The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of virtual mentoring for enhancing the persistence of secondary and postsecondary students with disabilities engaged in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning. The student participants (N = 189) were all engaged in STEM coursework and enrolled in a virtual-mentoring program for a span of 4 years. Persistence was measured with an online survey designed to evaluate growth across self-determination, self-advocacy, STEM aspirations, and self-efficacy (math and science). After participating in virtual-mentoring practices, the most significant improvement was demonstrated in students’ perception of self-determination and self-advocacy. Growth differences were identified across type of disability and race/ethnicity populations. Implications pertaining to STEM aspirations and self-efficacy were addressed.
BaiH.WangL.PanW.FreyM. (2009). Measuring mathematics anxiety: Psychometric analysis of a bidimensional affective scale. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 36, 185–194.
2.
BanduraA. (1995). Experience of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In BanduraA. (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 1-45). New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BartholomewD.SteeleF.MoustakiI.GalbraithJ. (2008). Analysis of multivariate social science data (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
4.
BurgstahlerS.CronheimD. (2001). Supporting peer-peer and mentor-protégé relationships on the internet. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 59–74.
5.
ChalmersR. P. (2012). Mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29. doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i06
DawsonP. (2014). Beyond a definition: Toward a framework for designing and specifying mentoring models. Educational Researcher, 43, 137–145. doi:10.3102/0013189X14528751
8.
DeciE. L.La GuardiaJ. G.MollerA. C.ScheinerM. J.RyanR. M. (2006). On the benefits of giving as well as receiving autonomy support: Mutuality in close friendships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 313–327. doi:10.1177/0146167205282148
9.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. doi:10.1207/S1532796pli1104_01
10.
FieldS.HoffmanA. (1994). Development of a model for self-determination. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 17, 159–169. doi:10.1177/088572889401700205
11.
FieldS.MartinJ. E.MillerR.WardM. J.WehmeyerM. L. (1998). Self-determination for persons with disabilities: A position statement of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21, 113–128.
12.
FoxJ.BailensonJ. (2009). Virtual virgins and vamps: The effects of exposure to female characters’ sexualized appearance and gaze in an immersive virtual environment. Sex Roles, 61, 147–157.
GlynnS. M.KoballaT. R. (2006). Motivation to learn college science. In MintzesJ. J.LeonardW. H. (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 25–32). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
15.
GreggN. (2013). Adults with learning disabilities: Factors contributing to persistence. In SwansonL.HarrisK.GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 85–103). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
16.
GreggN.WolfeG.JonesS.MoonN.ToddR. (2016). STEM e-mentoring and college students with disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 29, 47–63.
17.
GrigalM.HartD. (2010). Think college! Postsecondary education options for students with intellectual disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
18.
HamptonN. Z.MasonE. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender, sources of efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs and academic achievement in high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101–112. doi:10.1016/s0022-4405(03)00028-1
InmanC.WrightV. H.HartmanJ. A. (2010). Use of Second Life in K-12 and higher education: A review of research. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9, 44–63.
21.
KizelshteynM. (2008). Therapy and the metaverse: Second Life and the changing conditions of therapy for convalescent and chronically ill users. Washington University Undergraduate Research Digest, 4(1). Retrieved from http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/vol4_iss1/157
22.
LeeS. H.WehmeyerM. L.SoukupJ. H.PalmerS. B. (2010). Impact of curriculum modification on access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76, 213–233. doi:101177/00144291007600205
23.
MidgleyC.MaehrM. L.HrudaL. Z.AndermanE.AndermanL.FreemanK. E.UrdanT. (2000). Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
24.
MillerR. J.LombardR. C.CorbeyS. (2007). Transition assessment: Planning transition and IEP development for youth with mild disabilities. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
25.
National Research Council. (2012). Improving adult literacy instruction: Options for practice and research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/download.php?record_id=13242
26.
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2015). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2015 (Special Report NSF 15-311). Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
27.
NewmanL. A.MadausJ. W. (2015). Analysis of factors related to receipt of accommodations and services by postsecondary students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 208–219. doi:10.1177/0741932515572912
28.
NewmanL. A.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. M.ShaverD. (2010). Comparisons across time of the outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school (A Report of Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 [NLTS-2]). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/reports/2010_09/nlts2_report_2010_09_complete.pdf
29.
ReeveJ.DeciE. L. (1996). Elements within the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 24–33. doi:10.1177/0146167296221003
30.
RojewskiJ. W.GreggN. (2012). Adolescents and adults with learning disabilities and AD/HD career choice patterns and behavior of work-bound youth with disabilities. In KauffmanJ.HallahanD. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 584–593). New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
RojewskiJ. W.LeeI. H.GreggN. (2015). Causal effects of inclusion on postsecondary education outcomes of individuals with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 2, 210–219. doi:10.1177/1044207313505648
32.
RumrillP.PalmerC.RoesslerR.BrownP. (1999). Self-advocacy and conflict resolution training: Strategies for the classroom accommodation request. Fayetteville: Arkansas Research and Training Center in Vocational Rehabilitation.
33.
ShogrenK. A.PalmerS. B.WehmeyerM. L.Williams-DiehmK.LittleT. (2012). Effect of intervention with the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction on access and goal attainment. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 320–330. doi:10.1177/0741932511410072
34.
SowersJ.PowersL.ShpigelmanC. (2012). Science, technology, engineering and math (STEM): Mentoring for youth and young adults with disabilities: A review of the research. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.rri.pdx.edu/files/39/stem_mentor_monograph5_may2012.pdf
35.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.WoodW. M.BrewerD. M.EddyS. (2005). A conceptual framework of self-advocacy for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 43–54. doi:10.1177/07419325050260010601
36.
TokerY. (2010). Non-ability correlates of the science/math trait complex: Searching for personality characteristics and revisiting vocational interests (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
37.
TokerY.AckermanP. L. (2012). Utilizing occupational complexity levels in vocational interest assessments: Assessing interests for STEM areas. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80, 524–544. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2011.09.001
Van ReusenA. K.BosC. S. (1994). Facilitating student participation in individualized education programs through motivation strategy instruction. Exceptional Children, 60, 466–475.
40.
WehmeyerM. L. (1992). Self-determination: Critical skills for outcome-oriented transition services. Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 15, 3–7.
41.
WehmeyerM. L. (1996). A self-report measure of self-determination for adolescents with cognitive disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 31, 282–293.
42.
WilliamsL.WiebeE.YangK.FerzliM.MillerC. (2002). In support of paired programming in the introductory computer science course. Computer Science Education, 12, 197–212. doi:10.1076/csed.12.3.197.8618
43.
WolfeG.GreggN. (2015). E-mentoring supports for improving the persistence of underrepresented students in on-line and traditional courses. Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9177, 243–251. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20684-4_24
44.
WolmanJ. M.CampeauP. L.DuBoisP. A.MithaugD. E.StolarskiV. S. (1994). AIR Self-Determination Scale and user guide. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
