Student wellbeing for those with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities: same, or same but different?

The nature of student wellbeing, although now subject to some consensus, continues to engender debate. To improve student wellbeing, widely regarded to be an overarching non-academic outcome of schooling, it is generally argued that it must be consensually conceptualised in order to be operationally defined and made measurable. The new Australian Curriculum puts forward common educational curriculum and outcomes for all students – including those outcomes implicitly and explicitly related to student wellbeing, but for students with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities this is, argues the author, philosophically and practically problematic. The author puts forward a research-based conceptualisation of subjective wellbeing for these students and recommends this as a basis for guiding a continuing research agenda to improve their wellbeing.

[1]  J. Goldbart,et al.  Communication and people with the most complex needs: what works and why this is essential , 2010 .

[2]  J. Hogg Complex Needs and Complex Solutions: The Challenge of Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities , 2007 .

[3]  M. Forster Measuring the Social Outcomes of Schooling: What Does ACER Research Tell Us? , 2004 .

[4]  A. Halpern Quality of Life as a Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Transition Outcomes , 1993 .

[5]  W. Van den Noortgate,et al.  What makes them feel like they do? Investigating the subjective well-being in people with severe and profound disabilities. , 2010, Research in developmental disabilities.

[6]  D. Caulley Symbolic Interactionism: An Introduction, an Interpretation, an Integration , 2007 .

[7]  C. Vlaskamp,et al.  A Need for a Taxonomy for Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities. , 2007 .

[8]  P. Foreman,et al.  Interaction, inclusion and students with profound and multiple disabilities: towards an agenda for research and practice , 2008 .

[9]  A. Barrell People with Profound and Multiple Learning Disabilities , 2000 .

[10]  Elizabeth L. Pollard,et al.  Child Well-being: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2003 .

[11]  A. Strauss,et al.  Grounded theory methodology: An overview. , 1994 .

[12]  Robert L Schalock,et al.  The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities. , 2008, Evaluation and program planning.

[13]  D. Meier,et al.  [Assessment of the quality of life]. , 1997, Therapeutische Umschau. Revue therapeutique.

[14]  J. Fraillon Measuring Student Well-Being in the Context of Australian Schooling: Discussion Paper , 2004 .

[15]  R. Cummins,et al.  Maintaining Life Satisfaction: The Role of Positive Cognitive Bias , 2002 .

[16]  S. Forster,et al.  AFFECT ATTUNEMENT IN COMMUNICATIVE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN ADULTS WITH PROFOUND INTELLECTUAL AND MULTIPLE DISABILITIES AND SUPPORT WORKERS , 2011 .

[17]  H. Blumer,et al.  Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method , 1988 .

[18]  D. Barnett,et al.  Assessment of quality of life. , 1991, The American journal of cardiology.

[19]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[20]  G. Lyons Quality of Life for Persons with Intellectual Disabilities: A Review of the Literature , 2010 .

[21]  R. Cummins,et al.  Measuring Subjective Wellbeing: The Personal Wellbeing Index – Intellectual Disability , 2010 .

[22]  G. Lyons,et al.  Life Satisfaction for Children with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities , 2010 .

[23]  Julian Fraillon,et al.  What makes a difference? How measuring the non-academic outcomes of schooling can help guide school practice , 2009 .

[24]  John W. Travis,et al.  The wellness workbook , 1988 .

[25]  Carla Vlaskamp,et al.  Measuring the quality of life of people with profound multiple disabilities using the QOL-PMD: first results. , 2009, Research in developmental disabilities.

[26]  Mark Barber Using Intensive Interaction to add to the palette of interactive possibilities in teacher–pupil communication , 2008 .

[27]  G. Lyons The Life Satisfaction Matrix: an instrument and procedure for assessing the subjective quality of life of individuals with profound multiple disabilities. , 2005, Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR.

[28]  A. Strauss,et al.  Grounded theory , 2017 .

[29]  Nirbhay N. Singh,et al.  Mindful caregiving increases happiness among individuals with profound multiple disabilities. , 2004, Research in developmental disabilities.

[30]  Sue Roffey,et al.  Scoping Study into Approaches to Student Wellbeing: Final Report , 2008 .