Quick Question:
Projects
Working Towards a Coordinated National Approach To Services, Accommodations And Policies For Post-Secondary Students With Disabilities
Chapter 3: Service Provider Assessments
Service Providers were asked to rate the facilities and services available at their institution - as either 'excellent', 'good', 'fair', 'poor', or as 'not available' or 'do not know'. Nonresponses were coded as 'not stated'. Some service providers directly identified the missing category in the scale: 'not applicable', while others described how the categories and/or features were not applicable to their campus (see Appendix Two). To see the original version of the questions, see Appendix Four.
Facilities and services were grouped according to various features of accessibility: physical accessibility (main buildings, adaptive equipment, safety and emergency features, as well as accessibility to labs, on-campus housing and transportation etc.); educational accessibility (entrance examinations, preparation and orientation, athletic programs and facilities, assistance with course work and materials, support for instructors, student services, as well as examinations and course requirements); accessibility program and administration (administrative support and policies, volunteer services); and external community (liaison and transportation). Within each of these categories, respondents were asked to rate a series of 199 specific facilities and services in terms of accessibility - see Charts 3.1 to 3.19 at the end of this section.
As well, service providers were asked to provide any written comments on these features of accessibility, allowing them to elaborate on a rating, or to describe unique situations at their institution. These comments are itemized in Appendix Two.
The present chapter provides a review of these institutional self-ratings of the various features of accessibility, and is grouped into the following sections: Physical Accessibility of Buildings; Physical Accessibility of Equipment and Labs; Physical Accessibility of Safety, Housing and Transportation; Educational Accessibility and Program Intake; Educational Accessibility and Special Programs; Educational Accessibility and Materials/Coursework Accommodations; Accessibility Programs, Administration and Volunteers; and Accessibility of External Community.
A. Physical Accessibility of Buildings
Service providers were asked to rate specified features of 'typical' main campus buildings: main student services building; main administration building; main library building; main food services building; and book store. A very common response in the open-ended comment sections was to indicate that one or more of these building categories were either combined in a single building, or that they were not housed in a single building - this likely accounts for much of the nonresponse to these questions.
Respondents were asked to rate each main campus building according to a series of common features: identified parking spaces; low grade ramps; low pressure doors; wing door handles; wide doorways; automatic doors; accessible washrooms; handrails on walkways; wide aisle areas; accessible service counters; special services for customers; with disabilities; elevators in all areas; braille/large print floor; elevator numbers; braille/large print elevator buttons; floor bells in elevators; coloured strips on stairs; outside lighting, according to a scale including the ratings: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, and Not available - see Charts 3.1 to 3.86. In the open-ended portions of the building physical accessibility questions, service providers often commented on the variations in buildings on and across campuses. For instance, some campuses provide all services in a single building, while others provide all or most services in many buildings (which are interconnected in various ways):
† Bookstore, food services, student services, health, counseling, employment same building. University, Atlantic Canada
† The college is all under one roof! College, AB
† Brand new building. Note: all [The University's] buildings are interconnected so questions related to handrails, ramps, and parking are not really applicable to specific buildings. University, BC
In the case of the ratings, service providers tended to rate the facilities of buildings as Good or Excellent, however, they tended to include more ratings of Poor or Not Available in the case of some features. For example, the majority of service providers rated accessible washrooms as either Good or Excellent: Main Student Services Building - 78% (54170) ( Chart 3.7); Administration Building - 66% (46170) (Chart 3.18); Library - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.41); Food - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.59); Book Store - 62% (43170) (Chart 3.76).
† Service providers also described, in open-ended responses, numerous successes, and plans for future buildings (see Appendix Two). For example:
† [Main Student Services Building] Stairways textures, contrasting colours. Flooring has contrasting colours and blocks. One elevator is hands-free. Hands-free water fountains. University, SK [Main Library Building] I1 y a une borde contrastante de I'entree jusqu' au local de travail adapte reserve aux etudiants handicapes visuels. Universitk, QC [Main Library Building] The main adaptive technology lab campus is located on the ground floor of [one] Library. The coordinator for special readers' services is also located in this building; an adaptive lab for students with disabilities is located in [another] library. University, ON
† [Main Student Services Building] New Building - just opened this year. Many improvements. College, A tlantic Canada
† [Main Student Services Building] Please note - a new student services building is currently under construction ... open fall 1999. University, QC
On the other hand, some building accessibility features were rated lower, or as Not Available by some service providers (i.e. coloured strips, wing door handles, and accessible elevator features). Note, for example, a higher proportion of service providers rated Automatic Doors as Not Available in the case of some buildings: Main Student Services Building - 26% (18170) (Chart 3.6); Administration Building - 24% (17170) (Chart 3.23); Library - 27% (19170) (Chart 3.40); Food - 24% (17170) (Chart 3.58); Book Store - 40% (28170) (Chart 3.75).
Service providers also tended to describe problems or gaps in building accessibility features. For example:
† [Main Student Services Building] Elevator is claustrophobic; student in wheelchair would have to back out and turn; on special services offered, however, assistance provided when obvious or needed. University, ON
† [Main Student Services Building] Accessible washroom has to be backed into. University, ON a The primary residence's main dining hall has to be reached by an elevator that requires the customer student to travel through the kitchen. Many commercial food outlets are accessible; others are not. University, AB
† [Book Store] Part of the store is inaccessible and their solutions for this are OK but not great. The store should be ramped. University, SK
A common comment in the open-ended sections of the building accessibility features rating questions was the contrast between new buildings with better accessibility features, and older buildings that have been renovated or require renovations. For example: [Main Student Services Building] Older buildings with lots of idiosyncrasies. University, ON
† [Main Student Services Building] Ancienne bgtisse mais les nouvelles constructions tiennent compte des normes. College, QC
† The Arts (Annex) was built in 1991. There are excellent floor bells in the elevators in the Annex; there are none in the older section of the Administration Building (constructed in the 1960s). There are Braille elevator buttons in the Annex, and large print floor elevator numbers in the older section of the Administration Building. University, Atlantic Canada
B. Physical Accessibility of Equipment and Labs
Service providers were asked to rate the accessibility of: Special Equipment (scanner, CCTV,
brailler, 4-track recorder, TDD/TTY, phonic ears/FM amplifier, acoustically treated rooms,
talking calculator, wheelchairs, specialized software for students with learning disabilities);
Adaptive Computer Equipment (voice recognition, internet access, loaner lap-tops, braille
printers, brailler displays, real-time captioning, screen reading software, adapted computer
keyboards, hearing assistance software, adaptive technology training, and separate adaptive
technology resource centre); and Labs (accessible counters in physical science labs, accessible
computer labs, and adaptive computer technology in computer labs). See Charts 3.87 to 3.109
and 3.115 to 3.118.
† [Special Equipment] Voice recognition; speech output systems; training in use of
assistive technology; formal assessments for assistive technology. College, AB
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Adaptive technology training is available on all
software and hardware. University, ON
On the other hand, some features were rated low or Not Available. For instance, 47% (33170)
of service providers rated acoustically treated rooms as Not Available. Similarly, while 20%
(14170) rated acoustically treated rooms as Fair or Poor, only 12% (8170) rated them as
Excellent or Good
(Chart 3.93).
Also, a full 41% (29170) of service providers rated
specialized technology in physical science labs as Not Available
(Chart 3.116).
These types of gaps are also described in the open-ended responses:
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Students get their own equipment normally
College, BC
† [Access to Labs] Labs are not specifically designed to be accessible, but individual
arrangements are made to accommodate each individual student. University, ON
† [Access to Labs] Lorsque nous avons des eleves en fauteuil roulant dans un lab,
nous faisons adapter un espace de travail. College, QC
Again, a common pattern in the open-ended responses was the description of plans to improve
accessibility to these types of adaptive equipment:
[Access to Labs] Lab accessibility being implemented over time and as needed.
University, ON
† [Special Equipment] Regarding software: We are presently investigating for
purchase of several programs. College, AB
† [Special Equipment] We've just put in a request to upgrade and expand our
equipment to the tune of $90,000 - there is a good chance we will get some of this.
University, A B
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Regarding hearing-impaired software: Under
investigation for purchase. College, AB
Service providers also described some sources of funding for adaptive equipment, such as
grants and government programs. For example:
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] Most of the adaptive computer
equipment/technology has been acquired through grant writing, fund raising and
donations. University, Atlantic Canada
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] All adaptive equipment is arranged for, provided
and maintained by SET/BC and is provided to students individually through SOG and
provincial funds. College, BC
[Adaptive Computer Equipment] We have no budget. Our equipment has been
purchased through provincial access grants. University, MB
In the case of Cegeps, regionally-based, but provincially administered, equipment sharing
programs are in place:
† [Special Equipment] Les equipements specialises sont fournis par un organisme
parapublic aux eleves qui en ont besoin. Colltege, QC
† [Special Equipment] Tous ces equipements peuvent nous sont fournis par
† [Cegep ...I lorsque le besoin est exprime par un etudiant. Cegep, QC
† [Adaptive Computer Equipment] specialiste a louer par le biais de
l'equipement provincial. Nous sommes toujours rattaches au [Cegep ...I a ce sujet.
Cegep, QC
Service providers were asked to rate a series of non-academic service features, i.e.: Safety,
Emergency Features (safety policies, refuge alarms, flashing alarms, emergency procedures,
and emergency assistance); Access to On-Campus Housing (identified parking spaces, low
grade ramps, low pressure doors, wing door handles, wide doorways, automatic doors,
accessible washrooms, handrails on walkways, accessible rooms, and attendant care); and
Adapted On-Campus Transportation (on-campus transportation, convenient hours of service,
and affordable cost). See Charts 3.110 to 3.114 and Charts 3.120 to 3.131.
With respect to Safety and Emergency procedures, service providers tended to rate their
campuses high. For instance, over 50% of service providers rated Safety Policies
(Chart 3.11O),
Emergency Procedures
(Chart 3.113),
and Emergency Assistance
(Chart 3.114)
as either Excellent or Good.
In terms of open-ended responses, service providers described a range of levels of service
provision (or lack thereof). For instance:
Security knows where each disabled student is when in class. College, QC
† The main campus is connected almost entirely by a series of tunnels and skywalks
as well as mini-wheelchair elevators and lifts. The university has a 24-hour telephone
service for reporting on-campus physical accessibility concerns (e.g. snow clearing,
elevator repairs, light bulb replacements). Univevsity, Atlantic Canada
† Aucune measure specifique pour les etudiants handicapes. College, QC
However, the most common description included plans to improve safety and emergency
services. For instance:
† Starting to get organized in this area. University, BC
† Flashing alarms are gradually being installed in the 90-year old buildings on our
campus. University, A B
† We don't have a safety officer; Safety committee is presently inactive but
hopefully operational again soon. College, AB
† Regarding flashing alarms: will be shortly. University, BC
Similarly, while a good proportion of service providers do not provide on-campus housing,
and do not rate the facilities, those that do rate the facilities, tend to rate them favourably (see
Charts 3.1 19 to 3.128). As well, large proportions of service providers do not rate on-campus
transportation. However, those that do rate the services, tend to rate them favourably (see
Charts 3.129 to 3.131).
In terms of open-ended responses, service providers tended to describe a range of facilities,
and, again, plans to improve facilities. For instance:
† Varies from building to building; some are very good others are completely
inaccessible. University, BC
† Low-grade ramps; depends on building; accessible washrooms depends on
building. University, ON
† New accessible dorms are planned. College, BC
Similarly, a range of on-campus transportation services were described, ranging from not
necessary, to a time-limited service of varying cost. For instance:
† Our campus is small and we don't need "on-campus transportation". Our local
Handi-Transit Co. drives right onto the campus. University, ON
† Rarely necessary. Sometimes our security people have transported or we use taxis.
University, ON
† No charge for service. Earliest ride is at 8:15 am. Last possible ride is at 3:45 pm.
Service Mon-Fri only. University, MB
† Community Handidart doesn't run after 4:30. College, BC
Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to educational accessibility
and program intake, i.e.: Entrance Examinations (adaptations for exams and alternative test
procedures); Preparation, Registration and Orientation (registration assistance, pre-registration
for students with disabilities, TTY registration, study courses, orientation workshops, tours,
mobility orientation, and classroom relocation); as well as Athletic Programs and Facilities for
PWDs (adapted athletic/fitness programs, adapted athletic/fitness equipment, athletic/fitness
specialists assistance with course materials).
Service providers tended to rate entrance examination services high. Adaptations for Exams,
and Alternative Test Procedures, for instance, were both rated Excellent or Good by 60%
(42170) of service providers
(Chart 3.133).
These high ratings were also reflected in the open-ended responses:
† Available upon receipt of documentation. University, BC
† Have a clear policy with the Test Centre and Admissions regarding
Accommodations for entrance exams. College, ON
† Enlarged print available for mature student-testing. Individual testing and extended
time are offered for the mature-student testing. No braille version but oral testing an
option. College, ON
† Nous mettrions en oeuvre les mesures si des cas particuliers en necessitaient.
Cigep, QC
Some aspects of preparation and orientation were also rated highly by service providers. For
instance, a full 91% (64170) of service providers rated registration assistance as either
Excellent or Good
(Chart 3.134).
Similarly, 68% (47170) rated orientation workshops
(Chart 3.138),
80% (56170) rated tours
(Chart 3.139),
and 59% (41170) rated classroom relocation as either Excellent or Good
(Chart 3.141).
On the other hand, some features were rated low, or
as Not Available. For instance, a full 51% (36170) of service providers rated TTY registration
as Not Available
(Chart 3.136),
and 19% (13170) rated Mobility Orientation as Not Available
(Chart 3.140).
Service providers again described a range of services and assessment in open-ended responses
with respect to registration and orientation. For example:
† Students wishing to register using TTY may get help from Services for Students
with Disabilities or directly from departments or registration office. Orientation is
individual for all students coming to Services for Students with Disabilities followed
by group orientation at beginning of term. University, AB
† [Registration] Done by CNIB. University, BC
† These areas would be improved by having our consultants on campus over the
summer. College, A B
Greater than 25% of service providers rated each of the athletic programs as not available on
their campus (see Charts 3.142 to 3.144). On the other hand, where these programs were
rated, they tended to be rated highly. Descriptions of these programs in the open-ended
responses also tended to be favourable:
† Recreation staff give 1: 1 attention to disabled students to customize recreational
programming to individual needs. College, AB
† Rely on self-initiated requests for fitness programs - equipment available for those
who can exercise only certain parts of their body. College, ON
Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to educational accessibility
and academic accommodation: i.e. Assistance with Lecture Notes, Assignments and Research
Papers (note takers, photocopy pass, computer access, library assistance, on-campus readers,
editing help, peer tutoring service, proof reading, sign interpreters, oral interpreters,
remediating skills, NCR paper, lap-top computer, and other specialized note-taking services);
Text-Book Access (on-campus large print texts, braille texts, talking books, page turners,
CCTV, and assistance retrieving special texts); Support for Instructors (assistance with
alternate teaching strategies, in-service training, case-by-case representation to instructors, and
notification to instructors by administration); Student Services for Persons with Disabilities
(vocational assessment, psycho-educational assessments, counseling, assistance with job
placement, and tutoring); Course Requirements (oral examinations, extended exam time,
formula to calculate extended time, private rooms for writing, alternative formats, exam study
assistance, writers, readers, and modification of course/program requirements).
The ratings of these programs varies considerably across features (see Charts 3.145 to 3.18 1).
Many of the features are rated high by service providers: e.g. 90% (63170) rated extended
exam time
(Chart 3.175),
86% (60170) rated library assistance
(Chart 3.148)
and 80% (56170) rated counselling
(Chart 3.171)
as either Excellent or Good. On the other hand, a number of
features were rated as Not Available by a sizeable proportion of service providers. For
instance, 66% (46170) rated page turners
(Chart 3.162),
40% (28170) rated braille texts
(Chart 3.160),
and 5 1 % (3 6/70) rated on-campus large-print texts
(Chart 3.159)
as Not Available.
In the open-ended responses, service providers identified the provision of assistance with
lecture notes, assignments and research papers, where available, as based largely on the use of
volunteers:
† Students are asked to help. A very small fee is paid to these students. We get
$5.00 for note-taker during one semester. College, BC
† Students may audiotape lectures using their own equipment. Students may be able
to access instructor's notes and prepared overheads in some instances. Notetakers are
volunteer (student picked and screened). Instructor or Disability Services staff may
assist with recruiting volunteer notetaker. Student may photocopy notetakers notes at
no charge in Disability
† Small population, sometimes difficult to match peers with appropriate tutors.
College, A B
However, in the case of Cegeps, support for certain services is paid for by government
agencies and often accessed through a larger Cegep.
† Preneur de notes, interpretes, ordinateurs portatifs, papier NCF - finances par le
Ministere de l'education. Service de tutorat - non-disponible -> a developper.
Universzte, QC
† #45-7: CAF centre d'aide en francais pour les etudiants. #45.9, 10: Interpretes
envoyes par [Cegep ...I pour tous les etudiants malentendants. Cegep, QC
† [alternate text-book formats] Lorsque le besoin est exprime, nous pouvons offrir ce
service grCce a la collaboration du [Cegep ...I. Cigep, QC
In the case of alternative text-book formats, however, other provincial governments provide
similar support. For example:
† Where resources are needed, we work through Provincial Education Department to
obtain. College, MB
† All transcription services and requests ordered through other agencies. i.e. W.R.M.,
recording for blind, PALS, etc. In-house brailling available for classroom handouts and
documents. Must be ordered 2 months before class starts. College, ON
† Braille dictionaries available; many English novels, plays, poetry (classics)
available on tape; Inter-library Loans Division of the campus library assists students to
order special texts. University, A tlantic Canada
Service providers tended to rate instructor support features low. For instance, 42% (29170) of
service providers rated in-sewice training of instructors
(Chart 3.166)
as either Fair or Poor,
and 19% (13170) rated it as Not Available. In the open-ended responses, service providers
described some shortcomings. For instance:
† Training is good, but few take advantage. University, BC
† Area has been neglected recently. Need to focus on in-service training for faculty.
College, QC
† Certainly there is room for improvement here, in that there has not been an active
PD approach in recent years. However, the attitude of most faculty is in keeping with
the intent of the Ontario Human Rights Code. College, ON
Regarding service for students with disabilities such as vocational assessment, job placement
and tutoring, service providers described a range of practices, including outside referrals and
in-house services:
† [Vocational assessment] Usually referred out for assessments. College, AB
† Regarding vocational assessment - [Not available] Except for assessment to
determine suitable adaptive technology. Regarding assistance with job placement - We
work closely with our career and placement services. Regarding tutoring - Tutoring is
offered through the student's union. University, AB
† Tutors charge anywhere from $1 0-1/hour. English Department provides free peer
tutoring. SIFC provides free tutoring. University, SK
Service providers also described shortcomings in the provision of alternate examination times,
formats and locations:
† Understaffed to provide complete support for exams. College, AB
† Modifications of course/program requirements are rarely done in terms of diploma
credit requirements and consideration of alternative credits. The approach taken is to
provide accommodations to allow people to obtain the required credits. College, ON
† Nos eleves handicapes ne sont pas lourdes. Nous n'avons pas eu, jusqu'a present, a
mettre en place des services mais si tel cas se presentait, mon r81e serait de mettre en
place les services appropries. Cegep, QC
Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to Accessibility Programs
(human resources, required budget for services/programs, program administration, senior
administrative commitment, an overall policy on access for students, a policy that covers
specific disabilities (eg. learning disabled), in-service training for all employees, and
faculty/departmental cooperation); and Volunteer Services.
Service providers tended to rate the provision of administrative support and policies highly,
with the possible exception of required budget for service; while 50% (28170) of service
providers rated required budget
(Chart 3.183)
as either Fair or Poor, only 43% (23170) rated it
as either Excellent or Good. On the other hand, 49% (34170) rated policy on specific
disabilities
(Chart 3.187)
as Not Available, and 43% (30170) rated in-service training for all
employees as Not Available
(Chart 3.188).
Service providers provided a range of assessments of administrative support and policies, and,
once again, described plans to improve in the future:
† Some faculty departments are great; others are sometimes difficult. There is no one
who has adequate time. Coordinating services in an add-on to my role as Dean and
Registrar. There is no budget. University, MB
† We are writing a general policy. Draft #1 submitted. We have had few seriously
disabled students so no programs, in-service have been developed. College, AB
† Faculty have been cooperative for the most part in providing accommodations. A
draft policy regarding ALL disabilities is in progress. College, ON
† Le college a une certain expertise professionnelle pour qu'ils dispose la formation
technique en education specialisee. ColEge, QC
Service providers tended to emphasize the importance of volunteer-supported programs, for
instance:
† Readings onto tapes are completed in a timely manner; two notetakers per student
per class, exam writing support, etc. We never have a shortage of volunteers - they are
very dedicated. University, A B
Service providers were asked to rate a series of services related to External Community
Accessibility Liaison with public schools, Cegeps, other post-secondary institutions, other
service providers and agencies, government agencies, and other resources); and Transportation
(transit on campus, accessible public transit, and the cost of accessible public transit).
Service providers tended to rate liaison with other post-secondary institutions and service
providers and agencies highly - a full 78% (54170) rated liaison with other service providers
and agencies
(Chart 3.194),
70% (49170) rated liaison with governmental agencies
(Chart 3.195),
and 63% (44170) of service providers rated liaison with other post-secondary
institutions
(Chart 3.193)
as either Excellent or Good. These high ratings were also reflected
in the open-ended responses (e.g.):
† Meet with Regional Special Education Advisory Committees from school boards,
have an External Community Advisory Committee and a Learning Disability Advisory
Committee. College, ON
† [The Centre] has an excellent working partnership with the disability-related
community agencies in [The Province] . Many of these groups are represented on our
Advisory Committee (i.e. the Dean of Student Affairs Advisory Committee for
Students with Disabilities). University, Atlantic Canada
However, government agencies in some cases were the subject of criticism (e.g.):
† Vocational Rehabilitation Services in BC, and in particular our area, has
undergone significant changes in the past couple of years - in general their service is
extremely inadequate. College, BC
In terms of public transportation, service providers tended to rate accessibility to public transit
more highly than the cost of public transit. 47% (33170)
(Chart 3.198)
rated the accessibility
of public transit as either Excellent or Good, while only 38% (27170)
(Chart 3.199)
rated the cost of public transit as either Excellent or Good. Interestingly, however, 16% (1 1170) of
service providers did not know the cost of accessible public transit in their communities. In
terms of open-ended responses, service providers described the arrangement and cost of
accessible public transit:
† Adapted transport organized by handicapped association. College, BC
† Bus pass at same rate as everyone else. College, QC
C. Physical Accessibility of Safety, Housing and Transportation
D. Educational Accessibility, Intake and Athletic Programs
E. Educational Accessibility and Academic Accommodation
F. Accessibility Programs, Administration and Volunteers
G. Accessibility of External Community
H. List of Charts