What?

1. Not dis-ability, possibly in-abilities-Vincent BoulangerMasterstudent Social & Cultural Anthropology at KU Leuven

2. What? • Results from a thesis-research on disability in the Flemish Higher Education • Conducted between September 2012 & July 2013 • Under the guidance of Prof. Patrick Devlieger (Anthropology, KU Leuven) & Meggie Verstichele (SIHO) • At 5 Flemish HEI (3 universities, 2 university colleges) • Hybrid of quantitative and qualitative research • Surveys in auditoria • Follow-up interviews • Participant observation • Survey staff members • Comprised 1266 students, 184 of which disclosed having a disability

3. Aims of the research • To get a better understanding of students with a disability: • Who are they? • What are their stories? • How does their study-trajectory differ from other students? • Map the difference between students who disclose their disability to the HEI or choose not to. • Compare these findings with other students, and students who claim to experience other “barriers” in the course of their study.

4. Survey results: students with a disability (total & disclosed) Universities University Colleges: biased due to surveyed program.

5. Students with a disability

6. What does this tell us? Much higher number of students with a disability than most HEI’s assume Difference in disclosure rates depending on the type of disability Difference in amount of students with a disability & type of disability depending on program No (significant) difference in number between the first phase of a program & later phases.

7. Why register? –A conscious choice

8. But not always the ‘right’ choice While most non-disclosing students don’t experience significant difficulties, there are some exceptions: • Students who do not register for privacy-reasons, only to find out they need support afterwards. • Students who believe they’ll manage, only to find out they couldn’t • Refuse disclore & support due to previous negative experiences • Some didn’t know their impairment qualified them for special support = HEI’s need to have an adequat registration-system and explain why disclosing matters!

9. And disclosing doesn’t always result in the intended effect The students who disclose can be divided into two groups: those who felt they couldn’t cope without support, and those who knew there wasn’t any harm in disclosing, who are generally much less susceptible to delays in study-progress. (e.a. Coping-skills) Disclosing helps the student in most cases, and reduces their vulnerability. • Some students report their program refuses reasonable accomodations • Some say they face discrimination due to disclosing • Some expect more support rather than solely reasonable accomodations

10. Ableism Coping-skills= central to a good study experience • The more “tricks” you have, the higher your learning outcome • “Tricks” are complementary with other “sensible” choices (whether or not you disclose, what program you study, ...) • The learning of “tricks” relies either on social status or on the school you were in. • The Flemish Compulsory Education system is considered to be reproducing unequality (Hirt, Nicaise & De Zutter, “De School van de ongelijkheid” The School of Inequality) Obtaining “coping-skills” is therefore much more a matter of luck, than it is of ability.

11. Coping not exclusive to students with a disability • Also “registered” barriers • About 14% of the students experiences other difficulties • Difficulties studying • Difficulties focussing • Inadequate preparation • ... = often correlates with other disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities, first generation students, financially disadvantaged students, part-time students) = coping skills also subject to “luck” = often a post-problem analysis: number of “barriers” significantly higher in non-first fase surveys. NOT “I have a barrier, which will affect my grades” BUT “I have unsatisfying grades, I must have some kind of barrier” • Impact often similar to disability, although seemingly less severe • Solutions also similar

12. A solution: social networks

13. An auditorium

14. Another auditorium (raw data & compensated for ‘actual’ hindrance)

15. The same auditorium, but “actual hindrance” versus “HEI’s auditorium”

16. Yet another auditorium: raw data

17. That other auditorium, by “actual hindrance”

18. ...and by the HEI’s point of view

19. Students with “significant hindrances” often in contact with each other • Closer friendship between students • Stronger effect among students with a disability • Can “find” each other in a group, in spite of the fact their HEI can’t. • In spite of the large majority of disabilities being invisible • Experience of “being different” seems to be the key marker • Support each other passivly or activly • Offers perspective for inclusive HE approaches

20. Conclusions The group of students with a disability is not that heterogeneous Not so vulnerable as Flemish research or numbers indicate Reasonable Accomodations are useful, but need to be matched with inclusive practices Some responsibility also lies with the compulsory education system Existence of a “disability-network” Requires more research

21. Suggestions • HEI’s should be more than just providers of reasonable accomodations = study-facilitators • Not accord excessive attention to disclosure • Work inclusive: disadvantaged groups have some shared needs • And in most cases are capable of adapting general tools to their specific needs

22. Questions? E-mail: vincent.blngr@gmail.com