Technology and Communication Considerations for Engaging Youth Receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Benefits: Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor Perspectives

Abstract

Technology has been shown to enhance daily activities, increase participation in individualized planning and supports, and accommodate the transition needs of students with disabilities. This study examined the benefits and challenges regarding technology use when providing transition services for youth and families receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Specifically, it explored the nuances of employing technology to encourage engagement in Wisconsin Promoting the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (WI PROMISE) services and foster communication between counselors and participants. This qualitative study used a constant comparative method for analyzing data collected through two focus groups of WI PROMISE counselors. Counselors identified technology as essential to maintaining contact with WI PROMISE participants as well as extant barriers including inconsistent access to the internet, financial expense, and insufficient training and support. Recommendations for using technology to communicate with transition-age youth and their families will be discussed.

Keywords

technology transition-age youth with disabilities VR counselors texting

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

K. D.

Vatland

Bowen

S. L.

Burke

R. V.

(2015). An evaluation of parent-produced video self-modeling to improve independence in an adolescent with intellectual developmental disorder and an autism spectrum disorder: A controlled case study. Behavior Modification, 39, 542–556. http://doi.org/10.1177/0145445515583247

Anderson

Kumar

(2019, May 7). Digital divide persists even as lower-income Americans make gains in tech adoption. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/07/digital-divide-persists-even-as-lower-income-americans-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/

Ayres

K. M.

Mechling

Sansosti

F. J.

(2013). The use of mobile technologies to assist with life skills/independence of students with moderate/severe intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorders: Considerations for the future of school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 50(3), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21673

Blanck

(2014). The struggle for web eQuality by persons with cognitive disabilities. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 32(1), 4–32. http://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2101

Boulianne

(2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. http://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542

Bryant

B. R.

Seok

Bryant

D. P.

(2012). Individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities use of assistive technology devices in support provision. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27(2), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341202700205

Burckley

Tincani

Guld Fisher

(2015). An iPad™-based picture and video activity schedule increases community shopping skills of a young adult with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 18(2), 131–136. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2014.945045

Burgstahler

(2003). The role of technology in preparing youth with disabilities for postsecondary education and employment. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(4), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340301800401

Burke

K. M.

Raley

S. K.

Shogren

K. A.

Hagiwara

Mumbardo-Adam

Uyanik

Beherns

(2020). A meta-analysis of interventions to promote self-determination for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 41(3), 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193251880227

10.

Chadwick

Wesson

Fullwood

(2013). Internet access by people with intellectual disabilities: Inequalities and opportunities. Future Internet, 5(3), 376–397. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi5030376

11.

Clifford Simplican

Shivers

Chen

Leader

(2018). “With a touch of a button”: Staff perceptions on integrating technology in an Irish service provider for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 31, 130–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12350

12.

Davies

D. K.

Stock

S. E.

King

L. R.

Brown

R. B.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Shogren

K. A.

(2015). An interface to support independent use of Facebook by people with intellectual disability. Intellectual & Developmental Disabilities, 53, 30–41. http://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-53.1.30

13.

Flanagan

Bouck

E. C.

Richardson

(2013). Middle school special education teachers’ perceptions and use of assistive technology in literacy instruction. Assistive Technology, 25(1), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2012.682697

14.

Harry

Sturges

K. M.

Klingner

J. K.

(2005). Mapping the process: An exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educational Researcher, 34(2), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034002003

15.

Hart

Whalon

(2012). Using video self-modeling via iPads to increase academic responding of an adolescent with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 47(4), 438–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2012.682697

16.

Hartman

Schlegelmilch

Roskowski

Anderson

C. A.

Tansey

(2019). Early findings from the Wisconsin PROMISE project: Implications for policy and practice. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 51(2), 167–181. http://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-191036

17.

Hatlevik

O. E.

Christophersen

K. A.

(2013). Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Computers & Education, 63, 240–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.015

18.

Hoppestad

B. S.

(2013). Current perspective regarding adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities accessing computer technology. Assistive Technology, 8, 190–194. http://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2012.723239

19.

Hughes

Avoke

S. K.

(2010). The elephant in the room: Poverty, disability, and employment. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 35(1–2), 5–14.

20.

Iwanaga

Chan

Tansey

Strauser

Ritter

Bishop

Brooks

(2019). Working alliance and stages of change for employment: The intermediary role of autonomous motivation, outcome expectancy and vocational rehabilitation engagement. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 29(2), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9787-5

21.

Kaye

Yeager

Reed

(2008). Disparities in usage of assistive technology among people with disabilities. Assist Technology, 20, 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2008.10131946

22.

Luckasson

Schalock

R. L.

(2012). Human functioning, supports, assistive technology, and evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual disability. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27(2), 3–10. doi:http://doi.org/10.1177/016264341202700202

23.

Montes

Halterman

(2008). Association of childhood autism spectrum disorders and loss of family income. Pediatrics, 121, 821–826. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-1594

24.

Nasah

DaCosta

Kinsell

Seok

(2010). The digital literacy debate: An investigation of digital propensity and information and communication technology. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58, 531–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9151-8

25.

Näslund

Gardelli

(2013). “I know, I can, I will try”: Youths and adults with intellectual disabilities in Sweden using information and communication technology in their everyday life. Disability & Society, 28(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.695528

26.

Okoro

C. A.

Hollis

N. D.

Cyrus

A. C.

Griffin-Blake

(2016). Prevalence of disabilities and health care access by disability status and type among adults-United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67, 882–887. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6732a3

27.

Patton

(2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.

28.

Ramsten

Marmstål Hammar

Martin

Göransson

(2017). ICT and intellectual disability: A survey of organizational support at the municipal level in Sweden. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 30, 705–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12265

29.

Ramsten

Martin

Dag

Marmstål Hammar

(2019). A balance of social inclusion and risks: Staff perceptions of information and communication technology in the daily life of young adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability in a social care context. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 16(3), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12287

30.

Reichenberg

(2016). Who will present it during the broadcast? A case study of a daily activity centre. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 16, 65–73.

31.

Saldaña

(2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE.

32.

Samant

Matter

Harniss

(2013). Realizing the potential of accessible ICTs in developing countries. Disability and Rehabilitation. Assistive Technology, 8(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2012.669022

33.

Schreuer

Keter

Sachs

(2014). Accessibility to information and communications technology for the social participation of youths with disabilities: A two-way Street. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2104

34.

Seale

(2014). The role of supporters in facilitating the use of technologies by adolescents and adults with learning disabilities: A place for positive risk-taking? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29, 220–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.906980

35.

Seok

DaCosta

(2014). Development and standardization of an assistive technology questionnaire using factor analysis: Eight factors consisting of 67 items related to assistive technology practices. Assistive Technology, 26(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2013.778917

36.

Seok

DaCosta

(2017). Digital literacy of youth and young adults with intellectual disabilities predicted by support needs and social maturity. Assistive Technology, 29(3), 123–130. http://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2016.1165759

37.

Shikako-Thomas

Shevell

Lach

Low

Schmitz

Poulin

Majnemer

, & the QUALA group. (2015). Are you doing what you want to do? Leisure preferences of adolescents with cerebral palsy. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 18(4), 234–240. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2013.794166

38.

Social Security Administration. (2020). A guide to supplemental security income (SSI) for groups and organizations. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-11015.pdf

39.

Stendal

(2012). How do people with disability use and experience virtual worlds and ICT: A literature review. Journal of Virtual World Research, 5(1), 1–17.

40.

Tansey

T. N.

Dutta

Kundu

Chan

(2016). From admiration of the problem to action: Addressing the limited success in vocational rehabilitation of persons from diverse racial and cultural backgrounds. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 45, 117–119. http://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-160816

41.

Xenos

Vromen

Loader

B. D.

(2014). The great equalizer? Patterns of social media use and youth political engagement in three advanced democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 151–167. http://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318