Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Developing Consumer and System-Level Readiness for Effective Self-Advocacy: Perspectives from Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors Working With Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals in Post-Secondary Settings

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Effective self-advocacy skills have been shown to positively influence lifetime outcomes of d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) individuals. The literature suggests that many DHH individuals may be underprepared to effectively self-advocate in post-secondary settings due to a lack of effective training and opportunity. Vocational rehabilitation counselors (VRCs) who work with and serve DHH consumers are in a unique position to support their clients’ self-advocacy skill building, especially during the transition into the workforce and other post-secondary settings. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how VRC’s promote the self-advocacy knowledge and skills of their DHH consumers within post-secondary employment and educational contexts. Additionally, this study explored how VRC’s facilitated self-advocacy opportunities for their clients at broader systems-levels. Utilizing a grounded theory approach, data from semi-structured interviews with 10 VRCs working specifically with DHH clients was analyzed. Selective coding procedures revealed sixteen thematic strategies used by VRCs at both the individual and systems level, including defining of necessary self-advocacy skills, linguistic skill building, provision of full communication access, comprehension monitoring, both informal and formal self-advocacy assessments, direct modeling of advocacy skill, self-advocacy skills programming and counseling, an overall gauging of client ‘readiness to advocate’, identification of advocacy opportunity at the system-level, and employer education. Implications and future directions are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Many different terminologies for individuals who are deaf, Deaf, or hard-of-hearing are used across the research literature including “Deaf”, with a capital D (Padden and Humphries 1988), “individuals with a hearing loss”, “hearing-impaired”, “deaf”, and “hard-of-hearing.” In this paper, we refer to individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing broadly as including all variations in identification and language use. This manuscript uses person-first language and places the chosen label after the person, in this case ‘consumers who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH)’ to place emphasis on the individual’s capacities rather than on deficits (Lane 1992).

  2. When the term deaf is used with a lowercase ‘d’ it refers to the audiological condition of not being able to perceive sound, while use of the uppercase ‘D’ Deaf, refers “to a particular group of people who share a language and a culture” (Padden and Humphries 1988, p. 2).

References

  • Abery, B., Rudrud, L., Arndt, K., Schauben, L., & Eggebeen, A. (1995). Evaluating a multi-component program for enhancing the self-determination of youth with disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 30, 170–179. doi:10.1177/105345129503000307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akamatsu, C., & Stewart, D. (1998). Constructing simultaneous communication: the contributions of natural sign language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 3, 302–319. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.deafed.a014358.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Algozzine, B., Browder, D., Karvonen, M., Test, D., & Wood, W. (2001). Effects of interventions to promote self-determination for individuals with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71, 219–277. doi:10.3102/00346543071002219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boutin, D., & Wilson, K. (2009). Professional jobs and hearing loss: a comparison of deaf and hard-of-hearing consumers. Journal of Rehabilitation, 75(1), 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brent, E., & Slusarz, P. (2003). “Feeling the beat”: intelligent coding advice from meta-knowledge in qualitative research. Social Science Computer Review, 21, 281–303. doi:10.1177/0894439303253975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullard, C. (2003). The itinerant teacher’s handbook. Hillsboro: Butte Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buys, N., & Rennie, J. (2001). Developing relationships between vocational rehabilitation agencies and employers. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 44, 95–103. doi:10.1177/003435520104400206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cawthon, S., & Cole, E. (2010). Postsecondary students who have a learning disability: student perspectives on accommodations access and obstacles. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 23, 112–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, C., Wehmeyer, M., Saito, Y., Lida, K., Lee, Y., & Singh, V. (2007). Self-determination: what do we know? where do we go? Exceptionality, 15, 3–15. doi:10.1080/09362830709336922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVinney, D., McReynolds, C., Currier, K., Mirch, M., & Chan, F. (1999). Vocational issues in disability case management. In F. Chan & M. Lehy (Eds.), Health care and disability case management (pp. 183–212). Lake Zurich: Vocational Consultants Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, T., & Leung, P. (2004). Vocational rehabilitation: history and practice. Handbook of Vocational Psychology, 3, 319–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • English, K. (1997). Self-advocacy for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetterman, D. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, C., & Danneker, J. (2007). Self-advocacy instruction: bridging the research-to-practice gap. Focus on Exceptional Children, 39(8), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garay, S. (2003). Listening to the voices of deaf students: essential transition issues. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(4), 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Accountability Office. (2012). Students with disabilities: Better federal coordination could lessen challenges in the transition from high school [GAO Highlights (GAO-12-594)]. Washington, DC: House of Representatives, Committee on Education and the Workforce. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592329.pdf.

  • Hammer, M. (2004). Using the self-advocacy strategy to increase student participation in IEP conferences. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 295–300. doi:10.1177/10534512040390050601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, M., & Cole, P. (2012). Member checking: can benefits be gained similar to group therapy? The Qualitative Report, 12, 510–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, B., Schmidt-Davis, H., & HR92022001, E. C. N. (2000). A longitudinal study of the vocational rehabilitation service program. Fourth Interim Report: Characteristics and Outcomes of Transitional Youth in VR. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute.

  • Hochgesang, J., Dunning, L., Benaissa, S., De-Caro, J., & Karchmer, M. (Eds.). (2007). College and university programs for deaf and hard of hearing students (12th ed.). Washington, DC: Gallaudet Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingraham, C., & Anderson, H. (2001). Self-determination, transition, and deaf-blind students. Odyssey, 2(3), 24–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Izzo, M., & Lamb, M. (2002). Self-determination and career development: Skills for successful transitions to postsecondary education and employment. A white paper for the Post-School Outcomes Network of the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET) at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. Available on-line at: http://www.ncset.hawaii.edu/Publications.

  • Izzo, M., & Lamb, P. (2003). Developing self-determination through career development activities: implications for vocational rehabilitation counselors. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 19, 71–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, W., Patterson, J., & Szymanski, E. (1997). Philosophical, historical, and legislative aspects of the rehabilitation counseling profession. In R. M. Parker & E. M. Szymanski (Eds.), Rehabilitation counseling: basics and beyond (pp. 1–31). Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavin, D. & Botto, M. (2009). A model program to provide accommodations to college students who are hard of hearing. PEPNet Tipsheet: Serving students who are hard of hearing. 1–4.

  • Kluwin, T., & Stinson, M. (1993). Deaf students in local public high schools: Background, experiences, and outcomes. Springfield: Charles. C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushalnager, P., Topolski, T., Schick, B., Edwards, T., Skalicky, A., & Patrick, D. (2011). Model of communication, perceived level of understanding, and perceived quality of life in youth who are deaf or hard of hearing. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 512–523. doi:10.1093/deafed/enr015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, H. (1992). The mask of benevolence: Disabling the deaf community. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lent, R., Brown, S., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: a social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 36–49. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucker, J., & Becker, S. (2013). Fostering skills in self-advocacy: a key to access in schools and beyond. Odyssey, 14, 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luckner, J., & Stewart, J. (2003). Self assessments and other perceptions of successful adults who are deaf: an initial investigation. American Annals of the Deaf, 148, 243–250. doi:10.1353/aad.2003.0020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luft, P., & Huff, K. (2011). How prepared are transition-age deaf and hard of hearing students for adult living? results of the transition competence battery. American Annals of the Deaf, 155, 569–579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luzzo, D., & Hutcheson, K. (1996). Causal attributions and sex differences associated with perceptions of occupational barriers. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 124–130. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1996.tb02322.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C. (2001a). Disparities in job placement outcomes among deaf, late-deafened, and hard-of-hearing consumers. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 44, 144–150. doi:10.1177/003435520104400304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C. (2001b). Racial and ethnic members of under-represented groups with hearing loss and VR services: explaining the disparity in closure success rates. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 32(1), 15–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C. (2002a). Outcome variables that contribute to group differences between Caucasians, African Americans, and Asian Americans who are deaf. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 33(2), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C. (2002b). Relationship of consumer characteristics and service provision to income of successfully rehabilitated individuals who are deaf. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 45, 233–239. doi:10.1177/00343552020450040601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, J., Klinger, L., & McKinnon, C. (2007). The deaf: an exploration of their participation in community life. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 27, 113–120. doi:10.1177/153944920702700305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musselman, C., & Akamatsu, C. (1999). Interpersonal communication skills of deaf adolescents and their relationship to communication history. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 4, 305–320. doi:10.1093/deafed/4.4.305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. (1994). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padden, C., & Humphries, T. (1988). Deaf in American: voices from a culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch, R., Creed, P. A., & Hyde, M. B. (2006). Career barriers perceived by hard-of- hearing adolescents: implications for practice from a mixed-method study. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11, 224–237. doi:10.1093/deafed/enj023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Qi, S., & Mitchell, R. E. (2012). Large-scale academic achievement testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students: past, present, and future. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17, 1–18. doi:10.1093/deafed/enr028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, S., Antia, S. D., & Kreimeyer, K. H. (2008). Academic status of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in public schools: student, home, and service facilitators and detractors. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13, 485–502. doi:10.1093/deafed/enn006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sands, D., & Doll, B. (1996). Fostering self-determination is a developmental task. The Journal of Special Education, 30, 58–76. doi:10.1177/002246699603000104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiavetti, N., Whitehead, R., & Metz, D. (2004). The Effects of simultaneous communication on production and perception of speech. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 286–304. doi:10.1093/deafed/enh031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroedel, J., Watson, D., & Ashmore, D. (2003). A national research agenda for the postsecondary education of deaf and hard of hearing students: a road map for the future. American Annals of the Deaf, 148, 67–73. doi:10.1353/aad.2003.0014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, P., & Marschark, M. (2010). Evidence-based practice in educating deaf and hard-of-hearing students. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511557842.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology- an overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, E. (2000). Disability and vocational behavior. In R. G. Frank & T. Elliott (Eds.), Handbook of rehabilitation psychology (pp. 499–517). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press. doi:10.1037/10361-023.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Test, D., Fowler, C., Wood, W., Brewer, D., & Eddy, S. (2005). A conceptual framework of self-advocacy for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 26(1), 43–54. doi:10.1177/07419325050260010601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Test, D., Mazzotti, V., Mustian, A., Fowler, C., Kortering, L., & Kohler, P. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving post-school outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181. doi:10.1177/0885728809346960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19, 349–357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wehman, P. (2006). Life beyond the classroom: Transition strategies for young people with disabilities (4th ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeyer, M. (2007). Promoting self-determination in students with developmental disabilities. New York: Guilford Press. doi:10.1177/088572889501800202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeyer, M., & Lawrence, M. (1995). Whose future is it anyway? Promoting student involvement in transition planning. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 18, 69–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeyer, M., & Schwartz, M. (1997). Self-determination and positive adult outcomes: a follow-up study of youth with mental retardation or learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63, 245–256.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The contents of this article were partially developed under a grant from the US Department of Education, (blinded for review). However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Sarah Schoffstall, Stephanie Washbourn Cawthon, Rachel Harper Tarantolo-Leppo & Erica Wendel

Authors
  1. Sarah Schoffstall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephanie Washbourn Cawthon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rachel Harper Tarantolo-Leppo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Erica Wendel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Schoffstall.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Interview Questions

  1. 1.

    In your state and in your experience, at what point does VR become involved in the post-secondary planning for students who are DHH? Are VR specialists involved in the IEP meetings? If so, what is their role?

  2. 2.

    How do you determine who qualifies as ‘under-employed’ or ‘unemployed’? How does the client’s goals or aspirations fit into this definition?

  3. 3.

    Tell us about the process you use to make a match between individuals and potential jobs. What information do you share with potential employers if you have a good match, but the employers are reluctant about having a employee who is DHH?

  4. 4.

    What is the definition of a “successful case closure” in your state?

    1. a.

      When is a case closed? Under what scenario? What criteria are utilized?

    2. b.

      Where are the limitations of providing support and to what extent? Why?

  5. 5.

    On a related note, does VR have a revolving door policy? For example, if an individual loses their job that the VR helped set up, can they come back to VR to try again? After how much time does that ‘able to benefit from VR’ clause kick in?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schoffstall, S., Cawthon, S.W., Tarantolo-Leppo, R.H. et al. Developing Consumer and System-Level Readiness for Effective Self-Advocacy: Perspectives from Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors Working With Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals in Post-Secondary Settings. J Dev Phys Disabil 27, 533–555 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-015-9435-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-015-9435-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation