Quality of life and vocational education service quality in students with intellectual disability

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the relation between subjective quality of life and quality of vocational education services from the view of students with intellectual disability who participate in public special vocational education schools in Greece. The level of quality of life and quality of special vocational education services was explored. The article presents a functional description of service quality in special vocational education and operationalizes quality of life for students with disability. Instruments were developed and adapted in line with the participatory research paradigm. Convenience sampling was used. Data was gathered from 131 students with intellectual disability. All measures showed good evidence of internal consistency and construct validity. The findings suggest relationship between quality of life and quality of special vocational education services received by students with intellectual disability. Low levels of self-determination are highlighted. Practical implications concerning the application of the instruments in special education settings as measures for the quality assessment and the evaluation of educational interventions are discussed.

Introduction

Inclusion in the labour market and equal access to job opportunities for people with disability are fostered by the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (United Nations General Assembly 2007) and legislated in EU agendas on vocational education for people with disabilities (European Commission 2010). However, social inclusion is not yet realized according to the perceptions of people with intellectual disability (ID) (Merrells et al. 2019), who are highly excluded from the economical social and political life. Moreover, given the high rates of unemployment or underemployment (McGlinchey et al. 2013) and given that employment reports reach only one-digit figures (Ditchman et al. 2016), concern is raised that legislation and implementation are not synchronized. In fact, among people with disability, individuals with ID are the most likely to be excluded from work, or preparation for work and receive the lowest wages (Wilson and Campain 2020, World Health Organization 2011). The interest to increase opportunities for employment in the field of disability lead to the monitoring of vocational education, as vocational education and training measures facilitate employment for people with disability (Benz et al. 2000, European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education 2018) and specifically for persons with ID (Fasching 2014). Recent research in the vocational education and training for people with ID has been trying to identify components that strengthen employability (Wilson and Campain 2020). Actually, is has been suggested that synthetic models involving training, collaboration and awareness raising may forward students with ID to the workforce in a way that better corresponds to the current societal and market demands (Park and Bouck 2018).

Vocational education in the field of disability is not only related with work inclusion but various researchers (Beyer et al. 2010, Foley et al. 2012, Verdugo et al. 2010) also highlight that employment, vocational education and work-related skills training are connected with quality of life. In this context, obstacles restraining people with ID from quality vocational education and the work accomplishment become alarming. UN addresses the need for a paradigm shift in vocational education offered to people with ID (United Nations General Assembly 2012), in order to meet quality standards and better respond to the crucial challenges of unemployment and underemployment in this stigmatized group (Scior and Werner 2016). In light of the above, the present study aims to investigate the quality of life and quality of vocational education services offered in special education settings to people with ID, as well as inter-relations. Before however embarking into any further specific analysis, it is important to present the theoretical framework concerning the main concepts used in the study.

Theoretical background

Both quality of life and quality of the vocational education service are characterized by definition difficulties and methodological pluralism. Quality of life assessment is unique in its multidimensionality and utilizes both objective and subjective measurements (Verdugo et al. 2005). Similarly, vocational education is characterized by heterogeneity and transnational variances (Wolf 2011), and its quality assessment is attempted from different perspectives.

Quality of life

Quality of life demands a trans-disciplinary approach in order to be fully comprehended and defined (Schalock et al. 2002). The assessment of quality of life can be approached either economy-wise, on the grounds of social prosperity or on the basis of subjectivity (Rokicka 2014). The financial prospect for the evaluation of life quality through economy indicators, such as the Gross Domestic Product or the Consumer Price Index, has received multiple criticism as such rates cannot take into account other quantifiable but indirect economic data, such as indicators of economic inequality and growth-related pollution (Michalos 2011). Land and Michalos (2018) suggested that assessment of quality of life needs to allow for social data indicators that cover both subjective (ex. emotional, cognitive) as well as objective parameters (ex. housing, wages, accessibility, socio-economic status) (Skevington and Epton 2018). In the last two decades, the significance of subjectivity has emerged as a key aspect in the definition of quality of life (Barcaccia et al. 2013). According to Schalock et al. (2002), socio-political changes allowed for the development of interest in the subjective perspective of quality of life with an emphasis on self-determination (Lachapelle et al. 2005). Schalock and Keith’s contribution to the exploration of subjective quality of life has been thorough, in terms of both conceptualization and instrumentation, to the extent of developing measures for the assessment of subjective life quality either in general population (Schalock and Keith 1993) or in specific populations, such as students with and without disability (Keith and Schalock 1994). Quality of life has been related to life satisfaction (Diener and Chan 2011) and Sen (1999) introduced the terms autonomy, freedom of action, happiness into the discussion, suggesting that it is not the availability of tangible and intangible resources, but rather the subjectively identified accessibility to resources, that performs as a rate of quality of life.

Subjective quality of life is positively associated with employability, that is the acquisition of skills and knowledge and success related with employment in the chosen occupation (Baumann et al. 2011) -a top issue for people with ID (Beyer et al. 2010). Moreover, education in vocational skills has been found to enhance community involvement for young adults with ID (Hall 2017), one of the key aspects of quality of life (Schalock et al. 2005). Other measures of well-being, such as life satisfaction, are also associated with employment. People with disability who are employed show high levels of life satisfaction, in comparison to those who are unemployed, and amongst the employed, the highest life satisfaction is reported by those whose skills are fully utilized in the workplace (Konrad et al. 2012).

While full participation in economic and social life would improve quality of life and materialize social inclusion -one of the core issues in quality of life (Merrells et al. 2019)-, insufficient economic means, grounded on ineffective job maintenance, result in social exclusion for people with ID (Redley 2009). Moreover, restricted accessibility to job opportunities and obstacles to vocational educational resources and services challenge the inclusion of people with disability (Buddelmeyer and Polidano 2016). It has been found that misapprehensions about the work capacity of people with disability and practical limitations to job seeking and job attaining reduce the employability options for people with disability (Lewis et al. 2011) in comparison to their counterparts without disability (Schur et al. 2009). Furthermore, young adults with ID, compared to those with other types of disability, show feeble outcomes in terms of duration and intensity of enrolment in post-secondary educational programs, number of jobs attained, number of work hours and level of wages (Newman et al. 2011).

Employability seems to be served by vocational education of high quality (Silva et al. 2017), even at a greater level than positive societal beliefs (Ditchman et al. 2016). The impact that vocational education has on transition to employment, has intensified the interest in evaluating organizations offering services of vocational education and transition (Myklebust 2002). The link between education and employability is so strong that the term ‘vocationalization’ has been used to describe the growing demand for curricula aiming to train in pre-vocational and vocational skills (Snook 2007).

Vocational education quality assessment

With regard to the evaluation of quality in vocational education, two converse approaches are proposed: the outcome-oriented approach -which evaluates quality of education based on results- and the process-oriented approach -which conceives quality of education from the procedures and practices used (Ysseldyke et al. 1992). Vocational education learning outcomes vary and particularly in special vocational education (SVE) they can be distinguished into general knowledge or skills offered by the curriculum, and outcomes expected from the individualized life skills programs of students with disability (Shaddock et al. 2007). Interestingly, SVE learning outcomes have been related with employability, suggesting vocational inclusion as an explicit goal of SVE (Forlin and Forlin 2002).

On the other hand, evaluating vocational education as a process, emphasizes on all aspects of education and not just on results. After 2000, teaching and learning have been acknowledged as dynamic procedures and educational quality assurance has evolved to a process of continuous improvement (Hargreaves and Shirley 2009, UNESCO 2016). At the same time however, assessing the quality of vocational education without taking into consideration its outcomes has also been criticized (Xu and Guo 2019), given that the quality of the results depends on the quality of the process (Langford and Cleary 1995). Further criticism has been expressed on the process-orientated assessment approach of vocational education, as the immense complexity of the curriculum content (both general and practical) and the constant need to update with market advances turn evaluation into an unrealistic task (Mahapatra and Khan 2007, Qian and Kong 2013).

Alternatively, vocational education can be assessed as a service, with a transfer of the service quality paradigm from the world of marketing (Cronin and Taylor 1992) to the field of education (Mason et al. 2018). Research on service quality in tertiary, college and vocational education has been extensive and one of the main practices is to evaluate vocational education service quality on the ground of the views of the students as clients (Mahapatra and Khan 2007, Silva et al. 2017). Particularly in SVE, to acknowledge students with disability as active clients with an opinion may prove fundamental in a prospect of emancipation and active citizenship (Barnes and Sheldon 2007, Brown et al. 2015, Klubeck et al. 2010) with implications for quality of life improvement (Traina 2016). However, studies in special vocational education service quality assessment are still scant.

In the field of disability, research findings indicate that vocational education can enhance social mobility and inclusion, so long as training is not delivered as an end in itself, but rather designed as a skill accelerator and a school-to-market affiliator (Collett et al. 2011). Indeed, occupational skills and employability in disability benefit from effective vocational education and training (Poppen et al. 2017). However, in several European countries the role of vocational education is marginalized (Eichhorst et al. 2012). With reference to the serious vocational limitations that are reported from people with disability in Greece (Hellenic Statistical Authority 2002), all effort should be put to ensure high quality vocational education and better opportunities for work and inclusion for Greek students with disability.

Greece has ratified international human rights conventions (Greek Constitution, Article 21, Paragraph 6) that protect the right in vocational education and work inclusion for people with disability and especially intellectual disability, but legislation and implementation are not yet synchronized. Although Greek Laws (2817/2000, 3699/2008) have established three facilities of public secondary special vocational education and transition to work (Special Vocational Gymnasiums-SVG, Special Vocational Lyceums-SVL and Special Vocational Education and Training Workshops-SVETW), research and statistics attribute high percentages to people with disability who report disability-related constraints to the type, quality and quantity of job they acquire (50,4%, 43,5%, 47,9% accordingly) (Genova 2015, Hellenic Statistical Authority 2002).

Among students with disability who were educated in Greek SVE institutions in the school year 2017-2018, students with ID represented the majority in all three types of institutions: 40,69% in SVG, 48,14% in SVL, 41,76% in SVETW (Hellenic Statistical Authority 2019). Despite the high percentages, students with ID still remain an invisible population (Buchner et al. 2020) and little is known about the quality of SVE services that they receive. Moreover, although there is evidence about low employment rates in the field of ID in Greece, and though connections between employment and quality of life are supported (Verdugo et al. 2010), there is still lack of research and formal data concerning the quality of life of people with ID.

In light of the above, the purpose of the study is to examine the relationship between subjective quality of life and quality of SVE services from the view of students with ID. In particular, the study addresses four research questions:

• What is the level of the subjective quality of life in students with ID who participate in public Greek secondary SVE schools?

• What is the level of quality of SVE services based on the reports by students with ID, as the clients?

• What is the relation between the subjective quality of life and the quality of SVE services provided to students with ID?

• And, finally, what is the relation between gender, age, type of school, number of years in SVE, and the quality of student’s life or the quality of SVE services?

Method

Participants

The sample included 131 participants with formal diagnosis of intellectual disability, aged between 16 to 35 (M = 20.95, SD = 4.33), attending SVE schools for 1 to 12 years (M = 5.11, SD = 2.58). Seventy participants (53.4%) were male and 61 were female (46.6%). Participants attended three types of Greek SVE schools: Four Special Vocational Gymnasiums (24 students, 18.32%), six Special Vocational Lyceums (50 students, 38.17%) and ten Special Vocational Education and Training Workshops (57 students, 43.51%) (Table 1). Selection criteria were a) formal diagnosis of intellectual disability and b) adequacy in speech comprehension measured by the receptive vocabulary score in the PPVT V–PART A test (Dunn and Dunn 2007) (PPVT raw score range 110-180, M = 137.98, SD = 17.35).

Table 1.

Sample's distribution on types of Special Vocational Education (SVE) schools, gender, age and years of SVE school attendance.

					Type pf SVE school
	Age		Years of SVE school attendance		Special Vocational Gymnasiums	Special Vocational Lyceums	Special Vocational Education & Training Workshops
Students	M	SD	M	SD	%	%	%
Male n = 70	20.81	4.13	5.01	2.41	18.57%	31.43%	50.00%
Female n = 61	21.13	4.59	5.02	2.78	18.03%	45.90%	36.07%
Total N = 131	20.95	4.33	5.11	2.58	18.32%	38.17%	43.51%

Design and procedure

The method of convenience sampling was used, as has been the case in other surveys in educational service quality (Yildiz and Kara 2017). Initially, permission was granted by the Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs for conducting the research in SVE schools. According to the research design, SVE school administrators were introduced with the purpose of the research, and SVE school teachers and therapists helped identify potential participants: students with formal diagnosis of intellectual disability and a satisfactory level of speech comprehension. Receptive vocabulary assessment was then conducted in order to ensure adequate speech comprehension and parent consent was obtained for each student that would take part in the research. Three research measures were administered in individual interviews which followed common procedure: rapport establishment, anonymity and free participation statement, demographic and schooling information recording, and measurement distribution.

Measures

Quality of special vocational education services – the SVE-ServQual scale

The quality of SVE services was assessed by the Special Vocational Education Service Quality Scale (SVE-ServQual Scale) (Georgiadou et al. 2020), a self-report instrument which was developed in the context of a larger study for use by students with ID. SVE-ServQual Scale addresses SVE service quality as a multi-factorial construct comprised of five subscales (Responsiveness, Surroundings, Personalization, Training and Facilities adequacy). The instrument contains a total of 26 items. SVE-ServQual Scale uses a five-point Likert scale (Almost not at all, A little, Medium, A lot, Extremely). A raw total sum score is provided by summing item raw scores. Total score ranges from 26 to 130 with higher total scores indicating higher levels of quality of SVE services. Raw scores are also summed for each of the five subscales, indicating the level of staff willingness to help students and provide SVE services promptly (Responsiveness), the level of aesthetics and accessibility in SVE schools (Surroundings), the level of interpersonal interaction between SVE staff and students (Personalization), the level of practical orientation, prevocational and job-specific skills learning accomplished in SVE schools (Training), and SVE schools sufficiency in classes, workshops and recreation spaces (Facilities adequacy).

The measure was designed in line with research findings in the field of education, special education, vocational education and service quality (Mahapatra and Khan 2007, Vaughan and Woodruffe-Burton 2011) and was developed according to the participatory methodology (Barnes and Sheldon 2007). SVE-ServQual Scale construct validity has been established by EFA and CFA in previous research (Georgiadou et al. 2020), showing significant loadings of the items on the five factors and acceptable model-fit. The scale Cronbach’s alpha was 0.904, indicating good reliability in terms of internal consistency.

Quality of students’ life

In order to measure quality of life for SVE students with ID, the Student with Disability Quality of Life Questionnaire and the adapted Satisfaction with Life Scale were used.

The Student with Disability Quality of Life Questionnaire (Sd-QOL)

The Student with Disability Quality of Life Questionnaire (Sd-QOL), is a Greek adaptation of the Quality of Student Life Questionnaire (Keith and Schalock 1994) for the purposes of the research. The original Questionnaire is a self-assessment scale consisting of 40 items and measures students' subjective quality of life as a four dimensions structure.

Adaption of the Questionnaire was participatory and followed the steps: a) permission by the authors, b) forward and backward translation (Belayneh 2019), c) individual interviews with SVE students with ID aiming to simplify the wording of the items and establish social validity, d) consultation with group of academic experts in the field of special education and psychometrics in order to ensure cultural validity, e) pilot distribution to SVE students with ID. Reliability and internal consistency were investigated and construct validity was examined by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.

The adapted Sd-QOL consists of 19 items and three subscales. The questionnaire uses a three-point Likert type scale and measures students' subjective quality of life as a three-factor structure, in accordance with other researchers’ findings (Verdugo et al. 2010): Emotional Well-being, Self-determination, Satisfaction. Each of the three subscales produces a raw score and all three sub-scores are added to display the total quality of life raw score that may range from 19 to 57, with higher scoring indicative of a more positive perception of quality of life.

Cronbach’s alpha value 0.745 indicated acceptable internal consistency of the Questionnaire and the three-factor model fit was tested by Confirmatory Factor Analysis using Maximum Likelihood analysis in IBM SPSS AMOS 26, default setting, and was found acceptable [RMSEA value 0.051 with 90% confidence interval 0.033 − 0.067 (pRMSEA ≤ 0.5 < 0.001) P-value 0.437, CFI 0.862, TLI 0.829] (Lei and Wu 2007). Alpha values of each subscale were all above 0.500 (Emotional Well-being α = 0.766, Self-determination α = 0.712, Satisfaction α = 0.586).

The adapted Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS-A)

SWLS-A is an adaptation of the Greek edition (Patsiaouras et al. 2003) of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener et al. 1985), developed for the purposes of this study. SWLS has been widely used in surveys with Greek samples (Lyrakos et al. 2011) and comprises of five variables of the unidimensional satisfaction with life, measured in a seven-point Likert type scale.

The process of adaption included: a) individual interviews with SVE students with ID aiming to simplify the wording of the items of the Scale in order to ensure social validity, b) consultation with group of academic experts in the field of special education and psychometrics and c) pilot distribution to SVE students with ID. Distribution normality, internal consistency and item-total correlations were tested and construct validity was explored.

SWLS-A consists of five items measured by a three-point Likert-type rating scale. Total score range is 5-15, with the higher score indicating higher satisfaction from life. Unidimensionality was confirmed by Principal Axis Factoring with Promax rotation and Kaiser Normalization and confirmatory factor analysis. Goodness-of-fit indices also confirmed the model fit (CFI 0.964, TLI 0.928 and RMSEA 0.062, P-value 0.345) (Lei and Wu 2007). Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha 0.658).

Analyses

In order to examine the subjective quality of life of students with ID who participated in public Greek secondary SVE schools and the quality of SVE services they received, statistical analysis of the data was performed using the standard statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS, version 23). Descriptive statistics were used in order to examine the level of subjective quality of student life, the level of their satisfaction with life and the level of quality of SVE services they received. Moreover, in order to test the relations between subjective quality of student life, satisfaction with life and the quality of SVE services provided to students with ID, data were analysed through correlational statistical processes. Spearman Rho correlation was calculated, as the data were non-normally distributed. Finally, the relation between sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age, type of school, number of years in SVE), and quality of students’ life and quality of SVE services was examined through the performance of t-test, Kruskall-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test for independent samples. Descriptive statistics regarding subjective quality of life, satisfaction with life and SVE service quality are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Descriptive data of SVE-ServQual, Sd-QOL and SWLS-A.

	M	SD	%SM	Range	MIN	MAX
Sd-QOL	45.87	5.66	70.03	28	28	56
Emotional Well-being	17.93	2.61	78.08	13	8	21
Self-determination	14.63	3.48	54.53	13	8	21
Satisfaction	13.05	2.05	80.46	9	6	15
SVE-ServQual	107.44	10.99	77.69	56	71	127
Responsiveness	26.00	4.07	83.33	24	6	30
Surroundings	20.85	3.35	79.24	17	8	25
Personalization	26.34	3.11	84.76	13	17	30
Training	21.61	3.54	65.04	17	12	29
Facilities adequacy	12.63	2.75	80.28	12	3	15
SWLS-A	12.17	2.07	71.68	9	6	15

Results

Participant students with ID who are educated in Greek public SVE schools reported quite high level of quality of life, based on Sd-QOL total raw score (M = 45.87 SD = 5.66) and rather high level of satisfaction with life, based on SWLS-A raw score (M = 12.17 SD = 2.07). Quality of SVE services based on the responses of students with ID in the SVE-ServQual scale is also high (M = 107.44 SD = 10.99).

In order to avoid overestimation on the basis of the raw scores and allow comparisons between scales and indications of the extent to which the raw scores approximate the maximum scores that might be obtained, data was normalized according to the method of the Percentage of Scale Maximum (%SM), that is often used to standardize Likert Scales in the field of wellbeing and quality of life (Mitreva et al. 2019). The method was followed according to the original guidelines by Cummins (1998). Standardized %SM values revealed medium to high levels in Sd-QOL, SVE-ServQual and SWLS-A (70.03%, 77.69% and 71.68% respectively). The factor Self-determination received the lowest %SM value among the three subscales of the Sd-QOL questionnaire (54.53%) while %SM values of factors Emotional Wellbeing and Satisfaction were close to 80% (78.08%, 80.46% accordingly). As for SVE-ServQual Scale, factor Training had the lowest %SM value (65.04%), while %SM values for the other four subscales (Responsiveness, Surroundings, Personalization, Facilities adequacy) were near or above 80% (83.33%, 79.24%, 84.76%, 80.28% accordingly).

Gender, age, type of school, number of years in special vocational education, did not differentiate scores on quality of life, in accordance with previous evidence (Schalock et al. 2000) that such demographics are not related with quality of life differentiations. SVE-ServQual Scale and SWLS-A responses also had no relation with gender, age, type of school and number of years in SVE.

With reference to the relationship between quality of life and quality of SVE services from the view of students with ID, Spearman correlation coefficient was calculated to examine possible correlations between the normalized %SM total scores of SVE-ServQual, and Sd-QOL and SWLS-A. Scores were positively correlated with each other (SVE-ServQual and Sd-QOL Rho = 0.328, SVE-ServQual and SWLS-A Rho = 0.344, Sd-QOL and SWLS-A Rho = 0,307) at statistically importance level a = 0.01 (Table 3). Sd-QOL factor Satisfaction was highly correlated with SVE-ServQual total raw score (Rho = 0.533) and also positively correlated with all five factors of the SVE-ServQual Scale at statistically importance level a = 0.01 (Satisfaction-Responsiveness Rho = 0.363, Satisfaction-Surroundings Rho = 0.430, Satisfaction-Personalization Rho = 0.379, Satisfaction-Training Rho = 0.298, Satisfaction-Facilities adequacy Rho = 0.304). Interestingly, Sd-QOL factor Self-determination showed statistically significant correlation with SVE-SevQual factor Training (Rho = 0.215) at statistically importance level a = 0.01, implying possible association between effective application of the practical aspects of vocational training and the development of autonomy and independence. On the contrary, Sd-QOL factors Emotional Wellbeing showed statistically significant correlation with all SVE-SevQual factors except for Training, underscoring the multiple and differentiated associations between the components of quality of SVE services and the constituents of subjective quality of students’ lives.

Table 3.

Correlations between SVE-ServQual, Sd-QOL & SWLS-A, factors and normalized scores.

	Students with disability QOL				Special Vocational Education Service Quality
	Emotional Wellbeing	Self- determination	Satisfaction	Sd-OOL raw	Responsiveness	Surroundings	Personalization	Training	Facilities adequacy	SVE-Serv Qual %SM
Emotional Wellbeing		0.249 **	0.425 **	0.741 **	0.210 *	0.292 **	0.174 *	0.067	0.311 **	0.326 **
Self- determination	0.249 **		0.005	0.754 **	0.044	−0.066	−0.071	0.215 **	−0.035	0.045
Satisfaction	0.425 **	0.005		0.501 **	0.363 **	0.430 **	0.379 **	0.298 **	0.304 **	0.533 **
Sd-QOL	0.741 **	0.754 **	0.501 **		0.205 *	0.225 **	0.127	0.279 **	0.214 *	0.328 **
Responsiveness	0.210 *	0.044	0.363 **	0.205 *		0.329 **	0.527 **	0.290 **	0.183 *	0.730 **
Surroundings	0.292 **	−0.066	0.430 **	0.225 **	0.329 **		0.320 **	0.205 **	0.443 **	0.647 **
Personalization	0.174 *	−0.071	0.379 **	0.127	0.527 **	0.320 **		0.226 **	0.248 **	0.641 **
Training	0.067	0.215 **	0.298**	0.279 **	0.290 **	0.205 **	0.226 **		0.136	0.521 **
Facilities Adequacy	0.311 **	−0.035	0.304 **	0.214 **	0.183 *	0.443 **	0.248 **	0.136		0.522 **
SVE-Serv Qual raw	0.326 **	0.045	0.533 **	0.328 **	0.730 **	0.647 **	0.641 **	0.521 **	0.522 **
SWLS raw	0.450 **	−0.006	0.332 **	0.307 **	0.173 *	0.332 **	0.256 **	0.180 *	0.356 **	0.344 **

Note. **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Discussion

The purpose of the research was to investigate the quality of life of SVE students with ID as well as their perceived quality of SVE services. Furthermore, the study aimed to discover possible relationships between SVE service quality and the subjective quality of life of SVE students with ID and explore the relationships between demographic characteristics of students with ID and their estimation of subjective quality of life and of SVE service quality.

With regard to the first question of the research, the results showed that the participant students with ID who attended special vocational education schools reported medium to high quality of life as students, with the total score close to the 70% of the Sd-QOL Scale’s Maximum (%SM) score and the subscales’ scores within the range 50%-80%. Responses to the SWLS-A measure showed similar levels for satisfaction with life near the 70% of the Scale’s Maximum (%SM) score. Although these results may seem surprising, as they contradict with the living reality of people with disability in Greece (ESAMEA 2019), they are in line with evidence that in measures of subjective well-being, respondents’ average reports are near the 75 ± 2,5 percentage of each particular Scale’s Maximum (%SM) score (Cummins et al. 2003).

The tendency for positive reports of quality of life may have also been intrigued by social desirability or by acquiescence (Finlay and Lyons 2002), although they were more probably activated by the ‘homeostatic mechanism’, which was suggested by Cummins et al. (2012). The homeostatic mechanism refers to the psycho-social processes of adaptability and selective attention, that are often stimulated in disability, as Bishop et al. (2007) also mentioned. Furthermore, Sd-QOL operationalised subjective quality of student life and the current research did not intend to estimate objective parameters such as the financial or sociopolitical status of the respondents (Skevington and Epton 2018). Being so, results expressed the respondents’ personal perception of life quality, which may be positive regardless negative objective social indicators such as those concerning people with disability in Greece.

The results of the current survey study indicate modest scores of Self-determination, lower than the other two dimensions of Student with Disability Quality of Life Questionnaire (Emotional Well-being and Satisfaction), and also lower than the total score. Although previous research argues that youths with ID who report higher perceived self-determination also report higher quality of life (Wehmeyer and Palmer 2003, Lachapelle et al. 2005), the results of our study support that the level of perceived Self-determination may not be indicative of the level of students’ perceived quality of life. One justification for this divergent finding could be the fact that, as opposed to other surveys which assessed self-determination and quality of life as separate constructs, in the current research Self-determination was examined as a latent variable of students’ quality of life. Furthermore, the finding may be due to possible cross-cultural differences, concerning the importance of Self-determination as a dimension of quality of life in the Greek students with ID population, as those found by Schalock et al. (2005) in their cross-cultural study among five geographical groups. As Wehmeyer (2020) mentions, the interrelatedness between self-determination and quality of life is still to be unveiled. In any case, the observed level of Self-determination raises concern, as previous research has acknowledged this indicator as a predictor of positive post-school outcomes, in terms of successful employment and community living (Morningstar et al. 2010, Shogren et al. 2015).

As far as the service quality of SVE services is concerned, responses to the SVE-ServQual Scale by students with ID revealed medium to high satisfaction from the services provided by SVE Greek schools, with the total score proximate to the 80% of the Scale’s Maximum score and the subscales’ scores ranging between 65% and 85%. One way to interpret the results, that are discordant with the observed deficiencies in special education (Giavrimis 2020), might be the lack of educational programmes and participatory activities that would involve students with ID in evaluation procedures, choice making, advocacy skills and other active citizenship experiences. Moreover, further research should comprehensively explore the factor Training and evaluate possible positive impact of educational interventions which focus on the training of skills that relate more to the here-and-now job opportunities.

Regarding the question about the relation between SVE service quality and quality of life, such a connection was indeed supported by the findings of this research. The results verify other studies in the field of disability, which support positive relations between employability and vocational education of high quality (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education 2018), and between employability, employment and subjective quality of life (Cocks et al. 2015, Fasching 2014, Marcionetti and Rossier 2016). Yet, the direct relation between vocational education of high quality and subjective quality of life is a rather novel research finding. One justification for this relation could be the amount of time and the importance that SVE holds in the everyday lives of students with ID, as a space of learning and training as well as communicating with professionals and interacting with peers. Thus, the better the quality of SVE services the higher the perceived quality of life. Moreover, this survey functionally defined subjective quality of students’ lives as a multi-factorial construct which included the factor ‘Satisfaction’ that regarded respondents’ satisfaction from education related aspects of life. This operationalization again suggested that satisfaction from vocational education is a latent variable that may affect life quality. Finally, as far as socio-demographics are concerned, in accordance with previous evidence (Schalock et al. 2000), age, gender, type of SVE school and number of years in SVE were not related with quality of life differentiations neither with students’ estimation of SVE service quality.

Limitations

Convenience sampling method does not allow for generalization of the findings. However, reasons of time and cost efficiency led to the selected sampling method, as has been the case in other studies on quality of life and education service quality assessment (Verdugo et al. 2019).

Moreover, the study focused on students with ID, instead of including students with all types of disability in the sample. This decision was justified by the complexity of developing all three self-reported instruments for all students with different types of disability (Barnes 2011, Goegan et al. 2018). Indeed, this study was the first endeavour to adapt wellbeing instruments for Greek people with disability and develop a novel instrument in the field of SVE service quality. The characteristics of intellectual disability were considered and it was decided to concentrate on students with ID, as a means to prioritize this double-discriminated population (Buchner et al. 2020).

As for the rating scales, controversy has been exerted on the use of Likert-type data and scales (Bishop and Herron 2015). However, in the current study, Likert-type rating scale was used in all three instruments, using specific number of alternatives (less than five alternatives demonstrated through pictorial representations of responses (Hartley and MacLean 2006).

Also, participatory methods were used in the instruments’ development and adaptation, with an aim to facilitate the involvement of students with ID in the study and add on the paradigm shift towards a more inclusive research design (Barnes and Sheldon 2007). In the context of education, such a shift implies approaching the student with disability not as a product or as a consumer but as active recipient capable of provoking quality improvements (Vickerman & Blundell 2010). Future research needs to emphasize in providing adequate support to people with ID, with an aim to include them as active participants in research processes (Ditchman et al. 2016). Yet, the present study addressed students with ID who may have not been earlier engaged in educational programs aiming at the development of choice making, advocacy or critical evaluation skills.

Implications for research and practice

Future research could develop adapted versions of the instruments with respect to the universal design principles, thus addressing the need for administration to people with different types of disability, considering variations even within groups. Universal design may offer the theoretical framework and practical means to contribute to the inclusion of individuals with diverse disabilities within mainstream research. Methodological costs, problems and available solutions of ‘enabling’ research design and instruments should be thoughtfully considered, with a twofold purpose to obtain comparative data as well as consistently address peoples’ with disabilities varied profiles (Goegan et al. 2018, Meyers and Andresen 2000).

Longitudinal studies in the field of disability are needed with a focus in the assessment of students’ quality of life before and after the delivery of improvements in SVE, making use of measures that evaluate subjective quality of life and perceived SVE service quality. Moreover, as people with ID are particularly underrepresented in the workforce, compared to people with physical or sensory disabilities (Kersh 2011), future research should address issues concerning the vocational education and accessibility opportunities for successful employment. As public views and employers’ misapprehensions about the capabilities of people with ID may impede work inclusion just as much as SVE shortfalls, the suggestion to encompass workplace training as a core feature of vocational education programs for students with ID becomes an imperative. Furthermore, the establishment of agencies’ collaboration and the application of multi-disciplinary approaches in vocational education for students with disability, may foster maturity and readiness for all involved stakeholders (i.e. educators, families, students and graduates with disability, potential employers and colleagues).

To this direction, the development of a long-awaited systematic monitoring of training, transition and employment progress of Greek people with disability would contribute valuable input to an ongoing educational action research for the embetterment and modernization of SVE. Additionally, it would cover the absence of fully comparable national registry data concerning disability and foster formal supervision policies that could administrate measures for community and work inclusion.

Conclusion

The study findings argue for a relation between SVE service quality and students with ID quality of life. This result indicates the necessity for educational policies and training practices that will ensure high-quality vocational services which in turn, will promote the development of employment opportunities and the enhancement of social inclusion and quality of life. Even though students with disability reported positive perceptions of special vocational education services, this finding should not be considered without caution, given the modest level of self-determination that implies constraints in opportunities for decision making, self-management and self-initiatives. In light of the outcomes of this study, disability research and educational fora may elaborate on supportive mechanisms for the implementation of self-determination programs and training practices that will enhance students with disability role as active recipients and co-creators of the educational experience(s) and add on control-over-life.

Funding Statement

Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.