Misconceptions about Accommodations and Integrity
Brenda M. Stoesz; Robin Attas; and Hafizat Sanni-Anibire
The fictional scenarios presented above were designed to help you explore the concepts of accessibility and equity in relation to academic integrity. One scenario illustrates how attention to equity, rather than equality (see “Key Concepts 1”), reflects a culture of integrity grounded in fairness, respect, trust, responsibility, honesty, and courage (see “Accommodation and Academic Integrity Link” and “Key Concepts 2” below). The other scenario demonstrates the belief that accommodations provide certain students with an unfair academic advantage. This misconception may lead to other erroneous assumptions about disabilities and accommodations for postsecondary students. Table 1 lists several common misconceptions that have been reported by accessibility offices and students (C. Christie & S. Vitt, Student Accessibility Services, University of Manitoba, personal communication, October 4, 2022), and information that discredits these misconceptions.
Table 1. Debunking the Misconceptions about Accommodations and Academic Misconduct
| Misconception | Debunking the Misconception |
| An accommodation is synonymous with cheating because it provides an unfair advantage. | Students with disabilities often begin their postsecondary studies at an unfair disadvantage. The purpose of accommodations is to support students so they can demonstrate their knowledge and skills, and that they do so at a place that does not begin behind students without disabilities. |
| Students receiving accommodations engage in more academic misconduct. | There is no research supporting this claim. Emerging evidence suggests that students with mental health and learning challenges may be reported for academic misconduct more often than students without such challenges (Davis, 2022) but this does not equate to greater engagement in cheating. |
| Accommodated students must be judged more harshly on assessments because the accommodation has made the assessment easier to complete. | The purpose of accommodations is to ensure equitable opportunities to learn without compromising academic standards. Accommodations do not make assessments easier to complete; rather accommodations make assessments possible to complete. The most important point is that accommodations must be reasonable within the standards of the program or course and suitable to the student’s needs (Dickson, 2012). |
| Most students receiving learning and assessment support are not really deserving of this support and are trying to take advantage of accessibility laws and policies. | Whether a student requires learning and assessment support is dependent on the individual and their circumstances, including the structure of courses and programs. If students with disabilities find their studies challenging but are reluctant to ask for support, they may have been socially conditioned to believe that they “just need to try harder.” Failure to do well academically or reaching out for support may also be tied to feeling stigmatized, embarrassed, guilty, shameful, or fearful of judgement (Davis, 2022; Stamp et al., 2014). Although postsecondary students have attempted to deceive healthcare professionals to obtain diagnoses qualifying them for accommodations, the proportion is small (Harrison & Edwards, 2010) and does not support the idea that most students receiving support are undeserving. |
Despite evidence that these notions about accommodation and academic integrity are false, they continue to be reinforced by the absence of insight into at least three key areas. Below, we describe how lack of awareness, knowledge, and understanding of disability, accommodation, and academic integrity contribute to negative attitudes, stereotypes, and myths.
Key Concepts 1
Equity recognizes systemic and historic factors when considering fair treatment and the allocation of resources and opportunities to reach similar outcomes.
Equality focuses on each individual receiving equal or identical resources, opportunities, and treatment regardless of their particular situation or systemic and historic barriers.
Disability. Disability has been defined as “any impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment — or a functional limitation — whether permanent, temporary or episodic in nature, or evident or not, that, in interaction with a barrier, hinders a person’s full and equal participation in society” (Accessible Canada Act (S.C. 2019, c. 10), 2019).[1] According to the 2012 Canadian Survey on Disability, 16% (or 325,180) of 1,988,225 of postsecondary enrollments in 2011/2012 were students living with disabilities (Furrie, 2017; Statistics Canada, n.d.). Depending on the nature of the disability, students may encounter barriers to participating in and completing learning activities and assessments, and/or interacting with peers and instructors, among other challenges (e.g., Fuller et al., 2004; Healey et al., 2006). Intersecting forms of discrimination based on race, gender, nationality, religion, socio-economic status, and other social categorizations and identities might also impact learning negatively (Freire, 2020).
Equitable access to education. As mentioned, equity recognizes that individuals are unique, and that historic imbalances and systemic biases result in marked differences in access to services and support (see, for example, University of British Columbia, n.d.), including in educational settings. Academic accommodations address the inequitable situation for students with disabilities by modifying educational systems to improve accessibility. Unfortunately, some instructors may view accommodations (e.g., extra time on tests) in the postsecondary setting (and elsewhere) using an equality framework and as “privileges” or “special rights” that are restricted to a select group of students (Silverman, 2022). Even when instructors accept the need for formal accommodations, systems of accommodation are imperfect, as only a small proportion of postsecondary students contact accessibility service offices to request learning support (e.g., ~2.5% of total postsecondary enrollment; Fichten et al., 2003). This small proportion might be due to factors such as not having documentation of formal diagnoses from healthcare providers required to arrange accommodations. Even with formal diagnoses and supporting documentation, the “invisibility” of some disabilities (e.g., attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], learning disabilities [LD], mental health issues) can be associated with doubts over the validity of the disability (Waisman et al., 2020) and denial of accommodations (Cawthon & Cole, 2010; Quinlan et al., 2012). If instructors perceive that few of their students have disabilities and valid needs for accommodations, they may not feel compelled to learn how they can help remove barriers to learning for students with disabilities and misconceptions may continue to be perpetuated.
Accommodation and academic integrity link. Instructors may deny accommodations (Cawthon & Cole, 2010) because they fundamentally misunderstand academic integrity (Bens, 2022), deeply mistrust their students (Jensen et al., 2004), and view accommodations as a form of “situationally sanctioned cheating” that allow students to “gain an unfair advantage” rather than as necessary provisions that facilitate learning (Silverman, 2022). These are merely misconceptions as there is no evidence to support a direct link between accommodations and academic misconduct (see Table 1). Although some student groups (including those with LD) are overrepresented in academic conduct investigations (Davis, 2022), this does not mean they are more likely to cheat or that they are the only students who do so. Instructors are reminded that modifications made to assessments should not compromise the integrity of the course or program; that is, essential content or competencies should not be eliminated (Dickson, 2012). Rather, accommodations should make it possible for students with learning challenges to demonstrate essential knowledge and skills in alternative ways when it is reasonable to do so.
The commitment to supporting students with disabilities in fair and respectful ways is consistent with the fundamental values of academic integrity (International Center of Academic Integrity [ICAI], 2021), the seven grandfathers in academic integrity (University of Toronto, n.d.), and the principles of Indigenous academic integrity (Gladue, 2020). Building cultures of integrity through values and traditions, regardless of whether the primary purpose is to provide accommodations or to encourage honesty in academic work, can be accomplished by recognizing that we are all interconnected and that we are part of an educational community (Poitras Pratt & Gladue, 2022). Within a community (even within an educational community), we must care for one another, we must support one another, and we must respect one another, so that we can all learn and grow. This realization makes it possible to redefine academic integrity and promote cultures of integrity in higher education that are grounded in the interconnected values of relationality, reciprocity, and respect (Poitras Pratt & Gladue, 2022).
Key Concepts 2
Academic integrity refers to “a commitment to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. By embracing these fundamental values, instructors, students, staff, and administrators create effective scholarly communities where integrity is a touchstone. Without them, the work of teachers, learners, and researchers loses value and credibility. More than merely abstract principles, the fundamental values serve to inform and improve ethical decision-making capacities and behavior” (ICAI, 2021, p. 6).
Academic misconduct refers to “[a]ny action or attempted action that undermines academic integrity and may result in an unfair academic advantage or disadvantage for any member of the academic community or wider society” (Tauginienė et al., 2018, p. 8).
- The view of disability as an inability or deficit has been challenged by persons living with disabilities, disability activists, and the discipline of disability studies, where disability is conceived as a component of identity, and shaped by social and cultural structures of power and oppression (Titchkosky, 2003). ↵
