by Dr. Amra Pepić-Koubati
Abstract:
This qualitative study used semi structured interviews to explore the influence of the background and professional contexts of community college faculty (15) on their experiences and perceptions regarding professional development pertaining to students with disabilities (SWDs). The results indicated that participants’ perceptions of these opportunities were positive and influenced by their commitment to SWDs, personal and professional connection to disability, and recognition of a diverse student body. The results also highlighted a need for ongoing, multifaceted training in community college contexts, addressing the salience of future training initiatives, familiarity with different disabilities and appropriate supports, and faculty learning communities.
Context of the Study:
Students with disabilities (SWDs) constitute a significant proportion of the student body in postsecondary education. Specifically, SWDs attend community colleges at a higher rate than they do institutions in other systems of higher education (Raue & Lewis, 2011). In the California Community College (CCC) system, which consists of 116 colleges, 124,328 SWDs attended the 2016–2017 school year (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2018). While SWDs make up 5% of the student population and have shown a marked improvement in enrollment rates, they are much less likely than their peers without disabilities to attain a degree or certificate (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2018). One factor that might contribute to lower completion rates is the lack of faculty professional development (PD) that aims to increase faculty awareness, explore challenges faced by SWDs in institutions of higher education, and introduce pedagogical practices that effectively support this population. As such, promoting training as a paradigm for raising disability awareness can better equip faculty when they work with SWDs (Lombardi & Lalor, 2017). In the CCC system, targeted efforts to increase the above-mentioned faculty development have been most evident with the implementation of the Flexible Calendar Program also known as Flex Day.
Conceptual Framework:
The current study used Knowles’ (1968) adult learning theory, or andragogy, which postulates that adults learn best when addressing the process of learning as opposed to the content being taught (Swaner, 2016). Because adult learning theory tenets focus on individualized and self-directed learning, it calls for individuality and one’s self direction: it encourages the learner to provide input, share learning experiences, and foster topics that are practical and applicable to one’s praxis (Merriam, 2001).
Literature:
Effective faculty PD initiatives alleviate the knowledge gap between faculty responsibility toward SWD and appropriate training (Baker et al., 2012; Cawthon & Cole, 2015). The literature on training initiatives pertaining to SWDs is largely focused on faculty perceptions of reasonable accommodations, legal mandates, and inclusive, instructional practices through a Universal Design framework (Burgstahler & Doe, 2006; Cook et al., 2006; Murray et al., 2009, 2014; Park et al., 2012; Sowers & Smith, 2004). Empirical studies emphasize the need for comprehensive training that can better equip faculty when they work with SWDs. Regarding preferences for PD, Burgstahler and Doe (2006) highlighted the need for alternative formats: multifaceted training consisted of hands-on workshops, department-specific workshops, student panels, and evidence-based formats with active participation. Other scholars have asserted that faculty preferred hands-on demonstrations, case studies, seminars, peer-to-peer discussions, and student panels (Cook et al., 2006; Debrand & Salzberg, 2002; Murray et al., 2011; Sniatecki et al., 2015).
Methodology and Setting:
A basic qualitative design (Creswell, 2009) was an appropriate choice for this study because it examined faculty experiences and perspectives who had participated in Flex Day workshop initiatives pertaining to SWDs. The site for this research study was the Southern California Community College, SCCC, a public higher education institution in Southern California within a multi-college district. Purposeful sampling was used to identify participants who were knowledgeable about or experienced in a phenomenon of interest (Creswell & Plano, 2011), specifically, part-time and full-time faculty who had participated in the SCCC Flex Day PD workshop(s). Table 1 depicts the years and names of Flex Day workshops, whereas Table 2 illustrates descriptive information of participants by pseudonyms, academic department, academic rank, teaching experience, and race.
TABLE 1. Flex Day Workshops Pertaining to SWD at SCCC (Fall 2017–Fall 2019)
Fall 2017:
· Partnering with DSPS: You’ve Got a Friend (45 minutes)
· Partnering with DSPS: Academic Integrity (45 minutes)
· Partnering with DSPS: All Creatures Great and Small (45 minutes)
Spring 2018:
· DSPS Presents: Serving Those Who Have Served Us (45 minutes)
· DSPS Presents: Identifying and Handling Student Classroom Behavioral Situations (45 minutes)
· DSPS Presents: Tips and Approaches Toward a Universally Accessible Classroom (45 minutes)
Fall 2018:
· Addressing Disability Focused Behaviors in the Classrooms (45 minutes)
Spring 2019:
· Technology in the Classroom (45 minutes)
· Interacting with and Understanding Students with Autism and other Hidden Disabilities in the Classroom (1.5 hours)
· Universal Design for Learning—an introduction to “Inclusive Instruction” (45 minutes)
Fall 2019
· Putting Students First: Strategies for Implementing Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in your Course (45 minutes)
TABLE 2. Faculty Demographics or Profiles
Participant’s Subject of Faculty Status Years of Teaching Race
Pseudonym Instruction
Andreas German Part-Time 15 White
Ann Mathematics Part-Time 10 Asian
Fred Business Full-Time 3 White
Frank English Part-Time 2 Asian/Korean
Jeanie Psychology Part-Time 15 White
Leigh Ann English Full-Time 19 White
Lori Horticulture Full-Time 20 White
Marie Allied Health Full-Time 10 White
Matthew Accounting Full-Time 14 African American
Oliver Philosophy Part-Time 6 White/Samoan
Pauline Math Full-Time 9 White
Rayne Engineering Full-Time 30 Latino/Native
Royce Art Part-Time 3 White
Sarah Counseling Part-Time 2 White
Wilson ESL Part-Time 4 White
Results:
Faculty Commitment to SWDs
Faculty members’ background influenced their commitment to SWDs, especially when addressing SWDs’ academic needs. Faculty perceived themselves as a lifetime learning community proactively participating in PD; they shared personal stories to exemplify commitment to this group of students, which provided further insights into their positive attitudes toward SWDs. Frank, an English faculty recalled one time in particular regarding a current student who had been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD): “This semester, I have done more than in any other semester. I had difficulty finding a notetaker. So, to make up for that, I have put in a little more time talking with the student after class and commenting on the student’s draft. I also stay between 15–30 minutes after class. I feel like just spending more time talking to students one-on-one makes up for it.”
Faculty Status
Faculty status (part-time versus full-time) emerged as an important background factor in regards to faculty experiences with PD. Given their atypical status, seven out of eight part-time faculty members mentioned various challenges in proactively attending PD workshops. For example, Royce remarked: “The one thing I have noticed is there is a perception with full-time faculty that part-time faculty are lesser instructors and have less knowledge.” Oliver highlighted specific reasons that hindered participation in Flex Day training initiatives: the difficulty of working at more than one higher education institution, time constraints, and financial compensation.
Personal and Professional Connection to Disability
Both personal and professional contexts impacted faculty participation in Flex Day workshops pertaining to SWDs. Many faculty members reported knowing someone with a disability, usually a family member or friend. Marie, a full-time faculty who teaches Allied Health, shared a perspective derived from living with her sons, both of whom have learning disabilities: “My participation in these workshops comes from my personal experience with my own children. I teach the way I would like my children to be taught. It is more of a proactive mechanism for the student as I want the student to be able to achieve.”
Faculty Recognition of a Diverse Student Body
When faculty recognized the diversity of the student body, they were more likely to participate in PD opportunities pertaining to SWDs, helping them become more student-centered and empathetic towards a strengths-based perspective. Jeanie shared how her background (an educator with a Master’s in Special Education and a mother of a child with ASD) influenced her belief in the importance of learning about different disabilities, or, “getting to know more about what they are capable of doing.”
Perceptions of Effective Strategies
Though a few participants highlighted strategies they found useful, the majority focused on multifaceted training, future training opportunities, familiarity with different disabilities and appropriate supports, and a faculty learning community. To maximize faculty participation in future PD formats, Leigh Ann asserted the importance of developing multifaceted training: “I think something that combines an expert talking, a panel, a breakout session with other faculty members where you can talk about experiences, and a question- and-answer session with experts.” In order to enhance active learning, Wilson attended a Spring 2019 workshop with two facilitators, a case study analysis, peer-to-peer discussion, and a student panel. He also concurred with the need for multifaceted training formats, particularly cross-training: “The workshop was a wonderful introduction, and I loved it that the student’s mother was at one of the workshops. However, there should be a cross-disciplinary meeting with two or three professors from other disciplines; we get together and talk about it.”
Future Training Opportunities
The majority of the participants said future training should address the nature of different disabilities, appropriate academic support for learners, and participation of SWDs, employing interactive formats such as student and faculty panels, faculty–peer mentorship, and cross-disciplinary training. Eleven participants expressed interest in learning more about SWDs, especially if workshops included student panels. Ann asserted: “The most effective one should be the workshop that has student panels. In order for us to grow in our profession, we need to know how students with disabilities feel. So, if we don’t address the issue with the students, how are we going to help our students?” Marie emphasized: “I would like to actually have students, past and present students,” whereas Rayne remarked: “Hearing students gave me their account firsthand, unabridged, unsolicited, unbiased. Just as authentic as they could possibly be; if I know how the other person feels, that gives me great insight, or at least the incentive to go ahead and try to modify what I’m doing. That was an undiscovered area I would never have discovered.”
Familiarity with Different Disabilities and Appropriate Supports
The participants expressed a desire to learn more about the characteristics of SWDs. When emphasizing the importance of effective PD, nine participants suggested a workshop that promotes an active learning experience and familiarity with different disabilities within classroom settings. Specifically, Andreas, Rayne, and Royce highlighted, “identifying disabilities, behaviors, and prevalence rates” and providing an overview of definitions of disability categories for SWDs in college. Matthew shared a similar thought, recommending workshops pertaining primarily to “invisible disabilities.” Marie described the same idea: “Faculty members need to be educated on the different types of learning disabilities.” Lori concurred: “I would want the disabilities if they can be broken down. There’s a physical disability, a psychological disability, and a learning disability.”
Faculty Learning Community
Many of the participants spoke specifically about the need for faculty as a learning community. Thirteen participants indicated the need for faculty panels during Flex Day workshops pertaining to SWDs. For instance, Sarah asserted, “There are challenging things in the classroom, whether it be behavioral things that sometimes you’re not sure about the best way to deal with and so hearing from other folks on how they’ve navigated could be beneficial.” Similarly, Oliver addressed the importance of faculty as a support system, particularly faculty who have interacted with SWDs and know more about working with them: “Peer to peer would be huge and seems really intriguing to walk with someone who’s been through this, who can help look at the coursework I’m doing, and be able to offer criticism, where I can change things, maybe even somebody who could sit in at some time.”
In order to strengthen the effectiveness of future PD initiatives and enhance active participation among faculty members, four faculty members stated the importance of a multidisciplinary faculty panel, whereas six participants proposed faculty panelists from the same discipline. For instance, after participating in an UDL[TN1] workshop consisting of three faculty members from different disciplines, Oliver recalled active engagement and receptiveness to PD modules that involve faculty from different disciplines. In his opinion, such an approach could increase faculty collegiality and shared responsibility toward SWDs: “The applicability of having faculty with diverse backgrounds and disciplines in workshops who are working with us and doing this is really comforting, because each discipline is unique in some regard.”
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine faculty experiences and perceptions of Flex Day training initiatives pertaining to SWDs at SCCC. The study was grounded in adult learning theory (andragogy), which emphasizes lived experiences and self-directed learning, highlighting four key tenets: (a) individualized learning, (b) learning is self-centered, (c) adult learning experience, and (d) motivation to learning (Knowles, 1975, 1984a). The following questions guided this qualitative inquiry:
1. What are faculty experiences and perceptions of PD initiatives pertaining to SWDs in a community college setting?
2. How, if at all, do the background and professional contexts of faculty affect their experiences and perceptions?
3. What PD strategies are perceived as being the most effective?
All but one of the participants shared positive perceptions and experiences with Flex Day workshops pertaining to SWDs, consistent with the findings of other research conducted on PD pertaining to SWDs (Cook et al., 2006; Lombardi et al., 2013; Murray et al. 2009,2014; Park, Roberts, & Delise, 2012,2017; Sowers & Smith, 2004; Zhang, 2005). For example, in response to adapting to a student population diverse in many dimensions (especially regarding invisible disabilities and ASD), faculty supported diversity and inclusivity, which was consistent with several studies (Burgstahler & Doe, 2006; Cook et al., 2006; Debrand & Salzberg, 2004; Sniatecki et al., 2015). Both part-time and full-time faculty members agreed that Flex Day training workshops should happen in a more continuous and comprehensive manner, indicating the need for continual reinforcement of disability-related training topics. Similarly, as empirical research has suggested, the growing needs of ongoing, comprehensive PD pertaining to SWDs indicate that when faculty participate in PD, they are better able to meet the academic needs of SWDs (Evans et al., 2009; Lombardi & Lalor, 2017; Murray et al., 2009; Myers & Laux, 2010; Roth et al., 2018).
The participants in this study reflected on the demographics of a diverse population (namely, SWDs) and expressed motivation to participate in PD workshops, which aligns with Knowles’ (1975) notion of self-directed learning, in which adult learners, “enter into learning more purposefully and with greater motivation and tend to retain and make use of what they learn better and longer than do the reactive learners” (p. 14). Both personal backgrounds and professional contexts (personal or familial disability status, faculty rank, training in special education) had notable implications for PD experiences related to SWDs. Many participants alluded to a number of instances in which prior experiences with people with disabilities helped them focus on SWDs’ academic needs and proactively respond to different learning styles. Additionally, faculty’s employment status (full-time or part-time) predisposed access to PD opportunities and participation in them. All seven full-time faculty reported access to a myriad of PD opportunities, whereas part-time faculty reported barriers to Flex Day participation, including their obligations at other institutions, conflicting schedules, and a lack of monetary incentives.
Commensurate with andragogy’s learner-centered approach, which views faculty as adult, lifelong learners (Lawler, 2003; Lawler & King, 2000), faculty members sought learning opportunities in which their personal backgrounds and professional contexts played a critical role. Overall, few participants discussed the effective components of the PD they received; the majority focused on their aspirations, describing a variety of practices they perceived as potentially useful for future training opportunities. In particular, participants considered multifaceted training and acknowledged that explicit training could help them better serve diverse groups of students and improve professional skills when instructing SWDs. More specifically, many participants expressed the need for student panels in Flex Day workshops, as they would be directly exposed to SWDs’ personal experiences; in fact, the faculty who had participated in a workshop that included a student panel perceived student participation as insightful, integral, and helpful. Participants also expressed a need for workshops that focus on different disabilities and appropriate supports, especially those focused on students with ASD and invisible disabilities: half of the participants discussed their uncertainty in responding to behaviors presented in classroom settings by students with ASD. Finally, participants voiced the need for faculty participation in workshops, specifically peer-to-peer discussion, as a part of forming a learning community.
Recommendations for Institutional Practice
Faculty expressed interest in ongoing, multifaceted training initiatives with various training formats, focusing on a more robust training than what is currently offered in one Flex Day workshops[TN2] . Second, faculty demonstrated awareness of as well as commitment and responsiveness to SWDs, which may present an opportunity for additional inclusive practices in higher education, such as UDL training initiatives. Given that UDL workshops influenced faculty members’ teaching methodologies, disability office staff could offer multifaceted training efforts, which are congruent with UD, facilitating such activities in departmental/division meetings and Flex Day workshops could create a systemic change. Moreover, faculty expressed a strong desire for peer-to-peer support as a potentially effective strategy; thus, higher education programs should consider involving faculty with relevant expertise in developing PD pertaining to SWDs. In the current postsecondary milieu, PD initiatives ought to be student-centered (student panels). Thus, to promote faculty as a learning community through panels or peer mentorship, disability offices’ (such as DSPS within the CCC system) staff should work closely with departments in selecting faculty mentors or experts, especially those who have a strong connection to specific disabilities (due to professional or personal contexts). Nonetheless, this study emphasized PD opportunities that were mainly offered once per semester during Flex Day; nevertheless, ongoing training efforts throughout the semester could employ faculty experts who could serve in new faculty training, departmental, and institutional training efforts.
Recommendations for Policy
Given the variations in experiences and barriers to participation in professional development, there is a need for policies that recognize equal participation of part-time and full- time faculty in Flex Day workshops. Within the CCC system, those hours vary from college to college, which further illustrates the inconsistency within the CCC system. For example, at Southern California Community College, full-time faculty were required to attend six hours, whereas part-time faculty were entitled to only three hours. The growing proportion of part-time faculty (523 versus 271) at this institution was almost twice that of full-time faculty representation. This highlights the importance of providing the same individualized learning opportunities for both constituencies. Equally important is the number of days devoted to Flex Day professional opportunities. For example, a faculty member who attended a UDL workshop could not attend a workshop pertaining to invisible disabilities, working with students who have ASD, classroom behaviors and learning strategies, etc. Consequently, when providing a consistent, robust schedule, at the campus level, there should be a minimum of two days devoted to Flex Day, which could be achievable through the local collective bargaining (union’s purview and shared governance). Given that part-time faculty surpass the number of full-time faculty, such learning spaces could foster equal participation opportunities for both consistencies.
Future Research
Future research should focus on the effectiveness of multifaceted training modules, especially their impact on faculty teaching practices, and the conditions necessary for implementation—information that could improve the instructional climate and SWDs’ success outcomes in the CCC system. Further exploration is also needed to evaluate how and to what extent faculty involvement in PD is influenced by faculty status (part-time or full-time) and personal and professional contexts —an important area for research given the salience of identity and status-based experiences within the professoriate.
This study used a basic qualitative design; future studies could implement an observational component to assess faculty responsiveness to previous trainings, the effectiveness of PD workshops, and faculty responsiveness to differentiated instruction and culturally responsive pedagogy. In addition, future research could benefit from using mixed methods, in which quantitative data could be distributed to disability offices and used for training initiatives or ongoing collaboration with faculty mentors (liaisons) and department administrators. The current study did not include students’ voices, though participants did indicate a need to include SWDs in training opportunities. Consequently, future research should investigate student perspectives on inclusive instruction in community college settings. Finally, the racial/ethnic backgrounds of the study participants did not reflect the diversity of CCC students, as almost all the participants were White; therefore, future studies should reflect a cultural mix and diverse set of participants.
Conclusion
Due to the growing number of SWDs in the CCC system, efforts to promote accessible and supportive learning environments must begin with faculty members’ knowledge, skills, and perceptions of SWDs. This further highlights the importance of incorporating adult learning theory into workshop design. Creating meaningful professional development, where faculty members are actively involved encourages self-expression, which ultimately promotes critical reflection on their own practice and successful learning environments for the SWDs they serve. Consequently, providing training opportunities (that implement the tenets of adult learning theory, andragogy) corresponds to the need for multifaceted trainings and Universal Design as they create learning spaces through professional conversations based on the individualized and self-centered learning, adult learning experiences, and motivation to learning (Knowles, 1984).