University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Evaluating technical support provided in online education for students with disabilities

(USC Thesis Other)

Evaluating technical support provided in online education for students with disabilities

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

EVALUATING TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROVIDED IN ONLINE EDUCATION FOR
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

by

Bonnie Bowling Mulkey

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2023

Copyright 2023 Bonnie Bowling Mulkey

ii
DEDICATION
To my family and friends who have helped me navigate this chapter in my life. I truly couldn’t
have done it without the countless words of encouragement, snacks, and positive thoughts you all
provided. Cheers to less times where I’ll complain about having to write or edit my paper and
more times where I can guiltlessly say yes to all the invitations! Thank you, thank you, thank
you!

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To Dr. Helena Seli who has been my chair during the program and cheerleader. You have always
been there to provide feedback that makes sense, and you presented it in a way where I left our
meetings more confident than when I entered. I truly could not have completed this adventure
without your assistance and consistent support.

iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ ii
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. vi
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... vii
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
Field Context and Mission ................................................................................................... 1
Related Literature ................................................................................................................ 2
The Importance of the Evaluation ....................................................................................... 3
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 4
Stakeholder Group for the Study ......................................................................................... 5
Purpose of the Project and Questions .................................................................................. 6
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework ........................................... 7
Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 7
Organization of the Dissertation .......................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................... 9
Growing Population of Students with Disabilities and the Types of Tools Utilized in
Online Post-Secondary Education ....................................................................................... 9
Need for Effective Technical Support to Assist Students with Disabilities in Online
Post-Secondary Education ................................................................................................. 13
Benefits of Effective Technical Support for Students with Disabilities Who Utilize
Accommodations Tools ..................................................................................................... 18
Clark and Estes’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework ... 22
Support Teams’ Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ........................ 24
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation
and the Organizational Context ......................................................................................... 35
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 38

v
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 38
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................ 38
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 41
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 41
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 42
Chapter Four: Findings .................................................................................................................. 44
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 44
Research Question 1 .......................................................................................................... 45
Research Question 2 .......................................................................................................... 56
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 60
Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 62
Recommendations for Practice to Address the Gaps ........................................................ 63
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................... 73
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 81
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 82
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 82
References ..................................................................................................................................... 85
Appendix: Interview Protocol ....................................................................................................... 94

vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Field Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals .................................... 5
Table 2: Knowledge Influences and Types ................................................................................... 28
Table 3: Motivational Influences and Types ................................................................................. 31
Table 4: Organizational Influences and Types .............................................................................. 35
Table 5: Interview Participants ...................................................................................................... 45
Table 6: Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Findings ................................................... 61
Table 7: Summary of Knowledge Gaps and Recommendations ................................................... 64
Table 8: Summary of Motivation Influence and Recommendations ............................................. 68
Table 9: Summary of Organization Influence Gaps and Recommendations ................................ 70
Table 10: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ........................ 75
Table 11: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................... 76
Table 12: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ........................................................... 77
Table 13: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program ........................................ 79
Table 14: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ...................................................... 80

vii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this project was to explore and evaluate the degree to which technical support
team members contribute to the successful participation of students with disabilities who utilize
accommodation tools in online delivered higher education. The study utilized technical support
team members from the field to assess the degree to which their interaction impacted the students
with disabilities’ participation in their program by using Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis
framework. The framework consisted of exploring the knowledge, motivation, and the
organizational contributions to understand the involvement and effectiveness of the technical
support team members when working on issues for students with disabilities in relation to their
accessibility tools, such as screen readers and captioning services. The study included qualitative
data consisting of interviews with participants from a variety of technical support teams.
Everyone worked in organizations who support multiple higher education programs. The
interviews were coded and analyzed to find common themes related to the influences. The
technical support teams understood basic troubleshooting guidelines but did not have formal
training specific to accommodation tools or soft skills. However, they were very confident in
their ability to assist all students, regardless of their issue, and understood how critical their assist
was for students related to their successful participation in the program. The technical support
team also indicated that there was very little support provided by the organization to aid in
knowledge or feedback on the technical support team members’ productivity. Therefore, the
study culminated with recommendations for practice to address the gaps and reinforce the
influences that were not gaps. The study also includes an integrated implementation and
evaluation plan based on Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Model.

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this project was to explore and evaluate the degree to which technical
support team members contribute to the successful participation of students with disabilities who
utilize accommodation tools in online delivered higher education. According to the National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 19% of all 2-year and 4-year postsecondary institutions
in the 2015–2016 school year enrolled students with disabilities (NCES, 2017). Additionally, the
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, reauthorized in
1994, indicates that despite some program advances for adaptive technology, there remains a
lack of trained personnel to help individuals with disabilities use devices and services to
participate in education. In a study conducted by Cawthon and Cole (2010), 110 students with
learning disabilities at a 4-year university experienced lower academic achievement due to a lack
of support related to their disabilities and the accommodations they required. The evidence
highlights the need to provide students with disabilities with adequate online education support
(Barnard-Brak & Sulak, 2010). With a growing population of students with disabilities in higher
education, the services and support to all students should also expand to ensure all online
students succeed (Betts et al., 2013).
Field Context and Mission
The organizations utilized in the study are third-party vendors who assist university
partners and their students with tools to increase accessibility, which are largely referred to as
accommodation tools throughout the study. The technical support teams assist in implementing
accommodation tools and help students who have issues with these tools, which allow them to
complete assignments, engage in live classes, and participate in their online programs. The
organizations provide specific tools, whether a screen reader or captioning services, to university

2
partners and their students with asynchronous material and in live classroom settings. Students
receive these third-party’s contact information when they need someone to aid in implementing
or troubleshooting the tools they use. The organizations in this field all have an implicit goal to
provide high-quality, accessible accommodation tools to consumers, wherever they may reside.
All technical support teams would ensure that 100% of the student population can participate in
online education by the end of 2023.
Related Literature
Tracking students with disabilities in higher education is challenging because a portion of
them choose not to disclose their disability to their institutions (Grimes et al., 2017). However,
Gabel and Miskovic (2009) noted a rise from 8.2% to 10.2 % in the overall number of first-year
students who reported having a disability in the United States. Additionally, the NCES stated that
19% of all students enrolled in a post-secondary education indicated a disability in the 2015–
2016 academic school year. Students with disabilities have specific educational needs to learn on
par with someone without disabilities (Wang, 2009).
Students who require tools, such as screen readers and closed captioning services, to
increase their accessibility should receive adequate support to implement and troubleshoot the
tools if technical issues arise. One of the predictors of these students’ success is the amount of
support the institution provides for them (Madriaga et al., 2011). Kurth and Mellard (2006)
conducted a study on students who had disabilities in higher education and their satisfaction with
accommodations. In the study, the participants reported that their accommodations were
ineffective up to 25% of the time. The students thought it necessary to have more support from
faculty and disability services departments to feel that they had the same level of education as
students without disabilities. Vaughan and Woodruffe-Burton (2011) noted that with the quality

3
of education improving consistently, students with disabilities must receive the same quality
education as students without disabilities. These authors also suggested that anyone who wants to
complete higher education should have the opportunity to do so, as long as they meet the same
standards as their counterparts. According to Peña (2014), institutions and faculty members feel
a heightened level of pressure to support all student in their classrooms appropriately. These
studies indicate an opportunity for technical support teams to provide effective tools and
troubleshooting support for all students to access and successfully participate in online learning
environments.
The Importance of the Evaluation
It is important to evaluate the support for students with disabilities because as higher
education continues to develop online, students must have the tools and support to aid them with
online live session delivery and asynchronous content to be successful (Story et al., 1998).
Additionally, since the COVID-19 pandemic, many programs have made the transition to online
delivery or have incorporated online courses as an option to the students. As such, there will be a
higher need for technical support amongst students to participate in their programs effectively
and successfully. A student’s success in online programs is not only driven by interest and will to
complete a post-secondary program but also by the tools and support they receive for their
educational experience. Universities must consider how material is delivered to ensure they
allow students with disabilities the same rigor and experience students without disabilities have
access to explore (Konur, 2006). As the population of students with disabilities grows, it is
important to consider how well they can use their accommodations tools for online learning. The
added stress of feeling unsupported in their accommodation tool issues may jeopardize students’
success in higher education, given the already rigorous material they attempt to complete

4
(Heiman & Precel, 2003). Understanding what support for these students currently looks like
could highlight opportunities for improvement and result in higher retention and graduation rates
for these students.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The three stakeholder groups in the field who have a role in supporting students with
their accommodation tools within the live classroom are the faculty members, the universities’
disability services, and technical support teams. The faculty members are stakeholders because
they contribute to the students' success through their instruction. The faculty members must
understand the types of disabilities that exist in their classes and how students utilize
accommodations. The university disability services group is a stakeholder because it benefits
from having a reliable and knowledgeable technical support team. The university disability
services will have more confidence in their students’ ability to participate in online learning with
their peers. The assistance from technical support teams will allow university disability services
to strengthen the retention rates and success of students with disabilities. Lastly, the technical
support teams are stakeholders because these groups provide the technical structure and support
for how students utilize accommodations tools. The students rely on the ability of the technical
support teams to implement and support their accommodation tools to be successful in the online
learning environment. Table 1 presents the stakeholders’ performance goals.

5
Table 1
Field Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Field mission
To ensure technical support teams can provide students who require accommodation tools within
their online learning environment, a high-quality experience aiding in their academic success.
Field performance goal
By the end of 2023, technical support groups will ensure that 100% of the student population who
utilize accommodation tools can successfully participate in online education.
Technical support teams’ goal
By the end of 2023, technical support teams will integrate and support accommodations’ tools to
allow all students to participate in their online learning environment.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
A thorough analysis of all three groups would be ideal to have a complete understanding
of how to improve the experience for students with disabilities. However, to gain the most useful
knowledge for organizational improvement, the technical support teams stakeholder group was
selected as participants in the study. The primary reason for selecting this group was that they
have insight into how students interact with support resources specifically related to
accommodation tools. These teams include developers committed to implementing and
troubleshooting tools so that students have properly functioning tools for online learning.
The stakeholder goal was derived from the mission of the organizations, higher education
institutions and third-party vendors, who regularly assist students in online environments. There
may be challenges for students who utilize accommodations tools to navigate their online
learning environments. The parties taken into consideration when developing this goal were the
technical support teams who help the students with accommodations and the students
themselves, as they are the group who will benefit the most. The measures used to track progress
toward the goal include reporting from the technical support teams and whether they resolved the

6
students' issues. The technical support teams may also solicit feedback with surveys from
students who utilize the support services. If the stakeholder group achieves the goal, the
organization will allow a broader base of students to access to high-quality accommodation tools.
Students who seek assistance to ensure their accommodation tools function properly will be
better prepared than students who do not take advantage of that support (Cawthon & Cole,
2010). If the stakeholder group cannot achieve the goal, it would risk lowering students’
retention rates and could dissuade students with disabilities who utilize accommodation tools
from continuing with their education.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to explore and evaluate the degree to which technical
support team members contribute to the successful participation of students with disabilities who
utilize accommodation tools in online delivered higher education. While a complete performance
evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, the technical support teams make up the stakeholder
group of focus in this study for practical purposes. The analysis focused on knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences related to the teams’ goal.
The questions that guided the evaluation encompass how effective the technical support
teams are in aiding students with disabilities when they experience issues with their
accommodation tools. The following questions were addressed to guide the evaluation of the
stakeholder group’s capacity:
1. What are the technical support teams’ knowledge and motivation related to integrating
and supporting accommodations tools to allow all students to successfully participate in
their online learning environment?

7
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and technical support teams’
knowledge and motivation related to integrating and supporting accommodations tools to
allow all students to successfully participate in their online learning environment?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources related to integrating and supporting
accommodations tools to allow all students to successfully participate in their online
learning environment?
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The study utilized a modified version of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analytic framework
to explore the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the technical support
teams’ capacity to achieve their goal. The study utilized a qualitative approach consisting
primarily of interviews with technical support teams. The interviews allowed for gaining
feedback directly from the stakeholders.
Definitions
This section highlights the verbiage and specific terminology utilized throughout the
entire dissertation. These definitions provide clarity to the reader on what the terms mean in the
context of the dissertation.
• Accommodation tools: Any tools that students are utilizing for assistance with their
disability. For example, screen readers and captioning services are two commonly
utilized tools for students who may have visual or auditory disabilities.
• Online learning environment: The learning environment in which students participate
and the platforms they engage in, including the learning management system where

8
they access asynchronous work, the asynchronous work itself, and the live classroom
sessions.
• Technical support team: Any team providing implementation or troubleshooting
support for accommodation tools.
Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters organize this study. This chapter provided the key concepts and
terminology commonly found in a discussion about supporting students with accommodation
tools in online learning environments. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders and
the framework for the project were introduced as well. Chapter Two reviews and analyzes the
literature in a broader scope to assess what others have seen with this problem of practice. The
three topics discussed and assessed are the growing disabled population, their need for technical
support, and the benefits of having adequate technical support in their online post-secondary
education. Chapter Three will detail the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
within the field and the methods for analysis. The influences are examined regarding the
participants and data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed
and analyzed. Chapter Five provides recommendations for closing the perceived gaps and an
implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions based on literature and the data collected
from the stakeholders.

9
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The study addresses three areas of focus regarding students with disabilities in online
higher education and the support they require for academic success. The first area is the growing
population of students with disabilities in online post-secondary education. The population is
assessed to understand the overarching need to provide effective support to students with
disabilities. The second area of focus is on technical support teams provided for students with
disabilities who utilize accommodation tools in online institutions. The focus here will highlight
how that may impact student participation and success. The final area of focus is the benefits of
having effective technical support, which includes how technical support teams helpful students
who require accommodation tools to participate in their online education. All three areas
contribute to how students with disabilities participate in online learning environments.
Following these areas of focus, there will be a description of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis framework and a review of the learning, motivation, and organizational influences
related to technical support teams and their interaction with students with disabilities. Finally,
there will be a presentation of the conceptual framework to close out the end of the chapter.
Growing Population of Students with Disabilities and the Types of Tools Utilized in Online
Post-Secondary Education
Across the globe, some students matriculating through their educational journeys must
navigate their way differently due to a disability. This section reviews how the numbers of
students with disabilities in schools are growing overall and how disclosure policies in higher
education affect those numbers. Finally, students’ transition process from high school into post-
secondary education will be discussed in terms of how it factors into students with disabilities’
academic experiences.

10
Overall Growth in Students with Disabilities
The number of students with disabilities in post-secondary education has steadily
increased from 8.2% in 2009 (Gabel & Miskovic, 2009) to 19% in the 2015–2016 school year
(NCES, 2017). Additionally, there is evidence in several countries that there has been a steady
increase over the last 20 years in students with disabilities who enroll in post-secondary
education (Madriaga et al., 2010). All students with disabilities have needs to address for their
educational experience to be equal to students without disabilities (Wang, 2009). The growing
number of these students in postsecondary education suggests a growing need for additional
provisions concerning accommodations.
The number of students with disabilities has also increased due to a shift in the style of
delivery. Overall, there has been a 47% increase in online and blended courses in primary and
secondary education since 2007 (Picciano et al., 2012). Many universities transitioned or now
include an option to take coursework online instead of having only a physical classroom for
classes (Muñoz et al., 2018). Many universities no longer require students to attend only in a
physical classroom. The shift to online delivery resulted in more students attending an online
learning platform and increased demand for high-functioning technology systems (Kilburn et al.,
2014). Students with disabilities may require specific accommodations or additional tools to
participate in the online delivery of their program.
The increase in students with disabilities in online learning environments is also due to
the ease of participation related to joining a class or accessing asynchronous activities from home
(Barbour, 2013). Some students with disabilities utilize personal aides to assist them in their day-
to-day activities. Participating from home and maintaining a normal level of assistance from an
aide could be compelling reasons to opt for online delivered programs. Additionally, having

11
equipment or physical tools could make it difficult to move from one location to another. The
option of participating in an online program from their own environment allows them to mitigate
that obstacle.
Many factors contribute to the overall number of students with disabilities. One factor
that determines this number is whether students disclose that they have a disability at all, which
the following section discusses. Deciding whether to disclose a disability is a personal choice
and can have varying impacts on students’ experiences.
Disability Disclosure in Post-Secondary Education
The growth in the population of students with disabilities is generated from the number
of students who self-reported their disability to their learning institutions. Ressa (2016) indicated
this factor is important because students with disabilities must report their accommodations
independently to the disability office to receive services and be included in the number of
students with disabilities. Students may choose not to report their disability to the learning
institution. If a student does not report their disability, there is no absolute way to accurately
report whether they utilize accommodations or services provided by the university. Additionally,
they will be completely self-reliant or will be required to find their own services and assistance
affiliated primarily with their accommodation.
There is a wide scope of the types of disabilities students could have, which could be why
a student decides whether to disclose their status with the disability office. Often, students may
not disclose their disabilities if they do not require additional accommodation tools or if the
accommodation does not need to be approved by the disability office (Ressa, 2016). An example
of an accommodation requiring approval from the disability office could be extra time on
assignments or quizzes that students without disabilities would not be allowed.

12
Students might also not report their disability because they feel confident in their ability
to manage their studies and academic work without additional support or services (Nasir &
Efendi, 2019). With the scope of disabilities being vast, if a student’s disability is managed
through medication or alternative ways, they may forgo university assistance. These types of
disabilities could include conditions similar to autism and ADHD. Lastly, students might not
disclose their disability because they may not realize the services the disability office provides or
that they could benefit from these services (Nasir & Efendi, 2019). In any program, the disability
services office or department may not be highlighted as other services necessary to the entire
student body, like the registrar or account services for tuition payment. It could also be difficult
to find detailed information on how disability services personnel can help. Students with
disabilities should be able to locate and understand disability services and how they could benefit
from them.
Support Transition from K-12 to Post-Secondary Education
There is a significant difference between the support provided to students with disabilities
in a high school environment and a university environment. Hadley and Satterfield (2013)
indicated that students who received accommodations in high school unrealistically expected the
same level of support in their post-secondary education. When these students apply to a post-
secondary institution, they do so with the notion that they will receive the same learning
opportunities as their colleagues without specific needs (Douce, 2015). It can be a challenging
experience for them to shift from high school to a post-secondary institution. In high school, they
were proactively provided the plans, tools, and support to participate in their learning
environment. Additionally, they likely have support from their parents or guardians to assist
them with their needs. In post-secondary education, the student is responsible for taking all the

13
steps to ensure they have a plan, connect with the disability services office, and communicate
with the appropriate support teams to gain assistance when necessary (Mamiseishvili & Koch,
2012).
When students transition from high school to post-secondary education, it is their
responsibility to choose a university that will best suit their academic program desires and any
specific learning needs or accommodations they may have at that time. Transitioning from an
environment that proactively helps them via tools and services to an environment where the
student must take a significant role in their success can be overwhelming (Ressa, 2016). Once a
student enters a post-secondary institution, it is their responsibility to ensure they participate
effectively, whether they decide to contact the disability office.
Additionally, students with disabilities may be under the impression that they can handle
schoolwork without the assistance they received in high school. Excelling in coursework and
perceiving that their high school experience was similar to that of their classmates may lead to
the idea that they can successfully manage their coursework and participation in college.
However, if the student determines that they require assistance and have not already established
their disability status with the university, it may be daunting or challenging to acquire the
assistance they need at that moment (Lorenzo, 2012; Nasir & Efendi, 2019).
Need for Effective Technical Support to Assist Students with Disabilities in Online Post-
Secondary Education
In higher education, the trend toward online learning is becoming more robust each
semester (Goradia, 2019). With such an increase of students with disabilities in higher education,
the universities need to develop and continually enhance students’ learning experiences
(Downing & MacFarland, 2010). For technical support teams, understanding how to utilize a

14
wider range of accommodation tools allows them to support more students’ needs. Duffy (1999)
confirmed that while there are more prevalent ways to categorize disabilities such as vision and
hearing impairment, there also must be a consideration for the disabilities that are not as readily
apparent. The author stated that some disorders might not be evident, such as mental illness,
anxiety disorders, or autism, but should have the same consideration when analyzing how to best
troubleshoot and communicate as a support group. Technical support teams taking these
additional disorders into account while creating processes to support students will ensure the
organization can work toward the overall mission of effective resources and outcomes for the
growing population of students with varying degrees of disabilities.
Students with disabilities must be diligent in requesting assistance when issues arise,
especially when working on assignments and projects that have a heavy impact on their overall
grades. In research conducted by Dallas et al. (2015), students with disabilities placed a higher
priority on having passing grades than on their social interactions, which indicates that they will
utilize their support teams when they experience an issue they cannot resolve. Understanding the
types of institutional support and how to contact them is critical to completing assignments and
classwork if issues arise. Time is a stressful factor and can become an obstacle for students with
disabilities because it takes them longer to work through basic learning material than it does for
students who do not require accommodation tools (Timmerman & Mulvihill, 2015).
Accommodation Tools and Support in Online Post-Secondary Education
The accommodation tools and support provided to students with disabilities allow for a
more meaningful learning experience because they can participate at a level where they feel
engaged (Pudaruth et al., 2017). By allowing for easier consumption of material and support to
participate effectively, the student will have additional confidence to communicate and interact

15
in their online learning environment. With effective tools, these students will understand that
they are completing and participating at the same caliber as students without disabilities.
However, Mamiseishvili and Koch (2012) indicated that all institutions are responsible
for providing current accommodation tools and the necessary support for each student regardless
of their ability. Accessibility and new models of learning facilitating collaboration are created
with the development of tools and online learning platforms (Cook & Sonnenberg, 2014).
Universities are integrating online components to their programs to help facilitate programs
delivered in a physical classroom, which requires considering accommodations. In the PARCC
Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual, some of the tools reviewed and proven as
successful in enhancing students’ performance were screen readers and closed captioning for
verbal instruction (Bowman et al., 2014). Depending on how integrated and widely used, these
tools can be low-cost and incorporated into the students’ learning environment very easily.
While students could have various disabilities, this dissertation focused on the disabilities
that require accommodation tools for the student to participate in online learning. Specifically,
the two tools referenced throughout the following sections relate to hearing and vision
impairment. It is common for students with hearing impairments to have captioning services
available in asynchronous materials, such as videos, and live sessions. The tool frequently used
for students who have vision impairments is a screen reader for documents and any on-screen
text. Accommodation tools must be both integrated into the online learning environment and be
effective for the students to participate in their education. If the tools break or a student faces
difficulties while using the tools, the technical support team will need to be involved to resolve
the issue.

16
Many tools are helpful for students with disabilities in online higher education. One of
the tools students with hearing impairment rely on is captioning services. The captioning service
translates what is said into typed words that can be seen and read on the screen. If the service is
not enabled, the words are not correct, or there is a significant lag between what is said and what
is translated, it can hinder the students’ ability to understand the information (Cifuentes et al.,
2016). Furthermore, it can impact their overall participation and potentially lead them to
disengage from their program out of frustration (Seale et al., 2015). When the student’s
accommodation tool does not work as intended, or there are technical issues, the support teams
must have the expertise to resolve the issue (Luft, 2014).
Additionally, students with visual impairment may require a screen reader to process
words on a screen. Taylor (2016) indicated that the technical support teams need to be involved
before the school term starts to ensure that the reading and learning materials are fully functional
when processed by the screen reader tool. Learning materials might also include images, which
are not translated by a screen reading tool and can take additional time for the student to
understand (Timmerman & Mulvihill, 2015). The screen reader will process and read the image
title, which often does not provide any descriptive information about the image. The titles or
image descriptors that do not provide adequate details of the image, especially ones involving
diagrams aiding in the text material, can hinder the student’s ability to comprehend the
objectives in their courses. Taylor (2016) also cautioned that if these tools are not working
properly, the student risks falling behind in class or might be perceived as not participating.
Accessibility Measures in Online Post-Secondary Education
Institutions must consider whether they allow students with disabilities an equitable
experience through the tools and varying resources available to enhance their experience (Taylor,

17
2016). Hong (2015) stated that even though universities want to provide adequate support, they
are often not prepared to do much more than what is federally mandated. Students with specific
needs require more dedication to achieve the same accomplishments, which means institutional
resources are required to create a learning environment that is accessible regarding their
accommodation tools, such as screen readers and captioning services (Wang, 2009).
Students with disabilities often report that they must work harder than other students
because they must manage both their accommodations and their actual academic performance
(Seale et al., 2015). Students face many changes when enrolling in a new academic program,
even with online learning environments where they do not have to consider on-ground and
physical navigation of a campus. From the beginning of their post-secondary education, a student
who needs accommodation tools must perform extra tasks than students who do not need these
tools (Mamiseishvili & Koch, 2012). Students without disabilities are not often required to think
about additional accommodation tools as part of their orientation as new students. The technical
support team is critical for new students with disabilities to mitigate the additional work required
to provision and maintain accommodations tools.
Coleman (2018) indicated various opportunities related to having more inclusive
classrooms and contributions to technical student support that translate to the virtual classroom
environment. Schwartz (2016) analyzed the idea of reasonable accommodations for students that
fall within the Americans with Disabilities Act guidelines. Schwartz found that many students
did not feel they had reasonable accommodations and support to be successful. Therefore,
universities will need to invest in technical support teams for students with disabilities to feel
supported in their academic involvement.

18
Benefits of Effective Technical Support for Students with Disabilities Who Utilize
Accommodations Tools
The benefit of effective technical support for students with disabilities is that it gives
them the opportunity to work with a group who understands their technical issues and can ensure
they have equitable experiences. Wong et al. (2019) suggested that online education requires
additional support. The technical support team should know the accommodation tools, including
what situations the students may encounter and provide effective workarounds and ways to move
toward a resolution.
Technical support teams should be efficient and accurate when students require
assistance to resolve their issues and increase their ability to participate in their academic
programs. Resolving issues provide students with working tools and a growing rapport with the
technical support team (Nawaz & Siddique, 2012). If a student calls the technical support team
and has a positive experience where they feel their issue was resolved, they may have more
confidence in the technical support team’s ability to assist them in the future (Coomey &
Stephenson, 2018). Furthermore, the student may have overall increased confidence in their
ability to complete their work and program because they know they can rely on the support team
in stressful situations. It is important to establish a connection with the technical support team
early on in students’ academic careers. Students with disabilities who engage in support earlier in
their post-secondary education have a higher graduation rate than students who waited after their
first year to utilize the support teams (Lightner et al., 2012).
Students with disabilities have a plethora of accommodation tools and resources available
to them. However, the institution they attend may have a tool approved for their work in a
specific program. The technical support team needs to have a wide scope of understanding of

19
how to assess an issue a student with disabilities is having and be able to work toward a
resolution.
Challenges in Supporting Students with Disabilities in Post-Secondary Online Education
There are varying challenges to supporting students with disabilities, including various
types of disabilities, the tools and possible accommodations associated with them, the media or
content the student is attempting to access, and the privacy protocols or limitations around the
disability itself. Each of these challenges can impact the way a technical support team member
interacts with the student. It can be difficult to navigate a conversation with a student who has a
disability because they are not required to disclose any information to the technical support team,
or any group affiliated with the academic institution (Nasir & Efendi, 2019).
A student’s disability can be defined in many ways. For a technical support team
member, this is critical information for the specific issue of the student to be understood,
addressed, and investigated. The information related to a student's disability will not be stored on
the information database for student details because of privacy requirements. Additionally, the
student may or may not divulge the details of their disability right away or at all, which means
the technical support team member may have to ask clarifying questions to confirm what the
student needs assistance with related to their online learning (Genc & Kocdar, 2020). For
technical support to be effective, it is important to understand what the student is experiencing to
replicate the issue and assess ways of resolving the issue.
Terras et al. (2020) analyzed accommodations in online courses. These researchers
discovered that students, even if their disabilities are similar to those of other students, may
prefer to utilize a different tool with similar functionality. Different accommodation tools may
have varying levels of access required to assess the problem and troubleshoot the issue. The

20
technical support team members will need to be familiar enough with how each tool operates to
navigate the situation and provide helpful feedback (Correa-Torres et al., 2018). Additionally,
students might receive ad hoc digital material in their online environment that was not originally
included with the syllabus. Even though the material is digital and accessible online, it may not
be in the format or have the necessary accessible content to be utilized by the student. The
student will need to provide the context to allow the technical support team member to
successfully troubleshoot the issues with the material.
Regarding the conversations with the students, technical support teams need to have soft
skills that allow them to navigate and communicate with students appropriately. For students
with disabilities, their communication may vary. An effective technical support team will need to
be able to navigate the situation appropriate to the student to ensure a successful outcome and
that the student can participate in their program. Buchholz et al. (2020) conducted a study
involving communication with technical support staff and indicated that there needs to be a
balance of encouragement and advice about the issue experienced. There also may be situations
where the student operates from their home and has another individual acting as their aid. Instead
of working with one individual, it may be that the technical support team member is working
with two individuals with varying technical and overall abilities (Lambert & Dryer, 2018).
Working with multiple individuals poses a challenge because of the level of knowledge and
experience each person has, as they may be nervous or less willing to try to troubleshoot over the
phone or chat conversations. It could lead to longer conversations and growing frustration for the
student and aide. The technical support team member must be conscious of several factors during
their support conversations to make it successful.

21
Lastly, there could be a challenge for technical support conversations related to
accommodations determined by the disability office. The more commonly known
accommodations are additional time to submit assignments or complete tests, alternative projects
issued by the professor, or different testing accommodations. However, these details are not part
of the technical support teams’ information about the student due to privacy regulations. If there
is a technical issue related to a student’s exam or assignment, there needs to be an effective
protocol to enable the student to have the appropriate accommodations provisioned by the
university. Not providing accommodation details can cause confusion for the technical support
team and frustration for the student if the issue negatively impacts the students’ accommodations
in any way.
Having appropriate information is important for the technical support team to accurately
troubleshoot and resolve issues. When the technical support team can resolve the issue, the
student has a much better experience and can continue participating in their program (Ehlinger &
Ropers, 2020). A student with a positive experience is also more likely to complete the program
and graduate.
Support Experiences for Students with Disabilities
Contacting a support team for any student can be a vulnerable experience. Technical
support teams assist with issues related to academic platforms and tools. Students could
encounter a wide scope of issues. There are times when a student has a heightened sense of
urgency because their issue could impact their grades, assignment submissions, or overall
academic standing. Students with disabilities who utilize additional technology or tools to
participate in their everyday coursework inherently have more issues that could arise (Ehlinger &

22
Ropers, 2020). The additional tools students with disabilities must consider could cause added
stressors and challenges when attempting to complete their assignments.
Technical support teams should consider how the extra tools students with disabilities use
could elevate their stress levels. When working with students with disabilities, the technical
support teams must ensure they have access to the platforms and the additional tools, like a
screen reader (Boyko, 2019). Students with disabilities often rely on more tools than the
university provides to actively participate in their programs. To participate in their program
successfully, all of their accommodation tools have to operate effectively.
When tools are not working as intended, having a reliable technical support team to
assess and assist with resolving the issue means students will have a better chance of
participating and engaging in their studies. Students who need assistance may experience a shift
in their confidence based on the support provided to them, especially in situations where the
outcome of the support impacts their participation in the program (Much, 2018). For instance, if
a student asks for help accessing a final exam in a capstone course that is worth 60% of their
grade, a technical support agent’s inability to correct the issue may jeopardize the student’s
standing in the program. A technical support team available to assist students with disabilities is
critical to successful engagement and participation in online learning platforms. Understanding
the role of the technical support teams can provide the context of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational and possible improvements to address students with disabilities and their needs
for better participation in their programs.
Clark and Estes’s Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) established a specific framework and system for analyzing gaps in
processes and organizations. According to the researchers, one must start the conversation on

23
performance improvement by clearly understanding stakeholder and organizational goals.
Additionally, one must also have an accurate analysis of the cause of the gaps. The framework
utilized for the types of influences was created and explained by Krathwohl (2002), who
indicates four different types of knowledge.
In addition to knowledge-related influences, this review of the literature focuses on
motivation-related influences necessary to achieving the stakeholders’ goal of providing
technical support to aid in the success of students who require accommodation tools. Exploring
the stakeholder group’s motivation is critical to understanding the driver behind situations that
require improvement. The goal in the situation of technical support teams is to ensure support for
accommodation tools aligns with the organizational mission overall. Clark and Estes (2008)
suggested that even if there are no overarching gaps in the organization’s performance, there will
be an improvement in outcomes due to the sheer fact that there is a better understanding of why
people are motivated to function in particular ways.
Lastly, there is an overview of the literature related to organizational influences. If an
issue is present after the knowledge and motivation influences are ruled out, then there are often
organizational barriers in the business processes (Clark & Estes, 2008). In addition to faulty
processes, organization barriers may also consist of inadequate tools and values, attitudes, or
beliefs that make up the cultural model of the environment (Schein, 2004). In the context of
technical support teams, the organizational influences include adequate training and knowledge
base references along with coaching and bi-weekly meetings from supervisors to ensure the
technical support teams are supporting students who utilize accommodation tools effectively.

24
Support Teams’ Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
In researching the goals and mission of the technical support team’s inclusive and
equitable online learning environment, it is important to consider and review the stakeholders’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational aspects. In this study, the stakeholders are the
technical support teams who help students with their accommodation tools. These individuals
make the goal of inclusive learning environments a reality. They also provide assistance to
students when they struggle or have issues with their learning tools. Without understanding what
drives these stakeholders and how they are influenced, it is challenging to comprehend the issue
fully. The following section reviews the knowledge, motivation, and organization-based
influences assumed to influence the support team’s performance.
Knowledge and Skills-Related Influences
This section reviews the literature on the knowledge required to reach the goal of
providing technical support for students who utilize accommodation tools in their online learning
environments. By the end of 2023, technical support teams will support all students with
accommodations by ensuring routine training on accommodation tools and ensuring these tools
are effective within the online learning environment. There is inherent importance in having
certain knowledge and skills when assessing one’s goals and how to accomplish them. Cognitive
load theory, for example, indicates that one must have certain information before one can acquire
a more complex level of information (Kirschner et al., 2006). Rueda (2011) provided additional
support for this notion of requiring employees, stakeholders, end-users, and the general company
to have particular knowledge to achieve goals set out for them. Understanding the organization’s
mission and how to promote that mission through specific improvements or smaller goals will
more readily lead to success.

25
It is critical to assess the knowledge influences that correspond to the stakeholder’s goal
of integrating and supporting accommodation tools to allow all students with disabilities to
participate in their online learning environment. The framework utilized was created and
explained by Krathwohl (2002), who indicated four different knowledge types: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. The factual knowledge type refers to the basic
elements of what technical support teams must understand (Krathwohl, 2002). For example, the
student may be required to understand terms or geographic locations, which are specific pieces
of information. The conceptual knowledge type refers to the interrelationships between the basic
elements from the factual knowledge type and how these elements function together (Krathwohl,
2002). For example, one might consider this to be a theory, classification, categorization, or
principle that can be transferred and utilized in more than one context.
The procedural knowledge type refers to how to do something and likely involves a
review of technical support teams’ standard operations (Krathwohl, 2002). For example, one
may utilize training manuals when considering the environment workflow and the procedures
that are involved in day-to-day activities. Lastly, the metacognitive knowledge type refers to how
one perceives themselves in understanding their knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). In other words,
this entails self-assessment of tasks one might be performing or how they believe they
accomplished the task itself. For example, a technical support team member may assist a student
who may have been struggling on multiple occasions and may have worked with a different team
member. If they can resolve the issue and provide a positive experience for the student, they may
believe they have an increased ability to support students with their accommodation tools. Rueda
(2011) highlighted that the metacognitive knowledge type also requires contextual consideration
in the individual’s thought process, which often makes a clearer determination of when and why

26
that individual will do something or what their next steps might look like going forward from
that point.
The two areas of focus in this review are conceptual and procedural knowledge regarding
technical support for students in online learning environments. It is critical to see where there are
opportunities to enhance all students’ ability to participate in their online classroom environment
via tools and support. In highlighting these opportunities, it is also critical to assess how to best
resolve shortcomings in how technical support teams help students who utilize accommodation
tools.
Understanding Accommodation Tools to Aid in Better Technical Support
One of the roadblocks to ensuring students’ support is understanding how to utilize and
troubleshoot accommodation tools effectively. Technical support teams need operational
knowledge of current accommodation tools, consisting mainly of screen readers and captioning
services. The challenge then becomes that vendors may have varying tools they prefer to utilize
for their specific students. Each university will have a different process for the technical support
teams to assist students who have accommodations. The differences in those tools will impact
what the technical support teams need to understand to handle the conversation with each
student. If there are additional inclusive classrooms available for students with disabilities and
technical support teams are effective in supporting those classrooms, the students will have an
easier time participating altogether (Grossman & Salas, 2011). Based on the categories provided
in the previous section, this information falls under the conceptual category due to the idea of
what is involved in constructing the online learning environment and what it will require to
function better moving forward. If technical support teams have a better understanding of the

27
accommodation tools and of what type of support the students need to function related to
accommodations, there will be a better overall experience for the students involved.
Understanding How to Provide Effective Support for Students with Accommodations
Mamiseishvili and Koch (2012) found that students with disabilities may have less
motivation and willingness to continue in their programs than students without disabilities. The
technical support teams must understand how to interact with and support these students to
provide an online learning environment that allows students to participate successfully. From
training, the technical support teams will learn how to communicate and effectively troubleshoot
technical problems that arise from the accommodation tools. This requires the student support
teams to understand how to best navigate troubleshooting conversations with the students. For
example, the technical support team member should verify the student’s identity utilizing their
school ID, ask clarifying questions to ensure they understand the issue, and walk through the
troubleshooting steps to confirm the issue is resolved appropriately. The knowledge influence
this falls into is the procedural knowledge category, as it involves how to accomplish the task of
supporting students who require accommodation tools in their online learning environments.
Table 2 summarizes the knowledge influences based on general knowledge theory that the
technical support team needs to support students with disabilities in online learning
environments.

28
Table 2
Knowledge Influences and Types
Knowledge influence Knowledge type
Technical support teams need to understand the
accommodation tools’ functionality.
Conceptual
Technical support teams’ need the ability to
assist students with disabilities effectively.
Procedural

Motivational Influences
In addition to knowledge-related influences, this study also reviewed literature on
motivation-related influences necessary to achieve the technical support team’s goal. Identifying
the value of motivation is critical to understanding situations that require improvement to drive
the goal. The goals of the technical support teams for accommodations are pointed at or aligned
with the organizational mission. Specifically, team members want to provide unfettered access to
virtual education and understanding their reasons for being involved in the organization could
provide insight into how they stay motivated to meet their own and the organization’s goals.
Clark and Estes (2008) identified that even if there are no overarching gaps in the
organization’s performance, outcomes will improve due to a better understanding of why people
operate in particular manners. There are several different theories and ways this field is
influenced, including expectancy-value theory, self-efficacy, interest, attributions, goal-
orientation, emotions, and engagement (Pintrich, 2003). The two theories more closely assessed
in relation to the technical support teams’ goals are utility and self-efficacy.

29
Technical Support Teams’ Perception of the Importance of Their Role in Student
Participation
The motivational influence of utility incorporates how a process, group, or resource is
used to promote a goal. Eccles (2006) recommended understanding how aspects of the
organization are utilized toward the end goal. For those aspects to be effective, the technical
support teams need to understand their role within the online learning environment and how to
best support students with varying levels of disabilities. The support teams must be enhanced to
include every accommodation, which contributes to the overall goal of the students participating
in the online learning environment. When the technical support team members understand the
significance of their role, they will increase their perceived value for the students with
disabilities. This study will explore how the technical support teams are more effective when
they are provided with regular training opportunities related to the accommodation tools they are
required to troubleshoot.
Technical Support Teams’ Confidence in Supporting Students with Disabilities
The motivational influence of self-efficacy involves how one believes in their own
competence and ability to achieve specific goals (Rueda, 2011). The technical support teams that
most readily interact with the students and their accommodation tools have very specific metrics
that they must meet to show performance measures. If the support teams feel more confident in
their performance and ability to troubleshoot and assist students, they will continue to help
students with their needs related to accommodation tools. Technical support teams must be
knowledgeable enough to assist students with their technical issues, but also can manage the
customer service, or non-technical, aspects of the conversation. The non-technical aspects

30
typically include soft skills that enable the technical support team members to identify the issue
while being patient, adaptable, and empathetic to the students (Bagga & Khanna, 2014). Once
the support teams’ confidence increases with both the technical and non-technical aspects, their
ability to help students will also increase. This is supported by Bandura (2005) and Borgogni et
al. (2011), who outlined the idea that in a professional setting, employees may assess their
performance by how the group performs. In the professional setting for technical support teams,
if these teams consistently build efficiency in assisting students, they will also build their belief
that they are increasingly capable of assisting students. According to Lechtenberger et al. (2012),
there is a positive and significant increase in the number of students participating in online
education who require different levels of accommodations. Technical support teams have been
evolving to allow them to engage and work with students as a team effort, which promotes team
members’ self-efficacy and enhances the students’ success at the same time (Gomez et al., 2010).
The motivation for technical support teams is to build their confidence and ability to support
students to continue to be a strong resource for assistance overall. This study explored how the
technical support team members’ confidence in providing effective assistance with
accommodation tool issues impacts student participation in their online learning environment.
Table 3 summarizes the motivational influences based on general motivation theory that the
technical support teams need to support students with disabilities in online learning
environments.

31
Table 3
Motivational Influences and Types
Assumed motivational influence Assumed motivational
influence type
Technical support team members need to
perceive their role in providing inclusive
strategies as critical for successful
participation for all students.
Task value
Technical support team members need to feel
confident when supporting students with
disabilities within the online learning
environment.
Self-efficacy

Organizational Influences
In addition to the knowledge and motivational influences on an organization and its
goals, its culture also provides areas to assess to understand its strengths and weaknesses or gaps.
Clark and Estes (2008) indicated that if there is a conflict between the organization’s goals and
the organizational culture, one can anticipate problems across team performance and in the
organizational dynamic. Within an organizational culture, it is important to distinguish between
cultural settings and cultural models. According to Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001), cultural
settings are the concrete aspects of an organization, such as the physical office space for
employees, appropriate resources, and clearly stated expectations and performance feedback.
Additionally, they explained that cultural models are cultural practices and shared mental schema
or thoughts within the organizational groups (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). As groups start to
form a history of shared experiences and develop a common understanding, their culture will
develop and change along with those experiences and thoughts (Schein, 2004).
For technical support teams, the organizational culture setting is developed through their
tasks and expectations. The organization factors explored in the following sections include what

32
the organization needs to provide for the teams to ensure students with disabilities can
successfully participate in their online learning environment. One factor is the organization
providing adequate training on technological tools and how to troubleshoot effectively. The
second factor is that the organization needs to continually provide updated tools or software.
Accommodation tools require periodic updates and upgrades because of advancements to
enhance the products, meaning the support team must keep pace. These cultural settings are
paired with cultural models created and learned by the support teams from organizational work
expectations (Erez & Gati, 2004).
Support Teams Require Tools and Training to Assist Students
Managing change can be challenging, yet there are often effective solutions for
performance problems (Clark & Estes, 2008). When one works in an online environment, it is
essential for the technological tools to function effectively. The organization needs to provide the
support teams with adequate accommodation tools and regular training opportunities to
effectively troubleshoot issues. When said tools are not working how they should, or something
seemingly breaks, the support teams are relied upon to fix the problem. In an online learning
environment where the tools are used without flaw, students’ engagement can be positive.
Disruptions due to technology not working can hinder the students’ participation (Dennett &
Vásquez-Colina, 2012).
Technical support teams are required to assist students with varying needs, which include
a broad spectrum of disabilities. The cultural setting is such that the support teams are
responsible for a vast amount of information. Even with a knowledge base available to them as a
resource, it may be overwhelming to fix a specific and possibly uncommon problem that the
student or professor is experiencing. This overwhelming feeling across the team could lead to the

33
cultural model of feeling unprepared, resulting in lower support team performance. Additionally,
team members could receive negative customer service ratings from students. Per Terras et al.
(2015), the primary fear of students who require accommodations is keeping up in their classes,
especially when compared to their colleagues’ progression. If a support team fails to address an
accommodation issue or a technical issue in general, it could significantly delay the students’
work and possibly impact the retention rates of the student body.
Organizations Prioritizing the Needs of Students with Disabilities
The organizations that support students with disabilities need to prioritize how they
function and whether their needs should be addressed differently or with different
accommodation tools (Anctil et al., 2008). Prioritizing this population’s needs and gaining
insight into what they require to succeed will allow for increased learning accessibility.
Additionally, the cultural model could affect how the technical support teams prioritize these
students’ success as well. Erez and Gati (2004) posited that a cultural model is a value or belief
created in a group over time. According to Lechtenberger et al. (2012), the organization should
prioritize students’ needs by consistently gaining insight into their experiences. As the
organization provides opportunities for insight from the students, the technical support teams
may increasingly find value in the insight as well. This study explored the extent to which the
technical support teams believe their organization prioritizes the experience of students with
disabilities in their online learning environments.
Organizations Keeping up with Technological Trends
There are rapid technological changes and updates to how the general public functions in
their daily lives (King, 2018). Concerning education technology, it may be challenging to
identify specific tools geared toward an online learning environment. An organization could

34
discover and implement a new tool for the hearing impaired to replace an existing tool, such as
video captioning. The cultural setting for the organization is to provide the support teams with
the ability to stay current with technological changes. If support teams can resolve issues
efficiently because of ongoing training and technology updates, the students can successfully
participate in their online learning environment. The cultural model that would potentially evolve
is the notion that the organization needs to constantly research, but finding the team is ineffective
with using the tool itself. Also, if the team and the organization determine they are falling behind
or the tool is unsuccessful, it could be associated with lower student performance or lower
retention rates compared to competitors.
The trends in online education present additional challenges for support teams because
they are not considered institutional policy, and what is deemed necessary for students with
needs can vary greatly (Carter & Graham, 2012). Finding a balance between what is trending and
what is beneficial to the students requires consistent research and insight into students’ needs.
Scoppio and Covell (2016) noted that institutions must articulate a clear vision with the technical
support teams and have an ongoing improvement to aid the students and professors with
effective technology in online learning environments. This study explored the need for higher
education institutions to consistently research and provide efficient tools for the technical support
teams. Table 4 summarizes the cultural settings and models described above indicating the ways
in which the organization can assist the technical support teams.

35
Table 4
Organizational Influences and Types
Organizational Influence Organizational influence type
Organizations need to supply the support teams with
the training to understand all accommodation tools
and any changes or upgrades that impact student
participation.
Cultural setting
Organizations need to prioritize the needs of students
with disabilities in relation to their accommodation
tools.
Cultural model
Organizations need to ensure that accommodation
tools are adequately updated to support students’
ability to successfully participate in online
delivered education.
Cultural setting

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
The purpose of a conceptual framework in any study is to understand the main issues to
be studied and the presumed relationship between them (Maxwell, 2013). It is helpful to have
additional context around the issues analyzed to allow for more insight into the problem itself,
provide structure to what may have already been studied about this problem, and inform how the
rest of the study will progress (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). It helps build a frame around what
happened in the past and allows for more definition of what is to be expected in the study.
In previous sections, the influencers were described independently of each other.
However, all the influences interact with each other to varying degrees and are not isolated.
Figure 1 was utilized in addition to the prior descriptions to demonstrate how the knowledge and
motivation influences interact with the organizational elements. This will all be in the context of
supporting students who require accommodations and updated tools to aid them in their online
learning environments.

36
Figure 1
The Relationship of the Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences

Figure 1 includes the relationship between knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences and how they drive the overarching goals. The outlining figure is an arrow pointing to
the right to represent the goals of the organization progressing in a forward motion. The arrows
are pointing toward the students, which is where the efforts and support of the technical support
teams will be driving progress and successful participation of students who utilize
accommodation tools. Within that arrow is an additional arrow for the stakeholders’ goals. The
arrows are nested because the stakeholders’ goal should align with the organization to drive the
whole group forward in business. The stakeholder arrow is smaller because it is a piece of the
organization and must function with other parts of the organization.

37
Within the smaller arrow sit the influences, which collectively drive the stakeholders’
goals. The knowledge and motivation goals are linked to the organizational influences and
impact each other. The knowledge and motivation influences depend on more inclusive tools
provided by the organization for the online learning environment. Additionally, effective tools
would enhance the professors’ ability to have more successful classes, which would promote
student success in the overall program (Coleman, 2018). Effective tools are linked to the
organization because the support teams need the students to succeed in their online learning
environment (Scoppio & Covell, 2016). Organizations also need to ensure that the support teams
are prepared to troubleshoot and assist students if they experience issues in this capacity
(Borgogni et al., 2011). The organization, conversely, depends on the support teams to report
opportunities for processes or tools because they may not realize it otherwise. The organization
and the stakeholders need to communicate with each other because if one fails, the other will as
well, which in turn affects the stakeholder and the all-encompassing organizational goals.

38
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this project was to explore and evaluate the degree to which technical
support team members contribute to the successful participation of students with disabilities who
utilize accommodation tools in online delivered higher education. This chapter is organized into
sections describing the overall process of the data collection, the methods used, and protocols
created for the different methods. For this study, there will be an interview conducted with
individual technical support team members and an artifact analysis to triangulate the information
collected.
Research Questions
1. What are the technical support teams’ knowledge and motivation related to integrating
and supporting accommodations tools to allow all students to succeed in their online
learning environment?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and technical support teams’
knowledge and motivation related to integrating and supporting accommodations tools to
allow all students to succeed in their online learning environment?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources related to integrating and supporting
accommodations tools to allow all students to succeed in their online learning
environment?
Overview of Methodology
Interviews were the sole method of evaluation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The
interviews presented questions to the technical support team members regarding their
experiences and thoughts about their roles. Interviewing support team members provided first-

39
hand responses regarding how they support students requiring accommodations. The interview
questions touched on each of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences included
in the conceptual framework.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population of focus for the study was the technical support team
members who contribute to higher education students’ success in online environments by
assisting students with their accommodation tools and any additional technical issues that may
occur within the learning platform. The participants were individuals who work directly with
students with disabilities across the scope of academic accommodations and varying needs. This
group also includes individuals responsible for updating resources and tools that students utilize
for asynchronous and live session aspects of their academic programs. It was critical to include
participants who can speak to the student experience and how well they are supported. Eight
individuals were interviewed; as part of the criteria, they had all been with their respective
companies for at least a year. Within the group, each participant was in a position that required
them to troubleshoot technology for students and assess possible improvements in the resources
and tools the students utilize regularly. These criteria allow for assurance of knowledge across
the function of the teams related to the students.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The sampling strategy for the data collection was purposive sampling, as these
participants were selected with specific criteria (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). I reached out
with cold calls and emails to communicate with the participants. Once I confirmed that the
participants worked in the capacity required for the study, I followed up with them to set up

40
interviews that accommodated their schedules. Eight was an appropriate number of participants
because it allowed for data saturation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Interview Protocol
The type of protocol utilized for interviews is semi-structured, as defined by Merriam and
Tisdell (2015), and included a list of 12 questions to be explored but did not necessarily have to
be followed in a specific pattern. Additionally, they allowed for probing to clarify responses as
necessary. This is the most appropriate approach because some points in the interviews required
flexibility in understanding the responses or gaining clarity on what the respondent described.
The interview questions touched on all influences examined in this study. There were questions
dedicated to each influence type. Patton (1990) indicated different interview questions invoke
specific types of responses. Two types of questions were important: knowledge and feeling
questions. For the conceptual framework, it was imperative to understand what the stakeholder
group knows already, why they feel it is important to know particular information for the
accommodation tools and what the organization provides by way of resources to meet the
overarching organizational goal of closing the educational gap for students with
accommodations.
Interview Procedures
The participants were provided information about the study and the questions prior to
agreeing to being interviewed. At the beginning of the interview, the participants received the
information sheet for exempt studies outlining their rights regarding participation. I also asked
for their permission to record the interview as well. The interviews were conducted over the
Zoom conferencing software platform. With the respondents’ approval, the interviews were
recorded. Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes.

41
The interviews included aspects of formal and informal conversation. As explained by
Patton (1990), combining parts of each type of conversation is a common strategy where there
may be informal conversation at the beginning to allow for more flexibility in the interview and a
more structured list of questions ensures specific questions are asked. The combined approach
allowed for flexibility and included a more formal structure of questions. Due to COVID-19 and
social distancing requirements, videoconferencing was the only option available. The data were
captured with a recording device, and there was a backup device to account for issues that might
arise. Additionally, hand-written notes were captured for points to review after the interview.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To maintain the study’s credibility and trustworthiness, specific steps were taken
throughout the interviews. The primary way I intended to maintain credibility was through
having flexibility in the interview to include follow-up or probing questions to capture additional
information or details that were not already provided (Robinson & Firth Leonard, 2019). If there
were uncertain factors from the interview, I asked a more detailed follow-up questions to gain a
better understanding of possible gaps. Utilizing this strategy allowed the interviews to be
credible and present analysis that the reader can trust as accurate information.
Data Analysis
In the data analysis, there were several steps to ensure the interviews were adequately
analyzed. Once the interviews were conducted, the text was coded and categorized to identify
themes related to the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The coding and
categorization allowed for organizing the information to answer the research questions. The
interview protocol is in Appendix A and includes the questions delivered to the participants,
which aligned with the conceptual framework.

42
Ethics
My responsibility as the researcher in the study was to ensure the human participants’
safety and privacy above all else. The goal of the study was to enhance the technical support
provided to students who require accommodations in virtual environments to provide a more
equitable educational experience. There was only interaction with the support staff who
implement and troubleshoot issues with the technology required for students with
accommodations to function in their online learning environment. There was no direct
interaction with students, eliminating many ethical dilemmas (Glesne, 2011). Prior to speaking
with the participants, they provided their consent. They also indicated that they were aware their
participation was voluntary and had the option to withdraw from the study at any point. Once
information was gathered, another reminder was sent regarding the fact that their data were
confidential and would be stored securely. All the communication was provided once in written
form and a second time verbally during the time of data collection to ensure it was provided to
the participants (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
The relationship with the organizations was created either through a colleague or a direct
request for assistance. I am not employed by the organizations, nor do I have any ties that would
provide an unfair advantage or personal gain for myself, students, or the staff members involved.
The interest in the study is solely to benefit the students who may experience additional
challenges that are outside of their control. Prior to any data collection, the participants received
a short description of myself, my intention, and my role as an investigator (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015).
My assumption that there are opportunities in this area stems from my experience in the
education technology field. I have worked with organizations that transitioned on-ground

43
programs into virtual programs with online platforms. In the programs’ development, there was a
challenge in providing adequate tools and technical support for students requiring
accommodations. It is critical to listen carefully to gain insight from the professionals who have
been working closely in this area. In addition to my career field, my background lends itself to
bias as well. As someone who has not had accommodations in the past, I do not have first-hand
experience with the accommodation tools necessary to accomplish educational goals. In the
overall field, there has been a growing awareness of the population and the need to create a more
equitable educational environment.

44
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
This study utilized interviews to examine the technical support team members and their
interactions with students with disabilities. The participants’ affiliations with their organizations
are different, but their answers were kept because their roles and responsibilities did not deviate
from the other participants’ primary work roles and responsibilities, which is to provide technical
support to students with disabilities who use accommodation tools. The data collected assisted in
answering the following research questions:
1. What are the technical support teams’ knowledge and motivation related to integrating
and supporting accommodations tools to allow all students to successfully participate in
their online learning environment?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and technical support teams’
knowledge and motivation related to integrating and supporting accommodations tools to
allow all students to successfully participate in their online learning environment?
This chapter includes an overview of the participants and the findings derived from the
interviews.
Participating Stakeholders
The interview participants in the study were the technical support team members who
contribute to higher education students’ success in online environments by assisting students
with their accommodation tools and any additional technical issues that may occur within the
learning platform. The primary differences in the participants are the type of employer
organizations. Six are employed by third-party companies that have several universities as
clients. Two interview participants work with one university brand, but they support several
campuses and colleges of studies under their main university brand. All the interviewees

45
communicate and interact with students with disabilities in the same way. Table 5 outlines the
participants with a pseudonym for their name, including their career experience and the types of
groups they work for to illustrate that they all work with multiple types of students across
different locations and programs. Two participants identified that they had experience in
technical support but did not state their experience in number of years. Instead, James mentioned
he had three positions within the company he works for currently and Thomas indicated that he
had worked his whole career assisting his family with the business of supporting students with
their accommodation tools.
Table 5
Interview Participants
Interviewee
Pseudonym
Type of
company
Years in
technical
support
Group(s) the participant supports
Mary Public 6 years Third-party tech support for multiple universities
Andrew Public 20 years Third-party tech support for multiple universities
Carl Public 3 years Third-party tech support for multiple universities
James Public Unclear Third-party tech support for multiple universities
Chris Private 10 years Third-party tech support for multiple universities
Thomas Private Unclear Third-party tech support for multiple universities
Jason Private 29 years Tech support team for multiple campuses
Janet Private 25 years Tech support team for multiple campuses

Research Question 1
The first research question asked, “What are the technical support teams’ knowledge and
motivation related to integrating and supporting accommodations tools to allow all students to
successfully participate in their online learning environment?” An analysis of qualitative data

46
helped determine the technical support teams’ knowledge and motivation related to supporting
accommodations tools for all students. Interviews were the sole method of collecting data and
explored the experiences and roles of the technical support team members in relation to students
with disabilities who utilize accommodation tools. This section focuses on the knowledge
findings and is then followed by the motivational findings and the final research question related
to the organizational influences.
Knowledge Findings
The interviews explored technical support team members’ knowledge of accommodation
tools, the way to learn about accommodation tool troubleshooting, and how to effectively
support students with disabilities. The findings revealed a solid basic level of technical support
knowledge, which includes identifying and assessing online learning platform and operating
system issues. However, there were mixed levels of knowledge related specifically to
accommodation tools’ functionalities. Additionally, participants completed independent research
or learned about the tools as they were working on issues with students. Lastly, they all used soft
skills to assist them in navigating sensitive conversations with students with disabilities.
Technical Support Team Members’ Mixed Levels of Understanding Accommodation Tools
The participants all had a background in technical support or assisting students with
technology. However, many of them did not have specific knowledge or exposure to
accommodation tools prior to working with students with disabilities in their current roles. Mary
said, “I had never even heard of [accommodation tools] before until actually getting the
opportunity to work with some of the students, so it was definitely a huge learning curve.”
Additionally, Andrew shared, “As far as accessible-related experience, I had none prior to the
decision being made to form a team that could support [students with disabilities].” Participants

47
stated that many times, their general knowledge of how to troubleshoot and assess issues allowed
them to understand where the issue was stemming from within the students’ systems. Chris
remarked, “My knowledge of technology has helped a lot in my work.” Carl also indicated that
“the most important skill is tech support in general.”
According to multiple participants, once the technical support team members can conduct
basic system troubleshooting, then they can assess next steps, regardless of whether they know
how to troubleshoot a specific accommodation tool. None of the participants had intentionally
sought careers specifically involving how to support students with disabilities prior to entering a
role where it was part of their job responsibilities. One participant, Thomas, noted that the only
related academic award he earned was a certificate related to sign language, which helped in a
limited capacity when working in his position. All participants expressed that they were filling a
need to provide support to students with disabilities, but it was not their initial task upon starting
their technical support role.
The knowledge the technical support team members found most helpful came from
students who presented their issues with the accommodation tools, the issues the technical
support team members faced when testing out an accommodation tool, or anecdotal information
provided by their support colleagues. James cited that some of his information came from
internet forums where questions are proposed, and individuals respond with their knowledge or
experiences. Janet said that “being able to get out and figure out some of the technology and see
what students are using” helped her troubleshoot when it was not a familiar issue. Chris shared
that he would do independent research, and it helped “just knowing what technology is out there,
what its strengths are, what its weaknesses are, knowing when to apply it, what situations it
could assist in, [and] what situations it wasn't good in.” Each participant reported conducting

48
research or testing independently rather than receiving any formal training to understand how to
best assess and troubleshoot the accommodation tools students with disabilities were using daily.
Technical Support Team Members Understanding Accommodation Tools Through Trial and
Error
Many participants reported learning and shaping their knowledge of accommodation
tools through the act of troubleshooting and working through issues as they were presented to
them. The participants also reported that many vendors provided minimal support structures for
the accommodation tool. Furthermore, they indicated that there was minimal information on the
tool functionality, and it was rare that any contact information was found for the vendor. All
participants said that there is no standard or requirement for the students to use specific
accommodation tools. Additionally, the technical support team members indicated that the
organizations do not have contracts with the accommodation tool vendors, which results in no
dedicated contacts or information provided to the technical support teams. If a student contacts
the technical support teams, there could be gaps in knowledge between the student, the technical
support team member, and the vendor. Thus, these technical support teams research comes into
play. The technical support team members have the task of thinking critically to find instructions
or a way to understand the tool itself, and sometimes that means without being able to contact a
live person affiliated with the tool. Carl defined good technical support in this scenario as
“frantically Googling how to do it, and figure out what to do, and fiddling around with it…
[while] never really letting [the student] peek under the hood to realize that you're one step ahead
of where they are.” Ultimately, regardless of the gaps, all interviewees expressed a commitment
to working toward resolutions with all students who contact them.

49
The participants reported that they often assist students in instances where they are not
familiar with the issue in various ways. James mentioned that, in these scenarios, he will ask
probing questions to try to define the student’s issue, and during that time, he conducts internet
searches to figure out what the tool is and how to do basic troubleshooting. For team members
who have access to remote access tools that allow for assuming navigation of another person’s
computer system, they take control and observe the student’s screen in real time. James also
mentioned that in his case, he did not have remote access, but he leveraged the text-to-speech
ability and heard when the student had their mouse over certain commands or sections of the
screen. Thus, he listened to that to understand what the student was doing and assist with
navigation from there. For example, if the student was on the wrong screen, he could hear the
automated voice indicating if he was on a particular browser window, so he would instruct the
student to exit that screen and go to another settings option.
Technical Support Team Members Effectively Assist Students with Disabilities Utilizing
Technical Knowledge and Soft Skills Knowledge
Interview participants reported that they require technical abilities to troubleshoot the
issues, but they also require additional skills to successfully navigate difficult conversations with
students with disabilities. The technical support team members reported that soft skills play a
role in how successful a conversation will be when troubleshooting issues. Seven of the eight
participants indicated that while technical skills are important, it is also important to have
patience and empathy when assisting students with disabilities.
Technical Support Team Members’ Strong Ability to Technically Troubleshoot. As
mentioned in a previous section, the technical support team members all have many years of
experience in their careers working in a technical field. Their technical experience provides a

50
foundation for how well they navigate the issues they encounter. Chris reported that the work he
did in previous roles allowed him to strengthen his ability to quickly understand what is
happening for the student. James indicated that the way his team troubleshoots issues is by
“breaking things down step by step… and taking things one piece at a time.” He says this process
allows them to eliminate certain technical factors that could contribute to the issue the student is
experiencing, which is especially helpful with troubleshooting unfamiliar accommodation tools.
The technical support team members all have a similar approach to addressing technical
issues, whereby they have a “basic tree” as James explains it, to identify the issue along with a
proposed resolution. Thomas reported that they can usually “pinpoint the issue, whether it’s
hardware, software, internet or whatever” because they are able to effectively ask questions that
allow them to thoroughly understand the issue the student is experiencing. With all of the
technical support team members having a strong technical background, they are able to
successfully troubleshoot and identify the issues the students are experiencing.
Technical Support Team Members’ Mixed Ability to Utilize Soft Skills to
Successfully Navigate Student Issues. All the participants indicated that soft skills were not
part of the formal training provided by their organizations. James said, “[The] most important
thing I would say is soft skills. Making sure that when someone takes a call that they're able to
keep that student in a good place, to keep them focused.” The participants cite patience,
empathy, and active listening as skills to employ when working with students. Utilizing these
skills helps the technical support team member resolve the issue preventing the student from
participating in their program. Mary recalled one student who would contact her frequently in a
panic. She would spend more time calming the student down than working on the issue presented
to her. Mary said that during those types of scenarios,

51
I'm not trying to give advice, not trying to troubleshoot or fix the matter right away. A lot
of it sometimes is just frustration, and they just need to get it out. Just being a listening
ear and just having them express their feelings, and then once that's done, saying, “Okay,
I appreciate you expressing your frustration or your anger. Here's what we can do to see
how we can make the situation better.”
In those moments, Mary reported how it is necessary to address the panic and additional
emotions so she can get essential details and understand the problem the student is experiencing
during their interaction.
Technical support team members report that they work with students who are “already
frustrated or at a heightened level of concern at the times when they decide to reach out for
additional support,” said James. Each of these interactions requires a non-technical aspect of
customer service. Carl said the students’ frustration “often isn't about even what they're really
trying to do.” Jason said, “starting empathy conversations [is] all you can do at that point.” At the
very least, the support team member can get to a point where they can troubleshoot and either
resolve the issue or have a next step to offer to the student. Utilizing soft skills during emotional
conversations allows the technical support team member to support the student and progress
toward a resolution.
Motivational Findings
The first research question related to providing resolutions to students’ issues with
accommodations tools. Participants sought to ensure the students’ successful interaction and
participation in the online learning platforms. The motivation influences are the value of the
technical supports’ perception in how their role is critical for all students’ success and their self-

52
efficacy in believing they can resolve issues with accommodation tools so students can
participate in their program effectively.
Technical Support Team Members Perceive Their Role as Critical for Students’ Successful
Participation
Many of the participants’ responses highlighted their involvement when a student
expressed frustrations around their program participation. If accommodation tools are not
working properly, students rely on the technical support team to fix the issue to regain access to
their assignment information. Many participants deemed their support critical because there are
situations where a student has an issue that prevents them from consuming their course material.
Another way participants consider their role as critical is during elevated emotional
moments when their interaction with the student could be a deciding factor in whether students
continue with their studies. Four participants indicated they had at least one student with whom
they speak frequently. Carl mentioned one student who claimed they were not sure if they
wanted to stay in the program and “frequently would call us for help.” Andrew also said their
support is critical for students’ successful participation. He said the students work with them
regularly to ensure they can access their course materials, and they “develop a personal
relationship because we're checking in on them maybe weekly, bi-weekly, whatever, just saying,
‘Hey,’ [and] seeing how things are.” Understanding the tools and knowing they have reliable
support if an issue arises “builds their confidence in their ability to participate altogether,” said
Janet. Lastly, Mary noted that she also had more positive experiences when she was able to “help
[the students with disabilities] grow in learning how to use a computer or how to use their
application a lot better, just browsing or doing things, common tasks they would do on the
computer.” She continued, “I would definitely say, on a larger scale, it's assisting them with

53
knowledge in terms of working their devices that creates a successful student experience.” The
participants reported that this part of the interaction is essential for students to feel supported and
confident in their own ability to participate successfully in their program.
Technical Support Team Members Perceived their Role as Critical in Influencing the Overall
Educational Experience for Students with Disabilities
Based on interview data, technical support team members also impact the larger student
population utilizing accommodation tools by reporting issues with the appropriate administrative
groups. Mary said that she feels part of her role is to “bridge the gap from any concerns they're
having with the site, whether that's knowledge-based or actually a technical issue.” The
administrative groups are involved with the online learning platforms’ functionality, the
accessibility of asynchronous material related to captioning services and screen reading details
the overarching needs of students with disabilities. Chris indicated the interaction with the
administrative teams and whether they are willing to make updates can play a role in helping the
student have a positive experience. Carl said beyond just troubleshooting,
what then our role becomes, once we hear about it, is pushing on [other administrative
teams] in a way that might be uncomfortable for the student to do, or it's another thing for
them to do. So instead of them having to do it, we can reach out to the department of
disability services and get them to fix their PDFs.
The technical support team members reported that often, unless the university and
content creators audit material on the students’ platform, nobody will find out until the student
has to access it for class and realizes that they cannot complete their work. Carl said, “They
found it extremely helpful that we provided the service and that we would go beyond the initial

54
request.” It is critical for not just one specific students’ success but also for any other students
with disabilities who rely on the accommodation tools for consuming their course content.
Andrew said, “the most important focus should always be functionality, where you're making the
student able to do the things that they primarily want to do faster and easier.” The technical
support team provides resolutions for individuals’ challenges but also acts as a gateway to
improve issues for all students.
Technical Support Team Members’ High Levels of Self-Efficacy for Supporting Students with
Disabilities with Soft Skills and Technical Skills
The interviewees’ confidence stemmed from how well they completed basic
troubleshooting and how comfortable they were in navigating difficult scenarios when students
were upset. Both elements contribute to the success of the interaction and whether the student
can successfully participate in their online learning environment. The two different elements of
the technical support team members’ troubleshooting are outlined in the following sections.
High Levels of Self-Efficacy When Supporting Students with Technical Issues. All
the participants expressed confidence in their technical knowledge to troubleshoot most of the
basic issues the students might encounter. James reported that he is confident going into any
issue because he has a “solid grasp of the primary tools that are used, and [he has] a strong
enough understanding of how most of them work” that he can find resolutions for the issues he
works on with students. Chris said that “no matter what, [he] would know what the basic issue
is” and can “usually pinpoint … whether it’s hardware or software, internet, or whatever.” The
technical support team members reported that they understood how to troubleshoot the

55
fundamentals of computer systems, which aided them in finding the issue for the tools they
might not be as familiar with for the students.
High Levels of Self Efficacy When Supporting Students with Non-Technical Issues.
Another critical part of the technical support team members’ reported confidence was in their
ability to utilize their soft skills in resolving the issue. In three interviews, the notion of “stepping
back” emerged in that the interviewee gained a larger picture of what was happening with the
student. Instead of solely focusing on the technical problem, the interviewees shifted the focus to
how the student was feeling and how the technical issue impacted them personally. The shift in
conversation would allow space for the student to articulate why they were upset. Jason said it
was not uncommon when working with a student who had accommodation tools to say, “Hold
on, let's put what we're doing aside a minute and talk about how you're feeling."
Similarly, if Janet worked with an upset student, she said she might say, “Let's take a step
back. Let's look at this. This is what I'm hearing you say,” and then she shifts the topic
temporarily to whatever the student brings up. Jeffrey and Janet dedicate time to addressing the
student’s emotions as much as possible. From there, the participants reported providing
feedback, empathy, and validation to the student, which allows the technical support team
member to move into the troubleshooting work and resolve the technical issue. Carl also
indicated that it is helpful “just being there to listen to what their problems are, even if they sort
of stem beyond the technical realm.” He said that he often feels that he is “there as a support in
more ways than one,” which highlights that he benefits from having additional soft skills
providing him with successful interactions.

56
Research Question 2
The second research question asked, “What is the interaction between organizational
culture and technical support teams’ knowledge and motivation related to integrating and
supporting accommodations tools to allow all students to successfully participate in their online
learning environment?” The following sections present the results related to this question.
Organizational Findings
Three organizational influences aid in answering the second research question. The
organizational influences were formal training provided to technical support teams, setting clear
expectations around performance, and maintaining standard and effective accommodation tools
for students with disabilities. The findings revealed that while the technical support team was
able to provide general support for technical issues, there are gaps in training, undefined
expectations for technical support team members, and no standards around the types of
accommodation tools students with disabilities use regularly.
Organizations Lack Training and Coaching Opportunities to Aid Technical Support Team
Members in Understanding Accommodation Tools
All participants indicated that their organization did not provide formal training related to
students with disabilities or accommodation tools. Additionally, they indicated that their role in
supporting students with disabilities was a small part of their position in their support structure.
They all have titles and roles that cover a wider scope of responsibilities. Some hold the title of
student support generalist, but most hold the title of technical support representative. In both
types of roles, their responsibilities encompass additional work. Training could be provided as a
general guideline for experiences they would need to help all students. Andrew said, “I've given

57
myself effective enough training to provide support,” and indicated, “I would still want more
formal training of some sort for the software.” He continued,
I know what I know, but suppose what I know or what I've learned isn't the best way to
do something in the software, I only know it because I read these articles on the web
about JAWS [screen reader], or I watched these videos on YouTube about JAWS. If
there's multiple ways to do something and I don't know the fastest or best way to do it,
then that's a bit of a detriment for me in that regard.
All participants noted that time and resources were not specifically dedicated to them
understanding accommodation tools, and they did not receive training on how to work with
students with disabilities. Carl said, “the training was sort of a promised thing that would be
given, and then never actually happened.” Mary explained, “I think [accommodation tools]
definitely need to be explored more, and then there just needs to be a greater knowledge of how
to use it.” The interviewees have a general knowledge base, but beyond that, Chris said, “the rest
of it falls on our shoulders to just know technology and know the common problems and
shortcomings of certain technologies.”
Most of the participants commented that there was no official knowledge base or
repository where information could be stored, regardless of whether it was formal, self-taught, or
provided by a vendor. Mary said that even “coaching, knowledge-based articles, trainings,
miniature trainings for reference” it would be helpful. Thomas also noted that his organization
does not have good training documentation or guidance support videos for knowledge resources.
Organizations’ Lack of Clear Performance Expectations for Technical Support Team
Members

58
Interviewees did not have strong insight into how they thought their supervisors viewed
their work related to students with disabilities. Carl described, “I feel like I've only received the
feedback of ‘Keep on doing what you're doing. You're doing a good job.’” In many cases, they
knew that troubleshooting accommodation tools was part of their role, but there was never a
sense that the supervisor knew what types of issues or tools these students utilized. Mary stated,
“I'm not aware if my supervisor knows about some of these assistive technologies and how to
troubleshoot them,” which could prevent Mary from getting meaningful feedback to enhance her
performance. Furthermore, the supervisors cannot coach on how to do something regarding
support for students with accommodations because there is no expectation or thought-out rubrics
for the support team members to follow. Many of the participants responded that they often
completed independent training to ensure they understood enough to be able to assist students
with disabilities. James mentioned, “I took on [additional training] as part of my own
development, something I wanted to do.”
Several interviewees discussed having supervisors who did not have significant
experience in assistive technology to speak on accommodation tools, how to troubleshoot, or
how to effectively coach the technical support team members. However, Janet explained that her
supervisor has been “in the field for 40-something years” and is “very supportive of learning,
taking extra classes, networking, all of that.” While she mentioned that she undergoes a review
every year, she also described the relationship with her supervisor as a partnership where they
would each share new tools or technologies, they each found that could be helpful for students
with disabilities. Janet’s experience allows her to get assistance when she is struggling, while the
other participants did their independent research or leaned on other team members for resolution
steps.

59
Organizations Allow a Myriad of Accommodation Tools to Be Utilized, Presenting a Growing
Challenge for Technical Support Team Members
The participants explained their experiences in technical support and how their
underlying ability to address technical issues allowed them to at least understand key points in
the problems that the student was experiencing, regardless of the system or tool they were using
at that moment. However, when I asked about the specific tools offered by the organization to
utilize and have a firm understanding of, six of the eight participants indicated that they do not
have standard tools. Janet simply stated, “the technology and platforms are changing all the
time.” The field and options of tools are growing so quickly that it can be challenging for
organizations to offer specific or standard tools. At any given moment, something new and more
efficient could come along. A student with disabilities may discover it before the support team
does, and if there are issues, the support team has no training or awareness of the tool or possible
issues. Janet said it was almost impossible to know all the systems, so she would capture
whatever tools came up in conversations, work to fix the issue in front of her, and then study the
tool through help forums or knowledge resources. Through these efforts, she would at least be
familiar with where she could get assistance or look up information for issues. She would ask the
student which program they were using, and if it was something she was unfamiliar with, she
would let the student know, learn that system, and reach back out to the student to ensure they
worked through their issues together.
All but two of the participants indicated that students use so many tools that it was hard
to have a solid understanding of just one or two of them. Even if a university recommends and
aids a student in setting up or providing a tool, the student may find that another tool works
better for them. Andrew indicated that to support students with disabilities, “you're going to have

60
to have knowledge of quite a few different types of technologies.” The evolution of
accommodation tools and services has made it much easier for students to access different tools,
ranging in cost and ability. Mary echoed Andrew by indicating that it is helpful to have a
“general scope of understanding so if a student calls in, it’s something support is aware of.”
While organized training and standard tools would be beneficial, the participants indicated that
keeping pace with the rapidly changing accommodation tools would be challenging.
Conclusion
Interview data were analyzed to answer two questions about the knowledge, motivation,
and organization influences that impact technical support team members’ ability to support
students with disabilities who utilize accommodation tools. As outlined in Table 6, there were
gaps in the knowledge and organizational influences. In the motivation influence, there are no
gaps that existed. Chapter Five includes recommendations for addressing the gaps identified
related to enhancing knowledge, providing training, and how the organization can provide
assistance to technical support team members who troubleshoot students’ accommodation tools.

61
Table 6

Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Findings

Type Influence

Validated as
a gap?
Knowledge Conceptual- Technical support teams need to understand the
accommodation tools’ functionality.
Yes
Knowledge Procedural- Technical support teams’ need the ability to
assist students with disabilities effectively.
Yes
Motivation Task Value- Technical support team members need to
perceive their role in providing inclusive strategies as
critical for successful participation for all students.
No
Motivation Self- efficacy- Technical support team members need to feel
confident when supporting students with disabilities
within the online learning environment.
No
Organization Cultural Setting Influence I: Organizations need to supply
the support teams with the training to understand all
accommodation tools and any changes or upgrades that
impact student participation.
Yes
Organization Cultural Model Influence I: Organizations need to prioritize
the needs of students with disabilities in relation to their
accommodation tools.
Yes
Organization Cultural Setting II: Organizations need to ensure that
accommodation tools are adequately updated to support
students’ ability to successfully participate in online
delivered education.
Yes

62
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations provided to the stakeholders to fulfill their goals are categorized
by knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. In the knowledge category, the
influences are to ensure the technical support team members understand the different types of
accommodation tools utilized by students and understand how to use and troubleshoot issues
with those accommodation tools. In the motivation category, the influences are attributing failure
or success to interactions with students and ensuring the technical support team members believe
they can provide adequate support to students with accommodation tools. The last category of
the organization influences indicates that the organization should provide adequate training and
effective management to allow the technical support team members to succeed in helping
students with their accommodation tools.
The new world Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) served to construct
the recommendations implementation. The recommendations will be implemented in a program
to address the order and intended process of how the stakeholders will obtain the information,
skills, and support to meet their goals. There will be a “pulse check” included approximately
halfway through the initial training. The check will allow the support team members to provide
feedback on how they feel the training is going. From there, the facilitator can adjust as
necessary, which will ensure the team members are as engaged as possible. Once the training has
concluded, the support team members will take a final survey to indicate their thoughts and
feedback. Once the team members have completed training and start utilizing the information in
their day-to-day work, the supervisors will assess their productivity with a bi-weekly one-on-one
meeting and provide coaching as required. Lastly, to continue education on the accommodation
tools, the support team members will have an overview, including case studies, and time to

63
interact with the updated tool and ask questions if they need to clarify anything. The team
members will also have all their knowledge base and information resources updated as a
reference point.
To utilize the new world Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) to evaluate
the implementation program, the program’s different aspects will be compared to the four levels.
At level 4, the results are to have at least a 95% customer satisfaction rating from students on
how the technical support team assisted them. At Level 3, the support team members need to be
assessed on whether their behaviors are achieving that 95%. If not, supervisors need to coach
them on the appropriate information to ensure each team member can be successful. For Level 2,
the learning stage, the support team members need to be assessed after their training to ensure
they retained the information provided to them. The assessment at this level will be done via
questions presented to the group at the end of training and with a post-training survey. Finally,
with Level 1, the support team members will be asked in the first half of their training if there are
ways to make the training better. If the learners are engaged, there is a better chance of them
retaining and utilizing the information on the job. The new world Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016) calls for ensuring checkpoints throughout the program instead of at the
very end, so there is a greater chance of hitting the stakeholder goals.
Recommendations for Practice to Address the Gaps
The findings from Chapter Four indicated that there are gaps related to organizational
elements that impact the technical support team members’ ability to assist students with
disabilities. Once the organizational influences are addressed, the technical support team
members will need to receive training for implementing new support procedures. The following

64
sections present recommendations to address the organizational influences along with the
anticipated knowledge and motivational influences as well.
Knowledge Recommendations
The two knowledge influences reviewed in this study were declarative and procedural
knowledge regarding technical support for students in online learning environments. Both
influences emerged as gaps within the interview responses. Table 7 outlines the gaps and the
recommendations to enhance the knowledge or the technical support teams and allow them to
provide effective support. The recommendations largely include the addition of formal training
for technical support and soft skills to support students with disabilities who utilize
accommodation tools.
Table 7
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Technical support teams need
to understand the
accommodation tools’
functionality. (D)

All staff need the resources
to do their jobs, and
resources should be
prioritized based on the
organization’s goals (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Waters et al.,
2003)

Provide technical training,
tutorials, and job aids, on
the different types of
accommodation tools the
university has to offer.
Technical support teams’ need
the ability to assist students
with disabilities effectively.
The learner will develop
mastery of skills, if the
skills are taught,
integration is practiced,
and there is an
understanding of when to
apply what was learned.
(McCrudden & Schraw,
2009).
Provide modeling, including
demonstration, practice via
case studies, and feedback
on how to operate,
technically troubleshoot
accommodation tools, and
utilize soft skills to assist
all students.

65
Declarative Knowledge Solutions- Resources for Technical Support Team Members
The findings showed that interviewees were better equipped to assist students with
disabilities if they had training on the tools provided by the university. To close the knowledge
gap, a recommendation was selected involving information processing theory. Mayer (2011)
posited that one can increase their memory capacity by integrating auditory and visual
information into their learning. The specific recommendation with this theory in mind is to
provide job aids referencing the different types of accommodation tools available to students. An
example of this job aid would be a knowledge base environment where the technical support
team member can look up information about a specific accommodation tool a student may be
struggling with at any given moment (Mayer, 2011).
Technical support teams play an important role for students who have accommodations
by understanding what learning tools are available (Galkin, 2016). By providing a job aid such as
a knowledge base, the support teams would have information references readily available. Based
on Schreuer and Sachs’s (2014) work, students who require accommodations have less support
when transitioning from high school to undergraduate campuses. Thus, a technical team with
efficient reference tools will ensure the support team member is knowledgeable and can provide
effective assistance to students.
Procedural Knowledge Solutions- Understanding Ways to Effectively Assist Students with
Disabilities Related to Technical Troubleshooting and Soft Skills
The findings in this study indicate a gap in the technical support team’s understanding of
how to operate and troubleshoot accommodation tools utilized by students with disabilities.
Additionally, it was found that the technical support team members employed soft skills to
navigate the conversation and address non-technical issues during their interaction with the

66
students (Lambert & Dryer, 2018). To close this procedural gap for both the technical
troubleshooting and soft skills, the recommendation provided stems from information processing
theory. According to Shraw and McCrudden (2006), if the component skills are acquired,
integration is practiced, and there is an understanding of when to apply what was learned, then
the learner will develop mastery of information. Therefore, the recommendation for technical
support teams is to provide them with training models.
Understanding Ways to Effectively Assist Students with Technical Troubleshooting.
The training will include a video tutorial and a case study, which reviews the process for initial
troubleshooting, how to understand the root cause of the issue and additionally, it will provide an
overview of most commonly used accommodation tools. The video tutorial would provide
majority of the training material (Van Der Meij & Van Der Meij, 2016) and the case study,
would allow the trainee to work through the troubleshooting process with an example. Training
and behavior modeling enhance learning and improve computer skills substantially (Aguinis &
Kraiger, 2009; Davis & Yi, 2004). The modeling provided will allow the technical support team
to understand how to effectively support students utilizing accommodation tools.
Understanding Ways to Effectively Assist Students with Soft Skills. The training for
soft skills will include a video tutorial and a case study, which reviews the process for
challenging conversations and instances where soft skills, such as empathy, would be utilized.
The videos will allow the technical support team members to see various examples of scenarios
where soft skills were successfully utilized to enhance their own skills.
Along with the training and behavior modeling, the support team provides feedback
surveys to students to capture ways in which the support service can improve moving forward.
Based on the research, it is expected that the support team will initially model case studies that

67
have been done to understand best practices of interacting with students with disabilities. Beyond
that, students will complete surveys after their interaction with the technical support team to
indicate how effective the support was overall.
Motivation Recommendations
The study examined two motivational influences: technical support team members’
ability to see the critical value of their role and their belief that they can support the students with
disabilities successfully. The interviews indicated that the participants had a high level of task
value and self-efficacy while supporting all students and there was no gap in this area of the
evaluation. However, to further support the technical support team members and reinforce their
skills, the recommendation is for the organization to provide formal soft skills training (Ehlinger
& Ropers, 2020). Having training specific to soft skills related to students with disabilities will
increase technical support team members confidence to appropriately address any auxiliary or
non-technical issues that may arise during their conversations with students with disabilities.
Table 8 provides the influence that should be reinforced with training to enhance the technical
support team members’ ability to successfully navigate and support students with disabilities
during times when they are facing technical issues.

68
Table 8
Summary of Motivation Influence and Recommendations
Motivational influence Principle and citation Context-specific recommendation
Self-efficacy: Technical
support team members
need to feel confident when
supporting students with
accommodation tools
within the online learning
environment.
Feedback and
modeling increase
self-efficacy.
(Pajares, 2006)

Feedback as well as
actual success on
challenging tasks
positively influences
people’s perceptions
of competence
(Borgogni et al.,
2011).
Provide models via video examples
and/or case studies within the
knowledge base to indicate what
mastery looks like to aid in
positive motivation.

Provide instructional support
(scaffolding) early on, build in
multiple
opportunities for practice and
gradually remove supports
(Pajares, 2006).

Reinforcing Technical Support Team Members’ Self-Efficacy When Supporting Students with
Disabilities
The study’s results revealed that the technical support team members have high levels of
self-efficacy in their ability to troubleshoot technical issues and provide non-technical assistance
to students who were exhibiting frustration or issues beyond their accommodation tools. It is a
suggestion to reinforce both the technical and the soft skills training to further the technical
support teams’ confidence in their ability to support students with accommodation tools within
the online learning environment. The theory utilized to establish a recommendation stems from
Pajares’ (2006) suggestion that feedback and modeling enhance self-efficacy. The implications
of the recommendation would be to allow the support team to believe in their ability to assist
students because of the models and training provided. The recommendation is to provide models
of what the support looks like when the technical support team is working with students. The
model and training would occur through case studies and recordings of previous interactions to
showcase the correct ways to support students.

69
Training in any environment is critical to employees understanding their role and
expectations for success (Carrier, 1971). According to EL Hajjar and Alkhanaizi (2018),
including activities for learners that require them to walk through the new idea or area of
understanding will allow them to become fluid in that subject matter more quickly than with
other means of training. Additionally, these researchers indicated that having an example,
whether a video or knowledge base article to work from, will also increase the learners’
motivation to be more effective when working with students who utilize accommodation tools.
The research reveals that the motivation for technical support teams improves when they have
feedback and confirmation that the work they are doing is effective (EL Hajjar and Alkhanaizi,
2018).
Organization-Related Recommendations
Table 9 represents the gaps that emerged from the interview responses around the
assumed organizational influences. One cultural setting and one cultural model describe how the
organization could incorporate training and regular meetings specific to troubleshooting
accommodation tools. An additional cultural setting indicates how providing relevant knowledge
resources related to the different types of accommodation tools available to students would be
beneficial to technical support team members. Implementing these suggestions could improve
the knowledge and accountability of the organization and the stakeholders.

70
Table 9
Summary of Organization Influence Gaps and Recommendations
Organization gap Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Cultural Setting Influence 1:

Organizations need to supply the
support teams with the
training to understand all
accommodation tools and any
changes or upgrades that
impact student participation.
Building the capacity
of an organization is
crucial in improving
the institution and its
accountability
system (Norton et al.,
2005).

Provide technical support teams
with an overview and resource
materials anytime upgrades or
new material is released on
accommodation tools. This
will be accomplished by
additional team meetings to
review and test the specific
tool and ensure the support
team is knowledgeable.
Cultural Model Influence 1:

Organizations need to prioritize
the needs of students with
disabilities in relation to their
accommodation tools.
Effective leaders know
how to create and
manage good
working
relationships with
stakeholders
(Denning, 2005;
Lewis, 2011).

Provide meetings where the
manager will have ongoing
communication with the
technical support team
members to ensure students
are being provided with
appropriate support.
Cultural Setting 2:

Organizations need to ensure
that accommodation tools are
adequately updated to support
students’ ability to
successfully participate in
online delivered education.
All staff need the
resources to do their
jobs, and resources
should be prioritized
based on the
organization’s goals
(Clark & Estes,
2008; Waters et al.,
2003)
Provide and maintain a resource
indicating the varying types of
accommodation tools and
include troubleshooting
resources within a knowledge
base for technical support
team members to utilize.

Developing a Process to Update Technical Support Team Members on New Technology
Related to Accommodation Tools
Approximately 80% of participants indicated that they require assistance and additional
support when learning new or updated information on the accommodation tools utilized by
students with disabilities. A recommendation centered around change theory will help close this
gap, as it is crucial for the organizations to build capacity and internal accountability (Norton et

71
al., 2005). Garvin and Edmondson (2008) indicated that to have or maintain a competitive
advantage, organizations’ and individuals’ rates of learning must be greater than the rate of
change. The solution recommended is for the organization to provide the technical support teams
with an overview and resource materials when they release upgrades or new material on
accommodation tools. The goal of increased learning with overviews and additional materials
will be accomplished by scheduling additional team meetings to review and test the tools to
ensure the support team is knowledgeable. For example, if a screen reader tool has a new
sequence for selecting and running text, the manager will schedule a meeting for the support
team to test the sequence, ask questions, and become familiar with the update.
Laird et al. (2003) completed a study uncovering ways to achieve progress in
performance, specifically regarding updates in procedures. The research revealed that initial
training and follow-up training is necessary for employees to be successful in the long term. For
the technical support teams, their ability to assist students who use accommodation tools will
increase because of the time dedicated to understanding the new information and updates to the
tools themselves. The technical support teams will have continued success if they are provided
with learning development throughout the changes.
Developing an Ongoing Meeting for Managers and Technical Support Team Members to
Enhance their Performance
Approximately 90% of the support team members indicated that they require effective
management to understand and increase their performance in assisting students with their
accommodation tools. A recommendation based on communication theory will bridge this
organizational gap. Specifically, Berger (2014) stated that supervision affects productivity. The
implication for the support team is that they will get additional support through meeting more

72
frequently with their supervisors. The recommended solution is that the manager or supervisor
conducts ongoing one-on-one meetings with their direct reports on a bi-weekly basis. Bi-weekly
meetings will ensure students are receiving effective support from technical support team
members. An example of this is that if there is a need to increase a specific metric, like employee
satisfaction ratings, the employee will receive coaching on improving this rating.
When a manager and employee meet about performance regularly, there are naturally
more opportunities for communication around policy and procedure adherence. Waters et al.
(2003) explains that when all staff and students have performance monitoring in place, it can
correlate to higher learning outcomes. Also, Clark and Estes (2008) indicated that organizational
performance increases when policies and procedures align and all stakeholders receive
communication about them. The recommendation is to provide bi-weekly meetings, feedback,
coaching, and overall alignment with the technical support team’s performance and how they
interact with students who use accommodation tools.
Developing a Resource Outlining the Various Accommodation Tools and Troubleshooting
Instruction to Effectively Assist Students with Disabilities
While all the participants indicated that they felt confident in their general level of ability
to troubleshoot common technical issues, six of the eight participants did not feel that they had
adequate information to effectively troubleshoot all the accommodation tools they might
encounter. Organizational research indicates that all staff should have the resources necessary to
carry out their job function provided by the organization itself (Clark & Estes, 2008; Waters et
al., 2003). Nawaz and Khan (2012) discuss that the number of tools being utilized across higher
education are increasing and it may depend on the skill level and knowledge of the technical
support teams to ensure students are successful. The recommendation is for the organization to

73
provide the technical support team members with a shared resource outlining a consistently
audited and updated list of accommodation tools that their students are using. Additionally,
within that list, include the ability to research and contribute to troubleshooting information or
contact information for the vendors from which students’ tools are sourced.
Technical support team members encounter issues daily and having information gathered
and consistently maintained as a reference point could decrease the time in which it takes issues
to be resolved. Zaied, et al (2012) indicate that there is a direct correlation between well
maintained knowledge resources and organizational performance. Having a resource such as this
paired with the other recommendations of regular meetings with the manager related to overall
performance and around accommodation tool updates could enhance the overall quality with
which the technical support team members assist students with disabilities utilizing
accommodation tools.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) developed a model for training plans that include
three phases: planning, execution, and demonstrating value. Each phase should include an
element of evaluation to highlight what the stakeholder knows at the beginning, the intention of
the plan, and outcomes evaluation. For this study, implementation and evaluation are all part of
one plan outlined in the upcoming sections.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) developed an implementation and evaluation plan that
allows the researcher to analyze the data and systematically implement the changes they feel
would most benefit the stakeholders. The four levels to consider when utilizing this plan are
outlined in the reverse order from the previous model Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick created. The

74
reverse order requires that evaluation plans lead with the organization's goals and work backward
to find leading indicators that better align with the organizational goals. Initially, Level 4 centers
around results, and it is where the outcomes occur and are highlighted. Level 3 is about how
behaviors learned from training and recommendations are applied to the job at hand. Level 2 is
where the learning takes place to create a new behavior among learners. Finally, Level 1 is about
the participants’ reaction to the training or recommendations to create new behavior. By starting
with Level 4, there is a stronger connection between the larger goals and the new behavior taught
to learners (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The main reason technical support teams are included as a resource for students is to
troubleshoot any technical issues that may arise. It is critical for students who utilize
accommodations to have support available to ensure they can participate at the same level of
education as students without accommodation needs. The organizational mission is to ensure all
technical support team members can provide students who require accommodation tools within
their online learning environment a high-quality experience aiding in their academic success.
The following proposed solution includes periodic training whenever tool enhancements are
developed and implementing frequent meetings between the support team members and their
respective. The desired outcome is for all technical support team members to provide a quality
support experience for students with disabilities to participate in their online learning platforms
successfully.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 10 shows the proposed Level 4 results and leading indicators, with three columns
highlighting the outcomes, metrics, and methods for technical support team members. If the

75
organization provides the recommendations to the technical support team members, then students
should all be provided with adequate support from the technical support team.
Table 10
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Methods
External outcomes
Increased satisfaction
ratings on
troubleshooting
assistance.
Customer satisfaction (CSAT)
rating must be consistently at
or about 95% satisfied.
Send a short survey to students
and/or follow-up call to
students who utilized the
technical support team for
assistance.
Decreased time required
to resolve issues
involving
accommodation tools.
Number of minutes in overall
call or chat time
The phone and chat tools have
reporting features to indicate
the time spent on calls or
chats.
Internal outcomes
Increased accuracy and
knowledge of
accommodation tools.
Scoring of support teams live
work.
Supervisors will review
technical support team
member calls and cases with a
scoring rubric.
Increase employee
confidence/satisfaction
Positive/Negative Feedback
from managers satisfying all
metrics indicated for the
technical support team agents,
including CSAT scores and
length of call.
Regular 1:1 meetings to review
all aspects of their work.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
There are three critical behaviors identified that the stakeholder group, which is the
technical support team members, must focus on to meet the expected outcomes. The three critical
behaviors are to (a) correctly identify and resolve students’ issues, (b) hold meetings each time
enhancements or changes are made to accommodation tools, and (c) hold 1:1 meetings for the
manager and support team member to discuss feedback on overall productivity (Table 11).

76
Table 11
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metrics
Methods
Timing
Correctly identify
and resolve the
students’ issues.
Quality review scores Randomly select cases to
review with a set rubric
created by managers and
sr. leadership team
members.
Bi-weekly
Understand new
enhancements or
changes are
made to
accommodation
tools.
Having a 1:1 ratio
between an update
release and a
meeting
opportunity.
Create a meeting time for all
team members to learn
and work with the new
change.
Ongoing/ as
often as
required
Maintain metrics
that result in
positive student
outcomes.
Quality review scores
all above 90%,
Time/Chat length
that is aligned with
the average of the
team, soft skills and
communication
with students,
CSAT scores
remaining at or
above 95%
satisfied.
Create a standing 1:1
meeting for managers and
their team members to
attend on a regular basis
and to review scores.
Bi-weekly

Required Drivers
Technical support team members require the support of their colleagues and their
managers to successfully implement the topics discussed and learned in training sessions. The
organization should encourage the team members with knowledge base resources and
acknowledge their successful behaviors periodically to ensure a long-term increase in
productivity (Table 12).

77
Table 12
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Methods Timing
Critical behaviors supported
1, 2, 3, etc.
Reinforcing
Knowledge base resource
provided by organization as
well as repository for
technical support team
members to contribute
knowledge to as they
discovered helpful
information
Ongoing 1, 2
Team meetings centered
around
enhancements/changes
As needed 1, 2
Encouraging
Peer meetings to review
issues with understanding
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Posting accomplishments on a
team intranet
Monthly updates 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Establish incentive for most
improved metrics.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Manager discusses progress
and feedback with technical
support team member.
Bi-weekly 1, 2, 3
Metrics are reviewed for
quality and accuracy.
Bi-weekly 1, 2, 3

Organizational Support
The main resources that will be required from the organization to support these changes
are time, software to establish a knowledge base, and a case management tool if there is not
already one present. Devoting additional time to ensuring team members can digest new
information from tool updates and providing additional time to meet with their managers is
critical for team members’ progress. Depending on the organization's structure, additional team

78
members might need to be hired if the student base is expected to grow. The organization should
support the technical teams in these ways to ensure that students utilizing accommodation tools
can effectively and consistently participate in the online learning platforms.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
Following completion of the recommended solutions, the stakeholders will be able to
• Understand and articulate the different accommodations and tools available to
students. (D-C)
• Apply understanding of how to assist students with varying disabilities in using their
accommodation tools. (D-P)
• Attribute a success or failure to interactions with students who utilize accommodation
tools. (Attribution)
• Understand the training provided to support students with accommodation tools
within the online learning environment. (Confidence)
• Demonstrate confidence in understanding technical changes or upgrades that impact
accommodations tools utilized by students. (Confidence)
• Provide efficient performance from frequent feedback meetings with their supervisor.
(Skills)
Program
The recommended program will be a training program with different parts focusing on
the students who require accommodation tools. The initial training will involve an overview of
the tools students currently use, including a knowledge base as a resource. Additionally, it will
include a reference guide to administrative groups the students may work with closely in case

79
they require non-technical assistance. Beyond the initial training, there will be periodic training
sessions that focus on updates and new tool implementations. There will be an overview of the
new update or tool with time for the technical support team to learn and understand the steps to
feel confident in troubleshooting those tools. The following sections outline how the components
of learning will be evaluated, as summarized in Table 13.
Table 13
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Methods or activities Timing
Declarative knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge tests using pop quiz, multiple choice
format
In initial training
Walk through how to find information with
knowledge base and other resources.
In initial training
Procedural skills “I can do it right now.”
Demonstration in the group follow-up/periodic
trainings using case scenarios.
After the main review of the upgrade or
new tool
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
After the trainings (initial and periodic) survey
items to understand if they found it helpful.
Directly after the training
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Open discussion toward the end of the case
scenarios.
Toward the end of the case scenarios
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Hold 1:1 sessions to understand each tech
support team members’ confidence level
Within the same week of the training.

80
Level 1: Reaction
Participants’ reactions to the learning will be evaluated as presented in Table 14 and
discussed in the following sections.
Table 14
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Methods or tools Timing
Engagement
Observation by supervisor/trainer During the case scenario phase of the training
Relevance
Post-training check-in with open discussion During 1:1 within the same week as the
training.
Post-training check-in via survey Directly after training is complete
Customer Satisfaction
Review CSAT and case quality scores Reviewed in 1:1 meetings

Evaluation Tools

Immediately Following the Program Implementation
Once the program has been implemented, there will be a combination of surveys, pulse
meetings, and one-on-one meetings with the director supervisors to indicate the progress of the
technical support team members. For Level 1, there will be pulse meetings during the training to
indicate engagement and practical application of the information provided. For instance, the
stakeholders will provide verbal feedback on how they might use the information on their job.
Additionally, they might be asked to indicate how they feel about the delivery of the material and
have other options for consuming the same information. For level 2, there will be a survey at the
end of the training to indicate how the stakeholders felt about it overall. It will indicate how the
change in instruction, if there was any, aided in their training and understanding of the
information. It will also indicate how the support team members felt engaged and supported.

81
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation
After the initial training has been completed and work aids administered, there will be
periodic one-on-one meetings with the supervisors around the stakeholders’ metrics and CSAT
levels. These meetings will be held at least every two weeks. This will allow for more direct
feedback to the stakeholders and additional direction as required to ensure a positive outcome.
Additionally, after any new update or change to the accommodation tools, the team will review
the change and allow for time to test the tool with case studies as necessary.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The technical support team members’ Level 4 goal is measured by how satisfied the
students are with the assistance they receive. Specifically, satisfaction is rated in surveys
provided to the students after each interaction with the team. The overarching goal is to see
increased CSAT scores from those surveys over time. These findings are included in the one-on-
one conversations supervisors have with the technical support team members every two weeks. If
the CSAT score is below a 95% or if there is a specific survey that was rated poorly, the
supervisor will investigate and coach the member appropriately to increase their performance
and scores.
Summary
The four levels described in the new world Kirkpatrick model (2016) were instrumental
in planning, implementing, and evaluating the recommendations provided for the stakeholders to
reach their goals. Understanding what the results should look like initially allowed for better
alignment of what behaviors and learning should be, and as a result, the reaction or engagement
from the support team members will also be defined appropriately. The expectations for the
program are to understand the level of engagement early in the training process and adjust

82
information delivery to gain the most value from the training and from the technical support
team members’ overall productivity.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are aspects of the study that cannot be controlled in the data collection phase.
Delimitations are the choices the researcher makes and how these affect the data. For example, if
the interview questions are asked in a fluid format with one subject smoothly transitioning into
another, the participant is less likely to be confused or have difficulties understanding what is
asked. The limitations for the interview include the tone or reactions of the interviewer and the
credibility of the responses.
The delimitation for interviews was that there was only one type of organization and one
type of stakeholder studied. This is a boundary of the study because there is only one type of
organization that includes technical support teams assisting students with disabilities. It is a
specific support team that can assist students with accommodation tools. Another factor to
consider for delimitations is the methodology used. The study is bound by the interview
responses received from the participants.
Conclusion
The purpose of this project was to explore how technical support team members support
students with disabilities who utilize accommodation tools to meet the goal of successful
participation in online learning environments for all students. The qualitative study used Clark
and Estes’s (2008) framework to explore technical support team members’ knowledge and
motivation as well as how the organizations supported the technical support team members
ability to serve the student with disabilities who have technical issues with their accommodation
tools. The findings indicated that technical support team members had high levels of basic

83
technical knowledge to support students. However, they also reported mixed levels of knowledge
related to accommodation tools student with disabilities utilize overall. Additionally, the
participants indicated a high level of self-efficacy and value. The participants displayed
confidence in their ability to work with and assist student with disabilities regardless of having
the exact information they need readily available.
The participants indicated a lack of organizational support and resources. Specifically,
there were little to no expectations around performance when assisting students, and there were
no regular meetings with leadership for feedback. Additionally, there was no evidence from the
responses that regular training was in place for technical updates on accommodation tools
students with disabilities utilize in online learning environments. Therefore, the final chapter
provided recommendations for the organization to establish expectations for the technical
support team members along with additional bi-weekly meetings and regular training
opportunities related to accommodation tools. The technical support team members have a
critical role in supporting students with disabilities and their knowledge and motivation are
assets to the schools and students if the technical support teams have the information and
feedback necessary to support their work. The universities can have a positive impact by
implementing these recommendations. Since the pandemic started, there has been a shift for
many higher education programs to be delivered in an online platform. As the online learning
population grows, it is valuable to understand how students with disabilities experience and
navigate their online materials so the technical support teams can ensure they are supporting
them effectively. As long as the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences are
monitored and adjusted appropriately, there could be an increase in student satisfaction ratings,

84
retention rates, and overall participation rates to bridge the gap for all students with disabilities in
online learning environments.

85
REFERENCES
Anctil, T. M., Ishikawa, M. E., & Tao Scott, A. (2008). Academic identity development through
self-determination: Successful college students with learning disabilities. Career
Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31(3), 164–174.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728808315331

Bagga, T., & Khanna, G. (2014). Dell’s technical-support staff have the power to do more:
Recruitment and training ensure quality customer service. Human Resource Management
International Digest.

Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford University.

Barbour, M. K. (2013). The landscape of K–12 online learning: Examining what is known. In M.
G. Moore (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.; pp. 574–593). Routledge

Barnard-Brak, L., & Sulak, T. (2010). Online versus face-to-face accommodations among
college students with disabilities. American Journal of Distance Education, 24, 81–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08923641003604251

Berger, B. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1).

Betts, K., Welsh, B., Hermann, K., Pruitt, C., Dietrich, G., Trevino, J., Watson, T., Brooks, M.,
Cohen, A., & Coombs, N. (2013). Understanding disabilities & online student success.
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v17i3.388

Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810379799

Bowman, T., Wiener, D., Reavis, T., & Griswold, D. (2014). PARCC accessibility features and
accommodations manual: Guidance for districts and decision-making teams to ensure
that PARCC mid-year, performance-based, and end-of-year assessments produce valid
results for all students (3rd ed.). Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and
Careers.

Boyko, L. (2019). Disability in higher education: A social justice approach. Canadian Journal of
Higher Education, 49(1), 176–178. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v49i1.188583

Buchholz, M., Ferm, U., & Holmgren, K. (2020). Support persons’ views on remote
communication and social media for people with communicative and cognitive

86
disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 42(10), 1439–1447.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1529827

Carter, L., & Graham, R. D. (2012). The evolution of online education at a small northern
Ontario university: Theory and practice. Journal of Distance Education, 26(2).
http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/799/1433

Cawthon, S. W., & Cole, E. V. (2010). Postsecondary students who have a learning disability:
Student perspectives on accommodations access and obstacles. Journal of Postsecondary
Education and Disability, 23(2), 112–128.

Cifuentes, L., Janney, A., Guerra, L., & Weir, J. (2016). A working model for complying with
accessibility guidelines for online learning. TechTrends, 60(6), 557–564.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0086-8

Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.

Coleman, C. L. (2018). Perceptions of accommodation enhancements on student academic
achievement in higher education (Publication No. 13427044) [Doctoral dissertation].
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Cook, C. W., & Sonnenberg, C. (2014). Technology and online education: Models for change.
Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 7(3), 171–188.
https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v7i3.8638.

Coomey, M., & Stephenson, J. (2018). Online learning: It is all about dialogue, involvement,
support and control—according to the research. In J. Stephenson (Ed.), Teaching &
learning online (1st. ed, pp. 37–52). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315042527-
6

Correa-Torres, S. M., Conroy, P., Rundle-Kahn, A., & Brown-Ogilvie, T. (2018). Experiences of
students who are visually impaired receiving services by disabilities support services
(DSS) offices in higher education institutions. Journal of Blindness Innovation and
Research, 8(2). https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/jbir/jbir18/jbir080205.html

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.

Dallas, B. K., Ramisch, J. L., & McGowan, B. (2015). Students with autism spectrum disorder
and the role of family in postsecondary settings: A systematic review of the
literature. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28(2), 135–147.

Dennett, S. K., & Vásquez-Colina, M. D. (2012). Teaching with technology: Reaching out in the
digital age. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 3(2),
47–53. https://doi.org/10.4018/javet.2012040105

87
Denning, S. (2005). Transformational innovation: A journey by narrative. Strategy &
Leadership, 33(3), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570510700119

Douce, C. (2015). E-learning and disability in higher education. Open Learning, 30(1), 89–92.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2015.1013529

Downing, J. E., & MacFarland, S. (2010). Education and individuals with severe disabilities:
Promising practices. In J. H. Stone & M. Blouin (Eds.), International encyclopedia of
rehabilitation.

Duffy, J. T. (1999). Accommodations in higher education under the Americans with disabilities
act (ADA): A no-nonsense guide for clinicians, educators, administrators and lawyers.
College and University, 74(3), 51.

Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/

Ehlinger, E., & Ropers, R. (2020). "It's all about learning as a community": Facilitating the
learning of students with disabilities in higher education classrooms. Journal of College
Student Development, 61(3), 333–349. http://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2020.0031

EL Hajjar, S. T., & Alkhanaizi, M. S. (2018). Exploring the factors that affect employee training
effectiveness: A case study in Bahrain. Sage Open, 8(2), 2158244018783033.

Erez, M., & Gati, E. (2004). A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of
the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 583–598.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00190.x

Gabel, S. L., & Miskovic, M. (2009). Discourse and the containment of disability in higher
education: An institutional analysis. Disability & Society, 29(7), 1145–1158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2014.910109

Galkin, D. L. (2016). Beyond accommodations: Disability service professionals in higher
education as campus change agents (Publication No. A3701048) [Doctoral dissertation,
Manhattanville College]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5

Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization? Harvard
business Review, 86(3), 109.

Genc, H., & Kocdar, S. (2020). Supporting learners with special needs in open and distance
learning. In G. Durak & S. Cankaya (Eds.), Managing and designing online courses in

88
ubiquitous learning environments (pp. 128–151). IGI Global.
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9779-7.ch007

Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers. Pearson Education.

Gomez, E., Wu, D., & Passerini, K. (2010). Computer-supported team-based learning: The
impact of motivation, enjoyment and team contributions on learning outcomes.
Computers & Education, 55(1), 378–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.003

Goradia, T. (2019). Next generation, higher education: Online and blended learning. The
Educational Review, 2(7), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2019.07.003

Grimes, S., Scevak, J., Southgate, E., & Buchanan, R. (2017). Non-disclosing students with
disabilities or learning challenges: Characteristics and size of a hidden population.
Australian Educational Researcher, 44(4-5), 425–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-
017-0242-y

Grossman, R., & Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: What really matters. International
Journal of Training and Development, 15(2), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2419.2011.00373.x

Hadley, W. M., & Satterfield, J. W. (2013). Are university students with learning disabilities
getting the help they need? Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students in
Transition, 25(1), 113–123.

Heiman, T., & Precel, K. (2003). Students with learning disabilities in higher education:
Academic strategies profile. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(3), 248–258.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940303600304

Hong, B. S. (2015). Qualitative analysis of the barriers college students with disabilities
experience in higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 56(3), 209–226.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0032

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches. Sage.

Kilburn, A., Kilburn, B., & Cates, T. (2014). Drivers of student retention: System availability,
privacy, value and loyalty in online higher education. Academy of Educational
Leadership Journal, 18(4), 1–14.

King, D. L. (2018). Why stay on top of technology trends? Library Technology Reports, 54(2), 6.

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.

89
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/

Klein, S. M., Kraut, A. I., & Wolfson, A. (1971). Employee reactions to attitude survey
feedback: A study of the impact of structure and process. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 497–514.

Konur, O. (2006). Teaching disabled students in higher education. Teaching in higher
education, 11(3), 351-363.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

Kurth, N., & Mellard, D. (2006). Student perceptions of the accommodation process in
postsecondary education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 19(1), 71–
84.

Laird, D., Holton, E. F., & Naquin, S. S. (2003). Approaches to training and development:
revised and updated. Basic Books.

Lambert, D. C., & Dryer, R. (2018). Quality of life of higher education students with learning
disability studying online. International Journal of Disability Development and
Education, 65(4), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2017.1410876

Lechtenberger, D., Barnard-Brak, L., Sokolosky, S., & McCrary, D. (2012). Using wraparound
to support students with developmental disabilities in higher education. College Student
Journal, 46(4), 856–866.

Lewis, S. (2011). Positive psychology at work: How positive leadership and appreciative inquiry
create inspiring organizations. John Wiley & Sons.

Lightner, K. L., Kipps-Vaughan, D., Schulte, T., & Trice, A. D. (2012). Reasons university
students with a learning disability wait to seek disability services. Journal of
Postsecondary Education and Disability, 25(2), 145–159.

Lorenzo, G. (2012). A research review about online learning: Are students satisfied? Why some
succeed and others fail? What contributes to higher retention rates and positive learning
outcomes? Journal of Online Learning Research and Practice, 1(1), Article 26869.

Luft, P. (2014). A national survey of transition services for deaf and hard of hearing students.
Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37(3), 177–192.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143412469400

Madriaga, M., Hanson, K., Heaton, C., Kay, H., Newitt, S., & Walker, A. (2010). Confronting
similar challenges? Disabled and non‐disabled students’ learning and assessment

90
experiences. Studies in Higher Education, 35(6), 647–658.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903222633

Madriaga, M., Hanson, K., Kay, H., & Walker, A. (2011). Marking-out normalcy and disability
In higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 32(6), 901–920.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2011.596380

Mamiseishvili, K., & Koch, L. C. (2012). Students with disabilities at 2-year institutions in the
United States: Factors related to success. Community College Review, 40(4), 320–339.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552112456281

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Mayer, R.E. (2011). The mighty Ms: Motivation and metacognition. In Applying the science of
learning (pp. 38-41). Pearson Education.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed). John Wiley & Sons.

Miskovic, M., & Gabel, S. L. (2012). When numbers don’t add up and words can’t explain:
Challenges in defining disability in higher education. International Journal of Multiple
Research Approaches, 6(3), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.2012.6.3.233

Much, M. E. (2018). A day in the life: A study of the lived experiences of community college
students with physical disabilities (Publication No. 10815073) [Doctoral dissertation].
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Muñoz Cristóbal, J. A., Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Gallego-Lema, V., Arribas-Cubero, H. F.,
Asensio-Pérez, J. I., & Martínez-Monés, A. (2018). Monitoring for awareness and
reflection in ubiquitous learning environments. International Journal of Human-
Computer Interaction, 34(2), 146–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1331536

Nadler, D. A. (1976). The use of feedback for organizational change: Promises and pitfalls.
Group & Organization Studies, 1(2), 177–186.

Nawaz, A., & Khan, M. Z. (2012). Issues of technical support for e-learning systems in higher
education institutions. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer
Science, 4(2), 38.

Nasir, M. N. A., & Efendi, A. N. A. E. (2019). “I tell them, I tell them not”: Disclosing one’s
impairment in higher education. E-bangi, 16(8), 1–11.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). 2003-04 and 2007-08 National Postsecondary
Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04 and NPSAS:08). U.S. Department of Education,
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_240.asp

91
National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). 2015–16 National Postsecondary Student Aid
Study (NPSAS:16). U.S. Department of Education.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_311.10.asp

Nawaz, A., & Siddique, M. (2012). Continuous technical support for the effective working of e-
learning in higher education. International Journal of Current Research and Review,
4(23), 42–52.

Norton, L., Richardson, T.E., & Hartley, J. (2005). Teachers’ beliefs and intentions concerning
teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50(4), 537–571.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6363-z

Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-
theory/

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. SAGE Publications.

Peña, E. V. (2014). Marginalization of published scholarship on students with disabilities in
higher education journals. Journal of College Student Development, 55(1), 30–40.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0006

Picciano, A. G., Seaman, J., Shea, P., Swan, K., & the Sloan Foundation. (2012). Examining the
extent and nature of online learning in American K-12 education: The research initiatives
of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 127–135.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.07.004

Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667

Pudaruth, S., Gunputh, R. P., & Singh, U. G. (2017). Forgotten, excluded or included? Students
with disabilities: A case study at the University of Mauritius. African Journal of
Disability, 6, 359. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v6i0.359

Ressa, T. W. (2016). The path to college: Transition experiences of students with disabilities
(Publication No. 10305660 ) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses
Global.

Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. SAGE.

Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.

Schein, E. H. (2004). The concept of organizational culture: Why bother? In E. H. Schein, (Ed.),
Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.; pp. 3–24). Jossey Bass.

92
Schreuer, N., & Sachs, D. (2014). Efficacy of accommodations for students with disabilities in
higher education. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 40(1), 27–40.

Schwartz, A. (2016). Defining reasonable accommodations in higher education for adult
students with disabilities (Publication No. 10239857) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses Global.

Scoppio, G., & Covell, L. (2016). Mapping trends in pedagogical approaches and learning
technologies: Perspectives from the Canadian, international, and military education
contexts. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 46(2), 127–147.
https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v46i2.186043

Seale, J., Georgeson, J., Mamas, C., & Swain, J. (2015). Not the right kind of ‘digital capital’?
An examination of the complex relationship between disabled students, their technologies
and higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 82, 118–128.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.007

Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for
people of all ages and abilities. http://design.ncsu.edu/cud/pubs_p/pudfiletoc.htm

Taylor, M. A. (2016). Improving accessibility for students with visual disabilities in the
technology-rich classroom. PS, Political Science & Politics, 49(1), 122–127.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096515001134

Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, 29 USC 2201

Terras, K., Anderson, S., & Grave, S. (2020). Comparing disability accommodations in online
courses: A cross-classification. Journal of Educators Online, 17(2), n2.

Terras, K., Leggio, J., & Phillips, A. (2015). Disability accommodations in online courses: The
graduate student experience. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28(3),
329–340.

Timmerman, L. C., & Mulvihill, T. M. (2015). Accommodations in the college setting: The
perspectives of students living with disabilities. Qualitative Report, 20(10), 1609–1625.
https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2334

van der Meij, H., & van der Meij, J. (2016). Demonstration-based training (DBT) in the design
of a video tutorial for software training. Instructional science, 44(6), 527–542.

Vaughan, E., & Woodruffe-Burton, H. (2011). The disabled student experience: Does the
SERVQUAL scale measure up? Quality Assurance in Education, 19(1), 28–49.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881111107744

93
Wang, A. (2009). Enhancing the schooling level of the special higher education and perfecting
the disabled people higher education system. International Education Studies, 2(2), 165–
169. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v2n2p165

Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Mid-continent
Research for Education and Learning.

Wong, J., Baars, M., Davis, D., Van Der Zee, T., Houben, G. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Supporting
self-regulated learning in online learning environments and MOOCs: A systematic
review. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(4–5), 356–373.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1543084

Zaied, A. N. H., Hussein, G. S., & Hassan, M. M. (2012). The role of knowledge management in
enhancing organizational performance. International Journal of Information Engineering
and Electronic Business, 4(5), 27.

94
APPENDIX: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
I want to thank you for taking time out of your schedule to meet with me and agreeing to
participate in my study by answering some questions. This interview will take about 60
minutes.
I am currently enrolled in a doctoral program at USC and am conducting a study on the
capacity of technical support team members when assisting students with disabilities in online
learning environments. I am not here as an employee of this organization or to make a
professional assessment or judgment of your performance as a support team member. I would
like to emphasize that today I am only here as a researcher collecting data for my study. The
information you share with me will be placed into my study as part of the data collection. Your
name will not be disclosed to anyone or anywhere outside the scope of this study and will be
known only to me specifically for this data collection. While I may use a direct quote from you
in my study, I will not provide your name specifically and will remove any potentially
identifying information. I will gladly provide you with a copy of my final product upon request.
Your participation is entirely voluntary. You may skip any questions you don’t want to
answer and you may stop this interview at any time. I will record the interview to help me
capture all of your responses accurately and completely. This recording will not be shared with
anyone outside the scope of this project. If you would like me to stop recording at any point, I
will do so. The recording will be transferred to my password-protected files on a cloud storage
account and will be deleted from the recording device immediately upon transfer. I will be using
a third party such as rev.com to transcribe the recording and all files will be returned to me upon
finalization of the transcription. The recording and all other data will then be destroyed after
three years from the date my dissertation defense is approved.

95
With that, do you have any questions about the study before we get started? If not, please
review and keep the information sheet.
I would like your permission to begin the interview. May I also have your
permission to record this conversation? Thank you.

To start, I’d like to explore your role and some basic information around how you
work with students with disabilities.
1) Describe your career background and specifically how much experience you have
had with students who utilize accommodation tools.
2) What skills and/or knowledge were required for you to perform this role?
3) Combining your previous skills and the training you received for this particular
role when assisting student with disabilities, how assured are you that you are able to
resolve the technical issues they may face?
a. What additional training or information would increase your level of
confidence?
4) Take me through a common issue that you may assist with students who use
accommodations tools. What does that conversation sound like?
a. In those conversations, explain an instance where you didn’t have the answer
right away, what did you do or how did you go about helping the student with
what they needed?

96
Transition: Great. Thank you for those details. Let’s move into some questions around
your role and the student experience overall.
5) How important do you feel your role is as a support team member in relation to
these students’ successful participation in their program? Why?
6) In what ways, if any, do you feel you play a larger role in these students’ learning,
outside of helping them with their accommodation tools?
7) How do you navigate a conversation if a student gets emotional or upset?
a. What soft skills do you find yourself utilizing most during your conversations
in order for it to be most productive?
b. When you have a strong understanding of how the tools’ functions, how does
that impact your conversation?
8) Describe the way you believe different academic tools can affect students with
disabilities in their ability to participate in their online education environment.
9) To what extent do you feel like the current tools being utilized allow students to
successfully participate in their program?
Transition: Now that we have a better sense of you and your role, let's shift gears to the
organization.
10) When you think of the organization’s decisions when creating online
environments, what do you believe is the most important factor the organization should
consider?
11) Tell me about the feedback you receive from supervisors when it comes to
assisting students with disabilities?

97
a. When discussing your productivity, do you believe you have the coaching
necessary to provide effective support to students?
12) With regard to your training and day-to-day process documents, do you believe you
have adequate information to help you troubleshoot all the issues you might encounter?
a. If not, what do you think would be helpful to better assist you troubleshoot
issues with students with disabilities?
I appreciate your thoughtful responses and thank you for taking time out of your day to complete
the interview.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Disability, race, and educational attainment - (re)leveling the playing field through best disability counseling practices in higher education: an executive dissertation

PDF

A methodology for transforming the student experience in higher education: a promising practice study

PDF

Going through it all: an evaluation of medical leave policy impact on persistence rates for students with disabilities

PDF

Practices for assigning academic accommodations for students with specific learning disabilities

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Improving instructor skills (IIS): a Needs analysis

PDF

The importance of rigor and engagement on student achievement and mastery: an evaluation study

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

Effective practices for managing staff performance in higher education: an exploratory study

PDF

The impact of faculty interactions on online student sense of belonging: an evaluation study

PDF

Creating effective online educational content: an evaluation study of the influences affecting course developers’ abilities to create online content with engaging learning strategies

PDF

Completion in online learning: graduate students' perspectives

PDF

Army field-grade officer decisive action (DA) skill development: an evaluation study

PDF

Graduation rates in college of students with disabilities: an innovation study

PDF

Online graduate-level student learning and engagement: developing critical competencies for future leadership roles: an evaluation study

PDF

Managers’ roles in supporting employee engagement in Jewish nonprofit organizations

PDF

An evaluation of general education faculty practices to support student decision-making at one community college

PDF

Creating a safety culture to decrease vehicle accidents with Sales Service Representatives

PDF

Learners’ perceptions of the microlearning format for the delivery of technical training: an evaluation study

PDF

Instructional differentiation and accommodations to support student achievement in SLD and ADHD secondary school populations: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Mulkey, Bonnie Bowling (author)

Core Title Evaluating technical support provided in online education for students with disabilities

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 01/26/2023

Defense Date 01/17/2023

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,online education,students accommodations,Technology

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Seli, Helena (committee chair), Hirabayashi, Kim (committee member), Phillips, Jennifer (committee member)

Creator Email bbowling@usc.edu,bbowls87@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112718946

Unique identifier UC112718946

Identifier etd-MulkeyBonn-11437.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MulkeyBonn-11437

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Mulkey, Bonnie Bowling

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230126-usctheses-batch-1003 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu