Lisbeth Kvam

Despite the known benefits of workforce participation, many individuals with disabilities remain excluded. This exploratory study utilises selected analytical tools from constructivist grounded theory to investigate how 46 diverse stakeholders perceive disability during the transition from higher education to employment. Additionally, it examines how these perceptions influence efforts toward inclusion and the advice given regarding disability disclosure. Six workshops were conducted to facilitate dialogue on pathways to work for students with disabilities. The constructivist approach to analysis leads to the development of several concepts that capture stakeholders’ perspectives on disability, their strategies for promoting inclusion, and their recommendations regarding disclosure. Disabilities are conceptualised as an asset, a liability, or as insignificant. The views of disability as an asset or a liability influence advocacy strategies and disclosure recommendations, ranging from celebrating to concealing. These attitudes also shape how individuals who disclose disabilities are perceived. Society often expects people with disabilities to disclose their conditions to promote inclusion, even though performing such can involve risks like stigma and exclusion. At the same time, employers share responsibility for creating inclusive environments through universal design and supportive practices. The findings show that both disclosure and concealment can lead to inclusion or exclusion, emphasising the importance of universally designed institutions.

Although education is supposed to be an empowering process, some students experience the opposite. Disabled university students face multiple discriminating mechanisms during their studies, indicating that they are out of place. This study explores a participatory action research (PAR) study where 11 disabled students collaborated with university staff in planning and implementing measures to promote inclusion at a Norwegian university. The study aims to contribute knowledge of the processes empowering disabled students during co-production of inclusive higher education. Qualitative data were collected during the PAR study from January 2021 to March 2022 including audio recordings from workshops, reflection meetings and a group discussion, field notes from observing students in action as well as the students’ reflections notes and notes from shared analysis and shared writing. A reflexive thematic analysis resulted in the generation of four processes that were believed to support student empowerment: being united with inclusive faculty allies, belonging in a student fellowship, identifying an injustice, and experiencing meaning and change. This study indicates ways to strengthen the universities’ capacities to work towards inclusion, social change, and justice.

Including students with disabilities in higher education is a global political objective and is considered a human right. However, many students do not feel included and hesitate to ask for the help they need to succeed in their education. This study aims to investigate the processes of requesting accommodation for students with disabilities in higher education from the perspectives of both students and support providers. Six co-creation workshops were held, with a total of 46 participants from various backgrounds relevant to exploring pathways for students with disabilities in higher education and into the workforce. The audio recordings of the workshops were analyzed using a constructivist grounded theory approach to identify and explore processes. Three interconnected processes were identified: determining whether to disclose, asking for accommodations, and studying disability. The analysis showed that these processes could be time-consuming and riddled with barriers, and they did not always result in granted accommodations. Some students ended up using their study time to research their disability and potential accommodations instead of studying their subject matter. To eliminate barriers and promote disclosure, universities should ensure a universally designed education and that staff have the necessary knowledge to assist students in obtaining accommodations.

Background: Participation is essential in health promotion initiatives such as the Norwegian Healthy Life Centres (HLCs) which offer lifestyle-related guidance to people with lifestyle-related diseases or at risk for such diseases. While participation has been studied in this setting from the perspectives of health personnel or service users, no studies have been conducted on the contextual aspects of participation through studying the interactions between the actors involved in group activities within the service. To lead group activities requires competency in facilitation of learning in groups. The aim of this study is to explore participation in group activities in the context of a Norwegian HLC by studying the interaction between the various actors involved in the activities there. Methods: An ethnographic study was designed based on participant observation of physical activity groups and a healthy nutrition group in a Norwegian HLC over a period of three months. Findings: The findings suggest that (1) the multiple roles of the Health Professional (HP), (2) the process of goal setting, and (3) time frames and the physical context are central contextual aspects of participation in this setting, leading to an ambiguous facilitation of group activities.

Most countries are facing a common challenge: a rise in the number of chronically ill patients and limited medical resources. The combination of digital support and the principles of person-centred, integrated, and proactive care (Digi-PIP care) services constitutes the most ambitious initiative for patients with long-term needs. While there is research on digital support, person-centred, integrated, and proactive care, the combination of these components has been less explored.

Little is known about how welfare technology (WT) is used in welfare services for people with intellectual disabilities. This study aimed to explore expectations, experiences, and challenges concer...

Succeeding at university can be a complex matter, and the barriers are manifold for students with disabilities (SwDs). Accommodations are available for those with needs, but these alone do not meet the political goals of inclusive educations. Student ambassadors act as experienced representatives on campuses, supporting others and gaining individual benefits themselves. Approaches building on SwDs’ experiences and capacities can be a means to overcome the complex barriers often faced throughout education. This scoping review aimed to map research on student ambassador interventions for SwDs in higher education and identify the interventions’ key concepts. The result will inform an ambassador intervention in higher education. Six electronic databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles of any design published between 2010 and December 2020. Six studies met the inclusion criteria. A thematic synthesis resulted in three key concepts: peer guidance and supportive relationships; building strategies and transferable skills; and advocating for change. However, no program utilises exclusively students with disabilities in ambassador roles. The results indicate a lack of research as well as awareness on the unexplored potential of actively involving SwDs in ambassador roles.

Background: Technology support and person-centred care are the new mantra for healthcare programmes in Western societies. While few argue with the overarching philosophy of person-centred care or the potential of information technologies, there is less agreement on how to make them a reality in everyday clinical practice. In this paper, we investigate how individual healthcare providers at four innovation arenas in Scandinavia experienced the implementation of technology-supported person-centred care for people with long-term care needs by using the new analytical framework nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) of health and care technologies. We also discuss the usability and sensitivity of the NASSS framework for those seeking to plan, implement, and evaluate technology-supported healthcare programmes. This study is part of an interdisciplinary research and development project called Patients and Professionals in Partnership (2016–2020). It originates at one of ten work packages in this project. Method: The main data consist of ethnographic field observations at the four innovation arenas and 29 interviews with involved healthcare providers. To ensure continuous updates and status on work in the four innovation arenas, we have also participated in a total of six annual network meetings arranged by the project. Results: While the NASSS framework is very useful for identifying and communicating challenges with the adoption and spread of technology-supported person-centred care initiatives, we found it less sensitive towards capturing the dedication, enthusiasm, and passion for care transformation that we found among the healthcare providers in our study. When it comes to technology-supported person-centred care, the point of no return has passed for the involved healthcare providers. To them, it is already a definite part of the future of healthcare services. How to overcome barriers and obstacles is pragmatically approached. Conclusion: Increased knowledge about healthcare providers and their visions as potential assets for care transformation might be critical for those seeking to plan, implement, and evaluate technology-supported healthcare programmes.