Barriers and facilitators to students with physical disabilities' participation in academic laboratory spaces.

Purpose: To provide empirical evidence on learning barriers and facilitators in instructional science and engineering laboratory settings from a national survey on students with physical disabilities (SwD-P).Methods: A nationwide self-report survey, the Full Participation Science and Engineering Accessibility (FPSEA), was disseminated online via Qualtrics. Approximately 1200 organizations and universities across the United States were contacted through purposive sampling. Descriptive statistics were primarily used for the analysis of the results.Results: Survey findings reveal that students experience a wide range of limitations to full participation in the laboratory, from entering the laboratory (25%) to being given passive roles (50%). Additionally, while 66% of respondents indicated that instructors were willing to help SwD-P participate in science and engineering (S&E) laboratories, 16.8% were not willing to do so, and 47% SwD-P felt that practices were not in place to provide accommodations. The survey also reveals a range of facilitators such as elevators, ramps, accessible course materials and peer assistance. Most respondents (74%) also indicated that peers were helpful in completing laboratory tasks.Conclusion: This survey provides empirical evidence that was previously voiced through non-empirical information in the literature. Participants cited barriers such as inappropriate accommodations and instructors' negative viewpoints, as well as gaining access to facilities even after the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These findings suggest that while ADA has lessened some barriers to SwD-P, barriers remain in using the laboratory space. The FPSEA survey fills the gap in finding barriers and facilitators to using S&E laboratories from the SwD-P's perspective.Implications for RehabiliationBarriers students with disabilities encounter in science and engineering (S&E) laboratory environments remain unclear.The FPSEA survey fills the gap in finding barriers and facilitators to using S&E laboratories from the SwD-P's perspective.The FPSEA survey allows former and current SwD-P to share their experiences using a postsecondary S&E instructional laboratory.

Participation in science and engineering laboratories for students with physical disabilities: survey development and psychometrics.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to address the development of the Full Participation Science and Engineering Accessibility (FPSEA) self-report survey that gathers experiences from students with physical disabilities (SwD-P) using a postsecondary laboratory and to evaluate the survey's stability. Methods: Survey items were generated from an extensive literature review and recommendations articulated by experts. Think-aloud sessions and content validity index (CVI) were used to determine survey content validity and help finalize survey items. Individuals with physical disabilities (n = 20) who have taken a postsecondary science or engineering laboratory course completed the survey and took it again 10-14 days apart. The test-retest reliability was assessed using Spearman Rho coefficients for Likert-scale items, Chi-square and Fisher's exact test for the dichotomous items. Missing data completely at random (MCAR) test was computed before reliability data analysis. Results: Each sub-item passed the MCAR test, indicating that the data are missing completely at random and can be imputed to perform the analysis. Reliability analysis was completed on 20 individuals. The FPSEA had good content reliability: the item-level CVI of items kept ranged from 0.86 to 1. The scale-level CVI was 0.94. Stability was demonstrated with adequate Spearman correlation ranged from 0.56 to 0.86. Conclusions: No previous survey had been developed linking SwD-P and the postsecondary science and engineering (S&E) laboratory setting prior to this work. Overall, FPSEA is reliable and stable for reporting the barriers and facilitators to use S&E laboratories from the SwD-P's perspective. Implications for rehabilitation The barriers students with disabilities encounter in S&E laboratory environments are largely unknown. The FPSEA survey may help identify barriers and facilitators to using S&E laboratories for SwD-P. The FPSEA Survey allows former and current SwD-P to share their experiences using a postsecondary S&E instructional laboratory.

Adaptation of the adult Functional Mobility Assessment (FMA) into a FMA-Family Centred (FMA-FC) paediatric version.

AIM: The aims of this study were to adapt an adult wheeled mobility outcome measure, the Functional Mobility Assessment, for use with children (FMA-Family Centred) and establish the new measure's content validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency. BACKGROUND: Although several tools exist to measure a child's ability to operate and move a wheeled mobility device, none focus on the ability of the wheeled mobility device to support children and their families as they perform daily activities. METHODS: After adapting the FMA items with examples relevant to children aged 3-21, parent/caregiver and therapist stakeholder groups recommended adaptations relevant for families with children who cannot respond for themselves. RESULTS: Six of the initial FMA items were retained with child-appropriate examples, and 4 new items were developed. CONCLUSION: The content validity of the FMA-Family Centred was strongly supported, and internal consistency and test-retest reliability met accepted psychometric standards.

Development and consumer validation of the Functional Evaluation in a Wheelchair (FEW) instrument.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to develop an outcome measurement tool to investigate functional performance of consumers using seating and wheelchair systems as their primary seating and mobility device. The instrument is undergoing systematic development in three phases. The results of Phase 1 will be reported. METHOD: Manual and power wheelchair users were interviewed using a modified version of a client-centred outcome measure. An item bank was derived based on the interview data. Subjects were then asked to validate item categories of the new instrument, and finally to self-administer the first version of the instrument. RESULTS: Subjects reported 154 self-care, productivity, and leisure occupational performance issues related to their current seating-mobility system. Based on their input, 10 categories (i.e. transfers, reach, accessing task surfaces, transportation-portability, human-machine interface, architectural barriers, transportation-accessibility, transportation-securement, natural barriers and accessories) were validated for inclusion in the new outcome measure, Functional Evaluation in a Wheelchair (FEW). CONCLUSION: The items on the FEW focus on the interaction between the consumer, the technology, and the milieu. Consumers viewed the overall importance of FEW categories for seating-mobility system users differently than when they self-administered the FEW.

Occupational performance and the transition to powered mobility: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This quantitative study describes the transition from manual to powered mobility and its influence on occupational performance (organization of daily tasks, assumption of responsibility, roles, interests) and feelings of competence, adaptability, and self-esteem. METHOD: The Occupational Performance History Interview (OPHI) was used with a convenience sample of 8 participants with both static and progressive conditions to measure retrospectively changes in occupational performance after the change from a manual wheelchair to a powered mobility device (PMD). The Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Device Scale (PIADS) was used to measure participants' perceptions of the impact of the PMD on their competence, adaptability, and self-esteem. RESULTS: A comparison of the pretest and posttest means on the OPHI scores showed a significant improvement in occupational performance (p = .001) after the introduction of PMDs. The PIADS scores showed a positive impact of 2 or greater for 75% of the participants on 19 of 26 items. Scores were similar to scores in a PIADS database of persons with comparable conditions. No significant relationship between occupational performance and psychosocial impact was demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that the transition to a PMD enhances occupational performance, competence, adaptability, and self-esteem for persons with severe mobility impairments.