Does higher education support the integration of people with disabilities in Canadian society? Clarke Wilson, PhD Centre for Health Services and Policy Research School of Urban & Regional Planning Jeanette Parsons, MSc. MPA School of Rehabilitation Therapy Queen’s Student Accessibility Services Mary Ann McColl, PhD Centre for Health Services and Policy Research School of Rehabilitation Therapy CACUSS - Vancouver, BC May 24-27, 2015

Funding Acknowledgement Government of Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges & Universities Ontario Human Capital Research & Innovation Fund

Session Overview  Project aim & research questions  Policy development – postsecondary education in Ontario  General Social Survey  Results Time budget, activity sequence analysis Economic Impacts  Concluding remarks  Questions, answers, discussion

Project Aim: Examine the connection among public policy on access to postsecondary education(PSE), educational attainment and integration of disabled persons into Ontario society.

Research Questions 1.Have the daily routines of disabled students become more like the daily routines of non-disabled students over time? 2.Do disabled persons with PSE behave more like the general population than those without? 3.Is there a measurable economic benefit to disabled persons from PSE?

Students with Disabilities: Postsecondary Policy in Ontario YearDevelopment 1988Welsey Report 1989Accessibility Fund for Students with Disabilities 1999 – 2000 Human rights case law 2003Opportunity to Succeed – OHRC 2004Guidelines on Accessible Education 2005Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act 2013 Policy on preventing discrimination based on mental health disabilities & addictions 2014Accessibility Fund for Students with Disabilities - Review

Daily Activity = Evaluative Tool Canada General Social Survey (GSS) Conducted annually since 1985 Daily time use data collected roughly every 5 years Yesterday diary & demographic characteristics Period studied: 1992 – 2010 Time budget = total time spent in activities

Demographics 2010 GSS  estimates 110,100 students with disabilities in Canada  56,638 students with disabilities in 1992 = 94% increase in 18 years  3.7% annual growth rate = 40% larger than overall post- secondary rate (2.6%) 2010 General Social Survey N25 Years & OlderWomen Disabled Students 110,10149%62% Non-Disabled Students 1,366,38329%54%

Disability and Postsecondary Education - Ontario Change Total Population7.6M10.9M43% Ontarians with Disabilities1.3M (17%)2.2M (21%)68% PSE with degree – all Ontarians1.27M (18.7%)5.76M( 54.7%)353% PSE with degree – Ontarians with disabilities 152K(< 12%)933K(43%)514%

Analysis Time Budgets 18 activity groups, 1440 min/day Statistical analysis compares time budgets A & B Limitation: data lost (activity sequencing, transitions, duration, involvement of others)

Analysis Activity Sequence Similarity Analysis Uses dynamic programming algorithms Calculates pairwise similarity matrices of daily activity/context sequences Uses rich data lost in time budgets Wilson, 2006

Analysis Economic Engagement Multiple regression Isolate influence of PSE and disability status from demographic characteristics Finding positive impact of PSE on productive activities = estimated economic value of PSE

Time Budget Snapshot – 2010 Time Spent in Minutes ActivityDisabilityNo Disability Screen time Social Travel10890 Personal care7859 Active leisure7032 Shopping, services2532 Child care711 Heavy housework38

Time budget analysis: 1992 – 2010 All PSE Students 10 minutes or less = difference in time spent on any activity over 18 year period Very little change in student daily routines Disabled students Spent more time than non-disabled peers: personal care, screen time, travel and studies Results of time budget analysis: Routines of disabled students did not become more similar to those of non-disabled students over 18 years

Activity Sequence Analysis: In 2010, all students were less similar in their daily activities than students in 1992:  Similarity in activities declined only by 1.8% in 18 years Comparing students with disabilities to nondisabled students from 1992 to 2010:  Similarity in activities declined by 1.4% in 18 years Difference between 1.4% and 1.8% = slight relative convergence

Influence of PSE: Time use and daily activity People with disabilities became slightly more similar to non- disabled individuals in time use/daily activity from 1992 to 2010 Disabled persons with secondary education started off significantly less similar, became more similar to non- disabled persons; more convergence Disabled persons with postsecondary education started off more similar to non-disabled persons; less convergence

PSE and Economics Impacts: Ontario 2010 DisabilityNo Disability Average additional minutes paid work/day – PSE generated 4230 Annual marginal earnings/person$5,865$4,180 Estimated labour force with PSE588K3.86M Estimated economic impact$3.4$16.2

Non-employment benefits of PSE Example:Childcare Assumption:PSE leads to greater parental time inputs Ontarians with disabilities: PSE = 12 additional minutes of child care activity Ontarians without disabilities PSE = 14 additional minutes of child care activity Estimated economic impact:~$1.5B

Evaluating disability accommodation policy Estimating economic impacts – not a true estimate of net benefits of public education Ontario PSE comes with substantial price tag MTCU Budget $6.4B Tuition Credit for economic input is shared - government investment, tuition and other factors

Concluding Remarks Activity patterns of disabled Canadians becoming slightly more similar to non-disabled individuals Impact of PSE on Canadians with disabilities: Enrollment growing 40% faster than for non-disabled Estimated earning impact of PSE 40% greater than non- disabled Other benefits evident (e.g., childcare activities) Policy landscape for students disabilities has evolved significantly since 1988

References Wilson, C. 2006, Reliability of sequence-alignment analysis of social processes: Monte Carlo tests of ClustalG software, Environment and Planning A, 38,