to

university is a foundational step in the persistence and graduation puzzle, one that the Ontario

government recognized as indispensable in improving this group’s educational success (Nichols,

Harrison, McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002).

Ontario’s initiative to fund and mandate summer transition programs for students with

learning disabilities across public colleges and universities is one of a kind in Canada and thus

provides a unique opportunity to examine how these programs impact students’ experiences. The

development and maturation of the summer transition programs, having been in place for just

over a decade, provide a suitable setting to investigate this phenomenon. Examining the effects

of various models of transition programs and how they prepare students as they enter university

will provide a contextual framework to further enhance, develop, and re-structure transition

programs across institutions of higher education in Canada and abroad. The findings of this study

are particularly important for higher education practitioners who work with students with

learning disabilities, practitioners who develop transition programs in postsecondary settings,

and education policy makers and administrators who are seeking systematic ways to improve the

experience and graduation rates of students with learning disabilities.

The purpose of this study is to examine the experiences of students with learning

disabilities who participated in summer transition programs between 2012 – 2014 in public

universities in Ontario and examine how their participation in the program impacted their                                                                                                                1 In primary and secondary schools in Ontario, parents and teachers play a crucial role in working alongside with the student to develop individualized educational plans (IEP) that meet the needs for the student’s disability. In postsecondary educational settings, students with disabilities are responsible for registering with a Disability Office, providing proper documentation to receive accommodations, and advocating for themselves to receive support from various offices and faculty.

      8

   

transition into their first year in university. The university sector is selected for this study

because this is the sector where the retention and graduation gap of students with learning

disabilities is the widest (Statistics Canada, 2006). While there have been studies that have

examined the impact of some of the recommendations made by the LOTF (Harrison,

Areepattamannil, Freeman, 2012; Holmes &Silverstone, 2011; Tsagris & Murihead, 2012) there

is no study that has examined how the development of various summer transition program

models differently impact students’ experiences and preparation to transition to university. For

this study I utilize a case study research design (Yin, 2004) to closely examine students’

experiences at six institutions. A detailed description of the methodology is outlined in Chapter

3.

Research Questions There are two main questions guiding the study:

1) How do students with learning disabilities who participated in one of the six summer transition

models describe their experiences transitioning to university?

a. How prepared did students feel transitioning to university as a result of their participation

in the summer transition program?

b. What key strategies associated with a successful transition to university (e.g. time

management, learning strategies, managing disability in a new context, etc.) were students

exposed to in the six summer transition program models?

c. What additional strategies, topics, and/or resources do students with learning disabilities

who attended one of the six summer transition program models wish had been offered in

their program and why?

2) How do students’ experiences transitioning to university differ by program model?

      9

   

a. Are the differences in students’ experiences transitioning to university based on the

program model that they attended?

b. What aspects of the different models examined in this study lead to differences in

students’ experiences transition to university?

Theoretical Lens I use two theoretical lenses to frame and ground the study; first, I am guided by Critical

Disability Theory (CDT) to understand the context and experiences of students with learning disabilities

in postsecondary education. CTD posits that disability is a socially constructed phenomenon and not an

individual impairment (Hosking, 2008). It is not the disability that impairs the individual, but the

barriers that have emerged from socially and politically constructed environments that impair a person’s

ability to succeed to their fullest potential (Brzuzy, 1997; Hiranandani, 2005; Titchkosky, 2003). The

responsibility to support people with disabilities lies on the institutions that have historically limited the

inclusion of people with disabilities, and in this study I focus on how universities as institutions can

support students with learning disabilities as they enter university.

Secondly, I examine three theoretical models: Nora’s Student Engagement Model (2006), Tinto’s

Model of Student Attrition (1997), and Swail, Redd, and Perna’s Geometric Model (2003). These

theoretical models posit that institutions have the responsibility to support student success, particularly

the success of the most marginalized groups, by providing adequate services and support. What makes

these models of particular interest is that the onus of student success is shared by the institution and the

student rather than primarily focusing on student characteristics (e.g. social capital such as generation in

postsecondary education, income, academic background, etc.) to determine persistence and retention.

In conjunction, CDT and the three institutional models provide a framework from which to

understand the experiences of students with learning disabilities as they transition to university and how

      10

   

intentional supports influence their ability to navigate the institution, gain a sense of belonging, and

succeed academically.

Summary  

Students with learning disabilities are a fast growing minority group in postsecondary

education, primarily at the university level. While their enrollment has risen, there is a widening

gap in their degree attainment when compared to their peers. This graduation gap has

implications that primarily affect the student, but also affect institutions, policy, and the overall

knowledge economy as fewer numbers of skilled and educated workers participate in the

workforce.

In Ontario, the provincial government recognized the need to better support students with

learning disabilities’ transition into postsecondary education and thus enacted a funding envelope

in 2003 that required all public institutions to provide summer transition programs. With the

autonomy to develop a transition program that best supported each institution’s student

population, public colleges and universities in Ontario developed transition programs to meet

this need. This provincial initiative is one of a kind in Canada and a leading example of

governmental intervention to increase the retention of a student group that is at risk. In this study,

I will examine six different summer transition programs that have emerged as a result of this

initiative and analyze how they compare and contrast. I will also investigate the experiences and

perceptions of students who have participated in the various transition programs.

Organization of the Study In chapter 2, I expand on the theoretical lenses employed in this study and examine the literature

pertinent to students with learning disabilities and their experiences in secondary and postsecondary

education. I also provide a profile of students with learning disabilities in Canada and Ontario. In chapter

      11

   

3, I present the research design of the study, the methodological approach, the data collection plan,

including the selection of cases, participants, and other data, as well as how I analyze these data. In

chapter 4, I present a detailed account of each of the cases selected for this study as well as a cross-case

analysis to further the discussion. In chapter 5, I discuss the findings in Chapter 4 and combine the

themes that emerged from the data. In Chapter 6, I discuss the implications for practice, future research,

and provide recommendations.

Definitions

This section provides the reader with the definitions of terms utilized in the study. It is important

to note that many of the terms in this list have varying definitions in different contexts (and countries).

For this study, I focused primarily on utilizing definitions employed in educational settings.

Persons with Disabilities: For this study, I use the Canadian Government’s definition of

persons with disabilities. Statistics Canada (2006) defines persons with disabilities as “Persons

with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory

impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective

participation in society on an equal basis with others” (para. 3).

Learning Disabilities: I utilize the definition adopted by the Learning Disability

Association of Canada (LDAC) in 2002, as it provides a framework to examine learning

disabilities through an educational lens. LDAC defines learning disabilities as: “…a number of

disorders, which may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of

verbal or non-verbal information. These disorders affect learning in individuals who otherwise

demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and or reasoning” (para.1).

Accessibility Services/Disability Services: Offices in postsecondary institutions that

provide services and programs for students with documented disabilities. Services typically

      12

   

include accommodations, counseling, peer mentoring, academic coaching, and workshops. In

order for students to receive services and accommodations, they must register with the office and

provide appropriate documentation of their disability.

Accommodations for Students with Disabilities: The National Educational Association of

Disabled Students (NEADS), (2012), a Canadian Association, describes accommodations as:

“any service, adaptation or support mechanism that enables students with disabilities to

participate fully in academic, campus and community life. In particular, academic

accommodations provide students with disabilities an equal opportunity to master the essentials

of a post- secondary education. Accommodations are intended to level the playing field so that

students with disabilities have the chance to develop the same skills and abilities expected of all

students. Appropriate accommodation undoubtedly varies for each student dependent on their

disability and their academic requirements” (para.2).

Grade Retention. Grade retention means a student is not promoted to move to the next

year of education in K-12.

           

 13  

Chapter 2: Literature Review

In Chapter 1, I provided a preview about the characteristics and academic outcomes of

students with disabilities and the importance of having transitional support as a foundation to

succeed in university. In this chapter, I expand on the literature presented in Chapter 1 to provide

a comprehensive summary of learning disabilities and the experiences of students as they

transition to postsecondary education. My goal for this chapter is two fold; first I expand on the

theoretical lens introduced in chapter 1 to contextualize and position the study; secondly, I

provide the reader with rich context from which to understand the academic and personal

trajectories of students with learning disabilities as they make their transition from secondary

school into postsecondary education (PSE). I begin by providing the reader with the definition of

learning disabilities and delve into how learning disabilities affect students’ learning and

experiences in different educational contexts. Next, I analyze literature that examines the

experiences of students with learning disabilities in primary and secondary educational levels as

these experiences can greatly influence students’ transitions to postsecondary education. Finally,

I examine literature that explores the specific challenges associated with the transition to

postsecondary education.

Theoretical Lens Critical Disability Theory (CDT)

Critical disability theory (CDT) is a theory of jurisprudence that stems from critical legal

studies (Hosking, 2008). CDT is part of a family of critical theories that have examined race and

gender through a critical lens. Critical theory (CT) in its simplest form ‘seek[s] human

emancipation in circumstances of domination and oppression’ (Bohman, 2005) and its purpose is

to acknowledge oppression (Hosking, 2008). Primarily CDT posits that:

           

 

14

Disability is a social construct, not the inevitable result of impairment. Disability is a complex

inter-relationship between impairment, and individual’s response to that impairment and the

physical, institutional, and attitudinal environment. The social disadvantage experienced by

disabled people is the result of the failure of the social environment to respond adequately to the

diversity presented by disability (Hosking, 2008, p.7)

Disability has been historically defined through a medical lens, which posits that disability is a personal

limitation (Brzuzy, 1997; Hiranandani, 2005; Titchkosky, 2003). As such, disability as a pathological

construct ignores the socially constructed barriers that hinder accessible environments for people with

disabilities; thus, the limitations for people with disabilities stem from their inability to fully integrate

themselves to the physically, politically, and socially constructed environments. CDT contests the

medical/pathological approach to understanding disability, positioning disability not as an individual

limitation but a limitation of the social environment (Hiranandani, 2005; Law Commission of Ontario,

2009). In his paper titled “The Theory of Critical Disability Theory,” Hosking (2008) explains that early

disability activists declared: “no impairment was disabling;” what made an impairment disabling to an

individual was society’s inability to accommodate and support people with varying abilities. Hosking

refers to this approach as a social model of disability, and extends the notion that disability is an

interrelated relationship between the person’s response to the impairment affecting them and the

response of social constructs to support and accommodate their varying abilities. The World Health

Organization refers to this interrelated relationship between disability and environment as a

“biopsychosocial model,” and Hosking proposes that public policy must address this model to respond to

the needs of people with disabilities, a growing and heterogeneous group in Canadian society.

For the purposes of this research, I utilize the most basic definition of critical disability theory,

which posits that disability is not a personal limitation but a social construct and that “the social

           

 

15

disadvantage experienced by disabled people is the result of the failure of the social environment to

respond adequately to the diversity presented by disability (Hosking, 2008, p.7).” This premise provides

the lens for this study as I examine institutional efforts to support students with learning disabilities’

transition to university. The focus of the study is how universities support students with learning

disabilities during a critical point in their postsecondary trajectories: transitioning to university through

summer transition programs. In the next section, I examine three theoretical models that highlight

institutional responsibility as a means to support student success. These models exemplify what CDT

posits: that helping students succeed is shared responsibility between the person and the institutions,

particularly that of under-represented groups. Three models are highlighted: Nora and colleagues’

Student Engagement Model (2006), Swail, Redd, and Perna’s Geometric Model (2003), and Tinto’s

(1994) revised model of student attrition.

Institutional Models Supporting Student Success

Much of the discourse on persistence and retention over the past few decades has focused on the

characteristics of the student (e.g. parental education, income, minority status, etc.) and how these

influences student success. Theoretical frameworks that emphasized student characteristics and attributes

such as Spady’s (1970) model and Tinto’s (1975) model, depicted a one-sided framework from which to

understand student persistence. A more comprehensive approach to persistence began to develop in the

1990’s taking a closer look at institutional attributes and support that coupled with student variables

better predicted persistence. Notably, Tinto reframed his model in 1993 to emphasize institutional

variables as key pieces in the puzzle. Other models followed this approach, such as Swail, Redd, and

Perna’s Geometric Model (2003) and Nora, Barlow and Crisp’s Student Engagement Model (2006).

These new models emphasized the role of the institution in enhancing the student experience by

providing support services to improve persistence and graduation. Institutional programs and services,

           

 

16

particularly those that provide tailored and comprehensive support to under-represented groups, are

critical to the retention and graduation of students (Sattler & Academic Group Inc., 2010). In this thesis,

I explore the perceptions of students with learning disabilities on their experiences participating in a

summer transition program and how these programs prepared them to transition to university. My goal is

to further the discourse on how institutions play a critical role in providing support to students,

particularly students with learning disabilities as they make the transition to university, a critical marker

that increases students’ first to second year retention (Tsagris & Murihead, 2012).

Nora’s student engagement model (2006). Nora’s student engagement model contains five

main domains that influence student persistence; these are: pre-college factors and pull factors, sense of

purpose and institutional allegiance, academic and social experience, cognitive and non-cognitive

outcomes, and goal determination/ institutional allegiance (see Figure 1 for more details). It is important

to note that this model was developed by Nora to better understand the persistence and retention of

Latino/a students, an underrepresented group in postsecondary education, particularly in the U.S. (Nora,

Crisp, & Barlow, 2006). While this model was designed with a specific group in mind, it provides a lens

from which to understand other minority groups in postsecondary education as it recognizes that

institutional supports are essential to the persistence of such groups. My focus on this model is the role

that various institutional actors and programs play on students’ academic and social experiences. Figure

1 depicts Nora’s student engagement model and it is provided as a visual aid to guide the reader. The

third box represents students’ academic and social experiences and how these connect to cognitive and

non-cognitive outcomes, which relate to educational goals and ultimately persistence. Academic and

social experiences are influenced by institutional supports and mechanisms in five categories: formal and

informal academic interactions with faculty, involvement in learning communities, social experiences,

campus climate, validating student experiences, and providing mentoring opportunities to students.

           

 

17

Within each of these categories, the institution has some control; that is, institutions have the ability to

promote and support these categories by developing programs and services that influence academic and

social experiences in meaningful ways. For example, several institutions have recognized that faculty

and student interactions are essential for student success (Umbach & Wawrzynski, 2005) and thus have

developed under-graduate research opportunity programs where students work alongside faculty.

Another example is the development of peer mentorship programs to promote peer interactions, which

has been associated with sense of belonging (Johnson, 2002). Within each of the categories represented

in this model, institutions can make intentional efforts to support students’ academic and social

experiences. Academic and social experiences are critically posited between pre-collegiate factors and

sense of purpose, cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes and goal determination. While pre-collegiate

characteristics are expected to remain relatively constant over the student’s life, academic and social

experiences can be influenced by institutional efforts, which in return have a domino effect on cognitive

and non-cognitive outcomes, goal determination, and ultimately persistence.

           

 

18

Figure 1. Nora’s student engagement model (2006).

Swail, Redd, and Perna’s geometric model of student persistence and achievement (2003).

Swail and colleagues’ geometric model of student persistence and achievement (GMSPA) is

another model that emphasizes institutional responsibility to support student persistence (See figure 2).

This model consists of three main components: cognitive factors, social factors, and institutional factors.

Like Nora’s (2006) student engagement model, the GMSPA focuses on students’ pre-collegiate

characteristics such as family influences, financial issues, religious background, and maturity. The

GMSPA also focuses on cognitive skills, which influence students’ academic and personal experiences.

The most important component in this model is the institutional factors that form the base of the model.

Swail et al. posit that student success depends on students’ interactions with institutional support,

 

           

 

19

particularly within key areas: financial aid, academic services, student services, curriculum and

instruction, and recruitment and admissions. Similar to Nora’s model, institutional supports are

strategically positioned as central for student success. Swail et al. propose that institutions can support

their students by understanding their cognitive and social factors and by the way they react to these. It is

also noteworthy to mention that this model was initially developed to understand the persistence and

retention of students of color in the sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

Like Nora’s model, the GMSPA is now utilized to understand the persistence and retention of other

minority groups in postsecondary education.

Figure 2. Swail, Redd, and Perna’s geometric model of student persistence and achievement

(2003).

Tinto’s (1997) revised model of student attrition. One of the biggest criticisms of Tinto’s 1975

student integration model (SIM) is that it failed to recognize the needs of diverse and under-represented

students (McCubbin, 2003; Tinto, 1982). In the original SIM, Tinto’s focus of student integration into

the institution relied heavily on the student. Individual attributes such as race and gender, family

           

 

20

background, and quality of pre-college schooling, were weighted heavily in determining students’ goal

commitments and institutional commitment (allegiance to the institution). Tinto posited that students

who were of traditional age entering postsecondary education (18-22 years old), who lived in residence,

and had higher levels of social capital (e.g. had parents who had attended postsecondary education, had

higher levels of income, etc.) were more likely to have higher goal and institutional commitments and

thus have a higher likelihood to persist. Thus, critics of the SIM model claimed that Tinto had developed

a one-dimensional portrait of student persistence that focused too much on individual attributes and too

little on institutional characteristics (McCubbin, 2003).

Recognizing this criticism, Tinto revised his model in 1997 (see Figure 3) to include a more

expansive view on persistence, one that recognized the diversity of student groups and the

influence of institutional support on persistence. In the revised model, Tinto emphasized the

importance of institutional experiences, both formal and informal, as these influence students’

integration to the institution and impact students’ goals and commitments, which ultimately lead

to students’ decisions to persist or drop-out. Like the models of Nora et al. (2006) and Swail et

al. (2003), Tinto’s revised model positions institutional experiences centrally to student success,

particularly students’ interactions with faculty and peers, academic performance, and

involvement in extra-curricular activities. Tinto since has noted that our effort to understand

student retention often relied too heavily on factors external to the institution, ignoring the

impact of institutional efforts and program to support persistence (Tinto, 2007). In his message

about the importance of developing a model of institutional action to support student persistence

Tinto noted “In moving toward the identification of a possible model of institutional action, we

will focus at this stage of our work on the conditions within institutions rather than on the

attributes of students themselves” (p.5). This message aligns with the models proposed by Swail

           

 

21

et al. (2003) and Nora et al. (2006), where institutional factors can impact students’ experiences,

which can lead to persistence and ultimately degree attainment. By developing formal structures

and mechanisms that encourage students to connect with peers and faculty, and be involved in

co-curricular activities students are provided with a platform that provides them with a better

opportunity to succeed. In Tinto’s 1997 revised model, institutional experiences serve as a

gatekeeper to students’ ability to integrate to the institution.

Figure 3. Tinto’s (1997) revised model of student attrition.

I chose to utilize the three models because all three of them highlight the importance of formal

institutional support systems for students, particularly for underrepresented students.

The Intersection of CDT and Institutional Models

Critical disability theory in conjunction with the three institutional models presented in this

section (Nora et al., 2006, Swail et al. 2004, and Tinto, 1997) ground this research study. CDT provides

the foundation that disability is not a personal limitation, but a limitation caused by structural and

           

 

22

societal barriers. This proposition sets up the three institutional models that posit that institutions in fact

play a critical role in supporting students, particularly under-represented groups. Just as CDT argues that

institutions have a responsibility to accommodate people with varying abilities in order for everyone to

have the same advantages to succeed, the three institutional models push this notion in the higher

education sector. The intersection of CDT and the institutional models provide the current study with a

foundation from which to understand the support provided to students with learning disabilities in each

of the summer transition programs.

Defining Learning Disabilities

Learning Disabilities (LDs) encompass an array of neurological disorders that can affect

a person’s “acquisition, organization, retention, understanding, or use of verbal or non-verbal

information” (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 2002, para. 2). Learning disabilities

are also often referred to as “learning limitations”, “learning difficulties,” or “learning

disorders” (LDCA, 2002) For purposes of this study, I use the term learning disability (LD) as

this is the term widely utilized by professionals in postsecondary settings. A LD may impact a

person’s ability to comprehend oral language, reading, writing, and mathematics, or affect a

person’s organizational skills, social perception, and social interactions (LDCA, 2002). While

there are several definitions of LDs in the field of disability and education (Hammill, 1990;

Kavale, Spaulding, & Beam, 2009; Mercer & Pullen, 2009), I utilize the definition adopted by

the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada (LDAC) (2002) as it provides a comprehensive

lens from which to examine LDs in an educational setting. LDAC’s defines learning disabilities

as:

[…] a number of disorders, which may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or non-verbal information. These disorders affect learning

           

 

23

in individuals who otherwise demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and or reasoning (LDAC, 2002, para. 1). Learning disabilities are experienced differently by individuals and can have an effect on

various aspects of their life. A person may be diagnosed with more than one LD and require

specialized support to compensate their needs. The most common LD is dyslexia (Fletcher,

Lyon, Fuchs, & Barns, 2007; Handler & Fierson, 2011). Dyslexia is characterized by

“difficulties with accurate and / or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding

abilities” (International Dyslexia Association, 2002, para. 1). Other learning disabilities include

dyscalculia (math specific learning disability), dysgraphia (writing specific learning disability),

aphasia/dysphasia (language specific learning disability), auditory processing disorder, and

visual processing disorder, (Handler & Fierson, 2011). Gross-Tsur, Manor, and S.R. (1996)

found that a large proportion of the population of people with LDs experienced difficulty in all of

the educational domains (oral language, reading, writing, and mathematics). LDs are life-long

and there is no cure for LDs, rather individuals can learn skills and utilize tools—such as

tutoring, speech training, and technology—amongst other skills and tools available to assist them

to thrive in their area(s) of need(s) (Fletcher, 2003). Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, and Barns (2007)

noted, “the goal of understanding LDs is to provide the most effective instruction [and

experiences] possible in order to ameliorate the disabling effects of the conditions” (p. 10).

Unlike visible physical disabilities, learning disabilities are often difficult to identify due to how

they may manifest or affect each individual in various environments. For example, a person may

have dyscalculia, a learning disability related solely to math that may not affect the individual’s

ability to read, understand, or communicate in a general setting, thus making it difficult to

identify outside of the content specific subject. Also, since learning disabilities are characterized

           

 

24

as a neurological disorder, there are often very limited physical signs that a disability is present,

thus making it difficult to diagnose at the earliest onset.

Assessment of Learning Disabilities

A learning disability professional diagnoses learning disabilities as a result of a psycho-

educational assessment, typically conducted when the student is in K-12 or postsecondary.

(Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario, 2013). A psycho-educational assessment is a

multi-layered, comprehensive assessment that begins by investigating the person’s family

background (LDs are often hereditary) and the person’s personal history of physical trauma (LDs

can occur due to head injury). The assessment also involves obtaining information about the

person’s day-to-day functioning, both in educational and non-educational settings (e.g.

relationships with others, work, etc). Intellectual functioning is also measured utilizing a

psychometric test. In Canada and most of North America, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale – 3rd

Edition is widely utilized. This test provides scores on learning aptitude in verbal and non-verbal

areas as well as I.Q. Academic achievement is also measured utilizing an array of available tests

such as the Woodcock – Johnson Psycho – Educational Battery – Revised (WJ – R) and the

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT), the evaluation of school grades, and student

perceptions of their educational experiences (LDA0, 2011). Finally, a student’s self-esteem and

emotional status is evaluated, as people with LDs can often develop low emotional, motivational,

and self-esteem issues due to stereotypes associated with having a LD or how they are treated by

others (LDCA, 2002). Based on the holistic assessment, a professional is able to diagnose a

person with a LD and make appropriate recommendations of the accommodations and resources

available. In the K-12 setting, students who are diagnosed with a learning disability receive an

           

 

25

Individualized Educational Plan (IEP). According to the Learning Disabilities Association of

Canada (2007), an IEP should contain the following criteria:

• A statement of the student’s strengths, interests and needs; • The student’s present levels of educational performance; • Annual and short-term educational goals; • The specific special education program and related services that will be provided to

the student; • The extent to which the student will participate in the regular curriculum; • A statement of when services will begin and when they will be reviewed; • A statement of the accommodations the student will be receiving; • Assessment strategies for determining the student’s achievements and progress; • The provision for evaluating the effectiveness of the individualized education plan

as required to meet the student’s needs and at a minimum of once a year; and, • A transition plan for students who are progressing from one grade level to the next

or from one educational setting to another to be applied promptly (p.1).

Educational accommodations for students with a learning disability vary as learning disabilities

manifest differently on individuals, but can include additional time to complete projects, assistive

technology, working with learning strategists or tutors, and differentiated instruction. The IEP is

intended to be utilized in conjunction with special education teachers, parents, and the student.

The IEP does not carry over to postsecondary education (PSE), but in some cases the assessment

of the learning disability may be utilized to request accommodations in PSE. A detailed

description of accommodations and supports for students with learning disabilities in

postsecondary education are delineated later in this chapter. The costs associated with the

assessment of a learning disability can be significant. The average cost for a LD assessment is

between $1,500-2,000. This can be a significant expense for all families, but particularly for

families with low incomes. In addition to the costs associated with getting a child assessed for a

LD, the cost of supporting the student if it is determined a LD is present can be high. While

federal and provincial funding is available, it is often insufficient to cover the full cost.

Depending on the LD, an assortment of tools and supports may be recommended, such as

           

 

26

adaptive technology, tutoring, and academic coaching, amongst others. The high cost associated

with getting a learning disability diagnosis may put at disadvantage students from low-income

families who cannot afford to pay the cost (even with government assistance).

A Profile of Students with Learning Disabilities in Canada and Ontario Learning disabilities are the most prevalent type of disability amongst Canadian youth

(Statistics Canada, 2006). The results of the 2006 Participation and Activity Limitation Survey

(PALS), a national survey that examines how daily activities are impacted by “a physical,

mental, or other health-related condition or problem,” showcased that 2.5% (631,000) of

Canadian youth, 15 years of age and older reported having a learning limitation. PALS defines a

learning limitation as “attention problems, hyperactivity, and dyslexia.” Of this percentage, about

one fifth reported having a severe learning limitation. Men and women nearly equally reported

having a “learning limitation,” 52% of men and 48% of women. For the majority of respondents

(94%) having a main learning limitation was coupled with additional learning limitations. The

most cited additional learning limitations were pain, agility, mobility, memory, and

communication.

The educational profile of those 15 to 64 years of age was as follows:

• Nearly 14% were enrolled in secondary school or postsecondary education, with the

majority (54%) in the 15-24 age range.

• 81% of those enrolled in school or postsecondary education attended on a full-time basis.

• Of the respondents with a learning limitation, only 1/3 had received education beyond a

high school diploma.

• 14.7 % had received a college or non-university certificate.

• 10.6% had received a trade or apprentice certificate.

           

 

27

• 4.4% had received a bachelor’s degree.

• 4.4% had obtained education beyond a bachelor’s degree.

People with learning limitations noted several challenges associated with education and

employment. Educational challenges included taking longer to advance or having to interrupt

their studies, having to go back to school to re-train for additional skills, and having additional

expenses associated with schooling. With regards to employment, just over 42% were not in the

labour force and 7% noted they were unemployed. Of those who reported being employed, half

reported having limitations with their work responsibilities – of these respondents one fourth did

not disclose their disability to their employer, thus not receiving accommodations in the

workplace.

The province of Ontario has the highest number of people with learning disabilities in

Canada (Statistics Canada, 2006). It is important to note that Ontario also has the largest

population in comparison to other provinces and territories across Canada (Statistics Canada,

2013), which may explain the higher number people with learning disabilities. Ontario’s

population is almost as large (13.538 million) as all of the provinces combined without including

Quebec and the territories. In postsecondary education, students with learning disabilities are the

largest group amongst students with disabilities (MTCU, 2011). In 2011 the Ontario Ministry of

Training Colleges and Universities reported approximately 14,500 students with learning

disabilities were enrolled in public colleges and universities (6,000 at the university level, and

8,500 at the college level) in Ontario. In 2006 the degree attainment of students with learning

disabilities in Ontario remained low compared to students with physical disabilities and students

without a disability; nearly 19% of students with a learning disability ages 25-44 had earned a

university degree and approximately 26% had earned a college degree (Statistics Canada, 2006).

           

 

28

Learning disabilities can affect several aspects of a student’s academic and personal lives.

This can include academic set-backs such as having difficulty understanding academic content,

taking longer periods to complete academic work, and being retained additional years due to

academic underperformance. Personally, learning disabilities can affect a person’s self-esteem

and self-perception, how a person interacts with important agents during their academic

trajectory such as peers and teachers, and can affect a person’s academic aspirations.

Learning Disabilities and Grade Retention

Having a learning disability can have a significant impact for students if they are not

diagnosed on time or are not supported adequately (e.g. providing students with academic tools,

teaching them bridging skills, or providing appropriate accommodations and support). An early

diagnosis of a LD is key in helping students succeed academically (Gersten, Jordan & Flojo,

2005) as it prompts the support and accommodation that students require to succeed. However,

as cited earlier, often learning disabilities are not diagnosed or treated in a timely fashion as they

can be difficult to recognize. In other instances, even with a diagnosis it can take time (and

money) to properly accommodate a student. In several instances, a late diagnosis or insufficient

support can be detrimental to the student, particularly as it affects academic progress.

One commonly cited challenge faced by students with learning disabilities in primary and

secondary school is grade retention (Zill, Loomis, & West, 2011). A study conducted by

researchers at the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) estimates that between

30%-50% of students with a learning disability are retained at least once prior to reaching the

ninth grade (NASP, 2003). Other researchers estimate an even larger percentage of students with

learning disabilities are retained while in primary and secondary school. In a study conducted by

Barnett, Clarizio, and Payette (1996) the estimated number of students with learning disabilities

           

 

29

retained at least once in grade school was much higher than the predicted percentage by NASP,

reaching 71%.

In addition to obstructing a student’s ability to move forward academically, grade

retention is also associated with emotional and self-esteem challenges that impact a person’s

view of themselves and their ability to succeed, as well as their interactions with others

(Alexander, Entwisle, & Dauber, 1994; Jimmerson 1999; Smalls, 1997). While there is debate

amongst educators and researchers about the benefits and the disadvantages associated with

grade retention, some studies have concluded that the disadvantages outweigh the benefits (Hong

& Yu, 2007; Hughes, Chen, Thoemmes, & Kwowok, 2010). In a comprehensive review of

research studies regarding the outcomes of grade retention, Jimerson, Anderson, and Whipple

(2002) found that grade retention is one of the strongest predictors of high school drop-out.

Grade retention not only increases the likelihood of a student dropping out of high school, but

also reduces the student’s opportunity to enter postsecondary education and succeed

academically (Hong & Yu, 2007).

Learning Disabilities and Self-esteem Studies have documented the emotional effects related to learning disabilities on students

at all levels and the findings show that students with LDs are more likely to suffer from lower

self-esteem, self-concept, and motivational levels than students who do not have LDs (Saracoglu,

Minded, & Wilchesky, 1989). These characteristics have implications on their academic

achievements, aspirations, and their personal well-being, that is they may be less likely to

complete academic goals, poor or limited interactions with peers, faculty, staff, etc. (Saracoglu,

Minded, & Wilchesky, 1989; Shany, Wiener, & Feingold, 2011). In one study conducted at a

Canadian university with 34 students with a learning disability and students without a learning

           

 

30

disability, the researchers found this LD group more likely to report lower levels of self-esteem

and were less likely to find academic and personal adjustment to campus than students without a

learning disability (Saracoglu, Minded, & Wilchesky, 1989). Low self-esteem due to being

diagnosed with a learning disability has also been linked to high levels of stress and anxiety for

students (Shany, Wiener, & Feingold, 2011). Students with LDs are often concerned with the

negative stereotypes associated with having a learning disability, such as not being smart, having

lower IQ levels, or being lazy (May & Stone, 2010). In their study about how students at two

public universities with LDs perceived stereotypes for their conditions, May and Stone (2010)

found that students with LDs tended to hold to the belief of intelligence as a fixed trait and

tended to characterize their performance as lower than their peers without a LD. The issue

surrounding lower levels of self-esteem for students with LDs may be linked to how students

with LDs perceive the treatment and the interactions with others such as peers, teachers and

counsellors, (Bryan, 1974; Elksnin & Elksnin, 2003; Shifrer, 2013; Valas, 1999).

Learning Disabilities and Interactions with Others Studies show that students with LDs often have difficulty forming meaningful

relationships with others and feeling connected to groups (both academically and personally).

Thus they may feel as though they do not belong in an academic and social setting (National

Centre for Learning Disabilities, 2013).

Interactions with peers. Studies have documented that students with learning disabilities

often feel rejected by their peers due to lower levels of self-esteem, their awareness or

experiences associated with stereotypes about having a LD (ex. being lazy or not as intelligent),

or simply not feeling like they belong (Bryan, 1974, Valas, 1999). In addition to self-perceptions,

research by Hagger and Vaughn (1995) shows students with disabilities are often mistreated or

           

 

31

bullied by their peers and that students carry these negative feelings with them through their

academic and personal lives. These feelings often result in students with LDs (and other

disabilities) isolating themselves and being less involved and active in academic and

extracurricular activities.

Interactions with teachers. In addition to experiencing challenges interacting with peers,

researchers have also documented that students with learning disabilities also face challenges

interacting with teachers and counsellors. For example, in one study conducted by McIntosh,

Vaughn, Schumm, & Hagger (1994) that examined the behaviors of general education teachers

with both students with learning disabilities and students without disabilities, the authors found

that while the behavior of teachers towards both groups of students was the same, the behavior of

students with learning disabilities was different. Students with learning disabilities were less

likely to participate in classroom activities, and less likely to approach the teachers and other

students in the class.

Transition to Postsecondary Education

Transitioning and adjusting to postsecondary education is an important period that is

often an intimidating experience for all students (Getzel & Thoma, 2008; Lerner, 1997; Nichols,

Harrison, McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002). Students are faced with rigorous courses with

pressing deadlines, are expected to read higher volumes of text, write sophisticated academic

papers, think critically and become public speakers, while at the same time becoming involved

and be engaged in co-curricular activities (Skinner & Lindstrom, 2003). This new environment

can become overwhelming for all students as they transition to postsecondary education, but it

can be especially stressful and demanding for students with learning disabilities who must

balance these new demands with their learning disability.

           

 

32

Researchers have documented that students with LDs spend significantly more time

studying and writing in order to meet the academic expectations when compared to their non-

disabled peers (Ofiesh, Hughes & Scott, 2004; Upton & Harper; 2002). Students with learning

disabilities are tasked with learning how to manage their disability in a new environment with

new and evolving expectations and to seek support services to help them in this transition

(Babbitt & White, 2002). However, research shows that students with learning disabilities are

often not aware of support services available to them or are not comfortable seeking the

assistance that they need (Hadley, 2007; Roberts & Macan, 2006). For students with learning

disabilities navigating these pressing responsibilities while navigating and managing their

disability can make the transition and the experience more difficult (Getzel & Toma, 2008).

Disclosing Disability

Another experience that is often difficult for students with disabilities as they transition to

postsecondary education is disclosing their disability to peers, staff, and faculty (Brinkerhoff,

McGuire, & Shaw, 2002). While they do not need to disclose their disability to all of these

groups unless they choose to, students with documented disabilities who want to receive

academic accommodations must register with their accessibility office and request

accommodations. Typically, students meet with a Disability Counsellor or Specialist who

reviews the student’s disability, academic history and needs, and arranges for appropriate

accommodations that will enable the student to succeed academically. For students, having to

disclose their disability can cause anxiety and put them in a vulnerable psychological and

emotional state (Getzel & Briel, 2006). For many students with disabilities having to disclose

their disability to a professional is a new experience as they were accustomed to their parents

being their spokesperson in other settings. Self-identification often results in feeling anxious,

           

 

33

embarrassed, and feeling labeled (Roberts & Macan, 2006). These feelings often result in

students waiting to disclose their disability until they absolutely need to such as when they are

failing courses or feeling overwhelmed, (Getzel & Briel, 2006).

While the information that students with disabilities share with an accessibility office is

kept confidential under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA),

disclosing to others outside of an accessibility office can be even a more strenuous experience,

particularly for those with invisible disabilities like LDs. As highlighted previously in this

chapter, students with LDs often feel rejected from their peer groups because they may have their

own negative perceptions about their abilities or because they have been discriminated against

and/or bullied previously. Students with LDs are often afraid of how their peers and teachers

may perceive their academic abilities, treat them, and accept them (Hartman-Hall & Haaga,

2002; Skinner, 2007). Students with learning disabilities may often feel vulnerable once they

have disclosed their disability, especially if the person they disclose to is not aware of how to

support them. For example, a research study found that faculty and staff in postsecondary

institutions may not be adequately equipped or informed about how to support and refer a

student with a disability to the appropriate support services (Hodge & Preston-Sabin, 1997). Not

being able to provide appropriate support, encouragement, and referrals to students with

disabilities can have detrimental effects on the student.

The Role of Faculty and Staff There have been several studies that have documented the experiences of students with

disabilities and their interactions with faculty and staff in postsecondary education. Studies have

documented that faculty may be underprepared to support students with disabilities and or

misinformed about their responsibility to provide accommodations to students (Nelson, Dodd, &

           

 

34

Smith, 1990; Rao, 2004). While students with disabilities in Canada are protected by federal and

provincial laws that require postsecondary institutions to provide adequate supports and

accommodations to help them succeed academically, students with disabilities often still face

discrimination and lack of support from various agents at the institution. Studies have

documented that faculty attitudes and actions have a critical impact on the success of students

(Norton, 1997; Sweener, Kundert, May, & Quinn 2002; Vogel, Leyser, Wyland, Brulle, 1999).

Support and accommodations in the classroom provide students with opportunities to succeed

and provide the “level playing” field that students require to compete with their peers (Cox &

Klas, 1996). Outside of the classroom students also require support beyond those offered through

accessibility offices (Belch, 2000; Capps, Henslee, & Gere, 2002).

Institutional Support and Accommodations

Institutional services and support for students with disabilities primarily stem out of the

accessibility/disability offices at a PSE institution. Ontario is the only province in Canada that

funds transition programming through Accessibility Services’ offices at all public colleges and

universities (Nichols, Harrison, McCloskey, & Weintraub, 2002). Each Accessibility Services’

office is able to develop programs and services that support the students’ needs and fits their

demographic (e.g. commuter students). In addition to the accommodations provided by an

accessibility office, institutions may provide transition programs to help students acclimate to the

institution, peer-mentoring programs, academic workshops (e.g. how to study effectively, time

management, test strategies, etc.), meetings with a Learning Strategist who work individually

with a student on targeted skills to help them cope with their disability (or disabilities), amongst

other services and programs. While these services have been recognized as beneficial for

students with disabilities, there is no uniform format at PSE institutions, as funding for these

           

 

35

programs (not including accommodations) often have to be financed with institutional funds.

Thus, the experiences of students with disabilities and the services provided vary from institution

to institution.

Accommodations for students with disabilities also vary depending on the disability and

the status of the disability (for example, permanent vs. temporary or based on severity of the

disability). According to the National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS), a

Canadian organization focusing on disability, there is an array of academic accommodations that

institutions should make available for students. These accommodations may include: note taking

services, tutoring, visual language interpreting, captioning, customized classroom features,

procedural adjustments, field and practicum support, learning skills services, test and exam

accommodations, and assistive technology (NEADS, 2013). This list is not intended to be

exhaustive, but provides a sense of the variety of accommodations that can assist students with

disabilities succeed academically. To identify the most appropriate accommodations for a

student, the disability counsellor is supposed to work closely with the student to identify the

student’s specific needs. As mentioned earlier, every student is unique despite having a similar

diagnosis as disabilities can affect various areas for one student and not the other (e.g. physical,

emotional, etc.).

Other institutional support services for students include campus-wide orientation

programs designed to introduce first year students to the campus environment and assist students

as they make the transition from high school to post-secondary education. First year

transition/bridging support services have been regarded as a promising practice to engage

students into the campus environment and culture and as a means to help students successfully

navigate their first year (Greenfield, Keup, & Gardner, 2013). In the U.S. there are a wide range

           

 

36

of transition/bridging programs geared at supporting under-represented groups, such as first

generation students and ethnic minorities (Myers, 2003). Often, these programs extend

throughout the entire first year providing students with supplemental instructions, community

building, and academic enhancement opportunities. These programs certainly identify and target

the unique needs of first-year students and have proven to make a positive impact on students

transition (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). In Ontario, all public colleges and universities

offer transition programs for students with learning disabilities as part of recommendations made

by the Learning Opportunities Task Force to the MTCU (Nichols, Harrison, McCloskey, &

Weintraub, 2002). The purpose of these programs was to provide students with learning

disabilities with academic tools to succeed in postsecondary education and to provide students

with an introduction to their new environment. The recommendation to implement transition

programs across the province stemmed from two pilot programs, one college and one university,

that highlighted academic and social benefits for student with learning disabilities as they

transitioned to postsecondary education. Since this recommendation, funding for transition

programs for students with learning disabilities is distributed to all public colleges and

universities in the province.

Summary

This review of the literature was gives the reader an overview of the experiences of

students with learning disabilities. The number of students with learning disabilities enrolling in

postsecondary education in Canada and specifically in Ontario has grown while the degree

attainment of this population remains low. The literature presented here suggests that students

with learning disabilities face several challenges in their educational trajectory that influence

           

 

37

their transition to postsecondary education. Notable challenges include being retained in grade

school due to poor academic performance, which in turn can affect their academic and personal

esteem. Academically, being retained in grade school has implications for high school graduation

and entrance to postsecondary education. Personally, being retained in grade schools can affect a

person’s self-esteem and motivation at all levels of education. Another significant challenge that

students with LDs often face is feeling “labeled” by their peers and teachers as having lower

academic abilities, which also affects their self-esteem and their ability to form meaningful

relationships. For those students who enter postsecondary education, transitioning to a new

academic environment with high demanding expectations can be an overwhelming experience.

The literature shows that students with learning disabilities spend a significantly higher number

of hours studying and completing assignments when compared with students who do not have a

learning disability.

Interactions with people in a new environment can also be a stressful situation for

students. Feelings associated with low self-esteem, the mistreatment of others such as peers, and

lack of understanding of faculty and staff about how to support students with reading difficulties

also has implications for this student population. One event that is often a stressor for students is

having to disclose their disability to others. Managing their disability and accommodations

coupled with the strenuous process of transitioning to PSE can be a difficult experience for

students. Lack of support and understanding from various actors at the institutions, most notably

that of faculty and staff, has critical implications for students’ academic and personal success.

The review of the literature was structured to give the reader a “road map” of the profile

and experiences of students with learning disabilities. It is evident from this review that a special

focus on assisting students’ with learning disabilities transition to postsecondary is an essential

           

 

38

step in preparing them to succeed academically. The purpose of this study is to expand our

knowledge about how a host of transition programs help students make this transition and to hear

from students about their experiences in this process.

           

 39

Chapter 3: Research Design

The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of students with learning

disabilities who have participated in a summer transition program in a public university in

Ontario. Utilizing the basic premise of CDT and three higher education retention models

which posit that institutional responsibility is integral for student success, I employed a multi-

case study design to examine. I investigated six transition programs and examined their

various formats, how they prepared students transitioning to university, and what students

gained from their participation in these programs. It was important for me to understand the

format of each of the programs but most importantly to document students’ experiences in

these programs to gain a deep understanding about how the transition program they attended

assisted them (or not) as they transitioned to university. To address this inquiry, I chose a

multiple case study design in order to have the ability to examine each program independently

and in-depth and to capture students’ experiences within a particular program. A case study

design allows the researcher to explore “descriptive” or “exploratory” research questions that

seek to understand a particular “case” in-depth (Yin, 2004). Given the dearth of research on

the different types of transition programs for students with learning disabilities and the

experiences of students in these programs, a case study design was suitable to employ in this

study (Rowley, 2002).

One of the strongest features of case-study methodology is the researcher’s opportunity

to draw on a variety of data in order to conduct in-depth analysis to describe and examine each

case (Yin, 1994). Through this in-depth analysis the researcher is able to consider and

examine an array of data to best understand the phenomena under investigation. The ability to

analyze a variety of data (e.g. document analyses, interviews, observations, etc.), which can

           

 

40  

happen concurrently, strengthens the validity of the findings and provides a wider

context from which to understand these findings (Baxter & Jack, 2008). My goal for each case

was two-fold: first, I wanted to explore and examine each transition program by drawing on

both interviews (with the program coordinator) and documents (e.g. program schedules,

pamphlets and handouts, promotional materials, etc.) to understand their context and the

format of each program. Second, I wanted to understand students’ experiences in these

programs and how these experiences impacted students’ transition to university. To understand

students’ experiences, it was crucial to speak to the students directly to get their perspective

about their experiences and how these experiences impacted their transition to university.

Case study methodology is a suitable approach when researchers examine “how” and

“why” research questions in an effort to “understand complex social phenomena” (Hatch,

2002; Yin, 2003). Thus, a case study approach is suitable when examining distinctive and

unique phenomena within a given context. A case study research design yields a holistic

description and analysis of the case(s) under investigation (Merriam, 2002). A multiple case

study design allows the researcher to investigate a phenomenon (summer transition programs)

across different environments (institutions) to gain a deep understanding of each case and thus

develop a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon (Stake, 2005). Analyzing

multiple cases also provides a more robust form to collect and analyze data as it provides an

opportunity to examine the phenomenon under investigation using multiple examples

(Seawrigth & Gerring, 2005; Yin 2003).

The research questions guiding this study were:

1. How do students with learning disabilities who participated in one of the six summer transition

models describe their experiences transitioning to university?

           

 

41  

a. How prepared did students feel transitioning to university as a result of their

participation in the summer transition program?

b. What key strategies associated with a successful transition to university (e.g. time

management, learning strategies, managing disability in a new context, etc.) were

students exposed to in the six summer transition program models?

c. What additional strategies, topics, and/or resources do students with learning disabilities

who attended one of the four summer transition program models wish had been offered

in their program and why?

2. How do students’ experiences transitioning to university differ by program model?

a. Are the differences in students’ experiences transitioning to university based on the

program model that they attended?

b. What aspects of the different models examined in this study lead to differences in

students’ experiences transition to university?

Selection of Cases

In order to understand the variation of summer transition programs in Ontario and how these

influence the transition of students with learning disabilities, six cases, each representing one of the

summer transition categories, were selected at six different institutions across the province. To select

the cases I first conducted a preliminary online search of all 22 provincially funded public universities’

Accessibility Services websites to investigate the nature and structure of their summer transition

program. In Ontario, all of the transition programs for students with learning disabilities fall within the

purview of Accessibility Services’ offices at colleges and universities. This initial analysis was

conducted to determine the variability of transition programs across institutions and to investigate if

there were initial notable differences in the types of programs available. All of the institutions’

           

 

42  

Accessibility Services websites had some information on their transition programs, although the

amount of detail about the program varied across institutions. At the time of the initial review, all of

the institutional websites provided information about the length of the transition program, dates (or

approximate dates) and several websites provided information about their program structure (e.g

students having to live in residence) and topics covered during the program. As I examined the

information about each program, it was evident that the goal and objective of all of the programs were

similar; to prepare students with learning disabilities with skills and information to transition to their

new academic environment. While the information about each program varied in detail, the one

characteristic that distinguished each program was program duration, which ranged between one day to

eight weeks. Based on this distinction, I grouped all of the summer transition programs based on length

of delivery and designated five distinct groupings detailed in Table 1.

Table 1

Transition Programs Across Universities in Ontario Group Length of Program Number of Universities

1 1 Day 5 2 2-3 Days 6 3 4 - 6 Days 9 4 2 Weeks 1 5 8 Weeks 1

Recruitment of Institutions

The recruitment of the institutions selected for this study was iterative. Based on the

five distinct groupings of transition programs, my aim was to recruit one institution (case)

from each group to understand the format of the program and the experiences of students in

each group. The first five institutions that I approached were in close proximity to my home

university. Due to financial restrictions, travelling across the province to collect data was not

           

 

43  

an initial possibility, and thus selecting universities that were accessible within distance was an

important component in the initial selection process. My goal was to begin recruiting

institutions locally and then expand my recruitment based on institutions’ ability to participate.

First, to determine an institution’s interest to participate in the study, I communicated

via e-mail with the director of each Accessibility Services office and with their immediate

supervisor (typically the Vice President of Student Services) at the five chosen universities.

Please recall that all of the transition programs fall under the purview of Accessibility

Services’ offices which is the reason why I first approached the director of Accessibility

Services to inquire about their interest to participate. All of the contact information for each of

the directors and their supervisors was publically available on their institution’s website. It was

important to include the directors’ immediate supervisor in the initial e-mail for two reasons:

1) The Vice President of Student Services (VPSS) is able to gauge their unit’s position to

participate in research studies based on other projects underway 2) VPSS are able to provide

administrative consent on behalf of the institution to carry out research studies. The e-mail

(See Appendix A) described the nature of the study, the criteria for participants, and simply

inquired whether there was interest in participating. In the e-mail I also attached a document

(See Appendix A) detailing the background and purpose of the study, the data collection

process, guidelines for participating institutions, deliverables for each institution (a report with

general findings), and information about myself (e.g. academic and professional background)

to provide a fuller picture of the process of the study.

Of the first five institutions that I approached, only two agreed to participate in the

study. The two institutions represented the 8-Week group and the 2-3 day group. The other

three institutions were not able to participate due to competing priorities or time constraints in

           

 

44  

their department. Unfortunately, one of the three institutions from the initial recruitment fell

into the 2-Week category and this was the only institution in this group. Since this institution

was unable to participate the 2-week category had to be dropped from the study. From this

point, I expanded my search and sought the interest of five additional institutions that

represented the 1-day and the 4-6 day categories. Again, the five institutions in the second

round of recruitment were selected based on the nearest proximity to my home institution and

this expanded my search outside of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). From this second round,

I gained the participation from two universities, both running a program in the 4-6 Day

category. The other institutions either did not reply to the request (despite several follow-ups)

or showed interest but were unable to participate due to time constraints or shortage of staff.

Finally, I employed a last recruitment call to seven additional institutions, expanding my

search to reach institutions throughout greater Ontario. From this third wave of recruitment, I

gained another institution in the 4-6 day category. With this last wave of recruitment I had

secured the participation of five institutions and given the diversity of each of these programs I

decided to move forward with data collection. However, several months after one of the

institutions that had originally declined to participate during the first wave of recruitment

reached out to me expressing interest in participating after all. This last institution fell under

the 2-3 day category. Given the uniqueness of the program, which operates over a weekend, I

decided to include them in the study. Unfortunately, I was unable to recruit an institution

running a 1-day transition program. The recruitment process yielded six institutions falling

within three of the categories. In Table 2 I showcase the participating intuitions by group type.

           

 

45  

Table 2

Participating Universities

Group Length of Program Number of Universities 1 1 Day 0 2 2-3 Days 2 3 4 - 6 Days 3 4 2 Weeks 0 5 8 Weeks 1

Prior to collecting any data I sought ethics approval for the study of human subjects at

the University of Toronto’s (U of T) Ethics Review Board (ERB). Once I was granted

clearance to conduct the study from U of T’s ERB, I e-mailed all of the directors of

Accessibility Services and their VPSS from institutions who were willing to participate in the

study stating that my home institution had granted me ethics approval and provided them with

a copy of the certificate. In this e-mail I also attached the administrative consent form to be

signed by the VPSS agreeing to officially participate in the study. When the administrative

consent form was signed, I submitted an ethics application at each of the institutions’ Ethics

Review Board (ERB) for permission to conduct the study. Once ERBs at each institution

granted approval of my study I began with the student recruitment process. Table 3 shows the

pseudonyms of institutions participating in the study as well as the name of the transition

programs. For anonymity and confidentiality purposes, I utilize pseudonyms for all

institutions, programs, and participants.

           

 

46  

Table 3

Pseudonyms of Participating Institutions and their Transition Programs Length of Program Name of University Name of Transition Program

8 Weeks Nautical University Transitioning to Success Program Spartan University One-step Ahead Transition Program

4 - 6 Days Royal University On Your Mark Transition Program

Viking University Prepare for Success Transition

Program 2 -3 Days Creswell University Headway Transition Program

Troy University Bridge to Success Program

Guidelines for participating institutions. Institutions interested in participating had to

be willing to allow me to interview the coordinator of the transition program (or the person

most familiar with the program) in order for me to gain an understanding of the format and

structure of the program. While some of the information regarding the transition programs was

available on the institutions’ websites, I wanted to get in-depth information and details about

the transition program and have the opportunity to ask questions regarding the planning, topics

covered during the transition program, recruitment of students, and overall the structure and

scope of each program in order to understand each case independently. The purpose of the

interviews with program coordinators was to get an in-depth description of their program, not

to investigate their experiences or perceptions of their role. Each institution was responsible

for reserving a room where I could conduct the interviews with students in private, as I did not

have access to institutions’ room booking systems. Finally, each institution’s program

coordinator also was tasked with forwarding the recruitment e-mail and follow-up e-mail to

students. I was aware that due to privacy restrictions regarding access to student information

delineated in FIPPA, institutions could not give me access to students’ contact information and

thus, I asked each program coordinator to forward the recruitment e-mail on my behalf. In

addition to privacy matters that prevented me from contacting the students directly, it was most

           

 

47  

beneficial if students received the invitation to participate from a trusted and recognizable

source (Given, 2008).

I wanted to provide each institution a site visit report delineating general findings of

my interviews with students as a way to give something of value for their participation in my

study. I thought a visit report could be a valuable tool for each program to confirm the

effectiveness of existing practices or to provide direct student feedback on how to enhance the

program. To protect the confidentiality of student participants, no identifiable information

were shared and only broad themes were highlighted.

Recruitment of Students

To begin the student recruitment process, I contacted each of the program coordinators

of the transition programs to explain the recruitment process, set a date for a campus visit to

conduct interviews, and answer any questions regarding the scope or nature of the study.

During this initial conversation with the program coordinators, I also asked for any program

materials they were willing to share with me to familiarize myself with the program prior to

the site visit. Once a site visit date was set, I sent each coordinator recruitment materials for

students, which included an initial e-mail and a follow-up e-mail to be forwarded to student

cohorts who participated in the transition program between 2012-2014 (See Appendices F and

G). The e-mails detailed the purpose and scope of the study, the criteria to participate in the

study, and my contact information, as well as the contact information of my thesis supervisor

and my institution’s ethical review board. Participants were given the option of participating in

a one-on-one interview or in a focus group, whichever they felt most comfortable attending.

To accommodate students who attended a different university from the one that hosted them in

the transition program or students who lived far away, I gave participants the opportunity to do

           

 

48  

a Skype interview. Interested participants were asked to contact me directly to schedule the

time and format of the interview.

Student participant criteria. The criteria for students to participate in the study were

that they had participated in a transition program in one of the participating institutions

between 2012 and 2014 and had a diagnosis of a learning disability. I wanted to interview

students who attended the transition programs over a period of three years to understand the

experiences of students who were in various years of university (between first year and third

year) and how the transition program impacted their transition from high school to university.

Also, recruiting students across three cohorts increased the number of possible participants in

the study. Table 4 depicts the number of students (n=26) across the different institutions. To

protect the confidentiality of all participants, institutions, and transition programs, I utilize

pseudonyms to describe them.

Table 4

List of Cases, Institutions, and Participants Case Type Name of

University Name of

Transition Program

Student Participants

Year Attended

Program Coordinators

2 day

(Weekend)

Troy

University Bridge to Success

Transition Program

Peter 2013 Angela

Melanie 2012

3 day (Weekday)

Creswell University

Headway Transition Program

Lindsey 2012 Renne

Tery 2012 Jen 2013 Audry 2012

           

 

49  

5 day Royal University

On Your Mark Transition Program

Lorraine 2012 Carmen

(Residential) Kristie 2012 Nancy 2013 Jenna 2014 Aaron 2014 Rebecca 2012

5 day Viking University

Prepare for Success

Transition Program

Jeremy 2012 Rosie

(Non-residential)

Judy 2013

George 2014 Geoff 2014 Taylor 2014 Sophie 2014

5 day Spartan University

One-step Ahead Transition Program

Meghan 2012 Constance

(Optional) Stephanie 2014 John 2014 Gwen 2014

8 weeks Nautical University

Transitioning to Success Program

Patrick 2012 Betty

(In-person and online)

Olivia 2012

Abby 2013 Jamie 2014

Instrumentation I developed two interview protocols for the study, one for students and one for program

coordinators of the transition program. The purpose of the student interview protocol was to

ask questions to students about their experiences in the transition programs and understand

how the transition program had impacted their transition to university. The purpose of the

           

 

50  

coordinator interview protocol was to understand the structure and the scope of the summer

transition programs.

Interview protocol for students. In section I, the purpose was to provide participants

with a brief introduction of myself and the study, answer any questions prior to beginning the

interview, and most importantly, remind students about the voluntary and confidential nature

of their participation.

In section II of the interview protocol, my goal was to learn about students’ thoughts

and feelings about starting university prior to attending the summer transition program. I was

interested in learning about how students became aware about the existence of these programs

at their institutions, the reasons they chose to attend the transition program, what they expected

to gain from the program, and what their experiences were matriculating in the program.

Section II questions were important in two ways. First, these questions allowed me to compare

and contrast how institutions vary in their recruitment efforts and what students’ experiences

are in the registration process (e.g. costs associated with registering, online vs. paper

matriculation, etc.) as these can be a determining factor in students ultimately attending the

program. Understanding students’ experiences at the onset of the transition program would

allow me to discuss in Chapter 5 (Discussion) how these varied and how institutions can adapt

or improve their recruitment and matriculation strategies. Second, questions asked participants

to think recall their thoughts and feelings regarding starting university and recount what they

were most excited about and what they were most nervous about. My intention was to get a

sense of what students looked forward to and what they were most worried about prior to

beginning university. I wanted to get a sense if their participation in the transition program

           

 

51  

eased (or not) some of these worries and if it enhanced (or not) what they were most excited

about beginning university.

In section III, I delved into the students’ experiences during the summer transition

program. In this section, I wanted to explore the specific details of what students experienced

in each program, understand what was most helpful for them, and their overall perceptions of

their participation in the program. I included 12 questions in this section. In question a, I

focused on students’ initial reactions to the first day of the program and on students’

interactions with the people they interacted with during this first day. In question b, I was

interested in learning about what resources (if any) students received during the transition

program and how students utilized these resources during their first year in university.

Questions c-e explored the topics covered during the transition program and which of these

topics students found most and least helpful in understanding what to expect during the first

year of university. This information allowed me to delve deeper into each of the cases and

compare and contrast what information is delivered during each of the summer transition

programs and which information is most valuable and helpful to students as they make the

transition into their first year of university. Question f explored participants’ opportunities to

interact with peers, faculty, and staff throughout the transition program. Literature suggests

that building a community relatively early is a crucial step for student success as it increases

students’ self of belonging and commitment to their institution (Soria, Clark, & Koach, 2012).

I asked specifically about whether these interactions were facilitated during the summer

transition program and asked participants to share their perceptions of those interactions. In

questions g-h, I focused on exploring what services and programs students learned about

during the transition program. Institutional programs and services are highlighted as critical in

           

 

52  

each of the institutional models presented in the theoretical lens in Chapter 2 (Nora, 2006,

Swail et al. 2003, and Tinto, 1997). I was also interested in learning if participants received a

tour of the university to familiarize themselves with their new environment. In questions i-k, I

was interested in getting students’ perception about the length and structure of the program,

whether they completed the program, and their overall perception of their experiences in the

program. This block of questions was particularly interesting and allowed me to explore and

explain students’ overall experiences in the different types of cases highlighted in this study.

The last question in this section asked students to reflect about whether they felt prepared to

begin university after attending the summer transition program.

In section III, I asked participants to recount their overall experience in the summer

transition program and to recount their readiness to begin the semester based on what they

gained from the program.

Finally, in section IV, I focused my attention on understanding students’ experiences in

university after attending the transition program. This is the section where I was able to

compare students’ initial thoughts and feelings prior to attending university, their thoughts and

feelings regarding the transition to university while in the transition program, and whether the

transition program helped them with the transition in the first year of university. The first

question in this section focuses on whether students received any follow-up support or

information after attending the summer transition program and how this information further

assisted them in their transition to first year. In question b-e, I asked participants to reflect on

their experiences in the transition programs and to connect these experiences and the

knowledge they gained and to think how these impacted their transition to university. In

questions f-g, I asked participants if they reviewed any of the materials or resources that they

           

 

53  

were provided with in the transition program and whether they kept in touch with any of the

people they met during the program. Finally, I asked students if based on their experiences in

the transition program if they would recommend other students with learning disabilities to

attend as a means to better prepare for first year in university.

In section V, I provided students with a brief summary of the interview to inssure that I

had captured their experiences before, during, and after the transition program and ask

participants to add anything they think would help me understand their experiences.

Interview protocol for program coordinators. The purpose of the interview protocol

for program coordinators was to understand the structure and scope of the transition program

at each participating institution. I wanted to understand each institution’s transition program

individually and in-depth to be able to highlight the similarities and differences across cases

within the three model categories (2-3 day, 5-day, and 8-weeks). The interview protocol for

program coordinators included six sections (See Appendix B).

In section I, the purpose was to provide participants with an overview and purpose of

the study and a brief introduction of my self and to answer any questions prior to beginning the

interview. Coordinators were also reminded of the voluntary and confidential nature of their

participation.

In section II, I asked program coordinators to explain the structure of the summer

transition program particularly regarding the format of delivery, the duration, dates when the

transition program runs, and who is involved in the planning the program. While some of the

information regarding each program was available from each institution’s website, I wanted to

delve deeper into specific details regarding the procedure of each program.

           

 

54  

In section III, I focused on information regarding the recruitment of students to attend

the transition program, the registration process, the number of students that typically enroll in

the program, and what information is provided to students prior to the commencement of the

program. The questions in this section mirror questions in the student interview protocol, and

were intended not only to be informational but as a means to validate the information

requested.

In section IV, I focused on asking program coordinators to describe the activities and

topics covered during the transition program and what resources and tools are provided to

students, as well as who is involved in the delivery of material. As mentioned earlier, past

research has shown that interactions with various people (peers, staff, faculty, etc.) help

students form a community and develop a sense of belonging. The questions in this section

provided information regarding with whom students interacted during the transition program.

During the interviews with students I asked them about their perceptions and experiences with

the people they interacted with during the transition program to be able to discuss how this

helps them as they transition to university.

In section V I specifically asked the program coordinator to share if there are resources

and support available to students after the completion of the transition program. Finally, in

section VI, I asked program coordinators to share any additional information that I did not ask

that would help me understand the structure and scope of the nature of the transition program

followed by a wrap up of the interview.

Data Collection

           

 

55  

To understand each individual transition program I collected two types of data;

transition program documents and interviews with students and transition program

coordinators.

Documents. The documents that I collected from each program included information

available on each institution’s websites regarding the transition programs as well as additional

documents shared with me by the program coordinators. The documents shared with me by the

coordinators typically included promotional materials, registration materials, program

schedules and syllabi, training materials for people involved in facilitating workshops or

sessions, powerpoint presentations delivered during the program, printed resources provided to

students on specific topics, and program manuals. I collected the majority of the documents

during the site visits to institutions, although some of the documents were e-mailed to me by

the program coordinator before my visit.

Interviews with students. A recruitment e-mail was forwarded on my behalf by the

program coordinator at each institution. Interested participants were asked to contact me

directly to arrange a one-on-one or focus group interview during my visit to each campus.

Participants’ privacy, safety, and comfort were a priority for me when collecting interview

data. One step in providing students with a safe and comfortable environment was to give

students the option of participating in a focus group interview or an individual interview.

Focus group interviews have several benefits including participant interactions with one

another that can allow them to recall information about the program, validating each other’s

experiences, and enriching the data by listening to a variety of opinions during one session

(Gibbs, 1997). However, it is also imperative to give students the option of doing a one-on-one

interview if they are not comfortable sharing their experiences in front of a group – this can be

           

 

56  

due to having had negative experiences in the summer transition program, issues surrounding

their identification as a person with a learning disability, or specifically related to their

disability. To accommodate students who were not attending the host university where they

participated in the transition program or those who lived far away, I provided the option of

conducting the interview via Skype. Students who were interested in participating e-mailed me

directly and we arranged a time to meet based on the time slots I had provided in the e-mail.

The majority of the students (N=22) chose to participate in one-on-one interviews,

although I did conduct two focus groups at two different institutions (N=4). Five of the

interviews were conducted via Skype with students who had participated in a transition

program at one of the participating institutions in the study but were currently enrolled at a

different university. Prior to commencing the interviews, participants were provided with the

informed consent form (See Appendix E) and given time to read through the form and ask any

clarifying questions. For the students who participated in the interviews via Skype, the

informed consent was e-mailed two days prior to the interview and students were given an

opportunity to ask any questions regarding the form prior to beginning the interview.

Participants were asked for permission to record their interview but were given the option of

opting out if they were not comfortable; but all participants agreed to have their interviews

recorded. Once participants had read through the informed consent and agreed to participate,

they were given the opportunity to ask any clarifying questions about the study or their

participation. Once this step was completed, I followed the questions on the interview protocol

for students (See Appendix C). Interviews ranged between 30 minutes and one hour.

Interviews with transition program coordinators. Program coordinators were

recruited to participate in the study during the initial e-mail to the director of Accessibility

           

 

57  

Services and the Vice-President of Student Services (VPSS). In the invitation sent to

institutions I noted that in order to participate I would have to interview the program

coordinator (or the person most familiar with the transition program) in order to retrieve

information about the structure and scope of the program. Thus, it was up to each director of

VPSS to assure that the transition program coordinator (or someone in their office familiar

with the program) would be willing to participate in the interview. It is important to note that

program coordinators were only asked objective and descriptive information about the

transition program and I did not ask them about their perceptions or feelings of the program.

Once I received confirmation from each institution that they were willing to participate and

ethics had been approved, I contacted all of the program coordinators and offered the

opportunity to speak on the phone to explain the study in detail and answer any questions

regarding their participation. I received confirmation from each program coordinator of their

willingness to participate in the study via e-mail and it was from this point that we began the

conversation about my site visit and scheduling a time for a one-on-one interview with each

one.

One-on-one interviews were conducted with each program coordinator – four of these

were in-person and one was via Skype. Coordinators were provided with an informed consent

delineating the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of their participation and

confidentiality (See Appendix D). All participants agreed to have the interviews audio-

recorded, although they were given the option to opt-out of this request. Interviews with

program coordinators lasted between 45 minutes and 75 minutes.

To help the reader visualize the data, I have created a table that delineates each

institution, participants, and data collected (See Table 4). Pseudonyms were assigned to all

           

 

58  

people and institutions to reserve the privacy and confidentiality delineated in the ethics

application.

Data Analysis Document analysis. In case study research, document analysis can play an integral

step in the analysis of the case (Yin 2003). Some of the strengths of document analysis include

that it can provide an initial description or account of the cases that are being studied, as well

as provide references to people, places, and times that may help the researcher position

/confirm information (Hancock & Algozzine, 2006; Yin, 2003). For this study, I requested that

each program coordinator provide me with program materials that would help me better

understand the format of each case. These documents included program syllabi, program

schedules, power-point presentations, promotional materials, resources provided to students,

etc. These documents were reviewed independently by case to allow me to provide an in-depth

description of the program (Schreier, 2012). Because there are potential risks associated with

the trustworthiness and validity of documents, it is important to think of document analysis as

a “means to corroborate and augment evidence from other sources” (e.g. interviews) (Yin,

2003, p. 87). I utilized the documents along with the interview data from program coordinators

and students to understand each of the programs independently. Document analysis occurred

throughout the data collection process.

Interview data analysis. One-on-one informational interviews with program

coordinators of the summer transition programs in this study were conducted as well as one-

on-one or focus group interviews with students who participated in the cases selected.

The informational interviews with summer transition program coordinators were

conducted to yield detailed information about the format of each of the programs (e.g. the

           

 

59  

content that is covered, the documents that are given to students, the people who are involved

in the process and implementation of each program, etc.). These data were put into categories

to position the data in a format that I could compare and contrast (e.g. how many programs

cover specific topics, times allotted for various topics, etc.). My main aim from analyzing

these data was to better understand the content of the each of the programs as well as

understand similarities and differences within the categories delineated in this study.

Student interview data were transcribed verbatim in order to capture and analyze each

person’s experiences (Creswell, 2007). To capture the essence of students’ experiences in each

of the programs, I divided the data by program and analyzed each independently. The data

were coded through a two-step process. In the first cycle of coding, I went through each

transcript and assigned open codes to the text– this was often a word or sentence that I chose to

assign to a passage (Saldana, 2009). Having coded each of the transcripts within each case, I

went back to each set of transcripts for a second read and to further developed the first codes. I

counted how many times a particular code had emerged and the context in which this code

appeared. The constant comparison method allowed me to systematically analyze my codes

and begin to form meaning of the overarching themes (Dye, Schatz, Rosenberg, & Coleman,

2000). This exercise allowed me to begin to form themes across the transcripts within each

case (Glesne, 2010; Saldana, 2009). I reviewed the codes and the themes several times to

ensure that I was conceptualizing the data correctly. Once I had reviewed these themes I

moved towards writing the findings for each case. I wanted to analyze the data from each case

independently and write up the findings of a case before starting to analyze the data of the next

case and so forth until I analyzed the data from each of the cases. The number of themes that

emerged varied by case with some similarities and differences across programs. Once I had

           

 

60  

done the independent data analysis I went back to the data collectively and began to find

common themes and differences across the cases and this allowed me to further flesh out

themes that I present in the discussion in chapter 5.

Trustworthiness and Credibility I took several steps to ensure the credibility and trustworthiness of the data. The first

step in this process began at the onset of the recruitment of participants. In order to garner the

most accurate information about a particular phenomenon, it is crucial to seek the people who

have the most knowledge about what is being investigated (Shenton, 2004). In order to

understand the structure of each of the transition programs it was crucial to interview an

informant who could provide an accurate representation of the structure of the program, in this

case the program coordinator who plans the logistics of the program and manages the program.

To understand the experiences of students with learning disabilities in the transition programs

it was crucial for me to hear directly from them to hear their perspective about their

experiences.

In order to ensure the trustworthiness of the data that I utilized to delineate each of the

cases I relied on triangulation of data (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). I reviewed both documents that

I had received from the program coordinators (e.g. program syllabi, program schedules,

power-point presentations, promotional materials, resources provided to students, etc) along

with the information that I received from the one-on-one interviews with the program

coordinator. In addition, I provided a site report to the coordinator and director of each

program where I delineated each program structure as well as general findings to give them an

opportunity to review the accuracy of my interpretation (Bryman, 2004). To protect the

confidentiality of the students who participated in each case, no identifiable information on the

           

 

61  

students was shared in the reports to institutions and only the general themes were presented.

In order to ensure that I had captured students’ information correctly at the end of each

interview, I provided them with a summary of what we had covered during the interview and

provided them with an opportunity to reflect on our conversation in order to ensure that I had

recorded information accurately. During each of the interviews, I took copious notes to capture

any subtleties that are often not present in the audio-recorded interview, such as body language

and facial expressions (Knox & Burkard, 2009). I utilized these notes as I analyzed the data to

ensure that the meaning of a code or theme was recorded in the most accurate way possible.

Study Propositions In case study methodology developing propositions about the study helps the

researcher focus the scope and purpose of the study (Yin, 2003). These propositions are

intended to begin suggesting relationships that may come up in the data and their purpose is to

guide the researcher (Sutton & Staw, 1995), and not to serve as hypotheses in the sense of

experimental designs. For this study I have two propositions:

1. Students’ experiences in the summer transition programs will vary by program length

and topics covered during the program (e.g. time management, learning strategies, etc.)

2. Students who attend summer transition programs that are in-person and 3 days or more

in length will have a better experience in the program and transitioning to university

particularly because they:

a. Will have more days to attend workshops covering an array of transition topics

and thus have more information about the transition process to university

b. Will make stronger connections with program staff and other participants

(building community and sense of belonging)

           

 

62  

Researcher’s Role Qualitative inquiry is interpretive in nature, with the researcher as the main tool in the

process (Creswell, 2003). As an interpretive inquiry, it is imperative for the researcher to

“self-check” and recognize “biases, values, and personal interests in the topic” (Creswell,

2003, p.184). Recognizing one’s biases, values, and personal interest regarding the topic being

studied are not intended to remove or erase these biases and values, but for the researcher to

recognize them and be reflective of them throughout the research process (Bogdan & Biklen,

2003).

I am not a person with a learning disability, and thus I cannot relate to the academic

and lived experiences with the participants in the study on a personal level. However, over the

past three years I have worked with students with learning disabilities in my employment at the

office of Accessibility Services at the University of Toronto, St. George campus. During these

three years, I have coordinated the summer transition and peer mentorship programs for

students with disabilities, many of whom are diagnosed with a learning disability. I have also

been the Coordinator of the summer transition program (STP) for students with learning

disabilities, the very same programs I am investigating in this study.

On a personal level, I have formed meaningful connections with my students. I have

learned about their experiences living with a disability and how this has affected their personal

and academic trajectories. I am constantly inspired when I learn (and observe) about their

resilience, their willingness to overcome adversity, their aspirations for the future, and their

willingness to help one another succeed. I have also felt frustration when students have shared

the negative experiences they have encountered for having a disability. These often include

having been bullied by their peers in both secondary school and university, being

           

 

63  

discriminated against by people at the university or the community, faculty who are unwilling

to provide them with accommodations, and being mistreated by others. Despite these negative

encounters, many of my students do not allow these experiences to define them or their future.

They are courageous, dedicated, and high-achieving students who can excel in any setting that

provides them with the right accommodations and provides them with the right support. It has

been these interactions with this group of students that has led me to pursue the current study,

and the ones that will likely shape my future career as a scholar-practitioner.

On a professional level, having worked with students with disabilities has expanded my

experiences working with under-represented groups in postsecondary education. Over the past

seven years I have worked coordinating programs to support different groups of students in

postsecondary education, including first-generation, low-income, and ethnic minorities who

have been historically underrepresented in postsecondary education. My trajectory working

with under-represented groups stemmed from my personal experiences as a first-generation,

Latina in the U.S. My personal experiences led me to become interested in pursuing a career

where I could improve the educational conditions to increase under-represented populations’

retention and graduation rates. Working with students with disabilities has been an eye

opening and rewarding experience because disability can cut across gender, race/ethnicity,

income, generation in university, sexual orientation, and any other salient student

characteristic. This has widened my perception and understanding about under-represented

students and has provided me with an additional layer from which to understand students’

experiences in postsecondary education.

I value postsecondary education for the benefits that it has granted me as an under-

represented student. I believe that all individuals in society deserve the right to a postsecondary

           

 

64  

education. I believe targeted efforts to increase access, retention, and graduation of students

who have been historically under-represented (and under-served) in postsecondary education,

such as students with learning disabilities, are needed. I believe higher education institutions

have a responsibility to ensure that all students, particularly those who have specific needs, are

given adequate support (whether it is financial, structural, communal, etc.) to fulfill their

academic goals. I am aware that racism, sexism, and ableism exist in society and that such

discrimination manifests at institutions of higher education. I hope that my research will

contribute to scholars and practitioners’ understanding of how to support students with

learning disabilities during a crucial point of their university experience, their transition to

university, and that this study sparks interest in learning more about this group of students in

postsecondary education and how to support them.

Summary

In this chapter I provided the reader with a rationale for the case study approach I

utilized in undertaking this study. I also provided a detailed account of data collection methods

and procedures for data analysis, and how I will maintain credibility and trustworthiness of the

data. It was important for me to reflect on my role as the researcher and reflect on my biases

and values as I move to the next phase of this project In addition, I provide a detailed

explanation of the interview protocol that I will utilize during the interviews with students, as

this will be the main tool to gather information from students.

           

 65  

Chapter 4: Results

In this chapter I present the findings of the study first by describing each case

individually followed by an analysis of the data to address the questions guiding the study. For

each case, I describe the format of the transition program followed by a description of

students’ experiences. Students’ experiences are captured during three points in time: before

the transition program, during the transition program, and after the transition program; within

these three reference points I delineate the themes that emerged from students’ experiences. It

was important to capture students’ experiences during the three reference points to understand

their trajectory transitioning into university and how the program played a role in this process.

I followed this sequence of reference points in the interview protocol when interviewing

students.

My aim for organizing the findings in this manner was to capture the essence of each

individual case and the experiences of students in a particular type of program. Following the

description of each case, in Chapter 5 I provide an analysis that conceptualizes the themes

within the cases and I delineate similarities and differences of students’ experiences across all

of the cases. I organize the cases by duration of the program, as this is the characteristic that is

most distinct about each case.

                               66            

 

Case 1: 2-Day Summer Transition Program

The Bridge to Success (BTS) transition program is a two-day (weekend) transition

program at Troy University (TU) operated through the Accessibility Services’ office. The

program runs over the last weekend prior to the beginning of the school year, which is

typically the last weekend in August. Like the other programs in the study, the purpose of the

BTS program is to provide students with learning disabilities an introduction to university by

providing them with information that will help them navigate the new academic environment.

While the program is compact and only runs over two days, there is a peer-mentorship

program that participants can sign up for which runs for the academic year.

Students are recruited to the BTS program, through three main avenues. First, incoming

students with learning disabilities who register with Accessibility Services and meet with their

Disability Advisor during the summer are encouraged to attend the program. Second,

information regarding the program is online on TU’s Accessibility Services website as well as

TU’s transition program website where several transition programs for various student

populations (e.g. first generation, discipline specific program, etc.) are advertised. Finally,

information is sent out to TU’s feeder high schools to send out to students and parents.

Students can submit a paper application that they can mail or drop-off at the

Accessibility Services’ office or they can submit an online application. The application simply

asks students to provide their contact information and brief information regarding their

learning disability. Approximately 8-12 students attend the program each year. While this is

not a residential program, students who are from out of town and require overnight stay are

placed in a local hotel for two nights at no cost. Students stay at a hotel and not TU’s

                               67            

 

residences because the program runs so close to the first week of school that residences are in

the process of getting these rooms ready for incoming students.

The program runs for 10am – 3:00pm on the first day and from 10am- 4:00pm on the

second day. Students attend a variety of sessions and workshops during the two days. On the

second day participants are paired with an upper year peer mentor who provides on-going

support during the academic year. In the next section I describe the activities over the two days

and the peer-mentorship program.

Saturday. On the first day the program begins at 10am. Students sign-in and are

welcomed by staff members and are provided with an overview of the program as well as a

quick overview of student services on campus. Students also have an opportunity to introduce

themselves to the group. On this day, students receive kits that include a backpack that

contains supplies to help them during the program, such as paper, pens/pencils, highlighter,

sticky notes, rulers, etc. Following the introductions, students receive an overview of TU’s

online accessibility system, which provides them information on how to register for exams

online, note taking services, and accommodation policies, etc. The remainder of the day is then

divided into three learning strategies workshops that include: 1) Goal setting and time

management, 2) Library navigation, 3) Reading and writing workshops. All of the workshops

are facilitated by a Disability Specialist within TU’s Accessibility Services office. At the end

of the program, this Disability Specialist becomes the participant’s designated advisor. There

is a short break and lunch in between these sessions and students end the day at 3:00pm.

Sunday. On the second day students have an opportunity to meet an array of staff from

various programs and services at TU, professionals from the community, as well as attend a

mock lecture delivered by a TU faculty member. The day begins at 10am with a workshop on

                               68            

 

well-being that is delivered by a staff member from TU’s Health and Counseling Centre.

Following this workshop, students hear from a panel of experts (community members) about

self-advocacy, including understanding and explaining your disability, learning what

accommodations are available for specific disabilities, and how to demystify the stigma that is

often associated with having a disability. Students get a short break and then attend a

workshop on test-taking strategies. Following this workshop students attend a mock-lecture

delivered by a faculty member who teaches a first-year course. The program coordinator

mentioned that they reach out to a faculty who teaches a first-year course because this faculty

will be more knowledgeable about how to facilitate a true first-year mock lecture that students

can relate to once they begin the semester. Students then have an opportunity to learn about

ways to get involved in leadership and volunteer opportunities at TU and about events that are

offered at the institution. During the last block of the day students get an opportunity to meet

their peer-mentor who will provide academic and personal guidance during the academic year.

At the end of the day students can ask questions and review what they learned during the two

days.

Peer mentorship program. The last component of the BTS program is a peer

mentorship program. Participants of the BTS program are given the option to be paired with an

upper-year mentor for the academic year. Students have an opportunity to meet mentors and be

paired up during the second day of the BTS program if they choose to participate. Each mentor

gets paired up with one student and they are expected to meet once a week. Mentors assist

mentees navigating their new academic environment and provide them with information and

referrals to campus academic and extracurricular programs. In addition to the one-on-one

meetings once a week, the program hosts two social events during the year, one during the fall

                               69            

 

term and one during the winter. The social events are an opportunity for mentors and mentees

to mingle, ask questions, and simply to feel part of a larger community.

The peer-mentorship program is supervised by TU’s Accessibility Services’ Volunteer

Coordinator. The Volunteer Coordinator is responsible for training mentors, matching mentors

and mentees, and providing on-going support to each pair during the academic year. On

average, 30 mentors and 30 mentees participate in the peer mentorship program (this includes

students who participate in the BTS program and other students registered with Accessibility

Services at TU who wish to participate). Mentors and mentees are often matched based on

academic interests or program. Some of the mentors are students registered with Accessibility

Services, and often mentors were previous mentees of the program. However, any upper year

student regardless of being registered with Accessibility Services can apply to become a peer-

mentor.

Student Experiences in BTS.

Two students from TU participated in the study. It is important to note that TU joined

the study several months after the other institutions. TU had originally been approached to

participate in the study during the first wave of recruitment but declined to participate due to

other pending commitments. Several months after their original decline I received an e-mail

from the Director of TU’s Accessibility Services inquiring if it was possible to still participate

in the study. Even though I had secured five institutions by the time I received the inquiry, I

decided to move forward with TU’s program given the uniqueness of the program (two-day,

weekend program) as I believed it would add a valuable perspective to the study. While the

student recruitment process was the same as the other institutions, the timing of recruiting

students was not ideal. For the other five institutions students were purposely recruited and

                               70            

 

interviewed during periods when students are typically not yet too overwhelmed with

academic commitments (late December and January). Waiting for ethics approval at TU added

an additional couple of weeks before the invitation to students could be sent out. TU students

were recruited and interviewed in late February. The two students participated in virtual

interviews, one was a male student and the other was a female student. Both of the participants

attended the program during different years. Table 5 showcases the participants’

characteristics.

Table 5 Bridge to Success Student Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended

BTS Melanie F 2012

Peter M 2013

In the next section I highlight students’ experiences prior, during, and after the BTS transition

program.

Experiences prior to BTS. I asked students to think back to the summer prior to

beginning university and recall their thoughts and feelings regarding starting university and

what their expectations were about the summer transition program.

Theme 1 - Feeling nervous. Students shared that they recall being nervous about

starting university and were hoping that the BTS program would provide them with tools and

resources to help them ease their transition to university. For example, Melanie shared that she

attended the BTS program because she was nervous to start university, particularly because of

her learning disability. She shared:

I was terrified. I think I was terrified because a lot of my professors, or teachers in high school were like, if you had a learning disability, they kind of put you down, like

                               71            

 

you’re never going to make it. So, when I was in high school, they basically said that there is no point in going. I had taken a year off as well. So I think that the change from going from completely work back to school, ‘Could I actually make the transition?’ ‘Was I going to be able to handle the work load?’ Cause I went from doing eight courses all year round [to doing ] semester work, so it’s really compressed. That is what I was scared of.

Melanie’s account of having teachers who described university as an intimidating place,

particularly for students with learning disabilities, was not an uncommon report from other

students in the study. Whether teachers’ comments regarding what university would be like for

students impacted their decision to enroll in summer transition programs or not, it is

noteworthy to highlight the frequency in which students reported receiving negative messages

about the transition to university from their teachers in high school – these messages seemed to

often have negative implications on how students’ perceived their ability to succeed in

university. This is evident in how Melanie had perceived her ability to succeed, she expanded,

“in high school they told me it was going to be really difficult with someone with my disability

to even get into university, so I kind of had this very high expectation that I was going to fail.”

Similarly, to Melanie, Peter wanted to attend the BTS program to learn how to navigate

university having a disability:

I wanted to attend the program because I could get a head start of what I needed to do to succeed in university with a disability. I also thought I could gain great connections with students, who were in the same position I was, going into a new institution not knowing anyone and kind of intimidated.

Both Melanie and Peter enrolled in the BTS to learn how to navigate their new academic

setting and to learn specific skills to help them cope with their learning disability. In the next

section I describe their experiences during the BTS program.

                               72            

 

Experiences during BTS. Students reflected on their experiences during the two-day

program and shared that overall their experiences were very positive and they felt that what

they learned in the program prepared them to begin university. Melanie recalled the first day of

the program and said:

It didn’t really feel...you know when you walk into a really big classroom for the very first time and like you feel claustrophobic and anxious, none of that was there. You’re walking into a room full of people that had either the same or similar problems and who are going to have the same hurdles as you, right? So I found that kind of comforting. Like, we talked about where we came from, what we were going to do, what we were hoping to do, what classes we were hoping to take.

Peter found the materials he received on the first day extremely helpful, he shared, “the thing I

found most helpful was that we were given a backpack with really useful things that we would

need for university like water bottle, large calendar, pens, notepad, and many organizing

solutions. The program coordinator shared that students receive a full kit with school supplies

to help students be ready for their first semester in university.

Theme 2 - Learning content specific skills. Both of the students found the workshops

and information offered by the program very helpful in preparing them for university. For

example, in recalling what information had been the most helpful Melanie shared,

I think time management and organization were the two...they gave is this booklet of how to organize our notes and how to properly read material, and just you can’t read everything so...basically, and they gave us support on, like, based on your learning disability, ‘this is the appropriate method you can use to study in’ which optimizes our ability of our success in each class. So we spent a lot of time doing that, we spent a lot of time getting to know each other and how they dealt with it, to see if anyone else had success in different areas.

Peter also recalled,

I remember there was a renowned religion professor who gave an intriguing speech about religious symbolism and what to look for while extracting material. I remember we were taught how to register for tests and exams on the accessibility website. I

                               73            

 

remember we were given a booklet that covered stuff like helpful studying tips on how to take notes. …it got me familiar with the school.

Theme 3 - Connecting with peers. In addition to finding the workshops and tools

helpful and informative to transition to university, both Peter and Melanie found meeting and

connecting with peers a very valuable opportunity. As Melanie explained,

I think finding people that had either the same disability or were in the same program and, or from this area…I think it’s connecting people that have the same, I wouldn’t call them hardships, but the same....experiences. I don’t know, maybe it’s, because it’s hard to explain to your other friends that, oh, you get extra time ‘cause it takes you longer to process a question. And they see it as an advantage, but at the same time you are only being put on the same playing field. So having someone who kind of understands it is a lot easier than explaining it to every person you meet.

The majority of students in all of the summer transition programs found meeting and

connecting with peers with similar experiences extremely beneficial for the same reason that

Melanie explains in the quote above. Peter also found meeting peers rewarding sharing that he

had an opportunity to make friends “one or two whom I still keep in touch with today.” Of the

two students, only Melanie participated in the peer mentorship program and she found this

experience very rewarding and helpful as she transitioned during the academic year. I explain

her experience in this program in more detail as well as students’ thoughts after the BTS in the

next section.

Students’ reflection after BTS transition program. As students reflected on their

experiences in the BTS summer transition program and how it had prepared them to enter

university they explained that the program had been effective at teaching them tools and

strategies to succeed during the first year.

Theme 4 - Gaining new confidence. Melanie encapsulated what both participants

expressed regarding how the program helped them by saying,

                               74            

 

I think it kind of made me feel more prepared. And I think that having that person, like, combine the two programs together [BTS and peer mentorship], I think the combination, like, I could actually go to someone if I had problems. It made it a lot easier, instead of feeling like you were alone. I think the fact that like meeting people reduced my, just walking in and you feel like, ‘oh crap, I’m one of a thousand students,’ and then it’s ‘oh crap, I’m one of a thousand students that only has this disability’ and it makes you feel so secluded, and I think that program really shows you that, you know what, a lot of people have the same issues as you, and it makes you feel more confident about being able to do it, because past people have done it. Right? So it was really, really helpful for me. It reduced my anxiety level, and I’m a very anxious person.

For Melanie, there was an added benefit as she participated in the peer-mentorship program

and thus received on-going support during the year from her peer-mentor. While Peter did not

participate in the peer-mentorship program, he too felt that the program had provided him with

sufficient information and tools to transition into first year and was able to meet peers during

the program that he stayed in touch with. When I asked Peter if he felt that the program had

prepared him for university he responded:

I did feel more prepared for university and what was really helpful was the religion professor, because now I remember he gave us a sample lecture for an hour and we had to assume we were students taking notes like in real time, so that was probably the most helpful and best experience I had because he was an amazing prof.

Melanie concluded her experiences in the program by sharing the following:

I thank the program, because they really help boost your confidence, I think that if it wasn’t for the program I wouldn’t be able to actually go face to face and talk with each professor about what I need. So I think that, like having a mentor and that program put together has helped a lot in that area: Being comfortable talking with your professors, walking up to your professor and being like, “hi, I’m this person and you don’t know me, but you’re going to get to know me.”

Together, Melanie and Peter depicted a positive and rewarding learning experience in the BTS

program. Melanie did provide some constructive feedback for the program and that was to

have more ‘hands-on’ activities. Melanie explained that while the program did an excellent job

                               75            

 

at providing information about how to navigate the campus, that she would have enjoyed doing

tryouts instead of simply receiving verbal communication. She shared:

I think it needs to, I’m not sure about everyone, but for me, I’m very hands-on, so getting down and sitting down and bringing up the page myself and having them go through the process with you, I find that that might be more helpful instead of just telling us to go to this sight and, you know, click on this link and sign up that way. I think that if you’re doing it your self with someone there, you are probably more likely to remember it.

Both Melanie and Peter found the duration of the program sufficient and appropriate for all

that was covered during the two days.

Conclusion of Case 1

The BTS transition program offers students with learning disabilities an opportunity to

learn skills and gain tools to help them prepare from high school to university. The program

runs over the last weekend prior to the beginning of the school year, typically during the last

week in August. During the two days, students attend academic workshops, attend a mock

lecture delivered by a faculty member, and have an opportunity to meet other staff from Troy

University. In addition to the two-day activities, the BTS program offers students an

opportunity to join a year-long peer-mentorship program where students are paired up with an

upper year mentor who provides on-going support and guidance.

A total of two students who attended the BTS program participated in the study. Both

students had very positive experiences during the program and gained valuable skills to help

them ease their transition to university. Students found the academic specific workshops most

helpful (e.g. note taking) as well as having the opportunity to connect with peers in a relaxed

setting. Both of the participants found the duration and format of the program fitting for their

needs. While students found the duration and content helpful, one student noted that students

                               76            

 

might benefit from having more hands-on activities rather than lecture style workshops to meet

the needs of students with different learning styles.

Case 2: 3-Day Summer Transition Program

In this section I present Case 2 - Creswell University’s Headway to Transition Program

(HTP), a 3-day transition program for students with learning disabilities. First, I provide the

reader with an introduction of Creswell University to contextualize the program, then I provide

a detailed account of the format of the program, including the planning of the program, how

students are recruited and registered, the topics and activities presented during the program,

and follow-up support. Finally, I present the experiences of students in the HTP. A total of four

students who attended HTP between the summers of 2012 and 2013 participated in this study.

The student experiences are presented in the following order: their experiences before

commencing the HTP, their experiences during the HTP, and their experiences following the

HTP.

Description of program

The Headway Transition Program is a three-day, in-person, summer transition program

offered through Creswell University’s Accessibility Services Office. The program runs at the

end of July during three weekdays, but continues to provide support to students through the

academic year by offering monthly workshops and bi-annual student socials. Students have the

option of staying in residence at the campus at no charge for the first two nights. The residence

option is provided to students in order to accommodate those who do not live near the campus

or students who simply want to experience of living in the student dorms during the program.

                               77            

 

HTP was designed to assist students with LDs to learn about how their LD impacts

their learning and how to identify their strengths and areas for improvement in their new

learning environment. The program is also intended to introduce students to programs and

services at CU, help students improve their learning and study skills, teach students about self-

advocacy, and facilitate students’ connections with other first year students who also have a

LD. In addition to providing support for students, HTP also offers a workshop for parents to

provide information about how they can support their child as s/he makes the transition to CU.

A committee that consists of the Disability Office’s director, assistant director, the HTP

coordinator, and one disability consultant plans the program. The planning committee meets

on a monthly basis beginning in the winter term to discuss the details of the program, such as

topics and sessions that are covered, accommodations for students, and logistical aspects of the

program. The HTP program coordinator oversees the recruitment and registration of students,

the planning of workshops and activities for students, and the recruitment of staff facilitating

sessions during the duration of the program. The coordinator also plans and organizes the

follow-up events and workshops during the academic year for students who participate in the

HTP.

The format and duration of the HTP has shifted over the past seven years. According to

the program coordinator, the duration of the program varied between four and two-days

without any follow-up monthly workshops or student socials. The program first transitioned

from a four-day program to a two-day program after the coordinator received consistent

feedback from students that the duration of the program was too long with an overwhelming

amount of information being covered during the four days. As a result of the student feedback,

the program transitioned into a two-day program. This new format was not received well by

                               78            

 

the new cohort of students. Students perceived that two-days was not sufficient time to learn

all of the information covered by the HTP, and thus the program was changed to three-days

with follow-up monthly workshops and student socials. This current format has existed at least

since 2012 (there were no records of the specific date when the program officially changed)

According to the coordinator, the new duration of the program and the format has been well

received by students and has become a “happy medium” for students attending the HTP, and

this has been the format for the past four years.

Over the three days, students receive approximately 25 hours of instruction and attend

a host of activities. For two of the three days, the program runs from approximately 10am –

8:00pm and on the last day the program runs from approximately 10am – 3:00pm. Each day,

students attend a variety of academic workshops and sessions and have opportunities to

interact with staff and other students. In the next section, I provide a detailed account of the

activities and workshops during the three days.

Day 1. Day one of the HTP contains a combination of workshops and social

opportunities for students and a session for parents. Students attend five workshops on the first

day, the workshops occur in the following order: 1. Transition Tips: Navigating the Move from

High School to University (facilitated by the HTP coordinator); 2. Goal Mapping Workshop

(facilitated by a Learning Strategist); 3. Orientation to Programs and Services at CU and

Scavenger Hunt (facilitated by the HTP coordinator); 4. Meeting session with Upper-year

Students (facilitated by Upper-year students with a LD who successfully transitioned to CU);

and 5. De-briefing Session of the Scavenger Hunt (facilitated by the HTP coordinator). During

the first day, students receive a “transition kit” that contains items to help them throughout the

week – the transition kit includes items such as: a USB key that contains all of the power point

                               79            

 

presentations that happen during the week and other handouts, school supplies such as pens

and pencils, paper and index cards, a dry-erase calendar, and a CU T-shirt.

Students arrive at the provided location at CU and receive a breakfast followed by a

welcome and overview of the format of the program, the sessions that they will be attending,

and the overall expectations of their participation of the program. Followed by the welcome

and introduction, students engage in an icebreaker activity so they can begin to familiarize

themselves with each other. Students have an opportunity to engage with one another again

during lunch and during dinner, both provided by the program. For those students staying in

residence, once the day activities conclude they return to their dorm rooms. In the dorms, there

are no facilitated activities; students are on their own until the following day.

During this first day, the HTP’s coordinator hosts a parent session separate from the

student sessions where information about how to support students’ transition to the university

is presented. This is an optional session for parents.

Day 2. The format of day two is similar to day one activities. Students attend five

workshops and have an opportunity to interact with one another over breakfast, lunch, and

dinner. The five workshops that students attend during day two are as follows (in order as they

occur): 1. Note taking and Listening (facilitated by a Learning Strategist); 2. Faculty Mock

Lecture (Video Faculty Lecture); 3. De-briefing Mock Lecture (HTP coordinator); 4. Midterm

Preparation: Multiple Choice and Essay Type Exams (facilitated by a Learning Strategist); and

5. What is a Learning Disability? (Facilitated by a Psychologist). At the end of the day,

students travel as a group for dinner at an off-campus restaurant. Those students staying at

CU’s residences return to their dorm for the night.

                               80            

 

Day 3. The last day of the program is a half-day consisting of three workshops, group

lunch, and a wrap-up sessions. Students attend the following workshops in order: 1. What is

Assistive Technology (facilitated by CU’s Disability Office Adaptive Technologist); 2. Time

Management (facilitated by a Learning Strategist); and 3. How to use CU’s Disability Office

Services and Accommodations (facilitated by HTP coordinator). The last session of this day is

a group closing session where the HTP coordinator answers questions and provides students

with information about on-going support during the academic year.

HTP’s follow-up sessions during the academic year. Students who attend the HTP

continue to receive support from the coordinator who plans and organizes monthly workshops

during the academic year. Starting in September, students are encouraged to attend monthly

workshops that continue to support their transition to CU and help them cope with their

learning disability in the new academic environment. Some of the workshops are direct follow-

ups to the sessions students attended during HTP, while others contain new information. A

total of seven follow-up workshops are provided to students, these include: 1. Self-advocacy

and Disclosure; 2. Communicating with Professors and Employers; 3. Learning Disabilities; 4.

Time Management; 5. Social Skills Part 1; 6. Social Skills Part 2; and 7. End of the Year

Review. All of the workshops occur on campus, typically during the same day of the week and

time each month. Either CU’s disability consultants or other experts in the field of learning

disabilities facilitate the workshops.

Recruitment. Student recruitment for the HTP occurs in a variety of ways through a

host of channels, both inside and outside the university. Recruitment of students begins in the

Spring each year and runs through the week before the commencement of the HTP. There are

five main ways that students learn and are recruited to HTP; these include: E-mail from CU’s

                               81            

 

Recruitment and Admission’s Office, High School Teachers, Visit from the HTP Coordinator

to their High School, Visiting CU’s Disability Office and website, and online via Learning

Disability Association of Ontario (LDAO).

The HTP program coordinator works in collaboration with CU’s Recruitment and

Admissions Office to send information via e-mail to new incoming students entering CU in the

fall. Since there is no way for CU’s Disability Office to know which students entering the

university are diagnosed with a learning disability or will be registering with the Disability

Office (this information is not asked in the admissions application), the HTP coordinator

works with the CU’s Recruitment and Admissions Office to send two e-mails to all incoming

students with information about the transition program and the criteria that is required to

participate (students with learning disabilities). Students who are interested in participating in

the program are asked to contact the HTP coordinator for more information about registration.

The HTP coordinator also hosts Resource Teacher Luncheons during the spring where

teachers from high schools in the surrounding neighborhoods near CU are invited to attend.

During these luncheons, teachers are provided with information about the summer transition

program and how it is intended to support students with learning disabilities as they transition

to university. Teachers are encouraged to share this information with their high school students

and refer any questions to the coordinator. The HTP coordinator also visits high school

classrooms where she promotes the program to students and where she encourages students

who are planning to attend CU to meet with a disability Counsellor if they are diagnosed with

a learning disability prior to beginning their academic year.

Students can also learn information about the HTP when they visit CU’s Disability

Office as the information is posted on the LCD screens at the front desk and where there are

                               82            

 

flyers containing details of the summer program. Informational flyers are also placed across

the campus at student services offices.

Finally, information on the HTP is posted online on the Learning Disability

Association of Ontario, a registered charity providing information and support to people living

with learning disabilities, and on CU’s Disability Office website where in addition to learning

about the program students can register to the HTP online.

Registration. Students can register online or in-person for the HTP. Students can also

fill out the form and send it via mail, e-mail, or fax. The registration form is simple, only

asking students to provide contact information, program of study, emergency contact

information, whether the student’s parent will be attending the parent session, whether students

will be choosing to stay in residence for the duration of the program, and if the student requires

accessibility accommodations during the program or has dietary restrictions. A second part of

the registration form asks students to fill out answers to the following questions: 1. How did

you hear about HTP’s program? 2. Will you be attending CU’s orientation? 3. What

knowledge do you hope to gain from HTP? Is there anything you would like us to know about

you? This information is utilized to help the HTP coordinator plan and prepare for students’

arrival and to provide appropriate support during the duration of HTP. Students who wish to

register for the HTP must have registered with CU’s Disability Office and provide

documentation about their learning disability in order to participate in the program. According

to the HTP program coordinator, student registration varies by year, between 2 students to 12

students.

                               83            

 

Student experiences in the HTP program Four students who attended the HTP between the summers of 2012 and 2013

participated in this study; three females and one male. In Table 6, I depict the students’

pseudonym, gender, year they attended they attended the HTP program). Three of the

interviews were conducted in-person at the CU campus and one interview was conducted

online via Skype. Three of the students were currently attending CU while one student was

attending another university in Ontario. All of the interviews were one-on-one interviews.

Table 6 Headway to Transition Program Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended

HTP Terry M 2012

Lindsey F 2012 Audry F 2013

Jen F 2013

In this section, I present the students’ experiences in three blocks: experiences prior to

attending the HTP, experiences during the HTP, and experiences after the HTP. The findings

are presented following the sequence of questions asked in the student interview protocol.

Experiences of students prior to the HTP. Students were asked to describe their

thoughts and their feeling about starting university at the beginning of the interview to later

identify how the HTP had impacted these thoughts and feelings as they began university.

Theme 1 - Feeling nervous. All four students described feeling nervous about starting

university particularly around the new academic demands and navigating a new environment.

For example, Lindsey noted:

I was nervous because it was a whole different environment and I wasn’t sure what kind of work I would have – I heard stories, but every person is different so I didn’t

                               84            

 

know how it was going to be, so for the most part I was just nervous and unsure, and I even questioned if I should come in July. I was like ‘is this the right choice for me?’”

Audry shared a similar sentiment as Lindsey stating that coming to university was a nerve-

racking thought for her, she said: “I was pretty petrified about the fact that I was coming with a

learning disability, just because in high school no one really tells you about the resources

[available in university].” Audry went on to explain that in high school she had to work

diligently to get her teachers to provide appropriate accommodations and she was afraid that

these experiences would repeat in university, she continued: “for me I had to self-advocate [in

high school] because either teachers were ignorant or were never taught to deal with students

with learning disabilities…I was nervous it was going to be a similar experience…” The other

two students also spoke about being nervous about navigating a new environment like being

enrolled in large classes and managing a heavier course work, as well as making new friends.

Learning about STP. Three of the four students learned about the HTP through the

Accessibility Services (AS) office at Creswell University and one student found information

via the AS website. Two of the students learned about the program by meeting early in the

summer with the Disability Advisor regarding their accommodations for the academic year

and it was then that the advisor encouraged them to participate in the transition program. The

other student visited the AS office and picked up a pamphlet at the front desk and then decided

to sign-up online, while the last student simply found out about the program while browsing

the AS website.

Theme 2 – Parental influence. For two of the students, their parents were a source of

encouragement in their decision to attend the HTP. Audry recounted the following about

attending the transition program: “I was a little apprehensive just because I was already

                               85            

 

starting a new school in another city, so to meet a bunch of people…but my parents were like

‘no, no, it’s good to find all the tools you can.’” Terry also shared: “My mom did a lot of the

research into the accessibility program [HTP], I really didn’t know anything about how

university would be.” Parents seemed to be influential in Terry and Audry’s decision to

participate in the program and this was the case for many of the participants who participated

in the study.

Theme 3 - Uncertain expectations. When students were asked to share what they

expected to gain from participating in the summer transition program there was a recurring

response: “I was expecting, not a whole lot really.” This quote by Audry exemplifies what the

other three students shared regarding their expectations about the program. While students read

or were given the description of the summer transition program they did not fully understand

what the program would entail or what skills they would gain by participating. Audry

continued:

I really wasn’t expecting anything, I wasn’t expecting it to be so academic, because some of the courses we did they were actual classes, so it prepared you to take notes in class, we got the Psychotherapist from the university to give a mini seminar, so everything was really formal, where I thought it would be more laid back.

Lindsey shared a similar sentiment as Audry:

I wasn’t sure what to expect in terms of content, but I was like...I am going to be more equipped and comfortable with the area, so I would be less nervous…because that was part of what made me anxious, not knowing where I am on campus and how to get to places.

Terry echoed this further by stating:

Interesting I didn’t expect to gain any certain skills, I was expecting that the program would help me know the university, but my expectations were surpassed because the [program coordinator] was really good, there was food for us, there were people waiting for us, later there were other people [the program coordinator] introduced us to.

                               86            

 

While students did not know what to expect from the program, most of them

understood that attending the program would help them understand the university structure and

what to expect of university. It is evident from Lindsey’s and Terry’s comments that their

expectations (or lack there of) were surpassed and that what they learned and experienced was

extremely valuable for them. I expand on these experiences in the next section.

Experiences of students during the HTP. I asked students a series of questions

regarding their experiences and perceptions during the duration of the HTP program,

particularly their interactions with their peers and staff, what information and content they

found the most helpful, as well as their perceptions of the materials they received during the

program.

Theme 4 - Learning content specific skills. Students varied in their responses of what

each found the most beneficial, but they agreed that specific content skills such as note taking

and listening were the most helpful, along with learning about the different resources on

campus available to them, and listening to the upper year student panel. While students spoke

extensively about the content knowledge that they learned and the great experiences they had

meeting staff, it was their interactions with peers that were highlighted as the most influential

aspect of their summer transition experience.

Specific content knowledge such as note taking and listening, and visiting campus

resources during the scavenger hunt were noted as very helpful by students in the HTP

program. When asked what had been the most helpful information during the HTP program

Jen shared, “The note taking stuff, they actually gave us pamphlets on how to take notes the

best way possible and also they told us what kinds of things to ask the professor in terms of

[getting] extra time and how to communicate.” Lindsey concurred, “For me it was the note

                               87            

 

taking because we got to hear a mock-lecture, so we heard what lectures were like and I could

practice note taking about my strengths and weaknesses.” Students explained that learning

specific content made them feel academically prepared because they learned actual skills that

they could envision implementing in the classroom.

Them 5 – The power of peers. Students also shared that listening to the student panel

during the first day of the transition program was extremely beneficial, particularly because

they were able to relate to their stories. Terry noted,

When past students talked about their experiences in university, I found that really helpful. I found one story really helpful when he [student panelist] came [to university] and didn’t register for support [with Accessibility Services] and ended running out of time for his exams and ended up with a 1.6 average and was in danger of dropping out, all of those things were extremely helpful, they prepared me for things that impacted people in university…

Through this quote Terry was able to understand an important message delivered by the

student panelist, and that is the importance of seeking assistance when you need it because

without assistance or accommodations you can potentially fall into academic trouble. Audry

also found the messages delivered through the student panel helpful and encouraging,

particularly as she recounted her current situation, she said:

It was really nice to hear the stories of people who had done the program, like one girl, she took 6 years and another guy took 5 years [to complete their degree], and I am taking five to complete mine, so it was comforting to know that it is ok if you do not finish in 4 years, its been nice to have reminders like that.

Students found that the student panel was helpful particularly for two reasons, 1) they could

relate to the students in terms of having a learning disability, and 2) they were able to learn

from students with learning disabilities who had successfully transitioned and were close to

graduating. The messages in the stories that the student panel shared carried through past the

                               88            

 

summer for students. For example, both Terry and Audry grasped the messages of seeking

help in order to succeed and normalizing the fact that graduating in four years is not what

works or is realistic for all students. Students learning from upper-year peers who also have a

learning disability seem to have a really positive impact on participants because they can relate

to a closer level. As Lindsey explained, “I learn by other people telling me stories, I’m able to

understand that way.” Learning from peers and connecting with peers seemed to have one of

the biggest on the students who participated in the HTP program.

Theme 6 - Finding community. Students shared that there were several opportunities to

bond with one another during the program, including breakfast, lunch, and dinner, in-between

breaks, and most importantly during their stay in residence. Three out of the four students who

participated in the HTP program stayed in residence during the duration of the program. It was

during their conversations in the after hours of the program that students connected on a more

personal level with each other and where they were able to speak more candidly about

challenges associated with having a learning disability. A quote by Audry exemplifies

students’ mutual experiences and feelings during their time in the dorms, she shared:

It was good bonding…it was very different because you connect with them a lot deeper, you say stuff like ‘ hey, do you ever get scared when the teacher comes by?’ and everyone is like ‘Oh my God, yes!’ ‘That is me!’ or ‘Oh my God, I can’t sleep the night before a quiz.’ It was nice to have those conversations with people and realize that you are not the only one thinking that way.

Jen’s experience was very similar, she explained:

I remember during the night we started talking about what we faced in school, what difficulties we faced with our disability, we played board games and laughed, it was good. I feel like if we did not stay overnight we might not have a chance to talk about it amongst ourselves.

Terry also recounted:

                               89            

 

We all gathered in the big space [residence lounge] where doing games and talking, and doing dare games and typical teenager things, learning about each other. It helped me feel at home because now I know people who are like me at school. A big topic that came up when we were talking was about how people react to our accommodations and challenges we have, so it was interesting.

These three quotes highlight the exceptional bonding amongst students that occurred during

their stay in residence. Students talk about having fun and playing board games, “typical

teenager things,” however, it is their candid conversations around their experiences with a

learning disability and how it impacts them academically that seems to be a crucial

breakthrough for the students as they begin to feel as part of a community. Finding a common

ground and knowing they are not the only ones facing similar challenges seems to have a

positive impact on participants. Another noteworthy observation is that students facilitated

these conversations on their own without staff initiating the process. The HTP program

coordinator noted that students who stay in residence are given board games in case they want

to do something entertaining, but there are no planned activities for students or staff available

to supervise them, so they are on their own. Thus, students must take initiative while in the

dorm regarding what they do as a group, what they talk about, and whether or not they want to

bond with one another. From the three quotes above it seems that students quickly formed a

strong connection with one another and naturally engaged in personal conversations regarding

their lived experiences with a learning disability. Audry encapsulated what participants

generally expressed, she said:

I think we all wanted to get that conversation started, it is what it felt like. We were all taking this opportunity to let it all out, because I don’t think I will ever be in a situation like that where there are ten of us with learning disabilities together. It was kind of weird because when we got all together we were looking at each other, and I think it was one of the girls who said ‘ok…..sooo…who is going to go first?’ So we all told our own little story. It was just really weird how intense and how quickly we all connected with each other and the fact that we had an opportunity to find each other.

                               90            

 

As noted by Jen, without the opportunity to stay in residence, perhaps students would not have

found the space to dialogue with one another or bond so closely and facilitate the meaningful

conversations they had. Terry noted that having the opportunity to talk to peers alone was very

helpful as up until that point students are mostly interacting with adults (i.e., teachers,

Counsellors, parents, etc.) regarding their disability. He shared: “I got to talk to fellow

teenagers, because up until that point I had only talked to adults. It is helpful as you transition

if people going to school with you are involved in the social aspects.” It seems that peer

interactions in the dorms and hearing from upper year peers in the student panel was an

extremely positive opportunity for participants in the HTP program because they had an

opportunity to learn from their experiences and had an opportunity to share their story and find

a community.

Students’ reflection after the HTP.

Students were asked to reflect about their overall experiences in the summer transition

program and to recount any follow-up support from the program to help them transition into

the first year. Students were also asked to reflect on what additional information the program

could have provided them that would be useful for students as they transition into first year

and whether or not they would recommend the summer transition program to other students.

Overall students had very positive experiences in the HTP program and felt that they learned

very valuable information to help them transition into first year.

The HTP program offers monthly workshops to students during the academic year

beginning in September as well as one social once a semester where the cohort can meet over

dinner. Students noted that they did not regularly attend (or did not attend at all) the monthly

                               91            

 

workshops, primarily because of scheduling conflicts. Two of the four students had attended

only one of the follow-up workshops while the other two did not attend any of them. The two

students who attended the workshops found the information helpful, but could not continue

attending due to other academic priorities. However, students did note that they did make

efforts to attend the socials hosted each semester to connect again with the group and the

program coordinator.

Theme 7- Feeling prepared. Students were asked to reflect on how the summer

transition program had helped them to transition into the first year. All four students agreed

that they learned very important skills and knowledge that made their transition to university

more relaxed and they felt better prepared to begin their university experience. Terry noted, “I

was mentally prepared and I wasn’t afraid of it. I also had an idea of tests, the program, the

grading system, how professors could mark, how tough course loads would be, etc.” Lindsey

also shared, “for me it solidified that I have to make decisions for myself, I have to be the one

to initiate emails, talk to Counsellors or professors – don’t be nervous, because they are here to

help you.” Further strengthening the message that the transition program had been very

beneficial not only in teaching students about what to expect of university and teaching them

skills to be effective students, the program also familiarized students with the physical aspect

of the campus. Audry reflected on the scavenger hunt and said:

We all rolled our eyes at the beginning, ‘oh my god, they are going to give us a tour’ [sighed]. It wasn’t a normal tour, it was a scavenger hunt about where to find study rooms, where to find microwaves – they actually showed you things that you would need, so I felt confident the first two weeks because I knew where my classes were and where Accessibility Services was. People who had not come [peers] were really freaking out and I was a lot more prepared, but it took those first two weeks to notice how much the transition program had really helped.

                               92            

 

The HTP program provided students the opportunity to learn skills to prepare them

academically and socially into their new environment. All four students agreed that they would

recommend the program to other students with learning disabilities not only to learn how to

navigate the university and the new learning environment, but also to build community and

find common ground with peers in similar situations. All four students found that the length of

the program was a good fit for them stating that any shorter would have been too short and that

by the third day they were ready to go back home and begin processing all the new information

they had learned. The fact that the program shifted over the years in terms of length seems to

have worked for the four students in this study.

Students did have constructive feedback for the program on how to enhance or expand

some of the components. For example, Terry shared that while the program focused on

preparing students academically and introducing them to the physical campus, he felt the

program could have introduced participants to student clubs. Jen and Lindsey expressed that

more communication and follow-ups after the summer would be beneficial in order to keep in

touch with their peers who participated in the program. Both of these recommendations

seemed to stem from students’ desire to have on-going relationship and connections with

peers. I asked both of them how these follow-ups might differ from what already exists (e.g.

monthly workshops and one social each semester) and their advice was to have more tailored

communication with students rather than communicating with the entire group. Lindsey also

suggested that having the monthly workshops on varying days each month would

accommodate students’ schedules.

                               93            

 

Conclusion of Case 2

The Headway to Transition Program is a 3-day (weekdays) transition program at

Creswell University. Students who participate in the program have the option of living in

campus residence for two-nights at no cost. The residence option is available to accommodate

students who live far from the university or simply to provide students an opportunity to

experience living in student residence. The program consists of academic workshops,

presentations from staff and students, and a virtual mock-lecture. While the duration of the

program is only three days, the number of hours the program runs each day are significantly

higher than any other program in the study. For two of the three days, the program ran for ten

hours each day and on the last day the program ran for five hours, for a total of 25 hours of

activities and instruction. This is an interesting characteristic of the program because while the

number of days is short, the amount of hours of instruction mirrors that of two of the five-day

programs in the study. The HTP program provides follow-up support for participants including

monthly academic workshops and student socials where participants have the opportunity to

re-connect and continue to build community.

A total of four students who participated in the HTP between 2012 and 2013 were

interviewed (three females and one male). Participants expressed that prior to attending the

transition program they were worried about starting university and how to manage the new

academic expectations. For two of the participants their parents were a strong source of

encouragement to attend the transition program, which is a common thread found amongst

other participants in the study. All of the participants shared having a very positive experience

in the program and having gained invaluable skills and information to help them transition into

first year. Particularly, students spoke extensively about how they benefited from learning

                               94            

 

important academic skills such as note taking that were useful during their first year in

university. Students also spoke about the powerful connections they made with their peers

during the program and the positive impact these peers had beyond the transition program.

Students described feeling a sense of belonging when they interacted with other peers with

learning disabilities because these peers understood some of the challenges and experiences

they had encountered. Finally, all of the participants felt that the program had prepared them to

navigate their new academic environment, both the academic and the physical space, and that

they had gained new confidence to advocate for themselves. All participants enjoyed the

format of the program and felt that the structure and length was appropriate for their needs.

Case 3: 5-Day (Optional) Transition Program

The One-step Ahead (OSA) transition program is a five-day summer transition

program for students with disabilities at Spartan University (SU). The program is comprised of

two components, one that operates in the summer and one that continues during the academic

year. In the summer, OSA offers academic workshops for students over a five-day period.

Students have the flexibility to choose which of the workshops offered they want to attend and

are not required to attend every day. Workshops are offered multiple times during the day to

accommodate students with various schedules. Following the summer component, OSA

provides on-going support to students through a peer mentorship program that runs from

September to April where upper year mentors are paired with first year students. As part of the

peer-mentorship program, OSA offers social events for students as well as on-going academic

and social support. Unlike other transition programs highlighted in this study, OSA advertises

the program as a transition program for students with any disability, although the majority of

                               95            

 

students who participate in the program have a learning disability – all of the students that

were interviewed had a learning disability. A unique characteristic of OSA is that students are

encouraged to bring their parents to the workshops so that their parents can learn with them

about the different aspects of transitioning to university.

Prior to the commencement of the workshops, students (and their parents) are

encouraged to attend an orientation session that provides an overview of the program and

provides general information about transitioning to university. The orientation sessions happen

throughout the summer beginning in June and leading up-to the week of the workshops, which

are offered one week prior to the first week of the Fall semester (typically the last week of

August). There are four workshops for students that are offered through OSA during the five-

day period (from Monday through Friday), these include: accommodations and services at

SU’s Accessibility Services, academic skills for success, mock-lecture experience, and using

and navigating the library. The program has been operating in its current format for the past six

years. Prior to this format, the OSA was a consecutive five-day program that did not include

the peer-mentorship program, with students having the option to stay in residence for the

duration of the program. According to the coordinator, the program was revamped to its

current format to increase enrollment and to expand transition services beyond the duration of

the summer. The current format has been well received by students and has increased

enrollment over the past few years. In the next sections I provide information about the four

workshops that are offered during the summer and information about the peer-mentorship

program followed by students’ experiences in the program.

Workshop 1 – accommodations and services at SU’s accessibility services. This

workshop introduces students to all of the services and programs available for students

                               96            

 

registered with Accessibility Services at SU. Students learn about how to register with

Accessibility Services and what documentation is required to register, how to navigate the

Accessibility Services’ website (including how to sign-up for exams, download

accommodation letter, etc), and other support services available such as adaptive technology.

Students also learn about financial assistance and bursaries available for students with

disabilities and how to apply for this funding.

Workshop 2 – academic skills for success. In this workshop, students learn academic

skills such as time-management, how to navigate SU’s course website, and learn about specific

programs and services at SU that support academic needs. Students also learn about course

timetables and how to register for classes, and begin to learn about how to interact with

professors and T.A’s.

Workshop 3 – mock lecture experience. For this workshop, students attend a mock

lecture with a professor and have an opportunity to practice their note taking skills. After the

mock-lecture, students are introduced to effective note taking skills and note taking strategies

and receive feedback on the notes from the mock lecture. During the workshop, students are

introduced to different note taking methods including the Cornell and the SQ3R (survey,

question, read, recite, review, and reflect) systems. Students also learn how to use notes to

prepare for exams and assignments. For exam preparation, students learn about how to

effectively manage their time to prepare for exams, how to combat test anxiety, and services

available at SU to help them in the process (e.g. learning strategists, tutors, etc).

Workshop 4 – navigating the library. This workshop teaches students how to navigate

the library, both physically and online. The workshop takes place in a computer lab at SU’s

library and students learn how to search for books/documents on the racks and how to search

                               97            

 

and the online catalogue. Students also learn about services available in the library specifically

for students registered with Accessibility Services and assistive software available.

Peer-mentorship program. Students who register for the summer workshops can

request to be paired up with an upper-year mentor for the academic year (although, the peer

mentorship program is open to any incoming student registered with Accessibility Services

regardless of whether they attended the summer workshops). The purpose of the peer-

mentorship program is to continue to provide support to students as they transition into the first

year at SU. The goal of the peer-mentorship program is to provide students with social and

academic support and to help students acclimate to their new environment.

Peer-mentors are upper-year students (third year and above) who may or may not be

students registered with Accessibility Services. Peer-mentors are paired with at least one

student each and this number increases, as they feel more comfortable taking on more students.

Mentors and mentees begin to meet in September and their meetings run through April. Peer-

mentors communicate with their mentees once per week and meet one-on-one as often as

possible as long as it does not surpass two hours per week. The Peer-mentors are trained and

supervised by the OSA coordinator who meets with them once a month to provide feedback

and support regarding their mentees as well as provide additional resources to better prepare

them for their role. Peer-mentors provide academic and social support to students as well as

referrals to campus programs and services. Typically, there are 25 mentors and 40-50 mentees

every year.

In addition to matching students to upper year mentors, the peer-mentorship program

offers monthly social events where students can socialize with other mentors and mentees in a

safe and fun environment. The social events vary every year, but some examples include a

                               98            

 

murder mystery dinner, an ugly sweater party, and a Halloween Hunt. The program

coordinator mentioned that these social events have grown to be very successful and popular

amongst students in the peer-mentorship program and are now open to all students registered

with SU’s Accessibility Services, which provides students with a wider network. All social

events are free to students.

Student Experiences in the OSA

A total of three students participated in the study; all of the students attended OSA in

the summer of 2014. Student characteristics are depicted in Table 7. All interviews were

conducted one-on-one and in-person at the SU campus.

Table 7 One-step Ahead Transition Program Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended OSA Meghan F 2012 Stephanie F 2014 John M 2014

Students reflected on their experiences prior, during, and after the transition program and

provided their perspective on the format of the program and the skills that they gained as they

transitioned into first year.

Experiences prior to OSA. Two of the students who attended OSA found out

information about the transition program through SU’s Accessibility Services’ website and the

third student found out about the program during the summer while visiting the Accessibility

Services’ office.

                               99            

 

Theme 1 – Taking initiative. All three students registered for the program hoping to

familiarize themselves with the university and gain knowledge about how to receive support

and accommodations for their disability. Stephanie mentioned:

I was hoping to feel more comfortable coming to university because I really didn’t know what it would be like. I was trying to prepare myself for the change because from elementary school to high school I was not prepared at all, so I was trying to initiative and prepare for change.

John also talked about wanting to learn about how accommodations were provided and what

types of accommodations existed for students with learning disabilities. While he had some

knowledge about what to expect, he wanted to meet some of the staff and students prior to

beginning university. He explained: “I’m quite independent, but if there were going to be any

barriers I wanted to address them prior to beginning school.” Meghan shared that for her

attending the program was really important as she was new to being diagnosed with a learning

disability, she shared: “I wanted to attend the program because I was so new to being classified

of having a learning disability. I wanted to know what resources were out there to help me be

successful.”

Only John’s parents attended the orientation session and the workshops and this was a positive

experience for both John and his parents. He recalled:

They found it helpful, we talked to one of the accessibility Counsellors and she told us there were different accommodations you can have…it was really informative, they were really professional about it and it was really comfortable – I felt as part of the school already.

Experiences of students during the to OSA. I asked students to think back to their experiences

during the duration of OSA, from their perspective to the content of the workshops to the

interactions they had with peers, and those involved facilitating sessions. None of the three

participants attended all of the workshops that were offered during the week, however, they all

                               100            

 

attended the information session. I asked students why they had chosen to attend some

workshops and not others and all of them noted a similar response as denoted by John, he said:

“because I didn’t need to attend the other workshop. I felt I could learn about the other topics

on my own and the only questions I really had were around technology.” Students attended

between 1-3 workshops in total over the course of the week. While they did not attend all of

the workshops, students felt that they gained valuable information and support to help them

navigate the first year and made meaningful connections with others, whether this was peers or

staff.

While students’ interactions with others were overall positive, they varied based on

their own willingness to make connections. For example, when I asked John if he felt there

were opportunities for her to meet other peers she responded:

Not as much, and I didn’t want to. I think the point of the workshop was for us to individually be comfortable and ask questions, not necessarily interact with other kids, because everyone was there to focus on one thing. So I think it was good that we didn’t have a chance to interact as much, however awkward that sounds.

Theme 2 - Connecting with others. Stephanie has a very different experience and

perception about interacting with peers during the program. She enthusiastically recalled, “I

met a lot of people and one of the girls specially, I still talk to her, she is a friend of mine now,

which is pretty cool.” Stephanie also had a strong connection with the coordinator of the

program and she continues to seek her out for support, she explained, “I really liked [program

coordinator], I felt really comfortable talking to her so I actually continued all of my

accommodations with her. She has been really, really helpful.” It is interesting to note that

Stephanie participated in 3 of the workshops, and perhaps this is an indication of the stronger

bonds that she developed with peers and staff as compared to her other peers. Meghan recalled

                               101            

 

a similar experience with the program coordinator and other staff she met during the

workshops, she shared: “I follow-up with [program coordinator] and the learning strategists,

she is really good [helping] organizing your thoughts about papers so I talk to her about time-

management when I am feeling overwhelmed in university.”

Students recalled the materials that were handed out at each workshop as useful in

helping them better understand the content and as helpful tools to look back on during the

academic year to get a refresher on certain topics. At all of the workshops, students receive a

printed power point presentation as well as other useful handouts with information. For

example, Meghan shared that receiving materials during the workshops was a helpful tool to

review information, she explained:

I got a folder and it had all this information about taking notes, library services, how to access different services, so they gave us information that we got to take home, which was great because when you are first presented with the information not a lot sinks in, so that was good.

An interesting note regarding this account is that Meghan actually had her folder with her the

day I interviewed her, she shared that she likes to carry it around with her in the event that she

needs to review the information. John shared that he had found the supplies he received as

helpful, he said, “we got a folder with a note-pad and an itinerary it was neat because they had

a professor come in and give a lecture to give us an experience of how lectures are…that was

pretty cool.”

Theme 3 – Learning content specific skills. Similar to the perceptions of students in the

other transition programs, students who attended OSA found that the most helpful part of what

they gained in the program were academic skills and information about academic resources.

For example, Meghan shared: “for me learning about new technology was very important

                               102            

 

since my biggest learning disability is that when I read, I read downwards not across, so I

learned about Kurswell and Dragon (adaptive technology programs) and other useful tools.”

Stephanie made a powerful statement about how helpful the program was in preparing her

academically for first year, she declaimed,

I was expecting to fail everything and not do well. The summer program helped me relax and I felt more prepared than if I had nothing at all. I knew what resources were available to me, I also learned about the learning strategist at [Accessibility Services] and this made me feel more comfortable because I knew there were resources to go to. High School says you are on your own in university, that you can’t get help at all, which is obviously a lie – I have had so much help which has been great.

Students’ reflection after the OSA.

Theme 4 - Having flexibility. Upon reflecting on how the OSA had prepared them to

navigate first year, participants expressed having gained the necessary tools that facilitated

their transition. Participants also found the format of the program appropriate to meet their

needs and overall would highly recommend the program to other students with learning

disabilities entering university. One of the reasons participants enjoyed having workshop

format was the flexibility it allowed, John shared:

It was perfect, it gave me the flexibility as it was a long drive for me, I live about three hours away so for me to drive that distance…so it was good, they gave us different days and time slots so we could plan around it and know that it is not going to be a whole day event, but rather only a two hour event so it was easy to plan the day out because it is a long haul to [SU].

Stephanie came to the realization that the length of the program was the right fit for what she

needed, although this realization came after the end of OSA. She explained:

It was good enough time…it was all you needed to get the feel. At first I thought we needed more time just because of how much pressure and little time we had, but now looking back it was the right amount of time.

                               103            

 

Meghan, echoed a similar perspective and made an observation point regarding feeling

prepared to begin university, when I asked her if she after attending OSA she felt prepared to

begin first year. She replied:

At first, does anyone feel prepared for university? I do feel that OSA made the transition less scary since I knew where the buildings were and had a good idea of how things would occur like classes, midterms, booking tests. Just knowing that was a big deal to help you stay calm and that was big with feeling prepared for university.

None of the participants were part of the peer-mentorship program that follows the summer

program, although they were all aware that it was an available resource if they needed

additional assistance. For the three participants the resources they utilized once the summer

workshops ended was staying in touch with the coordinator of the program or with other staff

in the Accessibility Services office. All of the participants expressed that they would

recommend the program to other students, John made a really insightful comment that

encapsulates the core message that students shared, he said:

I was one of the skeptics, I was like ‘I don’t need anything, I will be fine, I can handle myself’ but there are always the little things that you don’t think about, even if I am completely independent and think ‘oh, I don’t need the program for what it is offering, I would say go!” I missed out on the other workshops and they would have perhaps benefited me in other ways that I don’t know because I never attended. So I would say go, they always have something to offer.

It is interesting to note that while John only attended one of the workshops and earlier had

noted that attending the one workshops was all he needed, he comes to the realization that

perhaps attending more of the workshops would have benefited him in other ways. I chose this

quote to exemplify what the other participants expressed because John says he was “one of the

skeptics” about how the program would benefit and we can see through the quote that he

gained helpful tools to help him transition.

                               104            

 

Students did have minimal constructive feedback to enhance the program. Stephanie

shared that she would have liked to receive more faculty-specific information so that she could

familiarize herself with her faculty before the beginning of the semester (although she

recognized that this was something her faculty did offer once the semester began). John

recommended that the program focus a bit more on helping students navigate the physical

space of the university and introduce them to different classrooms with different types of set-

ups.

Conclusion of Case 3

The One-step Ahead transition program at Spartan University offers students four

academic workshops over a five-day period. Students have the option to attend all of the

workshops or only attend the workshops that they are most interested in. This is a unique

characteristic of this program as it is the only in the study that has this format. Another unique

component of the program is that students are encouraged to attend the workshops with their

parents so that they can also become familiarized with the new academic expectations in

university. Prior to the week when the workshops are offered, there is an orientation session

that students are encouraged to attend where the program coordinator goes over basic

information about SU and where she reviews the format of the program. Different orientation

sessions are offered during the summer up until the week leading up to the official start of the

program, which occurs one week before the start of the semester.

Three students who attended the program between 2013 and 2014 participated in the

study (two females and one male). All three of the students explained that they had signed up

to participate in the program in order to prepare for the transition from high school to

university. All three students were very motivated to attend, particularly because they wanted

                               105            

 

to ensure that they would get the assistance and accommodations pertaining to their learning

disability. Students attended between 1-3 workshops and highlighted that they enjoyed having

the option and flexibility to choose what to attend. Students felt that they received sufficient

information and support during the workshops they attended and felt that this prepared them to

ease some of the anxiety they felt about starting university.

Case 4: 5-Day (In-residence) Transition Program

On Your Mark transition program (OYM) is a week-long in-residence program at

Royal University run through RU’s Accessibility Services office. Students are recruited

through a host of ways, including through RU’s open houses in the Fall and March where the

program coordinator speaks to prospective students about the program, by sending recruitment

materials and information to RU’s feeder high schools, by posting the information online, and

through word of mouth. Approximately 20 students with learning disabilities are selected to

participate in the program each year. Students submit an application that is reviewed by the

program coordinator. The application is composed of a personal statement where students are

asked to state why they want to attend the program, what they hope to gain and learn from the

program, and documentation that states that the student has a learning disability. For those

students who are not selected to participate in the program, they are re-routed to other services

or transition programs offered through RU. The structure of the program has changed since its

inception. The first year the program operated over a ten-day period, however, student

feedback revealed that the length was too long. After reviewing student feedback the program

was shortened to less than five days and this year students expressed that the program was too

short. Thus, the program was re-framed to run over a weeklong period and students have been

                               106            

 

satisfied with this length. The program coordinator explained that the program includes the

residence component as RU is a residential campus and this opportunity would give students a

sense of living away from home and living with roommates.

The OYM transition program is structured and modeled based on a typical week of

university for first year students. The week is composed of different workshops, lectures, and

social activities. The program runs from Sunday to Saturday, typically during the first week of

July each year. The core activities of the program (e.g. lectures, workshops, etc.) happen

between Monday – Friday, where Sunday and Saturday are mostly designed to get students

settled into and out of their dorm room. A unique component of OYM is that students receive a

report card at the end of the week on their performance on assignments and a grade for their

overall participation. This grade does not go on the students’ transcripts, but it is rather for

students to get a sense of their academic performance prior to beginning university. Students

are expected to attend the full duration of the program and participate in all of the lectures,

workshops, and activities offered during the week. For the duration of the program students

live in RU’s student residences where they share a room with same-gender roommates and are

supervised and monitored by Resident Assistants (RA’s) who facilitate after-hour activities,

such as board game nights and community outings.

In the next section I describe the daily activities in detail followed by describing

students’ experiences and reflections prior, during, and after OYM.

Sunday. Students check in to their dorm and meet their roommates as well as the RA’s

and the program coordinator. This is also the day when the parent session is hosted. The

Program Coordinator delivers the parent session, which explains the details of the program and

provides information about how parents can support their child as they make the transition to

                               107            

 

university. Parents also learn about programs and services available for students through RU’s

Accessibility Services as well as other programs and services delivered through RU. While

parents are in the session, the RAs run a simultaneous session with students in which they

explain the rules and expectations while staying in the dorms and provide an overview of the

week’s social activities and events. Following the student and parent sessions (which run for

two hours) there is a BBQ for parents, students, and staff. Once the BBQ is over the students’

parents leave and students return to their dorms with the RA’s and get ready to begin the first

day of the program on the following day.

Monday. This is the first official day of the program. The day runs from 9:00am to

3:30pm beginning with breakfast followed by an introduction to the week. On this first day

students receive a course outline that delineates the expectations of the program, required

readings during the week, and the breakdown of the assignments and how they will be graded.

This course outline is supposed to replicate a class syllabus so that students can begin to

familiarize themselves with following a syllabus in their courses. In addition to the

introduction to the program, students attend three workshops: 1. Being your own advocate; 2.

Writing; 3. Introduction to adaptive technology. Following these workshops, students return to

their dorms for dinner and participate in activities planned by the RAs. During this first day,

students receive a meal card that they can use to purchase breakfast and lunch during the week.

Tuesday. On the second day students attend three workshops and have an opportunity

to hear from a student panel. The three workshops include: 1) note taking; 2) strategies for test

and exam preparation as well as managing anxiety; and 3) time-management. Students also

hear from a panel of former OYM students who share their experiences transitioning to RU.

The day runs from 9:00am to 4:30pm followed by the activities planned with the RA’s.

                               108            

 

Wednesday. The third day is an interesting day during the program because students

begin to have choices regarding what activities and sessions they want to attend. For example,

during the first block of the day, students can attend either a financial assistance workshop or a

summer class lecture. The program coordinator asks professors who are teaching classes

during the summer if OYM students can attend one class lecture so they can experience being

in an actual lecture and get a sense of what to expect on the first day of class. Following these

concurrent activities, students get the option to attend a series of adaptive technology

workshops that run through the rest of the week. There are five workshops in this series and

students need to attend three of the five. The workshops include: affordable adaptive programs,

note taking and audio recording tools, using Kurzweil 3000 and TextHelp, and using

alternative texts. On this day the affordable adaptive programs and note taking and audio

recording tools workshops are offered. Following these workshops, all students are required to

attend a study and memory session and a session on transitioning from high school to

university. This day the programming runs from 8:30 am to 8:00 pm, followed by activities

planned by the RAs.

Thursday. The fourth day mirrors the structure of the third day, however it is shorter.

Once again, students have options in choosing what sessions they want to attend; they can

choose to attend the remainder of the assistive technology workshops or choose from three

class lectures. Following a lunch break all students are required to meet for a session that

explores exam preparation strategies. The day concludes at 4:30 pm and students return to the

dorm for social activities.

Friday. On the last day of the program students take a final comprehensive exam. The

format of the exam is a multiple choice and short answer questions and it is worth 30% of their

                               109            

 

overall grade. Students have one hour to complete the exam, but can arrange for

accommodations three days prior to the date. The format and length of the exam as well as

students asking for accommodations if needed are another example of how the program tries to

emulate an actual university activity. Following the exam students enjoy lunch together as well

as other social activities. The day runs from 10am – 3:30pm.

Saturday. On this day students engage in a de-briefing activity with the program

coordinator, following the debriefing session students check out of their dorm.

Student Experiences in OYM.

A total of six students who attended OYM participated in the study, five females and

one male. Student participants represented all three cohorts (2012-2014), see Table 8. One

interview was conducted via Skype, one of the interviews was conducted as a group with two

participants, and the rest of the interviews were conducted in-person, one-on-one. All, but one

of the participants currently attend RU and the other student attends a different university.

Table 8 On Your Mark Transition Program Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended

OYM Lorraine F 2012 Kristie F 2014 Rebecca F 2012 Nancy F 2013 Jenna F 2014 Aaron M 2014

Participants were asked to reflect on their experiences and perception prior, during, and after

attending the summer transition program.

                               110            

 

Experiences prior to OYM. I asked students to think back at the summer prior to

attending the summer transition program and to reflect on what they were most worried about

and most excited about attending university.

Theme 1 - Feeling nervous. The majority of the participants recalled being worried

about how they would perform academically once they started university. For example Jenna

shared:

I was most worried about being able to handle it, I didn’t know how much work there would be, how different it would be, and how I would be working and learning. In high school I had a lot of support in place and I was always getting told that in university I wouldn’t have that, so I had to prepare to take a lot by myself and that worried me.

Jenna was not the only student who talked about being worried about university based on the

messages she received from people in high school about what university would be like.

Lorraine recalled that while in high school teachers talked about how much more difficult

university would be and this made her worry. When I asked her what she was most worried

about coming to university she explained, “probably grades, how it was going to be, because

everyone was saying ‘oh, you know it is going to be really tough, your grades are going to

drop 10%, profs don’t care.’” As she recalled this anecdote, she could not help to laugh and

followed-up by saying “so I think I might have been concerned about that but after the

program I don’t think I felt that anymore.” Aaron also recalled receiving similar messages

while in high school, he recalled

Teachers from high school were always giving me warnings like, ‘oh you are going to have to copy notes faster in university’ or ‘you are in competition with so many people that it can get really hard, really fast and you find it really intimidating.’

From these types of messages from teachers, Aaron concluded that he would have to work

twice as hard, especially given that was coming to university with a learning disability. Aaron

                               111            

 

was not the only participant who had considered his learning disability as a potential setback,

Nancy shared: “I had always been a B student and I got accepted with a conditional acceptance

and my parents told me it was because I had a learning disability. So I was pretty scared.”

Theme 2 – Parental influence. Students who attended OYM recalled being encouraged

to attend their program by their parents, particularly their mother. When I asked students to

recall how they had learned about the program four of them cited their mother as the primary

source. Jenna recalled, “my mom does a lot of googling and she was looking around the RU

website and she found out about the program and asked me if I wanted to go. At first I was

hesitant.” Lorraine shared a similar experience,

I didn’t know about it [summer transition program] it was my mom. I had registered with the centre [Accessibility Services at RU] and they called my house or we got an email about it and my mom was like ‘you are going to do this’ and I was like ‘ok.’

Aaron happily replied, “my mom told me about it. She was very active about looking for help.” Finally, Kristie mentioned that she learned about the program while visiting RU for an open

house with her mother. While at the open house she and her mother came across a booth for

Accessibility Services where they received information about the summer transition program.

Kristie recalled, “my mom was really active about me getting accommodations that I needed it

so she encouraged me to go.” The other two students learned about the program online on

RU’s Accessibility Services’ website.

Theme 3 – Uncertain expectations. I asked students to reflect on what they were

expecting to gain from their participation in OYM once they had registered from the program.

A couple of students shared that they were not expecting too much of the program (or did not

know what to expect) because the reason why they were attending was that their parent had

                               112            

 

told them to do so. For example, Lorraine remembered, “I didn’t actually know what to expect

from the program, I was just like ‘uhh this thing my mom wants me to go to…whatever, I’ll

go.’ Jenna recalled that she was hesitant to attend because for many years her mother had made

her attend various summer camps and this program reminded her of those experiences. Jenna

recalled that it was her mother who explained to her the benefit of meeting other students with

learning disabilities, she explained:

There was something in me, I don’t know, maybe I didn’t want to express having a LD and owning it – focusing on it. But then my mom explained the program and I started to think that knowing other people in the same or similar situation would be valuable because I never had friends with LDs before.

Rebecca recalled a similar situation where she decided to attend the program because she

wanted to meet students who she could relate to. She shared:

I thought that I would go and make friends in university because it would be good to know people who understand my situation and it was really good. I made some really good friends and we had some really good talks about things that other people don’t get.

Other participants were looking forward to gaining information about how to navigate the

university and to gain academic skills to prepare them for their first year. Nancy recalled:

I expected to learn how university works, I heard that you could sit in a class and I was really excited about doing that because I had no idea what the classes would be like. I also hoped to figure out whether or not I could handle the coursework given how low my grades were.

There was a mixture between the participants who signed up to do the OYM program because

it was something their parents/s had “told” them to do and students who signed up because

they wanted to learn academic skills and how to navigate university. As I learned more about

their experiences in the program it was clear that regardless of the reason why they chose to

                               113            

 

attend, the outcome was very positive for all of them. In the next section I present students’

experiences during OYM.

Experiences of students during the OYM. I asked students to recall their first day of

the program to get a sense at how these experiences and thoughts progressed over the week.

Theme 3 - Making connections with peers. While some of the students recalled being a

bit shy during the first day or worrying about meeting new people, all of them remembered

feeling instantly welcomed and being able to connect with other students. Aaron shared how

he felt on the first day,

I am a really shy person at first, so I was really salty at the beginning because I was like ‘awwh, meet new people’ but then as the day went on I was like ‘oh, it’s ok!’ by the second day it was amazing!, they make the program very friendly.

Rebecca recalled being impressed with the interactions she had with her peers at first,

Some people were more outgoing than others, but everyone was really friendly and excited. I think I was scared if people would be nice or if I would fit in, or if my roommate would be nice, but she was great!

Jenna had a very similar perception of meeting other students in the program and explained:

First I was really nervous, but after a couple of hours I was really excited to get to know everyone and the RAs were really welcoming and really encouraging and it was clear it was going to be a really good week.

For all of the participants, their first impression and experiences during the first day was very

positive and this excitement carried on through the rest of the week as they got to know their

peers on a deeper level and as they got to meet other staff and faculty members.

Theme 4 – Utilizing program tools to succeed. Participants recalled receiving very

useful materials to help them during the week, including handouts, printed power point

presentations, and a USB key to save all of their assignments and other information. Students

                               114            

 

also received a binder containing helpful information, such as time-management sheets,

information about programs and services at RU, etc. Two of the participants talked about how

they still utilize the binder they received to search for helpful information. Lorraine talked

about how she still uses the binder even though she is now in her third year. She

enthusiastically noted:

I actually still have the binder in my room. I still go back to it a lot. Sometimes I forget and I need a refresher on good strategies for note taking or I have a friend who needs strategies for note taking. I can go into my binder and I have a long list of things that I can do.

Jenna shared a very similar account,

I still have my binder and it is full of things I learned. I even used it once to argue because my boyfriend’s roommate was trying to talk about how ADHD is not even that big of a problem – he was mad that I got extra time and he was trying to argue about that and then I used a bunch of the facts I learned to explain how extra time levels the playing field and I was so happy that I had that binder. The binder represents all the things that I learned and how it really made me confident in myself – everything that I learned kind of solidified what I knew about myself and changed how I think about having an LD.

These two quotes are powerful for two reasons; first, it is evident that these two students, both

in different years (Lorraine in third year and Jenna in first year) relied on their binder to

retrieve helpful information, whether this was academic or regarding learning disabilities.

Second, both students used the contents of their binder to educate their peers (both in very

different ways). Jenna elevates the value of the contents of the binder to helping her re-think

what it meant to have a LD and giving her more confidence in herself. The fact that she had

the tools to debunk a person’s personal opinion about ADHD with factual information is very

powerful.

Theme 5 – Learning content specific skills. Students shared that of all of the workshops

that they attended that time-management, adaptive technology, and self-advocacy were the

                               115            

 

most helpful. In the group interview that I did with Kristie and Aaron they talked about the

benefits of attending some of these workshops and specifically talked about self-advocacy.

Kristie talked about what had been most useful for her and shared:

I would say the note taking. In high school I didn’t really take notes, but here I am constantly reading the textbooks and they gave us a whole list of things we could use. The self advocacy one, that was a really big one – not that many first year students know how to do it, so if you get taught this it definitely helps you in the long run.

Aaron responded to this comment about self-advocacy by saying:

I think it is all about practice, the more you do it the better it will be. So I think this was the first time when I did it – I always considered my disability weakness and was like ‘I don’t need help’ I was stubborn that way, but after this I was accepting and now I am actually starting to tell my friends ‘listen, I may get things a little slower than you, so if you can please slow down.’

Theme 6 – Learning about how to be your own advocate. The program has two

activities related to self-advocacy; one activity is a session that is delivered by the program

coordinator on the first day of the program. The other activity on self-advocacy involves

assignments that make up part of the students’ overall grade. For these assignments, students

must write about their learning disability in a manner that explains how having a learning

disability impacts their learning; the second assignment requires that students talk to someone

in the program, for example the program coordinator or a RA, about their learning disability

and again, explain how their learning disability impacts their learning. These assignments are

supposed to help students explain their learning disability so that they are prepared to advocate

for themselves and ask for accommodations (or simply be more comfortable) when interacting

with others. Nancy recalled this activity being really helpful, she said, “you had to convince a

professor in writing to give you help that was not available in our plan and we had to write an

                               116            

 

essay that was graded. So now I am really good at self-advocating.” Rebecca, shared a similar

perspective saying:

The self-advocacy was great for me. It is hard to explain something that you understand but when someone is like ‘what is a learning disability?’ it can be weird. Now I tell my friends if they ask me, ‘you know, I think differently and it takes me extra time to process through the ideas, but eventually I get it.’ They are really accepting and help me out. So I have gotten better at it.

It is evident through these quotes that the self-advocacy workshop and assignments related to

this really helped students learn how to express and explain their learning disability, and even

helped them to be more self-accepting of having a learning disability. As Lorraine put it, “it is

one thing to write about it – having to talk about it was really helpful.” Learning academic

skills and self-advocacy were extremely beneficial to participants. Another critical aspect of

their experiences in OYM was the interactions with peers.

Theme 7 – The power of peers. Students had plenty of opportunities to interact with

their peers as they not only attended sessions and lectures together, but they also lived in

residence with each other. For most of these students this was the first time in their lives that

they were living away from home and were sharing a room with a peer. While some of the

students were a little nervous about how this they all really enjoyed the opportunity to stay in

residence during the week and the overall interactions they had with their peers. A quote by

Jenna exemplifies the overall sentiment shared by students about staying in residence. She

shared:

The person who was my roommate at OYM is basically one of the closest friends I have here. Our group of friends is five students; we met at OYM. We are really good friends, we are able to share things that I can’t share with other people. They can sympathize; it is a really nice experience.

Nancy concluded with Jenna stating:

                               117            

 

With OYM under my belt it was the first time that I had a group of friends where we all had learning disabilities and we understood what each other had gone through and that has been something really valuable to me. Because even though I have friends who don’t have LDs and they are really good friends, I just get something different out of friendships with people who are in a similar situation.

Having a critical mass of students with learning disabilities go through the program together

seemed to be an extremely beneficial aspect for students who not only became great friends,

but made friends with people who understood their circumstances and experiences. In the next

section I present students’ reflections after the OYM transition program.

Students’ reflection after OYM transition program. I asked students to reflect on their

experiences in the summer and how they felt it had prepared them transition into first year. It is

interesting to note that participants from each of the cohorts, 2012-2014, participated in this

study, so I was able to capture different experiences across different years and hear how what

students’ learned in the program extended beyond first year. It is evident from the quotes

presented in the previous sections that students who attended OYM had very positive

experiences, gained valuable information to help them prepare for university, and whether in

first year or third year, all students continue to utilize what they learned to help them succeed

in university.

Students were very pleased with the format and length of the program. In their

interview, Kristie and Aaron concurred that attending the program was a great decision as it

prepared them to enter university. Kristie shared, “It was definitely a good decision I made

because it did help me transition into university and not be so scared or nervous, or stressed –

that week was just phenomenal to be honest.” Aaron echoed this and commented, “I wish it

was two-weeks long! It cushioned the blow…it was just really comforting and really good.”

Lorraine, the participant who originally mentioned she had joined the program only because

                               118            

 

her mother had told her to, admitted that the program had been a great experience, she

recalled:

It was fantastic! It was so good. I came out feeling really prepared and I felt like I had a lot better study habits than a lot of people I was surrounded by that did not have a learning disability. When I got there in the first week I was prepared, I was ready, I was motivated – I was prepared and excited to learn about things, whereas other people were still trying to navigate everything else, like residence and food, but I was ready and I was focused on studying and making friends and I had such a great first year because of it – it was one of the best years of my life.

Lorraine was also the student who shared at the beginning that one of her biggest worries when

coming to university was academic work and being able to keep her marks up, because in high

school her teachers had warned her that in university students’ marks typically go down 10%.

She proudly pointed out by the end of the interview that her marks during first year did not go

down at all, and instead she saw an increase. Jenna was another student who mentioned at the

beginning of her interview that her mom was the person who had encouraged her to attend the

program and that while she enrolled in the program she was afraid it would be another summer

camp experience. However, Jenna was happy to report the following:

I think it was much more that I expected – I didn’t expect it to be so fun. I was a really, really fun experience – a meaningful experience because I made really good bonds with people and I am still really good friends with them and they are very important in my life now.

The quotes by Jenna and Lorraine exemplify how the program was successful at engaging

participants, even those who were skeptical and had reservations about what they would gain

by attending. Students not only gained academic skills to prepare them for their first year, but

also had fun while making new connections with peers; connections that extended beyond the

summer transition program. A comment by Nancy exemplifies the strong bonds that students

made with their peers, she shared: “Having the support of other people going through the same

                               119            

 

exact thing as me was so useful. Now I can say ‘hey are you guys still here?’ ‘yes we are still

here’ ‘ok good.’” It is noteworthy to point out that Nancy did not enroll at RU after the

summer transition program as she entered a different university in the province. However, she

talked about how she remained in touch with those students from RU and remained friends

with them from afar.

One last interesting observation about students’ experiences in the OYM program was

their perception regarding the feedback and grade they received upon completing the program.

OYM is the only program in the study that provides students with a grade upon completing the

program. The purpose of this grade is solely to give students a perspective of how they might

perform academically and to provide them with a more realistic university experience. This

grade does not appear on students’ official transcripts. Students shared that the grade and the

feedback provided both motivation for them during the program and also provided them with

encouragement about how to improve when university actually started. For example, Kristie

and Aaron concurred that knowing that they were going to be graded was a motivator to stay

on top of their assignments. Kristie shared: “it kept you motivated to go to the classes, you felt

like you had purpose. For example, we had to hand in the writing assignment, I think I was

thinking ‘oh if I don’t do it I will get kicked out.’ That is one of the reasons I did it.” Aaron

concurred with Kristi’s comment and added,

It gives you time to change if you don’t do well in the assignments. They would tell you on the writing assignments, ‘oh you have to work on this’ and it gave you the opportunity to review your writing so you could see where you messed up and you can see where you can improve.

Another example of how the feedback and grading had a positive impact on students in the

program comes from Jenna who explained,

                               120            

 

I remember there was a writing assignment where I got 12.5/15 and the person marking it said she had marked it like she would mark any university student and she wasn’t keeping in mind that we had LDs or that it was a summer program and I was really proud of myself. I was feeling good about that.

It is evident from this quote that Jenna really appreciated the candid feedback and grade that

she received and the fact that there was no special consideration taken by the person grading

her paper regarding her learning disability or the fact that it was a summer program. In

addition to the grade and the feedback on assignments, Jenna also appreciated the overall

feedback of her participation provided to her by the OYM program coordinator. She

recounted,

At the end of the week there was some written feedback and it was really encouraging. And even if the coordinator noticed things that I would need to improve on or need help with she just wrote that there are resources available to help you and if you can manage this you will be golden. Really encouraging stuff. I think she said ‘I was really impressed by your perseverance this week.’ And I thought it was really reassuring because in high school we didn’t get enough of that…Your only feedback is the mark you get and that indicates to you if you are good enough or not, and being a student with a LD, your marks will always turn out lower than matches your potential.

There are two important messages in Jenna’s comment above. First, the feedback she received

from the coordinator seemed to provide Jenna with encouragement but also with constructive

criticism (as well as where to find support to help her). Secondly, Jenna highlights how in high

school she did not receive this level of support and encouragement and took her grades at face

value as a measure of her academic ability. Receiving positive feedback really made an impact

on Jenna and the other participants in the program.

Conclusion of Case 4

The On Your Mark transition program is a five-day (inclusive), in-residence, transition

program at Royal University. The program typically runs during the first week in July each

year. Unlike other transition programs in this study, students have to apply and be admitted to

                               121            

 

take part in OYM. To apply, students must submit an application along with a personal

statement stating how they would benefit from participating in the program. Twenty students

are selected each year to participate in the program. The week is modeled after a typical week

in university where students make choices about the workshops or classes that are offered

(although the first two days all students attend the same sessions). Another unique

characteristic of this program from the other transition programs in the study is that it provides

students with a report card at the end of the program where the program coordinators provides

students with feedback about their performance during the program (students complete

assignments throughout the program).

Six students who attended the OYM program between 2012 and 2014 participated in

this study (five females and one male). Given the variability of students who had attended the

program during different years, I was able to collect rich data regarding their experiences in

the program. Across cohorts, students reported having exceptional and transformational

experiences in the OYM transition program. Students reported having gained invaluable skills

that helped them in their transition to first year (and often beyond) and felt ready and prepared

to start university following the program. While students highlighted having gained similar

academic benefits and skills as other students in the other transition programs, what they

seemed to have enjoyed the most was forming strong bonds with one-another. The OYM

program is one of two programs in the study that runs for five days but in OYM students live

in residence. Living in residence was a transformational experience for many of the

participants because they got to learn about each other’s experiences, form a sense of

community, and find common experiences.

                               122            

 

An interesting finding was that students reported appreciating the report card they

received at the end of the program. Students noted that knowing that they were going to be

graded motivated them to attend all of the sessions and take this experience very seriously

(although this grade would not appear in their transcript). Participants appreciated the feedback

that they received from the program coordinator and took this into consideration as they

transitioned into their first year.

Case 5: 5-Day (Non-Residential) Summer Transition Program

The Prepare for Success (PFS) transition program is a five-day (weekdays), 9am-4pm,

summer transition program for students with learning disabilities and/or ADHD at Viking

University (VU). The program typically runs at the beginning of July each year. An interesting

aspect of PFS is that it has a five-day sister program, Nature, offered to participants that

happens subsequently one week after PFS that is intended to provide students an opportunity

for self-discovery and team building while exploring Nature. Nature is an optional program

that PFS students can choose to attend and it is also open to students that do not attend PFS.

The PFS program has shifted from its current structure over the years. According to the

program coordinator, the program was initially offered online, very much like the

Transitioning to Success program from Nautical University. The program then morphed into a

five-day, in-residence program up until the summer of 2013 and then changed to a five-day

program with no residence option in the summer of 2014. One of the reasons for the change in

format that the program coordinator cited was the cost associated with hosting all students in

residence. This is the only transition program in this study that changed its format during the

three years that are being examined. This is particularly interesting as students who

                               123            

 

participated in the in-residence and non-residential program between 2012-2014 shared their

experiences.

Students are recruited through a variety of means, including local radio

announcements, by sending information about the program to the local high school district,

and in-person when students visit Viking University’s Accessibility Services centre. The

program coordinator shared that recruitment can be difficult at times, and shared that last year

when students registered for the PFS program they were asked how they had heard about the

program and every single student noted different means. While recruitment is often

challenging, the program still enrolls between 20-25 students each year. As with other

institutions, students who register for the program may be attending Viking University or

another university or college depending on what is most practical for the student (e.g student is

attending a university far from their home and would like to stay close for the summer thus

choosing a transition program near their home). Students register for the program by filling out

a simple online form. There is no cost for students to participate in the program and meals

(lunch and a coffee gift card are provided) and materials (e.g. note-book and handouts) are

provided through the PFS program.

The PFS program is overseen by the Director of Viking University’s Accessibility

Services and coordinated and managed by the program coordinator who receives support from

work-study students and a learning strategist during the five-day program. The program

coordinator is also involved in the planning of the Nature program as well as other student

volunteers and program staff. The purpose of Nature is to provide PFS students with an

opportunity for self-discovery and community building in an unstructured setting. For five

days and four nights, participants camp in a provincial park and engage in nature-type

                               124            

 

activities such as canoeing and hiking. The program hires professional guides to lead the group

through these activities for the duration of the program. Through these activities students begin

to build meaningful connections with one another, have an opportunity to build self-confidence

as they work through physical activities, and have an opportunity to reflect on their

experiences in the PFS program. The program coordinator referred to Nature as a rite of

passage for some students. Three of the six participants in this case participated in the Nature

program and I delineate their experiences in the next section.

Following the PFS and Nature program, the program coordinator hosts two events

during the year, one in the fall semester and one in the winter semester, where students reunite

to connect with one another and where they have an opportunity to reflect on their experiences

thus far. The program coordinator also keeps in touch with students via e-mail where she

provides them information and reminders about upcoming events.

Day 1. The first day of the program is primarily dedicated to providing students with an

overview of Viking University’s Accessibility Services as well as to provide students an

opportunity to introduce themselves to the group and meet their peers. During this day students

learn about the test and exam services at Viking University, attend a session on self-awareness,

and receive a tour of the Viking University campus.

Day 2. On the second day, students are introduced to more specific knowledge about

resources to help them transition to university and attend three main sessions; one session is on

financial assistance (both provincial and specific for students with disabilities), one session is a

on developing self-awareness, and one session teaches students about online resources to help

them academically. On this day, students are also introduced to pet therapy, a program that is

                               125            

 

offered at Viking University’s Accessibility centre. Students begin to bond informally through

a picnic lunch that is offered through the program.

Day 3. The third day of the program focuses on teaching students about the importance

of wellness and maintaining a healthy life balance. Students attend four main sessions that

include, mindfulness meditation, yoga for stress management, talking through emotions, and

soul writing. Students also watch two inspirational videos (a TEDTalk on mindfulness and

Ennis’ Gift). The day concludes with a tour of Viking University’s athletic centre.

Day 4. On day four students learn about learning tools and learning styles. This is a

busy day for students as they attend sessions dedicated to learning strategies, time

management, note taking, and self-advocacy. Students also have the option of attending one of

two mock lectures (one mock lecture is a math lecture and the other is a humanities lecture)

depending on their academic interest.

Day 5. The focus of the last day is to expose students’ to programs and services at

Viking University. An important event on this day is the student panel composed of former

PFS students who share with the new students their experiences transitioning to university and

answer any questions the students have. The day concludes with the Director of Accessibility

Services giving closing remarks and with students watching an inspirational video.

In the next section I describe students’ experiences in PFS prior, during, and after the

program to provide the reader with an overview of students’ experiences.

Student Experiences in PFS.

A total of six students participated in the study, four males and two females. All

interviews were conducted in-person, with two students participating together in a focus group

and the rest participating on a one-on-one interview. The students who participated encompass

                               126            

 

the three cohorts (2012-2014) represented in this study and thus yielded interesting results as

the program changed from being a residential summer program to non-residential program last

year. In Table 9 I depict the participants.

Table 9 Prepare for Success Transition Program Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended

PFS Jeremy M 2012 Judy F 2013 George M 2014 Geoff M 2014 Taylor M 2014 Sophie F 2014

Experiences prior to PFS I asked students to reflect on their thoughts and feelings

about starting university before beginning the PFS program to gauge how the program may

have eased or reinforced some of their anxieties, worries, and excitement. Students candidly

shared the things they were most excited and most worried about before about starting

university and their comments resonate with what other students from other institutions had to

share.

Theme 1 - Feeling nervous. Overall, students who attended the PFS program shared

that what they were most worried about was the new academic expectations and how to

manage their disability in this new environment. George shared,

It is probably easier to list what I wasn’t worried about, but probably the volume of work, the lectures and how that was going to work out. I know I was certainly worried about how the accommodation system would work, that was a big blank space that I did not know anything about.

                               127            

 

Geoff echoed this sentiment by stating, “I was most worried about the exams and completing

assignments because I wasn’t really sure how it worked…That was the thing that I was most

nervous about.” The other participants had very similar worries and concerns as George and

Geoff and often cited feeling anxious about university experience because they often did not

know what to expect, personally and academically. Having a learning disability certainly

impacted student perceptions about how university would be like, but this perception seemed

to shift once students completed the program. A recollection by Jeremy about what he was

most worried about in regards to starting university exemplifies this notion, he explained,

Wow, that is a tricky question, hmmm. Passing, I think that would be it. Being an IEP student in high school I kind of slacked off and now I was going to university and I didn’t know if I could still slack off – and I did at the beginning and then realized I had to stop. The transition program taught me a lot, we did a lecture once for three hours. We had a professor come and talk about economics and so he just did a sample lecture of how it would be like and that made me less worried about being in university.

In this comment Jeremy mentions being an IEP student, which means that, he had an

individualized education plan (IEP) – these are designed for students with disabilities in high

school and indicate what accommodations and learning assistance students require in the high

school setting. The way he describes being an IEP student in this quote hints that there might

have been a different expectation to how should he perform. From his description it is evident

that the transition program helped him realize that this kind of behavior would not be helpful

in succeeding in university, which is a positive evolution for Jeremy as he describe his

experiences after the transition program. Other things students cited as worrisome were talking

to professors and being able to manage their time independently in university.

Theme 2 – Being excited about new possibilities. However, being nervous about being

in a new academic environment was described as both being nerve-racking and exciting.

                               128            

 

Students shared that what they were most excited about was exploring program specific

knowledge and having a different academic experience from high school. Taylor shared, “I

was most excited for the program and what I was going to be learning, it was certainly new

and it sounded very interesting to me.” Judy expressed a similar feeling, she said “I was most

excited about making new friends, getting involved in the campus…yeah, I was really excited

to start my academics.” Overall, students had mixed feelings about starting university, but

these feelings seemed to be balanced in terms of nervousness and excitement. In the next

section I describe students’ experiences in the PFS program.

Students’ experiences during PFS. Students reflected on their experiences during the

transition program and for those who participated in PFS sister program, Nature, I asked them

to also share their experiences and perceptions as of that program. Students enthusiastically

talked about what they learned and gained by attending the PFS program and also shared ways

that components of the program could be improved or enhanced.

Theme 3 – Finding community. A common thread amongst the responses regarding

students’ experiences was how much they learned about themselves and their learning

disability, at times even expressing how they became accepting and more kind to themselves

having explored what it really meant to have a LD. Students also shared the excitement they

felt when they met other students who had experienced similar challenges or students who had

similar interest. A comment by Geoff exemplifies this message. He enthusiastically shared

what he felt on the first day of PFS. Geoff shared,

I was shocked at how many people were similar to my situation, I couldn’t even believe it! I was like ‘wow!’ I think we all sensed that, we could all help each other a little bit seeing how things worked.

                               129            

 

Other participants were simply excited to set foot on campus, and for the two who participated

in the program in 2012 and 2013 when the program had the residence component talked about

being very excited about staying in residence while attending the program. Taylor shared that

coming to Viking University from his home town was exciting because he had never really

been to a large city before, he said “I was from the country, so it was different going to [PFS]

for the week. What I was most excited about was living in residence and living in the city.”

Theme 4 – Learning content specific skills. I asked students to recall what were the

most helpful topics and skills they had learned during the course of the week. As students in

other transition programs in this study, participants of the PFS program found that attending a

mock lecture, learning strategies, adaptive technology, and hearing from a student panel were

the most helpful activities and skills that they learned. As Jeremy stated,

It was definitely interesting [attending a mock lecture], you always have this idea about the professor will be, but he was very nice and he obviously did this on his own time – he did us a favour and it has really helpful. He was inspiring, it was like “wow, this is what a room looks like, this is how big the rooms are!” we learned a lot from him.

For Jeremy, attending a mock lecture demystified whatever expectations he had about what

professors were like and familiarized him with the physical space, which he seems to have

truly appreciated. He continued to describe his experience and explained how what he learned

from this mock lecture carried him through his second year. Jeremy continued,

He [the professor] also talked about what not to do in class and he always said to sit at the front – these were good suggestions that I actually took. He also talked about what to expect and how to get a good mark – he also mentioned to always sit at the front of the class, that is something that I took that really helped me during first and second year.

George shared his excitement regarding an insightful presentation that was given by a staff

member at Viking University regarding career options. What George enjoyed about this

                               130            

 

presentation was that the presenter disclosed that he also had a learning disability and this

really inspired George, he explained,

One presentation that really stood out for me was the career presentation, I forgot his name but he was showing us how [Viking University] has a good career centre and to look into your career options – it was very interesting. He had a learning disability himself, and that really helped me connect, it was very interesting and I was really excited about it.

This was an empowering observation by George. Meeting a staff member who was open

regarding his learning disability was an experience that was influential and this helped him

connect with the staff member and the material that was covered. In addition to meeting staff

from the career centre at VU, students were also introduced to other staff members from other

services, such as the math and writing centers, the library, and even the campus’ athletic

facilities. When I asked Geoff if he felt that after meeting staff from these services whether he

felt he had a good grasp on what was available at VU he said “better than a good grasp! Better

than people just walking into the services on the first day.”

Theme 5 - The power of peers. Peer interactions were highly regarded by students and

cited as one of the most influential experiences during and after the PFS program. For the two

students who stayed in residence during the 2012 and 2013 programs, the bonding experience

with their peers was particularly strong, which was also the case for the students who attended

the Nature program. Taylor conveys the message that students conveyed time and time again

in regards to meeting peers in the program, he recounted,

It was really cool; I got to meet a lot of people – a lot of people who had learning disabilities. In high school it is a bit different, you kind of keep it a secret when someone asks you where you did your test, you are just like ‘I did it somewhere else,’ you kind of just shrug it off. I made a lot of friends and I realized I saw myself in them, some of their disabilities I had, some I didn’t have, some of their disabilities were worse than mine so it was like ‘don’t be frustrated with your disability when someone else has it worse.’

                               131            

 

This quote encapsulates the messages that I consistently heard from students, not just students

in the PFS program, but students across programs in this study. Time and time again, students

connected with each other on a very personal level regarding their disability and the challenges

that this often posed for them. However, it was also an opportunity to be open and to feel

comfortable with one another and learning from each other’s experiences. The underlying

message described by Taylor is having a sense of belonging amongst his peers, something that

he had not experienced in high school. Meeting peers with similar experiences allowed him to

put into perspective his own situation. Taylor continued to recount what is was like to be able

to meet peers like himself and how this had helped him understand that a learning disability

does not mean that you cannot succeed or do as well as students who do not have a learning

disability. He continued,

It showed me that [having] learning disabilities doesn’t make you any less smarter than anyone else, it just makes you –your intelligence – you just learn different and in high school you have this stigma but now I have realized through [PFS] and getting accommodations, being pro-active…I was kind of the cool kid because I got extra time on the test and it really didn’t matter.

This realization by Taylor is very powerful and it is one that many students in the study came

to understand as they participated in the transition programs. Meeting peers with similar

experiences truly impacted how they perceived having a learning disability and often provided

encouragement and a sense of belonging that helped them overcome whatever negative

perceptions or stigma they carried for having a learning disability diagnosis. Other examples

where peers played a critical role for students was during the Nature program. The three

students who attended this program recalled extraordinary bonds with the peers and the staff

that participated in the outdoor trip. One common response to what they enjoyed most about

                               132            

 

this program was having an unstructured experience where they could learn organically from

one another and engage in truly building connections by exploring Nature. Students explained

that while the lessons they learned while in Nature where not academic like they were in the

PFS program, that they found them to be profoundly similar. For example, Geoff shared,

I remember I was terrified of jumping off the waterfall, but I ended up doing it and that was huge – even though school can be fearful just go and do it! Try not to think about it, just do it! That really stuck with me, and it still does.

George chimed in on this example and said, “at the very least you find out what you can do

yourself, physically and emotionally. It was very mental, you really had to believe you could

do it.” This is an example of how students connected what they experienced in Nature with

being a university student and this reinforced the messages they received during PFS. As

students shared these wonderful experiences I highlighted how there were these metaphors

from Nature that related to what they learned in PFS and Geoff responded, “and there are

many more experiences similar to that where you can take that moral, that learning and just

carry it over, and it is amazing.” Nature seems to have served a very important purpose for

those who attended as they transitioned to first year. Students not only bonded on a more

personal and organic level, but the change in setting and activities really inspired students and

recharged their excitement and readiness to begin university.

In the next section I describe students’ reflections on participating in the PFS program

and highlight some of the recommendations students had to enhance the program and students’

experiences.

Students’ reflection after PFS transition program. I asked students to reflect on how

the PFS program had influenced their transition to first year (and for some beyond) and to

                               133            

 

think about what they might change or add to the program to enhance it for future students. I

also asked students to provide feedback on the structure of the program (e.g. length and

format).

Theme 6 – Finding new confidence. All of the students shared that the structure of the

program felt right for them and that the tools and skills they gained prepared them to begin

university. For example, Sophie said,

I would say it worked for me. It was able to help me reinforce having a schedule, like ‘get up in the morning!’ I liked having breaks during the day and I always felt like I learned something each day. Even now I have a really good friend that I hang out with on a regular basis who was from the program.

At the beginning of the interview, Judy shared that she was both excited and nervous about

starting university, and I asked her how this had changed once she completed the PFS program

and started first year. She exclaimed,

The [PFS] program was a very positive experience about university and then when you are actually thrown in university to start your program you feel pressure – in my program I feel pressure all the time. So I thought [PFS] made me ready for the academic components of university life. I feel like I apply things that I learned in [PFS] every day – I am always trying to manage my time, make lists to help me figure out what to do, I’m always talking to professors trying to figure out accommodations.

At this point during the interview Judy revealed something interesting she had not yet

disclosed to me – she mentioned that before she found out about the PFS program and

registering with Accessibility Services at Viking University that she had contemplated not

signing up for accommodations. I asked her to elaborate why she had considered this and she

responded,

I think I wanted to be like everyone else in a sense, not rely on the system. I felt it would make me more different and when I talked to my parents they were like ‘no! Just give it a try; it is not going to make you different.’ Originally I thought I would just be a regular student…that was pretty stupid; that was not going to be a good idea.

                               134            

 

This is an interesting comment because it ties with some of the stigma that other students

mentioned throughout the study – this concept of being “regular” or “normal” was often

brought up by students. However, it was attending the summer transition programs and

meeting other students who also had learning disabilities that often help students have a

different perception of what it meant to learn differently. Taylor directly commented on this

process [see quote on pg. 143] of coming to terms with how having a learning disability did

not mean that one is less intelligent, rather one simply learns differently and can succeed just

as any student without a learning disability.

I asked students to reflect on how PFS had helped them as they transition to first year

and a quote by Jeremy reflects students’ common sentiment, he stated,

I think [PFS] definitely helped my social and academic life. I would always sit at the front like they told me, I would always take notes, paying attention in class and coming early to class. Sometimes I was too prepared.

Students who attended the PFS program certainly felt that they had gained sufficient skills to

navigate their first year and beyond. They spoke about utilizing the resources (printed

materials and handouts) that they had received during the program to refresh the academic

skills they had learned and some of them spoke about keeping in touch with the peers they met

during PFS.

Finally, I asked students if they had any constructive feedback for the program to

improve students’ experiences. The majority of students said that there was no need to change

any of the components, although when one of the students who had attended the program

while it had the residence component learned that this was no longer available she was

appalled and mentioned that she would definitely push to bring residence back as it was such

                               135            

 

an important part of her experience. Other students touched on how they felt that the program

supported them holistically and expressed that there was no need to change or add any of the

components. Only one student provided some constructive feedback for the program stating

that perhaps there could be more time spent on teaching students about different learning styles

and helping them explore which learning style they identify with the most and exploring how

you can learn differently in different subjects. Another suggestion the student had on how to

enhance the program was to spend some time introducing students to campus clubs and social

groups. All students who participated in the SPF program gladly admitted that they would

highly recommend the program to incoming students with learning disabilities.

Conclusion of Case 5

The Prepare for Success (PFS) transition program is a five-day (non-residential)

transition program at Viking University. The program operates during the first week of July

from Monday to Friday. The PFS transition program is the only program in the study that

changed its format between the three years I was examining (2012-2014). In both 2012 and

2013 the program operated over five days, but students lived in the campus residence during

the duration of the program. Starting in 2014, the program was restructured and the residence

component was omitted. An interesting component of the PFS transition program is its sister

program, Nature, an outdoor program intended for students who wish to explore nature while

exploring self-discovery. Nature takes place two weeks after the transition programs and it is

an optional activity for students.

Six students, representing all three cohorts, participated in the study (four males and

two females). Students’ experiences in the program did not differ too drastically regardless of

whether they participated in the program when it had the live-in residence option or once it

                               136            

 

was omitted. However, the two students who attended the program when it had the in-

residence component spoke excitedly about the opportunity they had to live with peers during

the program. Several of the participants were particularly vocal about the life-changing

experiences and realizations they had during the program. For example, students spoke about

how having the opportunity to meet other students with learning disabilities changed any

negative perceptions they had of themselves for having a learning disability – they came to the

understanding that having a learning disability simply means that they learn differently. One

student also spoke about learning to accept himself as he met other students who had

encountered similar experiences while in high school. He spoke about how in accepting his

learning disability he found new confidence in himself and his ability to succeed in university.

Students enjoyed the format of the program (both with the residence option and without) and

enjoyed having the opportunity to attend the Nature program, although only three of the six

students participated.

                               137            

 

Case 6: 8-Week Transition Program

Transition to Success Program (TTS) is an eight-week transition program offered

through the Accessibility Office at Nautical University (NU). The program operates both in-

person and online, although students complete the majority of the program online. The

program runs during the Winter term each year typically beginning in March and ending in

May. Students meet in person for three days, beginning with the first two days of the program

where they receive an introduction and orientation of the program and during the closing day

of the program once they complete the online portion. Unlike the other transition programs, the

TTS does not operate in the summer and it runs while students are enrolled in their last

semester of high school. The program originally ran in the summer (same online format) for

the first few years but shifted to the Winter and has remained this way for the past eight years.

A unique feature of this transition program is that it offers a discounted psycho-educational

assessment to students who complete the program (or the fee is waived if students qualify for

OSAP as they qualify for a bursary). This feature can incentivize student participation, as

colleges and universities in order for students to register with Accessibility Services and

receive accommodations typically require an updated psycho-educational assessment.

The purpose of the TTS is to help students increase their understanding and knowledge

of their learning disability and/or ADH/D, to help students learn how to effectively self-

advocate in the university setting, to develop learning strategies to cope with the new academic

demands, and to learn about services available for students with disabilities in postsecondary

institutions. There is no cost for students to attend the TTS. Students who wish to participate in

the program must be currently enrolled in high school (either grade 11 or 12) or be taking an

extra year of high school, have a diagnosis of a learning disability and/or ADH/D, are planning

                               138            

 

to attend postsecondary education in the fall semester of that same year, and have access to a

computer and internet. For the students who are enrolled in grade 11 it is recommended that

students complete the first half of the online component in grade eleven and the second half

during grade 12. Students are graded on the work that they submit and can either pass or have

the option of re-submitting their work until it is satisfactory.

The program is planned and coordinated by the Coordinator of the TTS program, who

also facilitates several of the sessions and activities during the three in-person meetings, and

who is also responsible for training and supervising the moderators of the online components.

The moderators of the online component are NU teacher candidates who provide their service

as part of their practicum requirement. Prior to beginning the program teacher candidates

receive 30 hours of training delivered by the program coordinator. Teacher candidates are

assigned a group of students each during the duration of the program and are responsible for

marking and providing feedback to students. Other staff are involved in the delivery of the

content during the in-person sessions including an adaptive technologist, the coordinator’s

supervisor, a psychologist, and teacher candidates.

Recruitment. Recruitment of students for the TTS program begins in the fall semester.

To recruit students the program coordinator reaches out to local high schools near NU and

provides information about the program along with pamphlets. In addition, the program

coordinator hosts information sessions for parents and students where she provides detailed

information of the format of the program and the requirements to participate. Right before the

beginning of the program the program coordinator visits high school students in the classroom

to provide a reminder about the program and to introduce herself to the students. Finally, the

                               139            

 

information and registration are posted on NU’s Accessibility Services office. Students can

register for the program beginning in the fall and through the end of January.

In-person day 1. The first in-person meeting runs between 9:00am to 3:30pm. As

students arrive they receive a complimentary breakfast and engage in icebreaker activities that

allow them the opportunity to meet and interact with one another. Students are provided with

an introduction overview of the format of the program and what the expectations are for

students. Students then spend one hour in a computer lab navigating the course website do an

online scavenger hunt that helps them familiarize themselves with the program. Following this

activity, there is a student panel composed of former TTS students who share their experiences

about transitioning to postsecondary education. Students receive a complimentary lunch and

during this time they have an opportunity to engage with other students and the staff. After

lunch, students have an opportunity to ask questions about the information they received so far

and begin to engage in conversation about transitioning to postsecondary education.

Facilitators then engage in discussion with students about learning disabilities and discuss

stigmas and stereotypes associated with LDs and how to re-define these as they transition to

postsecondary education. Students also begin to talk about their disability and how it impacts

their learning in small groups and watch a video on learning disabilities. At the end of the day

students are given another opportunity to ask questions or clarifications about the program.

In-person day 2. The second in-person day occurs immediately following the first in-

person meeting from 9:00am -3:30pm. Again, students are provided a complimentary breakfast

followed by icebreaker activities. Students then attend two workshops and watch a film titled

Aron’s Talk. The last two components of the day entail fun group activities and a wrap up

where students can ask remaining questions regarding the program.

                               140            

 

Online component. The online portion of the program is broken down into the

following five modules: 1) All About You; 2) Tools for Success; 3) Academic Strategies; 4)

College and University; 5) The Road to Independence. Each of these modules is comprised of

several topics and I explain these in detail in the next section. Goals and objectives are

delineated at the beginning of each module so that students know what to expect and what they

should gain from each of the components. Students are given specific written assignments

within each of the modules or are expected to engage with their peers in the group forum.

Some of the modules include videos or supplementary materials to help students clarify

questions or deepen their understanding of the topics being covered. Students complete the

modules at their own pace. The online modules are moderated and graded by teacher

candidates at NU. Moderators provide students with on-going feedback on their assignments

through the duration of the program. Ideally, students complete the program within the official

duration of the program (between March – May), as this is the time when teacher candidates

can provide them with feedback. However, if students do not complete they can continue to

work until necessary, but at this point the feedback and the grading is conducted by the

program coordinator.

Module 1 – all about you. This module is intended to give students an opportunity to

reflect and set goals of what they want to gain from the course. Students are also expected to

introduce themselves to the group via the online platform and are asked to connect with a few

peers with whom they may have something in common. This is an opportunity for students to

begin to build a virtual community with their peers. In this module students also learn about

learning strategies and have an opportunity to identify their academic strengths and areas for

growth and deepen their understanding about learning disabilities. They are also asked to

                               141            

 

reflect on what having a learning disability means to them. The last activity in this module is

for students to begin developing a summative presentation they must present during the last in-

person day of the program. During this presentation, students must demonstrate what they have

learned in the course

Module 2 – tools for success. This module focuses on academic skills to help students

transition into their new academic environment. The module begins with tips about getting

motivated and beating procrastination. The second part of the module focuses on time-

management and stress-management. For this second section of the module students are asked

to create a two-week schedule of their daily activities using a template. This activity is used to

help students see how they spend their hour-by-hour and to begin to understand how they

could be using their time more effectively. The third part of the module focuses on strategies to

study and complete assignments, such as breaking down assignments into smaller tasks and

finding spaces to work more effectively. The fourth activity of this module focuses on problem

solving. Students learn about plagiarism and the potential consequences of plagiarism in

postsecondary settings. The last activity in the module again asks students to develop thoughts

and ideas that they can include in their summative presentation.

Module 3 – academic strategies. There are three main skills covered in this module:

reading, writing, and note taking. The reading component focuses on reading comprehension

and effective reading strategies and methods. The note taking portion of the module asks

students to watch a video lecture and take notes during the lecture. Students submit these notes

for feedback by their moderator and are given tips on how to enhance their skills in this area.

For writing strategies students are introduced to plan and breakdown written assignments

including how to make mind-maps and writing first drafts. Students are also introduced to the

                               142            

 

editing process including grammar, punctuation, and spelling. The last portion of the module

focuses again on preparing students for the summative presentation.

Module 4 – college and university. This module begins to explore the transition from

high school to postsecondary education. Information about the differences between high

school and college/university are presented including academic expectations, grading systems

and syllabi, and differences between high school teachers and college/university professors.

Students also learn about the differences between colleges and universities, as well as explore

degree programs by conducting an online search of the program they are interested in studying.

A component of this module is the introduction to how to communicate with professors in

postsecondary education, including how to communicate with them via e-mail and in person.

Module 5 – the road to independence. The last module focuses on introducing students

to how to become independent as they transition to postsecondary education. Students are

presented with materials on financial assistance, how to manage finances and stay on budget,

and various ways to help them pay for school. Another component to this module focuses on

students’ rights as a person with disabilities and the services available to them to navigate and

succeed in postsecondary education. Finally, the module concludes with information about

being a self-advocate, choosing to disclose their disability, and how Accessibility Services can

help in this process.

In-person day 3. The last in-person day of the program occurs in May. On this day,

students present their summative presentation about what they have learned in the program.

Each student presents for 15-20 minutes and share their experiences with their peers.

Student Experiences in the TTS

                               143            

 

Four students participated in the interviews; two males and two females. Three of the

interviews were conducted via Skype and one interview was conducted in person. All of the

students who participated in the TTS program did not attend NU after completing the program

and were enrolled in other universities across Ontario – one of the participants was, in fact,

enrolled in one of the participating universities in this study. Table 10 depicts the students’

pseudonym, gender, and the year they attended the TTS.

Table 10 Transition to Success Program Participants Pseudonym Gender Year Student Attended

TTS Patrick M 2012 Olivia F 2012 Abby F 2013 Jamie M 2014

In the next section I present students experiences in three blocks: Students experiences prior to

attending the TTS, student experiences during the TTS, and students experiences after the

TTS. The findings are presented following the sequence of questions asked in the student

interview protocol.

Experiences of students prior to the TTS. I asked students to reflect on their thoughts

and feelings prior to stating university including what each was most excited about and most

worried about. My intention was to get a sense about their thoughts and feelings and to gage

how the transition program impacted these in any way as they learned new skills or met new

people. I also asked participants about how they had learned about the program and what their

expectations were prior to beginning the TTS.

                               144            

 

Theme 1 – Feeling nervous. Students shared that some of the aspects they were most

worried about regarding university was regarding academic work, including new academic

expectations, keeping up with assignments, communicating with professors, and also being on

their own for the first time. As mentioned earlier, all of the four students who attended TTS did

not attend NU, which was located in their hometown, and thus had to move away on their own

to different universities across Ontario. Patrick encapsulates what the four participants

described regarding their worries about beginning university. He shared,

I was most nervous about the curriculum, if I could handle it, because I had heard from my peers that it was really hard. So I was really nervous about how to handle the academics, that really worried….I was also worried about how to prepare since the class schedule was so different and I was used to 8:30am – 3:30pm class schedule from high school.

Olivia shared that what she was the most worried about were the interactions she would have

with faculty and how these would differ from the relationships with her teachers in high

schools. She explained,

I was really nervous about professors and how to handle the relationship with them because in high school the teachers are more hands on, you can just step away and ask them questions, follow-up with them, and here they are more strict. In high school I could go to the teacher and they were like ‘yeah, you can turn-in that assignment late’ but at university there are more guidelines.

Despite being nervous about navigating a new academic environment interacting with faculty,

students were generally really excited about learning new content and meeting new people, as

well as living on their own for the first time (although this was also one aspect they were

worried about). In this example, Jamie explains this paradox, “I was most excited and probably

most worried about being away from home – I was most anxious about that but most looking

forward to that.” Patrick shared his excitement about being introduced to new topics, “ I was

                               145            

 

really excited about studying something I liked – I kind of thought it would be more fun, if that

is the right word, being able to study something you are passionate about.”

I asked students to recall on how they had learned about the transition program and

what they were expecting to gain from their participation. Two of the four students had learned

about the TTS program through their parents, one student learned about the program through

his high school teacher, and one student found information on NU’s Accessibility Services’

website. In regards to what students were expecting to gain from the program the responses

varied; Jamie and Abby mentioned that they were hoping to complete the program in order to

qualify for the discounted psycho-educational assessment available to those who complete the

program. Patrick mentioned that he was hoping to learn ways to cope with the transition to

university, including developing new skills to prepare him for the first year of school. Olivia

shared that she really did not have specific expectations about what she would gain from the

program, but hoped to meet others with similar experiences.

Experiences of students during the TTS. Students were asked to reflect on their

experiences during the TTS, both the in-person days and the online components. Students

reflected on their experiences and on what they found most useful from the materials they

received.

Theme 2 – Connecting with others. Overall, students felt welcomed during the in-

person meetings and found the information and introduction to the online component helpful.

They also enjoyed meeting peers, staff, and the moderators in-person as it allowed them to

connect on a one-on-one basis. One participant mentioned that attending the first in-person day

was very stressful because she had to miss school (please recall that students who attend this

program miss three days of school in order to participate). She shared,

                               146            

 

To be honest I was a little bit worried because I was missing school during the week and usually if I miss a day I fall behind and my anxiety just got built up around that so I came in with a negative impression.

While this student felt anxious for missing school in order to attend the first two in-person

meetings, she recognized that attending was a helpful experience to get a better grasp of the

program and the expectations. She recalled thinking that “it was going to be [doing the

program] a lot less painful…I became interested in the online modules because they told us

about time-management skills…I was looking forward to that.” Patrick talked extensively

about the benefits of the first two in-person meetings, particularly getting to know the teacher

candidates and meeting the staff of the program, he explained,

We were encouraged the entire day to sit with our student teachers and discuss [the program]…it would have been better to have more activities to get more comfortable with them specifically because it was like you were meeting someone for the a day and you were in contact with them for a few months [via e-mail].

While Patrick mentioned he enjoyed these interactions, it is evident in this quote that he would

have benefited from having more one-on-one time with the moderators.

While students have an opportunity to interact with peers in the in-person days, all four

of the participants did not make as meaningful relationships with their peers or stay in touch

with them after the program as other students in the study. For example, Olivia’s perception

was that while there were opportunities for students to talk to each other the fact that some

students were in different grades (grade 11 or 12) and the fact that they all attended different

high schools made it difficult to connect. She expressed,

We definitely had a chance to meet a lot of the students. Since some of them were from different high schools you kind of just sat with who you knew. I didn’t quite speak to students from different high schools, a lot of them were in grade 11 and some of the students were not pursuing university. So I didn’t stay in contact with anyone after the program.

                               147            

 

This account by Olivia regarding her interactions with peers is an interesting phenomenon

since peer interactions seem to be such an influential piece for students in the other transition

program in the study. She continued to make an important observation regarding the reason

why she did not keep in contact with her peers, she said,

After the program there wasn’t much of a reason to stay in contact with them because we never really interacted with them…pretty much you are there for one day to meet with them to learn about the program, during the presentations you talk to them, but there is no time to build a relationship with them.

Abby also talked about how during the in-person portion of the program she only connected

with other students from her high school who were also participating, which suggests that

students perhaps need more facilitation in socializing with their peers in the TTS. Given the

nature of the structure of the program, students spoke most extensively about the online

components and what they gained from these experiences. In the next sections I focus on

students’ perceptions of the online modules and their experiences with the moderators.

Theme 3 – Enjoying the flexibility of the transition program. Students found the online

portion of the program helpful and easy to navigate. They also enjoyed having the ability to

complete assignments on their own time and receiving feedback from the moderations. Abby

shared that doing the program online prepared her to use a similar platform in university, she

explained,

It was the first time I had done something like that [online program], which was strange, but now that I have gone through university we have a similar thing online where we submit a lot of assignments online, so it was good, it was the first introduction to that platform.

                               148            

 

Jamie shared that it was really helpful for him to be able to work through the modules during

his own time because there were times where he felt he could work faster on some topics than

others. Jamie shared,

It was good to do the modules because I could go on my own pace, which I would usually just sit at once and do a bunch of work. If it was in-class I probably could not have gone through doing as much because I would be at a different pace than other students.

Olivia also enjoyed the convenience of doing the modules online and being able to

communicate with the moderators through this forum, recalling,

When there was a time that I did have a question that came spontaneously from the work it was very convenient that I could post it and send an e-mail or message to either the people in my group or my moderator.

Regarding the feedback students received from the moderators students felt it was helpful and

useful information that they actually put in practice once in university. Patrick shared,

It was quite helpful; I thought they were giving us a lot of information on what we needed to improve on for lectures at university. They would give us guidelines like ‘ok, you did it this way in high school, but in university the professors are going to this way’ so you get a lot of that kind of feedback.

Abby recalled a similar example. She said, “They went [moderators] ‘this is how you talk to a

professor; this is how you don’t talk to a professor. This is when you go to office hours’ etc. It

was very useful.”

Theme 4 – Learning content specific skills. As with other transition programs,

participants of the TTS found information regarding academic skills like note taking and time-

management the most useful as they transitioned into first year as well as specific information

about disability related topics. For example, Patrick recalled “they were all helpful [the

modules] but if I had to rank them I would say the most helpful was the note taking and the

                               149            

 

time-management because those are the biggest ones in university.” Abby explained why the

time-management skills she learned during the TTS were so useful,

I forget all the details of the assignment, but you were given a timetable for a week and then you had a certain number of hypothetical courses, but you also had to include things like eating and sleeping, and washing your clothes and doing chores, and I never really thought about it. I knew I had to do these things since I would be like a ‘person,’ but I had never given it that much thought to how, well, how much time it would take to schedule it and organize it, so it was very helpful. Theme 5 – Learning disability related information. Information regarding disability,

both specific and also information regarding disability services were also helpful topics for

participants. Jamie shared that what he found most helpful was the information on depression

and anxiety and learning new aspects of his disability. Olivia explained that learning about the

disability services that she should expect once she arrived at her campus prepared her to begin

university,

It got me thinking ‘ok, I need to make a plan, I need to talk to Disability Services, I need to do this and that’…because TTS was on my radar I registered for my accommodations relatively early [at her new campus], although relatively early for me meant that I was about two weeks late in booking my appointment [with disability services] and consequently I was two weeks late getting accommodations.

Learning about how to register for accessibility accommodations at her new campus was an

important lesson for Olivia, even if she was still a bit late in getting her accommodations. She

continued to describe the importance of gaining this specific knowledge,

I know some people who had no idea what they were doing about their accommodations, they were stumbling through all these processes, but I was given heads up by going to the program so it was good. It helped reduce the stress and I knew what to expect and how to frame that.

Learning information regarding disabilities or disability related services was something Abby

whished the TTS could have focused more on. Specifically, she touched on the importance of

teaching students with disabilities how to address having an accommodation, she recalled the

                               150            

 

first time one of her peers in first year asked why she was not taking an exam with the rest of

the class,

So the first time someone asked me why I wasn’t writing with the rest of the class it took me by surprise and I really didn’t know how to deal with that – I dealt with it and it went well, but maybe a little bit more about that would be helpful. It is really strange, like some people are neutral when you disclose and there are others who are like ‘oh, good for you, you are so brave!’ and it’s like ‘Ahhhhh, what did you just say?’ and there are others who are more negative, and that I wasn’t expecting that, and that is probably because I have been so sheltered.

Students who participated in the TTS program found academic specific skills such as note

taking and time-management very useful in helping them transition into university as well as

disability specific information and information about disability services. Having interactions

with the moderators online and receiving feedback on their assignments was also useful for

participants and they overall enjoyed the flexibility of the program and having the ability to

complete the online modules on their own pace. In the next section I report TTS’s reflections

and experiences after completing the program.

Students’ reflection after the TTS. Students were asked to reflect about their overall

experiences in the summer transition program and to recount any follow-up support from the

program to help them transition into the first year. Students were also asked to reflect on the

format of the program and how the program could improve or enhance aspects of the program

to better prepare students with learning disabilities make the transition to university.

The TTS program does not provide transition information follow-up services during the

academic year. However, once students complete the program they are eligible to receive a

discounted psycho-educational assessment that students can utilize as documentation to

register with the Accessibility Services office at their university. For two of the students, the

psycho-educational assessment was the incentive to enroll in the program, although they

                               151            

 

explained that they ended up gaining many more skills that helped them as they transitioned to

university.

Theme 6 – Being prepared for university. Abby mentioned that the skills that she

learned in the transition program continue to carry over now that she is in her second year,

There are some things that they touched on that I keep using like notes, printing out power point slides – I didn’t know that existed! Initiating conversations with professors about disability, ‘ah yes, I have accommodations, can you please sing this form?’ so that keeps transferring over and the academic skills and the time-management skills. Now that I have more practice, I keep using that definitely.

While students do not receive follow-up transition services once the program ends they still

have access to the online materials indefinitely. Students can log back in to the online forum

and review the modules, assignments, and read their moderator’s feedback. For Patrick, having

access to this information was extremely helpful during his first year as he felt he was falling

behind academically. When I asked him if he reviewed the online materials he said,

Yes, probably about a dozen times, more during first year. After the first semester my grades were slipping a bit so I tried to figure out what was wrong so I went back to the resources to see the more effective tools, like specifically my note taking – I was just typing whatever I was feeling, but sitting down and doing the schedule and note taking methods again was more specific, so I have used the resources for the past two years.

Giving students access to the online modules where they can revisit what they learned seems to

have been a great advantage for Patrick who continues to utilize these resources way beyond

the transition program.

Overall, participants enjoyed their experiences in the TTS program and gained very

valuable and useful information that helped them transition to first year and beyond. Regarding

the format of the program students saw both strengths and disadvantages. The strengths that

were highlighted included having the ability to complete the program at your own pace, being

                               152            

 

able to ask questions and get feedback on an on-going basis as you worked through the

modules, and being able to retrieve the information online beyond the duration of the program.

Some of the disadvantages to having the majority of the program online included limited time

and interactions with peers and staff, having to miss school days in order to attend the three in-

person days, and in some cases students felt that they learned information about transitioning

to university too early since the program runs while students are still enrolled in high school.

However, despite the disadvantages delineated by students, all four participants felt that the

program prepared them to transition to university and provided an introduction to the basic

information you need to get started in university. A quote by Jamie exemplifies the general

feeling students expressed about how the program prepared them,

It is kind of like when you are making a fire and you need to take a little bit of bramble and light that on fire so that when you put it over the logs the logs will go up. Well, the TTS was like that little bit of bramble, it didn’t cover everything and it didn’t make a huge fire, but when that was lit everything else could go up.

Students in the TTS felt that the information that they gained was comprehensive and that

while it did not/could not cover every single aspect of university that students can expect as

they transition, it provided them with the basic knowledge to navigate their new academic

environment.

Conclusion of Case 6

The Transition to Success Program (TTS) is an eight-week transition program for

students with learning disabilities that operates primarily online with three in-person days.

Students who enroll in the program complete online modules and assignments intended to

provide them with an introduction to postsecondary education, including what to expect, the

                               153            

 

types of programs and services available to support them, and learning strategies and tips to

help them adjust to their new academic environment. There are several characteristics that

make this program unique from the rest of the programs in the study. First, this is the only

program in the study that operates primarily online and that runs over a week in length. In

addition, the program operates during the winter term, when students are still enrolled in high

school. Finally, the TPS is the only program in this study that offered students a psycho-

educational assessment at no-cost or partial cost (depending on students’ income) if

participants completed the program.

Four students who participated in TTS between 2012-2014 participated in this study. It

is interesting to note that all of the students that attended TSP did not attend Nautical

University, but attended four different universities in the province of Ontario. Overall, students

reported having gained helpful skills and knowledge to help them transition into first year,

including note taking and time-management. Students also benefited from learning specific

information about how to cope with their disability in their new environment and learning

about specific services available to students with disabilities in postsecondary education.

Students highlighted that the format of the program was a right fit for their schedules as it

allowed them to work on their own time at their own pace.

 

           

154  

Chapter 5: Discussion

My objective for this chapter is to provide the reader with a discussion of the findings as I

discuss the research questions guiding this study:

1) How do students with learning disabilities who participated in one of the six summer transition

models describe their experiences transitioning to university?

a. How prepared did students feel transitioning to university as a result of their participation

in the summer transition program?

b. What key strategies associated with a successful transition to university (e.g. time

management, learning strategies, managing disability in a new context, etc.) were students

exposed to in the six summer transition program models?

c. What additional strategies, topics, and/or resources do students with learning disabilities

who attended one of the six summer transition program models wish had been offered in

their program and why?

2) How do students’ experiences transitioning to university differ by program model?

a. Are the differences in students’ experiences transitioning to university based on the

program model that they attended?

b. What aspects of the different models examined in this study lead to differences in

students’ experiences transition to university?

First, I focus on question one by doing a cross-case analysis. Second, I focus on question two and

do a cross-category analysis. I draw on the themes that emerged within the cases to determine

how the transition programs prepared students’ with learning disabilities as they transitioned to

university and how students’ experiences differed based on program type.

     155              

 

Finally, at the end of the chapter I discuss the initial propositions delineated in Chapter 3 and

discuss these propositions in light of the results presented.”

Research Question 1 Research question one explored students’ descriptions of their experiences in the six

transition programs. I was particularly interested in exploring how prepared (or unprepared)

students felt after participating in a transition program, what particular strategies students’

learned in their transition program that helped them successfully transition to university, and

what information or resources students wished they had learned in the transition program once

they began university. I first explore the overarching question, followed by the sub-questions

of Research Question 1.

1) How do students with learning disabilities who participated in one of the six summer transition models describe their experiences transitioning to university?

Overall, the majority of the participants across cases expressed having a positive

experience in their transition program, although there seemed to be degrees of satisfaction. For

example, some students expressed absolute joy over their experiences in the program, while

others felt that the program had done a fine job at preparing them for university. Despite the

level of excitement or satisfaction that students conveyed during the interviews, all students

felt that they had gained something valuable from their participation in the program. Before

delving into students’ experiences during the transition programs, I want to highlight students’

responses about their experiences prior to beginning the program as important themes emerged

from their responses.

Students felt nervous regarding starting university, particularly as it related to

academic performance, managing their time, and navigating a new academic environment

     156              

 

and expectations. Students across programs overwhelmingly shared feeling anxious and

nervous about starting university. Particularly, students noted feeling worried about navigating

a new environment, managing academic expectations, and overall succeeding in university. At

times, students accredited these doubts and feeling to having a learning disability or to their

previous academic experiences in high school. Students were often worried about being able to

keep up with the workload or getting good marks. For example one student noted “I had

always been a B student and I got accepted with a conditional acceptance and my parents told

me it was because I had a learning disability.” Another student noted “I was pretty shy having

a learning disability because I really didn’t want anyone to know. I was pretty self-conscious,

so that was my biggest fear – “how am I going to fit in if students are getting really good

marks and mine are pretty average?” For many of the students in the study these feelings and

doubts were often harvested by negative messages they had received from their high school

teachers or peers regarding how university would be. Several students shared that teachers

often characterized university as a difficult and unfriendly place to navigate, one where you

were on your own with limited support and assistance. For some students, these messages

increased their anxiety about starting university and often impacted their perception about their

ability to succeed. However, once students participated in the transition programs their

nervousness and anxiety about university decreased and students expressed feeling more

confident or more comfortable with starting university.

Parental involvement in encouraging students to participate in the transition

program was salient for many of the participants in the study. Parental influence was a strong

force in students deciding to attend a transition program. It was common for students across

programs to acknowledge that their parents played a key role in informing them about the

     157              

 

existence of the transition program and/or to encourage them to participate in the program.

Some students even revealed that it was their parents who had filled out the registration form

for them. Students noted that their parents, typically their mother, had been very involved in

their education from K-12 and that it was common for them to do research on academic

programs or support services to help them cope with their learning disability. A couple of

students recalled feeling uneasy about attending the transition program because they perceived

it as another “task” or another activity their parents were making them attend. However, every

single student who had this experience noted that this feeling quickly changed as soon as they

began the transition program and were ultimately very glad that their parents had encouraged

them to participate because they benefited so much from this experience. This finding

confirms the importance of parental involvement in students’ postsecondary education and the

positive influence parental involvement can have on students’ decisions to participate in

important academic activities. The effect of parental encouragement to attend a transition

program suggests that parents can be critical partners and allies in the transition process for

students.

Students expressed finding a sense of community and belonging through their

interaction with peers and staff. Across the six programs, students explained that interacting

with peers during the transition programs provided them with a sense of community and a

sense of belonging. Peers seemed to have the most impact on students’ sense of community

and sense of belonging, as for many of the participants it was at the transition program where

they first met a critical mass of other students with learning disabilities. Meeting peers who

shared similar challenges and experiences had a very comforting effect on participants as they

began to realize they were not the only ones experiencing the same challenges and

     158              

 

experiences. Students recalled being able to finally speak with peers who could understand

them and their experiences, both academic and personal, and how this opportunity provided

them with a sense of community, often referring to the peers they met at the transition program

as friends and family. Many of the participants in this study had remained in close

communication with these peers years after the transition program and relied on them for

support and encouragement. In addition to meeting peers who participated in the transition

program, each program provided students with a student panel composed of past program

participants to share their experiences in university. Students spoke time and time again about

how attending this panel really helped them begin to think about what university would be like

and really appreciated the candid anecdotes and advice students provided for them.

Participants recalled being able to relate to the panelists and their messages were thus very

powerful and important for students. Overall, meeting peers, whether it was other participants

or student panelists, was a very important part of students’ experiences. The interactions and

relationships that students developed with their peers often extended well beyond the transition

program and students founded community with these peers through common experiences.

Meeting and interacting with staff and faculty were also important components of

students’ experiences in the transition programs. In particular, students spoke about building

positive relationships with the program coordinator of their transition program with whom they

learned to trust and reach out to once they had started university. All of the programs also

introduced students to other staff members of programs and services at their campus and

students found this opportunity very valuable as they felt part of a greater community meeting

with these staff prior to beginning school. Students often met these staff during the campus

tours offered by the program. Students found navigating the physical campus of their

     159              

 

institution an important component of the transition programs. All students received some

form of tour of their campus and received information about the general programs and services

available to support their academic success, such as the library, learning centres, wellness

centre, and career services. Students shared that by the time they started university they felt

confident in navigating the campus and were aware of where to search for services if they

needed assistance. This knowledge assisted students to quickly adapt and acclimate to their

new environment and focus on their studies or making friends rather than feeling lost and

overwhelmed. For many students, knowing the exact location of buildings and services eased

some of their anxiety around moving away from home to be in a new location or getting lost

on the first day of classes. Interestingly, some students shared that they were helping their

classmates or roommates locate buildings or services during the first week of classes, and this

was a rewarding experience for them as it gave them an opportunity to bond with new peers.

Meeting faculty during the mock-lectures was also a really important experience for students

as this opportunity often demystified perceptions they had of how university faculty would be

like (e.g. hard to approach, unfriendly, not accommodating). Many students found that the

mock lecture gave them an opportunity to experience both how a real lecture would be

conducted, but also an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the physical space and this

gave them some comfort.

Students shared that learning academic skills such as time management, note taking,

and using adaptive technology, eased some of their anxiety entering first year. Students

expressed that attending workshops (or completing them online for TSP) on time-management,

learning strategies, note taking, and adaptive technology, eased some of the anxiety and doubts

they had about starting university. The majority of participants in the study noted that they felt

     160              

 

nervous and anxious about starting university, particularly as it related to managing their time

and learning in a new environment, but these feelings and perceptions changed as they

participated in the program and attended the academic skills workshops. Students expressed

that by participating in workshops they identified various learning styles and explored a variety

of strategies to write and read more effectively, and take notes and manage their time in a new

academic setting. Students expressed that attending the workshops also helped them to identify

their academic strengths and areas for growth and noted that having the opportunity to practice

these new skills during the program and receive feedback from either the workshop instructor

or program coordinator assisted them in improving these skills. For example, some students

spoke about learning the importance of utilizing a calendar/agenda to track all of their

activities during the day to target the ideal time to study or to identify where they could

add/remove activities to be more productive. Other students spoke about the benefit of learning

efficient ways to decode text on books to better understand content or learning strategies to

effectively take notes in class. In many instances, students kept the handouts, sample

worksheets, or the notes that they took while in the program to refer to and apply once they

started university. Some of the participants shared that they kept referring to these notes

beyond the first semester or beyond (for those enrolled in second or third year), and that they

often shared these notes/tips with peers seeking assistance and support with academic skills.

Another workshop that students highlighted during the interviews as important in

easing some of their anxiety about starting university was utilizing adaptive technology as a

tool for learning. For the majority of the participants, adaptive technology was a new concept

and learning about the variety of available technology to assist them in their learning provided

students with some reassurance and relief about managing their studies. Many of the adaptive

     161              

 

technology workshops not only provided students with a demonstration of various hardware

and software technology, but it also provided students with information about pricing,

bursaries available to help students purchase technology, and free technology available online.

a. How prepared did students feel transitioning to university as a result of their

participation in the summer transition program?

Overall, students in the study reported that participating in a transition program helped them make

a successful transition to first year, eased their anxiety about navigating their new environment, and

learned key academic skills to succeed at their institution. All students in the study felt that the

transition programs they attended provided them with new knowledge and skills to successfully

transition to university. While there were students who felt more strongly than others about the extent

to which they prepared to transition to university, not a single student in the study felt that they were

not prepared or that they had not, at least, learned some valuable information in the transition program

to help them begin university. During the interviews, I asked students about what they were most

worried about and excited about when thinking of starting university. Overwhelmingly, students

shared that their biggest preoccupation in regards to starting university was their academic

performance, being able to keep up with the workload, and being able to manage their time

appropriately to balance the new academic expectations. However, after attending a summer transition

program, students felt better prepared academically because of the learning skills they explored,

including writing, reading, and note taking.

Students spoke about having new confidence in themselves after having attended the

transition program, specifically around having a learning disability. For many students in the

study, the summer transition program was the first time they learned specifics about their

     162              

 

learning disability. All of the programs provided students with a workshop or information

about the different learning disabilities (general information about they various types of LDs),

how learning disabilities impact learning, and most importantly how to cope with a learning

disability in their new academic setting. For students, this was the first time that a professional

had explained this information to them and this new information often changed their

preconceived notions of what it meant to live with a LD. Students often spoke about the stigma

that they carried for having a learning disability while in high school, mostly because they did

not fully understand their diagnosis or what it meant for their learning. Also, in high school

students often did not play a key role in their learning or accommodations, as it was primarily

their parents and teachers who structured their individual educational plans. As students

participated in the transition programs and experienced their first semester of university, they

quickly realized how much agency they had to exercise in order to register with the

Accessibility Services program at their campus, get accommodations from faculty, how to

register for exams, when to disclose and to whom, and most importantly, taking control of

their learning.

As students reflected on their experiences in the transition programs and on the skills and

strategies they learned I asked them to reflect on what aspects of the program they would like

enhanced or changed to improve students’ experiences and learning. The majority of students had very

limited feedback for each program as they felt that their particular program had provided them with the

right kind of information and activities that prepared them to attend university. The constructive

feedback was specific to some of the programs. For example, for the Headway to Transition program

students noted it would be helpful for the program to introduce students to student clubs and

organizations and to provide students with additional follow-up support after the transition programs

     163              

 

that would keep students connected to one another. For the One-step Ahead transition program one

student noted that she would have liked to receive more program/faculty specific information during

the program rather than only general information about university so that she could be better prepared

in her area of study. Another student noted that while the program did a good job at introducing

students to the classrooms at the university, that visiting a variety of classrooms (e.g. large, small,

lecture style, etc.) would help students get a better picture about what to expect during the year. Lastly,

for the Bridge to Success program, one student noted that she would have enjoyed having more hands-

on activities, however she understood that the time constraints of the program (2-day program) made

this request a bit of a challenge.

b. What key strategies associated with a successful transition to university (e.g. time

management, learning strategies, managing disability in a new context, etc.) were students

exposed to in the six summer transition program models? The key academic strategies that students

were exposed to during the transition programs were: time-management, reading and writing skills,

self-advocacy, and the use of adaptive technology. All of the transition programs offered students these

skills through workshops and often provided students with written materials about these topics that

students could utilize during the year like time management tables, Cornell notes templates, and

reading or online materials for review. Several students from across programs shared that they often

relied on these sources as the first year got started to get a “refresher” on the subject sometimes

reviewing their notes throughout the first year and sometimes even beyond. A few of the students even

noted having shared these materials with their peers in classes or roommates who were having

difficulty with the subjects. Adaptive technology was cited as a key strategy for many of the students

across the programs. Students noted that it was helpful to know what adaptive technology might be

able to help them take notes, organize, and retain course material. For many students, this was the first

     164              

 

time that they were exposed to adaptive technology and this was an exciting opportunity for them,

especially as they also learned about financial support available for students with disabilities

specifically available to purchase adaptive technology. Several students noted that in addition to

finding the workshops and materials helpful, that interacting with instructors who taught these

workshops, typically learning strategist and the adaptive technologist, was extremely beneficial

because they often provided them with individualized feedback targeting their strengths and areas for

growth.

Students also shared that attending a mock lecture during the transition program eased some of

the anxieties and worries they had in regards to attending a lecture in university and speaking to their

professors. For some students, the mock lecture not only provided a preview of what first year classes

were like but also introduced them to the physical space (some students had not realized how large the

classrooms would be). In addition to these skills and experiences, students also learned about academic

accommodations and other services offered through their Accessibility Services’ office often including

note taking programs, peer-mentorship programs, and adaptive technology to help them succeed

academically. Outside of services provided through Accessibility Services’ offices, students were also

introduced to the academic support at their university, such as academic centres, libraries, and online

resources. This information reassured students that they were not going to be alone as they transitioned

to university and that there was in fact plenty of support to help them succeed in university, unlike

what some of their teachers had portrayed in high school.

Research Question 2

The focus of question 2 was to examine any differences in students’ experiences based

on the different transition programs students attended. I wanted to investigate if there were any

differences in how students described their transition to university and the type of program

     165              

 

they attended. I also wanted to examine what aspects of the different transition program types

led to any differences in students’ transitioning to university.

2) How do students’ experiences transitioning to university differ by program model?

a. Are the differences in students’ experiences transitioning to university based on

the program model that they attended?

Students’ experiences transitioning to university did not seem to differ too significantly based

on the type of transition program they attended. Students seemed to have benefited from the transition

program they attended irrespective of the type of model. While there were differences across program

in regards to duration (e.g. 2-day vs. 8-weeks), when the program was offered (e.g. March vs. August),

and the format of the program (e.g. 5-day inclusive residential vs. 5-day non-residential, non-inclusive)

all the programs covered very similar topics and activities during the duration of the program,

including learning strategies (time-management, reading and writing, adaptive technology), campus

tours, mock-lectures, and student panels. Of course, those programs that were longer were able to

expand deeper on these topics or offer variations of these activities.

b. What aspects of the different models examined in this study lead to differences in

students’ experiences transition to university?

What did seem to matter based on program type was the interactions students had with their peers

and other staff/and or faculty. Students who participated in the two five-day inclusive programs (On

Your Mark and Prepare for Success) and the programs that offered a residence option (On Your Mark,

Headway to Success, and Prepare for Success) seemed to have developed very close relationships and

bonds with their peers, more so than students in other programs. This may have to do with the type of

activities and time spent together. Living in residence during the transition program allowed students

to bond after-hours and develop organic relationships. Students who lived in residence often spoke of

     166              

 

having breakthrough moments with their peers around being able to talk about their disability openly

and this was something that made an impact on their experience during the transition program and the

transition to university. On the other hand, students who attended transition programs where residence

was not available and where they only had limited interactions with peers like the Bridge to Success

program (2-day), the One-step Ahead program (5-day, non-inclusive) and the Transition to Success

program (8-weeks, primarily online with three in-person days) seemed to have developed more

detached relationships with their peers. These students still interacted with their peers and still clearly

enjoyed and benefited from these interactions, but did not describe the close relationships that students

in the other programs developed with each other.

Another difference that students highlighted as important transitioning to university was

whether or not there were follow-up services provided to them by the transition program throughout

the year. The majority of programs, except for On Your Mark and Transitioning to Success, provided

students with some type of follow-up after the transition program such as socials and gatherings once

per semester, academic workshops during the academic year, and peer-mentorship support. The

follow-up service highlighted as most beneficial was peer support through formal peer-mentorship

programs. Both Shifting Gears and Bridge to Success programs offered formal peer-mentorship

support following the transition programs. In both programs students were paired with upper-year

mentors who provided guidance and support during the academic year. The students that chose to

participate in the peer-mentorship programs talked about greatly benefiting from this support through

the academic year as mentors provided them with guidance, encouragement, and support as well as

share tips for succeeding in university based on their own experiences. While some students enjoyed

having the socials or workshops during the year offered by their transition program, these activities did

not seem to have a meaningful impact on their experiences nor did students seem to have actually

     167              

 

attended these on a regular basis. The two programs that did not have formal follow-up support had

different approaches to providing students with a connection to the program – On Your Mark program

paired all participants with the Program Coordinator as their official Disability Advisor for the

academic year and this allowed her to keep in touch with the students which provided some continuity

of support beyond the transition program. The Transitioning to Success program did not provide

students with official follow-up support during the academic year, but allowed them to keep access to

the online materials for the entire year after the transition program. By having access to the online

materials, students could review the materials and resources, read the feedback they received from

their instructors, and read the discussion board they engaged in with their peers.

All participants from across programs stated that they would recommend the transition program

to students with learning disabilities because they felt the program provides students with the

information that they need to make a successful transition; the programs not only provided an

academic booster but it also created opportunities for students to meet friends and begin building a

community.

Study Propositions Prior to commencing the study I delineated two study propositions:

1. Students’ experiences in the summer transition programs will vary by program length

and topics covered during the program (e.g. time management, learning strategies, etc.)

2. Students who attend summer transition programs that are in-person and 3 days or more

in length will have a better experience in the program and transitioning to university

particularly because they:

a. Will have more days to attend workshops covering an array of transition topics

and thus have more information about the transition process to university

     168              

 

b. Will make stronger connections with program staff and other participants

(building community and sense of belonging)

In this section I compare these propositions to the findings of the study to enrich the discussion

and gain a better perspective of the results.

The first proposition posited that students’ experiences in the summer transition

programs would vary by program length and topics covered during the program (e.g. time

management, learning strategies, etc.). This proposition did not hold strongly as there were no

pronounced differences amongst students’ experiences based on the length of the program and

topics covered. The majority of the programs covered very similar content despite the duration

of the program. For example, all programs offered workshops on time-management, learning

strategies (such as note taking, reading, and writing), had a mock lecture with a faculty (except

the online program), invited a student panel to share their experiences with program

participants, etc. From the interviews with students there were no pronounced differences in

their experiences based on the topics that were covered during the transition program, and this

could potentially be attributed to the similarities in content across programs. What did seem to

have a more pronounced impact on students’ experiences in the program was the structure of

activities, both during the transition program and after the transition program. Table 11

showcases some of the unique program activities and program structure that differentiate the

transition programs in this study.