Next Article in Journal
Navigating Invisible Disability Disclosure and Workplace Inclusion: Employers’ Attitudes and Workplace Policies
Previous Article in Journal
Barriers and Facilitators in Reaching and Supporting Parents with Intellectual Disabilities
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Disabilities
Volume 5
Issue 2
10.3390/disabilities5020036
disabilities-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Factors Influencing the College Decision-Making Process for Students with Disabilities

by
Stefania D. Petcu
1,*,
Kathleen J. Marshall
2,
Dalun Zhang
3,
Adam R. Lalor
4 and
Yasir Hussain
5
1
Kansas University Center on Disabilities, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA
2
Department of Educational and Developmental Science, College of Education, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA
3
Department of Educational Psychology, School of Education and Human Development, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA
4
Center for Neurodiversity, Landmark College, Putney, VT 05346, USA
5
Department of English, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 15320, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Disabilities 2025, 5(2), 36; https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities5020036
Submission received: 30 November 2024 / Revised: 14 February 2025 / Accepted: 28 March 2025 / Published: 5 April 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The purpose of this study is to increase understanding of the college decision-making process for students with disabilities by listening to their perceptions of factors that influenced their decisions related to attending postsecondary education. A semi-structured interview was used to provide descriptive evidence from 20 college-going high school students with disabilities. Content analysis was utilized to evaluate the data collected. The results suggest that the factors influencing the college decision-making process of students without disabilities also influence the decision-making process of students with disabilities.

1. Introduction

“All my life I was told to do my best and now I am told that ‘my best’ is not good enough to get me into the college I want to attend.”
—Caiti
Caiti is one of the many students with disabilities dreaming of going to college but not fully prepared to tackle the overwhelming process of college admission. Caiti was excited to go to visit the college of her dreams with her high school as part of the college preparation program. During this visit, she had the opportunity to talk with the admission counselor about her intention to apply to her dream school; that is when she found out that her Grade Point Average (GPA) and SAT Reasoning Test scores were not close to being satisfactory for admission to the college.
Caiti is among the 80% of students with disabilities in the United States who aim to pursue postsecondary education (PSE) [1,2]. The transition from high school to college is rife with opportunities, challenges, and decisions; thus, it is unsurprising that many students with disabilities who aspire to enroll in postsecondary education never apply for admission [3]). Only 60% of students with disabilities enroll in PSE within eight years of graduating from high school, a lower rate than that of their peers without disabilities [2]. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ employment projections forecast that by 2033, jobs that require some form of postsecondary education will continue to have the highest earnings and lower unemployment rates [4]; thus, postsecondary enrollment becomes increasingly important for all students, including those with a disability [5].
Federal legislation mandates that school districts offer transition planning and services to all students with disabilities aged 16 years and older Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) [6]. Students receiving transition services and their parents must be invited to the Individualized Education Program (IEP )meetings to discuss goals for life after school and develop a plan for reaching these goals, including postsecondary education goals. Research indicates that supporting students to develop and pursue their transition goals increases the chances of a successful transition to adulthood [7,8]. Despite these supports, students with disabilities who have an IEP continue to be behind their peers in preparing for college, and they are less likely than in the past to participate in key transition activities that can support their transition to postsecondary education [1]. For example, the last report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study indicates that in 2012, students with an IEP (ages 16 and older) were nearly 30% less likely to report having taken a college entrance or placement test (42% versus 70%) and almost 20% less likely to have taken a high school course for college credit (9% versus 28%) [1]. Similarly, while more than three-quarters of students with an IEP receiving transition services reported that they expect to obtain postsecondary education, this rate was 18% lower than the rate for students without an IEP (76% versus 94%).
The enrolment in and completion of postsecondary education for students with disabilities increased in the last few decades; however, this increase was not consistent for students who experience various disabilities, race/ethnicity, and language and socioeconomic statuses [2]. For example, while 40% of English language learners with disabilities have attended a 2- or a 4-year college or university within eight years after high school graduation only 25% of English language learners with disabilities graduate from a 2-year community college and 4% from a 4-year university [9]. Similarly, the enrollment in and completion of postsecondary education programs vary by race and ethnicity within both the general and disability population, with Asian and non-Hispanic Whites having a higher percentage of enrollment in and completion of postsecondary education programs [10].
While efforts have been made to facilitate the transition to postsecondary education, many youths with disabilities still face obstacles that impede their goals, resulting in less desirable PSE outcomes [11]. These obstacles include, but are not limited to, low self-determination or academic skills [7,12]; low student and parent expectations [1,13]; low teacher expectations [14], which can be influenced by the type or severity of a student’s disability [15]; the student’s race or ethnicity [16]; the provision of needed information about higher education access and opportunity [17]; and the level of their engagement in the high school college-going activities (e.g., college fairs, financial aid, or college applications [18]. Additionally, students with multiple identities, such as English language learners with disabilities, are facing additional challenges that are associated with learning a new language and navigating school with a disability [19,20]. Thus, students with disabilities must navigate the college decision-making process, facing challenges beyond those of the average student without disabilities. Decisions associated with going to college are made throughout the high school years, and students should use information from various sources to make decisions [3]. Knowing how students with disabilities make decisions about going to college and when they struggle in the decision-making process might help educators design support that better addresses their needs and that, ultimately, leads to increased enrollment.
The factors influencing college decision making for students without disabilities have been well documented. Among these factors are the following: personal aspirations, performance at school [21], postsecondary institutional marketing efforts [22,23], and finances [24]. Little is known, however, about the factors influencing the decision to go to college for students with disabilities. Researchers in the field are beginning to identify some of the factors that may play a role in the transition to postsecondary education: household income, parents’ educational level, rural or urban high school attendance, and first-generation status [25,26,27,28]. Cabrera and La Nasa [29] proposed a model for decision making for students without disabilities who go to college. It has three components: predispositions, search, and choice for college. Cabrera and La Nasa [29] stated that while each stage can be associated with a particular age and grade cohort, they often overlap. The predisposition stage, which should occur in seventh through ninth grades, encompasses the development of occupational and educational aspirations and the intentions to continue beyond the secondary level. The search stage involves gathering information about colleges of interest and preparing a shortlist of potential postsecondary institutions [29]. The last stage—choice—entails applying to and enrolling in college, which encompasses knowledge of, for example, college expenses, admission criteria, and due dates for submission of the application or financial aid [29]. The college decision-making model proposed by Cabrera and La Nasa [29] might help educators better understand how students with disabilities go about deciding to pursue higher education. Thus, this study uses the model proposed by Cabrera and La Nasa [29] to explore the factors and resources that influence the decision to pursue higher education. Additionally, this study explores if and how these factors and resources differ from those identified in the literature as being associated with college decision making for students without disabilities. Specifically, this study will answer the following questions:
  • What factors and resources do students with disabilities report as influencing their decision to pursue higher education?
  • Do the factors and resources associated with pursuing higher education reported by students with disabilities differ from those reported in the literature for students without disabilities?

2. Method

2.1. Research Design and Survey Instrument Development

A semi-structured interview was used to answer the research questions. The interview protocol included 31 open-ended questions, including demographic information (i.e., gender, ethnicity, and grade level-2 questions), predisposition (8 questions), search stage (14 questions), and the choice stage (7 questions). The questions from the choice stage were excluded from the analysis because only two students were seniors and considered for the last stage of the college decision-making process. The questions were designed to guide discussion with the students. Several questions included prompts for the interviewer in case the student responded with a simple “yes or no” response or if there was a need to ask additional questions to clarify. The survey instrument included eight open-ended questions for the first stage, predisposition. Students were asked if they considered going to college when they started thinking about it, if anyone in their family went to college, and with whom they discussed this topic. The second part of the interview, the search stage, included 14 open-ended questions, which were designed to identify if the students had a list of colleges in mind, how they decided a particular college was the right choice for them, what factors were important when choosing a college, and where they were able to find that information. The survey protocol can be provided on request to the first author.
The interview protocol was developed based on a literature review, which identified components of the process of deciding to go to college for students without disabilities. After the initial development, four professionals in the field of special education who have experience working with students with disabilities as educators and/or conducting qualitative research reviewed the protocol. Minimal (e.g., wording, eliminating some redundant questions, and collapsing others) changes were made to the initial instrument.

2.2. Sampling Procedures and Inclusion Criteria

Purposive sampling was employed to select the school districts and the student participants [30]. First, an invitation to participate was sent to seven school districts from one state in the southeastern U.S.; only three school districts agreed to participate in this study. Next, the first author of this study sent an invitation to participate to the school principals from all high schools located in this school district, and five school principals agreed to participate. Following receipt of permission from the respective school principals, invitation letters and consent forms were sent to students with disabilities receiving resource services with the support of special education resource teachers or transition specialists from each high school. The invitation letters and consent forms were sent to students with disabilities receiving resource services. Resource services are defined, under IDEA, as participation in the general education classes for 80% or more of the school time. Inclusion criteria for participants included the following: (a) signed formal consent to conduct this study from the district/school officials, (b) identification as a student with high-incidence disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities, speech and language impairments) receiving resource services, (c) enrollment in a public school in the U.S., and (d) parental consent to participate in this study. The final study sample included 20 participants. All interviews were scheduled by each student’s transition specialist, taking place at their respective high school. Because the participants were young students with disabilities, the interviews were conducted one on one by a research team member to allow each participant to respond to each question. The researcher rephrased questions when needed to ensure students understood them. The semi-structured protocol was employed, but occasionally, students were (a) asked to elaborate on topics related to their decision to pursue postsecondary education and (b) redirected to the topic under discussion if any deviation of significance occurred. All interviews were audiotaped with the permission of the students and parents and lasted around 35–45 min.

2.3. Participants and School Characteristics

The participants’ parents signed the consent forms and allowed their children to participate in this study. As noted earlier, 20 students participated, 14 of whom were white, and 6 were African American. Seven of the participants were male, and the remaining thirteen were female. Grade level was self-reported: three participants were in the 9th grade, four were in the 10th grade, eleven were in the 11th grade, and two were in the 12th grade. Although school districts did not approve data collection on student disability status, the participants were selected from those receiving resource support. Eleven participants were enrolled in rural high schools, and nine attended suburban high schools. The schools’ annual report card from the year of data collection shows that using free and reduced lunch as a proxy, the percentage of students living in poverty was 82% in the rural high schools and 24%, 66% and 95% for the three suburban high schools. All high schools were medium sized.

2.4. Data Analysis

Content analysis was used to analyze the data. This methodology was selected because it is a qualitative research technique widely used to organize large quantities of text into fewer content categories; it is also a flexible, pragmatic method for developing and extending knowledge of human experiences in different fields [31]. Research team members began the analysis process by thoroughly reading the interview transcripts. Three authors independently coded data and identified overarching themes; a fourth author analyzed the interviews manually (e.g., reading all interviews and identifying themes) and used the qualitative data analysis tool Nvivo (version 13). Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted in both inductive and deductive manners to identify all possible clues that might help us understand the decision-making process of students with disabilities. Separate analytical themes were written by each team member and compared for the credibility of the analysis.

3. Results

The purpose of this study was to identify the factors and resources that students with disabilities use when making decisions to go to college during Predisposition Stage 1 (see Table 1) and Search Stage (see Table 2). The findings of this study indicate that students’ path to college was influenced by the following resources: (a) high school college-going programs, which also included teachers and guidance counselors as a source of support; (b) family, friends, and community; and (c) online resources. These resources, however, intertwined and created a wraparound system of supports, students accessing more resources being more prepared than the other ones.
Participants reported that campus visits helped gather more information about a particular college. Additionally, several students reported that they knew about different college-going events taking place in their high school (e.g., college or career fairs) but that they never attended one. Table 2 shows students’ perspectives on college-going activities offered by their high school. Direct and indirect exposure to college life (e.g., attending football games, friends talking about college life) played an important role in helping students decide to go to college. Most students reported discussing college matters with parents, siblings, and close relatives (e.g., aunts, grandparents, or cousins), and the majority identified teachers and school counselors as the most knowledgeable regarding college preparation and admission. Students who received help from both high school programs and family, friends, and community members had an extended array of support and, as a result, presented themselves as knowing more about colleges. These students, for example, were able to collect more information about college life from friends attending college.
The majority of the students interviewed for this study reported considering one of the local community/technical colleges. The students reported that they were told to apply to the local community college, and one can argue that some students were “pushed” (e.g., Paul) by the school counselor/high school program to apply to a local community/technical college. In Niki’s words, “everybody else (from the high school) has to apply to it (local community college)”.
All but one student reported talking with parents about going to college regardless of the parents’ college experience. The findings indicate that the family was a great source of inspiration to continue with postsecondary education after high school. Interestingly, students reported receiving more moral support and encouragement to be the first in the family to go to college, rather than logistical support and support in making decisions. Seven students reported that they would be the first generation to go to college in their family and how that is a motivating factor for them. Lexie stated, “my family is very proud of me because a lot of people in my family did not go to college”. Only three of the students included in this study reported that their parents provided more than moral support such as assisting with the collection of information about colleges or discussing plans to save for college. Some students reported that parents were protective and did not fully support their decision to attend college because they might be bullied or because they did not trust they could handle college life. Going to college in a different city meant for some students to be away from their family and have more opportunities to be independent. Overall, most of the students were aware of the impact that their decision would have on their family. On one hand, some students recognized that going to college would allow them to improve their socio-economic status, have a better life, and help their family. On the other hand, students felt responsible for their families and recognized that going away for college might leave their families without their support.
Fifteen of the twenty students interviewed reported having discussed going to college during their IEP meetings that took place while in high school. Some students did not remember what was discussed regarding college attendance during the IEP meeting, saying “I do not remember” (Drea), but some described the discussion as “they (teachers) try to find out what is best for me” (Cheyenne) or “they are pushing me to do what I need to do” (Danielle). Students who reported having their parents involved in the college-going discussion during the IEP meeting were among the ones to remember more details about those particular discussions.
Students were aware of the potential of gathering college information online; thus, they were influenced in their decision by the college marketing strategies. They all knew, for example, that one way to find out information about a particular college is to access their online website. Students relied on the online sources to find information about different colleges, either because they were required to research for a school assignment or because they had a personal interest in learning more about a particular college. While the college/university official website was typically the primary resource, there were some exceptions. For example, one student learned more about an agriculture program and reported using YouTube where “… you find videos with what they do” (James). While marketing efforts of higher education programs are designed to broadly attract students during college visits and college fairs, the participants did not know that they could inquire about information of personal interest, for example, information about disability services and specific information about tuition and scholarships. In summary, the findings of this study indicate that students reported that several factors influence the decision to pursue postsecondary education. These factors included the following: support within the community (e.g., family, friends, relatives, or mentors), teachers, and school counselors, via the school programs and the IEP meetings, and college/university marketing efforts.

4. Discussion

This study aimed to better understand the college decision-making process for students with disabilities by listening to their perceptions of factors that influenced their decisions related to pursuing postsecondary education. An additional aim of this study was to identify if students with disabilities rely on the same system of support in their college decision making as students without disabilities.
What factors and resources do students with disabilities report as influencing their college decision-making process?
Overall, for the participants interviewed for this study, the college decision-making process was not an individual one but the result of a consultation process with the immediate family, relatives, friends, teachers, school counselors, as well as people from the community. Several factors appear to influence the college decision-making process for this study’s participants: support within the community from family, teachers, school counselors, high school programs for college-going students, and college/university marketing efforts. The findings of this study provide new insight into some of the issues that may affect the enrollment of students with disabilities in postsecondary academic settings. As expected, the findings of this study indicate that family plays an important role in the college decision-making process for students with disabilities. Moreover, these findings suggest that parental and family influences are important and identify factors that contribute to family influence. These factors include responsibility for family support, pride, and protectiveness, which are bi-directional and at the forefront of college decision making. The relationship between some factors influencing the college decision-making process and disability, poverty, and opportunity requires further exploration. Educating parents and students earlier (as early as the 9th grade) and in greater depth about college options and helping them create a college application timeline might increase their awareness about college options, tuition, scholarships, and skills necessary to be competitive in college admissions [3,12]. Increasing students’ knowledge, as early as the 9th grade, about college in general, tuition, and financial aid can increase students’ involvement in college-preparatory behaviors during the high school years [32].
While all the students interviewed for this study reported involving their families in their college decision-making process, only a few of them received additional support from their families beyond moral support (see Table 1). Parent–student discussions about college planning, a distinct college-planning activity, are enhanced when both students and parents engage in college preparation, have higher college aspirations, and get involved in school and community [33]. For students without disabilities, parental involvement varies based on socio-economic status, parental educational attainment, school context for college opportunity, higher education context, and the social, economic, and policy context [34]. Students with disabilities are more likely than their peers to be socio-economically disadvantaged [1]; thus, they may be less likely to rely on parent involvement in the college-going process. Students with disabilities are less likely than their peers without disabilities to take the PSAT [1]; thus, their parents may be less likely to receive direct-mail college marketing and recruitment materials, which can later trigger parent–student discussion about college going [34]. As a result, school counselors and teachers are becoming the primary source of college-going information for students with disabilities and their parents [35].
As expected, the findings of this study indicate that for participating students, more constructive support in this process came from their high school via teachers and school counselors. The results of this study show that, although students might play with the idea of going to college, the specific activities included in the curriculum (e.g., having to do a project on a college of interests) or visiting a college are what initiate more concrete actions. Additionally, the majority of the students reported seeing their teachers and the school counselors as being the most knowledgeable about college going. However, students also reported not taking full advantage of the additional college-going activities happening in their high school and not sitting down to discuss going to college with their school counselors. Research suggests that visiting a counselor for college-going information increases the likelihood of postsecondary enrollment for students with disabilities; this impact is greater for those with low socio-economic status [34]. Further research is needed to explore in more depth the support students with disabilities receive from their school counselors. Moreover, it can also be beneficial to explore ways of embedding the College and Career Readiness curriculum in all high school grades and ways to specifically target students with a low SES or those who are not the typical college-going students [36].
The majority of the participants in this study reported their intent to enroll in a local community college due to a high school application requirement; this finding is not surprising given that data show that students with disabilities are more likely to enroll in a community college [2]. Research in the field of special education also shows that only half of the students with disabilities intending to go to college will apply to a college [37]. If a high school has a single-trajectory model for most students with disabilities that involves information on and planning for attending a specific (and local) community or technical college, students may be more likely to apply to that school because of group guidance and contextual support. This type of group “guidance” provides extensive supports that may not be available when multiple students are thinking of applying to many different colleges with a range of requirements. Studies of the importance, role, and structure of different high school experiences related to college decision making and the effects of program types on application and enrollment are absent in the related literature and may be critical to understanding how students with disabilities pursue opportunities in higher education.
Do the college decision-making factors and resources reported by the students with disabilities differ from those identified in the literature as being associated with college decision making for students without disabilities?
For students without disabilities, some of the most important factors influencing their college decision-making process include their personal aspirations, school counselors’ support, and the marketing efforts of the higher education institution [35,38,39]. These factors were also found to play a role in the college decision-making process of students with disabilities, as identified in the current study. Similarly, Fleming and Fairweather [25] argued that traditional factors influencing enrollment in postsecondary education, such as minority status, socio-economic background, and academic achievement in high school, play an important role for students with disabilities too. High schools from across the United States already have support systems in place for college-going students. Although these resources and support systems should be available to all students, “typical” college-going (e.g., students with good GPA, those who take the PSAT, or coming from families with higher SES) students are more likely to access them. “Non-typical” college-going students, including those with disabilities, are less likely to access existing resources and support systems. Thus, research is needed to identify ways of getting students with disabilities to access existing college-going resources and support systems (e.g., meeting with the school counselors). Additionally, existing data need to be used to tailor these resources and support systems to meet the individual and family characteristics and needs (e.g., race/ethnicity, SES, or first generation to go to college).

4.1. Limitations

There are several limitations to this study that must be acknowledged. First, the analysis performed was based on self-reported data, and the data could not be independently verified. Second, the school districts did not allow access to disability-related demographic characteristics; access to such information would have allowed us, for example, to identify if students identified as having a particular type of disability were more informed about the college of their interest. Third, data on the third section of the Cabrera and La Nasa [29] framework for this study, choice, were not included in this study due to the limited number of senior students included.

4.2. Implications for Research and Practice

We know that students with disabilities enroll at a higher rate in two-year community colleges compared to their peers without disabilities [2]. While we need to prepare all students to be college and career ready [40], this must happen based on students’ individual interests and abilities [6]. Future research should clarify if the national trend of increased enrollment rates by students with disabilities in the two-year community colleges [2] is fed by the high school policies of having students enroll at these types of colleges, or if the trend is a result of student interest in this category of institution. Of additional interest will be determining how many of the students enrolling at a community college with the plan of transferring later to a four-year institution do so. The road to college for students with disabilities continues to be a challenging one, and more research is needed to better support these students. The ultimate goal should be to prepare all students to be college and career ready [40] or, in the words of one the participant students (Caiti), to make “it where they looked at the college like anybody can go”.
As mentioned earlier, only two participants were seniors, and data on the third section of the Cabrera and La Nasa [29] framework used for this study—choice—were not included. However, given that only approximately 50% of students with an IEP who have to pursue postsecondary education as a transition goal are enrolling in a postsecondary education program [2], it is crucial that future studies focus on this last step of college decision making to explore why the students end up not enrolling in a program. The findings from studies exploring the choice stage in the college decision-making process can support research and school leaders in developing support services that will address students’ needs and might increase the college enrollment rate for students with disabilities.
Furthermore, in addressing students’ needs within the process of college decision making, school leaders should use a strength-based approach and take into consideration the cultural, ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds of their students and their families [41,42,43]. For example, emerging research indicates that, while parents of English language learners with disabilities report being less involved in the IEP process and less informed about the college process [44], students report relaying their family and community for support with their transition to postsecondary education [43].
Furthermore, the results of this study suggest important implications for practice. First, it may be important to help students build their aspirations and college predispositions as early as possible. Ideally, the process should start as soon as the eighth grade but no later than the ninth. Applying for college is a long and daunting process that requires laborious preparation [3]. School counselors should work with students starting from ninth grade and help them build a yearly calendar with activities that help them not only with the final steps of applying to college but also to develop the skills necessary to initiate and implement all three steps of college decision making. As Morningstar and colleagues [36] pinpointed, College and Career Readiness are relevant not only to knowledge and skills for transition but also to academic engagement, mindset, critical thinking, and skills related to goal setting, decision making, and self-advocacy. Developing these skills during the early years of high school might help students to be more engaged in the college decision-making process and have the right tools to collect information about their college(s) of interest.
Second, the inclusion of parents in college discussions and related school activities is crucial. As the findings of this study suggest, many students are (or will be) the first generation attending college, particularly in rural settings, and may rely heavily on family support. Family members, however, might lack the necessary skills and knowledge to help and guide their children in the process. Additionally, some may also have lower postsecondary education expectations for their kids. Understanding these family dynamics is essential and aligns with emerging research in transition services [42,43]. Families’ moral support can play an important role in the college decision-making process, particularly for first-generation Hispanic students [41,45]. The participants in this study, however, reported that parents occasionally had low confidence in their children’s ability to attend college and tended to be protective of them and not encourage them to go. School personnel need to recognize and understand these underlying factors. School professionals should develop and implement activities specifically designed for parents of first-generation college-going students and encourage them to be more involved in the Individualized Educational Program (IEP) or to attend meetings with guidance counselors. Research shows that if students’ families are more involved in the development and implementation of the IEP, they are more likely to attend a postsecondary institution [7,8]. Thus, schools should reach out to parents, involve them in the college-going activities throughout the school year, and help them build the knowledge necessary to support their kids.
Finally, school counselors must increase the effort of reaching out to secondary students with disabilities and their involvement in college-going activities that are happening in high school. A large subset of students mentioned being engaged in college-related activities during particular class activities, which offered them the possibility to gain more information about different colleges and explore majors of interest. The college-going activities, however, did not seem to work as a wraparound service for these students but rather felt disjointed. Several students, for example, recalled discussing going to college during their IEP meetings but did not define those as relevant. Additionally, the findings of this study indicate that most of the students included in this study did not fully take advantage of college-going activities (e.g., college fairs at the high school) geared towards all students, despite most of them knowing that these activities were taking place. Notably, those who attended found them helpful and relevant.
College-going activities are part of the curriculum of guidance counselors in high schools across the U.S., and school guidance counselors and teachers should make an additional effort to reach out to all students with disabilities and have them involved from the beginning of the ninth grade. By having the school guidance counselor arrange a meeting to discuss going to college, which can be attended by students, parents, and teachers, long- and short-term planning can take place, which will position students well for the college-going process. These initial meetings may raise awareness and increase engagement in activities relevant to the college application and that might eventually compensate for not-so-great academic outcomes [3]. Such meetings can also be an opportunity to help students begin to develop self-determination skills, which have been found to (a) increase their enrollment in and completion of postsecondary education programs [7,46] and (b) help them set up goals and make decisions throughout the college decision-making process.
In summary, the implications of college decision making for students with disabilities involve ensuring equal access to education, provide opportunities for developing skills that ensure successful transition to adulthood, and tailored academic support. Academic guidance and orientation programs play a vital role in addressing the needs of these students by offering personalized support, fostering self-advocacy, and creating an inclusive school environment. The focus should be on both removing barriers and providing the necessary resources to help students with disabilities succeed academically and personally while allowing students to use and elevate their cultural and community wealth.

5. Conclusions

In the 21st century, PSE is a critical step in gaining meaningful employment and leading a productive life for many individuals. Students with disabilities should and can succeed in pursuing PSE. Schools and parents are important in helping them set this goal in the IEP process and supporting them with the college decision-making process. The factors identified in this and other studies and the strategies resulting from this study provide useful information for students with disabilities and their supporters to make this process smooth and successful. School personnel who are involved in student IEPs play a key role in disseminating this information to students and their families so that more students with disabilities benefit from attending PSE programs.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.D.P. and K.J.M.; methodology, S.D.P., K.J.M. and Y.H.; software, S.D.P. and Y.H.; validation, S.D.P., K.J.M., D.Z. and Y.H.; formal analysis, S.D.P., K.J.M., D.Z. and Y.H.; investigation, S.D.P., K.J.M. and D.Z.; resources, S.D.P., K.J.M. and A.R.L.; data curation, S.D.P., K.J.M. and D.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, S.D.P. and K.J.M.; writing—review and editing, S.D.P., K.J.M., D.Z. and A.R.L.; visualization, D.Z. and A.R.L.; supervision, S.D.P. and K.J.M.; project administration, S.D.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of South Carolina (Pro00040890, 1/9/2015).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lipscomb, S.; Haimson, J.; Liu, A.Y.; Burghardt, J.; Johnson, D.R.; Thurlow, M.L. Preparing for Life After High School: The Characteristics and Experiences of Youth in Special Education. Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012. Volume 1—Comparisons with Other Youth: Full Report; (NCEE 2017-4016); U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  2. Newman, L.; Wagner, M.; Knokey, A.M.; Marder, C.; Nagle, K.; Shaver, D.; Schwarting, M. The Post-High School Outcomes of Young Adults with Disabilities up to 8 Years After High School. A Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2; (NLTS-2) (NCSER 2011-3005); SRI International: Menlo Park, CA, USA, 2011. Available online: https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/2025/01/20113005-pdf (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  3. Lalor, A.R.; Petcu, S.D.; Madaus, J.W. Navigating the Transition from High School to College for Students with Disabilities; Grigal, M., Madaus, J.W., Dukes III, L.L., Hart, D., Eds.; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Employment Projections. Available online: https://www.bls.gov/emp/chart-unemployment-earnings-education.htm (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  5. Ma, J.; Pender, M. Education Pays 2023: The Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society. College Board. 2023. Available online: https://research.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/education-pays-2023.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  6. Public Law 108 - 446 - Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. Available online: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-108publ446 (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  7. Mazzotti, V.L.; Rowe, D.A.; Kwiatek, S.; Voggt, A.; Chang, W.; Fowler, C.H.; Poppen, M.; Sinclair, J.; Test, D.W. Secondary transition predictors of postschool success: An update to the research base. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2021, 44, 47–64. [Google Scholar]
  8. Test, D.W.; Mazzotti, V.L.; Mustian, A.L.; Fowler, C.H.; Kortering, L.; Kohler, P. Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2009, 32, 160–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Newman, L.A.; Trainor, A.A.; Javitz, H.S. Effect of Self-Determination on Postsecondary Enrollment of English Learners with Disabilities. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2023, 44, 113–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. National Center for Education Statistics. College Enrollment Rates. Available online: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cpb (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  11. Smith, F.A.; Grigal, M.; Sulewski, J. The Impact of Postsecondary Education on Employment Outcomes for Transition-Age Youth With and Without Disabilities: A Secondary Analysis of American Community Survey Data; Think College Insight Brief, Issue No. 15; University of Massachusetts Boston, Institute for Community Inclusion: Boston, MA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  12. Newman, L.A.; Madaus, J.W. Analysis of factors related to receipt of accommodations and services by postsecondary students with disabilities. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2015, 36, 208–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Grigal, M.; Deschamps, A. Transition Education for Adolescents with Intellectual Disability. In Handbook of Adolescent Transition Education for Youth with Disabilities; Wehmeyer, M.L., Webb, K.W., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 398–416. [Google Scholar]
  14. Benner, A.D.; Fernandez, C.C.; Hou, Y.; Gonzalez, C.S. Parent and teacher educational expectations and adolescents’ academic performance: Mechanisms of influence. J. Community Psychol. 2021, 49, 2679–2703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wagner, M.; Newman, L.; Cameto, R.; Levine, P. Changes over Time in the Early Postschool Outcomes of Youth with Disabilities. A Report of Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED494920 (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  16. McGrew, K.S.; Evans, J. Expectations for students with cognitive disabilities: Is the cup half empty or half full? Can the cup flow over? Available online: http://www.iapsych.com/nceo54.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  17. Madaus, J.W.; Grigal, M.; Hughes, C. Promoting access to postsecondary education for low-income students with disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2014, 37, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Papay, C.K.; Grigal, M. A Review of the Literature on Postsecondary Education for Students with Intellectual Disability 2010-2016: Examining the Influence of Federal Funding and Alignment with Research in Disability and Postsecondary Education. J. Postsecond. Educ. Di. 2019, 32, 427–443. [Google Scholar]
  19. Keel, J.M.; Cushing, L.S.; Awsumb, J.M. Post-school visions and expectations of Latino students with learning disabilities, their parents, and teachers. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2018, 41, 88–98. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kim, W.G.; Garcia, S.B. Long-Term English language learners’ perceptions of their language and academic learning experiences. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2014, 35, 300–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hossler, D.; Gallagher, K. Studying student college choice: A three-phase model and the implications for policy makers. Coll. Univ. 1987, 62, 207–221. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hossler, D. The Strategic Management of College Enrollments; Jossey-Bass, Inc.: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  23. Maringe, F. University marketing: Perceptions, practices and prospects in the less developed world. J. Mark. High. Educ. 2006, 15, 129–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bryant, J. Understanding the Enrollment Motivations of College Students. Available online: https://www.ruffalonl.com/blog/enrollment/understanding-enrollment-motivations-college-students/ (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  25. Fleming, A.R.; Fairweather, J.S. The role of postsecondary education in the path from high school to work for youth with disabilities. Rehabil. Couns. Bull. 2012, 55, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Report on the Condition of Education 2023. Available online: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2023/2023144rev.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  27. Korcich, A.; Chen, X.; Hughes, R.P. Understanding the effects of rurality and socioeconomic status on college attendance and institutional choice in the United States. Rev. High. Educ. 2018, 4, 281–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Papay, C.; Bambara, L.M. Best practices in transition to adult life for youth with intellectual disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2014, 37, 136–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cabrera, A.F.; La Nasa, S.M. Understanding the college-choice process. New Dir. Institutional Res. 2000, 107, 5–22. [Google Scholar]
  30. Campbell, S.; Greenwood, M.; Prior, S.; Shearer, T.; Walkem, K.; Young, S.; Bywaters, D.; Walker, K. Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. J. Res. Nurs. 2020, 25, 652–661. [Google Scholar]
  31. Hsieh, H.-F.; Shannon, S.E. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 2005, 15, 1277–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Perna, L.W. Impact of Student Aid Program Design, Operations, and Marketing on the Formation of Family College-Going Plans and Resulting College-Going Behaviors of Potential Students; The Educational Resources Institute, Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  33. Myers, S.M.; Myers, C.B. Are discussions about college between parents and their high school children a college-planning activity? Making the case and testing the predictors. Am. J. Educ. 2012, 118, 281–308. [Google Scholar]
  34. Rowan-Kenyon, H.T.; Bell, A.D.; Perna, L.W. Contextual influences on parental involvement in college going: Variations by socioeconomic class. J. High. Educ. 2008, 79, 564–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Belasco, A.S. Creating college opportunities: School counselors and their influence on postsecondary enrollment. Res. High. Educ. 2013, 54, 781–804. [Google Scholar]
  36. Morningstar, M.; Lombardi, A.; Fowler, C.H.; Test, D.W. A college and career readiness framework for secondary students with disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2017, 40, 79–91. [Google Scholar]
  37. Baer, R.; Daviso, A.; McMahan Queen, R.; Dennis, L. The Ohio Longitudinal Transition Study: Annual State Report. 2013. Available online: https://www-s3-live.kent.edu/s3fs-root/s3fs-public/file/2013-state-report.pdf?VersionId=9xFntV5nJFBBK.g9X3qNtHOZdb5bCJU3 (accessed on 1 February 2025).
  38. Servier, R.A. Image is Everything: Strategies for Measuring, Changing and Maintaining Your Institution’s Image; (White Paper No.1); Stamats Communications, Inc.: Cedar Rapids, IA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ariffin, A.A.M.; Ahmad, A.H.; Ahmad, S.; Ibrahim, A. Determining decision-making styles and demographic differences in selecting higher education services among Malaysian. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2008, 9, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wehmeyer, M.L.; Nota, L.; Soresi, S.; Shogren, K.A.; Morningstar, M.E.; Ferrari, L.; Sgaramella, T.M.; DiMaggio, I. A crisis in career development: Life designing and implications for transitions. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2018, 42, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Grosso Richins, L.; Hansen-Thomas, H.; Lozada, V.; South, S.; Stewart, M.A. Understanding the power of Latinx families to support the academic and personal development of their children. Biling. Res. J. 2021, 44, 381–400. [Google Scholar]
  42. Scott, L.A.; Shogren, K.A. Advancing anti-racism and anti-ableism in transition: Equity-oriented indicators for research. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2023, 46, 237–248. [Google Scholar]
  43. Romano, L.; Trainor, A.; Sarkissian, G.; Newman, L. Integrating Community Cultural Wealth Into Postsecondary Transition For Students With Disabilities Receiving English Learner Services. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Trainor, A.A.; Newman, L.; Garcia, E.; Woodley, H.H.; Traxler, R.E.; Deschene, D.N. Postsecondary education focused transition planning experiences of English learners with disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2019, 42, 43–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ceja, M. Understanding the role of parents and siblings as information sources in the college choice process of Chicana students. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 2006, 47, 87–104. [Google Scholar]
  46. Petcu, S.D.; Van Horn, M.L.; Shogren, K.A. Self-Determination and the enrollment in and completion of postsecondary education for students with disabilities. Career Dev. Transit. Except. Individ. 2017, 40, 225–234. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Predisposition stage: parental involvement.
Table 1. Predisposition stage: parental involvement.
Name Grade/SexStatements
Drea9/FMy mom doesn’t want me to go because I am her only child. She is scarred that I might get heart, people bullying me, and about my health condition because I have asthma. She said don’t take life for granted and do the best you can in school.
Hippy9/MThey are good and they want me to go to college. They say to always reach for the stars and follow your dreams.
Boby11/FThey check my schedule for my school so I can get better grades and staff.
Lexie11/FMy daddy really wants me to go to college and follow his foot step and became successful in life. They are encourage me a lot. They are so happy with my grades and have faith in me. My mom talked with the guidance counselor and call at the college.
Cheyenne 11/FThey are excited; they are ready to see how far I can go. They give me different ideas of what I can do or what they think will be best for me. Follow your dreams, if you see it happening just follow it.
Danielle11/FThey really want me to go to college. They are really excited about me leaving the nest because I lived around my family all my years and now I am done. Leaving and following my dreams. They are worried that I will fall behind because with school.
Tiffany 11/FThey want me to go. My mom talks to teachers and the guidance counselor (about going to college).
Carl11/MThey make sure that may grade are good at the high school right now. They Make sure I am doing everything right, even on social media not putting anything stupid because colleges can look at that. They want me to work hard in the classroom and on the baseball field.
Paul 11/MMy mom is very happy because I am telling her that I am following her footsteps. The others (members of the family) want me to go to college to play football. I am a football player. They think that if I go to college for nursing I will stay there without finishing it.
Cazz11/FBoth my parents did not get a college experience so both of them want to have me go since I have honors classes like a high GPA; both want me go like a 4-year college. My mom is helping me like going to colleges, and researching majors, and minors.
Kloye12/FEverybody knows that once you finish high school you go into college. My dad is definitely set on it; he is saying that “you want to go to a two-year college and finish it off at a four year college”. My mom is also really nervous about me going to college; she is scarred that I will not know what to do.
Bevi9/FI mostly talk with my dad. I usually talk with him about how I will gone pay for college. They say that if I get a bachelor degree I will be paid better.
Emy9/FI’ve talked with my parents about it. To get good grades and to do well.
AK10/MIt is just breaded in to you have to go to college, you have to do this, you have to be successful. I was raised believing that I have to go to college.
Will12/MThey (parents) did talked about college when I was little. They talked about how fun it was and about the difficulties of it. They say that it is very hard to get through it.
Table 2. Search stage: students’ perspectives on the college-going activities offered by their high school.
Table 2. Search stage: students’ perspectives on the college-going activities offered by their high school.
Name Grade/SexStatements
Danielle11/FThey give you free ACT. They have a lot of programs and they help you look at colleges. They have people come here and talk about their careers.
Daren9/MWe went to visit all the colleges.
Lexie11/FThey had a college finance support night; I did not go but my mom’s co-worker has been there and she brought my mom a flyer.
Lexie11/FIf you really want to know about it (college) you go and talk to her (guidance counselor).
Cheyenne11/FI remember the career day and different (people with different) careers come out and told us about their jobs; you are able to get some information about it (the job).
Danielle11/FHere at school you need to talk about your career (of interest) and that’s when I really started thinking about it.
Emi11/FWe had to do a project on which colleges we want to go; I did not do too much (other than the class project).
Carl11/M(Encourages me to get a) scholarship in baseball somewhere because not too many people are left here to play baseball in college, only a hand full of people.
Maya11/FI chose my college when I went to a college fair.
Paul11/MWe have activities class and projects; we do PowerPoints about colleges we want to go to.
Cazz11/F(Guidance counselor) was helping with getting all the recommendation letters together and how we should start (asking) people to write the letters of recommendations (for us).
Cazz11/FThe resource teacher asked us to make presentations about what majors we are interested in.
Kloye12/FThey have few things (college going activities) but I never paid attention to that staff.
Emy11/F(Guidance counselors) tell you when a scholarship is (available to apply too) and when some people are coming to visit us.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Petcu, S.D.; Marshall, K.J.; Zhang, D.; Lalor, A.R.; Hussain, Y. Factors Influencing the College Decision-Making Process for Students with Disabilities. Disabilities 2025, 5, 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities5020036

AMA Style

Petcu SD, Marshall KJ, Zhang D, Lalor AR, Hussain Y. Factors Influencing the College Decision-Making Process for Students with Disabilities. Disabilities. 2025; 5(2):36. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities5020036

Chicago/Turabian Style

Petcu, Stefania D., Kathleen J. Marshall, Dalun Zhang, Adam R. Lalor, and Yasir Hussain. 2025. "Factors Influencing the College Decision-Making Process for Students with Disabilities" Disabilities 5, no. 2: 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities5020036

APA Style

Petcu, S. D., Marshall, K. J., Zhang, D., Lalor, A. R., & Hussain, Y. (2025). Factors Influencing the College Decision-Making Process for Students with Disabilities. Disabilities, 5(2), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities5020036

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop