Teaching Adults with Disabilities in the Postsecondary Setting: Examining the Experiences of Faculty Members

This phenomenological investigation explores the e ssence of postsecondary faculty experiences teaching adults with disabiliti es. Twelve participants revealed how their positive and negative experiences impacted th ir eaching practices and resulted in specific disability dilemmas. Adults with disabilities are a valuable untapped re source, viewed at times as helpless and incapable of high academic achievement and employme nt. In today’s society, their human potential as contributing and intelligent citizens still needs to be fully recognized, nurtured, and developed. The fullest realization of their potent ial requires an investment of time and effort on the part of all educators. Currently there are more than fifty-four million Americans living with a disability, representing about 20% of the U.S. popu lation and nearly half of these individuals have a severe disability affecting their ability to see, hear, walk or perform other basic functions of life (New Freedom Initiative, 2001). The import ance of providing quality education options in higher education for adults with disabilities ca n have long lasting implications. Sitlington (2003) reports that three to five years after high sc ool, 27% of students with disabilities, as opposed to 68% of students without disabilities, at tend some form of postsecondary education. Although increasing numbers of professors are encou tering students with disabilities in their classroom, training opportunities to learn how to m eet the needs of students with special needs are lacking in many colleges and universities (Fich ten & others, 1990, p. 2). Purpose of the Study The purpose of this phenomenological study was to u nderstand the lived experiences of postsecondary education faculty members who have ta ugh adult learners with disabilities. This study on disabilities experiences encompasses those seen and unseen by the faculty member. Disability categories that involve learning, attent io , as well as physical impairments related to vision, hearing and mobility have been included. Th is study further explored and examined the specific meanings developed from these lived experi ences and gain insight into how faculty members responded and felt about the experience. I t was also important that this research provided an understanding of how college faculty vi ewed their role as instructors working with adults who have learning difficulties, physical imp airments, and psychological disorders. The following major research questions were developed f or the study: (1) How do faculty members describe their lived ex periences teaching adults with disabilities in the postsecondary education setting? a) What was most significant about their teaching experiences and; b) What meaning did faculty member s make of their experiences as it related to their teaching practices? (2) What positive or negative experiences have pos tsecondary faculty had with providing accommodations, modifying instructional practices, classroom structure, and establishing communication with adult students with disabilities ? Theoretical Framework The conceptual framework for this research project uses Stephen Brookfield’s (1995) Critical Reflection Process. This model examines th experiences of post-secondary faculty teaching adults with disabilities and how they see their practices in new ways by standing outside themselves and viewing what they do for students wi h disabilities through four distinct lenses. This model involves four critically reflective lens es: (1) personal autobiographies as teachers and learners, (2) seeing ourselves from the student per spective and understanding, (3) colleagues’ experiences, and (4) theoretical literature. There are multiple assumptions made in higher education regarding faculty teaching adults with di sab lities. First, students are viewed as not having the academic ability to complete required wo rk. Second, adult students with disabilities use their disabled status as an excuse or crutch. T hird, providing accommodations to students with disabilities alters or significantly changes t he content of the course or program. These assumptions made by faculty members need to be chal lenged and explored in greater depth in order to truly understand the lived experiences of faculty members. This research project sought to examine these areas by using Brookfield’s Critic al Reflection Process in an effort to elicit the details behind these faculty assumptions. Research Design In order to truly capture this lived experience, th e qualitative research approach of phenomenology was employed in order to study human behavior, explore reflection, and personal experiences. In this case, not only under standing the phenomenon of teaching adults with disabilities but also gaining insight into wha t meaning faculty members gained from the teaching experience and about themselves, thus lead ing to critical reflection. This investigation combined critical reflection, meaning development, a d phenomenological procedures in order to gather information on the lived experiences of f aculty members and the researcher. The target population included faculty members of colleges and u iversities located in the state of Wisconsin. Purposeful sampling techniques were used to locate and select 12 postsecondary faculty members who had personally taught adults wi h disabilities within the last three-five years. Research participants took part in two 60-90 minute interviews related to their personal teaching experiences. Seeking vivid, accurate, and comprehensive portrayals of what these experiences were like for faculty members (i.e., th eir thoughts, feelings, and behaviors) a critical Incident Questionnaire was administered which asked participants to identifying one positive or negative event or happening pertaining to adults wi h disabilities in a postsecondary setting. The data analysis process began with the researcher providing a full description of her own experience with the phenomenon of teaching adul ts with disabilities, this concept is known as Epoche. Second, the process of bracketing and h orizontalization was employed in order to organize the data and reduce the information collec ted (Creswell, 1998; Patton, 2002; Moustakas, 1994). Themes that emerge were graphical ly organized into concept maps and supported by individual narrative descriptions and statements. Segments of participants’ statements were used to develop the textual and str uctural descriptions and further supported with the critical incidents questionnaires. Essential Themes The experience of teaching adults with disabilities was placid or easygoing for some participants while others considered it an “on edge encounter” pushing them at times to respond “what should I do now? ” For the participants in th is study, the essence of teaching this group of adult learners essentially fell into three categori es: Discovery of Disability, Realization & Reality, and finally Reaction and Results. Within t hese categories of experiences, participants discussed how they were delighted, challenged, unco mfortable, and perplexed by the disability situations they had experienced over the last three to five years. The participants were reflective on both the positive and negative experiences they had with teaching adults with disabilities and how it impacted their own instructional abilities a nd beliefs. The most significant findings reveal three major themes that encompassed the entire disa bility experience. Figure 1. Significant faculty experiences and majo r dilemmas Disability Discovery There was a reaction of surprise and disappointment for some faculty, when students were not willing to reveal their disability or lear ning troubles until they were close to failing the class. For these study participants, detection and notification of a student with a disability occurred ultimately in one of three ways; in person or revealed by the student, identification through the disabilities services office, or not re vealed at all. Discovery of the disability for the faculty participants raised the question of “Ok wha t does the student need for me to do? ” While not being viewed as giving special treatment or be es ntful about the possibility of additional work. During this stage of reflection faculty memb ers felt uncertain about the unknown, a sense Eliminate