Work-integrated learning for students with disabilities: time for meaningful change

ABSTRACT

The global push towards widening participation for equity cohorts, including students with disabilities, is promising, but it is yet to translate into improved employment experiences. In this commentary, we highlight what higher education institutions must now do to drive meaningful change and better support students with disabilities’ workforce transitions. In doing so, we advocate for a much-needed change towards inclusive work-integrated learning practices that enable students with disabilities to leverage these opportunities to trial career pathways, build networks, and develop their future career goals. Necessary in this is the adoption of co-designed work-integrated learning, that brings together students with disabilities, industry and community, and academics to ensure non-ableist inclusive practices and a culture which understands the strength in diversity.

KEYWORDS:

• Work-integrated learning
• inclusion
• disability
• work-based learning
• employability

Introduction

The World Health Organisation (WHO, 2023) estimates that globally as many as one in six people, almost 20% of the population, identify as having one or more disabilities. Yet people with disabilities continue to be marginalised and discriminated against in labour markets worldwide. In Australia, for example, the unemployment rate of working-age individuals with disabilities is twice of those without disability (Australian Government, 2022). Within this cohort, particularly troubling is the job outcomes for skilled higher education graduates with disabilities, with evidence that this cohort is 11 percentage points less likely to attain full-time work (Social Research Centre, 2023), and more likely to be underemployed and/or overqualified in the jobs they do secure (Jackson & Li, 2022). Perhaps unsurprisingly, research also suggests that employed individuals with disabilities may be more prone to inflexible and discriminatory work practices or meeting resistance to their accommodation requests (Goodall et al., 2022).

Somewhat paradoxically, the employment disparities in global labour markets for individuals with disabilities do not align to the push for widening participation in the higher education sector. Students with disabilities are one of the fastest (and only) growing equity cohorts in higher education (Morris et al., 2017; NCSEHE, 2020) with recent research identifying a breadth of programmes and initiatives to support their inclusion in higher education institutions (Dollinger & Hanna, 2023; Rillotta et al., 2020). Addressing employment discrepancies for people with disabilities is the right thing to do and will improve their quality of life (e.g., Ellenkamp et al., 2016), as well as boosting an economy’s gross domestic product by up to seven percent (ILO & OECD, 2018). The question, therefore, is how can educators and practitioners ensure greater inclusion in the labour market for an increasing number of students with disabilities?

We argue that work-integrated learning (WIL) is an important mechanism for addressing labour market inequities experienced by individuals with disabilities. It is a tri-partnership between students, educators, and industry or community members and is offered virtually and on campuses (e.g., projects, consulting) and as work-based experiences (e.g., internships, practicum). Work-based WIL is particularly renowned globally for its transformational benefits to higher education students, helping to build their professional identities, enrich networks, enhance confidence, and improve career clarity and skill development (Aprile & Knight, 2020; Jackson & Dean, 2023). There is also a growing body of evidence that work-based WIL increases the chances of students transitioning into quality, graduate-level work (ACEN, 2023b; Jackson et al., 2023).

Could work-based WIL be the missing link to better supporting higher education students with disabilities’ transition to work? Indeed, large-scale, national studies in Australia have shown that students with disabilities report among the greatest employment gains from work-based WIL compared to other equity groups after graduation (Jackson et al., 2023). For example, ACEN (2023b) reported a 13.4 percent higher full-time job attainment rate in 2023 among graduates with disabilities who had completed work-based WIL, compared to those who had not, and showed the gap was growing over time. This may relate to the transformational learning experience work-based WIL affords, developing skills, building networks and gaining industry knowledge to support future recruitment (Dollinger et al., 2023b), or otherwise how it builds greater awareness among host partners on the capabilities of students with disabilities, their capacity to contribute to the organisations and the value of inclusive recruitment and workplace practices (see Rillotta et al., 2024). Yet, as with employment, students with disabilities are less likely to engage in work-based WIL (ACEN, 2023a; Bell et al., 2021; Chatoor & Balata, 2023), and are more likely to face discrimination and stigma when they do (Dollinger et al., 2023a; Lawlis et al., 2024). This is a significant system failing which is not only detrimental for students with disabilities but also the national economy, which is failing to draw on resilient, skilled individuals who can contribute to bridging critical talent shortages. Not confined to Australia, the challenges of higher education students with disabilities’ access and experiences in work-based WIL are recognised worldwide (Gatto et al., 2021; Moriña & Biagiotti, 2022).

What are the challenges?

Research has highlighted different challenges to the participation and success of students with disabilities in work-based WIL; here, we consider the critical ones of lack of flexibility, inadequate preparation and ableist discourses.

Lack of flexibility

The first challenge relates to the design of the experiences which are often highly structured around specific days, hours, and locations. While structure has supported the scale or massification of WIL practices, and often the specific degree’s accreditation requirements (e.g., in Nursing), it has also adopted a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach which disadvantages diverse students (Gatto et al., 2021). The process is further complicated by understanding what reasonable adjustments can or cannot be offered to the student, which often requires a relational, nuanced approach (Dollinger et al., 2023b). Research has further highlighted that the experience of seeking accommodation is confusing for students, professional staff, and industry supervisors who are often unsure of what accommodations are acceptable and how to take a more developmental approach (Davis et al., 2020). Assessment processes in work-based WIL particularly lack flexibility, contextualisation and alignment with students’ needs and goals (Ajjawi et al., 2020).

Inadequate preparation and/or training

Second, a well-known issue is the lack of training and preparation for students prior to WIL experiences (Collins et al., 2019; Moriña et al., 2020). Disability is increasingly recognised not as a medical diagnosis, with the responsibility solely on the individual to navigate, but through a biopsychosocial model (Dollinger et al., 2024a). From this vantage point, ‘disability can be both absolute and dynamic, as some disabilities may diminish or arise depending on the context or environment a person is situated in’ (Dollinger et al., 2024a, p. 2). Yet little training is offered to students or industry supervisors on how environments and workplaces could be more equitably designed to maximise inclusion, not only in physical spaces (e.g., access, lighting, sound), but psychological (e.g., psychological safety, trust), and social dimensions (Dollinger et al., 2024a). Preparation and training should thus highlight that employability is a shared responsibility and encourage students and supervisors alike to have open dialogue about how inclusion can be best supported. The burden of disclosure substantially affects students cognitive and emotional load, detracting from learning during work-based WIL.

Ableist assumptions of an ‘ideal’ worker

Third, inequity for students with disabilities in WIL often manifests in less detectible though still significant ways, such the exclusion that can accompany inherent requirements and ableist, meritocratic assessment designs. Societal and cultural assumptions of ‘ideal’ workers mean those with disabilities are often considered incapable and unsuitable for the workplace, changing how they perceive themselves or are viewed by others and disempowering them from achieving career success (Hennekam & Descubes, 2024; Jammaers et al., 2016). Although difficult to gauge whether these negative stereotypes extend to work-based WIL, research on students’ lived experiences has revealed the stigma or discrimination students face and highlights students’ concerns around disclosure (e.g., Itano-Boase et al., 2021; Khan et al., 2024), with many students indicating that they go to great (and painful) lengths to mask their disability (Cameron et al., 2019; Fleming & Hay, 2021). Take, for example, situations where students must self-source a placement, perhaps using their CV or LinkedIn profiles as material. Were there unexplained career gaps, perhaps linking to when a student needed time off for a medical procedure? Or in the profile picture are they visibly disabled? While we’d like to think that these variables wouldn’t impact someone’s decision to support the students’ placement, the reality is that they often do.

What is needed?

Now we turn our attention to what practices could help students with disabilities access and be supported in their work-based WIL experiences.

Co-design

A key component to designing flexible WIL is through enabling and sharing the voices of diverse stakeholders (e.g., students, graduates, industry, academics, disability advocates) in the co-design of how WIL occurs (Jackson, 2024). Industry partner perspectives have been noticeably absent in developing fit-for-purpose affordances to more inclusive WIL (Dollinger et al., 2023a) despite their critical role in students' learning experiences at work (Fleming & Hay, 2021) and others advocating their involvement (e.g., Bell et al., 2021). An important step before joining stakeholders in the co-design process is to first understand industry’s confidence and capability in supporting students with disabilities in work-based WIL, including perceived challenges, aspirations for improvement and ways to build industry capacity for meaningful and at-scale workplace experiences.

Also needed before co-design is exploring and documenting students with disabilities’ experiences in work-based WIL, giving context to the challenges that arise and how they are responded to. Possibly presented as fictional vignettes (Dollinger et al., 2023a) these can foster rich stakeholder conversations to generate ideas and develop solutions (Hughes & Huby, 2002). Using a co-design approach that explicitly shifts the conversation from barriers to affordances will allow these rich insights to inform dialogue on potential strategies for flexible design that is focused on empowerment rather than navigating resource constraints.

A key focus of co-designing inclusive practice is how to best prepare students for work-based WIL, especially around how to enact reasonable adjustments, with the higher education institution playing a key role in facilitating dialogue with stakeholders and monitoring progress (Thompson & Brewster, 2023). Importantly, co-design should also focus on how to make work-based WIL flexible, learning about contemporary work practices that account for varying commitments, characteristics, and preferences. An example of flexibility is allowing students with disabilities to undertake work-based WIL experiences online or on-campus (Bell et al., 2021). Variation of modes must purposefully facilitate professional socialisation and network building, critical for supporting students’ transition to work (Tomlinson & Jackson, 2021).

A culture of inclusion

Second, WIL should be understood as an opportunity for higher education institutions to support inclusion in the labour market through leading by example. Higher education policies or approaches towards inclusive WIL should be crafted to intentionally support diverse students and ensure that students feel supported in disclosing their disability, negotiating adjustments and during their WIL experiences (Eckstein, 2022; Pitman et al., 2023). Processes should encourage greater individual agency and self-determination in managing disclosure (Stergiopoulos et al., 2018), ensure equitable recruitment of students with disabilities for work-based WIL, and adopt strength-based approaches to sourcing WIL opportunities and placing students with disabilities. This requires more higher education staff training (Dollinger et al., 2023b) and greater sharing of practice and resources which are reflected in established WIL quality standards (e.g., Campbell et al., 2019). Higher education institutions should also do what they can to support industry or community members to understand the benefit of having a diverse workforce, and the powerful innovation that occurs when people feel they play to strengths (O’Shea et al., 2023). They must normalise disability in industry partnerships and support partners in building greater awareness of lived experiences of disability and developing policies that promote equality and a positive, respectful environment for all workers (Cage et al., 2022).

Improving pedagogy and learning support

Finally, work-based WIL research and practices need to refocus on how students’ learning is supported, for those with disabilities, and indeed, all students (Healy, 2023). This requires intentional learning activities and/or assessment that help students reflect on what they are learning, while promoting a strengths-based lens on diversity (O’Shea et al., 2023). Key in this work is the integration of career development learning in WIL activities. For example, Dollinger et al. (2024b) advocate for the lens of ‘career stories’ (Meijers & Lengelle, 2012) to help both students and educators understand how work-based WIL can help develop students’ professional identities. Other approaches could include more structured channels for formative and summative feedback from co-workers or supervisors to build students’ self-awareness and inform their career planning and ensuring that this feedback positions diversity as a strength, not a deficit.

Another powerful mechanism is connecting students with disabilities with others during WIL, such as diverse student mentors with experience in WIL and workplace mentors for career guidance and to help students to advocate for themselves (Bellman et al., 2014; Dollinger et al., 2023b). Of course, good pedagogical design of assessment, appropriate supervision, reflective activities, and strong feedback practices matter for all work-based WIL experiences yet more concerted efforts are needed to upskill preceptors and students with disabilities in how to seek feedback and develop WIL literacies. This re-centring on the process of learning, rather than learning outcomes, is critical amid increased use of GenAI in higher education (Lodge & Ashford-Rowe, 2024) and must include attending to the varying supports needed by diverse student groups.

Conclusion

We highlight the need to tackle one-size-fits-all WIL design, lack of training and preparedness and ableism embedded in current WIL structures and practices. Now is time to shift the conversation from problematising to actionable change through flexible design strategies, strong pedagogy and support, and promoting a culture of inclusivity. This will support stakeholders’ voice and agency and reimagine equitable WIL design to tangibly improve students with disabilities’ access and experience in WIL, addressing the urgent need for more inclusion in higher education (Australian Government, 2024). While we recognise that structural issues in the labour market still play a role, we are confident that the globally heralded power of work-based WIL for enhancing employability and the ability to secure quality work (ACEN, 2023b) will improve higher education students with disabilities’ transition to work.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.