COVID-19 influenced education delivery worldwide. The Up the Hill Project (UTHP), a university mentoring program in Australia for people with intellectual disability, transitioned from a face-to-face to online format during 2020.
Results:
The experience of transitioning online for one semester (12-week period) had positives and challenges associated with it. The UTHP Coordinator reported initial doubts for the online mode and identified the importance of at home support. However, the experience has opened up avenues for future program practices, such as intake processes and increased flexibility. From the participants’ perspective, the online experience supported participants to develop new technology skills. However, challenges were that participants needed support, and missed face-to-face contact.
Conclusion:
Online mentoring in the UTHP had challenges, but has also supported continuation of university programs. Lessons learnt will influence the development of the UTHP in some capacity into the future.
Alfredsson ÅgrenKKjellbergAHemmingssonH (2020a) Access to and use of the Internet among adolescents and young adults with intellectual disabilities in everyday settings. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability45(1): 89–98.
2.
Alfredsson ÅgrenKKjellbergAHemmingssonH (2020b) Digital participation? Internet use among adolescents with and without intellectual disabilities: a comparative study. New Media & Society22(12): 2128–2145.
3.
Al-KumaimNHMohammedFGazemNA, et al. (2021) Exploring the impact of transformation to fully online learning during COVID-19 on Malaysian University Students’ Academic Life and Performance. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies15(5): 140.
BarlottTAplinTCatchpoleE, et al. (2020) Connectedness and ICT: opening the door to possibilities for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities24(4): 503–521.
6.
BonkCJ (2020) Pandemic ponderings, 30 years to today: synchronous signals, saviors, or survivors?Distance Education41(4): 589–599.
7.
BradleyV (2020) How COVID-19 May change the world of services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities58(5): 355–360.
8.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3 (2): 77–101.
9.
BurgstahlerSCronheimD (2001) Supporting peer-peer and mentor-protégé relationships on the internet. Journal of Research on Technology in Education34(1): 59–74.
10.
CourtenayKPereraB (2020) COVID-19 and people with intellectual disability: impacts of a pandemic. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine37(3): 231–236.
11.
DanielSJ (2020) Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects49(1–2): 91–96.
12.
EmbregtsPvan den BogaardKFrielinkN, et al. (2020) A thematic analysis into the experiences of people with a mild intellectual disability during the COVID-19 lockdown period. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities. Published online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1080/20473869.2020.182714.
GamageKWijesuriyaDEkanayakeS, et al. (2020) Online delivery of teaching and laboratory practices: continuity of university programmes during COVID-19 Pandemic. Education Sciences10(10): 291.
15.
HartDMele-McCarthyJPasternackRH, et al. (2004) Community college: a pathway to success for youth with learning, cognitive, and intellectual disabilities in secondary settings. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities39(1): 54–66.
16.
JosephBKearneyKBBradyMP, et al. (2021) Teaching small talk: increasing on-topic conversational exchanges in college students with intellectual and developmental disabilities using remote audio coaching. Behavior Modification45(2): 251–271.
17.
KrollT (2014) Designing mixed methods studies in health-related research with people with disabilities. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches5(1): 64–75.
18.
MolinMSorbringELöfgren-MårtensonL (2015) Teachers’ and parents’ views on the Internet and social media usage by pupils with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities19(1): 22–33.
NeergaardMAOlesenFAndersenRS, et al. (2009) Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology9(52): 1–5.
21.
O’BrienPMcConkeyRGarcia-IriarteE (2014) Co-researching with people who have intellectual disabilities: insights from a national survey. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities27(1): 65–75.
22.
OrtizRWWGreenTLimHJ (2011) Families and home computer use: exploring parent perceptions of the importance of current technology. Urban Education46(2): 202–215.
RedquestBKTintARiesH, et al. (2020) Exploring the experiences of siblings of adults with intellectual/developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research65(1): 1–10.
25.
RillottaFArthurJHutchinsonC, et al. (2020) Inclusive university experience in Australia: perspectives of students with intellectual disability and their mentors. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities24(1): 102–117.
26.
RillottaFLindsayLRaghavendraP (2019) 10. Journey through “Up the Hill” through inclusive higher education for people with intellectual disability at a South Australian university. In: O’BrienPBonatiMLGadowF, et al. (eds) People with Intellectual Disability Experiencing University Life: Theoretical Underpinnings, Evidence and Lived Experience. Boston, MA: Brill Sense, pp. 155–169.
27.
ShogrenKAWehmeyerMLSchalockRL, et al. (2017) Reframing educational supports for students with intellectual disability through strengths-based approaches. In: WehmeyerM. L.Shogren& K. A. (eds) Handbook of Research-Based Practices for Educating Students with Intellectual Disability. London: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 17–30.
28.
ShpigelmanCGillC (2013) The characteristics of unsuccessful E-mentoring relationships for youth with disabilities. Qualitative Health Research23(4): 463–475.
29.
ShpigelmanCWeissPReiterS (2009) E-mentoring for all. Computers in Human Behavior25(4): 919–928.
30.
Tallent-RunnelsMKThomasJALanWY (2006) Teaching courses online: a review of the research. Review of Educational Research76(1): 93–135.
31.
TanisESPalmerSWehmeyerM, et al. (2012) Self-report computer-based survey of technology use by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellectual Developmental Disability50(1): 53–68.
32.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2020) Education: from disruption to recovery. Available at: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse(accessed 4 November 2020).
ThompsonJRBradleyVBuntinxWHE, et al. (2009) Conceptualizing supports and the support needs of people with intellectual disability. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities47(2): 135–146.
35.
ThompsonJRShogrenKAWehmeyerML (2017) Supports and support needs in strengths-based models of intellectual disability. In: WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK. A. (eds) Handbook of Research-Based Practices for Educating Students with Intellectual Disability. London: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 31–49.
36.
WangCGShannonDMRossME (2013) Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education34(3): 302–323.
