First-to-Second-Year Persistence of Students With Disabilities in Postsecondary Institutions in the United States

Abstract

The authors used the data from the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study survey (BPS:04/06) to (a) examine the characteristics of the national sample of college students with disabilities and (b) identify the factors that influenced their first-to-second-year persistence in U.S. postsecondary institutions. Students with disabilities in their study display many of the characteristics that are recognized as potential risk factors for attrition in higher education. The results from chisquare tests reveal that academic and social integration and disability-related accommodations are significantly associated with first-to-second-year persistence of students with disabilities; however, when controlling for other demographic, entry, and in-college characteristics, they do not hold significant in the final logistic regression model. Among in-college characteristics, on-campus living, full-time enrollment, degree expectations, first-year GPA, and net price of attendance emerge as significant predictors of persistence of students with disabilities. Recommendations for rehabilitation counselors and disability services staff in higher education are provided.

Not the right kind of ‘digital capital’? An examination of the complex relationship between disabled students, their technologies and higher education institutions

“…Despite these increasing enrolments there is evidence to suggest that disabled students continue to lag behind non-disabled students in terms of retention rates (Izzo, Marry & Novak, 2008;Mamiseishvilli & Koch, 2011). One possible reason for low retention is the many challenges that disabled university students report they face.…”

How well does the Theory of Planned Behavior predict graduation among college and university students with disabilities?

“…The literature suggests unique predictors of persistence and drop-out for this group (Koch, Mamiseishvili, and Higgins, 2014;Mamiseishvili and Koch, 2011;Getzel and Thoma, 2008). For example, needed academic supports are not always available (e.g., Christ and Stodden, 2005;Tagayuna, Stodden, Chang, Zeleznik, and Whelley, 2005).…”

“…The literature on the role of registration for disability related services in predicting graduation is inconsistent, with some studies showing that this adds, although slightly, to the ability to predict persistence (O'Neill et al, 2012), while others show that the effect of accommodations is negated when other variables are included (Mamiseishvili and Koch, 2011). Such differences may occur, in part, due to a priori differences between students who do and those who do not elect to register for such services.…”

“…Younger age was related to two components of intention to graduate among students, a finding consistent with some studies Mamiseishvili and Koch, 2012) but not others (O'Neill, et al, 2012). The literature suggests that some students wait before starting postsecondary studies, and it is these students' older age that is related to drop-out (Mamiseishvili and Koch, 2011). Clearly the role of age in predicting academic persistence needs further investigation.…”

“…When it comes to graduation, some investigations use actual graduation (e.g., Achola, 2013;Barber, 2012;Unger, Pardee, and Shafer, 2000), others use persistence (i.e., students are enrolled a year or a semester after testing -e.g., Boutin, 2008;Mamiseishvili and Koch, 2011), "quality of degree" (i.e., various types of honors degrees - Richardson, 2009), or a mixture of "positive outcomes" including graduation or persistence in a junior/community college or a transfer to a four year university (Jameson, 2007). Other investigations use "graduating in prescribed time" (i.e., the time prescribed for the program of study -e.g., Jorgensen et al, 2005) while others evaluate graduation two, five or even 10 years after "prescribed time."…”