Access to Academic Materials for Post-Secondary Students with Print Disabilities

Student Survey Details

Section A: Demographic Information

The first section of the student survey contains 11 questions, concerning demographic data such as age, gender, province, institution type, academic program and standing.

1. What is your year of birth?

The average age of respondents (accurate to within one year) is 27.7 years of age.

The range of ages for students is great. Student respondents gave birth years from 1930 to 1987, with the majority in the 1983-1985 period. The highest numbers by year are 18 (1984), 16 (1983), and 15 (1985).

	Male	Female	Total			Male	Female	Total
1930		1	1		1974		1	1
1941	1		1		1975	1	3	4
1942	1		1		1976		3	3
1945	1		1		1977	2	4	6
1954		1	1		1978	1	1	2
1955	1	2	3		1979	2	1	3
1956		1	1		1980	2	6	8
1957		1	1		1981	3	8	11
1958		1	1		1982	4	4	8
1961	1	1	2		1983	10	6	16
1964	1		1		1984	7	11	18
1965	1	1	2		1985	2	13	15
1966	1	1	2		1986		4	4
1967	1	1	2		1986			0
1968	1	1	2		1986			0
1970	1	1	2		1986			0
1971	1		1		1987		1	1
1972	1	1	2		TOTAL			127

The following columns list the years of birth and ages of the respondents.

1981	2005	24		1984	2005	21		1967	2005	38
1981	2005	24		1984	2005	21		1967	2005	38
1981	2005	24		1984	2005	21		1968	2005	37
1981	2005	24		1984	2005	21		1968	2005	37
1981	2005	24		1985	2005	20		1970	2005	35
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1970	2005	35
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1971	2005	34
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1972	2005	33
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1972	2005	33
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1974	2005	31
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1975	2005	30
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1975	2005	30
1982	2005	23		1985	2005	20		1975	2005	30
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1975	2005	30
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1976	2005	29
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1976	2005	29
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1976	2005	29
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1985	2005	20		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1986	2005	19		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1986	2005	19		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1986	2005	19		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1986	2005	19		1977	2005	28
1983	2005	22		1987	2005	18		1978	2005	27
1983	2005	22		1930	2005	75		1978	2005	27
1983	2005	22		1941	2005	64		1979	2005	26
1983	2005	22		1942	2005	63		1979	2005	26
1983	2005	22		1945	2005	60		1979	2005	26
1983	2005	22		1954	2005	51		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1955	2005	50		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1955	2005	50		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1955	2005	50		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1956	2005	49		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1957	2005	48		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1958	2005	47		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1961	2005	44		1980	2005	25
1984	2005	21		1961	2005	44		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21		1964	2005	41		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21		1965	2005	40		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21		1965	2005	40		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21		1966	2005	39		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21		1966	2005	39		1981	2005	24
1984	2005	21

Table 1. Year of Birth and Age

The oldest student respondent was 75 and the youngest 18. The average age of female respondents is 27, and of men 28.

2. Gender

Chart 1: Gender of respondents

The gender breakdown of respondents to the student survey is as follows: males 49 (38.28%), females 79 (61.72%).

It has been demonstrated in various surveys that women respond to surveys more frequently than men do.

It is also the case that women outnumber men in terms of a) general population, b) student population, and c) students with disabilities enrolled in Canadian post-secondary institutions. The 1999 NEADS survey revealed a response rate of 59.7% for women (207/349). Therefore some difference in gender response was to be expected. Nonetheless, that 61.72% of the student respondents should be female is still a surprisingly high number. Further research may elucidate a gender difference in terms of those students who regularly communicate with the disability service office on campus, and therefore are exposed to surveys that are advertised and distributed. Enrolment at universities and community colleges is almost twice as high as males. There are seven females from CEGEPs and one male, but there were six males in technical vocational and two females. The females who attend university, however, make up 60% of all female respondents, whereas for males this figure is 48%. Furthermore, community college females are 28% of all females, while males attending community college account for 26%.

		Qualification sought				Total
		Cert.	BA	MA	Other
Gender	Male	22	21	1	4	48
	Female	30	37	6	5	78
Total		52	59	7	9	127

Table 2. Gender & Qualification sought Crosstabulation

Students seeking a BA make up 46.46% of the respondents. Those seeking a certificate comprise 40.94%, and MA students are equal to 5.5%. The other category accounts for 7.08%.

Of the 128 responses to the question relating to gender as compared to disability type blind or visually impaired our sample showed the following representations:

Blind/visually			Percent
Gender	Male	16	12.5
	Female	18	14.06
Total		34	26.15% of N (130)

Table 3. Gender & blind/visually impaired Crosstabulation

These are quite similar numbers in total, but when compared to the overall gender breakdown the 16 males represent 32.65% of all male responses. The 18 females reporting a blind/visually-impaired disability represent a lower overall percentage of female participants – 22.78%.

3. Do you require or use academic materials in alternate formats to pursue your studies?

This question was required to be answered in the affirmative for the respondent to continue the survey; thus the results are 100%.

4. What type of post-secondary educational institution do you attend?

In response to question four, the representation by type of school was as follows, by number of students and percentages: university 73 (56.59%), community college 35 (27.13%), CEGEP 8 (6.2%), technical/vocational 8 (6.2%), other 5 (3.8%). Over twice as many students are attending university compared to community college amongst the respondents to our survey. This reveals that the majority of students are accessing materials in alternate formats as provided by university disability service centres or libraries, which are the main organizations used to support this community.

“Other” is comprised of 5 respondents who chose not to select the categories provided in the survey and who report that their institution is: college of applied arts and technology, institute of technology and advanced learning, college, university/college collaborative program, college.

Chart 2: Type PSEI attended

The gender breakdown of respondents by type of institution attended is expressed in Table four.

	Gender		Total
Type PSEI[1]	Male	Female
Univ	24	47	71
Comm Coll	13	22	35
CEGEP	1	7	8
Tech Voc	6	2	8
Other	5	0	5
TOTAL	49	78	127

[1] PSEI stands for Post-Secondary Educational Institution.

Table 4. Type PSEI, Gender Crosstabulation

5. What is the province/territory of the post-secondary educational institution that you attend?

Chart 3: Province of institution

Student respondents were represented from across Canada. The breakdown by number is the following: Manitoba - 5, BC - 12, Ontario - 63, New Brunswick - 6, Quebec - 14, Nova Scotia - 9, Saskatchewan - 1, Alberta - 17, Newfoundland and Labrador – 3.

Ontario alone accounts for 48.46% of all respondents. The other larger responses were: Alberta – 13.08%, Quebec – 10.77%, and BC – 9.23%. Between the four largest responding provinces, students account for 81.54% of all survey participants.

6. What province are you a permanent resident of?

Chart 4: Province resident of

Again, there is a broad range. Students were permanent residents of: Manitoba - 5, BC - 13, Ontario - 67, New Brunswick - 5, Quebec - 11, Nova Scotia - 8, Saskatchewan - 1, Alberta - 15, Newfoundland and Labrador – 5. Open-ended responses provided for this question indicate that one respondent is a permanent resident of New Hampshire, United States, and another is a permanent resident of France.

7. What type of educational qualification are you currently pursuing?

Chart 5: Qualification sought

The question reveals a majority of those are planning to complete a B.A. (46.09%). That is only a slight majority however, as 40.62% are currently seeking a certificate or diploma. Those in Masters programs represent 6.25% of the respondents.

Under the category of “other”, two respondents wrote that they are currently pursuing ‘academic upgrading’. Two students are pursuing electrical journeymen certification at technical college; one student indicated they were unable to gain admission to a program and were therefore taking general courses “to help with my future goal”, one student is pursuing qualifications to become a teacher; and another indicated pursuit of a concurrent double major Bachelor’s degree, in education and humanities.

8. As of September 1st, 2004, what year of your program have you completed?

Chart 6: Year completed

Year of program:
18 (13.85%) Less than 1 year
40 (30.77%) 1 year
36 (27.69%) 2 years
22 (16.92%) 3 years
7 (5.38%) 4 years
7 (5.38%) More than 4 years

Those students enrolled less than one year, one year, and two years account for 72.3% of all respondents. This is an important statistic, as it may impact on the extent of knowledge regarding adaptive technology and academic access issues. It may be argued that students become more aware of services and programs available to them as they advance in their field of study. For example, as expected, students in their earlier years rely more on family support for programs and services outside of their institution than do those enrolled in later years of their program.

		Family support		Total
		Yes	No
Year	<1	7	11	18
	1	17	21	38
	2	12	23	35
	3	6	13	19
	4	2	5	7
	4	1	6	7
Total		45	79	124

Table 5. Family support and student standing

Furthermore, a higher rate (despite the higher enrolment numbers) of those students in their earlier years indicate they are not receiving their academic materials in a timely manner. The responses to this question in the survey, and the data we have generated, highlight the crucial role of information transmission and the central part that must be played in this process by the various disability service centres in Canada’s post-secondary institutions. This question raises issues of effectiveness and assertiveness; that is, whether students with print disabilities in the early stages of their studies know how to request the formats they require.

	Program year						Total
	-1	1	2	3	4	4+
Always	9	18	10	7	2	3	49
Sometimes	4	14	15	12	5	3	53
Never	2	2	5	0	0	0	9
N.A.	3	3	4	1	0	1	12
Total	18	37	34	20	7	7	123

Table 6: Program year and receipt of materials in a timely manner

9. What is your field of study?

Chart 7: Field of study

There was no single dominant field of study reported by the participants. A range of fields of study was provided. Categories listed on the chart include: Social Sciences - 5 (3.94%), Psychology - 11 (8.66%), Women's Studies - 1 (.79), Human Relations - 1 (.79) Political Science - 4 (3.15%), General - 9 (7.09%), Sociology - 5 (3.94). The category “other” is not included in the chart, as it accounted for 79 (62.2%) of the responses. Survey respondents who chose “other” listed the following courses of study. (Bracketed numbers beside a program/course indicate multiple respondents identifying with that classification).

Business administration (5)
Administrative studies (2)
Electrician/electrical apprentice (4)
Computer science (2)
Early childhood education (3)
Fine arts (2)
Geography (3)
Police foundation (2)
Religious studies (3)
Social work (2)
Social services worker (3)
Upgrading (2)

The following courses of study were listed once:

Disability manager
Education and disability services
Office administration
Criminal just/policing
Welding
Computer programming
Prepatory health sciences
Information technology support services
Computerised accounting technology
Biology
Pharmacy technician
Community outreach worker
History
Media studies
Child studies
Child and Youth Studies (Master’s degree)
Journeyman machinist
Nursing
Geography and religion
Graphic design
Environmental technician
Health and physical education
Recreational-leisure services
Sports administration
English
Emergency medical responder
Cinema and communication
Environmental studies
Gender equality and social justice
Correctional services
Communication sciences
Law & Society
Science
Civil engineering
Heavy equipment technician
Public administration (Master’s degree)
Administration
Human service worker
Recreation and leisure activities
Developmental service worker

10. Are you enrolled as a:

When answering this question, student respondents indicated their enrolment type as: 97 (74.62%) Full-time student, 30 (23.08%) Part-time student, 3 (2.31%) Other.

It should be noted here that students with disabilities are often considered to be studying full-time if they are taking 60% of a full course load. In fact, this is the criterion applied to students with permanent disabilities under the Canada Student Loans Program.

Chart 8: Enrolment status

The breakdown for enrolment by province is as follows:

		Full Time	Percent	Part Time	Percent	Other	Percent	TOTAL
Province	MB	2	40	1	20	2	40	5
	BC	6	50	6	50	0	0	12
	ON	52	83	11	17	0	0	63
	NB	4	67	2	33	0	0	6
	QC	12	86	2	14	0	0	14
	NS	7	78	2	22	0	0	9
	SK	1	100	0	0	0	0	1
	AB	12	71	4	24	1	6	17
	NL	1	33	2	67	0	0	3
Total		97	75	30	23	3	2	130

Table 7: Province in & Enrolled as Crosstabulation

11. Did you choose this school on the basis of:

Chart 9: Choice basis for school

This question solicited multiple responses – the students could check more than one box. From the responses, location was the most common (68), followed by academic programs offered (48), accessibility (of services offered) (44), then reputation (24), scholarship or grant (funding) (10), and finally other (12).

Among the open-ended responses given, two students wrote that they chose their school based on its size. One said it was because of lower living and course costs, one chose the school based on proximity to friends and family, and one said, “Started with a placement.” Finally, one respondent noted that the school they chose was the “only school that could provide equipment and services.” It is interesting to note that while location of the college or university was most important to our student respondents, accessibility and programs offered scored very well. Clearly, our respondents require an accessible education with programs of study which meet their interests and aptitudes. One can surmise that many students with disabilities still live at home and have limited opportunity to move, making location a priority.

Table of Contents