This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Weidenthal, C. Articles by Kochhar-Bryant, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

An Investigation of Transition Practices for Middle School Youth

The George Washington University, cweiden{at}gwu.edu

Carol Kochhar-Bryant

The George Washington University

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEIA 2004) shifted the requirement to initiate transition services from age 14 back to age 16, a change with significant implications for middle school students with disabilities transitioning into high school. This study, based on practices under the Amendments to IDEA 1997 regulations, employed a survey and open-ended interviews to investigate transition practices of special education teachers who instructed eighth- and ninth-grade adolescents with learning disabilities (LD). The study focused on (a) student participation at Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, (b) strengths considered in IEP development, and (c) transition service needs focusing on a course of study. Findings demonstrated the significance of self-determination training and its application in the IEP process by the age of 14; reliance on assessments of students' strengths and needs, which include informal measures and information from family members; and teachers' support for long-range, coordinated transition planning for students beginning no later than middle school.

References

• Aspel, N., Bettis, G., Test, D., & Wood, W. (1998). An evaluation of a comprehensive system of transition services. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21, 203—222.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Baer, R., Simmons, T., & Flexer, R. (1996). Transition practice and policy compliance in Ohio: A survey of secondary special educators. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 19, 61—72.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Bakken, T., & Kortering, L. (1999). The constitutional and statutory obligations of schools to prevent students with disabilities from dropping out. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 360—366.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Belcher, D.C., & Hatley, R.V. (1994). A dropout prediction model that highlights middle level variables. Research in Middle Level Education, 18(1), 67—78.
• Benz, M., & Halpern, A. (1993). Vocational and transition services needed and received by students with disabilities during their last year of high school. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 16, 197—211.[Free Full Text]
• Bremer, C., Kachgal, M., & Schoeller, K. (2003). Self-determination: Supporting successful transition. NCSET Research to Practice Brief, 2, 91
• Bullis, M., & Cheney, D. (1999). Vocational and transition interventions for adolescents and young adults with emotional or behavioral disorders. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32, 1—24.
• Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Wagner, M. (2004). Planning for transition from school to adulthood for secondary school youth with disabilities. In R. Cameto, P. Levine, & M. Wagner (Eds.), Transition planning for students with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved January 6, 2006, from http://www.nlts2.org/pdfs/transitionplanningchp1.pdf
• Cameto, R., Marder, C., Wagner, M., & Cardoso, D. (2003). NLTS2 data brief: Youth employment. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
• Christenson, S.L., & Thurlow, M.L. (2004). School dropouts: Prevention, considerations, interventions, and challenges. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(1), 36—39.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• DeStefano, L., Heck, D., Hasazi, S., & Furney, K. (1999). Enhancing the implementation of the transition requirements of IDEA: A report on the policy forum on transition. Career Development for Exceptional Children, 22(1), 85—100.
• Dunn, C. (1996). A status report on transition planning for individuals with learning disabilities. In J. Patton & G. Blalock (Eds.), Transition and students with learning disabilities: Facilitating movement from school to adult life (pp. 19—41). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
• Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
• Getzel, E., & Gugerty, J. (2001). Applications for youth with learning disabilities. In P. Wehman (Ed.), Life beyond the classroom (3rd ed., pp. 337—389). Baltimore: Brookes.
• Grigal, M., Test, D., Beattie, J., & Wood, W.M. (1997). An evaluation of transition components of Individualized Education Programs. Exceptional Children, 63, 357—372.[Web of Science]
• Haring, K.A., Lovett, D.L., & Smith, D.D. (1990). A follow-up study of recent special education graduates of learning disabilities programs. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(2), 108—113.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Hasazi, S.B., Furney, K.S., & DeStefano, L. (1999). Implementing the IDEA transition mandates. Exceptional Children, 65, 555—566.[Web of Science]
• Hasazi, S.B., Johnston, A.P., Liggett, A.M., & Schattman, R.A. (1994). A qualitative policy study of the least restrictive environment provision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Exceptional Children, 60, 491—507.[Web of Science]
• Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (1990)(amended 1997)
• Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, P.L. 105-17. Final Rules and Regulations. Federal Register, Volume 64, Number 48, March 12, 1999.
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (2004)(reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990)
• Jennings, L. (1989, September). Report's good news: Many who drop out complete education. Education Week, 9(4), 51—73.
• Johnson, D.R., Sharpe, M., Sinclair, M.F., Hasazi, S., Furney, K., & DeStefano, L. (1997, July). State and local education efforts to implement the transition requirements of IDEA: Report on the National Survey of the Implementation of the IDEA Transition Requirements. Burlington: University of Vermont.
• Johnson, D.R., Stodden, R.A., Emanuel, E.J., Luecking, R.L., & Mack, M. (2002). Current challenges facing secondary education and transition services: What research tells us. Exceptional Children, 68, 519—531.[Web of Science]
• Kochhar, C.A., West, L.L., & Taymans, J.M. (2000). Successful inclusion: Practical strategies for a shared responsibility. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Kochhar-Bryant, C., & Bassett, D. (2002). Challenge and promise in aligning transition and standards-based education. In C. Kochhar-Bryant & D. Bassett (Eds.), Aligning transition and standards-based education. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
• Marder, C., & D'Amico, R. (1992). How well are youth with disabilities doing? A comparison of youth with disabilities and youth in general. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.
• Martin, J., Marshall, L., & Sale, P. (2004). A 3-year study of middle, junior high, and high school IEP meetings. Exceptional Children, 70, 285—297.
• Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Mizelle, N.B. (2005, April). Moving out of middle school. Educational Leadership, 56—60.
• National Council on Disability. (2000). Back to school on civil rights. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 70 6301 et seq. (2002)
• O'Leary, E. (2000, September). Systemic Reform: A conceptual model for addressing the transition services requirements of IDEA 97. MPRRC Today, 11—14. Retrieved January 6, 2006, from http://www.1.usu.edu/mprrc/infoserv/mprrctoday/0900.pdf
• O'Leary, E. (2001). Transition outcomes projects. Paper presented at the conference on the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development, Alexandria, VA.
• Rubin, H.J., & Rubin, I.S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Sinclair, M., Thurlow, M., Christenson, S., & Evelo, D. (1995). Check and connect partnership for school success: Project evaluation 1990—1995. In H. Thornton (Ed.), Staying in school: A technical report of three dropout prevention projects for middle school students with learning and emotional disabilities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute on Community Integration.
• Sitlington, P.L., & Frank, A.R. (1990). Are adolescents with learning disabilities successfully crossing the bridge into adult life? Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 97—111.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Spss. (1997). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 8.0) [Computer software]. Chicago: Author.
• Storms, J., O'Leary, E., & Williams, J. (2000, May). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. Transition requirements: A guide for states, districts, schools, universities and families. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute on Community Integration.
• Test, D.W., Mason, C., Hughes, C., Konrad, M., Neale, M., & Wood, W.M. (2004). Student involvement in Individualized Education Program meetings. Exceptional Children, 70, 391—412.[Web of Science]
• U.S. Department of Education. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Washington, DC: Author.
• U.S. Department of Education. (2003). Twenty-fifth annual report to Congress on the implementation of IDEA. Washington, DC: Author.
• U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). School dropouts: Education could play a stronger role in identifying and disseminating promising prevention practices (GAO-02-240). Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• U.S. General Accounting Office. (2003). Federal actions can assist states in improving postsecondary outcomes for youth (GAO-03-773). Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• Wagner, M., & Blackorby, J. (2004). Overview of findings from wave I of the Study of the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
• Wagner, M., Newman, L., & Cameto, R. (2004). Changes over time in the secondary school experiences of students with disabilities: Findings from the NLTS and NLTS2. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
• Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, N. & Levine, P. (2005, April). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
• Wehmeyer, M.L., Field, S., Doren, B., Jones, B., & Mason, C. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413—425.

Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, Vol. 30, No. 3, 147-157 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/08857288070300030401


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Weidenthal, C. Articles by Kochhar-Bryant, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?