Identifying Key Concepts in Ambassador Interventions for Students with Disabilities in Higher Education: A Scoping Review

Figures & data

Table 1. Search concepts and terms. example search string from ERIC database.

Search concepts	Terms
Students with disabilities	((DE Students with disabilities OR DE Disabilities OR TI Disabled OR KW Disabled OR AB Disabled OR TI Disabilities OR KW Disabilities OR AB Disabilities TI Disability OR KW Disability OR AB Disability)
	AND
Higher education	(DE Higher Education OR DE College Students OR DE Postsecondary Education OR DE Universities OR DE Colleges OR TI Student* OR AB Student* OR TI College* OR AB College* OR TI Universit* OR AB Universit*)
	AND
Ambassador	(DE Peer Counseling OR DE Peer Relationship OR DE Mentors OR DE Student Empowerment OR DE Inclusion OR TI Inclusive OR TI ‘Peer assist*’ OR AB ‘Peer assist*’ OR TI ‘Peer volunteer*’ OR AB ‘Peer volunteer*’ OR TI ‘Peer-to-peer’ OR AB ‘Peer-to-peer’ OR TI ‘Peer facilitat*’ OR AB ‘Peer facilitat*’ OR TI ‘Peer counseling’ OR AB ‘Peer counseling’ OR TI ‘Peer counselling’ OR AB ‘Peer counselling’ OR TI ‘Peer companion*’ OR AB ‘Peer companion*’ OR TI Mentor* OR AB Mentor* OR TI Ambassador* OR AB Ambassador* OR TI ‘Role model*’ OR AB ‘Role model*’ OR TI Pathway* OR TI Emancipati* OR TI Empower* OR TI Including OR TI Inclusion OR TI Transition* OR TI Support* OR AB Support*)
	AND
Intervention	(DE Programs OR DE Transitional Programs OR DE Special Programs OR DE Academic Support Services OR DE Pilot Projects OR DE Program Effectiveness OR DE Program Validation OR DE Program Evaluation OR DE Program Implementation OR DE Program Descriptions OR DE Program Development OR TI Program* OR AB Program* OR TI Designing OR TI Evaluat* OR TI Implement* OR TI Development* OR TI Developing OR TI Creating OR TI Creation OR TI Intervention* OR TI Initiative*))

Figure 1. The process of study selection is illustrated in a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, & Altman, 2010).

Table 2. Study characteristics of included studies.

	Author and year published	Country	Study aims	Study design	Intervention	Participants	Outcome
1	Boney et al. (2019)	USA	Evaluate the participants impressions with the program and assess the degree participants met their goals	Mixed methods: Quantitative Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS); Qualitative semi-structured interviews	Greater Opportunity for Learning and Living Success (GOALS^2)	SwDs n = 10 (f = 6, m = 4)	>80% of SwDs reached self-identified goals. Participants experienced academic success, emotional support, progress towards goal attainment, personal health and wellness, decreased stress and anxiety, time management and organisation skills
2	Hillier et al. (2018)	USA	Examine mentors’ experiences of mentoring SwDs	Mixed methods: Expected Costs and Benefits to Being a Mentor instrument; Mentor Experiences Questionnaire; Focus groups (n = 5)	Student to Student Mentoring Program (SSMP)	Mentors (students): n = 35 (m = 3, f = 32)	Positive experiences of being mentors and felt more commitment to the university. Mentoring SwDs also cause unique challenges.
3	Hillier et al. (2019)	USA	Examine outcomes for mentees (SwD) participating in SSMP	Mixed methods: Student adaptation to college questionnaire; Mentee program questionnaire; Focus groups (n = 5)		SwDs: n = 74 Intervention group (mentees): n = 46 (m = 36, f = 10) Comparison group (SwDs): n = 28 (m = 25, f = 3)	High overall satisfaction and several benefits. No significant impact on academic performance and limited effect on complex and challenging skills
4	Lombardi et al. (2020)	USA	Examine the effect PMP has on academic achievement for mentees	Quantitative	The Peer Mentor Program (PMP)	SwDs n = 287. Intervention group (mentees) n = 46 (f = 9%, m = 91%). Comparison group (SwDs): n = 241 (f = 42%, m = 58%)	No significant effect between intervention and comparison group. Intervention group had more supports available.
5	Cragg et al. (2013)	Canada	Examine the benefits and challenges of the APC	Qualitative: One-on-one interviews	Accessibility Planning Committee (APC)	Staff and students affiliated with the APC n = 7 (f = 3, m = 4)	Gain experience as social workers, developing leadership skills, capacity development, community advocacy, raising awareness
6	Cragg et al. (2015)	Canada	Examine the benefits and challenges of the APC	Qualitative: One-on-one interviews

Table 3. Intervention components.

Component	Intervention	Included in study
Mentor training, mentee orientation	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Expectations of mentors	SSMP	2;3
Expectation of mentees	SSMP	2;3
Challenges of mentoring	SSMP	2;3
Design and goals of program	SSMP	2;3
Person-centred planning	SSMP	2;3
Communication with program staff	SSMP	2;3
Disability categories	SSMP	2;3
Career goals and future plans	SSMP	2;3
Session guide	SSMP	2;3
Boundaries	SSMP	2;3
Applied Behavioural Analysis	PMP	4
Role-playing	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Peer mentoring	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Provide psychological, emotional, social support and guidance to SwDs	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Coaching-in-context model	GOALS^2	1
Framework by Nora and Crisp	SSMP	2;3
Applied Behavioural Analysis	PMP	4
Contact logs, field notes	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Online discussion boards	SSMP	2;3
Common or self-identified goals, adjusted to mentees needs	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Identifying strategies	GOALS^2	1
Practicing goal related tasks	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Regular mentor sessions	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Progress towards goal attainment	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Create and review plan	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Review mentees progress	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Rating goal attainment	GOALS^2	1
Student-driven, student chair	GOALS^2, APC	1;5;6
Collaborative and active learning processes	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP, APC	1;2;3;4;5;6
Collaboration between students and faculty/staff members	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP, APC	1;2;3;4;5;6
Provide arena to develop and practice skills in a safe environment	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP, APC	1;2;3;4;5;6
Social skills	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Interpersonal relationships	GOALS^2	1
Socialising on campus	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Communicating and practice conversation	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Classroom etiquette	SSMP	2;3
Academic and study skills	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP	1;2;3;4
Time management, administrative and organisation skills	GOALS^2, SSMP, PMP, APC	1;2;3;4;5;6
Assistive technology	GOALS^2	1
Review and prepare homework and finals	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Expectations, success, and failure	SSMP	2;3
Self-advocacy, advocacy skills	GOALS^2, APC	1;5;6
Peer pressure	SSMP	2;3
Seeking help and campus resources	SSMP, PMP	2;3;4
Campus, community involvement	PMP, APC	4;5;6
Capacity development	APC	5;6
Personal health and wellness	GOALS^2, SSMP	1;2;3
Exercise, sleep, eating habits	GOALS^2	1
Manage stress	GOALS^2, SSMP	1;2;3
Professional networking	APC	5;6
Leader and citizenship skills	APC	5;6
Promoting and raising awareness on disability and accessibility issues	APC	5;6
Empower and giving students a voice	APC	5;6
Presentation to faculty/staff members and students	APC	5;6
Weekly radio program	APC	5;6
Social justice and civic engagement	APC	5;6
Student placement	APC	5;6
Attending meetings	APC	5;6
Counselling students	APC	5;6
Program development research	APC	5;6

Table 4. Code groups (n = 12) and key concepts (n = 3) across the interventions.

Peer guidance and supportive relationships

Peer mentoring

Progress towards goal attainment

Social guidance

Social, psychological and emotional support

Building strategies and transferable skills

Identifying and practicing social-, academic and personal strategies and skills

Taking part in enhanced learning situations and developing work-related skills

Professional networking

Developing competences in a safe environment

Advocating for change

Promote disability knowledge and awareness

Advocate disability and accessibility issues

Empower and giving a voice

Collaborative campus processes

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2010). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. International Journal of Surgery (London, England), 8(5), 336–341.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Boney, J. D., Potvin, M.-C., & Chabot, M. (2019). The GOALS 2 program: Expanded supports for students with disabilities in postsecondary education (practice brief). Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 32(3), 321–329.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hillier, A., Goldstein, J., Tornatore, L., Byrne, E., Ryan, J., & Johnson, H. (2018). Mentoring college students with disabilities: Experiences of the mentors. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 7(3), 202–218.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hillier, A., Goldstein, J., Tornatore, L., Byrne, E., & Johnson, H. M. (2019). Outcomes of a peer mentoring program for university students with disabilities. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 27(5), 487–508.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lombardi, A., Rifenbark, G. G., Monahan, J., Tarconish, E., & Rhoads, C. (2020). Aided by extant data: The effect of peer mentoring on achievement for college students with disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 33(2), 143–154.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cragg, S. J., Carter, I., & Nikolova, K. (2013). Transforming barriers into bridges: The benefits of a student-driven accessibility planning committee. practice brief. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 26(3), 273–277.

 Google Scholar

Cragg, S. J., Nikolova, K., & Carter, I. (2015). Sustaining learning initiatives through a student-led accessibility. Professional Development: The International Journal of Continuing, 18(2), 15–23.

 Google Scholar