Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T07:23:57.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Challenges and Opportunities in International Partnerships in Rehabilitation Counselling: An Exploratory Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2018

Na Lor ,
Wei-Mo Tu ,
David Rosenthal  and
Chen Wang
Na Lor
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Wei-Mo Tu
Affiliation:
University of North Texas
David Rosenthal*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Chen Wang
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
*
Address for correspondence: Dr. David Rosenthal, Rehabilitation Psychology, University of WI – Madison, Madison, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

We provide a comparative case study of rehabilitation counselling across the U.S., Japan and Taiwan focusing on the common challenges facing international constituents in the field. Through interviews with students, faculty and administrators from each of the respective countries, we use thematic coding analysis to identify key points of tension. Emergent themes comprise (a) systemic challenges, (b) student and faculty mobility, (c) cultural and linguistic differences and (d) lack of sustainable international leadership. We further discuss mitigation of these recurrent challenges and conclude collaborative research, student exchange and institutional partnerships may advance teaching, research and service scholarship of rehabilitation counselling programs, and, in turn, enhance the lives of people with chronic illness and disability worldwide.

Keywords

International partnershipcommunity-based rehabilitation and rehabilitation counselling
Type
Articles
Information
The Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , July 2018 , pp. 35 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alfawair, A.M.J.O., & Lee, L.W. (2015). Adaptation of the knowledge validation inventory to measure training needs of vocational rehabilitation service providers in Kuwait schools. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 58 (2), 91–104.Google Scholar
Alsaman, M.A. (2014). Effectiveness of training for international rehabilitation counseling graduates. Rehabilitation Research, Policy, and Education, 28 (2), 66–79.Google Scholar
Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2016). Rethinking Case Study Research: A Comparative Approach. Burlington, Massachusetts: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative case studies: An innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1 (1), 5–17.Google Scholar
Bentley, J.A., Bruyère, S.M., LeBlanc, J., & MacLachlan, M. (2016). Globalizing rehabilitation psychology: Application of foundational principles to global health and rehabilitation challenges. Rehabilitation Psychology, 61 (1), 65–73.Google Scholar
Boeltzig-Brown, H., Sashida, C., Nagase, O., Kiernan, W.E., & Foley, S.M. (2013). The vocational rehabilitation service system in Japan. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 38 (3), 169–183.Google Scholar
Burkard, A., Knox, S., & Hill, C.E. (2011). Data Collection. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Buys, N., Matthews, L.R., & Randall, C. (2015). Contemporary vocational rehabilitation in Australia. Disability and Rehabilitation, 37 (9), 820–824.Google Scholar
Chan, F., Leahy, M.J., Saunders, J.L., Tarvydas, V.M., Ferrin, J.M., & Lee, G. (2003). Training needs of certified rehabilitation counselors for contemporary practice. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 46 (2), 82–91.Google Scholar
Chen, R.K., Jo, S.J., Ong, L.Z., & Kotbungkair, W. (2007). Rehabilitation services and education in four Asian countries: Thailand, South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia. Rehabilitation Education, 21 (4), 231–240.Google Scholar
Chen, R.K., Za Ong, L., & Brodwin, M.G. (2008). Making a global impact: The United States' role in training international students as rehabilitation counselors and educators. Rehabilitation Education, 22 (3–4), 193–202.Google Scholar
Chiang, P.C. (2009). The global mapping of low vision services. (Doctoral dissertation). Melbourne, University of Melbourne. Retrieved from https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/35343/253972_Peggy_Chiang_Thesis_2009_no_archival.pdf?sequence=1_.Google Scholar
Cleaver, S., & Nixon, S. (2014). A scoping review of 10 years of published literature on community-based rehabilitation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36 (17), 1385–1394.Google Scholar
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Ditchman, N., Wu, M., Chan, F., Fitzgerald, S., Lin, C.P., & Tu, W.M. (2014). Vocational rehabilitation. In Strauser, D.R. (Eds.), Career Development, Employment, and Disability in Rehabilitation: From Theory to Practice (pp. 343–360). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Donnell, C.M., Robertson, S.L., & Shannon, C.D. (2009). Multicultural education and training in rehabilitation counseling education programs. Rehabilitation Education, 23 (3–4), 193–201.Google Scholar
Elliott, R., Fischer, C.T., & Rennie, D.L. (1999). Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38 (3), 215–229.Google Scholar
Evans, P.J., Zinkin, P., Harpham, T., & Chaudury, G. (2001). Evaluation of medical rehabilitation in community based rehabilitation. Social Science & Medicine, 53 (3), 333–348.Google Scholar
Frain, M., Ferrin, M., Rosenthal, D.A., & Wampold, B.E. (2006). A meta-analysis of rehabilitation outcomes based on educational level of the counselor. Journal of Rehabilitation, 72, 10–18.Google Scholar
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (2009). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction publishers.Google Scholar
Goodrick, D. (2014). Comparative case studies. Methodological Briefs: Impact Evaluation 9, Florence: UNICEF Office of Research.Google Scholar
Gupta, N., Castillo-Laborde, C., & Landry, M.D. (2011). Health-related rehabilitation services: Assessing the global supply of and need for human resources. BMC Health Services Research, 11, 1–11.Google Scholar
Hampton, N.Z., & Olney, M.F. (2008). Analysis of an innovative blended international psychiatric rehabilitation Course. Rehabilitation Education, 22 (3&4), 203–214.Google Scholar
Hampton, N.Z., & Sax, C. (2007). Introduction and overview of the special issue in international rehabilitation education. Rehabilitation Education, 21 (4), 219–222.Google Scholar
Hill, C.E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E.N., Hess, S.A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52 (2), 196–205.Google Scholar
Hill, C.E., Thompson, B.J., & Williams, E.N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist, 25 (4), 517–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000097254001.Google Scholar
Hoyt, W.T., & Bhati, K.S. (2007). Principles and practices: An empirical examination of qualitative research in the Journal of Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54 (2), 201–210.Google Scholar
Hu, X., Oertle, K.M., & Bong, X. (2007). Rehabilitation education and services: A Chinese perspective. Rehabilitation Education, 21 (4), 251–258.Google Scholar
Iemmi, V., Kuper, H., Blanchet, K., Gibson, L., Kumar, K., Rath, S., . . . & Weber, J. (2016). Community-based rehabilitation for people with disabilities. International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, Summary 4, 1–26.Google Scholar
Kuan, Y., & Wang, S. (2009, July). Is Government's interventions too much? The impact of public authorities on the development of social enterprises in Taiwan. Paper presented at 2nd EMES International Conference on Social Enterprise, Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
Kuipers, P., & Sabuni, L.P. (2016). Community-based rehabilitation and disability-inclusive development: On a winding path to an uncertain destination. In Shaun, G. & Karen, S. (Eds.), Disability in the Global South (pp. 453–467). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Kwok, J. (2007). Education and personnel training in Hong Kong: A decade of drastic reform. Rehabilitation Education, 21 (4), 269–276.Google Scholar
Lewis, A., Graham, K., & Quamar, A. (2014). Beyond discipline-based expertise: Preparing global leaders in rehabilitation. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 45 (2), 26–31.Google Scholar
Lin, H. (2008). Transition services for high school students with disabilities in Taiwan. Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 14, 40–51.Google Scholar
Matthews, L.R., Buys, N., Randall, C., Marfels, B., Niehaus, M., & Bauer, J.F. (2015). A comparative study of the job tasks, functions, and knowledge domains of rehabilitation professionals providing vocational rehabilitation services in Australia and Germany. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 58 (2), 80–90.Google Scholar
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Mpofu, E., Jelsma, J., Maart, S., Levers, L.L., Montsi, M.M., Tlabiwe, P., . . . Tchombe, T.M.S. (2007). Rehabilitation in seven sub-Saharan African countries: Personnel education and training. Rehabilitation Education, 21 (4), 223–230.Google Scholar
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Rennie, D.L. (2004). Reflexivity and person centered counseling. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44 (2), 182–203.Google Scholar
Siu, F.W., Brodwin, M.G., Huang, I.C., Brodwin, E.R., & Kier, C. (2014). International collaborative cross-cultural teaching project: United States and Taiwan. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 45 (2), 39–45.Google Scholar
Stake, R.E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Strohmer, D.C., & Chan, F. (2015). Introduction to the special issue on international rehabilitation counseling research. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 58 (2), 67–69.Google Scholar
Szymanski, E.M. (1991). The relationship of level of rehabilitation counselor education to rehabilitation client outcome in the Wisconsin division of vocational rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 35, 23–37.Google Scholar
Thompson, B.J., Vivino, B.L., & Hill, C.E. (2012). Coding the data: Domains and core ideas. In Hill, C.E. (Ed.), Consensual Qualitative Research: A Practical Resource for Investigating Social Science Phenomena (pp. 103–116). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Yaeda, J. (1998). Vocational rehabilitation services in Japan: Trends and future perspectives. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 11, 39–51.Google Scholar
Yaeda, J., Iwanaga, K., Fujikawa, M., Chan, F., & Bezyak, J. (2015). The use of evidence-based practice among Japanese vocational rehabilitation professionals. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 58 (2), 70–79.Google Scholar
Wang, Y.T., & Lin, Y.J. (2017). Vocational rehabilitation case manager factors associated with vocational rehabilitation service program outcomes for people with disabilities in Taiwan-an exploratory study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 39 (3), 244–250.Google Scholar
Williams, E.N., & Morrow, S.L. (2009). Achieving trustworthiness in qualitative research: A pan-paradigmatic perspective. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4–5), 576–582.Google Scholar
World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
World Health Organization. (2011). World Report on Disability. Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/en/.Google Scholar
Zhu, Y., & Degeneffe, C.E. (2011). International students in rehabilitation counseling education programs: Results from a national survey. Rehabilitation Research, Policy & Education, 25 (1/2), 73–85.Google Scholar