Disabled students may experience a range of academic and non-academic challenges that hinder a successful transition into HE. One way to address these challenges is through  mentoring / buddying / tutoring schemes that can provide a mix of pastoral, social and academic support to students. While this activity could be delivered through three different formats (listed below), it is suggested that activities are underpinned by ‘person-centered planning’, which aims to prioritise students’ own goals, preferences, and priorities in service provision (ibid.). Specific training for mentors and ‘buddies’ should be organised by the Disability Service team to ensure mentors and buddies have the most appropriate skills to support mentees, are able to provide the most up-to-date information on disability support practices and facilitate the sharing of experiences.

Timing

Post-entry transition stages

Activities

  • Student-to-student (peer-to-peer) mentoring programme, in which mentors follow a curriculum structured by monthly and weekly goals. Evidence suggests that this format could be beneficial for mentees, especially in relation to learning how things work at the HEP, to meet people on campus, and to access support (Hillier et al., 2019) including on using assistive technology. The evidence indicates that for this intervention / programme to be successful, mentees should be recruited by disability support staff based on their judgement of the students’ needs for additional support, as well as their interest in participating. Mentors should be peers or senior students, willing to participate and be matched with mentees by availability. Having lived experience of disability is desirable but not essential. [Type 2 evidence]
  • Campus ‘buddy’ programme. Like the peer mentoring activity, campus buddies should be assigned to disabled students in the instances where Disability Service pre-entry work shows that this could be helpful. For example, one aim for the ‘buddies’ could be to support disabled students by meeting with them on a regular basis and sharing personal experiences of the academic and student life at the HEP. [Type 1 evidence]
  • Faculty mentorship programme where specially trained faculty mentors provide tailored support to disabled students during the transition period. Evidence suggests that this type of programme should offer disabled students the opportunity to be paired with a faculty member for the duration of their first year at HE (Markle, Wessel and Desmond, 2017). It is recommended that an introductory email is sent to initiate the relationship, but the nature of it should be determined by the participants, including the frequency and manner in which the pairs should meet. Finding a system that is beneficial for both is essential. Faculty members should provide advice on how students could successfully complete their coursework, introduce them to resources and other faculty members. [Type 2 evidence] 

Change mechanisms

Improved support for disabled students that is provided early on → in-depth understanding of disabled students’ needs by HEP staff / peers → better provision and increased use of support, confidence among disabled students and impact on progression after HE.

Assumptions

1.1 We assume that students have time available and invest it to actively engage with HEPs and to take up the support on offer to them during their transition journey. This is based on Type 1 evidence from HEPs delivering transition support for disabled students.

1.3 We assume that the interventions/programmes generate awareness and confidence among those that have not shared information about their disability to declare or seek targeted support. This is based on Type 1 evidence from HEPs delivering transition support for disabled students.

1.4 We assume that disabled students welcome the opportunity to learn about disability support from HEPs and related interventions / programmes and engage with them. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Markle, Wessel and Desmond (2017) as well as Type 1 evidence from HEPs delivering transition support for disabled students.

1.5 We assume that disabled students experience their engagement with staff and other stakeholders as being supportive and trustworthy. This is based on Type 1 evidence from HEPs delivering transition support for disabled students.

2.2 We assume that education providers are proactive with supporting students with a disability and reflect their commitment through activities such as staff training, student access to disability services / resources. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Baker et al. (2021).

2.3 We assume that education providers identify appropriate interventions / adjustments aligned with specific disabled student needs. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Baker et al. (2021).

2.4 We assume that staff and other stakeholders (such as peers involved in interventions / programmes) form supportive and trustworthy relationships with disabled students in all engagements conducted. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Hillier et al. (2019).

2.5 We assume that faculty members understand the importance of their role in the academic success of students with disabilities and the reasons why transition into HE might be more difficult for students with disability. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Markle, Wessel, and Desmond (2017).

2.7 We assume that parents and supporters are receptive to the idea of transition support and understand the benefits it can accrue for students as they enter HE. This is based on Type 2 evidence from Markle, Wessel, and Desmond (2017).

3.3 We assume that there are sufficient resources available for implementing a programme of transition support at HEPs. This is based on Type 1 evidence from HEPs delivering transition support for disabled students.

← Back to ‘Supporting disabled students: a blueprint for transition support’