Transportation Experiences of College Students With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: A Photovoice Study

Researcher Positionality

Our research team included two current IPSE employees and one university faculty member. Rebecca and Hannah each had existing relationships with the study participants via their involvement with the IPSE. All three identified as White and nondisabled. Two identified as cisgendered females and one identified as a cisgendered male. We shared history of working with and advocating for youth and young adults with disabilities. In an attempt to uncover the ways in which members of a group that has been historically marginalized understand and experience their reality within a power-laden society, we undertook this study using a lens of critical constructivism (Friere, 1970; Kincheloe, 2005).

With our research team’s inherent identity-based privilege in society, we actively worked to recognize the ways in which we could dismantle the marginalizing structures inherent in traditional ways of doing research and instead deferred to our participants as the experts in their own lives and experiences. Drawing upon Walmsley (2004) to address our roles as nondisabled researchers in inclusive research, we positioned ourselves as simultaneous facilitators and learners and sought to provide our students with opportunities to drive the research process.

Participants and Setting

The participants in this study were students who attended an IPSE program at a large, public research university in the southeastern region of the United States. Prior to engagement in research activities, all participants were read and then signed an informed consent. This IPSE program admits students based on a several factors: diagnosis of an IDD, a completed high school education, independence in basic care tasks such as administration of medications and personal hygiene, and a personal desire to attend college. Students attending the IPSE program have a relatively high level of independence as the program is residential, and students are expected to be able to live safely in a typical college residence hall as well as safely navigate the college campus. The program’s philosophy is founded on inclusion, individualization, and collaboration across university systems, based on each student’s interests and identified support needs. All students have the same opportunities as typical college students, including access to college-level coursework at an audit status, on-campus nonsegregated living within university residence halls, and access to all university-sponsored clubs and organizations. Participants in this study were recruited through their individualized career development activities. Specifically, their IPSE instructor or coach introduced the study in all four employment courses and asked if they would be interested in participating. Based on each participant’s program of study, they had expectations of travel on and off campus for employment, social events, or community engagement/independent living tasks. The program emphasizes learning about and utilizing transportation to get to and from work as part of career development activities. The breakdown of participants by age, level in college, gender, and race can be seen in Table 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Demographics of the IPSE Program Student Participants.

Student	Age	Level in school	Gender	Race
Abigail	20	Sophomore	Female	White
Betty	22	Senior	Female	African American
Carl	23	Senior	Male	African American
Diane	21	Junior	Female	White
Eliza	22	Senior	Female	African American
Fiona	18	Freshman	Female	African American
Grace	21	Freshman	Female	African American
Harold	22	Junior	Male	Asian
Ian	23	Senior	Male	African American
Jared	20	Sophomore	Male	White

The university enrolled more than 25,000 students in 2023 and is embedded in a medium-sized city with a population of around 135,000 people. Given the size of the university and the city, there are transportation options such as a public transit bus, paratransit, and rideshare options. In addition, the university operates a shuttle contracted through the public transit system for students to use in and around campus. All student participants in this study could access these transportation options based on their university program enrollment status.

Photovoice and Study Procedures

We employed photovoice, a participatory action research (PAR) method, to investigate students’ experiences accessing various transportation options within their campus and surrounding urban community. Utilizing a critical constructivist theoretical framework, we worked with participants to co-construct situated knowledge (Haraway, 1988) and provide participants an opportunity to share their experiences and expertise with their community. Photovoice is a process by which participants can identify and enhance their community and personal situation through a specific photography technique. The method entrusts cameras to people to act as recorders and potential catalysts for change in their own lives and communities (Wang & Burris, 1997).

“Photovoice is particularly suited to participants who may have limited formal education, people with cognitive issues or disabilities, or those who might struggle to participate in other types of research reliant on reading or writing” (Milne & Muir, 2020, p. 6). The photovoice method “recognizes that such people [those with socially stigmatized health conditions or those who do not read or write] often have an expertise and insight into their own communities and worlds that professionals and outsiders lack” (Wang & Burris, 1997, p. 370). The method employs tenets of critical and feminist theories and in so doing recognizes participants as “co-researchers” (Macdonald et al., 2023).

Participants in the study were instructed to take a minimum of 15 photos responding to prompts posed related to their experience with transportation. For the purposes of this study, “transportation” could include car, city bus, university shuttle, Uber, Lyft, bicycle, or any other mode used that gets a student from point A to point B. Examples of prompts included the following: Take photos of your experience in using transportation to get to work; Take photos of your experience in using transportation to get to a social event (university event, club event, a party, excursion with friends, etc); and Take photos of your experience in using transportation to get to a grocery store or other stores like Target or Walmart. See Supplemental File 1 for the Transportation Photovoice Participant Prompts.

After participants took their photos, they were instructed to email five photos to the lead researcher (first author). The lead researcher compiled photos into a slideshow presentation and invited participants to a group meeting to discuss the photos. To accommodate all participant schedules, researchers facilitated two separate group photo discussion sessions, each lasting approximately 90 min. During group meetings, each participant was given an opportunity to discuss their photos and answer questions facilitated by the researchers related to their transportation experiences. See Supplemental File 2 for the Group Photo Discussion Protocol. All group discussions were recorded and transcribed using Otter.ai.

Data Analysis

Our research team used the SHOWeD method for group photo discussion and analysis. The SHOWeD method (Milne & Muir, 2020; Payne et al., 2016) includes group analysis using the following questions: “What do you See here? What is really Happening here? How does this relate to Our lives? Why does this situation, concern, or strength exist? What can we Do about it?” Researchers led participants through these questions as they shared their individual photos with the group. In addition to the photographs themselves, data were collected through semi-structured photo discussion groups (akin to focus groups) through which participants were asked to explain their ideas and thoughts about the photos they shared. The focus groups were facilitated by the lead researchers and the data were recorded and transcribed using Otter.ai.

Using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022), the lead researchers subsequently coded the photo discussion transcript data both across and within focus groups. Each researcher individually coded the transcripts first; then, we came together and collaboratively coded the data to enhance understanding and interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2022). Iterative stages of open coding, axial coding, and then selective coding were employed to develop codes, categories, and ultimately themes (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

The coding team created a coding framework from the initial codes and then through discussion and comparison, created categories from the individually created raw codes. We did this by physically combining all like codes into categories and talking through collapsing into categories. The nine categories we created from codes included the following: (a) walking; (b) negative emotions/worry/anxiety related to transportation; (c) safety related to transportation; (d) family, friends, and coaches as support; (e) campus shuttle; (f) city bus; (g) environmental/physical accessibility; (h) rideshare options; and (i) scooter inconvenience. In an effort to “give the developing analysis some distance,” as Braun and Clarke (2022, p. 8) suggest as a way to enhance the quality of thematic development, our team took a break from the analysis process after we created categories. A few days later, we reconvened to examine our categories with fresh eyes to develop our overall themes. The four themes are discussed in the next section, and to enhance validity, member checks with all participants were completed via one-on-one discussions to ensure they understood and agreed with the themes.

Interdependence

The most salient theme we uncovered in the participants’ descriptions of their photos was the idea that students often embarked upon transportation, no matter the type, with others. The students described traveling with others for many different reasons, sometimes out of necessity and sometimes due to preference or other reasons. Grace describes a combination of safety and utility when telling why she chooses to travel with others in and around campus: “. . . we hold hands so we don’t end up getting disconnected. And [we] always have charged phones!” She goes on to say “I think I would just prefer to go with someone because I don’t really know, like, how to get to a lot of off-campus places.”

Students described traveling with peers and friends but also utilizing IPSE staff and family for rides or assistance when using public transportation options. Because none of our 10 study participants had their driver’s license, many described riding in others’ personal vehicles. When asked about her preferred mode of transport, Betty stated that someone driving her in a car was most preferred (see Figure 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Betty’s View From the Passenger Seat.

A common sentiment among participants was that riding in a friend or family member’s personal vehicle is much preferred to other options, for ease of access to the mode of transportation as well as comfortability. When asked how she preferred to get places off campus, Grace stated, “Well, if I don’t want to take the shuttle, I would ask like, a staff, or small-group leader.”

While interdependence was mostly seen as a positive aspect of accessing transportation options for participants, Alana shared that the fact that she has almost no other option but to depend on others was frustrating. When asked how she feels about having to rely on others to take apart her scooter when riding in a personal vehicle or to help her open a door that may not have a button for automatic opening, Alana said, “That kind of makes me mad, but I’m, like, okay with that.” She talked openly about the myriad of barriers she faces to getting around both on and off campus using a motorized scooter (see Figure 2).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Alana’s Motorized Scooter.

Another participant, Jared, shared that while it was much easier to get a ride with a family member, he often did not prefer it. When asked why he preferred the campus shuttle or walking instead of a car ride with family, he stated, “They always pick me up, but sometimes they would say I had to go home and just spend some time with them, spend a night . . . I always want to go back on campus.” Because Jared’s family lives locally, he expressed frustration that they would pressure him to go home with them instead of back to his dorm after taking him to an event, so valuing his independence, he would opt for the shuttle or walking.

Many students exhibited a form of self-advocacy through their interdependence by utilizing natural supports when they needed help. For example, Betty took a photo of the city bus map located at a bus stop (see Figure 3) but expressed that she was unsure how to read the map. When probed about how she knew which bus to take, she stated, “I ask someone to show me . . . ‘cause I don’t know how to read that. And I asked them how to read them and they helped me read.”

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

City Bus Map.

Negative Emotions Related to Transportation

The majority of the negative emotions participants expressed relating to accessing or using transportation were anxiety or fear. Fear of the unknown, such as how to access the city bus or how to navigate to a specific place without getting lost, was a common sentiment. Fiona relayed that she had never used the city bus independently “because I feel like I might get lost or might not know where I am going.” Grace agreed that using the city bus could be difficult for her. She shared a photo of the cell phone application used to track and access the city bus, but stated that “the app can be confusing.” Fiona shared a photo of the yellow cord to pull when requesting a stop on the bus and explained that while she does understand its use now, she was at one time intimidated to use the city bus (see Figure 4). “The yellow- I didn’t know you pulled the yellow thing to make it stop . . . They [the bus driver] just asked ‘Where’s your stop at?’ and it stopped for you.”

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

City Bus Stop-Request Cord.

Some participants’ stress related to using the city bus for transport went beyond a lack of understanding of how to access or use it. Harold shared that time management related to using the bus was a source of anxiety for him: “Management time on the bus is like, I want to be early for the bus, but you don’t want to be too early and you do not want to be too late.” He went on to describe his anxiety related to the possibility of missing the bus and the possible ramifications of that. When probed about what he thought may happen if he missed the bus to work, he responded, “You will be, maybe, you’re going to get fired? Or maybe you’re gonna be in trouble.”

Betty describes a time she rode the bus to campus for class and the driver stopped to take a break en route. “We had to wait for like five or ten minutes . . . just sit there, and I guess they take breaks or something like that. And it was so stressful because I’d be like, ‘Let’s go.’” Betty’s stress and frustration was palpable as she described feeling fearful that she would be late to class due to the bus driver’s break. Waiting for a bus to arrive was another cause for a negative emotion for Fiona: “Cause we had to wait outside. So I had to wait for the bus for a long time. I got aggravated.”

Accessibility Versus Inaccessibility

Categories included under this theme were environmental and physical barriers as well as informational barriers. As well, specific aspects of the physical environment that could either aid or deter accessibility were included as a subcategory. These physical features included stairs, ramps, elevators, wheelchair lifts, accessible crosswalk features, and automatic door open buttons. All study participants described at least one aspect of the environment or at least one facet of their transportation experience that was a barrier to their easily getting from point A to point B.

An example of informational inaccessibility came to light when Alana showed a photo of the campus shuttle and expressed that this shuttle was not an option for her to use because of her motorized scooter. Betty interjected to say “The campus shuttle does have a lift.” Alana was under the impression that she could not access the shuttle due to it not having a lift for her scooter, when in fact it does have a lift.

The city bus transit app was mentioned more than once as an inaccessible aspect of bus ridership. Carl, who described his most used mode of transportation as walking, described the transit app: “The lines and they’re color-coded. And when you like, zoom in, there’s like different color routes, and then you try to go to one specific place . . . It’s like a maze.” Carl shared a photo of him walking from the student union, where he eats most of his meals while on campus, back to his dorm (see Figure 5). He indicated that he enjoys “roaming the campus instead of just sittin’ in my room.”

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Carl Walking to His Residence Hall.

Several campus features determined accessibility or inaccessibility for Alana, the participant who uses a motorized scooter. She shared photos of stairs and old elevators, as well as door handles that require physical maneuvers inaccessible to her like in Figure 6. Alana described certain elevators on campus that were large and easily accessed, as well as others, “Like the one here in this building. It’s pretty cramped. And it’s pretty old.” In reality, one of the elevators located in the building where we were conducting the group photo discussion was so small that Alana’s scooter could not even fit inside it. “Yeah, and the scooter cannot go up or down the stairs. I have to use the elevator. It makes it difficult because I have to figure that out every day.”

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 6.

Inaccessible Door Handles.

Alana expressed that she always had to be aware of a building’s accessibility: the type of door handles it has, whether it has steps or ramps at entrance, the presence and size of elevators, and the condition of the sidewalks on her path. Any of these things could be a potential barrier to her getting where she needs to be. When asked if she wished there were easier ways for her to get around, Alana answered “I really do.”

Accessing Varied Transportation Options

The final theme discovered in the data was the idea that participants understood they had multiple options and modes for transportation while on campus. Some modes are more accessible than others, and some were better understood, to be sure, but multiple modes were identified and discussed during the group photo discussion. Eliza and Betty both identified the campus shuttle as a transportation mode that they had used: “It’s a [university name redacted] transit bus that we can use to go to the grocery store, to class every day, or to a sporting event.” Other participants acknowledged the existence of the campus shuttle but admitted they did not understand the routes or how to access this shuttle.

Two participants, Harold and Betty, described utilizing rideshare apps like Uber and Lyft, and Harold relayed the option as easy to use: “I downloaded Uber. It is simple.” See Figure 7 for Betty’s photo of her experience using Lyft to get a ride to campus on a day when she had missed the city bus and was fearful she would be late to class if she waited for another bus.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 7.

Betty’s Lyft.

Nearly all participants described walking as a primary mode of transportation while on campus, while also acknowledging that there are places that are too far to walk. Jacob shared “The easiest way if, whenever there’s a basketball game, I can still walk to the arena, but sometimes if it’s off-campus, I can still take the shuttle or whatever.” Carl and Diane both described walking as their primary and preferred mode of transportation. Diane shared a photo of herself coming down stairs and gripping a handrail (see Figure 8). She shared that she has “trouble with visual-spatial things,” related to her disability, so a handrail makes stairs easier for her to navigate. Grace, like many participants, shared that while walking is an option, she prefers to ride in a car. “I would choose like, getting into the car instead of walking all over the place.” No participants in the study took photos of or discussed the area paratransit option, although some participants are approved to use this mode of transportation.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 8.

Diane Coming Down Stairs.

Limitations and Future Direction for Research

While the voices of the young adults with IDDs were centered through our participatory action study and their experiences highlighted, one limitation of our study is that our participants are likely more independent than other transition-age young adults with IDDs who are not enrolled in an IPSE. This fact indicates that the transportation experiences of other emerging adults with IDDs who do not have the privilege of attending an IPSE may very well be more dire and they may have access to many fewer transportation options. As well, young adults attending IPSE likely have access to more resources and education than young adults who do not attend a similar postsecondary education program. Another limitation of our study is related to the current state of the action-oriented aspect of our participatory action research study. A key aspect of participatory action research methods includes informing local stakeholders about participant experiences in an effort to bring about positive change. Our research team plans to broaden the scope of this study to other IPSE programs nationally, as well, we hope to then provide all participants a platform to share their photos to an audience “wider than the academy” (Glesne, 2016, p. 246).

This study took place on a large university campus with ample resources for transit and within a city that offered public transit, paratransit, as well as ridesharing options. Not all universities or all cities or towns in the United States will have the same offerings. The transit offerings will vary in their accessibility across settings as well.

Among the participants in our study, the majority of them are multiply marginalized, with six of them identifying as females and seven of them identifying as people of color (African American or Asian). The compounded inequities at the intersections of disability, gender, and race are well documented (Forber-Pratt et al., 2020; Horner-Johnson, 2021; Parker, 2015). In particular, systemic barriers related to transportation disproportionately affect marginalized communities; for example, on average, 20% of African American households live without a personal vehicle (Faghri et al., 2022). While there were no explicit references to these other identities within our participants’ discussion of their photos, it is highly likely that their experiences were colored by intersectional marginalization.

Researchers interested in understanding the lived experiences and amplifying the voices of marginalized communities such as transition-age adults with IDDs should consider participatory action methods such as photovoice. When the power dynamic is dismantled and research is conducted with as opposed to on participants, we can take the first steps toward acknowledging ableism and addressing the inequities in societal structures such as transportation access. Future research to be conducted in this area includes investigating the transportation experiences of transition-age adults with IDDs attending IPSE in more rural areas as well as those not attending IPSE. Comparisons among transition-age adults living in differently populated regions of the country would provide interesting information related to the transportation experiences and needs of this population in specific settings. Researchers should also investigate the transportation experiences of career-bound and job-seeking or newly employed young adults with IDDs. The perceived barriers and facilitators to specific transit options such as public transit, paratransit, and ridesharing options should also be investigated more in-depth.

Implications for Transition Professionals

To address the findings in our study and engage transition professionals in delivering services and supports to best prepare transition-age youth and young adults to access transportation effectively, we have developed four recommendations. While the roles of transition professionals are myriad, we believe supporting emerging young adults with disabilities in understanding and accessing transportation should not be neglected in their provided planning and skill-building services and supports. The importance of transportation to the lives of independent, thriving young adults cannot be overstated.