BACKGROUND
According
to Mckinnon, Sharynne and
Reilly (2007), stuttering is the most serious speech disorder compared to voice
and articulation disorders. This is a result of the negative traumatic
consequences an individual goes through in all aspects of life. Stuttering is
characterized by repetitions, prolongations, interjections, hesitations and
blocks (Ogutu, 2005). This results in involuntary
disruption of a person’s capacity to speak (Craig, Hancock & Tran, 2003).
This affects an individual’s physical behaviour,
emotions, perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, intentions and physiological
responses (Ammon, 2010).
Fulya (2014) defined
vocational aspirations as having a strong desire to pursue a certain job or
career such as being a doctor, teacher, farmer, or an engineer. Vocational
aspirations among learners are important as they influence attainment and hard
work (Fulya, 2014). Fulya
(2014) carried out a study in Turkey explored the fifth grade elementary school
students’ vocational aspiration and the factors affecting it. Sample size
consisted of 115 students in 20 elementary public schools with which
face-to-face interviews were conducted. Findings showed that engineering,
medicine and teaching were the most preferred vocations by students. Boys were found to aspire to traditionally masculine
occupations while girls aspired to traditionally female occupations. Parents
seemed to be the most influential factor on students’ vocational aspirations,
followed by the favorite academic subject and social environment. On the other
hand, vocational guidance activities were the least influential factor, which
was not a surprise given that approximately 90% of the students indicated
absence of vocational guidance activities. Based on the findings, improving the
quality and quantity of the vocational guidance activities at schools is
suggested.
Zhang, Saltukaroglu,
Hough, and Kalinowski ((2009) carried out a study to
assess the impact of stuttering on Persons Who Stutter (PWS) in various life
aspects such as vocation, romance, daily activities, social life, family, and
general lifestyle. The target population consisted of 91 university students,
who answered questionnaire with 56 statements on a 7-point likert
scale. Forty-four participants were randomly selected to assume a stuttering
identity and 47 respondents to assume fluent identity.
Zhang et al. (2009), the results indicated
that there was a significant difference between fluent and stuttering persons.
The significance difference between the
groups was found in more than two thirds of items regarding employment,
romance, daily activities, and in fewer than half of items regarding family,
social life, and general life style (p <0.001). The study concluded that
social penalties associated with stuttering appeared to be apparent to fluent
individuals, especially in areas of vocation, romance, and daily activities
(Zhang et al., 2009).
Both Fulya (2014)
and Zhang et al. (2009) studies were related with regard to vocational
aspirations among learners. Fulya (2014) study was
based on vocational aspirations among regular learners. Secondly, key
influential factors on students’ vocational aspiration were parents, favourite academic subject, and social environment. The
influence of other factors such as stuttering however was not established.
Zhang et al. (2009) study focused on
how stuttering influenced the type of vocations among PWS unlike Fulya (2014) who focused on vocational aspirations among
regular learners. Both studies, however did not determine how stuttering
effects such as fear, anxiety, frustrations, embarrassment, and self-stigma
influenced vocational aspirations among young adolescent LWS. The current study
bears similarity to Zhang et al. (2009) with regard to the impact of stuttering
on vocations. Zhang et al. (2009)
study compared fluent and stuttering persons with regard to vocation, romance,
daily activities, family, and social life. Zhang et al. (2009) found out that stuttering had impact on vocation of
PWS but failed to address whether stuttering had an influence on vocational
aspirations among PWS. The present study determined the influence of stuttering
effects on vocational aspirations among adolescent LWS in school. In view of
the fact that data on vocational aspirations of LWS was limited, the present
study is an important addition on stuttering in regular primary schools. Therefore, there was need to determine how
stuttering effects such as anxiety, fear, embarrassment, frustrations, and
self-stigma influenced vocational aspirations among young adolescent LWS.
Gabel, Blood, Tellis
and Althouse (2004) carried out a study to establish
role entrapment among people who stutter in careers. The purpose of this study
was to explore whether people who stutter experience role entrapment in the
form of vocational stereotyping. To accomplish this, 385 university students
reported their perceptions of appropriate career choices for people who
stutter. Direct survey procedures, utilizing the newly developed Vocational
Advice Scale (VAS) were used in this study. Comparisons for the main effect of
speaker status (person who stutters and person who does not stutter) were
conducted using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results of this
analysis suggested that the university students reported an overall perception
that stuttering affected career opportunities and that 20 careers were judged
to be inappropriate choices for people who stutter. Conversely, 23 careers were
judged to be appropriate choices for people who stutter. Findings of this study
provided an initial data that supports that people who stutter may suffer from
role entrapment related to vocational choice.
The
present study was similar to Gabel et al. (2004) with regard to role entrapment
in career choice towards persons who stutter. The present study examined the
influence of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations among LWS in regular
primary schools, unlike Gabel et al. (2004) study which focused on
role-entrapment at work place among PWS. Gabel et al’s
(2004) study used a comparative design; the present study used correlational
design to find out the effects of stuttering on vocational aspirations among
LWS. Gabel et al. study used analysis
of variance (ANOVA) for data analysis while the present study used multiple
regressions to find out how each effect of stuttering influenced each component
of educational achievement among LWS. Unlike Gabel et al. (2004) study that
used Vocational Advice Scale (VAS) for data collection, the present study used
rating scale questionnaire and interview schedule as instruments for data
collection. In addition, the study by Gabel et al. (2004) that was carried out
on non-stuttering individuals on which careers were appropriate and
inappropriate for PWS, the present study was carried out among LWS themselves;
who were the primary respondents. The present study was more factual and valid
because it was carried out among LWS themselves, unlike Gabel et al. (2004) study
which was based on perceptions of non-stuttering individuals.
Gabel, Hughes and Daniels (2008) carried out
a study in USA on the effects of stuttering severity and therapy involvement on
role entrapment of PWS. The purpose of the study was to examine whether a group
of university students would report role entrapment of PWS in form of
occupational stereotyping. The sample size involved was 260 students who
completed the Vocational Advice Scale (VAS). Results suggested that stuttering
severity and the level of therapy involvement did not appear to alter the
judges’ reports for all of the careers except for the career of speech
therapist. Findings suggested that university students reported that 16 of the
careers listed on the VAS were appropriate choices for PWS and were less
certain about advising for 27 other careers. Thus, findings from this study do
not support the notion that stuttering leads to role entrapment in the form of
vocational stereotyping and variations in therapy involvement or stuttering
severity do not change perceptions of role entrapment.
McAllister, Collier and Shepstone (2013)
carried out a study in Britain to determine the impact of stuttering on
educational and employment outcomes when these other factors were controlled.
Data was analyzed from the National Child Development Study (NCDS), a British
birth cohort study that has followed a group of over 18,500 people born in 1958
from birth and throughout life. It has collected data from cohort members as
well as their parents, teachers, and doctors covering topics as diverse as
health and development, cognitive abilities, socio-economic circumstances,
education, employment, and relationships. When the members were 7, 11 and 16
years-old, their parents were asked to say whether their child stuttered. By
the time they were 16 years, 217 indicated they stuttered. Educational
achievement and employment outcomes for PWS were compared with those who do not
stutter of the same age who took part in the study.
The employment analyses investigated the
impact of stuttering on the likelihood of being unemployed prior to age 23, pay
at 23 and 50, and social class of occupation at 23 and 50. In all the analyses
the researcher determined whether there was an association between stuttering
and the outcome variable, and then looked at what happened when we controlled
for the other factors. This second ‘multivariate’ analysis provided a more
valid assessment of the impact of stuttering on the outcomes (McAllister et
al., 2013).
Findings by McAllister et al. (2013)
indicated there was a limited amount of evidence that adolescent stuttering
might have a negative impact on later employment outcomes. Those reported to
stutter in adolescence were not significantly more likely than controls to
experience unemployment lasting a month or longer at the start of their working
lives, nor did they earn significantly less at 23 or 50, or have a greater
likelihood of being in a lower-status occupation at 23. But they were more
likely to be in an occupation in a lower socio-economic class at 50. This may
arise because of discrimination on the part of employers. Alternatively, it may
be the result of the use of avoidance on the part of those who stutter. Many
occupations with higher socioeconomic status (professional and managerial
posts) required, or were perceived to require, good verbal communication
abilities. PWS may avoid such jobs through fear that they will stand no chance
of being offered such work or that their stuttering might prevent them from
carrying out the role effectively. They may instead seek occupations that are
lower in socio-economic status, which require less talking in order to avoid
embarrassment and frustrations at work place (McAllister et al., 2013).
Klein and Hood (2004) carried out a study to
examine the impact of stuttering on job performance and employability. The
method involved administration of a 17-item survey that was completed by 232
people who stutter, aged 18 years or older. Results indicated that more than
70.0% of people who stutter agreed that stuttering decreases one's chances of
being hired or promoted. More than 33.0% of people who stutter believed
stuttering interfered with job performance, and 20.0% had actually turned down
a job or promotion because of their stuttering. Results also indicated that men
and minorities were more likely to view stuttering as handicapping than women
and Caucasians. These findings suggested that people who stutter believed
stuttering was handicapping in the workplace. The results may be helpful for clinicians
who work with people who stutter.
Klompas and Ross (2004)
carried out a study to investigate the life experiences of a group of South
African adults who stutter and the impact of stuttering on their quality of
life. Participants were 16 adults with a mean age of 28.9 and ranging from 20
to 59 years. Methods involved individual interviews designed to explore the
life domains of education; social life; employment; speech therapy; family and
marital life; and identity, beliefs and emotional issues. Main findings of the
study indicated that the majority of participants perceived their stuttering
did not have an adverse effect on their choice of occupation, ability to obtain
work, and relationships with managers and co-workers, although it was perceived
to influence their work performance and hamper their chances for promotion.
Although findings of this study concur with the present study with regard to
vocation. Klompas and Ross (2004) focused on adult
PWS aged between 28 to 59 years. The present study was carried out on a
different age group; adolescent learners in class 6 to 8. In addition, the
present study focused on vocational aspirations of LWS, unlike Klompas and Ross who focused on impact of stuttering in
work environment.
Study findings by Zhang et al. (2009), Gabel
et al. (2004), McAllister et al. (2013), Klompas and
Ross (2005) were related as all focused on stuttering versus vocational
aspirations and later employment. Fulya’s (2014)
study was based on factors influencing vocational aspirations among regular
learners while Zhang et al (2009) was based on the impact of stuttering on
various aspects of life such as employment. In addition, the study by Gabel et
al. (2004) was based on role entrapment among PWS in career and how stuttering
impacted on career opportunities. Gabel et al. (2008), study focused on effects
of stuttering severity on role entrapment among LWS, where the study was done
on non-stuttering university students. McAllister et al. (2013) was carried out
to establish the impact of stuttering on employment outcomes. Findings
indicated that there was no evidence adolescent stuttering might affect later
employment. Fulya’s
(2014) study examined factors that affect vocational aspirations among
elementary students. Key factor such as disability was not studied. The present
study sought to determine how stuttering effects influence vocational
aspirations among LWS. Stuttering is a speech disability.
The
study by Zhang et al. (2009) was carried out on fluent individuals who assumed
the stuttering condition. Thus, the present study was based on real facts from
the LWS themselves, unlike Zhang et al. (2009) study which was based on
perceptions of the non-stuttering students, who assumed the stuttering
condition. The present study was correlational, unlike Zhang et al. (2009)
study which was comparative. The present study sought to determine how
stuttering effects influenced vocational aspirations; hence it was
correlational. In view of the fact that data on vocational aspirations of LWS was
limited.
The current study was carried out on CWS in
primary schools unlike the study by Gabel et al. (2008) which was carried out
on non-stuttering university students to get their perceptions on role
entrapment. Secondly, the current study used questionnaire and interview
schedule while Gabel et al. used VAS. Thirdly, the present study sought to
determine the influence of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations among
LWS. Unlike Gabel et al. (2008) study which found out role entrapment among PWS.
In addition, the present study was carried out to find out which specific
vocations LWS aspired to be in future and which ones the learner did not aspire
to be in future, unlike Gabel et al. (2008) which was not specific on
vocational entrapment among PWS.
Klein and Hood (2004) focused on adult PWS,
however how stuttering influenced young adolescents in vocational aspirations
was unknown, there was need to carry out a study among young adolescents LWS to
get their views on how stuttering effects influenced choice of vocation in
future. The current study bears similarity to Klein and Hood (2004) with regard
to the influence of stuttering on careers. The present study examined the
influence of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations among adolescent learners
who stutter in regular schools, unlike Klein and Hood (2004) who used adults
aged 18 years and above. Thirdly, Klein and Hood used a 17-item survey as
instrument for data collection, the present study employed a rating scale,
multiple choice questionnaire and interview schedule.
The present study bears similarity to Klein
and Hood (2004) with regard to impact of stuttering on job performance. The
current study established the influence of stuttering effects on vocational
aspirations among learners who stutter. From the review of literature, a few
empirical researches have been done in Africa and hardly any in Kenya on
stuttering. Therefore, there was need to carry out a study to establish the
influence of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations, a key educational
achievement element among learners who stutter in regular primary schools in Kakamega County, Kenya.
According to a baseline survey across the
former Western province in EARC centers (20102013), Kakamega
County had the highest number of Learners who Stutter LWS (138), followed by Vihiga (84), Bungoma (33), and Busia (10) in primary schools. Baseline survey (2014/2015)
reports indicated only a few, 179 LWS were found in 20 schools across Kakamega County. LWS were also found to experience difficulties
in social activities, class participation, and vocational aspirations. This
necessitated a study to be carried out in Kakamega
County. Results of baseline survey across various EARCs in Western Kenya.
How these stuttering effects influenced
vocational aspirations among young adolescent LWS in Kenya was also unknown.
Therefore, the current study was carried out to determine the influence of
stuttering effects on vocational aspirations among young adolescent LWS in
regular primary schools in Kakamega County, Kenya.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to determine the influence
of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations among young adolescent learners
who stutter in regular primary schools in Kakamega
County, Kenya.
METHODOLOGY
The
study employed descriptive survey and correlational research designs.
Descriptive survey design was used to find out the classroom participation
status among LWS. Correlational design was used in this study to find out the
relationship between effects of stuttering on classroom participation among
LWS. The study was carried out in 20 regular primary schools in Kakamega County. The target population consisted of 84
learners who stutter in class six, seven and eight, 2301 regular learners in
class six, seven and eight, 120 teachers and 20 head teachers were involved in
the study. The study employed multi-stage sampling technique, where it employed
purposive, simple random and saturated sampling techniques. Purposive sampling
was used to select schools which have LWS in Kakamega
County. Stratified random sampling was used to select 329 regular learners in
class six, seven and eight. Where sample size (n) was estimated using Krejcie and Morgan formula (1970). Stratified random
sampling was used to avoid biasness. This technique ensured that each member of
the target population had equal and independent chance of being included in the
sample (Mugenda and Mugenda,
2003). Saturated sampling technique was used to select 76 learners who stutter
in class six, seven and eight, 108 teachers and 18 head-teachers. Saturated
sampling technique ensured all participants take part in the study, because the
population of learners who stutter, teachers and head teachers is small. The
technique ensures all categories of population presented were included in the
sample (Best and Kahn, 2006).
Table 1: Target Population and Sample Size
|
Category
Of Respondents
|
N
|
Sample
size
(n)
|
%
|
|
Learners who Stutter
|
84
|
76
|
90
|
|
Regular learners
|
2301
|
329
|
14
|
|
Teachers
|
120
|
108
|
90
|
|
Head teachers
|
20
|
18
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
N-Target population,
%-percentage of sample size.
The
study used questionnaire, interview schedule, observation schedule as the
instruments of data collection. Content validity was used to establish the
accuracy of the research instruments on extent to which the effects of
stuttering occur among LWS. Content validity was established by presenting the
research instruments to experts from Special Needs Education department, Maseno University who are conversant in content on
stuttering to ascertain. The experts judged the instruments independently to
ensure that all the content on each test item addressed specific objective on
vocational aspirations and on effects of stuttering on vocational aspirations.
The experts made recommendations on each section testing each objective. Later
corrections were made based on recommendations before the instruments were used
in the field. Reliability of the research instruments was established using
test-retest method through a pilot study. For pilot study, ten percent of the
study population was selected; where 8 learners who stutter, 230 regular
learners, 8 teachers and 2 head-teachers were selected. Reliability for the
questionnaire for learners who stutter was 0.89, while reliability for regular
learners’ questionnaire was 0.86. Reliability for interview schedule was
established through triangulation. Necessary corrections were be made on the
research instruments before being administered to the respondents. However, the
population used for pilot study was not used in the actual study. For data
analysis, quantitative data collected from the questionnaires was coded
manually, entered into SPSS data sheet before analyzing it using the
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) – 16.0 version. For objective
one, means and standard deviations were used to establish the classroom
participation status among LWS, while multiple regression analysis was employed
to establish the effects of stuttering on classroom participation while
controlling for the effect of age, gender, socio-economic status of the
parents, and their education level. Qualitative data collected from interview
and observation schedules was organized, put into various categories and
reported in an ongoing process as themes and sub-themes emerged. Results were
presented using tables.
In coding and interpretation of the
questionnaires from LWS and regular learners, the positively stated items from
closed ended questionnaire were coded with each of the five points rating scale
being given: Always (A) - 5 points, Very Often (VO)- 4 points, Often ( O)- 3
points, Rare (R) - 2 points, Not at All (NA) - 1 point. For those statements
that were negative, reverse coding was employed in order to find the desired results,
where Always (A)- 1 point, Very Often (VO)- 2 points, Often (O)- 3 points,
Rare- 4 points, Not at All (NA)- 5 points. Means and standard deviations for
each item on extent to which effects of stuttering occur among LWS in Kakamega County were run using SPSS. In the interpretation
of scores, a mean score of above 3.0 indicated a positive influence while a
mean score of 3.0 implied a neutral influence while a mean score of below 3.0
implied a negative influence. For
objective on effects of stuttering on vocational aspirations, multiple
hierarchical regression analysis was used. In multiple regressions, the control
variables such as age, socio-economic status and gender of learner were first
analyzed in model 1 to establish their effect on vocational aspirations without
controlling. In model 2, the control variables were controlled and how the five
effects of stuttering influenced vocational aspirations established using enter
method of multiple regressions. For
interpretation of multiple regressions, significance level of p (sig) < 0.05
for each independent variable (5 effects of stuttering) was found to have an
effect on vocational aspirations.
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSIONS
Data
on the effects of stuttering on vocational aspirations among LWS was collected
using a questionnaire, coded, analyzed, and presented in Tables 2,3,4 and 5.
Preferred Vocational
Aspirations according to LWS
Data
on vocational aspirations that were preferred by LWS was analyzed using means
and presented in Table 2.
Table
2: Preferred Vocational Aspirations according to LWS
|
|
Vocation
|
M
|
|
1
|
LWS prefer teaching profession
|
2.75
|
|
2
|
LWS prefer engineering profession
|
4.45
|
|
3
|
LWS prefer profession of being a lawyer
|
2.30
|
|
4
|
LWS prefer preaching as a vocation
|
2.13
|
|
5
|
LWS prefer being a poet
|
2.66
|
|
6
|
LWS prefer business profession
|
4.04
|
|
7
|
LWS prefer farming profession
|
4.53
|
|
8
|
LWS prefer mechanic profession
|
3.86
|
|
9
|
LWS prefer carpentry
|
3.58
|
|
10
|
LWS prefer being a politician
|
2.43
|
|
11
|
LWS prefer artist profession
|
4.51
|
|
12
|
LWS prefer being a medical doctor or a nurse
|
3.96
|
KEY: M-
Mean
Table
2 shows results on preferred vocational aspirations according to learners who
stutter. The preference of vocations was rated as follows: farming (Mean=
4.53), being an artist (Mean= 4.51), engineering (Mean= 4.45), medical doctor
or nurse (Mean= 3.96), mechanic (Mean= 3.86), carpentry (Mean= 3.58). Least
rated vocations in terms of preference included: teaching (Mean= 2.75), poetry
(Mean= 2.66), politician (Mean= 2.43), preaching (Mean= 2.13). Vocations that
were preferred to a large extent required less verbal communication, while
vocations that were preferred by LWS to a smaller extent required much verbal
communication. This implied that LWS preferred vocations that required less
talking as compared to vocations that required much talking.
Findings of this study were in agreement with
study findings by Gabel, Blood, Tellis and Althouse (2004), who noted that some careers were
inappropriate for persons who stutter. In the present study, careers which were
least preferred by LWS included; teaching (Mean= 2.75), poetry (M= 2.66),
politicking (Mean= 2.43), preaching (Mean- 2.13). Teaching, poetry, politics
and preaching are vocations that require much verbal communication. The least
rated vocations by LWS demanded much verbal communication. These vocations that
were less preferred by LWS required much talking, while vocations that were
high rated by LWS such as being a farmer, an artist and an engineer require
less talking. This implied that LWS hated vocations that demanded much talking.
Vocational aspirations of LWS tended to prefer vocations that demand less
talking activities, such as farming and engineering; and least preferred
vocations that demanded much talking such as teaching. This might be as a
result of fear to stutter in case the learner pursued vocations that demand
much talking.
The present study is related to Zhang et al.
(2009), and Klompas and Ross (2004) with regard to
impact of stuttering on vocation, it is worth noting that stuttering effects
negatively influenced vocational aspirations among LWS. This is because most
LWS were unwilling to persue vocations such as
teaching, politicking and preaching, because LWS feared the vocations that
required much talking as a result of stuttering condition.
From interviews, LWS had vocational
aspirations with preference to vocations that require less talking such as
engineering than a politician. Findings by Klein and Hood (2004) were closely
related to present findings; both agreed stuttering had impact on vocation. The
present study found out that as a result of stuttering effects, LWS preferred
vocations that require less verbal communication. Therefore, stuttering effects
negatively influenced vocational aspirations, a key educational achievement
element among LWS.
The current study differed with study
findings by Klompas and Ross (2004), who noted that
PWS did not have difficulties on choice of occupation, ability to obtain work
and form relations with others at work. In the current study, LWS preferred to
be a farmer (M= 4.53), an artist (M= 4.51), an engineer (4.45) or a doctor as
opposed to being a teacher (M= 2.75), preacher (2.13) or politician (2.43).
This was because they preferred vocations that required little talking.
Based on the findings of the study, it is
important to observe that LWS had difficulties in vocational aspirations as a
result of negative stuttering effects as opposed to Klompas
and Ross (2004) findings that indicated persons who stutter had no difficulties
in choice of job or vocation. Thus, stuttering effects such as anxiety,
self-stigma, frustrations, fear and embarrassment negatively influenced
vocational aspirations among LWS in primary schools.
Reasons for
Preferring Vocational Option Chosen
Data on
reasons for preferring the vocational option chosen was collected using a
questionnaire, coded, analyzed and presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Reasons for Preferring the Vocational Option
chosen in Question One for a Person who stutters (LWS, n= 76)
|
|
Reason
|
f
|
%
|
|
|
The vocational
option requires less talking
|
47
|
61.8
|
|
The vocational
option earns more money
|
14
|
18.4
|
|
The vocational
option is interesting
|
13
|
17.1
|
|
The vocational
option is more demanding in terms of time and work
|
2
|
2.6
|
|
Total
|
76
|
100.0
|
Key: f- frequency, %- percentage
Table
3 shows data on reasons that led LWS to choose particular vocations. From Table
21, most LWS indicated that they preferred the chosen professions. This
was because it required less talking 47
(61.8%), because it earns more money 14 (18.4%), because the vocation is
interesting 13 (17.1%), and that the vocational option is more demanding in
terms of time and work 2 (2.6%). Therefore, most LWS indicated that they
preferred the chosen vocation because it required less talking.
Findings of this study concurred with those
by Gabel et al. (2004) who observed that university students reported an
overall perception that stuttering affected career opportunities among PWS; 20
careers were judged to be inappropriate choices for people who stutter.
Conversely, 23 careers were judged to be appropriate choices for people who
stutter.. In the present study, most LWS preferred the
chosen profession because it required less talking 47 (61.8%). From the results
in Table 3, vocations that were preferred included farming, being an artist,
engineering, and medicine. This was because the professions required less
talking. Thus, LWS felt that if they pursue vocations that require less talking
in future, they might not be exposed to negative stuttering effects such as
fear, anxiety, and stigma at the work place. Therefore, stuttering effects had
significant negative influence on vocational aspirations among LWS. It is worth
noting that Gabel et al. (2014) and the present studies agreed on role
entrapment in vocational aspirations among PWS. Both the present study and
Gabel et al. (2014) studies indicated stuttering affected career choice in
different age groups right from primary school to university. However, the
present study found out that LWS preferred vocations that require less use of
spoken communication.
Reasons for not preferring the Least Rated
Vocation
Learners
who stutter were asked to choose reasons for not preferring the least rated
vocation from the options given. Data on reasons why LWS rated least some
professions was coded and analysed and presented in
Table 4.
Table
4: Reasons for not preferring the least Rated Vocation
|
|
Response
|
F
|
%
|
|
|
LWS fear career
that require much talking
|
53
|
69.7
|
|
LWS hate career
that has low pay
|
7
|
9.2
|
|
The career is
demanding
|
10
|
13.2
|
|
The career is
boring
|
6
|
7.9
|
|
Total
|
76
|
100.0
|
f- frequency
%- percentage
Table
4 shows data on responses of LWS regarding why they did not prefer the career
in question. From the table, most LWS indicated they fear careers that require
much use of spoken communication 53 (69.7%) and that the career is demanding 10
(13.2%). A few indicated that they hate the career because it has low pay 7
(9.2%) while the least rated reason for disliking the career is that it was
boring 6 (7.9%). Therefore, LWS did not prefer the career that they least rated
because the career requires much talking.
Findings of the present study concurred with
findings by Zhang et al. (2009) findings who found out that stuttering impacted
negatively on the quality of life of PWS such as vocation. In the present
study, most LWS rated they were afraid of pursuing careers that require much
talking 53 (69.7%). This was as a result of inadequate fluency which made them
to be afraid of careers that required much talking in order to avoid being
frustrated and embarrassed in future while talking at work place.
The Extent to which the Effects of Stuttering
Affect Vocational Aspirations among LWS
LWS
were asked to respond to what extent the effects of stuttering affect their
vocational aspirations. Data on the extent to which the effects of stuttering
affect vocational aspirations among LWS was collected, coded, analyzed and
presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Extent to which Effects of Stuttering Affect
Vocational Aspirations among LWS (N= 76 LWS)
|
|
Response
|
F
|
%
|
|
|
To a very large
extent
|
28
|
36.8
|
|
To a large extent
|
15
|
19.7
|
|
To some extent
|
17
|
22.4
|
|
To a small extent
|
8
|
10.5
|
|
Not at all
|
8
|
10.5
|
|
Total
|
76
|
100.0
|
Key: f- frequency, %- percentage
From
Table 5 LWS indicated the extent to which effects of stuttering affect
vocational aspirations as follows: to a very large extent 28 (36.8%), to some
extent 17 (22.4%), to a large extent 15 (19.7%), to a small extent 8 (10.5%),
and not at all 8 (10.5%). Most (36.8%) of LWS indicated that the effects of
stuttering affected their vocational aspirations to a very large extent (36.8%)
while few indicated to a small extent (10.5%), and not at all (10.5%). This
means that most LWS agreed stuttering effects affected vocational aspirations
among LWS.
Findings of this study disagreed with study
findings by Klompas and Ross (2004), who indicated
that the majority of PWS perceived stuttering, did not have an adverse effect
on the choice of occupation, ability to obtain work, and relationships with
managers and co-workers, although it was perceived to influence their work
performance and hamper their chances for promotion. In the present study, the
majority of LWS noted that stuttering effects influenced vocational aspirations
among LWS to a very large extent (28, 36.8%) and to a large extent (15, 19.7%).
Unlike in Klompas and Ross (2004), effects of
stuttering affected vocational aspirations among LWS. This is because LWS did
not prefer vocations that involved much talking. This was in order to avoid
embarrassment and frustrations in future vocation.
To validate the quantitative data on the
influence of stuttering effects on vocational aspirations, the researcher
further triangulated the quantitative results with results from the interview
schedule. From the interview schedule, several issues arose.
LWS were interviewed on how they felt
stuttering effects influenced their vocational aspirations. Seventy three LWS
(96.0%) reported that stuttering effects influenced their vocational
aspirations. For example,
LWS 015
reported:
I would prefer a job that involves less talking and dealing with few
people. This will help me to avoid stuttering a lot while talking.
LWS 46 reported:
I would like to be an engineer so that I do
not talk much. I would go for work that does not involve much talking to avoid
being laughed at by others as I talk.
LWS 052
reported:
I would like to a job that doesn’t involve
much talking so that I don’t feel embarrassed at work place. I fear jobs that
require much verbal communication because of my condition.
The
second question with regard to vocational aspirations was on the type of
vocation they would like to pursue after school. Most LWS rated they would
prefer to pursue vocations such as engineering, being a doctor, farming, pilot,
carpentry, being a shopkeeper, and mechanic. All these vocations listed above
by LWS in the interview require less talking. When more information was probed
as to why they preferred the vocation, most LWS reported they prefer the
vocation noted because it require less talking and they fear if they do jobs
that require much talking, they will be embarrassed and frustrated at work
place as a result of stuttering.
In
addition, teachers and head teachers were also interviewed on the effects of stuttering on vocational aspirations. Teachers
were interviewed on what advice they would give a LWS in terms of vocational
choice. Ninety
two teachers (85.0%) interviewed reported they would advise a LWS to pursue a
vocation that requires less talking so that the child does not suffer from
frustrations and embarrassment as a result of stuttering.
Teacher 72 said:
I would
advise a learner who stutters to undertake vocations that
do not require too much talking to avoid frustrations and embarrassment at work
place as a result of stuttering.
Teacher 83 said:
I would advise LWS to pursue a job such as
engineering because it requires less verbal communication. This would make me
the learner to avoid being frustrated and embarrassed at work place in futat work place in future
as a result of stuttering when talking.
From the interviews, both LWS reported they would
pursue vocations that require less talking such as engineering. This was in
order to avoid frustrations and embarrassment that would arise if they pursued
vocations that required much talking. From teachers’ views, they concurred with
LWS. Teachers felt LWS should pursue vocations that do not require much talking
to avoid frustrations and embarrassment at work place in future as a result of
stuttering.
Therefore, stuttering effects negatively
influenced vocational aspirations among LWS.
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
Stuttering
effects such as anxiety, fear, frustrations, self-stigma and embarrassment
negatively influenced choice of vocational aspirations among LWS in primary
schools. LWS preferred vocations that require less talking to avoid negative
effects of stuttering.
Recommendations
Teachers
need to guide LWS in the choice of vocation. LWS need to be advised to pursue
vocational aspirations that require less talking. This is in order to reduce
the stuttering effects at work place in future. LWS need to be taken through
guidance and counseling sessions on
REFERENCES
Ammon,
J. (2010). Stuttering Difficulties. Retrieved from
https://stutterrockstar.com/2011/05/ on March 15, 2014. at
1.48 p.m.
Australian
Raising Children Network (2016). Changes During Early
Adolescence Stage. Retrieved from http://www.raisingchildren.net.au/articles/preteens_development_nutshell.html on July 02, 2016 at 3.40 p.m.
Fulya, D.K. (2014). Influential Factors on
Students’ Vocational Aspiration in Turkish Elementary Schools. Journal of
Educational Research and Reviews; 9 (1); 34- 40.
Gabel,
R.M., Colcord, R.D.& Petrosino,
L. (2002). Reported Anxiety of Adults who do and Do Not Stutter. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 94,775–784.
Gabel,
R.M, Hughes, S. & Daniels, D. (2008). Effects of Stuttering Severity and
Therapy Involvement on Role Entrapment of Persons who Stutter. Elsevier:
Journal of Communication Disorders 41 (2008), 146-158.Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021992407000548on November
11, 2015 at 9.54 a.m.
Gabel,
R. M., Blood, G.W., Tellis, G. M.,&
Althouse, M. T. (2004). Measuring Role Entrapment of
`People who Stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 29
(1); 27– 49.
Klein,
J.F & Hood, S.B. (2004). The Impact of Stuttering on Employment Opportunities
and Job-performance. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 29; 255 273.
Klompas, M. & Ross, E. (2004). Life
Experiences of People who Stutter, and the perceived Impact of Stuttering on
Quality of Life: Personal Accounts of South African Individuals. Journal of
Fluency Disorders, 29, 275-305.
McAllister,
J., Collier, J. & Shepstone, L. (2013). What is the Impact of Stuttering on
Education and Employment? British Stammering Association. Retrieved from
http://www.stammering.org/speaking-out/articles/what-impact-stammeringeducation-and-employment
on February 11, 2016 at 8.28 a.m.
Mckinnon, D.H., McLeods,
S. & Reilly, S. (2007). The Prevalence of Stuttering, Voice and
Speech-sound Disorders in Primary School Students in Australia. Journal of
speech, language and Hearing Association; 38 (1); 5-15.
Mugenda, O. N., & Mugenda,
A. G. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches.
Nairobi: African Center for Technology Studies Press.
Nall, R. (2012). Types of Stuttering.
Retrieved from http://www.healthline.com/health/stuttering#Overview1 on January
14, 2014. Ndung’u,
R. & Kinyua, M. (2009). Cultural Perspectives in
Language and Speech Disorders. Journal of Disability Studies Quarterly. 29
(4).
Ogutu, T.A. (2005). Children with
Stammering Problems. Kenya Institute of Special Needs Education. Nairobi: KISE
Printing House.
Zhang,
J., Saltukaroglu, T., Hough, M., & Kalinowski, J. (2009).
Jobs, Sex, Love, and Lifestyle. Journal of Communication Disorders: 61
(1); 18-23.
