Postsecondary Students With Disabilities’ Perceptions of How Academic Peer Coaching Influenced Their Academic Skill Development

Abstract

Students with disabilities are enrolling in postsecondary education at record rates, but still fall behind their non-disabled peers academically. One factor contributing to these gaps is that many students enter college with underdeveloped academic skills, including executive functioning and study skills. Postsecondary disability resources offices (DROs) offer reasonable accommodations, and some also offer academic coaching programs to help students develop academic skills. The current study interviewed 12 students with disabilities who registered with their institution’s DRO and received academic peer coaching (APC). Participants sought coaching to receive guidance, develop academic skills, and replace previous support systems. Key elements supporting student progress included direct and collaborative skill instruction, peer relatability and professionalism, and flexible coaching formats. Participants viewed APC as an equally valuable accommodation that helped them strengthen academic skills and increase independence.

Keywords

postsecondary students with disabilities executive functioning academic peer coaching disability resources

Introduction

Students with disabilities are a growing segment of the population at institutions of higher education; however, this group of students experiences higher dropout and non-completion rates than their peers without disabilities (U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2024). In fact, only 40% of students with disabilities graduate from postsecondary education compared to 52% of their peers without disabilities (Nelson & Buckley, 2021). To support the increasing number of students with disabilities attending institutions of postsecondary education, the federal government allocated funding to support disability resource offices (DROs). Disability resource offices are designed to ensure that qualified students with disabilities are afforded an equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs, services, and activities offered by the public institution (Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, 1973). A DRO’s primary function is to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified students with disabilities (e.g., access to readers and scribes, exam accommodations); however, these accommodations may not be sufficient to support students with disabilities who may lack college and career readiness (CCR) skills (Dawson & Guare, 2012; Lombardi et al., 2014).

Lombardi et al. (2023) defined CCR as a framework encompassing four distinct domains, including (a) ownership of learning, (b) academic engagement and processes, (c) interpersonal engagement, and (d) career development. Previous researchers suggest that high school students with disabilities may struggle to assimilate and effectively apply skills that support CCR and the transition from high school to postsecondary settings (Lombardi et al., 2014). To help students gain skills and improve CCR, particularly skills within the ownership of learning and academic engagement and processes domains (e.g., executive functioning and academic skills, such as studying), academic coaching may serve as a promising intervention (Parker & Boutelle, 2009). While some DROs offer this support, it exists outside of typical accommodations and is not required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), the primary law governing service provision in postsecondary education (Association on Higher Education and Disability [AHEAD], 2023). Academic coaching utilizes a strengths-based, individualized approach and blends elements of life coaching, student-centered decision-making, and targeted skill development (e.g., Ahmann et al., 2018). Through academic coaching, students build executive functioning skills, engage in self-determination, and use academic strategies (Parker et al., 2013). Academic coaching is distinct from other forms of academic support, such as tutoring or advising. Rather than focusing on specific course content or a student’s mental health, academic coaching emphasizes skill development and personal growth through a structured process that includes rapport-building, goal setting, and accountability (Parker & Boutelle, 2009). Coaching outcomes are closely aligned with components of CCR (Lombardi et al., 2023) and may provide a bridge to help students with disabilities gain skills necessary to be successful in postsecondary education.

Much of the extant research on academic coaching has focused on undergraduate students with disabilities at 2- and 4-year colleges and universities (hereto referred to as “student(s)”; DuPaul et al., 2017; Hartung et al., 2022; Parker & Boutelle, 2009; Parker et al., 2013). These programs aim to address the individual needs of students by providing both structure and flexibility in how goals and strategies are developed and pursued. Academic coaching programs can vary in structure, frequency, and format depending on the institutional context, available resources, and target population. In higher education, coaching is most commonly delivered through weekly, one-on-one sessions (Parker & Boutelle, 2009). These sessions are often framed around helping students identify academic challenges, developing personalized strategies, and reflecting on progress over time. Coaching relationships typically begin with an intake or planning phase, followed by regular meetings and, in many cases, between-session communication via text, email, or digital platforms to provide reminders and check-ins (Saviet & Ahmann, 2021). The duration of coaching engagements varies widely, ranging from interventions lasting less than a semester (e.g., Hartung et al., 2022) to models that span over an academic year (e.g., DuPaul et al., 2017). In addition to traditional in-person meetings, coaching is increasingly being delivered through remote formats (i.e., video conferencing, phone calls), which have been shown to be equally effective and preferred by some students for their flexibility (Anderson & Marino, 2024). Coaching can also be delivered by a range of providers, including professional staff within DROs, often with expertise in learning strategies or student development, and graduate or undergraduate students who receive targeted training in coaching principles (Rando et al., 2016).

Academic coaching has been associated with a range of positive outcomes for college students with disabilities, including improved executive functioning (Anderson & Marino, 2024).

Specifically, students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who engaged in academic coaching reported an increased ability to set goals, plan academic tasks, and implement strategies to successfully follow through with their academic work. Students also noted that coaching helped them manage their time more efficiently and stay organized, which led to increases in productivity in clinical, professional, and personal settings (Hartung et al., 2022). Students who engaged in academic coaching reported increases in self-esteem and self-efficacy (Bellman et al., 2015), improvements in self-talk, and experienced a decrease in self-doubts and worries (Parker et al., 2013). Those who engaged in critical reflection and targeted goal setting also experienced enhanced communication, self-control, self-awareness, and increases in quality of life (Parker et al., 2013; Richman et al., 2014). Researchers noted increased use of study skills and improved grades, grade point average (GPA), and retention rates (DuPaul et al., 2017; Hall et al., 2021; Marino et al., 2020).

Although academic coaching programs have demonstrated positive effects for students with disabilities, many institutions have faced challenges in offering one-on-one coaching at scale due to limited professional staffing (U.S. GAO, 2024). In response, academic peer coaching (APC) models have emerged as a promising and cost-effective alternative (Marino et al., 2020). While professional coaches often hold certifications or advanced degrees in education, counseling, or psychology and are trained in specific coaching methodologies (Ahmann et al., 2018), peer coaches are typically trained through institution-specific curricula and supervised by campus staff. Academic peer coaching programs can vary in the depth of the training provided to coaches; however, their structure and purposes align with the aims of academic coaching. Academic peer coaching programs include elements found in professional coaching (e.g., rapport-building, goal setting, time management, and organization) and are designed to improve executive functioning, self-advocacy, and academic confidence (Anderson & Marino, 2024).

Although institutions of higher education are implementing APC programs (Campbell & Mogashana, 2025), few researchers have investigated the impacts of APC on students, particularly focusing on students’ perspectives. More frequently, researchers have examined peer mentoring and coaching interventions that target components central to APC (e.g., executive functioning, goal setting, and self-regulation; Anderson & Marino, 2024). Across multiple studies, undergraduate and graduate peer coaches have supported disabled students to develop key academic skills, such as executive functioning skills, behavioral regulation, metacognitive strategies, self-regulation, and planning skills (Rando et al., 2016).

Academic coaching has gained recognition as a promising support for college students with disabilities; however, several gaps exist. While previous research has documented positive student outcomes, there is little consistency in how APC programs are structured, how coaches are trained, or what outcomes are measured. As a result, the field lacks a clear understanding of which elements of APC are most effective and for whom. In addition, there is a scarcity of research that centers on the voices of students with disabilities who have participated in APC. Existing studies tend to emphasize programmatic outcomes or coaches’ perspectives, rather than exploring how students themselves experience and interpret coaching and the coaching relationship (Anderson & Marino, 2024). Understanding students’ motivations for pursuing coaching, and their perceptions of the features that support their progress and of the program’s impact, can inform how APC programs are designed, delivered, scaled, and relate to elements of CCR. In light of these gaps, the current study examines student perspectives on an APC program at a large public university. The following research questions guided our study:

Research Question 1 (RQ1): For what reasons did students pursue APC?

Research Question 2 (RQ2): What features of APC did students perceive as enabling their ability to engage in coaching and develop academic skills?

Research Question 3 (RQ3): How did students perceive APC compared to other supports (i.e., accommodations) they received from the DRO?

Research Question 4 (RQ4): How did students perceive APC to influence their academic abilities?

Method

This study was positioned within a disability studies in education (DSE) theoretical framework, which applies the central tenets of disability studies to critically examine educational structures and practices that create barriers for people with disabilities (Gabel, 2005). DSE challenges the notion that disability is a deficit and embraces the social model of disability, which posits that inaccessible environments create disabling conditions for individuals who experience natural variation of abilities (Gabel, 2005). DSE calls researchers to center the lived experiences of disabled people, enabling them to identify educational barriers and to lead educational reform (Hughes, 2023). The current study relies on student narratives to evaluate the influence of APC and analyzes data using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019).

Sampling and Participants

Participants were recruited from a large public university in the Midwest. This institution’s DRO offers APC to students who are registered with their office. The coaches are graduate students who primarily study within the College of Applied Health Sciences, including those studying speech and language pathology and audiology. These students were recruited as their programs of study involve working with people with disabilities, and recruitment emails were distributed through graduate coordinators of these academic programs. Coaches are compensated hourly for the time they spend coaching students; the rate is the same for in-person or remote sessions. Two disability resources professionals (DRPs) coordinate and oversee the program by providing a brief training to the graduate student coaches and a digital folder of resources for them to use throughout coaching. The training involves reviewing an “Academic Coaching Handbook” that defines coaching and executive functioning skills, provides links to two articles to learn more about coaching (e.g., Parker & Boutelle, 2009) and motivational interviewing, a skill to be used when coaching (Swartz et al., 2005), and provides guidance regarding how to maintain professional boundaries with students, information about the population of disabled students at the institution and the logistics of the program. Information about program logistics included the nine steps coaches take to prepare for the first meeting (see Supplemental Figure S2), the process of accessing referrals sent from the program coordinators, a description of procedures and goals for the first session (e.g., email templates to schedule first meeting, a confidentiality contract, guidance to establish short-term and long-term goals for coaching, how to follow up on progress in subsequent sessions and how to support the student rather than lead the session). Resources include descriptions of study and learning strategies (e.g., note-taking guidance or tips for paraphrasing and active reading) and strategies and tools to develop organization and executive functioning skills (e.g., organizational skill worksheet, calendar, and planner templates) for coaches to use during their sessions with students. Coaches review this information with students and provide them with written copies of strategy descriptions to support their use. Other than initially meeting with the two DRPs who oversee the program to review its purpose and materials, no other formal training is provided. The two DRPs meet weekly with all individual coaches during the first semester coaches participate, and as needed thereafter to review student progress and answer any questions coaches have about working with students. Approximately 20 to 30 coaches and 50 students participate in coaching each semester. Coaches typically work with one to two students, although several meet with a total of three. Students were given the option to participate in coaching in-person, remotely, or hybrid and were advised that they could change the format at any time by notifying their coach.

After receiving Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, we sent email recruitments to the DRPs who coordinate the APC program and asked them to forward the recruitment to all students who received coaching.

Procedures and Data Collection

When interested participants emailed the first author, they were sent an informed consent form describing the study. After each participant reviewed, signed, and returned the consent form, one of the members of the research team, which included the first author and two undergraduate research assistants, emailed the participant to schedule a Zoom interview. At this time, they also provided interview questions to the participants to allow them to review before the interview.

Participants completed a demographic questionnaire before completing interviews, sharing their academic status, gender identity, race, and disability identity (i.e., we used participants’ exact words to categorize their disabilities). The questionnaire also asked when students began coaching, how frequently they met with coaches, and for how long. Demographic characteristics and descriptive coaching session information can be found in Supplemental Table S1.

We used semi-structured interviews to build on previous qualitative research. Interviews continued until data saturation was reached, which occurred at 12 participants. Previous qualitative studies with students who used academic coaching investigated their perceptions of how coaching influenced their skills, academic performance, and socioemotional experiences (Anderson et al., 2024). While the current study also asked students to reflect on how coaching influenced their skills and development, it also aimed to build on the previous research by uncovering why students pursued coaching, what elements of coaching facilitated their development, how coaching compares to other services received by their DRO, and what students’ relationships were like with their coaches. Interview questions that were used to uncover this information can be found in Supplemental Table S2.

A semi-structured interview protocol guided each interview, allowing interviewers to ask follow-up questions as needed. To ensure privacy, the team conducted interviews from a secure location, and participants were informed that they could select from where they wanted to participate in the virtual interview. Interviews were recorded and transcribed by research assistants, and once transcripts were created, the interview recordings were deleted. Participants were identified with pseudonyms, and only the first author had access to the document specifying participants’ actual names and pseudonyms, which was stored on her password-protected computer. Participation in the study was voluntary, demographic data were compiled in aggregate form, and participants’ actual names were not associated with the study to protect their privacy.

Data Analysis

This study employed reflexive thematic analysis to systematically identify, analyze, and report patterns or themes within the data (Braun & Clarke, 2019). Reflexive thematic analysis was selected for its flexibility and capacity to reveal significant patterns in qualitative data. This approach interprets meanings conveyed by participants through analyzing recurring keywords or concepts. Reflexive thematic analysis requires researchers to continually reflect on how their biases may influence the interpretation of the data and consciously put measures in place to ensure that the analysis is trustworthy and credible (Braun & Clarke, 2019; Nowell et al., 2017).

To carry out the analysis, the researchers (i.e., authors) first independently familiarized themselves with the data by reading it and jotting down initial reactions, potential emerging themes, and connections to the existing research literature. Next, each author reread the data labeling specific segments of text with “open codes,” or words or phrases that encapsulated significant portions of the text that related to the research questions. After independently coding, the researchers collectively discussed their codes, resolving any discrepancies. After the researchers reached consensus across open codes, they continued the process of consensus coding by identifying recurring patterns across the data and organizing them into potential themes that answered the research questions. Decisions to merge or separate codes were guided by grouping codes according to which research question they corresponded to and determining how the codes complemented or deviated from each other through iterative discussions. This process led to the identification of initial themes, which were then cross-checked with the codes that comprised them to ensure alignment. Themes were refined and named throughout this process. The final step of this method involved writing the analysis report to convey the findings.

Trustworthiness and Credibility

The researchers implemented several measures to ensure the trustworthiness and credibility of the analysis. We maintained reflexive journals throughout the research process to document reflective thoughts and initial and developing reactions to the data. Researcher triangulation was carried out as three researchers independently coded the data and then worked together to reach consensus codes and collectively identify and refine themes based on their analyses. The research process was also thoroughly documented and described, and researchers created a coding tree to serve as an audit trail of this process (see Supplemental Figure S1). Participants were sent copies of their original transcripts, as well as the researchers’ interpretations of data, to ensure that the research team accurately characterized participants’ narratives. When participants made edits, their feedback was incorporated, and the transcripts and interpretations were revised. Finally, to stay close to participants’ words, the researchers used thick descriptions throughout and included quotations to center the narrative around participants’ voices.

Positionality

The first author approached this study recognizing her identity as a disabled scholar and a former director of a university DRO. She is currently a faculty member in the Special Education Department at her institution, where she conducts research with disabled students to continue to learn about their experiences. As her personal and professional experiences inform her perspectives as she carried out this research, she intentionally put trustworthiness and credibility measures in place to remain aware of her biases and limit them from influencing the analysis.

The second author is a researcher and former special educator. She approached this study recognizing that she cares deeply about the quality of services that are provided to students with disabilities and has an overall positive view of academic coaching. Due to her limited experience interacting with DROs at universities and to ensure her previously held views did not unduly influence her interpretations of the data, multiple measures were used to ensure trustworthiness and credibility (Nowell et al., 2017).

The third author for this study reflected on how he navigated institutional barriers to access graduate education without the benefit of academic mentorship. As a Black African doctoral student studying special education, he developed a deep awareness of the challenges that students, particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds, face in pursuing their academic and professional goals. While his experiences shaped his awareness of the critical role of academic support, he remained committed to maintaining reflexivity and ensuring that his background did not unduly influence the direction of this study.

Results

We identified six themes to answer the research questions. Theme one illustrates that students sought APC to develop needed skills and replace previous support systems. The second, third and fourth themes describe features of APC that enabled students to engage in coaching and skill development (e.g., participating in active and guided skill development and accountability check-ins, having a relatable relationship with a peer who kept them accountable, and coaching being offered in a flexible format). The fifth theme encapsulates students’ conceptualization of APC as an equally valuable accommodation, and the sixth theme illustrates that participants perceived that APC led to improved academic skills and increased independence.

RQ1: For What Reasons Did Students Pursue APC?

Participants discussed how, in postsecondary education (i.e., before coaching), they did not receive support to develop required skills for postsecondary education, such as executive functioning or academic skills. Participants also described previously relying on other educators or individuals, particularly in K–12 education, to support their development and use of these skills and needing to replace these support systems. Participants pursued coaching to supplement their learning of needed skills in a more independent learning environment.

Theme 1: Navigating Independence: Developing Needed Skills and New Support Systems

Participants reported lacking executive functioning skills, including time management and planning. Not knowing how to structure free time was a common experience. Teresa shared, “I was a chronic, I mean, chronic procrastinator, like turning things in late, like, the sheer amount of emails I’ve sent that just asked for extensions was so long. I didn’t know when to do work.” Hunter conveyed similar experiences and specifically struggled to determine how much time to schedule for work tasks. He said, “My freshman year I really needed to work on time management. I didn’t know how much time an assignment would take, so I wouldn’t plan and then there wouldn’t be enough time.” All participants who discussed executive functioning also mentioned that work took longer than expected due to trouble focusing or needing to take extra time to process information. Ellie described that work would not only take longer, but also how long it would take would vary. She said, “I try to get my academic work done in a timely manner although it might take me longer than it would take other students just because I have issues with processing and staying on task.” She also discussed how struggling to organize her assignments, particularly those that were online, slowed down her progress. Being unable to find assignments and class materials consumed large portions of her homework time. She said, “By the time I found what I needed, I had way less time to work.” Others described that not having strategic study skills made work take longer. Teresa said, “I didn’t know how to study. I would waste time just staring at my notes without a strategy to learn anything.” Hunter shared that he never thought about how to study before coming to college. “I was having issues with studying for my courses. I wasn’t sure. The exams were very different than in high school.”

Difficulty with time management was related to challenges with planning and prioritizing. Participants expressed not knowing how to make a schedule they could stick to or as Ophelia described, “a realistic plan.” Prioritizing assignments and determining which to work on first was a challenge for several students. Rebel said, “sometimes everything seems important so I don’t know where to start.” Teresa said, “I didn’t know how to prioritize things on my own and be able to get stuff done and choose what work to do.”

Participants described that lacking time management, planning, and prioritization skills caused them to feel overwhelmed, especially when it led to turning in work late or forgetting assignments altogether. Having varying types of assignments from multiple classes was challenging for several participants. Teresa, Ellie, Ophelia, and Rebel all used the phrase “completely overwhelmed” to describe their feelings managing large numbers of assignments. Teresa and Rebel described “shutting down,” when they were overwhelmed with tasks and Ellie said that feeling overwhelmed with work was like having a “nervous breakdown.”

Participants shared that forgetting deadlines would lead to additional stress. Leah shared that this pattern led to her not doing her best work, which added additional anxiety. Hunter discussed how not keeping track of online quiz dates caused him to miss quizzes, which impacted his grades and resulted in anxiety. Rebel experienced a similar pattern. “I would fixate on missed deadlines, and it became a cycle of missing more deadlines.” Overall, students recognized that they were struggling with executive functioning or study skill issues, which led them to seek assistance.

Half of the participants described the need to replace previous support systems. Evan and Leah discussed meeting with support professionals in high school to review assignments, study strategies, monitor grades, and set goals. Evan started working with a peer coach during the first semester of his sophomore year when he reflected on how much he benefited from coach-like support in high school. He said, “I would meet with somebody every day in high school to go over assignments and study strategies and make plans for homework . . . so when I got to college, I really needed to make sure I found something similar.” Leah signed up for coaching the second semester of her sophomore year because she earned lower grades than in high school and realized she needed support. She said, “I definitely forgot about assignments and didn’t even know what my grade was because I forgot to check. I was used to someone helping me stay on track.” Arthenia discussed being used to her high school teachers providing more guidance and needing assistance adapting to a new, more independent learning environment. She said, “It was a weird transition just because it was just so different . . . you got to like figure stuff out for yourself kind of thing, like, I’m not going to hold your hand.” She described being surprised by needing to use different study strategies for different content, that her classes used different grading systems, and that instructors expected students to review syllabi independently and learn how to manage the learning management system. She said, “It was a lot and I needed help adapting.” Teresa and Rebel described previously relying on their parents for help with time management and following through and they sought coaching because they wanted to develop these skills for themselves.

RQ2: What Features of APC Did Students Perceive as Enabling Their Ability to Engage in Coaching and Develop Academic Skills?

Participants described how participating in active and guided skill development influenced their development and independent use of target skills. Accountability check-ins also helped participants stay on track. Participants shared that working with a peer allowed them to form a close, relatable relationship while also maintaining a level of professionalism, enabling them to feel comfortable and make progress. Additionally, coaching offered through a flexible and convenient format reduced barriers and enabled them to use this resource.

Theme 2: Active and Guided Skill Development

Participating in hands-on activities to develop their skills helped students to learn and gradually take on more independence. They participated in active skill development to address the skills they sought to build when they pursued coaching: time management, planning, organization, and prioritization. Collaborative schedule-making was the most frequently discussed activity. Alisha described how she and her coach would talk through upcoming assignments, with Alisha listing tentative “start dates” on her calendar. Her coach would do so as well, and they would compare, being sure to set realistic goals and to spread out work. She described, “My coach will be like, you have here that you’ll do this assignment on Thursday, but it looks pretty busy . . . do you think it’ll be more manageable if we spread it out? She would help me think through it.” Angela discussed how making a visual schedule with her coach was helpful. Julia described benefiting from verbalizing her goals and plans when making a schedule with her coach. “Talking about it out loud helps me know what my schedule is going to look like and remembering it,” she said. Ophelia found collaborative scheduling to be a useful starting point for her to get organized, even though she expects to customize it as the week goes on. She said, “I usually change things around based on what I feel like doing that day, but at least having a plan helps me not feel like I have an idea of what to do.”

As students planned their schedules, coaches also guided them to develop prioritization strategies. “When I would have something overdue, I would definitely procrastinate and almost dread working on it. My coach helped me think about those feelings and prioritize getting those assignments off my plate,” Evan said. Ellie described how she learned to prioritize her work based not only on due dates but also on how her preferences for types of assignments might influence her ability to complete them. “Of course, what’s due the soonest is obviously going to be higher up on the list, but I also started considering the types of assignments I don’t look forward to or struggle with. I need to start those earlier so I can work on them at a slower pace.”

As participants learned to prioritize, they also had to develop strategies to divide large assignments into smaller, easier-to-manage components. Angela described, “Before I could map out when I would do certain assignments, I needed to think about the bigger ones and split them up into different days to make it feel more manageable.” Similarly, Rebel said, “I started thinking about writing a paper in the easy bite-size chunks rather than all at once, so I don’t get as overwhelmed.” Arthenia, Ivy, and Teresa discussed how this strategy helped them improve their studying. Arthenia described her previous studying technique as “cramming” and admitted that it was usually not an effective way to prepare for a test. Instead, her coach helped her study in “chunks,” which she related to learning more and improving exam scores. Ivy described learning to work in “short bursts” and scheduling regular break times to improve her focus. Teresa also benefited from breaking up study time and added that her coach helped her use smaller study periods more effectively. “Even with the smaller amounts of time, I wasn’t using them well. We practiced making lists of terms, making flashcards, making notes on what I reviewed, and that all helped me to use my time more effectively.”

Theme 3: Working With a Relatable and Professional Peer

Participants described having a close, friendly connection with their coach, with 10 of them using the phrase “close relationship.” Sessions began with casual conversation before diving into academics. Angela said, “We would joke and laugh before getting started.” Ophelia mentioned that beginning sessions with “talking about life and laughing made them fun.” Arthenia described that discussing life outside of academics, such as her coach asking for updates about the sport she played, made her feel that her coach really cared about her.

Participants shared that working with a peer made it easier to form a close relationship, feel understood, and be honest. Working with peers who were recently undergraduate students meant they connected with participants about coursework and academic struggles they both experienced. Julia shared that her coach felt like “a peer who had shared college experiences but could share another point of view.” She went on, “I like to be able to talk about how my schoolwork is going not with like a classmate or my roommate but to talk to someone that has . . . they experienced what college was like.” Relating to coaches helped some participants to share more openly. Teresa said “[Coach] is pretty close to my age, so it feels like a friend giving me guidance, rather than I don’t want to say like an interrogation, but it feels a lot less formal, which helps me to open up.” Ivy expressed how having shared experiences with her coach helped her to be honest. She said, “We seem to have a couple things in common procrastination level wise, so we have connected about all that and she told me how she deals with it.”

While participants appreciated their coaches’ relatability, they also indicated that their coaches’ professionalism and reliability helped them to feel supported. Participants described being able to count on their coaches to provide positivity, encouragement, honest feedback, and to be attentive and engaged during meetings. Hunter discussed, “[Coach] is very reliable . . . if I have a question I can definitely count on him to find the answer . . . I can definitely count on being able to email him and get a response in a reasonable amount of time.” He continued to describe how he could rely on his coach, even during challenging times. He said, “I would say, definitely he’s helped me through some tough spots academically . . . it’s like if stuff happens, it’s like I have a homing beacon. I know where to go.”

Participants discussed that one of the biggest benefits of coaching was having accountability check-ins. Coaches held students accountable in several ways. Having weekly sessions reminded students to check in with themselves about academic progress so they could share with their coaches. Leah said, “I like that [coach] holds me accountable . . . I actually know what’s going on in my life because otherwise I just would go with the flow and not think about what I need to do until it’s too late.” Participants described feeling encouraged to accomplish the goals they set with their coaches. Arthenia described, “[Coach] held me accountable and was counting on me to follow through with whatever we planned.”

Students not only reported back on grades and classes but also on the study strategies they discussed with coaches, as well as their accommodations. Overall, students described that their coaches motivated them to achieve their goals. Alisha said, “I don’t feel like it without [coach] giving me motivational pressure . . . I mean, I think I have a lot of motivation myself, but it’s like I have another person watching me, so it’s really awesome.”

Theme 4: Convenient and Flexible Virtual Coaching

All students primarily met with their coaches via a virtual platform (e.g., Zoom or Microsoft Teams), with 10 (Alisha, Arthenia, Ellie, Ivy, Julia, Leah, Ophelia, Angela, Rebel, and Teresa) only having virtual coaching sessions. Hunter and Evan attended coaching in person prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, but after meeting on Zoom when this service was remote, they now use a mix of in-person and virtual coaching, opting for in-person sessions when they are in the DRO for other reasons or appointments.

Participants cited three benefits of receiving coaching virtually: saving travel time, increased flexibility, and meeting remotely, coinciding with meeting procedures such as making a digital schedule. Six participants noted that meeting remotely saved travel time by reducing the need to walk or drive to the DRO. Participants discussed benefiting from the flexibility of attending from their dorm or home. Ellie shared, “For people with executive functioning challenges, attending on Zoom means you don’t have to plan travel time.” Teresa echoed this sentiment. “I don’t have to worry about, you know, if I’m driving, if there’s traffic, or if the bus isn’t coming. So it’s a lot less stress.”

Students noted that virtual meetings were convenient and aligned with coaching activities. Participants discussed making schedules during their meetings, and doing so over a computer enabled them to use supportive tools. Arthenia shared, “I share my screen so my coach can see the page I’m looking at from my point of view. Then we both take notes of what’s coming up and compare, which is helping me to do that on my own.”

RQ3: How Did Students Perceive APC to Relate to Other Supports (i.e., Accommodations) They Received From the DRO?

Students made connections between coaching and the accommodations they received from the DRO. They also described how coaching complemented or facilitated their use of accommodations.

Theme 5: Coaching Is “An Equally Valuable”, and Complementary Accommodation

As students described the features of coaching that most influenced their development, all students related coaching to accommodations provided by the DRO. Arthenia recognized that coaching is technically not an accommodation, like extra time on tests, but described coaching as “an accommodation for a cognitive disability.” Similarly, Hunter characterized coaching as “an active type of accommodation . . . it is an accommodation in the sense that not everyone is good at time management. Like with my executive functioning disorder, or ADHD, it provides help with learning how to manage that.” Rebel said that typical accommodations and coaching are “equally valuable” and compared it to therapy. She said, “Learning academic strategies in coaching is similar to learning coping strategies in therapy.” Angela also related the planning she carried out with her mental health therapist to the type of support she received from her coach.

Participants conveyed that coaching complemented other accommodations they received. Coaching helped students prepare for tests, while accommodations removed barriers when they took them. Participants who received an accommodation for extended time for assignments indicated that developing time management skills reduced the need for this accommodation. Participants also received help scheduling their accommodations, such as taking a test in the testing center. Evan noted, “He [coach] would check in with me to see if I scheduled my test and help me if I forgot.” While most participants compared or related coaching to the accommodations they used, three indicated that coaching was the only service they received from the DRO.

RQ4: How Did Students Perceive APC to Influence Their Academic Abilities?

Participants perceived gains in both academic skills and independence after participating in coaching. They developed new skills and enhanced those they were already using. Further, they found themselves utilizing skills in increasingly independent ways.

Theme 6: Improved Academic Skills and Increased Independence

Participants described how coaching had positive influences on their skills, including time management, organization, study skills, and the ability to independently use these skills. Participants reported that their time management skills became more efficient over time. Rebel discussed replacing inefficient scheduling practices, such as planning to study for large amounts of time, with more realistic scheduling. Improved time management skills translated to fewer missed assignments, better preparation for tests, and a feeling of less overwhelm for participants. Rebel noted that while she would occasionally forget an assignment, it became much less common. Teresa recalled, “I was so proud that I was asking for fewer extensions. I had a better handle on when things were due and when I could get them done.”

Participants also described using more effective organizational strategies, including saving assignments or emails related to classes in designated locations and using a planner or specific study skills, such as the Pomodoro method, explaining concepts in their own words, and taking practice tests and using flashcards. Not only did participants discuss using more effective academic strategies, but they also used these strategies more consistently.

Overall, participants identified that their academic skills grew over time, and they found themselves becoming less dependent on their coaches. While participants used to make schedules collaboratively with coaches during sessions, six of them indicated that they felt comfortable making them on their own and emailing them to their coach if they needed feedback. Ophelia said, “I can look at my schedule and kind of figure out a plan and then email it to [coach]. So, it’s helped me figure out those skills to do it for myself now to stay on top of stuff.” Participants also noticed that developing independent skills helped them feel more confident. Arthenia believed that her coach gave her the confidence to independently implement the strategies she learned with her coach, stating, “[my coach] and I can do it together, but I knew she wanted me to try. So, like, I’ve been trying it and I’m like, okay, I can do this. I can do this on my own.”

Discussion

This study sought to explore disabled postsecondary students’ perceptions of why they pursued APC, what features of APC enabled them to engage with the program and develop academic skills, and their perceived outcomes of program participation. Students participating in APC were interviewed, and their narratives were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings from this study highlighted six central themes: (a) students pursued APC to develop executive functioning skills and replace past supports; students perceived that (b) active and guided skill development, (c) working with a relatable and professional peer and (d) convenient and flexible virtual coaching were key elements that enabled them to engage and develop skills, (e) students viewed APC as an equally valuable and complementary accommodation, and (f) students associated coaching with improved academic skills and increased independence. These findings contribute to the growing body of research suggesting that APC may serve as a promising support for students with disabilities in postsecondary settings; it also adds student narratives to explicate how coaching can benefit them (Ahmann et al., 2018).

Participants identified areas of needed growth in two areas of CCR (i.e., academic engagement and processes and ownership of learning (Lombardi et al., 2023). Additionally, they shared that actively working with their coach (e.g., cocreating schedules, talking through assignment priorities) contributed to their development of academic skills and independence. Although APC sessions were not specifically designed to provide explicit instruction, many participants indicated that principles of explicit instruction were used to help them learn new skills and take ownership of their learning. Explicit instruction uses clear statements about the purpose for learning the new skill, explanations and demonstrations of how to carry out the skill, opportunities for guided practice and feedback, and gradually faded supports (Archer & Hughes, 2011). Although grounded in the experiences of 12 students, the patterns identified in this study suggest that insufficient explicit instruction in college and career readiness, particularly related to executive functioning and academic skills, may be an area of concern for some secondary students with disabilities. Working with a relatable peer who was also reliable and professional was identified as a benefit of the APC program. This finding mirrored Yomtov and colleagues’ (2017) finding that first-year postsecondary students who participated in peer mentoring identified that working with a friendly, relatable peer who provided emotional support and encouragement was a benefit. These researchers also noted that students benefited from the mentor being able to answer questions about academics, resources on campus, transitioning to postsecondary education, and help with studying, homework, and time management (Yomtov et al., 2017), which parallels the “relatable, yet professional” characterization of peer coaches identified by participants in the current study. Further, participants in the current study perceived improved academic skill use and self-reported grade improvement, reflecting findings by Rando et al. (2016), who determined that students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who participated in a peer coaching program for incoming postsecondary freshmen experienced improved grades. While the current study did not collect explicit data on student grades, participants perceived improved academic skill use and self-reported grade improvement.

The current study also found that postsecondary students with disabilities preferred to meet online with academic peer coaches, as this format offered flexibility. This finding supports Tarconish et al. (2022), who found that postsecondary students with disabilities preferred meeting with DRPs in virtual formats, as attending in person presented a barrier for some students. While most participants in our study preferred to meet with coaches virtually, two participants mentioned the benefits of attending in person. As such, offering coaching in hybrid formats may accommodate the greatest number of students.

Participants also likened coaching to reasonable accommodations (RAs) they received through their university’s DRO. The Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) defines RAs as “Any change in the work environment or the way things are customarily done that provides an individual with a disability equal access to employment opportunities, benefits, and privileges.” The law continues to designate categories of RAs, including “Modifications or adjustments necessary to enable a qualified individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of the job.” Some of the most common RAs include test-taking accommodations (e.g., extra time or a reduced distraction environment), use of assistive technology such as text-to-speech, note-taking software, or audiobooks, and scheduling changes, such as priority registration for classes (Parker Harris et al., 2019). These RAs remove accessibility barriers that do not reduce the requirements of a course or academic program. Academic peer coaching is typically viewed as an “additional” service that institutions of postsecondary education are not required to offer. Participants in our study, however, suggested that academic coaching should be considered a type of reasonable accommodation, as individuals with some disabilities may require additional support to develop executive functioning and academic skills. The DROs may consider providing academic coaching services, but it also raises the question of how coaching relates to RAs.

The current study explored students’ perspectives on how APC influenced their academic skills. Uncovering student perspectives of academic skill development allows participants to define what progress means to them, and document incremental changes, such as strategies used or experiences studying, that would not be captured by reporting grades alone. Participants in the current study identified that coaching improved their academic skills (i.e., consistent and increasingly independent use of effective executive functioning and study skills). This finding mirrors previous research that found coaching improved students’ abilities to use executive functioning and study skills (Bellman et al., 2015; Richman et al., 2014).

Limitations

The current study provides insights into how students with disabilities perceive academic coaching; however, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the study was conducted at one public institution with an established APC model in a DRO. As such, our findings may not reflect the variability in how APC has been designed and delivered across institutions, and for this reason, generalizability may be limited. Some readers may expect interrater reliability (IRR) in qualitative research. However, this study used reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019), in which IRR is not appropriate because themes are interpreted and constructed through engagement with the data rather than objectively coded units. To enhance trustworthiness and credibility, the authors used reflexive journaling, iterative coding with peer discussions, triangulation, an audit trail, member checking, and rich participant quotations, consistent with best practices in reflexive qualitative research.

Another limitation related to generalizability involves the participant sample. All but one participant identified as white, and most identified as female (i.e., 10/12 participants). There is a need to continue to study APC models in different types of institutions and to study how these programs influence more diverse samples of participants. Additionally, while this DRO defined their program as offering APC, it may be argued that the program is more accurately described as peer strategy instruction, as its primary focus was on student skill development, as opposed to the intentional development of other characteristics that may be cultivated through coaching (e.g., growth mindset, self-determination). Our study also prioritized students’ perceptions rather than quantitative academic outcomes. While participants described improvements in organization, time management, and academic performance, the study did not collect data on GPA, course completion, or retention. As a result, we are unable to draw conclusions about the quantitative impact of the APC program, and measurable academic success remains speculative. Finally, while the study explored how students experienced coaching, we did not systematically examine how institutional structures (e.g., coach training, supervision practices) influenced those experiences, which limits our ability to draw conclusions about the fidelity or variability of the intervention.

Implications for Research

This study highlights several opportunities for future research. First, scholars should continue to investigate the measurable impacts of APC on executive functioning and self-regulation. Quantitative approaches, such as pre–post designs using validated measures like the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Second Edition (BRIEF2A; Moura et al., 2025) or Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI; Feda et al., 2025), could provide additional insight into executive functioning and academic skill growth over time. To determine how APC affects CCR, participants could complete the College and Career Readiness for Transition Assessment (CCR4T) before and after receiving APC (Lombardi et al., 2023, 2025; Taconet et al., 2024). However, if coaching focused solely on executive functioning and academic skills, students may only experience changes in two domains (i.e., ownership of learning, academic engagement, and processes). If APC also included explicit guidance on communication, academic social skills, and career development, participants may be more likely to experience changes across all four CCR domains. As such, future research could examine both types of programs. Our study’s findings also suggest that once students have the requisite skills, they begin to direct their own coaching sessions. Future research may be directed at understanding how specific elements of coaching affect this growth (e.g., structure of sessions, use of explicit instruction, dosage, and APC background). Mixed-methods designs could complement these approaches by capturing students’ lived experiences alongside measurable outcomes. Previous studies have used randomized controlled trials (DuPaul et al., 2017), quasi-experimental designs (Parker et al., 2013), and small group pre–post designs (Hartung et al., 2022) to examine coaching impacts; however, few have disaggregated findings by disability type, cultural background, or academic standing. Future studies can investigate how coaching affects students from underrepresented backgrounds, as well as those with distinct executive functioning profiles (e.g., ADHD, ASD, traumatic brain injuries). Finally, given participants’ perception of APC as a form of accommodation, future research might examine how institutions integrate coaching into their broader service and compliance frameworks and whether such integration supports long-term academic and psychosocial outcomes.

Implications for Practice

Findings from this study have implications for secondary special educators and postsecondary disability service providers. For secondary special educators, the results highlight the importance of providing explicit instruction related to skills within the CCR framework (e.g., academic engagement and processes, ownership of learning) for students with disabilities. Embedding CCR-specific skill instruction in students’ transition services (e.g., time management, study strategies) can help ensure students develop the foundational skills needed to navigate postsecondary environments. To support this effort, secondary special educators can collaborate with Pre-Employment Transition Services (Pre-ETS) providers to promote continuity in skill development and ensure students are well-equipped for college and employment.

For postsecondary institutions, particularly DROs experiencing staffing shortages, budget constraints, and increased demand (see U.S. GAO, 2024), APC offers a cost-effective model to support students with disabilities. Despite its potential, academic coaching is viewed by institutions of higher education as an additional “service” rather than recognized as an RA. Given the evidence that APC contributes to improvements in executive functioning, academic confidence, and persistence (e.g., Anderson & Marino, 2024; Marino et al., 2020), institutions should reexamine how coaching fits within their broader framework of support services and disability-related accommodations. To create effective and equitable programs, DROs can draw upon training resources offered by established coaching organizations (e.g., The ADHD Coaches Organization, The Association of Coach Training Organizations, The Association on Higher Education and Disability). Additionally, DROs may benefit from partnering with peer institutions that have established APC programs to co-develop training, supervision structures, and assessment tools. By institutionalizing APC as a structured and accessible support, postsecondary institutions can better align their services with the diverse needs of disabled students and promote a more inclusive academic environment.

Conclusion

As postsecondary students with disabilities continue to experience lower academic achievement compared to their non-disabled peers, both secondary educators and postsecondary service professionals must ensure these students have the skills they need to succeed. Disabled students who transition to postsecondary education must navigate differences in laws, student expectations, academic rigor, and services that are available. As research continues to confirm that disabled students enter postsecondary education with underdeveloped CCR, both secondary/transition educators and postsecondary service professionals need to provide effective support to guide students to develop these abilities. Academic peer coaching is a promising practice that can likely be offered to students in both secondary and postsecondary education as one way to enhance needed academic skill development.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-cde-10.1177_21651434261435531 – Supplemental material for Postsecondary Students With Disabilities’ Perceptions of How Academic Peer Coaching Influenced Their Academic Skill Development

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-cde-10.1177_21651434261435531 for Postsecondary Students With Disabilities’ Perceptions of How Academic Peer Coaching Influenced Their Academic Skill Development by Emily J. Tarconish, Emily Malouf and Jordan Nyirenda in Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Emily J. Tarconish

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Supplemental Material

Supplementary material for this article is available at .

References

Ahmann

Tuttle

L. J.

Saviet

Wright

S. D.

(2018). A descriptive review of ADHD coaching research: Implications for college students. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 31(1), 17–39. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1182373.pdf

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (1990).

Anderson

Marino

M. T.

(2024). Executive function coaching for college students with disabilities: A systematic literature review. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 37(2), 131–142. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1445898.pdf

Archer

A. L.

Hughes

C. A.

(2011). Effective and efficient teaching. The Guilford Press.

Association on Higher Education and Disability [AHEAD]. (2023). Performance indicators for disability resource professionals. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/information-services-portal/data-collection-and-management/performance-indicators

Bellman

Burgstahler

Hinke

(2015). Academic coaching: Outcomes from a pilot group of postsecondary STEM students with disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28(1), 103–108. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1066319

Braun

Clarke

(2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Campbell

A. L.

Mogashana

(2025). Assessing the effectiveness of academic coaching interventions for student success in higher education: A systematic review. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 62(4), 1325–1347. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2417173

Dawson

Guare

(2012). Coaching students with executive skills deficits. The Guilford Press.

10.

DuPaul

G. J.

Dahlstrom-Hakki

Gormley

M. J.

Pinho

T. D.

Banerjee

(2017). College students with ADHD and LD: Effects of support services on academic performance. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 32(4), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12143

11.

Feda

J. T.

Pucillo

E. M.

Wenger

L. E.

Scales

M. H.

Adams

K. R.

Minahan

C. A.

Martin

J. G.

Smith

N. S.

(2025). Validation of the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) in Doctor of Physical Therapy learners: A retrospective observational study. Physical Therapy, 105(10), pzaf108. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaf108

12.

Gabel

S. L.

(2005). Disability studies in education. Peter Lang Publishing.

13.

Hall

M. M.

Worsham

R. E.

Reavis

(2021). The effects of offering proactive student-success coaching on community college students’ academic performance and persistence. Community College Review, 49(2), 202–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552120982030

14.

Hartung

C. M.

Canu

W. H.

Serrano

J. W.

Vasko

J. M.

Stevens

A. E.

Abu-Ramadan

T. M.

Bodalski

E. A.

Neger

E. N.

Bridges

R. M.

Gleason

L. L.

Anzalone

Flory

(2022). A new organizational and study skills intervention for college students with ADHD. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 29(2), 411–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2020.09.005

15.

Hughes

(2023). Pedagogies of lived experience: The perspectives of people with disabilities on their educational presentations about disability topics. Disability Studies Quarterly, 42(3–4), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v42i3-4.8120

16.

Lombardi

A. R.

Kowitt

J. S.

Staples

F. E.

(2014). Correlates of critical thinking and college and career readiness for students with and without disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38(3), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143414534888

17.

Lombardi

A. R.

Rifenbark

G. G.

Esposito

Taconet

A. V.

Mazzotti

V. L.

Morningstar

M. E.

(2025). An intersectional examination of college and career readiness for youth with and without disabilities. Journal of Education, 205(2), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574241309818

18.

Lombardi

A. R.

Rifenbark

G. G.

Rogers

H. J.

Swaminathan

Taconet

Morningstar

M. E.

Mazzotti

V. L.

Langdon

(2023). Establishing construct validity of a measure of adolescent perceptions of college and career readiness. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 46(1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/21651434221081229

19.

Marino

M. T.

Vasquez

Banerjee

Parsons

C. A.

Saliba

Y. C.

Gallegos

Koch

(2020). Coaching as a means to enhance performance and persistence in undergraduate STEM majors with executive function deficits. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 20(5), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v20i5.3040

20.

Moura

Albuquerque

C. P.

Vilar

Pereira

Seabra-Santos

M. J.

Lopes

A. F.

Major

Gaudêncio

Simões

M. R

. (2025). Psychometric properties of the behavior rating inventory of executive function—second edition adult version (BRIEF2A): Does it fit better than BRIEF-A? The Clinical Neuropsychologist. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2527695

21.

Nelson

Buckley

(2021, December 9). Advancing research on students with disabilities in postsecondary education: Technical working group summary. National Center for Special Education Research. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED630866

22.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

23.

Parker

D. R.

Boutelle

(2009). Executive function coaching for college students with learning disabilities and ADHD: A new approach for fostering self-determination. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540

24.

Parker

D. R.

Hoffman

S. F.

Sawilowsky

Rolands

(2013). Self-control in postsecondary settings: Students’ perceptions of ADHD college coaching. Journal of Attention Disorders, 17(3), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054711427561

25.

Parker Harris

Gould

Mullin

(2019). ADA research brief: Experiences of discrimination and the ADA. ADA National Network. https://adata.org/sites/adata.org/files/files/ADA%20Research%20Brief_Discrimination%20and%20the%20ADA_FINAL.pdf

26.

Rando

Huber

M. J.

Oswald

G. R.

(2016). An academic coaching model intervention for college students on the autism spectrum. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 29(3), 257–262. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1123790.pdf

27.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, § 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794. (1973).

28.

Richman

E. L.

Rademacher

K. N.

Maitland

T. L.

(2014). Coaching and college success. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 27(1), 33–50. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1029647.pdf

29.

Saviet

Ahmann

(2021). ADHD coaches’ experiences with and perceptions of between-session communication with clients: A focus group. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 14(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2021.1877754

30.

Swartz

S. L.

Prevatt

Proctor

B. E.

(2005). A coaching intervention for college students with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 42(6), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20101

31.

Taconet

Langdon

Esposito

Mazzotti

Morningstar

Lombardi

(2024). Using data to improve instruction and support college and career readiness for students with disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 59(5), 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512231183361

32.

Tarconish

Taconet

Madaus

J. W.

Gelbar

Dukes III

Faggella-Luby

. (2022). Perceptions of college students with disabilities regarding institutional and disbaility services offices’ response to sustaining education during COVID-19. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 35(2), 99–111. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1364197.pdf

33.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2024). Higher education: Education could improve information on accommodations for students with disabilities. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105614#:~:text=Fast%20Facts,Our%20recommendations%20address%20these%20issue

34.

Yomtov

Plunkett

S. W.

Efrat

Marin

A. G.

(2017). Can peer mentors improve first-year experiences of university students? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 19(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115611398

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.08 MB

0.00 MB