Participation in science and engineering laboratories for students with physical disabilities: survey development and psychometrics

References

• Fogarty D. Pennsylvania project for advanced manufacturing careers. Adv Manuf. 2010;1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Miner DL, Nieman R, Swanson AB, et al. Teaching chemistry to students with disabilities: a manual for high schools, colleges, and graduate programs. 4th ed. Washington DC: American Chemical Society, Office of Professional Training; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• National Science Foundation. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2015. Special Report NSF 15–311. Arlington, VA, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Supalo CA, Isaacson MD, Lombardi MV. Making hands-on science learning accessible for students who are blind or have low vision. J Chem Educ. 2014;91:195–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bureau of Labor Statistics. Persons with a disability: labor force characteristics summary – 2014 Data. Washington DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey; 2013.[cited 2018 Jul 18]. Available from: http://factfinder2.census.gov.
   Google Scholar
• S. S. Administration. Disability evaluation under social security. Blue Book.Baltimore, MD:Social Security Administration. 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Brault MW. Americans with disabilities 2010: household economic studies. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Gray D, Hollingsworth H, Stark S, et al. A subjective measure of environmental facilitators and barriers to participation for people with mobility limitations. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:434–457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. How to use the ICF: a practical manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35:382–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill MR, Noonan VK, Sakakibara BM, et al. Quality of life instruments and definitions in individuals with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2010;48:438–450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper A. Programme on Mental Health: WHOQOL-BREF: introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment. Geneva: World Health Organisation;1996.
   Google Scholar
• Lin M-R, Hwang H-F, Chen C-Y, et al. Comparisons of the brief form of the World Health Organization Quality of Life and Short Form-36 for persons with spinal cord injuries. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86:104–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post MWM, de Witte LP, Reichrath E, et al. Development and validation of IMPACT-S, an ICF-based questionnaire to measure activities and participation. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:620–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang F-H, Ni P, Coster WJ, et al. Measurement properties of a modified measure of participation for persons with spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2016;0268:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Netemeyer RG, Bearden WO, Sharma S. Scaling procedures. Thouasand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle Rivers, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Cushman WH, Rosenberg DJ. Human factors in product design. Adv. Hum. Factors/Ergon. 1991;14:53–66.
   Google Scholar
• Jeannis H, Joseph J, Goldberg M, et al. Full-participation of students with physical disabilities in science and engineering laboratories. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;13:186–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman K, Caseau D, Stefanich GP. Teaching students with disabilities in inclusive science classrooms: survey results. Sci Ed. 1998;82:127–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawes J. Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used. Int J Mark Res. 2008;50:61–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann AW, Magasi S, Hammel J, et al. Environmental factors item development for persons with stroke, traumatic brain injury, and spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:589–595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:229–238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaaskelainen R. Think-aloud protocol. Handb Transl Stud. 2010;1:371.
   Google Scholar
• Durning SJ, Artino AR, Holmboe E, et al. Aging and cognitive performance: challenges and implications for physicians practicing in the 21st century. J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 2010;30:153–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis LL. Instrument review: getting the most from our panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res. 1992;5:194–197.
   Google Scholar
• Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29:489–497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haahr M. Random. org: true random number service. Dublin, Ireland: School of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Qualtrics. Qualtrics. Provo, Utah, USA, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Barnard J, Meng X-L. Applications of multiple imputation in medical studies: from AIDS to NHANES. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8:17–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garson GD. Missing values analysis and data imputation. Asheboro: North Carolina State University Stat. Assoc. Publ; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Dong Y, Peng C-YJ. Principled missing data methods for researchers. Springerplus. 2013;2:222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves RM, Fowler FJJ, Couper MP, et al. Survey methodology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15:155–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IBM’s Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Bargerhuff ME, Ph D, Turner H, Myers K, et al. Assistive technology in the teacher education program at Wright State University. Ohio Center for Mathematics Science and Reading. 2006:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Burgstahler S, Chang C. Promising interventions for promoting STEM Fields to students who have disabilities. Rev Disabil Stud An Int J. 2014;5:1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Duerstock B, Hillard L, McDonagh D, et al. Technologies to facilitate the active participation and independence of persons with disabilities in STEM from college to careers. From College to Careers. Fostering Inclusion Persons with Disabilities in STEM. Washington D.C.:The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS); 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Howard LA, Potts EA, Linz E. Reaching the next Stephen Hawking: five ways to help students with disabilities in advanced placement science classes. Sci Teach. 2013;80:38–41.
   Google Scholar
• Lunsford SK, Bargerhuff ME. A Project to make the laboratory more accessible to students with disabilities. J Chem Educ. 2006;83:407–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansoor A, Ahmed WM, Samarapungavan A, et al. AccessScope project: accessible light microscope for users with upper limb mobility or visual impairments. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2010;5:143–152.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martin JK, Stumbo NJ, Martin LG, et al. Recruitment of students with disabilities: exploration of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. J. Postsecond. Educ. Disabil 2011;24:285–299.
   Google Scholar
• Mastropieri MA, Scruggs T. Science for students with disabilities. Rev Educ Res. 1992;62:377–411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rule AC, Stefanich GP. Using a thinking skills system to guide discussions during a working conference on students with disabilities pursuing STEM fields. J STEM Educ Innov Res. 2012;13:43–54.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips C, Giasolli M. Assistive Technology Enhancement Using Human Factors Engineering. In Proceedings of the 1997 Sixteenth Southern Biomedical Engineering Conference, Broadwater Beach Resort and Hotel, Biloxi, Mississippi, USA: IEEE; 1997. p. 26–29.
   Google Scholar
• Burgstahler S. Increasing the representation of people with disabilities in science, engineering, and mathematics. Info Technol Disabil. 1994:180–187.
   Google Scholar
• Duerstock B. Accessible microscopy workstation for students and scientists with mobility impairments. Assist. Technol. 2006;18:34–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn C, Rabren KS, Taylor SL, et al. Assisting Students with high-incidence disabilities to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Interv Sch Clin. 2012;48:47–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilliard L, Dunston P, McGlothlin J, et al. Designing beyond the ADA – creating an accessible research laboratory for students and scientists with physical disabilities. RESNA. 2013. RESNA.ORG [Internet] Arlington: RESNA; [cited 2018 Jul 17]. Available from: http://www.resna.org/sites/default/files/legacy/conference/proceedings/2013/JEA/Hilliard.html
   Google Scholar
• McDaniel N, Wolfe G, Mahaffy C, et al. The modification of general chemistry laboratories for use by students with disabilities. J. Rehabil. 1994; 60:26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehrabian A, Olson JT, Ehlers G, et al. Encourage Students with Physical Disabilities to Study Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology: Program ACCESS. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, 2001, p. 6.
   Google Scholar
• Duerstock B, Hilliard L, Dunstun P, et al. 3D Simulation of an Accessible Biomedical Lab. In 29th Annual International Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference Scientific/Research Proceedings, 2013, p. 220–231.
   Google Scholar
• Grout I. Supporting access to STEM subjects in higher education for students with disabilities using remote laboratories. Proc. 2015 12th Int. Conf. Remote Eng. Virtual Instrumentation, REV 2015, February, p. 7–13; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Architectural US, Barriers T. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility guidelines for buildings and facilities; play areas. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. Final rule. Fed Regist. 2003;65:62498–62529.
   Google Scholar
• ADA. 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Washington DC: ADA. 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Sallis JF, Saelens BE. Assessment of physical activity by self-report: Status, limitations, and future directions. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000;71:1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig CL, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-Country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35:1381–1395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yen M, Lo L-H. Examining test-retest reliability: an intra-class correlation approach. Nurs Res. 2002;51:59–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar