College-University Transfer Experiences of Students With Disabilities: A Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The benefits of postsecondary education (PSE) are well documented and yet historic challenges have contributed to significant underrepresentation of students with disabilities. This paper presents the results of a survey study that explored students with disabilities’ experiences of transfer between PSE institutions in Canada. Data was collected using a survey questionnaire developed by the research team. Rating questions were analyzed using descriptive data. Students also answered open-ended questions that were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis approach. Sixty-nine of the 248 survey responses received indicated involvement in transfer between PSE institutions, mostly college to university. Four out of 5 of the transfer students self-identified as having psychiatric and mental health disabilities (e.g., anxiety, depression). Perceptions and experiences among successful and non-successful transfer students were mixed. Fully one-third of transfer students indicated that they felt that college-university transfer may be a better route for PSE for students with disabilities than going straight to university. Barriers to college-university transfer, among others, included a lack of information about who can assist with the process (62.5%) and inadequate information about disabilities and accommodation (56.3%). The results of this snapshot of PSE students with disabilities’ perceptions of college-university transfer may inform the design of evidence-based PSE transition interventions for this population. Additionally, given the under-representation of Indigenous and other racialized students in PSE, there is merit in further investigation focusing on their transfer experiences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".