Barriers and Facilitators to Access to Post-secondary Education for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Narrative Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our narrative literature review sought to identify potential barriers and facilitators to access to academic participation for post-secondary students with learning disabilities. A search of eight databases yielded over 1600 possible articles, reduced to 107 after applying selection criteria. We identified three themes: accommodations, self-advocacy, and supports. We found that current efforts are focused primarily on the provision of individualized accommodations to help students adapt to an inaccessible academic environment, despite a scarcity of evidence confirming their efficacy. Students must submit a psychoeducational assessment report to be eligible for accommodations, even though there is no clear relationship between the information they contain and the specific accommodations approved. The likelihood that students receive accommodations further depends on personal factors, including self-advocacy. Skills-based supports, mental health and wellbeing supports, and inclusive pedagogical methods act as facilitators to equity. Persistent barriers associated with retroactive accommodations could be substantially reduced if more resources were directed to proactive efforts to increase academic accessibility of post-secondary education.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".