Sara Taylor, Ph.D.
Northwest Missouri State University
This issue of NASET’s LD Report comes from the Fall 2021 edition of the Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals (JAASEP). It was written by Sarah Taylor, Ph.D. from Northwest Missouri State University. After high school, the outcomes for youth with disabilities fail to keep up with their typically developing peers. Participation in post-secondary education, hourly earnings, and engagement in either education or employment up to six years after high school are all lower than the general population (Cameto et al., 2011). A researcher-developed online survey investigated the current strategies used with students with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD). The questions focused on the development of skills necessary to meet post-secondary education, employment, and independent living goals. A directed content analysis did not reveal evidence that teachers are using the evidence-based practices described by the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition. The paper includes the practices of respondents. This research shows that there is a significant difference in the practices of teachers when it comes to students with SLD. These differences may contribute to decreased post-secondary engagement. There is also a lack of research and evidence-based practices for this population leading teachers to pull from unreliable sources or ignore the need for transition skills.
Abstract
After high school, the outcomes for youth with disabilities fail to keep up with their typically developing peers. Participation in post-secondary education, hourly earnings, and engagement in either education or employment up to six years after high school are all lower than the general population (Cameto et al., 2011). A researcher-developed online survey investigated the current strategies used with students with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD). The questions focused on the development of skills necessary to meet post-secondary education, employment, and independent living goals. A directed content analysis did not reveal evidence that teachers are using the evidence-based practices described by the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition. The paper includes the practices of respondents. This research shows that there is a significant difference in the practices of teachers when it comes to students with SLD. These differences may contribute to decreased post-secondary engagement. There is also a lack of research and evidence-based practices for this population leading teachers to pull from unreliable sources or ignore the need for transition skills.
Keywords: post-secondary transition, specific learning disabilities, teacher practices
The Practices of Teachers in the Development of Post-Secondary Skills in Students with Learning Disabilities
According to the U.S. Department of Education (DoE) (2016), during the 2013-14 school year, approximately 8.7% of the population ages six through 21, or 5,825,505 students, were identified as having a disability, with 3.4% of the population recognized under the category of Specific Learning Disability (SLD). On December 3, 2004, Congress reauthorized the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 2004) (108th Congress Public Law 446, 2004). According to IDEA (2004) section (602)(30)(A), defined SLD as a “disorder in one or more of the basic phonological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written. The disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations.” The learning problems cannot be a result of physical or emotional disabilities nor mental retardation. Students with SLD account for 39.2% of the students served nationally under IDEA part B, which covers students aged 3 to 21, the highest percentage of any category. According to the U.S. DoE’s report to Congress (2016), in 2013-14, 42.1% of students served under IDEA part B graduated with a high school diploma; of that, 71% were students with SLD. In the same period, 82% of the typically developing population, those students without a disability, completed a regular high school diploma. In California, 50.7% of students served under IDEA part B graduated with a regular diploma in four years, while 17.5% dropped out. Students with SLD account for 44.6% of the student’s aged 6-21 served under IDEA part B. Compared with national statistics, California has a higher percentage of students graduating with a high school diploma (50.7% vs. 42.1%) and a higher number of students qualified under SLD (44.6% vs. 39.2%).
After high school, the outcomes for youth with disabilities fall behind their typically developing peers. Participation in post-secondary education (55% vs. 62%), hourly earnings ($9.40 vs. $13.20), and engagement in either education or employment (84% vs. 95%) up to 6 years after high school are all lower than the general population (Cameto et al., 2011). Each school district mandates the diploma requirements, consisting of courses in English, Mathematics, Social Science, Science, Art, Foreign Language, and Technology. Students in special education often require remedial or support courses to complete academic coursework. When combined with district mandates, there is little room for courses explicitly targeting the skills needed for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living. While there are many high school transition programs expressly designed for students ages 18-22 with moderate to severe disabilities, and adult programs that serve this population beyond the age of 22, services end for students once they earn a high school diploma. Nationally over 42% of students with a disability are exiting high school in 4 years with a regular diploma, including over 50% of students in California, with 71% of this population being students with SLD, a step which permanently ends the support provided by special education personnel (U.S. DoE, 2016).
Post-Secondary Transition
IDEA (2004) seeks to improve educational results for students with disabilities to ensure equity of opportunity, participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency. Section 601(c)(14) of the law states, “As graduation rates for children with disabilities continue to climb, providing effective transition services to promote successful post-school employment or education is an important measure of accountability for children with disabilities.” This document highlights the importance of providing transition services that assist students beyond a high school diploma. Section 601(d)(1)(A) asserts “the purposes of this title are to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education…to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living.” As stated within the law, the primary purpose of the IDEA reauthorization of 2004 was to focus the efforts of special education on skills that promote post-secondary engagement for students with disabilities.
One way to promote post-secondary engagement is through transition services. Section 602(34) defines transition services “as a coordinated set of activities that…is focused on improving the academic and functional achievements of a child with a disability to facilitate the child’s movement from school to post-school activities.” The explanation of funding, in section 610(e)(2)(C)(vi), names transition programs and services as authorized activities. The guidelines for an individual transition plan (ITP) are presented in Section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII). Special education teachers are required before a student turns 16 to develop a plan that includes “appropriate measurable postsecondary goals based on age-appropriate transition assessments related to training, education, employment, and, where appropriate, independent living skills.” IDEA (2004) defines transition services, allocates funding, and requires post-secondary assessment, and goals occur for students by the age of 16.
The Individual Education Plan (IEP) team, which includes the student, guardian, general education teacher, special education teacher, and service providers such as a speech-language pathologist, develop post-secondary goals. The goals take into account the student’s interests and preferences. The ITP identifies the services and course of study needed to attain the goals and develops a plan to build the skills and supports necessary to meet the goals (Flannery, Kato, & Lombardi, 2015). IDEA 2004 requires transition services be in effect before the student is 16 years old; this results in a transition plan typically being written during the junior year of high school, leaving less than two years to build the skills necessary to meet transition goals. Correlational studies show that transition-related skills improve through interventions within the classroom (Doren & Murray, 2013). However, in a survey of special education teachers, the teachers of students with SLD reported the lowest levels of transition skills preparation and implementation (Benitez & Morningstar, 2013).Many educators do not feel sufficiently knowledgeable about transition planning to write and implement effective transition plans (Landmark, Roberts, & Zhang, 2013).Although IDEA requires special education teachers to develop activities to support post-secondary goals as a part of the IEP, and research supports instruction related to transition skills during school, survey results indicate teachers feel under prepared in the practices necessary to build these skills.
Problem Statement
Students with SLD demonstrate average to above-average intelligence quotients (IQ) with a deficit shown in academic achievement. Given their average ability to learn, the post-secondary outcomes for students with SLD should be similar to those of their typically developing peers; yet, research shows this is not the case. Students with SLD often require classes to support academic content or remediate skills leaving little room in the schedule for elective courses beyond the diploma requirements. Specialized programs do currently exist within special education to teach the skills necessary for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living; unfortunately, these programs often take place after the first four years of high school, when the majority of students with SLD have graduated.
Purpose of Study
The researcher investigated the current strategies used during the first four years of high school by special education teachers of students with SLD, specifically those designed to facilitate the development of skills necessary to meet post-secondary education, employment, and independent living goals. Surveys of special education teachers indicate teachers of students with SLD potentially lack some knowledge regarding the instruction of post-secondary transition skills (Benitez & Morningstar, 2013; Mazzotti & Plotner, 2014), yet IDEA requires the development of annually updated ITPs, which include activities to support post-secondary goals. If this population of teachers feels underprepared, in what ways are they assisting the development of post-secondary education, employment, and independent living skills? This study sought to address this gap in the literature. To fill this gap, a survey of current special education teachers gathered demographic data and information on the location, frequency, intensity, and duration of instruction and activities designed to promote post-secondary employment, education, and independent living skills. Open-ended question responses allowed for the identification of research-based practices. The benefit of this study is that the current practices of teachers are described to allow for further research.
Literature Review
IDEA 2004 mandated special education teachers use “scientifically-based” instruction to improve secondary and post-secondary outcomes for students; however, transition service providers lack the knowledge and skills to adequately implement evidence-based practices for post-secondary success (Benitez, Frey, & Morningstar, 2009). Poor post-secondary engagement in education, employment, and independent living has created a need for enhanced transition skills development that fully implements evidence-based practices (Mazzotti & Morningstar 2014; Mazzotti, Mustian, & Test, 2014). The transition perspective (Kohler & Rusch, 1996) argues that all educational programs and activities be based upon individuals’ post-secondary goals and interests. This perspective supports integrating the development of post-secondary skills across grades and for all ability levels. Correlational studies suggest that transition-related skills improve through interventions within the school setting (Doren & Murray, 2013).
Teacher Surveys
Pham (2013) surveyed 248 special education teachers across 20 states using the Promoting Transition Skills Inventory (PTSI), developed by the author from the Transition Assessment Goal Generator (TAGG) (Hennessey, Kazimi, Martin, & McConnell, 2011). The PTSI measured the extent to which teachers were promoting the constructs from the TAGG. The constructs include knowledge of strengths and limitations, disability awareness, employment, goal setting and attainment, persistence, proactive involvement, self-advocacy, and utilization of supports through responses on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (almost never true) to 7 (almost always true). Teachers rated statements about promoting transition skills as “usually true” (M = 5.67, SD = 0.85) with similar means in each construct. The author also gathered information about where special education teachers learn about transition practices. Roughly 20% of respondents learned about transition practices through either professional development or colleagues. Other sources include college courses (14%), previous experiences (14%), through trial and error (13%), conferences (11%), online sources (6%), and research journals (4%). This study found teachers self-reported promoting high levels of nonacademic transition skills while learning about transition practices from a wide variety of resources. The survey utilized research-based constructs to focus statements that the respondent rated on a Likert scale. Unfortunately, the wording appears to lead educators to the desired response, as indicated by the high mean and low standard deviation throughout the constructs. The current survey developed by the researcher utilized open-ended responses to gather more specific data about the ways in which teachers promote and develop transition skills.
Benitez and Morningstar (2013) conducted a multistate survey of secondary special education teachers. Approximately 51% of respondents were teachers of students with SLD. On a four-point Likert scale, with one being very unprepared and four being very prepared, the respondents indicated the level of preparation to perform the transition competencies as somewhat unprepared to somewhat prepared (M = 2.69, SD =.65). A one-way ANOVA showed significant differences between educators working with specific disability groups, F(5, 543) = 5.21, p < .001, with an effect size of ?2=.046. A Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test indicated the transition (specialists that teach students beyond grade 12) teachers’ level of preparation was significantly higher (M = 3.08, SD = .08) than teachers of students with SLD (M = 2.61, SD = .62, p <.00), low incidence (M = 2.53, SD = .64, p <.03), and those that indicated a combination of disabilities (M = 2.66, SD = .66, p <.002). The survey also asked the frequency of implementation of transition activities on a five-point Likert scale of 1 being never to 5 being frequently. The average overall was rarely to occasionally (M = 2.70, SD = .56). A one way ANOVA showed significant differences by student disability, F(5, 545)=6.04, p <.001. Again a Tukey HSD highlighted differences between the transition specialist group (M = 3.03, SD =.51) and teachers of students with SLD (M = 2.62, SD = .53, p < .01), low-incidence (M = 2.54, SD = .66, p <.01), and combination (M = 2.71, SD = .56, p < .01). A significant correlation existed between the perceived level of preparation and the frequency with which educators reported completing transition activities (r = .72, p < .01). Staff development hours (r2=.08, p< .001)
and the number of courses (r2=.
07, p< .001) in transition significantly contributed to the variation in the frequency of implementation. The detailed quantitative analysis shows significant correlations between preparation and frequency of implementation, but there is no information on the ways in which teachers implement transition practices. The current survey addressed this through both categorical and open-end responses.
Mazzotti and Plotner (2014) conducted a multistate online survey of transition service providers, focusing on the implementation of evidence-based secondary transition practices. Researchers asked the frequency with which the respondent received professional development opportunities specific to evidence-based practices, with 51.8% reporting they were never or seldom provided opportunities by the school district. Over half (56.3%) strongly disagreed or disagreed that professional development prepared them to implement evidence-based practices. University preparation programs fared worse than professional development provided by school districts, with 67.4% either disagreeing or strongly disagreeing that their university teacher preparation program taught them about evidence-based practices. The survey asked how frequently (always, often, sometimes, never) the provider used evidence-based practices in seven transition-related skill areas. The majority of responses indicated they used the identified evidence-based practices always, often, or sometimes. Very few stated they never used them. This survey used evidence-based practices as the framework for data but compiled all transition service providers together. The participants included teachers of students with all types of disabilities, administrators, program coordinators, rehabilitation counselors, and other professionals. The current survey developed by the researcher specifically targeted high school teachers of students with SLD due to the high percentage of these students exiting high school after four years when compared to students with low incidence disabilities. As they exit high school, they also lose the support of special education. Moreover, previous survey results have indicated that teachers of students with SLD feel unprepared to perform transition activities.
Evidence-Based Practices
In 2009, Catherine Fowler and colleagues published a paper to identify evidence-based practices for the post-secondary transition. The researchers used the five areas of the Taxonomy for Transition Programming as study inclusion criteria and a way to organize the evidence-based practices (Kohler, 1996). Kohler defined the five areas as student-focused planning, student development, interagency collaboration, family involvement, and program structures such as program philosophy, policies, resource allocation, and human resource development. The studies analyzed came from the National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center (which became NTACT in 2015), the What Works in Transition Research Synthesis Project (Alwell & Cobb, 2009), which performed a thorough literature review through 2005, and an additional search to identify studies published from 2005-2008. Studies needed to be either a systematic literature review or group- or single-subject experiment meeting specific quality criteria. The evidence base evaluated 240 reviews and studies. The researchers used input from Carr et al. (2005) and Compton et al. (2005) to create a series of checklists to evaluate individual studies. Overall, 63 articles met the criteria for high or acceptable quality and were used to develop the 32 evidence-based practices.
According to the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT), an evidence-based practice is one based on group experimental, single-case, and correlational designs, which adhere to strict standards. The research must use stringent research design, display a robust record of success for improving outcomes, undergo a systematic review process, and follow quality indicators for the specific research design. All evidence-based practices were reviewed and published on the NTACT website, along with lesson plans and guides. Given the focus of this research, the evidence-based practices have been condensed to include the two which address students with learning disabilities.
Using published curricula to teach student involvement in the IEP meeting is an evidence-based practice in the areas of education, employment, and independent living developed with evidence from two high-quality group studies, three acceptable group studies, and five quality single-subject studies. Seven of the studies focused on students with SLD, with 107 total participating students. The curricula included “The Self-Directed IEP” (Jerman, Marshall, Martin, & Maxson, 1996), “Self-Advocacy Strategy,” (Bos, Schumaker, & Van Reusen, 1994), “Whose Future is it Anyway?” (Garner, Lawrence, Palmer, Soukup, and Wehmeyer, 2004), and an adapted version of “Personal Futures Planning Model” (Bates & Miner, 1997). Students were provided instruction on participation in IEP meetings and transition planning, leading IEP meetings, self-determination skills, and transition awareness. The teaching took place in general education, high school, self-contained, or resource classrooms.
The Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI) (Palmer & Wehmeyer, 2002) to teach goal attainmentis anevidence-based practice in the areas of education, employment, and independent living based on one high-quality group study. The study included 14 students with learning disabilities. SDLMI is a curriculum focused on self-directed and self-regulated learning. The three units are: set a goal, take action, and adjust the goal or plan based on results of action. Students are taught a series of steps to solve problems: identify the problem, identify potential solutions to the problem, identify barriers to solving the problem, and identify the consequences of each solution. Lee, Little, Palmer, Soukup, and Wehmeyer (2008) conducted a study with a randomized trial control group design. The special education teachers of the students in the experimental condition received instruction in the SDLMI intervention. The average implementation time was ten weeks. Students set a goal that required action in the general education environment. Students were assessed using the Goal Attainment Scale (GAS), a 5-point rubric that compares progress across multiple targets. In the experimental condition, a higher than expected score on the GAS was shown (M = 52.80, SD = 11.28) with 65% of students at or above expected levels (raw GAS scores were converted to T scores with a mean of 50, indicating an acceptable outcome, and standard deviation of 10).
Research-Based Practices
According to the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (NTACT), a research-based practice is one based on group experimental, single-case, and correlational research, which adheres to rigorous research designs, and has demonstrated repeated evidence of improving outcomes. Unlike evidence-based practices, research-based practices may or may not have undergone a systematic review process or adhere to all quality indicators of the specific research design.
Given the evidence for improving student outcomes, research-based practices provide valuable tools for educators. Throughout this section, effect sizes reported are obtained from Fowler et al. (2009) to allow for comparison with Pearson’s r effect sizes.
Predictors of Post-Secondary Participation. According to NTACT, occupational and vocational courses are correlated, at the research-based practice level, with improved post-secondary education and employment outcomes. These courses support career awareness and exploration of career pathways, develop job skills, and assisting students in focusing on an employment goal. The course should include career awareness, planning, and assessment activities; 2lst century skills, technology, and specific career content; and hands-on and community-based learning opportunities. It should also incorporate Universal Design for Learning principles, take place during the school day, and offer a wide variety of occupational clusters (Alverson et al., 2014).
Two studies found potential evidence to support the use of occupational courses. Benz, Doren, Halpern, & Yovanoff (1995) found that students who passed more than half of all courses covering topics such as remedial academics, finance, community access, and vocational education were more likely to be engaged in postsecondary education with a medium to large effect size (r = 0.47-0.53). Similarly, Heal and Rusch (1995) found that a student who took more hours of academic and occupational courses was more likely to obtain post-secondary employment (r = 0.09). The proposed survey will solicit data on the availability and student use of these courses.
The skills necessary to manage one’s self-care and independent living needs include personal management skills to interact with others, daily living skills, financial management skills, and the self-management of health and wellness needs. While practice covers a wide variety of skills, assessments are needed to determine in which areas a student requires instruction. Potential topics for instruction include financial planning, self-help, cooking, housekeeping, home maintenance, using transportation, clothing care, accessing community services, time/organizational management, self-determination, social roles/citizenship, community/peer relationships, and critical thinking and problem-solving. Research promotes embedding self-care/independent living skills instruction into academic coursework in general education, special education, and the community with individual, small group, and whole-class instruction, as appropriate, with opportunities to practice skills during the school day (Alverson et al., 2014).
Self-care was found to have a small to large effect size on independent living across three studies. Heal, and Rusch (1994) saw that high scores on adaptive and self-care skills led to an increase in the likelihood of living independently (r = 0.06). Students with high self-care skills are more likely to be engaged in living independently, employment, and education (r = 0.27) (Blackorby, Hancok, & Siegel, 1993). Similarly, students with high daily living skills, as assessed by the teachers, have an increased quality of life and higher levels of engagement in post-secondary employment (r = 0.53) (Brolin, Johnson, & Roessler, 1990). The current survey asked about instruction in independent living goals on the ITP, as many students with SLD are deemed, by the IEP team, not to need support in this area.
Research Questions
In California, over half of students with a disability graduate with a diploma after four years, and a high percentage of those are students with SLD. Survey results indicate that teachers self-report high levels of engagement in promoting transition skills (Pham, 2013). However, among all special education teachers, Benitez and Morningstar (2013) found that teachers of students with SLD reported the lowest levels of transition training and implementation. IDEA (2004) mandates that teachers use evidence-based practices in special education. Mazzotti and Plotner (2014) found, in a survey of transition service providers, the majority of respondents sometimes, often, or always reported utilizing evidence-based practices in seven transition-related skill areas. While NTACT reviews research on transition practices and recommends evidence-based practices, little is known about the ways in which teachers are utilizing these methods. The current survey extended the results of Pham (2013), Benitez and Morningstar (2013), and Mazzotti and Plotner (2014) by utilizing qualitative methods to discover how students with learning disabilities were assessed and received instruction in the skills necessary for post-secondary engagement with the following research questions:
- In what ways are students with learning disabilities provided instruction and assessed for post-secondary transition goals during high school?
- What evidence-based practices are teachers utilizing with students with learning disabilities to develop post-secondary skills?
Methodology
The research questions required qualitative methods. Qualitative research allowed the researcher to ask open-ended questions and is the ideal method for both research questions. The topic is not easy to measure and is too complicated for the presentation of a detailed understanding through quantitative measures.
Research Design
The researcher conducted a self-administered Internet survey. An Internet survey allowed the respondent control of the pace and recording of their response to ensure accuracy (Manfreda & Vehovar, 2008). It allowed for the accumulation of a large number of surveys at a lower cost than using an interviewer. An email invitation required only a single click by the respondent to move into survey completion with a reminder email sent out one week later. Upon completion of the survey, respondents had the option to complete a Google Form with their contact information to be entered into an incentive drawing. In an experimental study, Göritz, Sattler, and Van Veen (2011) found offering incentives increased response rate with no effect on perceptions of anonymity. A meta-analysis completed by Göritz (2006) found that material incentives increased web survey completion by 27%.
The survey expanded upon research that utilized teacher surveys on transition (Benitez & Morningstar, 2013; Mazzotti & Plotner, 2014; Pham, 2013). The purpose of the study is to identify and describe teachers of students in grades nine – 12 who are developing the transition skills of diploma-bound students with Specific Learning Disability (SLD). The study sought to discover the ways in which teachers are providing instruction and assessment for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living. Open-ended questions compiled detailed accounts by participants as to the methods that they are using to develop transition skills.
Hypothesis
The study examined teachers of students with SLD due to a gap in the literature regarding current practices of teachers and survey results that indicated teachers of this population lack instruction for developing post-secondary skills of their students. The researcher suspected the open-ended results would vary across the region and districts. Based on the survey by Mazzotti and Plotner (2014), the hypothesis is that teachers will report a low frequency of use of evidence-based practices.
Population and Sample
The survey went to all high school special education teachers in three Southern California school districts. The student population of the four school districts is diverse and reflective of the Southern California population. California is an ideal research location because it has a higher graduation rate for students on an IEP and a higher percentage of students served under the category of SLD than the national average (U.S. DoE, 2016).
The survey sample consisted of all special education teachers at the high school level that report students with SLD on their caseload in these districts. School district A has nine high schools, district B has 24 high schools, and district C has 13 high schools. A request for teacher participation occurred via e-mail.
Research Sites. The research sites were all located in urban and suburban areas in Southern California. The sites provided a diverse student and teacher population. The locations vary in size, but all offered traditional high school sites to study.
School district A. This district consists of nine comprehensive high schools, two charter high schools, one continuation high school, two alternative education sites, four special education facilities, a middle college high school program, a Regional Occupational Program (ROP), and an adult education program. According to the district website, over 22,000 students attend the district schools, with approximately 53 percent of high school students identifying as white and 47 percent coming from diverse backgrounds such as Hispanic, African-American, Asian, Filipino, Pacific Islander, and Native American.
School district B.According to the district website, this district serves over 130,000 students and consists of over 226 educational facilities, serving kindergarten through 12th grade. There are 117 traditional elementary schools, 9 K-8 schools, 25 traditional middle schools, 24 high schools, 49 charter schools, and 14 atypical/alternative schools. The student population is very diverse, with more than 15 ethnic groups and more than 60 languages and dialects. The racial diversity includes 46.5% Hispanic, 23.4% White, 10.2% African American, 5.4% Filipino, 4.9% Indo-Chinese, 3.3% Asian, 0.3% Native American, 0.6% Pacific Islander, and 5.4% identifying as multiracial. Approximately 59.4% of students are eligible for free or reduced meals, and 26.5% are classified as English Language Learners.
School district C.According to the district website, this district serves over 42,000 students in grades seven through 12. There are 32 campuses with 13 traditional high schools and 11 middle schools. The student population comprises a diverse group of ethnicities, including Hispanic, Filipino, African-American, and Asian. Approximately half of the students speak a language other than English at home. Over 24,000 students receive free or reduced meals.
Data Collection
With IRB approval, an online survey was sent out to the sample teachers via email. The site “Qualtrics” hosted the survey. It allows for unlimited questions, surveys, responses, and pages with the ability to export responses. Answers are confidential and untraceable to the email address and protected with multifactor authentication. Respondents were allowed to complete the survey one time but had the option to save and continue later. An optional Google Form enabled them to submit their email address to enter the incentive drawing, but it was not tied directly to the responses.
Survey Questions. The survey consisted of a combination of multiple-choice, short answer, and paragraph responses. The questions are in Appendix A. Section 1 covered demographic information. Section 2 asked how many hours of instruction or professional development the teacher received in writing transition plans or providing transition instruction. Section 3 asked open-ended questions regarding how students were assessed for their transition plans, the ways in which the teacher-built transition skills with students with SLD, and the use of published curricula, if any. Section 4 asked a series of questions regarding whether students participated in a course specific to the development of skills in education, employment, or independent living. Next were questions targeting who taught the transition course, if indicated, as available. Another series of questions asked if students participated in pull-out activities specific to the development of skills in education, employment, or independent living, followed by questions targeting who conducted the pull-out activities, if indicated as available: the respondent, a general education colleague, or special education colleague. Altogether, the questions elicited a variety of qualitative and quantitative data to address the research questions.
Data Analysis
Theoretical and Analytical Framework. As described by David Silverman (2011), theories are like a kaleidoscope where the images change as the lens is rotated. The same is true for a theoretical perspective, which alters the focus of a researchers’ data collection and analysis. The application of a valuable theory helps to organize the data, especially when elements seem disconnected from one another (Maxwell, 2008). A theoretical framework allows the researcher to focus his/her kaleidoscope on a specific area of interest that requires further explanation.
The transition perspective, as defined by Kohler (1996), provided the interpretive lens for all data. It encouraged the development of programs and activities that are focused on the students’ post-secondary goals and taking into account their unique needs, interests, and preferences. Transition planning provided the cornerstone for all educational programs and activities. Kohler and Rusch (1996) assert transition planning consists of three steps: identification of post-secondary goals, the creation of instructional activities and experiences to develop the skills necessary to meet post-secondary goals, and collaboration with the student and a variety of individuals for continued progress towards post-secondary outcomes.
Analytical Methods. The responses from Section 3, the open-ended questions on the survey, and question 46 were analyzed using directed content analysis, which allowed for the identification of evidence-based practices for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living within the responses. These data answered both research questions to address how students receive instruction, are assessed, and teacher use of evidence-based practices for post-secondary skills. The directed content analysis provided for the interpretation of a text through coding, uncovering themes, and uncovering patterns with a specific focus (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Upon completion of the content analysis, the qualitative data was evaluated holistically to look for patterns and themes across data types.
Findings
The survey received 78 responses during the spring of 2019, which included respondents who did not meet sample criteria because they did not have students with SLD. The survey sample (n = 55) is all teachers who indicated one or more students with SLD on their caseload.
Sample Descriptive Statistics
The survey sample consisted of teachers from school district A (n = 22), district B (n = 13), and district C (n = 13). The majority of teachers reported working at a traditional high school (n = 54). Most respondents were female (n = 44) and Caucasian (n = 37). There were a variety of Education Specialist credentials held: Mild/Moderate (n = 50), Moderate/Severe (n = 12), Deaf and Hard of Hearing (n = 1), and Language and Academic Development (n = 3). The state of California issues a wide variety of added authorizations. All are represented in this sample: Autism (n = 41), Deaf-blind (n = 1), Emotional Disturbance (n = 11), Other Health Impairment (n = 5), Orthopedic Impairment (n = 1), and Traumatic Brain Injury (n = 3). The highest level of education received was commonly a Master’s Degree (n = 45) with no reported doctoral degrees. The majority of teachers had several years since their last credential (M = 8.623, SD = 7.670).
The sample included teachers from programs serving students with Mild/Moderate (n = 45), Moderate (n = 4), and Moderate/Severe (n = 6) disabilities. Each participant had numerous students with SLD on their caseload (M = 15.04, SD = 10.632) with a high percentage being diploma-bound (M = 52.33, SD = 45.127).
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Table 4 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Means, Standard Deviations, and Range (Minimum/Maximum) for Years Teaching |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Variable |
M |
SD |
Min |
Max |
|
|||||||||
|
Total |
13.29 |
8.583 |
1 |
39 |
|
|||||||||
|
High School |
8.81 |
8.266 |
0 |
34 |
|
|||||||||
|
Transition |
4.18 |
7.245 |
0 |
31 |
|
|||||||||
|
Special Education (SE) |
11 |
7.242 |
1 |
33 |
|
|||||||||
|
SE High School |
8.48 |
7.412 |
0 |
31 |
|
|||||||||
|
SE Transition |
3.53 |
6.610 |
0 |
31 |
|
|||||||||
Question 1
Assessment. As shown in Table 5, teachers reported using a variety of teacher/ district created, online, and published assessments, and a directed content analysis was conducted to look for similarities among respondents. The most common means of assessment was a student interview (n = 23). The BRIGANCE (n = 5), which measures transition skill areas, was the most common published assessment.
|
Table 5 |
||||||
|
Teacher Reported Transition Assessments and their Frequency |
||||||
|
Teacher/Online Assessments |
Published Assessments |
|||||
|
Career Cluster Survey |
8 |
BRIGANCE |
5 |
|||
|
District/Teacher Created |
11 |
Career Cruising |
1 |
|||
|
Grades/Work Sample |
1 |
California Career Zone Quick Assessment |
1 |
|||
|
Interest Inventory |
4 |
COPS Interest Inventory |
1 |
|||
|
Interview |
23 |
My Next Move Survey |
1 |
|||
|
Learning style inventory |
1 |
|||||
|
Observation |
2 |
|||||
|
Practical life skills |
3 |
|||||
|
Skill inventory |
1 |
|||||
|
Vocation specific |
1 |
|||||
Employment. The ITP requires a goal, activities, and services to support the development of employment skills. Table 6 shows teachers reported students are taught to build resume skills (n = 9), interview skills including mock interviews (n = 8), and how to obtain and complete job applications (n= 5). Teachers also connected students to district (n = 6) or outside agency resources (n = 4), on the job training (n = 4), paid internships (n = 2), and business/industry tours (n = 4).
|
Table 6 |
|
|
|
|
Activities to Improve Employment Outcomes and their Frequency |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-Campus Skill Building |
Off-Campus Activities |
||
|
Classroom enterprise |
1 |
Business tours |
4 |
|
Executive function |
1 |
Connect to district resources |
6 |
|
Guest speakers |
2 |
Connect to outside agencies |
4 |
|
Interview |
8 |
Career Technical Education |
1 |
|
Job application |
5 |
Job fair |
1 |
|
Networking |
2 |
Job shadow |
1 |
|
Research careers |
3 |
On the job training |
4 |
|
Resume |
9 |
Paid Internships |
2 |
|
Transition class |
3 |
Volunteer work |
2 |
Education. In addition to ITP requirements, high school academics are to designed to prepare students for post-secondary education. Teachers reported, as illustrated in Table 7, teaching students to research college options and requirements (n = 16), taking students on 2-year and 4-year college tours (n = 8), and assisting students with college, financial aid, and scholarship applications (n = 7). Teachers also coordinated meetings with academic counselors (n = 6), Disabled Student Programs and Services (n = 5), and Department of Rehabilitation (n = 1).
|
|
|||
|
Table 7 |
|||
|
Activities to Improve Education Outcomes and their Frequency |
|||
|
On-Campus Activities |
Off-Campus Activities |
||
|
Assist with College/FAFSA/Scholarship Applications |
7 |
College Tour |
8 |
|
Attend College Visit on Campus |
1 |
Community College Classes |
1 |
|
AVID |
1 |
Connect with DOR |
1 |
|
College Ready Goals |
1 |
Connect with DSPS |
5 |
|
Executive Function Training |
1 |
ROP Class |
1 |
|
Guest Speakers |
1 |
||
|
Meet with Academic Counselor |
6 |
||
|
Research requirements/options |
16 |
||
|
Transition Class |
1 |
||
|
Write Letters of Recommendation |
1 |
||
Independent Living. The skills needed for an adult to successfully live independently are vast. Potential topics for instruction include financial planning, self-help, cooking, housekeeping, home maintenance, using transportation, clothing care, accessing community services, time/organizational management, self-determination, social roles/citizenship, community/peer relationships, and critical thinking and problem-solving. Nearly 35% of the survey sample said the development of independent living skills with students with Specific Learning Disabilities was unnecessary. Table 8 displays teachers reported instructing students on budgeting/finance (n = 10), options for living arrangements (n = 4), and food preparation skills (n = 3). Several teachers reported off-campus community-based instruction focusing on accessing public transportation (n = 4), visiting local stores and points of interest (n = 2), and obtaining a driver’s license or identification card at the Department of Motor Vehicles (n=2). Respondents also indicated connecting students to adult agencies or resources for support after high school (n = 2).
|
|
|||
|
Table 8 |
|||
|
Activities to Improve Independent Living Outcomes and their Frequency |
|||
|
On-Campus Activities |
Off-Campus Activities |
||
|
Budgeting/Finances |
10 |
Connect to adult agencies |
2 |
|
Cleaning |
1 |
Obtain Driver’s License |
1 |
|
Discuss Living Arrangements |
4 |
Obtain ID Card |
2 |
|
Food Preparation |
3 |
Open Bank Account |
1 |
|
Gardening |
1 |
Public Transportation |
4 |
|
Self-advocacy class |
3 |
Register to Vote |
1 |
|
Visit Community Locations |
2 |
||
Question 2
According to NTACT, five published curricula incorporate evidence-based practices for students with SLD. A directed content analysis revealed none of the published curricula in the survey responses. NTACT also identified vocational and occupational courses as a research-based practice for students with SLD. Only one teacher reported using occupational courses with students on her caseload. Nearly 35% of responses stated that independent living was not an area addressed in their classrooms. High levels of self-care skills have a positive correlation with post-secondary independent living (NTACT). As discussed in Question 1, a variety of on-campus and off-campus activities were reported with the intent to improve independent living skills.
Conclusions, Discussion, and Suggestions for Future Research
The 46-question survey focused on the preparation of teachers in transition skills, transition assessment of students with learning disabilities, instruction in post-secondary skills, and demographics. The survey results created a detailed picture of the current practices in three large southern California school districts.
Summary of Findings
The qualitative analysis reveals that teachers utilize a wide variety of assessments and on/off-campus activities to develop post-secondary education, employment, and independent living skills. There are no consistencies between or across districts with a low frequency reported in most areas. The teachers were involved in teaching students with SLD the skills necessary for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living, but there is no indication of the use of evidence-based practices.
Conclusions
Transition Assessment and Practices. There appears to be little consensus among practitioners in the sample on assessments or practices related to transition. Student and family interviews were the most commonly reported assessment. The challenge with developing an evidence-base for the use of an interview is the inherent lack of structure and inconsistencies in implementation. Teachers most frequently reported assisting with resumes and job interview skills. While these help a student obtain a job, it does little to help them maintain engagement in post-secondary employment. Respondents focused their efforts in the area of post-secondary education on 2-year colleges and 4-year universities. The most regularly reported activity was the research of the requirements for colleges of interest to the student. Focusing on college does not show students all the options or teach them strategies to help maintain enrollment.
The expanse of independent living skills is the most overlooked transition skill area for students with SLD. Almost 35% of the sample reported: “Most of my students do not need assistance with independent living” or a similar sentiment. The lack of development of independent living skills is not unexpected but alarming, nonetheless, considering the complexity of independent living. The most common topics of instruction were budgeting or public transportation, but there were low frequencies throughout the responses. Overall, there was a wide range of activities described with low frequencies, including food preparation, self-advocacy, and support to obtain a driver’s license or identification card.
Evidence-Based Practices. NTACT identified a small number of evidence-based practices for students with SLD, supporting their absence from responses. Only one response indicated using occupational courses with students. Even when the research base was expanded to include research-based practices, they did not appear in the responses. One participant stated, “In your survey, I learned that there is a curriculum I can utilize when working with my students. I would love to use that in the future because the training on post-secondary transition planning in my schooling and the district training always seem abstract/vague.” The survey questions did not include the phrases evidence-based or research-based, but by asking about the published curriculum used, this teacher was enlightened to their existence.
Discussion
The qualitative results provide practices for further evaluation to develop an evidence-base. Published assessments such as the BRIGANCE and COPS Interest Inventory need additional research with students with SLD to develop an evidence-base. In order to use an interview as an assessment, a standard protocol must be developed and tested. Practices such as on the job training, internships, and volunteer work show promise but also lack operational definitions or evidence-bases to demonstrate their effect on post-secondary engagement in employment. Executive function activities were reported. These activities may support engagement in education as it is studied in a variety of age groups with a research-based curriculum available, yet additional research is needed to show whether such an emphasis is helpful for students with SLD. Self-advocacy is well researched with several published curricula to teach student involvement in the IEP meeting as an evidence-based practice supporting all areas of post-secondary engagement. The survey responses did not include these curricula, so it is unclear how or whether respondents developed self-advocacy skills.
Engagement in post-secondary education, employment, and independent living are the keys to a successful life. The limited research, evidence-based practices, and research-based practices that involve students with SLD, the most common educational disability, are concerning. This lack of research creates challenges for teachers as they seek to develop post-secondary education, employment, and independent living skills of their students.
Limitations
The survey was conducted exclusively in southern California with credentials and added authorizations specific to the state. The small sample size led to difficulties in conducting quantitative analysis. Several quantitative questions relied on self-report, which can lead to errors. The survey consisted of 46 questions, which took an average of 17.5 minutes to complete and may have discouraged participation.
Suggestions for Future Research
Survey. The researcher developed a survey and conducted it in southern California. The survey contained questions that did not yield the expected information. The survey will be revised to reflect credentials in another state and distributed to gather additional data. The goal of this future study will be to gather practices to study and adapt to create additional evidence-based practices.
Evidence-Based Practices. Of the 32 evidence-based practices to develop transition skills described by NTACT, only two were developed to support students with SLD: using a published curriculum to teach IEP participation and the SDLMI (Palmer & Wehmeyer, 2002) to teach goal attainment. Given the prevalence of students with SLD in special education and their underperformance in post-secondary engagement, additional research is needed to identify and describe evidence-based practices for this population. Specifically, practices are needed that positively influence engagement in post-secondary education, employment, and independent living for students with SLD.
References
Alverson, C. Y., Fowler, C. H., Kellems, R, Rowe, D. A., Test, D. W., & Unruh, D. K. (2014). A Delphi study to operationalize evidence-based predictors in secondary transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38, 113-126.
Alwell, M., & Cobb, B. (2009). Social and communication interventions and transition outcomes for youth with disabilities: A systematic review. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 94–107. doi:10.1177/0885728809336657
Bates, P. E. & Miner, C. A. (1997). The effect of person-centered planning activities on the IEP/transition planning process. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 105-112.
Benitez, D. T., Frey, B. B., & Morningstar, M. E. (2009). A multistate survey of special education teachers’ perceptions of their transition competencies. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32(1), 6-16.
Benitez, D. T. & Morningstar, M. E. (2013). Teacher training matters: The results of a multistate survey of secondary special educators regarding transition from school to adulthood. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(1), 51-64.
Benz, M. R., Doren, B., Halpern, A. S., & Yovanoff, P. (1995). Predicting participation in postsecondary education for school leavers with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62(2), 151-164.
Blackorby, J., Hancock, G. R., & Siegel, S. (1993). Human capital and structural explanations of post-school success for youth with disabilities: A latent variable exploration of the National Longitudinal Transition Study. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Bos, C., Schumaker, J. B., & Van Reusen, A. K. (1994) Self-Advocacy Strategy for education and transition planning. Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises.
Brolin, D. E., Johnson, J. M., & Roessler, R. T. (1990). Factors affecting employment success and quality of life: A one-year follow-up of students in special education. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 13(2), 95-107.
Cameto, R., Knokey, A.M., Newman, L., Sanford, C., Shaver, D., & Wagner, M. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 6 years after high school. Key findings from the National Longitudinal Transition study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2011-3004). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Carr, E.G., Halle, J., Horner, R.H., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165-179.
Compton, D., Coyne, M., Fuchs, L. S., Gersten, R., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149-164.
Doren, B. & Murray, C. (2013). The effects of working at gaining employment skills on the social and vocational skills of adolescents with disabilities: A school-based intervention. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 56(2), 96–107. http://doi.org/10.1177/0034355212452614
Flannery, K. B., Kato, M. M., & Lombardi, A. (2015). The impact of professional development on the quality of the transition components of IEPs. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38(1), 14–24. http://doi.org/10.1177/2165143413489727
Fowler, C. H., Kohler, P., Kortering, L., Mazzotti, V. L., Mustian, A. L., & Test, D. W. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals. http://doi.org/10.1177/0885728809346960
Garner, N., Lawrence, M., Palmer, S., Soukup, N., & Wehmeyer, M., (2004). Whose Future is it Anyway? A student-directed transition planning process. Retrieved from http://www.ou.edu/content/education/centers-and-partnerships/zarrow/selfdetermination-education-materials/whos-future-is-it-anyway.html
Göritz, A. S. (2006). Incentives in web studies: Methodological issues and a review. International Journal of Internet Science, 1(1), 58-70.
Göritz, A., Sattler, S., & Van Veen, F. (Eds.). (2011). Proceedings from the European survey research association conference (ESRA) Lausanne and General Online Research Conference (GOR): The impact of monetary incentives on completion and data quality in online surveys. Düsseldorf.
Heal, L. W., & Rusch, F. R. (1994). Prediction of residential independence of special education high school students. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 223–243.
Heal, L. W., & Rusch, F. R. (1995). Predicting employment for students who leave special education high school programs. Exceptional Children, 61, 472–487.
Hennessey, M. N., Kazimi, N., Martin, J., & McConnell, A. (Eds.). (2011). Proceedings from the 16th International DCDT Conference: The transition success assessment development study: Phases I & II. Kansas City, MO.
Hsieh, H. & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research. 15(9), 1277-1288.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
Jerman, P. Marshall, L., Martin, J., & Maxson, L. (1996). Choicemaker: Self-directed IEP. Longmont, CO: Sopris West, Inc.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed-methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 112–133. doi:10.1177/1558689806298224
Kohler, P. D. (1996). A taxonomy for transition programming: Linking research and practice. Champaign, IL: Transition Research Institute, University of Illinois.
Kohler, P. & Rusch, F. (1996). Secondary educational programs: Preparing youths for tomorrow’s challenges. In H. C. Reynolds, H. J. Walberg, & H. C. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of special and remedial education: Research and practice (107-130). Tarrytown, NY: Elsevier.
Landmark, L. J., Roberts, E. L., & Zhang, D. (2013). Educators’ beliefs and practices about parent involvement in transition planning. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36(2), 114–123. http://doi.org/10.1177/2165143412463047
Lee, S. H., Little, T. D., Palmer, S. B., Soukup, J. H., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2008). Self-determination and access to the general education curriculum. The Journal of Special Education, 42(2), 91-107.
Manfreda, K. L. & Vehovar, V. (2008). Internet surveys. In E. D. de Leeuw & D. A. Dillman, (Eds.), International handbook of survey methodology (264-284). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods, (214-253). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Mazzotti, V.L. & Morningstar, M.E. (2014). Teacher preparation and professional development to deliver evidence-based transition planning and services to youth with disabilities. Gainesville: Collaboration for Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform Center, University of Flordia.
Mazzotti, V.L., Mustian, A.L., & Test D.W. (2014). Evidence-based practices and predictors: Implications for policymakers. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 25, 5-18. doi:10.11771044207312460888
Mazzotti, V. L., & Plotner, A. J. (2014). Implementing secondary transition evidence-based practices: A multi-state survey of transition service providers. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 2165143414544360. http://doi.org/10.1177/2165143414544360
Palmer, S. B., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2002). A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction: Early Elementary Version. Retrieved http://beachcenter.org/sites/beach.drupal.ku.edu/files/images/general/SelfDetermination/teachers-guide-to-sd.pdf
Pham, Y. K. (2013). An exploratory survey of transition teaching practices: Results from a national sample. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36(3), 163–173. http://doi.org/10.1177/2165143412464516
Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data: A guide to the principles of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Limited.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs. (2016). 38th Annual report to congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act. Washington, D.C., U.S.
About the Author
Sara Taylor, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in special education at Northwest Missouri State University. Before joining the faculty at NWMSU, she worked as a special education teacher for over 9 years and earned her Ph.D. at the University of California, Riverside. Her research targets teacher preparation, post-secondary transition outcomes, and teacher practices for students with learning disabilities, and special education eligibility.
Download this Issue
To Download a PDF file version of this Issue of the NASET LD Report – CLICK HERE
