Skill development in an employment-training program for adolescents with disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Relatively little is known about the first employment experiences and skill development of youth with disabilities. The purpose of this study is to explore the skills gained by adolescents with disabilities who have completed an employment-training program. Methods: In-depth, qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 adolescents with a physical and/or mobility-related disability. The youth and their parents also completed a brief questionnaire about their experience in the program and we reviewed their self- and staff-assessments that were completed throughout the program. Results: The findings highlight how adolescents with disabilities developed several practical, social and communication skills, and self-confidence over the course of an employment-training program. Despite personal gains, youth reported challenges in their post-program search for employment. Conclusions: Youth valued involvement in the workforce and perceived that through their participation they developed important life skills.Implications for RehabilitationEducators and health care providers should be awar that teens with disabilities as young as 15 years old are thinking about their future and looking for employment experience.Educators and clinicians can assist youth and their families by talking about the benefits of involvement in volunteering and providing practical suggestions for how to get involved, including discussing the strengths and areas for skill development.At a community level, advocacy can raise awareness of the importance of early work experience and the potential contributions of youth with disabilities. Advocacy should target community employers, but also increased government funding for employmenttraining programs and employment transition supports for this age group.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".