Dismantling Ableism Survey: Student Accommodations Experiences at UM

Introduction

The Dismantling Ableism: Institutional Action and Accountability survey (DAS) was administered in November-December 2023 to University of Manitoba students, faculty, and staff who self-identified as disabled or as having chronic health conditions.1,2 

Disability is not a singular experience, nor are disabled people a homogeneous group. People encounter different barriers and forms of ableism. Moreover, two people with similar impairments will also experience disability differently as personality, circumstance, privilege, and intersectional identities contribute toward their complex identity. 

“Experiences of inequities are particular to the type of chronic health issues [or] disability. When paired with intersectional issues such as race, class, etc., these inequities become more pervasive.” 

This results report is one in a series highlighting student, staff, and faculty experiences of ableism and inaccessibility at UM. It is intended to diversify understandings of ableism in academia through the presentation of disaggregated results that indicate differences among those who may share one or more broad socio-demographic characteristics such as Indigenous, racialized, or disability identities, gender, or sexuality.3 We emphasize disaggregated data to acknowledge intersectional marginalization to decenter Whiteness, colonialism, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and cisnormativity within anti-ableism action. 

Comparing the experiences of intersectionally marginalized groups is not intended to set these groups in competition with one another or to focus only on barriers and the ways in which they are “disadvantaged”, rather than their agency and vast array of achievements and skills. Rather, disaggregated analysis emphasizes experiences and voices that are often overlooked to pinpoint the concrete actions that will have the most widespread positive impacts on the entire UM community.

Language

The DAS used identity-first language (disabled persons) rather than person-first language (persons with disabilities) to acknowledge the disabling effect of social, environmental, and institutional barriers which hinder disabled individuals’ full participation in society, including university life.4

Similarly, the survey also used the term “chronic health conditions”, broadly defined as any condition, including mental health conditions, that is continuing or that occurs again and again over a long period of time, which in interaction with various barriers, may hinder full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.5

Positionality

Researchers bring their experiences, identities, and biases to their work. The DAS team members identify with various systemically marginalized identities, including disability and chronic health-related identities. These lived experiences are assets, but we recognize that our personal intersections of privilege also influence our work. Our commitment to research quality includes an openness to concerns and criticisms. Please feel free to send feedback on the DAS results to the Office of Equity Transformation at Equity@umanitoba.ca.

Footnotes

1. The survey was funded by the Robbins-Ollivier Award for Excellence in Equity.
2. The final sample size for the DAS, after data cleaning, is 544.
3. For example, do those who identify with cognitive disabilities feel more or less safe at UM than those identifying with physical or sensory disabilities? Do those who identify as disabled and as either bisexual or pansexual encounter more ableist microaggressions than their heterosexual counterparts?
4. Language choices were explained in the survey introduction; nevertheless, the DAS project team respects that members of disability and chronic health communities have diverse language preferences, including person with a disability, chronically ill, and episodic disability, for example. The team is grateful for all of the feedback we received regarding language and it will inform our work going forward.
5. Adapted from Bernell, S., & Howard, S. W. (2016). Use your words carefully: What is a chronic disease? Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 159. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00159 and the United Nations.

Report content

This summary highlights some of the experiences of student respondents who need or are currently receiving accommodations.

Who needs accommodations?

  • More than two-thirds (68%) of students6 require an accommodation to fully participate at UM.
  • Another 20% of students are unsure if they require accommodations. 
  • Students who identify as having multiple disabilities and chronic health conditions are more likely to require accommodations than students who identify as having one disability or chronic health condition (80% vs. 59%7).
  • Students identifying with cognitive disabilities are more likely to require accommodations (76%) than students identifying with physical or sensory disabilities (61%), and mental or emotional health-related disabilities (47.5%8).
  • Students identifying with mental or emotional health-related disabilities or chronic health conditions are more likely to be unsure as to whether they require an accommodation (25%), as compared to students identifying with cognitive (19%) and physical or sensory disabilities and chronic health conditions (18%9).

Footnotes

6. The results in this report refer only to those UM students who participated in the Dismantling Ableism Survey, not all UM students.
7. X2 (2, 149) = 7.1, p =<.05, V = 0.22
8. X2 (4, 256) = 21.5, p =<.001, V = 0.21
9. X2 (4, 256) = 21.5, p =<.001, V = 0.21

Whose needs are not currently being met?

  • Graduate students who need accommodations are less likely than their undergraduate counterparts to be receiving them10 (40% vs. 28%11).
  • Students identifying with mental or emotional health-related disabilities are less likely to be receiving needed accommodations (55%) than students with physical or sensory disabilities (36%) and students with cognitive disabilities (26%12).
  • Only 1/3 of students currently receiving accommodations indicate their needs are being met or exceeded by their instructors or academic supervisors. 
  • 1/3 of students have been denied an accommodation at some point.13

Footnotes

10. Student Accessibility Services and Faculty of Graduate Studies are currently working together to improve graduate students’ accommodations experiences, specifically.
11. X2 (2, 215) = 7.9, p =<.05, V = 0.19
12. X2 (4, 221) = 11.1, p =<.05, V = 0.16
13. This includes both formal and informal accommodation requests.

Why are students denied accommodations?

Students who have been denied accommodations were invited to expand on the circumstances surrounding these denials. Students described: 

  • Feeling that their expertise regarding their own needs was challenged or ignored;
  • Barriers related to the existing accommodations process and system, including application deadlines, and available resources and supports to fulfill accommodations requests;
  • Denials or delays related specifically to the need to obtain official medical documentation or approvals;
  • Concern that the wider UM culture views accommodations as an unfair advantage;
  • Instances where instructors denied accommodations requests, including those approved by Student Accessibility Services; or engaged in other ableist conduct (e.g., downplaying the seriousness of students’ disabilities or deciding that honoring accommodations would enable students’ disabilities).

What is the impact of being denied?

Students described the following consequences of accommodations denials: 

  • Continuing to struggle through classes unnecessarily;
  • Dropping classes, affecting future workloads and graduation timelines; 
  • Extra time and effort spent self-advocating or challenging denials; 
  • Distress, burnout, and feeling unwelcome at UM Feeling discouraged from requesting accommodations again in the future.

Next steps

Two concrete actions recommended by students to improve their accommodations experiences include14:

  • Better educating the UM community, including instructors, on the wide range of disabilities and chronic health conditions students identify with (e.g., cognitive and mental health disabilities), accommodation options and processes at UM, and accessible course design;
  • Implementing reporting mechanisms and consequences for ableist conduct.

 

Footnotes

14. Students, faculty, and staff offered a wide variety of suggestions regarding the types of supports they would like to have. These suggestions will be fully detailed in future results summaries. The two actions highlighted here were selected because they appear particularly relevant to preventing students from being unfairly denied accommodations.

Dismantling Ableism Survey (DAS) Keep reading

Download the full Dismantling Ableism Survey report (PDF)