Disability Services

1. 2013 AHEAD Conference Developing and Using a Faculty Advisory Committee to Advance Strategic Partnerships and Improve Service Delivery Disability Services

2. Disability Services 2013 AHEAD Conference Developing and Using a Faculty Advisory Committee to Advance Strategic Partnerships and Improve Service Delivery Susan A. Aase, J.D., M.S.Ed. Cynthia Fuller, Ph.D., L.P. Donna Johnson, M.A., M.S. Linda Wolford, M.S. July 10, 2013

3. Agenda: • Introduction/Overview • Backwards Design • Faculty Advisory Committee • Why • How • Who • What • Wrap Up/Evaluation

4. Learning Objectives: • Participants will have an opportunity to consider various rationales for developing a faculty advisory committee and learn about some of the benefits such a committee can provide to a disability services office. • Participants will take home a frame of reference for conceptualizing, developing, and implementing a faculty advisory committee. • Participants will acquire practical tools that can help design their own faculty advisory committee on their campuses.

5. Activity: Back to the “Drawing Board” • Think about an event, meeting, or a project that turned out badly, in other words it was a “disaster.” • Pair up with a person next to you and discuss your example. Why do you think the outcome was not what you had planned? • Share with large group.

6. Backwards Design: • Begin at the END. • Identify overall goals. • Write clear, unambiguous, specific outcomes. • Use multiple accessible tools and methods for assessment. • Provide tasks and activities that are flexible, adaptable and consistent with outcomes. • Reflect.

7. Why Form a Faculty Advisory Committee?: • Because we value continuous improvement. • Because we value timely, responsive, quality service delivery. • Because we value collaborations with campus partners. • Because we are “Driven to Discover.” • Because we are the University of Minnesota!

8. Why Utilize Empowerment Evaluation?: • Empowerment evaluation is the use of evaluation concepts, techniques, and methods to foster improvement and self-determination; • Promotes development of sustainability of evaluation capacity within available resources; • Builds a sense of community: communities of practice. • - Fetterman, 2002

9. WHY: Assumptions for Our Evaluation • If Disability Services approaches service delivery from a continuous improvement standpoint, then we will seek information from our many stakeholders on what we can do to better meet the needs of university students, staff, faculty, and guests with disabilities. • If Disability Services considers disability to be an equity issue, then Disability Services will collaborate with campus partners to create an accessible campus.

10. WHY: Overarching Outcomes • We expect that Disability Services will: • gather qualitative and quantitative data to modify our decision-making based on evidence. • be responsive to the needs of its users in the university community. • assist qualified people with disabilities to fully participate in and contribute to the university community.

11. Activity: Sales Pitch Think/Pair/Share: Take five minutes to write down your two-minute “sales pitch” for why faculty would want to participate in your Faculty Advisory Committee. Share your sales pitch with the person next to you. Partner provides feedback to increase faculty buy-in. Switch places and partner shares sales pitch and you provide feedback.

12. HOW: Creating a Faculty Advisory Committee Executive Team (FACET) • Considerations: diversity of perspectives, personal strengths, campus connections, commitment. • Staffing: Director; Outreach, Education and Training leadership; and Student Services leadership. • Regular meetings to discuss priorities, institutional support, recruitment, goals and details, ongoing planning and evaluation.

13. Activity: Next Steps Make a list of THREE – FIVE staff members that you would like to invite to participate in your FACET. Why did you choose them? What qualities are you seeking in membership? Why are these qualities important to you?

14. WHO: Strategies for Membership • Establish faculty nomination process • Consider 6-12 faculty; variety of departments and perspectives • Personally invite participants • Secure professional development funds for participants • Create resource binder for each participant

15. Activity: Next Steps Make a list of FIVE faculty members that you would like to invite to participate in your FAC. Why did you choose them? What qualities are you seeking in membership? Why are these qualities important to you?

16. HOW: Strategies for Meetings • Develop FAC parameters: • Frequency of meetings, e.g., monthly, quarterly • Consistent meeting time and place with lunch/snack • Agenda and materials developed and distributed in advance of each meeting • Facilitator and note taker assignments • Meeting minutes

17. WHAT: Meeting #1: Explore Faculty Needs • Where were the gaps in what faculty knew about their role and DS’s role? • What did faculty need from DS to better implement accommodations? Used first FAC meeting to gather information to build questionnaire.

18. Data Collection Methods: • Disability Services used a community expert model in which members of the DS Faculty Advisory Committee were asked to recommend 1-2 faculty to complete an e-mail survey. These were sent to thirty-three (33) faculty in the College of Liberal Arts, College of Science and Engineering, Humphrey Center, College of Biological Sciences, Academic Health Center, School of Public Affairs, and the University of Minnesota – Morris. Twenty-two (22) faculty completed surveys for a 66 percent response rate.

19. Analysis Methods: • A thematic analysis was used. DS staff compiled and reviewed the data to identify themes. Peer and member checks were used to validate the process by reviewing the findings with members of the DS Faculty Advisory Committee at the January 10, 2013 meeting.

20. WHAT: Meeting #2: Review Survey Results • What were the key findings from the survey • What were the key recommendations?

21. WHAT: Key Findings from Survey • Faculty are unclear regarding Disability Services’ role – access vs. success. • Faculty need multiple methods of communication, regarding providing accommodations to students with disabilities in their courses (from DS, Dept. Chairs, and Provost). • Faculty consider DS as a “just in time” service unit – contact with DS is initiated only when a problem or crisis occurs. • Faculty have observed more students with mental health issues, behavioral issues, and unrealistic expectations.

22. WHAT: Key Messages • Faculty want to know how many and what types of disability conditions are present on campus. • Faculty want a flow chart that outlines the faculty role, the student role, and Disability Services’ role in providing accommodations. • Faculty want additional information on how to approach students who may have not disclosed the disability. • Faculty want a list of frequently asked questions around disability issues that are modified for specific academic audiences.

23. WHAT: Meeting #3: • What are some key recommendations? • What are some juicy topics? • What are some critical issues?

24. WHAT: Key Recommendations • Disability Services should tailor messaging for faculty based on faculty needs/interests. • Disability Services’ outreach efforts should include basic elements of what is a disability, what is the purpose of the accommodation letter, what is the student’s role, the faculty role, and Disability Services’ role in implementing the accommodation, and what is the process to address issues, if the accommodation is not working?

25. WHAT: Juicy Topics • Test proctoring • Accommodation letter • Students in distress

26. WHAT: Critical Issues • How do faculty address needs of a student not registered with DS? • Who is responsible for what in the accommodations process? • How can faculty quickly access information when they want it? • Clarify the interactive process and how to engage DS in the accommodations letter.

27. WHAT: Meeting #4: • What are some key priorities? • What is the value of the FAC?

28. WHAT: Key Priorities • Create Disability Toolkit for Faculty on website. • Brief video clips on faculty identified topics. • FAQs on testing accommodations. • Accommodation process flowchart • Revise accommodations letter. • Establish practice for emailing faculty. • Participate in new faculty orientation.

29. Activity: Next Steps Make a list of FIVE issues, areas, or topics that you envision your FAC should address.

30. WHAT: The First Year in Review • Benefits included: • Working as partners on the accommodations process, platform for mutual feedback and collaboration. • Learning about campus resources. • Developing liaisons to academic units. • Most participants will continue next year with or without a stipend.

31. WHAT: Next Steps • Implement changes. • Survey faculty about key issues to address next year. • Identify colleges/departments from which to recruit new participants. • Utilize FAC as a continuing resource and sounding board.

32. Disability Services Questions?

33. Evaluation Thank you for your participation! Please complete the evaluation.

34. Contact Information Susan A. Aase, J.D., M.S.Ed. Associate to the Director, Disability Services 612-624-2993 aase0020@umn.edu Cynthia Fuller, Ph.D., L.P. Associate Director, Student Services, Disability Services 612-626-8427 full0060@umn.edu Donna Johnson, M.A.. M.S. Director, Disability Services 612-624-4120 johns042@umn.edu Linda Wolford, M.S. Manager, Student Services, Disability Services 612 -624-1403 wolfo001@umn.edu