Factors Affecting Experiential Learning Experiences of University Students with Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Experiential learning (EL) experiences are an important component of a university education, positively impacting career-related attitudes, knowledge, and skills. Students also require EL opportunities to gain experiences required for admission to competitive graduate and professional programs. Students with disabilities face barriers accessing and benefiting from such opportunities. Purpose: This study examined the degree to which demographic factors, type and severity of disability, dispositional factors, and overall adjustment and wellbeing are predictive of the quality of EL experiences among university students with disabilities. Methodology/approach: A survey was distributed to undergraduate students with disabilities who have participated in EL courses. Results were analyzed using multiple linear regression. Findings/conclusions: Dispositional and adjustment and wellbeing variables, including the environmental mastery dimension of their psychological wellbeing rather than demographic factors, such as gender or type and severity of disability, are significant predictors of the quality of EL experiences among students with disabilities. Implications: For students with disabilities to have academically and professionally successful EL experiences, post-secondary institutions must continue to provide appropriate accommodations and educate instructors about the diverse and complex needs of this student group. This must include an understanding of the uniqueness of each individual student’s needs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".