Background
The following case study provides insights and approaches relating to a
single student, Simon, from three different academic staff who were involved
in teaching him over his first two semesters in university. He was
undertaking study in an economics and business management faculty.
Simon was 35 and had been head-injured many years earlier in a car-racing
accident. He had been a promising young racing driver prior to the accident
and car-racing had been the most important thing in his life.
Simon had been in rehabilitation for many years. His recovery had been
painstaking and prolonged. He could walk slowly but not far. He was unable
to use his right hand and he spoke slowly though he could be understood
quite well. Simon was friendly, outgoing, likeable and confident.
Simon had some cognitive impairment. His educational history even before
his accident had not been strong, and he had not completed high school. His
family was very supportive.
Resources used
Simon used a note-taker. He also had his own lap-top computer with
trackball.
Lecturer 1
Interaction with Simon
Before the course started the lecturer was informed by the faculty office
that Simon was enrolled in the course, so she was aware of him ahead of
time. This was the first subject of his degree.
The lecturer commented that Simon was charming, sociable, outgoing and
very confident. He had no difficulty in asking staff for assistance when he
needed it.
The lecturer gave Simon considerable additional time and attention, both
in her office and over the phone. She found that Simon needed further
explanation of the content of the lectures, as well as constant
reinforcement of all the work covered. Taping of the lectures would not have
met Simon's needs. Simon needed constant reassurance about his progress, and
reassurance that he was ‘doing all right’.
The lecturer noted that Simon was able to cope with direct answers but
had some difficulty with discussion and tasks that required planning or
analysis.
Assessment
The lecturer did not modify the course content in any way for Simon
because she was acutely aware of maintaining academic standards. Simon’s
exam was done at home, in the presence of an invigilator. This modification
was his own initiative. He had extra time for the exam but it was completed
on a single occasion.
Reasons for unsuccessful outcome
Simon did not pass this subject.
The lecturer believed that Simon had not grasped the content of the
course sufficiently well to pass the exam. However, she also felt that
entering university after the long recuperation from his accident had been a
difficult and ambitious undertaking, and that Simon would have benefited
from a more gradual introduction to university life. This was particularly
so as he had not been academically inclined before his accident.
Lecturer comments/observations
The lecturer did not find the extra time she spent with Simon a burden
but she commented that if there were a number of students requiring this
same kind of commitment it would become difficult.
The lecturer volunteered that she might have done things differently with
Simon, particularly in the flexibility of assessment, if she had had more
information about the kinds of modifications that come under the umbrella of
‘reasonable accommodations’. She had not been aware of legislation or
university policy and had been concerned about compromising educational
standards.
She added, though, that she did not think that such modifications would
have made the difference between a pass and a fail for Simon as his mark was
well below a pass.
Lecturer 2
Interaction with Simon
The lecturer was first made aware of Simon by the course coordinator and
she then approached the lecturer of Simon’s previous subject (above), in an
attempt to learn as much as she could about his needs prior to the beginning
of the course.
The lecturer's first contact with Simon was when she observed him in her
lecture, sitting on the end of the front row near the door (a position he
chose due to his limited mobility).
The lecturer ensured that Simon had a tutorial early in the day to
minimise his fatigue. She became aware that Simon was having difficulty with
his tutorials, and that he was over-using the hourly paid tutor who was
generous with his time (see below). To address this the lecturer instigated
weekly meetings with Simon, immediately prior to his tutorial, to go through
the content with him.
At this point the lecturer realised that some of Simon’s difficulties
stemmed from the fact that he did not know how to learn. The lecturer then
sought out books on study skills and collected study skills sheets and
information from the Study Skills centre. She then worked methodically
through this material with Simon to identify which strategies would help
him.
This brought about a marked improvement in Simon’s progress. He learnt to
direct his learning and was able to implement strategies to help him retain
what he was learning. The strategies that he learnt, particularly the
mnemonic ones, were very effective and his use of them could be seen in his
written work.
The lecturer also spent time with Simon teaching him how to cope with
examination formats, including how to deal with multiple-choice questions, a
question form which Simon had found very difficult.
As soon as the assignment (worth 40% of the total mark) was given, the
lecturer instituted weekly sessions with Simon to monitor his progress with
this project. She set up charts to indicate the appropriate progression and
goals for which Simon should aim. She focussed on time management skills
and, together with Simon, planned the work week by week. The lecturer did
not think this was advantaging Simon over other students because she said
she would have given similar assistance to others if it had been required.
The assistance was basically compensatory.
Assessment
Forty percent (40%) of the mark was for an assignment. This was completed
by Simon in the same way as other students. The remaining 60% of the mark
was from an exam. Simon was given an extra hour to do this. It was conducted
at Simon's home and the lecturer purposely appointed an invigilator who was
unknown to Simon. Simon was allowed three rest breaks of 15 minutes each
during the exam. He dictated the answers to the questions to a scribe who
typed them. The exam was marked anonymously with the other students' papers.
Reasons for Simon's success
Simon passed his subject and did better than a quarter of the class.
Simon was highly motivated and determined. He had told the lecturer that
his reason for doing the degree was to enable him to work in car-racing
administration and achieving this goal was very important to him.
The time commitment and methodical, problem-solving approach of the
lecturer to Simon's learning difficulties was a major factor in his success.
Problems identified
The lecturer had trouble getting relevant information within the
university about the kinds of strategies that would work best in assisting
someone like Simon to succeed in his study.
The lecturer felt that she had insufficient prior information about
Simon. She observed him in her lectures but commented that a 13 week course
is too short to enable adequate observation of a student to work out how
best to meet their needs. She believed that strategies for different
students result from knowing their needs well, but there is not time to do
this in a semester-long subject.
She was also concerned at the end of the course about the dependency that
Simon had developed on her and other supportive staff. She expressed concern
that Simon would not find it easy to succeed without the same level of
support from the staff of his next subject. While she believed that he was
going ahead in leaps and bounds, further progress would be dependent on the
same level of support he had had during his semester of study with her.
Simon's lack of acculturation to the university system caused some
difficulties. He expected considerable time to be given to him by staff, out
of hours and in their own homes, and when it was pointed out to him that
there was a limit to this, he expressed the belief that that was what staff
were paid to do.
The lecturer expressed concern about the current trends in tertiary
education towards larger numbers of students in lectures, a trend which she
felt would result in the inability to identify and attend to the needs of
individuals like Simon.
Simon's interaction with other students was limited. The lecturer
commented that students in her faculty tended to be insular, and from
privileged backgrounds, with limited awareness of people in the population
who were different from themselves. They stared at Simon and did not talk to
him. Over the duration of the course the lecturer noted that there was some
improvement in this attitude but some students remained oblivious to Simon,
as demonstrated by their refusal to leave a seat for him in the lecture
theatre.
Lecturer comments/observations
When asked about the time commitment to Simon the lecturer said she spent
an extra two hours a week with him. She stated firmly that she did not find
this onerous because working with Simon to find out how best to assist him
to learn was stimulating and enjoyable and took her ‘back to the bones of
teaching’. She commented that she liked the interaction with people, and
that she appreciated the challenge of working with students who face
obstacles to learning because it made her examine her fundamental teaching
principles and techniques in seeking ways to facilitate the best learning
outcomes for them.
When asked if a class of more than one student with a severe disability
would be too difficult the lecturer said it would not, that if there were
numbers of students she would work out appropriate group sessions.
The lecturer did not question Simon's right to undertake tertiary
education. She believed that he had the capacity to complete the course and
to take employment afterwards if he so chose. She commented that in many
respects Simon had better relevant attributes than many of the other
students in the group, his interpersonal skills being an example of this.
The lecturer stressed the importance of a team approach in providing
students like Simon with the necessary support to enable them to succeed.
She felt that this must involve the participation of the course and subject
coordinators, the disability office of the university and all teaching
staff.
The lecturer also pointed out that using hourly-paid staff poses
significant difficulties. She stressed the importance of team support, peer
teaching, proper initial assessment and information (lists of resources that
might assist teaching staff), and the opportunity to meet and talk with the
student before the beginning of the course.
The lecturer felt that it was of great importance to meet the student
beforehand to get to know her or him so that appropriate steps could be
taken from the very beginning. The lecturer did not meet Simon until he
appeared in her lecture.
Hourly paid tutor
Interaction with Simon
The tutor observed that Simon was cheerful, confident and engaging. He
also felt that Simon was used to getting his own way and was adept at
manipulating people. As a survival strategy over the years he had learnt to
make the most of people's sympathy.
The tutor was told about Simon by the lecturer of the course but he was
not provided with any information from other sources.
The tutor observed that Simon's short term memory was poor and that even
when information was repeated several times Simon had difficulty retaining
it. He observed that Simon learned best by doing and consequently he started
to take Simon through processes, step by step, doing them with him. He found
that that way Simon would retain what he had learned.
The tutor observed that Simon was easily confused when there were two
ways of doing something, such as using the mouse on a computer to move the
cursor or using the arrows on the keyboard. The tutor usually taught all
alternatives to the class but it was clear that this was confusing to Simon.
The tutor decided to focus on a single process that Simon was comfortable
with and to overlook alternative methods in order to facilitate his
learning.
The tutor commented that his course was competency-based, teaching the
manipulation of a word-processing program. This kind of learning suited
Simon better than that which involved more analytical thinking.
Problems identified
The tutor was uncertain about whether Simon did his assignment work
himself. The standard of his assignment work was higher than that he
demonstrated in class. The tutor did note, however, that the standard of the
work Simon did in his exam was also higher than he had expected, and yet the
exam was definitely done by Simon himself. He commented on the difficulty of
assessing Simon's true capabilities.
The tutor commented that he and the lecturer ‘nursed’ Simon, and that
keeping a professional distance from him had been impossible in all
circumstances. He observed that Simon's behaviour was frequently familiar in
ways that were inappropriate.
He would put love and kisses on the bottom of his work. He also made a
lot of physical contact such as touching and putting his arm around staff.
In one instance he ran his finger up the back of the lecturer's neck to her
hair.
Because Simon was likeable, and because staff were not experienced in
handling this kind of situation, these incidents were not addressed. The
tutor felt, in retrospect, that they should have been dealt with as they
occurred. Simon also made inappropriate comments to the female students
about their dress or their appearance. This appeared to contribute to their
avoidance of him.
When asked by the tutor why he was doing the course Simon had said it was
to stop his brain ‘from going dead’. The tutor expressed some concerns about
whether there was justification for Simon doing the course if this was his
reason.
The tutor made himself very accessible to Simon. At times when Simon was
doing work at home he would ring the tutor up three or four times in an
hour. The tutor's wife took to answering the phone calls to keep them to a
reasonable number and duration. Simon visited the tutor several times at his
home and would stay for inappropriately long periods of time (on one
occasion he stayed all day), even though the tutor would take him straight
to the study and keep the meeting on a professional footing.
The tutor recognised that lack of experience and information about
working with students like Simon, and fear of doing the wrong thing, had led
to mishandling of some situations. He felt, in retrospect, that some of the
issues (such as the over-familiar behaviour and the visits to the tutor's
home) should have been dealt with more assertively.
The tutor observed that there was no interaction between Simon and the
other students. Tutorials were only one hour long so group work was not
built into these sessions. Interaction with peers was therefore not a
necessary part of the course. Consequently the tutor did not pay any special
attention to this lack of interaction but left it to Simon and the group to
work out. With hindsight he said he felt that perhaps he could have done
something about this. He could have discussed the matter with Simon, and
instigated some discussion with the class about disability, social
responsibility and appropriate behaviour. However, he had had Simon's
privacy in mind.
The tutor noted that his status as an hourly-paid tutor made it difficult
for him to be as closely involved in strategies to assist Simon as was
desirable due to his lack of inclusion in broader staff activities and his
limited time on campus.
Tutor comments/observations
The tutor had no specific information about the university's equal
opportunity policies. He was only vaguely aware of these through once seeing
a poster on a noticeboard.