STEM Career Pathways for Transition-Age Youth With Disabilities

Participants

Data for this study were extracted from the RSA-911 for FYs 2017–2019. The database contains information about people with disabilities who receive state VR services, including demographic information, duration, cost and types of services, and employment outcomes. From FY 2017 to FY 2019, a total of 1,429,488 individuals existed in the state-federal VR system. Of those with a comptetive integrated employment outcome (382,408), only 20,420 (5.3%) were employed in STEM fields. Of these 20,420, 8,348 (40.9%) transition-age youth aged between 14 and 24 were successfully engaged in STEM occupations/careers. To examine the associations between individual characteristics and STEM employment, the sample was categorized into four major disability groups: physical (e.g., mobility, manipulation, dexterity orthopedic), sensory/communicative (e.g., visual impairment/blindness, hearing impairment/deafness), cognitive (e.g., cognitive impairments), and psychiatric disabilities (e.g., psychosocial impairments).

Regarding race/ethnicity, White (93.7%) was the dominant sample characteristic followed by African American (3.1%), Hispanic or Latinx (2.5%), Asian (0.4%), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.2%), and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.1%). Regarding gender, 4,401 females (52.8%) were employed in STEM fields compared to 3,940 males (47.2%). Regarding the type of disability, 58% of transition-age youth had cognitive disabilities, 25.4% had psychiatric disabilities, 8.5% had physical disabilities, and 8% had sensory/communicative impairments. In terms of the level of education, 47% of transition-age youth had less than a high school education, while 42.6% received a high school diploma or a high school equivalency. About 8.1% of the participants had 1 or 2 years of postsecondary education experience or an associate degree, and 2.2% had either a bachelor degree or a higher degree. Only about 1.1% of transition-age youth participants received general assistance as well as temporary assistance for needy families (TANF), 5.5% received supplemental security income (SSI), and 8.8% received social security disability insurance (SSDI). In addition, 32% of the participants received Medicaid at application for VR services, whereas 4.3% received Medicare. Lastly, the median days between application and closure was 612.5 (SD = 964.7). The demographic information of the sample is presented in Table 1.

Variables

The dependent variable used in this study was employment in STEM occupations and non-STEM occupations using the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) codes. For STEM occupations, SOC codes that coincide with the STEM fields (e.g., 15-0000 computer and mathematical occupations, 17-0000 architecture and engineering occupations, 19-2000 physical schientists) were recoded as STEM occupations, and the rest of SOC codes were considered as non-STEM occupations. The predictor variables used in this study were the demographic characteristics of the sample, including (a) gender, (b) race/ethnicity, (c) disability type, (d) level of education, (e) employment status at application, (f) living arrangement, (g) receipt of general assistance, (h) receipt of SSI, (i) receipt of SSDI, and (j) receipt of TANF.

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS 27.0. Descriptive statistics were used to identify the demographic characteristics of transition-age youth with disabilities aged 14–24 (n = 8,348) successfully closed in STEM jobs/careers after serving under an IPE. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations between demographic characteristics of transition-age youth aged 14–24 (n = 20,420) closed in STEM and non-STEM jobs/careers and employment outcomes in STEM fields (STEM vs. non-STEM). The odds ratios (ORs) were presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Consumer Characteristics Associated With STEM Employment Outcomes

Study results showed that female transition-age youth with disabilities were more likely to be employed in STEM fields than males. In contrast to the national trends on persons with and without disabilities in STEM (NSF, 2019) as well as previous studies (e.g., Lawler et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2013) that reported that STEM areas are perceived as male domains, our findings may reflect the positive changes toward prioritizing an inclusive workplace culture by reducing the gender disparity in STEM occupations/careers. Simply knowing this information may serve as “good news” for females with disabilities with an interest in STEM, who may have been told explicitly or implicitly that they are at a disadvantage due to their gender identity and that STEM jobs are more suited for males. In addition to serving to increase optimism and self-efficacy, this finding is also perhaps evidence of the effectiveness of some of the interventions that have been implemented in previous years to increase women participation in STEM. Such interventions and inclusive approaches lead women to enter STEM fields, thrive in STEM careers, and reach their full potential.

Despite the positive shift toward the increase of women’s representation in STEM fields, the results indicated that transition-age youth with disabilities who were White were more likely to be employed in STEM fields than those of other races/ethnicities. This is congruent with NSF’s report (2019) and Lee’s study (2014) that also showed that racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in both STEM education and careers. This finding reminds us that it is important to promote a more supportive organizational structure that places a high value on equity, cultural diversity, and positive working environment where those from underrepresented minority backgrounds feel accepted, welcome, and being a valuable part of the team. Moreover, state VR agencies and rehabilitation professionals working with youth with disabilities should expand their focus on exemplary outreach and recruitment efforts for eligible minorities. Strategic alignment between K–12, postsecondary education, workforce development, and employers in STEM fields should further offer youth a guided career pathway to gain the knowledge and skills necessary to move into the STEM workforce. As part of their efforts to improve access to STEM fields for youth with disabilities, rehabilitation professionals should also monitor and implement effective mentoring strategies that mitigate barriers and improve retention in STEM fields.

It is also worth mentioning that the results of our study showed that most participants employed in STEM have either cognitive (58%) or psychiatric (25%) disabilities. Those with physical and sensory disabilities were largely underrepresented (8.5% and 8%, respectively). Our findings demonstrate consistency with all age groups who were successfully engaged in STEM fields during the years 2017 to 2019 (cognitive 31.8%, psychiatric 28.4%, sensory/communicative 21.5%, physical 18.2%). Many interventions in the literature (and described later in this article) are aimed at improving STEM opportunities for those with cognitive and psychiatric disabilities and those who experience attitudinal barriers. Although it is important to ensure the continued effectiveness of these interventions as well as to continuously develop and refine them, interventions that are targeted toward those with different types of disabilities, including sensory and physical, are worth exploring.

Results from the logistic regression analysis also indicated that certain types of living arrangements of transition-age youth with disabilities predict their employment outcomes in STEM fields. Transition-age youth with disabilities who lived in community residentials or rehabilitation facilities/mental health facilities/nursing homes at the time of application were less likely to be engaged in STEM occupations/careers than those who were living in private residences.

Lastly, the results also indicated that transition-age youth with disabilities who received general assistance, SSI, SSDI, or TANF at the time of application had significantly lower odds of finding employment in STEM fields. Relatedly, national data also show that students with disabilities are less likely to receive federal student aid than students without disabilities; therefore, they may need to rely on more general assistance such as SSI and SSDI (NSF, 2019). However, it is also well known that the receipt of disability benefits prevents participants from reaching their employment goals (Catalano et al., 2006; Chun at el., 2018; Dutta et al., 2008; Rosenthal et al., 2007). Lee et al. (2020) further indicated that limited information and knowledge about work incentivizing programs for disability beneficiaries prevents them from career exploration and achieving their potential. The consistent finding regarding the impact of disability benefits on employment outcomes calls attention to provide information and benefits counseling to help youth with disabilities and their caregivers/legal guardians understand how work and earnings can affect their benefits earlier than later, which in turn can help them promote their career development and make effective career decisions. However, it should be noted that the interpretation should be made with caution due to a relatively small proportion of this group (ranging from 1.1% to 8.8%).

Interventions/Strategies for Promoting Career Development of Transition-Age Youth in STEM Fields

Despite past and current inequities, systemic barriers, and inherent competitiveness of the STEM fields, there is high value and reward in pursuing a career in STEM. There have been several initiatives in recent years to address these concerns as they relate to people with disabilities to promote equity, improve educational experiences, and enhance the probability of successful outcomes and a better future of STEM. For instance, Street and colleagues (2012) sought to improve the academic performance and satisfaction in STEM classes for undergraduate students with disabilities. They provided an intervention that infused a peer-led team learning program based on the principles of Universal Design Instruction to a group of undergraduates with learning disabilities (LDs) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The results showed that the intervention was successful; participants saw improvements in grade point averages (GPAs), overall skills, self-efficacy, and satisfaction (Street et al., 2012). The authors stressed the importance of peer support and peer mentors, or at least the presence of quality social engagement in academic pursuits, and the need for instructors and class facilitators to be knowledgeable of both disability and universal design.

Another notable example of an effort to improve STEM experiences for young people with disabilities is a program at the Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems of Pace University. Lawler and colleagues (2018) described the program in detail, explaining that it offers students with developmental and intellectual disabilities a certificate, non-credit, non-degree curriculum of courses in technology in fully inclusive settings. Additional elements of the program include extracurricular activities, social engagement, and the provision of non-disabled mentors. Like Street et al. (2012), Lawler emphasized the social component as a key to the success of these interventions. In addition, the program has been found to increase students’ academic identity, content learning, and norms of sociability, thus improving their perception of and motivation to pursue careers in STEM and simultaneously increasing their skillset and knowledge, enhancing their marketability to employers.

Other interventions explore the role of career mentoring as a potentially viable approach for youth with disabilities to gain exposure to role models in STEM disciplines (Lindsay et al., 2019). In addition, interest in digital career discovery and assessment for youth with disabilities has grown rapidly in the past few decades. One reason for this is the potential of digital technology to provide career and occupational information and feedback in accessible formats (Shute & Rahimi, 2017). Scalise et al. (2018) reviewed the literature related to accessibility and accommodations for technology-enhanced STEM education. They emphasized that there are several frameworks that can help improve the accessibility of career-related information, including universal design frameworks and web content accessibility, by using language simplification, altering presentation modalities, and providing tools specifically designed for students with disabilities. Sukhai and Mohler (2016) also highlighted the importance of enhancing accessibility for students with disabilities into STEM education, emphasizing the integration of STEM disciplines (life and physical sciences, engineering, and mathematics) into curricula for students with physical, sensory, learning, mental health, chronic medical, and developmental disabilities. The authors provided useful resources for STEM teachers and instructors working with students with disabilities as well as global perspectives on making research or workspaces (such as laboratories) accessible for students with disabilities in STEM fields.

In regard to the outcomes of STEM interventions on youth with disabilities, Kolne and Lindsay (2019) recently provided a synthesis of research pertaining to interventions for increasing the participation of youth with disabilities in STEM. The authors identified 17 articles meeting inclusion criteria. A review of STEM-specific interventions revealed significant improvements in perceived self-advocacy, self-esteem, social skills, independence, preparation for college and employment, and perceived career options (including STEM careers). These benefits were found to exist across many delivery formats, including web-based interventions, virtual and face-to-face mentoring programs, and course-based interventions or workshops.

Implications for Rehabilitation Counseling

Rehabilitation counselors can play a significant role in working with students and consumers to promote the intrinsic and social values of STEM careers by enhancing interest in societal benefits, emphasizing extrinsic values such as earning potentials and job security, and highlighting prestige values associated with respected and stable STEM occupations. Working with individual consumers, rehabilitation counselors provide holistic career assessments considering a multitude of factors that impact a consumer’s career development (e.g., family, work, personal concerns). Career counseling interventions can include activities that target work adjustment, stress, mental health, enhancement of work skills, enhancement of interpersonal skills and communication, adaptability, flexibility, and all other developments that lead to career self-agency (Zunker, 2012).

In summary, rehabilitation counselors can work collaboratively with consumers who may be interested in STEM-related career paths to address the following areas:

As eloquently postulated by R. Roosevelt Thomas, Jr., “Creating a diverse workforce is a process, not a destination.” A rehabilitation counselor can be an integral part of this journey.

Implications for Research and Limitations

The implications for research should be taken with some caution given the limitations of the current study. First, the study analyzed only fiscal year data from 2017 to 2019. With only 3 years of data, our results could be limited, especially given the dramatic social and economic changes during the current coronavirus pandemic. In addition, the RSA-911 data were recorded by VR counselors at various stages in the case service process. Thus, it is possible that if counselors did not consult the case file to verify which services were delivered and if they relied solely on memory, there could be missing or incorrect information, which could significantly influence the results of this study. Given these limitations, it is premature to make a conclusion that the specific predictors of successful employment outcomes in STEM fields identified in this study can be generalized to all transition-age youth with disabilities. Future research needs to incorporate more concurrent RSA-911 data from multiple fiscal years to investigate the relationship between key demographic variables and employment outcomes in STEM fields. Such research will have the capability to verify the findings of this study and uncover patterns in identifying factors that over time predict successful employment outcomes in STEM fields for transition-age youth with disabilities.

This study did not examine the employment outcomes in STEM fields for transition-age youth with multiple disabilities. RSA (2017) defined a secondary disability as an “individual’s secondary physical or mental impairment that causes or results in a substantial impediment to employment.” Therefore, future research studies need to include a variable for multiple disabilities or a secondary disability to investigate its impact on employment outcomes in STEM fields for transition-age youth with disabilities. Moreover, the current study used archival data and an ex post facto research design. Therefore, a causal relationship between variables could not be established.

Lastly, future research is needed to examine different types of VR services that predict employment outcomes in STEM fields. More in-depth studies to identify the barriers, challenges, and supports associated with the use of VR services and engagement in STEM fields for individuals with disabilities need to be conducted.