1. Despite an increase in the number of students with disabilities attending college, only 20% successfully graduate from 4-year institutions due to multiple barriers such as a lack of necessary skills and understanding among faculty on how to support them.
2. Disability services offices (DSOs) located on college campuses provide support for students with disabilities, but little is known about their effectiveness, and dropout rates remain prevalent.
3. Family involvement in college is often challenging for both students and their family members due to limited communication between colleges and families, and there exists limited information on how families and college professionals can effectively collaborate to support students.
The article focuses on the experiences of college students with disabilities and their perceptions of college readiness, services and supports, and family involvement. While the topic is important, the article has several limitations that need to be addressed.
Firstly, the article relies heavily on self-reported data from a small sample size of 109 participants. The authors acknowledge that they were unable to calculate an exact response rate for the study, which raises questions about the representativeness of the sample. Additionally, self-reported data can be subject to bias and may not accurately reflect actual experiences.
Secondly, the article does not provide a comprehensive review of existing literature on college readiness and support for students with disabilities. This limits the context in which the findings are presented and makes it difficult to assess how novel or significant they are.
Thirdly, while the article acknowledges some of the challenges faced by students with disabilities in college, it does not explore potential solutions or best practices for addressing these challenges. For example, there is no discussion of evidence-based interventions or strategies that have been shown to improve outcomes for this population.
Fourthly, there is a lack of consideration given to potential risks associated with family involvement in college. While family support can be beneficial for some students, it can also lead to over-involvement or interference that undermines student autonomy and independence.
Finally, there is a potential bias towards promoting disability services offices as effective sources of support for students with disabilities. While these offices can provide valuable resources and accommodations, they are not always sufficient or accessible for all students. The article could benefit from a more nuanced discussion of alternative sources of support and ways to improve accessibility and inclusivity in higher education.
Overall, while the article highlights important issues related to college readiness and support for students with disabilities, it would benefit from a more critical analysis that considers potential biases and limitations in its approach.