Newsletter
Volume 30 | 2007 | Number 3
Evidence-Based practices for Helping Secondary Students with Autism Transition Successfully to Adulthood
By Dr. David W. Test, University of North Carolina at Charlotte and National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center
Life is a series of transitions; from diapers to underpants, from bicycles to cars, from daycare to preschool, preschool to elementary school, elementary school to middle school, and middle school to high school. One of the most significant points of transition is graduating from high school and entering into adult life. It is a time anxiously awaited by students and parents, filled with hopes and dreams of successfully leaving high school and moving into the adult world of employment and/or post-secondary education. Halpern (1992) defined secondary transition as “a period of floundering that occurs for at least the first several years after leaving school as adolescents attempt to assume a variety of adult roles in their communities” (p. 203). Unfortunately for students with disabilities the “floundering period” often lasts for years, and in some cases, a lifetime.
Current Post School Outcomes for Students with Autism
Since 2001, the National Longitudinal Study-2 (NLTS2) has been gathering data on the level of post-high school engagement for all students with disabilities (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Garza, & Levine, 2005). These data indicate that of the 11 disability categories summarized, students with autism had the third lowest rate of “being engaged” (55.7%). A more detailed look at these data indicated that 14% were employed only, 15% were enrolled in postsecondary education only, 13.6% were both employed and enrolled in postsecondary education, and 13.1% were in job training alone or with one of the other categories. In addition, although the following percentages showed small improvements from 2001, NLTS2 data from 2003 indicate 79.4% of school leavers with autism still lived with their parents and their primary leisure activities were using a computer (49%) or watching TV/video (43.9%). Given these outcomes, an important task is to ensure that schools are providing all students with disabilities access to evidence-based secondary transition practices.
The National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center
The National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center (NSTTAC) was funded by the U. S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) (Award #H326J050004). NSTTAC’s purpose is to assist states in building their capacity to support and improve transition planning, services, and outcomes for youth with disabilities. Toward this goal, NSTTAC: (a) assists State Education Agencies to collect data on Part B State Performance Plans Indicator 13 and use these data to improve transition services. Indicator 13 is the “Percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the child to meet the post-secondary goals.” [20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B)]; (b) generates knowledge that identifies evidence-based practices as a foundation for improving transition services; (c) provides capacity building resources to states and local educational agencies; and (d) disseminates information about effective transition education and services. For more information, visit http://nsttac.org.
Initial Evidence-Based Secondary Transition Practices for Students with Autism from the NSTTAC Literature Review (February, 2007)
The purpose of NSTTAC’s review of the literature is to determine the evidence-base for transition practices, disseminate that information, and make recommendations to IES for future research. Sources are being organized by the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996) and then categorized by the Institute for Educational Sciences (IES) levels of evidence. These levels are (a) high (i.e., a systematic review of high-quality evidence, e.g., randomized control trials or well-designed quasi-experiments) that supports the effectiveness of a program, practice or approach or several well-designed randomized controlled trials or well-designed quasi-experiments and no contradictory evidence using the standards for positive or potentially positive findings from the What Works Clearinghouse; (b)medium (i.e., correlational studies with convincing statistical controls for selection bias; multiple comparison groups studies that do not demonstrate equivalence of groups at pretest but which consistently show enhanced outcomes for participants experiencing a particular program, practice or approach; on or two experiments are quasi-experiments with small sample sizes and/or other conditions of implementation or analysis that limit generalizability or (c) low (i.e., expert opinion based on widely held theory and conceptualizations).
Student-Focused Planning
To date, the evidence-base for strategies in this category would be high. First, numerous examples of empirically validated strategies for increasing student self-determination skills, including involvement in transition planning exist (Allen, Smith, Test, Flowers, & Wood, 2001; Powers, Turner, Westwood, Matuszewski, Wilson, & Phillips, 2001) and second, Test, Mason, Hughes, Konrad, Neale, and Wood (2004) reviewed the literature to identify strategies for promoting student involvement in the IEP process. Results indicated that students with widely varying disabilities can be actively involved on their IEP process.
Student Development
To date, the evidence-base for strategies in this category would be high. Alwell and Cobb (2006) recently completed a meta-analysis of 50 studies which taught functional life skills to 482 youth with (largely) disability labels of moderate to severe mental retardation were reviewed. Functional life skills included money and purchasing skills, other community-based instruction, self-protection curricula, leisure skills, domestic or home-keeping skills, and personal self care. Findings provide tentative support for the teaching functional/life skills curricular interventions across educational environments, disability types, ages, and gender in promoting positive transition-related outcomes.
Family Involvement
To date, the evidence-base for strategies in this category would be low. This literature is mostly comprised of descriptive and qualitative studies that indicate the importance of parent involvement in the transition planning process (Greene, 1996; McNair & Rusch, 1991), the need for parent training (Field, Martin, Miller, Ward, & Wehmeyer, 1998; Miner & Bates, 1997), and the need for educators to learn strategies for working with culturally and linguistically diverse families (e.g., Greenan, Powers, & Lopez-Vasquez, 2001; Kalyanpur & Harry, 1999).
Interagency Collaboration
To date, the evidence-base for strategies in this category would be low. Although data exist supporting a multi-level interagency collaboration process, such as the TASSEL transition model (Aspel, Bettis, Quinn, Test, & Wood, 1999) which uses a multi-level approach of community-level, school-level, and individual-level teams and the Community Transition Team Model (Benz, Lindstrom, & Halpern, 1995), these data are primarily descriptive.
Program Structure and Attributes
To date, the evidence-base for strategies in this category would be low to non-existent.
References
Allen, S. K., Smith, A. C., Test, D. W., Flowers, C., & Wood, W. M. (2001). The effects of self-directed IEP in student participation in IEP meetings. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 24, 107-120.
Alwell, M., & Cobb, B. (2006). A Systematic Review of the Effects of Curricular Interventions on the Acquisition of Functional Life Skills by Youth with Disabilities. What Works in Transition: Systematic Review Project. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University.
Aspel, N., Bettis, G., Quinn, P., Test, D. W., & Wood, W. M. (1999). A collaborative process for planning transitional services for all students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 22, 21-42.
Benz, M. R., Lindstrom, L. E., & Halpern, A. S. (1995). Mobilizing local communities to improve transition services. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 18, 21-32.
Curtis, E., & Dezelsky, M. (1986). New hats for letting go. Salt Lake City, UT: New Hats.
Field, S., Martin, J., Miller, R., Ward, M., & Wehmeyer, M. (1998). Self-determination for persons with disabilities: A position statement of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21, 113-128.
Greenan, S., Powers, L. E., & Lopez-Vasquez, A. (2001). Multicultural aspects of parent involvement in transition planning. Exceptional Children, 67, 265-282.
Greene, G. (1996). Empowering culturally and linguistically diverse families in the transition planning process. The Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 19(1), 26-30.
Halpern, A., (1992). Transition: Old wine in new bottles. Exceptional Children, 58, 202-211.
Kalyanpur, K., & Harry, B. (1999). Culture in special education: Building reciprocal family-professional relationships. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Kohler, P. D. (1996). A taxonomy for transition programming: Linking research and practice. Champaign, IL: Transition Research Institute, University of Illinois.
McNair, J., & Rusch, F. (1991). Parent involvement in transition programs. Mental Retardation, 29, 93-101.
Miner, C. A., & Bates, P. E. (1997). The effects of person centered planning activities on the IEP/transition planning process. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 32, 105-112.
Powers, L. E., Turner, A., Westwood, D., Matuszewski, J., Wilson, R., & Phillips, A. (2001). TAKE CHARGE for the future: A controlled field-test of a model to promote student involvement in transition planning. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 24, 89-104.
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.
Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, N., & Levine, P. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. A report for the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
NSTTAC Contact Information
David Test, Co-Principal Investigator
704-687-8853 (direct)
704-687-8606 (NSTTAC)
704-687-6327 (TTY)
704-687-2916 (fax)