The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 46, No. 1 - 52

Autumn K. Wilke, Nancy J. Evans, Charlie E. Varland, Kirsten R. Brown, Ellen M. Broido

As a case study approach does not have a
defined data analysis strategy, we followed the
procedures of generalized inductive methodology (Liu, 2016; Maxwell, 2005). In the first
review, each author was randomly assigned
six to eight transcripts to code. We identified
meaningful statements in each transcript and
applied descriptive codes, concurrently building a coding system. Following our theoretical framework of social justice, we coded for
instances of ableism at the individual, institutional, systemic, and social-cultural levels
(Hardiman, Jackson, & Griffin, 2007). Then
we clarified definitions, combined and reworded codes to eliminate redundancy, and began
to create categories from codes. We employed
a second review of each transcript's coding,
reading different transcripts than we had initially, to verify the prior coder's decisions. Then
we met to identify themes that addressed each
research question.
This study had several delimitations. The
four institutions were highly selective; as a
result, the backgrounds, goals, and experiences
of our participants may be different than those
of students at less competitive colleges. Additionally, data represent participants' views at one
point in time. Data in this study were limited
in important ways. Only one first-generation
student participated in this study, and our findings might differ if students from a wider range
of educational and socioeconomic backgrounds
were included. Nineteen of the 24 participants
were White; disabled students of color are likely
to experience racial prejudice not felt by White
students (Abes & Wallace, 2018). All students in
the study reported having non-apparent disabilities. Factors affecting students with non-apparent disabilities differ meaningfully from factors

One student . . . indicated that he
was unaware of the process for
asking for housing accommodations,
highlighting a notable gap in
institutional communication as all
students in this study were recruited
through the Disability Resources
Office.

influencing those with mobility impairments
(Evans et al., 2017).

PARTICIPANTS' PERSPECTIVES
ABOUT LIVING ON CAMPUS
Our analysis of the interview data indicated
that the degree of accessibility, flexibility, use
of accommodations, and staff awareness of
disability and their responsiveness influenced
the students' social integration and residential experience. Students appreciated efforts
that were made on their behalf and articulated
areas where institutions could improve.

Accessibility
Students perceived accessibility as a broad,
overarching concept that included access to
aspects of campus life as well as physical facilities. Several students with learning disabilities
indicated that living on a small campus supported their academic success. Lloria elaborated that it was easy to arrange meetings with
her professors, and she did not have to cook,
shop, or clean-activities that would take time
away from her studies. The physical facilities

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 46, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 46, No. 1