Session 60: The disutility of ‘disabled’ as a category in HE analytics: an LJMU case study

Abstract

HEIs are striving to understand the experiences and outcomes of their students, particularly those with Equality of Opportunity Risk Register characteristics such as having a disability. Studies have demonstrated that disabled students have worse outcomes than their non-disabled peers, and Access and Participation Plans (APP) aim at reducing the attainment gap and providing support services for such students. However, the use of ‘disabled’ as an analytical unit is brutish and arbitrary. The category encapsulates a range of ‘disabilities’, each of which presents a unique set of challenges. From dyslexia to neurodiversity, or physical and sensory disabilities to psychiatric disorders, how can one category appropriately reflect the diversity of the disabled community? It cannot. The category is so generalised that analytical results lack nuance for different disabilities and the challenges they present for students, set within the context of their areas of study and the differing associated skills required. An analysis comparing the outcomes of 23,000 students from LJMU reveals that for Award GPA, on average, ‘disabled’ students do not underperform compared to their non-disabled peers at LJMU. However, this is not true at the level of specific disability types, masked by the ‘disabled’ umbrella. Those stating Physical Disabilities underperform, those indicating Mental Health and ASD outperform, and those with SLDs (e.g. dyslexia, ADHD) perform in-line with non-disabled peers. Inversely, students registering Mental Health and ASD were far less likely to complete their studies than others. This type of specific, targeted analysis demonstrates that we need to be looking in more detail at our data, to avoid drawing inaccurate conclusions. This has implications for how we support the disabled community and the diversity within it, develop our APP, and identify and provide responsive support to those who may be at greater risk, particularly considering their specific disability type and disciplinary context.

The disutility of ‘disabled’ as a category in HE analytics: an LJMU case study PowerPoint.  Only LJMU staff and students have access to this resource.