ED 378 749

AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTION

PUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPEJOURNAL CIT

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESUME

EC 303 646

Retish, Paul, Ed.Vocational & Social Inclusion. Special Issue.Haifa Univ., Mount Carmel (Israel). School ofEducation.94123p.AHVA Publisher, P.O. Box 7610, Haifa 31076, Israel($55 per year individuals; $75 per year,institutions; 2 issues per year, including postage;make check payable to AHVA Computer Service).Collected Works Serials (022)Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation; n1

1994

MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.College Programs; *Disabilities; Foreign Countries;Interpersonal Competence; *Normalization(Disabilities); Postsecondary Education;'PrereferralIntervention; Program Effectiveness; Rehabilitation;Resource Allocation; Secondary Education; *SocialIntegration; Special EducaLion; Teacher Attitudes;*Transitional Programs; Two Year Colleges; VocationalEducation; *Vocational Rehabilitation

IDENTIFIERS Mexico

ABSTRACTThis special issue on vocational and social inclusion

of people with disabilities includes papers with the following titlesand authors: "Applying Theories of Career Behavior to SpecialPopulations: Implications for Secondary Vocational TransitionProgramming" (Jay W. Rojewski); "Familiarity with the Service Systemand Perception of Needs at Transition" (Richard I. Goldbaum andothers); "Avoiding Inappropriate Referrals of Minority LanguageLearners to Special Education: Implementing a Prereferral Process"(Paul C. Kavanaugh); "Integration PLUS: A Community Based SocialLearning Program for Youth with Mental Retardation and PhysicalAggress;on" (Patrick J. Schloss and others); "Striving forDevelopment: An Overview of Special Education in Mexico" (PedroSanchez-Escobedo); "Promoting Postsecondary Education for HighSchool-Aged Youth with Disabilities: Influencing Teacher Attitudes,Developing Teacher Knowledge" (Robert J. Miller and others);"Characteristics of Services Provided by Two-Year Colleges That ServeStudents with Learning or Cognitive Disabilities in Highly EffectiveWays" (John Gugerty); "Postsecondary Vocational Education--Does ItReally Make a Difference?" (Patricia L. Sitlington and others); and"Effectiveness of Special Education Programs--Deriving EmpiricalStrategies for Efficient Resource Allocation" (Howard L. Garber andothers). (Each paper contains references.) (JDD)

************************************************************************ Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

***********************************************************************

00t,4Ief) ssues in=W

\blume 9Number 11994

pedal

ducation &

Rehabilitation

U.S. DEPARTMENT or EDUCATION°Noce of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC

--LLCENTER

document has been reproduced asreceived horn the person or Organizationoriginating it

C Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Points ol ntew or opinions stated In this docu-men! do not necessarily represent offic,a1OERI po,hon or pokey

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS

MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

70 THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC).

SPECIAL ISSUE

GUEST EDITOR - PAUL RETISH

VOCATIONAL & SOCIAL INCLUSION

THE KUNIN LUNENFELD CHAIR OF SPEC W. 'EDUCATIONSCHOOL OF EDUCATION - UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA

0) AM Publisher2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

AIMS AND SCOPE,Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary scientific journal which emphasizes the

linkage between special education and rehabilitation services. It provides a forum for the publication of research,

position papers and specirtl projects.The major features of the journal are:

The presentation of a wide range of topics concerning special education and rehabilitation

Peer review of manuscriptsInternational disseminationInterdisciplinary contributions: education, psychology, social work, medicine, philosophy, public policy

A Hebrew version of the journal appears in a separate edition.

Editor-In-Chief Guest Editor

Dr. Shunit Reiter Prof. Paul RetishThe University of Haifa, Israel The University of Iowa, U. S. A.

Associate EditorDr. Luba Friedman, U. S. A.

Sectional Editor on Measurement, Assessment and Research Issues

Dr. Moshe Zeidner, Israel

Annual subscription rates: (2 issues per year, including postage): individuals $55 a year, institutions $75.

Cheques payable to AHVA Computer Service P. 0. Box 7610, Haifa 31076, Israel

Notes for Contributors

Manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate in English. Articles should typically be between 2000 and 5000

words long and be typed throughout in double spasing on one side only of A4 paper, leaving 4cm margins on each

side. Manuscripts should adhere to the conventions of style and format described in Publication Manual ofthe

American Psychological Association (3rd edition, 1983). Contributers whose native language is not English, are

kindly requested to have their manuscripts pre-edited for language style.

Title page: This should contain the title of the paper, a short running head, the name and full postal address

of rash author, and an indication of which author will be responsible for correspondence.

Abstract: An abstract in English of not more than 150 words in length should accompany each contribution

and should appear on a separate sheet.

References: References should be listed in full at the end of the article, in alphabetical order.

Figures and tables: These should be presented on separate sheet, and each should be appropriately

numbered and have a self-explanatory title. Tables should be clearly typed, using double spasing throughout.

Number tables consecutively with arabic numerals and give each a clear descriptive caption. Figures should be

of sufficient guality for direct reproduction. They should be prepared to professional standarts in black ink, with

all the symbols and lettering included. Photographs intended for half-to-one reproduction must be high quality

glossy originals of maximum contrast. A list of figure captions should be typed on a separate sheet and included

in the typescript.

Submission of Manuscripts

Contributors should send manuscripts to the Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Shunit Reiter, School of Education,

University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. Submission of an article implies that it has not been published and is not

being considered for publication elsewhere. Acceptance of submitted material is on the understanding that it will

not be reproduced in full or in part without the permission of the publishers.

[OAHVA Publisher ISSN 0334-8113

P. 0. Box 7610 Haifa 31076 Israel 42 Allenby Rd., Israel, Haifa 33056, Tel/Fax 972-520432

3

ISERIssues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Vp lame 9Number 1

1994

The Kunin-Lunenfeld Chair of Special EducationSchool of Education, University of Haifa

Issues in Special Education and Rehabilitation

Editor-In-Chief Guest EditorShunit Reiter, Israel Paul Retish, U. S. A.

Associate EditorLuba Friedman, U. S. A.

Sectional EditorMeasurement & AssessmentMoshe Zeidner, Israel

Editorial BoardD. N. Bryen, Temple University, U. S. A., (Special Education); R. I. Brown,University of Calgary, Canada, (Educational Psychology & Rehabilitation);M. Hovav, Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, Jerusalem, Israel,(Correction); F. Culbertson, University of Winsonsin, U. S. A., (Psychology);S. Katz, Bar-Ilan University, Israel, (Rehabilitation Psychology); W. E.Kiernan, Boston College and The Children's Hospital, U. S. A.,(Rehabilitation); M. Margalit, Tel-Aviv University, Israel, (SpecialEducation); R. McConkey, Gattenside House, Scotland, (Families: Training &Research); M. E. Michael, Head Supervisor of Special Education, Jerusalem,Israel, (Ministry of Education); D. Mitchell, University of Waikato, NewZealand, (Special Education Policy); P. Mitt ler, Manchester University,England, (Educational Psychology); H. Ronen, Supervisor of Special Education,Israel, (Ministry of Education); D. H. Saklofske, University of Saskatchewan,Canada, (Educational Psychology); R. Schalock, Hastings College, U. S. A.,(Psychology); V. L. Schwean, University of Saskatchhewan, Canada,(Exceptional Children); E. Tirosh, Bnei-Zion Medical Center, Israel,(Child Development).

Issues in Special Education and Rehabilitation is a scientific journal compiled of original con-tributions in the field of education, treatment and rehabilitation of children and adults with specialneeds.

Manuscripts accepted for publication describe research, offer professional opinions of expertson controversial issues and present new projects. The latter should intergate theory with practice.Priority will be given to papers focusing on current problems and issues with a scientific, experimen-tal and theoretical orientation.

The ideas and opinions presented are those of the authors only, and do not necessarily repre-sent the philosophy of the editors.

5

Editorial

When Dr. Shunit Reiter asked me to be the guest editor of ISER I realized I faced aformidable challenge. Dr. Reiter asked me to put together a series of articles that wouldchallenge the readers and address contemporary issues. I elaborated on this challengeto publish not for the sake of publishing and, therefore, I wanted authors to extend whathas already been researched. I did not want to be a party to publishing more of the samebut rather publish pieces that delved into new areas, challenged established thought.and extended contemporary thinking.

As I called, sent letters, or was approacned by potential authors, I posed the followingchallenge. Are you interested in submitting a new piece that extends the thoughts oftoday's special educators and also questions what had become the absolute of contem-porary special education? For some this was viewed as an opportunity while othersdecided not to take advantage of this opportunity.

What follows are the fruits of this search. We hope you find the reading and ideas asstimulating as I found the process of selection. Two of the articles in these pages representinnovative work done outside of the USA. In Israel, individuals with disabilities areputting out this Journal and other activities and this process is described. The emergingareas of special education in Mexico is also included which describes the evolution takinglace as well as the pitfalls that have been and will be faced as special education gainsacceptance.

Kavanaugh reflects on the populations found in special education and the ongoingproblems of over - representation of persons of color. Though this is not startingly newinformation, the perspective is new and seems appropriate that once again raise an issuethat we are familiar with but continue to ignore. In light of the icreasing emigration intothe USA, this issue once again needs to be highlighted.

Post secondary services is the topic for the next series of articles. Perspectives fromservice providers in the community are presented by the article of Goldbaum et al whileSitlington et at discuss the ongoing results of state wide survey and the impact of thedata collected. These two articles represent the most fundamental of partnershipsState Departments, Universities and Service Delivery Agencies.

Miller and his colleagues and Gugerty discuss the services available, usefulness to theindividuals, and which services are most wanted and used by the people themselves.Issues in post-secondary education, after graduation and next and usefulness of curricu-lum are discussed in depth.

Alper and her colleagues look at the integration movement and combine this processwith community actions. This article tries to tie together the process of teaching personsto live and work together and combines the academic and the practical. The issue ofexisting realities that the developmentally disabled face on a daily basis is addressed andexplored, and strategies for daily living are discussed.

Garber discusses the roots of the problems: money, funds, and usefulness. His analysisof how money is developed for strateg,les and the actual spending of money at the locallevel is illuminating. More and more we hear of reevaluating the funding level for special

education and determining whether the money being spent is worth the energy. Thisquestion, among others, is fundamental to continuance of special education.

If we were to take the isolated ideas and results of some of the research done on specialeducation in the last 10 years, serious questions regarding the level of funding and whatimpact this has had on the lives and future of persons with disabilities could be raised*.Are we a system that has its own momentum for survival which does not take into accountour impact on those with disabilities? Surely we have done well with many persons, butwe also have done not as well with many others. The score is about even so we shouldjust continue. When and what is the balance? The research on these pages are not endpoints but we hope that they will add to the many beginnings that we have in publication.Of course this raises questions regarding who reads and uses what is published? Weneed to make concerted efforts to move to the next step of using the research for action,based upon sound understanding of the limited conclusions we now have. Only when wehave changed, because of what we know, will the articles that appear in this and otherJournals truly enrich the lives of person, with disabilities.

As a tax payer, one cant help but wonder if money could be spent in a bettter, efficientand more productive manner.

7

Paul RetIshThe University of Iowa.

.,

.

ISERIssues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

ContentsJay W. RojewskiApplying Theories of Career Behavior to SpecialPopulations: Implications for Secondary VocationalTransition Programming 7

Richard I. Goldbaum, Ronald Rebore, Gary L. Siegel, Julie GatesFamiliarity with the Service System and Perceptionof Needs at Transition 27

Paul C. KavanaughAvoiding Inappropriate Referrals of Minority LanguageLearners to Special Education:Implementing a Prereferral Process 39

Patrick J. Schloss, Sandra Alper, Charles GreenIn PLUS: A Community Based Social Learning Program forYou with Mental Retardation and Physical Aggression 51

Pedro Sanchez-EscobedoStriving for Development: An Overview ofSpecial Education in Mexico 61

Robert J. Miller, Stephanie Corbey, Ramona L. Springls DossPromoting Postsecondary Education for High School-Aged Youth withDisabilities: Influencing Teacher Attitudes,Developing 'Reacher Knowledge 69

John GugertyCharacteristics of Services Provided by Two-Year CollegesThat Serve Students with Learning or Cognitive Disabilities inHighly Effective Ways 79

Patricia L. Sitlington, Alan R. Frank, Rori R. CarsonPostsecondary Vocational EducationDoes ItReally Make a Difference? 89

Howard L. Garber, Maurice McInerney, Raja VeluEffectiveness of Special EducationPrograms Deriving Empirical Strategies forEMcient Resource Allocation 101

Around the World of Special Education and Rehabilitation - In Brief 113

8

mob

Despite Mental Handicap

Learning to cope with adult daily life

Edited by H.C. GunzburgA monograph of The British Journal of Developmental Disabilities,Stratford-on-Avon: SEFA; 138 pages, 4 Fig., 25 Tables; Price £9.00

CONTENTS: Target Setting - Control Measures: "Normal homeenvironments" indifferent or stimulating? A sixth form college for mentally

handicapped adolescents; Monitoring progress - Wentwood statisticalanalysis; "Wentwood Education" analysis of environmental, social andeducational assessments; Personalisation through Social Education; A

pathway to greater independence?

This monograph presents a very readable account of a remarkableeducational demonstration teaching adults with a mental handicapto cope with life in the open community. Wentwood Educationprepared during ten years 63 students in two years courses tostand on their own feet and to become confident young men andwomen despite the disadvantages resulting from their handicap.Their day to day life and educational curriculum have beendescribed in detail, their very modest skills at arrival at the"College" and their acquisition of new competencies have beenmeticulously recorded and provide the scientific evidence forsupporting the operational philosophy that a methodical, aimdirected approach can succeed in giving severely mentallyhandicapped adult people the confidence and ability to tackle"normal" life situations.

Orders should be sent to:

B.S.D.D.Accounts Dept.

5 Handsworth DriveGreat Barr

Birmingham B43 6EDEngland

All orders be accompanied by an official order or a sheque for Sterling£9.00 (U.S. $19.00, Canadian $22.00) made out to

The British Journal of Developmental Disabilities.

9

C3.

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 7-261994 AHVA Publisher

Applying Theories of Career Behavior toSpecial Populations: Implications for

Secondary Vocational Transition Programming

Jay W. Rojewski

Abstract: Much of the literature on transition from school to work for adolescents from specialpopulations reflects a systems change or systems analytic perspective which views individualcareer-related difficulties as a reflection of problems in broader social systems (i.e., systemicproblems inhibit the capacity of schools or other institutions to deliver effective programs andservices). While this position is valid and makes important contributions to our understanding,other theoretical perspectives may also provide unique and valuable insights into the careerbehavior of adolescents from special populations and should not be neglected. The author ofthis article examines the contributions of prominent career theories to an understanding ofcareer behavior in adolescents who experience learning disabilities or are economicallydisadvantaged. In addition, the application of major theoretical concepts and principlestoward developing vocational transition programs and counseling interventions are exam-ined. This review may provide a base for future research and practice, and contribute to amore comprehensive understanding of career behavior in adolescents from special popula-tions.

Introduction

During the past decade preparingyouths for the transition from school towork has evolved from a national priorityto a mandated component of educationalplanning for all adolescents with disabili-ties. More recently, growing concern hasalso been expressed about the transitionof non-college bound youths, especially

those who are economically disadvan-taged' (U.S. Department of Labor, 1993;William T. Grant Foundation, 1988). Thisincreased attention on preparing non-college bound youths for adult life hasfueled an explosion of new secondaryvocational and transition programs. And,while increased focus on the vocationalpreparation of diverse student popula-tions has been beneficial, an overriding

1 Here, the term special populations refers to adolescents who have learning disabilities or are economically disadvantaged. Thesetwo groups share a number of similarities including learning characteristics and difficulties, problems encountered as theyprepare for the transition from school to adultlife (Gardner, Beatty, & Gardner, 1984; Gottfredson, 1986), eligibility forsecondary vocational special education programs, and lack of adequate theory to explain career behavior and development.While commonalities exist each group also experiences unique career-related problems and needs that must be acknowledged.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 0 7

concern is yet to be adequately ad-dressed: Why do we do what we do withregard to planning career and vocationalprograms for secondary-aged specialpopulations? (Cummings & Maddux,1987).

The research literature contains awealth of investigations on the transitionfrom school to work of special popula-tions. Much of this research describestransition program components (Whatdo we do or what has been done withregard to transition program develop-ment?), examines participant involve-ment through follow-up studies (How ef-fect4-re are transition programs foradolescents from special populations?),or investigates the effectiveness of federaland state policy efforts (Clark & Knowl-ton, 1987; Johnson & Rusch, 1993).Most of these studies reflect a systemschange or systems analytic perspectivetoward vocational transition programswhich view career-related difficulties as areflection of problems in broader socialsystems. These systemic problems in-hibit the capacity of schools or institu-tions to deliver effective programs andservices (Halpern, Benz, & Lindstrom,1992; Rusch, Kohler, & Hughes, 1992).This stance is understandable and justi-fied given the unique circumstances sur-rounding the emergence of school towork transition programming, the col-laborative and political nature of servicedelivery, and the need for practical infor-mation that can be readily adopted byprofessionals. Knowledge generatedfrom these types of studies is critical tothe development of effective secondaryvocational and transition programs.

Even so, other perspectives may alsoprovide valuable insights that could con-tribute to more effective career counsel-ing and vocational interventions for stu-dents from special populations andshould not be neglected. Theories of ca-reer behavior (e.g., psychological-basedtheories) represent one such perspective.Unfort nately, discussions of theoretical

perspectives that explain and predict thecareer behavior of special populationsare somewhat limited in the professionalliterature (Conte, 1983; Curnow, 1989;LoCascio, 1974; Phillips, Strohmer, Ber-thaume, & O'Leary, 1983). As a result,substantive questions remain unan-swered: What them etical foundationsand principles should be used to guidethe development of secondary vocationalspecial education and transition pro-grams or career counseling interventionsfor students from special populations?To what degree can current theories beused to explain and predict the careerbehavior of adolescents from specialpopulations?

Carr and Kemmis (1986) suggestedthat the methods and procedures em-ployed by a profession should be basedon a body of theoretical knowledge andresearch. Without a solid theoreticalfoundation, program and counseling in-terventions may be based on a method oftrial and error, governed more by whatfeels good or sounds right at the time; asopposed to the development of tech-niques or strategies based on proventheoretical foundations. Despite the ar-gument for theoretically-based program-ming, Cummings and Maddux (1987)feared that vocational and career prepa-ration programs for youths from specialpopulations have been based more ontraditional and stereotypic views of indi-viduals' capabilities rather than on anyphilosophical viewpoint. This assertionis supported by the fact that most existingcareer theories are based on relativelysmall samples of White, middle-classmales that do not adequately reflect thecareer behavior of individuals from non-traditional populations (Gottfredson,1986; Phillips et al., 1983).

To examine how dominant career theo-ries might be used to enhance our under-standing of career behavior in adoles-cents from special populations, thisarticle is divided into several sections.First, assumptions held about the career

8 11 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

behavior of individuals from specialpopulations are examined. Next, promi-nent theories of career behavior are re-viewed. Concerns, inherent limitations,and the applicability of each theory to-ward a comprehensive explanation of thecareer behavior of adolescents from spe-cial populations are included. Relevanttheoretical concepts and principles forthe design of career counseling interven-tions and vocational transition programsare also highlighted.

Career Behavior of Special Populations

A prevailing theme in the literature oncareer choice and development centers onwhether current theories of career behav-ior can be applied directly to adolescentswith pedal needs. Two differing view-points have emerged. One view suggeststhat prominent theories are not applicableto special groups. Proponents of this viewsee the career behavior of persons fromspecial populations as unique and unre-lated to majority groups. Manuele (1983)explained that "tasks such as crystallizingand specifying a vocational choice may beunimportant when compared with the ne-cessity of getting employment of any kind"(p. 47).

A second, more moderate, view advo-cates that tradis onal theories can bemodified to explain the particular needsand situations encountered by adoles-cents with special needs (Osipow, 1976;Super, 1957). Supporters of this positionbelieve that all individuals experiencesimilar career development needs. Theyargue that constructing new theories toexplain the unique circumstances of vari-ous special groups does more harm thangood. "The stress on uniqueness hasserved to perpetuate an ad hoc and incon-sistent approach to different specialgroups, and thus has continued to ob-scure rather than illuminate group differ-ences" (Gottfredson, 1986, p. 141). Theapproach adopted for the present articlereflects this second view.

What is called for is not a separatheory of vocational development fi[persons from special population,but rather a reexamination of curre:theories in light of the observation ththese theories may not in fact fit tldata of exceptional or minority grout(Conte, 1983, p. 327).

The following sections examine thrissues that influence our ability to aprcurrent career theories to special poplations. First, widely-held but inaccuraassumptions about the career behaviof individuals from special populatio:are examined. Second, the tendencyexplain the career behavior of membeof special populations from a deficien("blame the victim") model Is address(Gottfredson's (1986) framework is avanced as a viable alternative for intpreting the impact of at-risk factorscareer behavior. Finally, specific issurelated to the career behavior of adollcents who are learning disabled or e(nomically disadvantaged are reviewed

Assumptions That LimitApplication of Career Theories to Spe-cial Populations

A number of misconceptions astereotypes exist regarding the career 1havior of special populations. Thesecorrect beliefs have diminished the iportance of career-related issues adiscouraged serious efforts at applyitheories of career behavior to youth wspecial needs (Conte, 1983; Neff, 198A brief examination of these assumpticis important because professionals wtacitly adhere to them are likely to ppetuate stereotypes that may arbitrairestrict or limit the career choices MEavailable to individuals from specgroups (Osipow, 1976).

A pervasive assumption about thereer development of adolescents fr,special populations is the notion thatindividual's special needs precludesother aspects of vocational behavior; t

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

12

is. disability or socioeconomic disadvan-tage is the primary determinant of careerbehavior (Conte, 1983; Curnow, 1989).Those who support this notion tend toview particular careers as appropriate orinappropriate for adolescents simply onthe basis of whether a disability or eco-nomic disadvantage is present (e.g., itwould be better for a youth of lower so-cioeconomic status to go to a techni-cal/trade school rather than a four-yearcollege or university). Neff (1985) cau-tioned that while one's special needs mayimpair or restrict an individual's skillsand abilities to perform particular typesof work, they should not be the initial orsole basis for determining career alterna-tives or program enrollment.

A second assumption posits that thecareer behavior of special populations isunsystematic (not guided by developmen-tal stages) and influenced primarily bychance. One conclusion from this think-ing is that young people from specialpopulations better take whatever kind ofemployment they can get - i.e., interven-tions designed to enhance career devel-opment are a waste of time (Osipow,1976). A distinction between career andvocational development for at-risk popu-lations illustrates this line of reasoning.Conte (1983) asserted that vocational de-velopment might be a more appropriateconcept for some individuals with specialpopulations in that they may never obtainlong-lasting competitive employment,much less a planned, sequential career.

Osipow (1976)2 warned that such in-accurate thinking could be used to justifythe placement of youths with specialneeds in low wage, low-prestige worktasks without regard for individualstrengths and interests. He also identi-fied other fallacies commonly attributedto the impact of special needs on career

behavior and choice including the notionthat career development issues are notimportant, career options are limited,and that career development is a con-stantly stressful experience for membersof special populations. Taken as a wholethese inaccurate beliefs may, in part, ex-plain the failure to apply theoretical ca-reer behavior concepts to individualsfrom special populations.

Alternative to the DeficiencyPerspective of Career Behavior

General agreement exists that indi-viduals from special populations tend toexhibit career behavior that is differentthan majority groups (Brooks, 1990). Inthe past, identified differences in careerbehavior and development were oftenviewed and interpreted as deficiencies.The practice of viewing differences froma deficiency or deficit perspective hasbeen criticized in that it tends to blameindividuals for factors beyond their con-trol (e.g., discrimination) and focusesmore attention on individual limitationsrather than strengths (Gottfredson,1986; Smith, 1975). It may be more ap-propriate to consider variations in careerbehavior as merely different rather thandeficient.

As an alternative to the deficit model,Gottfredson (1986) asserted that every-one (not just special groups) experiencessome type of career-related problemsbased on the degree to which certain riskfactors are present. "Risk factors are at-tributes of the person or of the person'srelation to the environment that are as-sociated with a higher-than-average prob-ability of experiencing the types of prob-lems under consideration" (p. 143).Potential risk factors are organized intothree main categories including factorsused in comparisons with the general

2 Although observations by Osipow (1976) ware originally targeted to persons with disabilities, his comments appear to be equallyappropriate for individuals who are economically disadvantaged.

10 13Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

16

population (e.g., poor education, poverty,low self-esteem, functional limitations),factors used in comparisons within one'sown social group (e.g., nontraditional in-terests. social isolation), and an individ-ual's family responsibilities (e.g., being aprimary caregiver or economic provider).Gottfredson hypothesized that the differ-ential rates of risk encountered in eachcategory had to be examined in order tounderstand and explain differences incareer behavior.

Influence of Learning Disabilities andEconomic Disadvantage onCareer Behavior

Gottfredson's (1986) framework pro-vides a basis for understanding the ca-reer behavior of adolescents who experi-ence learning disabilities orsocioeconomic disadvantage. This sec-tion builds on this understanding by ex-amining (a) risk factors that individualsin these special groups are likely to expe-rience and (b) the impact of these factorson career development and careerchoice.

Impact of learning disabilities. The ca-reer behavior of adolescents with learn-ing disabilities is likely to be influencedby a number of the risk factors identifiedby Gottfredson (1986). Prominent riskfactors used to compare the career be-havior of disabled youths to the generalpopulation and to one another are brieflyexamined in subsequent paragraphs.The third category, family responsibility,does not represent a greater risk simplybecause of the presence of a learningdisability.

Factors used to compare adolescentswith learning disabilities to the generalpopulation may hold the greatest likeli-hood of posing career-related problems.Documented differences that exist be-tween individuals with learning disabili-ties and the general population includepoor academic skills, functional limita-tions, poor social skills, and low self-es-

teem. When compared with nondisabledpeers, individuals with learning disabili-ties are often characterized as passivelearners with specific academic-relatedproblems including poor educationalperformance, poor organizational skills,test anxiety, perceptual problems. andlimited attention span (Rosenthal, 1989;Sarkees & Scott, 1986).

Individuals with learning disabilitiesoften experience difficulties in the social-personal domain which cause problemsin career development and decision-mak-ing. Low self - esteem and low self-conceptcaused by repeated failure, limited socialskill development, reduced success inliving independently, and limited abilityto act as a self-advocate are cited as majorproblems for this population (Dowdy,Carter, & Smith, 1990; Hudson,Schwartz, Sealander, Campbell, &Hensel, 1988). As a result, adolescentswith learning disabilities often experi-ence low social status among their peers(Dudley-Marling & Edmiaston, 1985).

Youths with learning disabilities arelikely to experience one or more func-tional limitations such as difficulty inlocating and maintaining employment(Siegel, Gaylord-Ross, Greener, &Robert, 1990) and problems adjusting toindependent community living (Hudsonet al., 1988). Studies have also shownthis group to be less satisfied with theirsocial lives, of lower socioeconomicstatus, more dependent on their families,and less likely to pursue postsecondaryeducation than nondisabled peers. As aresult of these limitations, youths withlearning disabilities are more likely tohave societal expectations play a role indetermining their career behavior thannondisabled peers (Goldberg, 1992).

Adolescents with learning disabilitiesmay also experience career-choice prob-lems resulting from factors that are usedto compare individuals within the samesocial circle. The severity of disability isone factor that may isolate an indivichial

Volume 9, No. 1, 19941.4 11

with a learning disability from peers whoare also learning disabled. In general, theimpact of disability on adjustment andfunctioning increases as the disability be-comes more severe (Hardman, Drew,Egan, & Wolf, 1993). In turn, increasinglevels of severity place individuals atgreater risk of social isolation and careerchoice problems. The severity of disabil-ity may also influence one's ability ormotivation to develop realistic careerchoices.

The risk factors that adolescents withlearning disabilities are likely to encoun-ter can have a profound effect on careerbehavior. In general, this group experi-ences greater levels of affective and cog-nitive career immaturity than nondis-abled peers (Bingham, 1980; Kendall,1981). Rojewski (1993a) reported thatadolescents with learning disabilities areless involved and more dependent onothers for assistance in career decision-making. They also tend to experiencegreater difficulty in negotiating (i.e., com-promise) between career-related needsand reality. In terms of cognitive skills,youth with learning disabilities havegreater difficulty in self-appraisal and areless knowledgeable about the world ofwork than nondisabled counterparts.

The impact of risk factors on careerbehavior is, ultimately, evidenced in theoccupations held by adults with learningdisabilities. Gottfredson, Finucci, andChilds (1984) examined the employmentpatterns of several hundred young maleswith dyslexia and found them less likelyto be employed in professional occupa-tions and more likely to be in managerialor sales-related positions. The nature ofjobs occupied by these individuals re-quired less reading, writing, and relatedacademic skills. Gottfredson et al. con-cluded that learning disabilities "ap-pear( ed] to affect careers both by de-pressing the educational attainmentrequired for much professional work andby decreasing the likelihood of entering

professional work even if one (was) aswell educated as others" (p. 366).

Impact of economic disadvantage.Adolescents who are economically disad-vantaged may be affected by numerousfactors that distinguish their career be-havior from the general population. Theimpact of economic disadvantage tendsto be pervasive and affects most areas ofan individual's life. When compared tonondisadvantaged groups, adolescentsfrom lower socioeconomic backgroundsare more likely to experience school fail-ure, high drop out rates, high crimerates, teenage pregnancy, substanceabuse, low self-esteem, and welfare de-pendency (Coulton & Pandey, 1992; Reed& Sautter, 1990). Garbarino (1992)noted that economic disadvantage alsoplaces youth at greater risk of culturalisolation from the community.

Youths who are economically disad-vantaged are probably at no greater riskthan other groups for experiencing careerchoice problem:, caused by factors in-volving "within-in group" differences.However, it appears that for many ofthese adolescents the probability of hav-ing family responsibilities is high, par-ticularly for young women. Researchshows a relationship between low socio-economic status and a higher rate of teenpregnancy (Reed & Sautter, 1990). Notonly are teen mothers less likely to earna high school diploma, it is highly prob-able that they will drop out of school andexperience extremely limited employ-ment opportunities (Chase-Lansdale,Brooks-Gunn, & Paikoff, 1992). The ca-reer behavior of adolescent males whoare disadvantaged may also be at riskbecause of family responsibilities.Brooks (1990) noted that careers ofmales who experience low socioeconomicstatus are often restricted because theyare less free to seek self-fulfillment inroles that do not produce income"(p.389).

12 1 5, Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

What is the impact of these risk factorson the career behavior of adolescentswho are economically disadvantaged?Surprisingly, the influence of socioeco-nomic status on career behavior has notreceived as much attention as other is-sues. And, the literature that does existpresents somewhat conflicting results.One body of work implicates socioeco-nomic status as an important variable indetermining career behavior (LoCascio,1974; Manuele, 1983; Phillips et al.,1983; Westbrook, Cutts, Madison, & Ar-cia, 1980). Adolescents of low socioeco-nomic status tend to be less career ma-ture than nondisadvantaged peers, areless involved in the career decision-mak-ing process, and possess limited infor-mation about the world of work (Ro-jewski, 1993b).

Not all research unanimously sup-ports economic disadvantage as having asignificant role in career behavior.Lawrence and Brown (1976) observedthat socioeconomic status had less im-pact on career behavior than other vari-ables such as race, intelligence, and gen-der. Likewise, Super (1990; Nevill &Super, 1988; Super & Nevill, 1984) main-tained that work role salience (i.e., therelative importance of work) plays a moredeterminant role in career behavior thangender, race, or socioeconomic status.However, Brown (1990) criticized thisconclusion by noting that "what [Super]has failed to do, is build propositionsthat, despite people's similarities in ca-reer maturity, can account for differencesin career patterns observed in personsfrom lower socioeconomic groups" (p.335).

Overview of Prominent Theories ofCareer Behavior

A number of psychological andnonpsychological theories have been ad-vanced to explain and predict career be-havior and choice. Theories that havegenerated the most attention over the

past four decades include trait-factortheories, personality theory, develop-mental self-concept theory, social learn-ing theory, and a sociological perspective(Brown & Brooks, 1990; McDaniels &Gysbers, 1992; Neff, 1985; Osipow,1983). While each theory is distinctive,they all emphasize several commonthemes including biological factors, pa-rental influences, outcomes, personality,methods, and life-stage influences(Osipow, 1990). Each of these major ca-reer theories are briefly reviewed next.

Trait-Factor Theories

Trait-factor theory posits that success-ful occupational outcomes result frommatching individuals and work environ-ments on measurable characteristicsthat each possesses. Situations where in-dividuals and environments are closelymatched (congruent) results in greaterlevels of satisfaction (McDaniels & Gys-bers, 1992). Historically, the concept ofmatching individuals and environmentshas played a pivotal role in assessingcareer interests. However, this theory hasbeen criticized for being largely atheoreti-cal in nature, and for placing too muchemphasis on the matching process to theexclusion of developmental and socio-logical concerns (Hackett, Lent, & Green-haus, 1991).

Despite criticisms of trait-factor the-ory, no other explanation of career behav-ior has totally replaced this perspective(Borgen, 1986; Brown & Brooks, 1990).And, it seems appropriate to consider thepossible contributions of the trait-factorapproach for gaining a more comprehen-sive explanation of the career behavior ofindividuals from special populations.This may be particularly true as it relatesto identifying appropriate career alterna-tives in broad occupational fields. 11vowell-recognized trait-factor (congruence)theories of career behavior may have rele-vance for adolescents from special popu-lations including Holland's (1985) theoryof work personalities and work environ-

Volume 9, No. 1, 199416 13

ments, and work adjustment theory(Dawis & Lofquist, 1984).

Holland's theory of work personalitiesand work environments. Holland's(1985) theory of vocational personalitiesand work environments has probablybeen the most influential and highly re-searched theoretical perspective on ca-reer behavior in the past two decades(Hackett et al., 1991). According to Hol-land. job satisfaction and success occurswhen an individual's particular interestsand abilities are matched with an occu-pation that satisfies these interests andabilities. The theory views occupationalbehavior as the interaction between indi-vidual and work environment charac-teristics. Six work personality types andoccupational classifications on six paral-lel constructs are used as a basis fordetermining the degree of congruence be-tween an individual and a particular oc-cupation.

Holland's (1985) theory establishes acognitive-emotional basis for careerguidance and counseling that incorpo-rates an understanding of one's self, ofselect occupations, and their relation-ship. Yet, while Holland's theory may lenditself to practical application in guidingadolescents with special needs towardmaking appropriate career choices(Cummings & Maddux, 1987), it doeslittle to help explain and, subsequently,shape the experiences and decisions thatmust occur in the years before a careerchoice is made (Navin & Myers, 1983). Infact, the theory is phenomenological anddescriptive in nature rather than devel-opmental (Neff, 1985).

Work adjustment theory. A second no-table trait-factor theory is the theory ofwork adjustment (Dawis & Lofquist,1984). Advocates of this theory empha-size the development and consequencesof one's work personality on tht. degreeof job satisfaction and tenure. This the-ory advances the notion that occupa-tional adjustment is dependent on

achieving a balance between an individ-ual's work-related needs and job skillsand the demands of a particular workenvironment. From this perspective, ca-reer choices are made in order to maxi-mize one's sense of balance or harmony(i.e., correspondence with work environ-ment). If an imbalance is perceived,workers will react to the environment inorder to initiate change (Gajar, Good-man, & McAfee, 1993).

Work adjustment theory focuses on thework behavior of individuals from spe-cial populations (Neff, 1985) and can en-hance our understanding of work adjust-ment, performance, and job satisfaction(Osipow, 1990). However, the primarycontribution of this theory to vocationaltransition programming and careerchoice interventions for special popula-tions is the relationship between indi-viduals and chosen work environmentsrather than on the process of making acareer choice. Conte (1983) noted that tobe useful as a career development theorythis approach would need to address thelong-term relationship between a seriesof jobs and the way these jobs were cho-sen.

Personality Theory

Roe's (1956; Roe & Lunneborg, 1990)personality theory posits that people se-lect careers in order to satisfy importantpsychological needs. These needs de-velop from the interaction of inheritedcharacteristics, cultural background, so-cioeconomic status, and environmentalconditions. One environmental conditionof particular importance is that of paren-tal child-rearing practices. Roe believesthat parental child-rearing practices bothsatisfy and frustrate a child's needs. Thepattern established by satisfying or notsatisfying needs results in a needs-hier-archy. It is this hierarchy that impacts anindividual's personality and, ultimately,channels career attention and interests.Thus, career choice is an attempt to sat-

14 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

isfy a need (personality) structure estab-lished in early childhood.

Roe's (1956) theory has receivedmixed empirical support and possesseslimited usefulness for career guidanceprimarily because of the importanceplaced on early childhood experiences.The theory is further limited by a focuson occupational choice rather than ca-reer development (Hackett et al., 1991;Osipow, 1983). However, one aspect thatmay be relevant to special populations isthe concept of the relative influence offour variable sets on career behavior. Roeand Lunneborg (1990) grouped potentialcareer behavior influences into four cate-gories: factors outside of individual con-trol, under partial control, under partialcontrol with diminishing influence, andpersonal characteristics. Roe devised aformula that weights each of these factorsets to account for differing degrees ofinfluence at various life stages. For exam-ple, variables outside of individual con-trol have limited influence on career be-havior during the exploration stage, butexert considerable influence during theestablishment stage. Similarly, factorsthat gradually diminish in impact (e.g.,peer group) are highly influential duringexploration but exert limited influenceduring later developmental stages.

Developmental Self-Concept Theory

Proponents of developmental theoryposit that career development is an inter-active and dynamic process that focuseson developing and implementing one'soccupational self-concept through syn-thesis and compromise. The most com-prehensive developmental theory wasproposed by Super (1957, 1974) whoviewed his theory as a synthesis of ideasand concepts "taken from developmen-tal, differential, social, personality, andphenomenological psychology and heldtogether by self-concept and learning the-ory" (Super, 1990, p. 199). According toSuper, an individual's career develop-ment can be traced through five stages

including growth (childhood), explora-tion (adolescence), establishment (youngadulthood), maintenance, and decline.He postulated that certain vocationaltasks must be accomplished at each dis-tinct stage according to defined and pre-dictable sequences. For example, a pri-mary outcome of the growth stageinvolves the formation of attitudes andbehaviors critical to future work and ca-reers. The exploration stage is charac-terized by a progressive narrowing of ca-reer options from fantasizing aboutpossible careers to identification of ten-tative career options to final decisionsregarding career choice. In recent years,the theory has been modified in severalways including added attention beingplaced on multiple life-roles (not just oc-cupations) and an explanation of a proc-ess known as a mini-cycle. Mini-cyclesinvolve new growth, reexploration andreestablishment activities and can betriggered by destablizing events or tran-sition points in one's life.

An important construct of career de-velopment theory is career maturity(Osipow, 1990; Super, 1974, 1990). Sim-ply defined, career maturity describesone's ability to successfully cope withboth affective and cognitive vocationaldevelopment tasks (e.g., in adolesc-ncetasks such as crystallizing, specifying,and implementing career choice are im-portant) encountered across the develop-mental continuum from explorationstage through decline.

The applicability of developmental the-ory to individuals from special popula-tions has frequently been questioned.Critics maintain that since developmen-tal theory was originally based on a ho-mogeneous group of middle-class adoles-cent males with continuous vocationaldevelopment, theoretical views may notbe applicable to groups whose life expe-riences are different (Gottfredson, 1986;Manuele, 1983). And, in fact, Super(1990) acknowledged that certain demo-graphic variables, particularly socioeco-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

1815

nomic status, may influence self-concept.However, his own research (Nevill & Su-per, 1988; Super & Nevi 11, 1984) indi-cates that work role salience (i.e., com-mitment to work) has a greater impact oncareer development than socioeconomicstatus, gender, or race.

Social Learning TheoryWhen applied to career behavior,

Krumboltz's (1979) social learning the-ory assumes that the behavic,a1 reper-toire an individual uses to make careerdecisions develops from a complex inter-action of genetic predispositions, envi-ronmental conditions and events, pastlearning experiences, and current taskapproach skills. 'Social learning theoryprovides an alternative to theories thatrely too heavily on either sociological(economic) factors or psychologicalevents to explain career choice. Instead,this theory considers the impact of bothsets of factors and their interaction(Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1990). Economicand social conditions positively andnegatively reinforce an individual's pastlearning experiences, which, in turn, af-fect career aspirations and the processused to make career choices. Past learn-ing L.xperiences may be significantly influ-enced by the presence of a disability, so-cioeconomic disadvantage, race, gender,cultural norms, discrimination, one'sphysical characteristics, or the availabil-ity of adequate role models. Mitchell andKrumboltz concluded that "persons willbe more likely to learn and use the taskapproach skills of career decision mak-ing if they are positively reinforced forlearning and using the skills or if theyobserve a model being positively rein-forced for using the skills" (p. 188).

A strength of social learning theory isthe identification of specific factors thatcan influence the decision making proc-ess and the recognition that sociologicaland psychological factors interact to in-fluence career behavior (Hackett et al..1991). Theory suggests several impor-

tant issues for career counselors to con-sider including the use of role models,positive reinforcement, structuring jobtasks to provide success experiences(e.g., individualizing), and providingfeedback (Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1990).Yet, while Krumboltz's theory contributesto our understanding of the career behav-ior of special populations, Brown (1990)cautioned that it is limited by a focus onthe decision making process as opposedto a developmental emphasis. As the the-ory now stands, it would be difficulL touse it for determining normative behav-ior or designing career development pro -grams" (p. 357).

Sociological Perspective

Proponents of a social systems (socio-logical) perspective are most interestedin the influence that institutional andimpersonal forces such as socioeco-nomic status, cultural expectations, race,gender, stereotyping, discrimination, andpure chance have on career decisionmaking and the fulfillment of career de-cisions (Cummings & Maddux, 1987;Mc Daniels & Gysbers, 1992). Theoristsargue that systemic (institutional) biasand structural barriers ae often erectedon the basis of race, gender, and socialclass which lead to limited career alter-natives and availability. Hotchkiss andBorow (1990) suggested that this mayexplain why a disproportionate numberof individuals from minority groups andwomen are concentrated in low-paying,low-prestige Jobs.

Disagreement exists as to the utility ofa sociological theory to explain the careerbehavior of individuals from specialpopulations. Cummings and Maddux(1987) declared that this perspective isless relevant for persons with specialneeds than all other career developmentmodels. Similarly, others have discour-aged serious consideration of this theoryfor members from special populationsbecause it is too simplistic, does not takevariable interaction into account, and ig-

16 issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

19

nores psychological processes involvedin career development (Brown, 1990)."The fault lies not in the basic premise ofthe theory so much as in the incomplete-ness of the variables included" (Gajar etal., 1992, p. 431).

Hotchkiss and Borow (1990) and Neff(1985) have countered that professionalsoften ignore the powerful influence thatsocial systems, socioeconomic status, so-cial stratification, and stereotypes haveon an individual's educational and careeroptions. In their opinion, to ignore theseinfluences is to unwittingly accept andeven perpetuate educational and occupa-tional stereotypes based on gender, race,or social class. Thus, while sociologicaltheory may be inadequate as a sole expla-nation of career behavior, it appears thatsocial influences must be consideredwhen examining the career behavior ofadolescents with special populations.

Implications for Practice

From the foregoing discussion, severalimplications for career counseling andvocational transition program develop-ment emerge. These implications can begrouped into four clusters: the nature ofcareer counseling and preparation, iden-tifying career options and choice, consid-erations in vocational-transition pro-gram ....evelopment, and constraints oncareer behavior imposed by psychologi-cal and sociological factors. Table 1 con-tains a summary of the major tenets ofprominent career theories, potential con-tributions of theories to an under-standing of career behavior in adoles-cents from special populations, andimplications of each theory for practice.

Nature of Counseling andPreparation

The design and structure of careercounseling and transition programs foradolescents from special populations canbe guided by a developmental perspec-

tive. One implication of adopting a devel-opmental theory is that career prepara-tion programs mv.,st provide early andfrequent opportunities for consideringcareer alternatives. The provision ofearly and sustained vocational and socialexperiences appears to be an especiallycritical factor for long-term success.Conte (1983) concluded thrt personsfrom special populations "must have ex-posure to typical vocational challengesand tasks early if they are to developadequate vocational maturity to becomesuccessfully employed as adults" (p.320).

The regular and predictable patternsof career behavior outlined by Super's(1990) life stages provide a frameworkfor design and implementation of pi e-paratory experiences and support re-quired for the transition from school towork. Counseling interventions shouldprovide development or growth-produc-ing activities and environments that ad-dress occupational self-concept clarifica-tion and implementation, and offeropportunities to handle appropriate de-velopmental tasks rather than an exclu-sive emphasis on identifying, preparingfor, and obtaining a specific job (Curnow,1989).

Recognition of the cyclical nature ofcareer behavior holds a second implica-tion for practice. Appropriate interven-tions should be available to target spe-cific problems and provide variousmeans for adolescents to revisit or "recy-cle" developmental tasks previously com-pleted if developmental delays or impair-ments are experienced. Super (1990)suggested that the need to recycle is mostlikely to occur during times of stress andtransition (e.g., starting a new job orwork experience).

Identifying Career Options and Choice

'INvo theories (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984:Holland, 1985) are particularly relevantin guiding career assessment and deci-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 17

20

MA

& 1

. Con

trib

utio

ns o

f ca

reer

theo

ries

to v

ocat

iona

l tra

nsiti

on p

rogr

amm

ing

for

spec

ial p

opul

atio

ns

The

orie

s of

Car

eer

Beh

avio

r

The

ory

of V

ocat

iona

l Per

sona

lity

and

Wor

k E

nvir

onm

ents

(H

ol-

land

, 198

5)

Maj

or T

heor

etic

alC

once

pts

Six

voca

tiona

l per

sona

lity

type

s(i

nter

ests

) an

d oc

cupa

tiona

l env

i-ro

nmen

tsJo

b sa

tisfa

ctio

n an

d su

cces

s re

-su

lt fr

om a

mat

ch b

etw

een

per-

sona

l and

wor

k en

viro

nmen

tch

arac

teri

stic

es (

cong

ruen

ce)

Cog

nitiv

e-em

otio

nal b

asis

for

ca-

reer

gui

danc

e an

d co

unse

ling

de-

sign

ed to

cla

ssif

y pe

rson

-env

i-ro

nmen

t fit

Phen

omen

olog

ical

and

des

crip

-tiv

e in

nat

ure,

not

dev

elop

men

tal

Wor

k A

djus

tmen

t The

ory

(Dav

is &

Des

crib

es d

evel

opm

ent a

nd c

on -

Loq

uist

. 198

4)se

quen

ces

of w

ork

pers

onal

ityw

hen

impl

emen

ted

thro

ugh

ca-

reer

cho

ice

In'

21

Job

stab

ility

and

sat

isfa

ctio

nW

ork

adju

stm

ent d

epen

ds o

n de

-gr

ee o

f ba

lanc

e (c

orre

spon

denc

e)be

twee

n in

divi

dual

wor

k ne

eds

and

abili

ty o

f w

oi k

env

iron

men

tto

mee

t tho

se n

eeds

Con

trib

utio

n to

Und

erst

andi

ngof

Car

eer

Beh

avio

r in

Spe

cial

Popu

latio

ns

Pivo

tal r

ole

in c

aree

r as

sesm

ent-

iden

tifyi

ng a

ppro

pria

te c

aree

rch

oice

alte

rnat

ives

in b

road

occ

u-pa

tiona

l fie

lds

Pare

ntal

infl

uenc

e is

impo

rtan

t to

typo

logi

cal d

evel

opm

ent

Doe

s no

t add

ress

exp

erie

nces

and

deci

sion

s th

at m

ust o

ccur

inye

ars

prio

r to

car

eer

choi

ceR

esea

rch

need

ed to

det

erm

ine

impa

ct o

f pe

rson

al a

nd e

nvir

on-

men

tal c

hara

cter

istic

s

Focu

s on

rel

atio

nshi

p be

twee

n in

-di

vidu

al p

erso

nalit

y an

d w

ork

en-

viro

nmen

t rat

her

than

on

proc

-es

s of

mak

ing

choi

ces

Il E

xam

ines

rei

nfor

cem

ent a

vail-

able

in w

ork

envi

ronm

ents

lead

-in

g to

sat

isfa

ctio

n

Impl

ied

cont

ribu

tions

to n

arro

w-

ing

care

er c

hoic

e al

tern

ativ

es (

op-

timiz

e sa

tisfa

ctio

n)

Impl

icat

ions

for

Pra

ctic

e

Voc

atio

nal a

sses

men

t to

iden

tify

appr

opri

ate

care

er a

ltern

ativ

es(h

ighl

ight

s th

e re

latio

nahi

p be

-tw

een

know

ledg

e ab

out s

elf

and

occu

patio

nal i

nfor

mat

ion)

Pred

ictio

ns o

f jo

b sa

tisfa

ctio

nan

d st

abili

ty

Voc

atio

nal a

sses

men

t and

cou

n-se

ling

iden

tifie

s ne

eded

wor

k pe

r-so

nalit

y an

d re

info

rcem

ent f

or in

-di

vidu

al s

atis

fact

ion

Ass

ista

nce

with

sel

ectio

n an

dpl

acem

ent i

n vo

catio

nal t

rain

ing

prog

ram

s (e

.g.,

OJT

, JT

PA, c

oop-

erat

ive

educ

atio

n)E

nhan

ce a

djus

tmen

t to

wor

k af

-te

r gr

adua

tion/

tran

sitio

n

Prog

ram

pla

cem

ent a

ndfo

llow

2up

or

follo

w-a

long

suc

cess

indi

-ca

tors

(Con

tinue

)

9

The

orie

s of

Car

eer

Maj

or T

heor

etic

alB

ehav

ior

Con

cept

s

Roe

's P

erso

nalit

y T

heor

y (1

956;

111W

ork

pers

onal

ity (

inte

rest

s an

dR

oe &

I,u

nneb

org.

199

0)ne

eds)

dev

elop

fro

m c

ompl

ex in

-te

ract

ion

of g

enet

ic li

mita

tions

,cu

ltura

l bac

kgro

und,

and

soc

io-

econ

omic

sta

tus

Car

eer

Dev

elop

men

t Sel

f-C

once

ptT

heor

y (S

uper

. 197

4.19

90)

23

Nee

ds-h

iera

rchy

cre

ated

by

child

-rea

ring

pra

ctic

es im

pact

son

per

sona

lity

/inte

rest

s

Exp

erie

nces

cha

nnel

car

eer

in-

tere

sts

and

atte

ntio

n in

par

ticu-

lar

dire

ctio

ns

Car

eer

choi

ce is

a d

evel

opm

enta

llif

e-lo

ng p

roce

ss in

flue

nced

by

self

-con

cept

Five

life

sta

ges

(max

icyc

les)

out

-lin

e gr

owth

, exp

lora

tion,

est

ab-

lishm

ent.

mai

nten

ance

, and

de-

clin

e

Min

tcyc

les

(rec

yclin

g) o

ccur

dur

-in

g tr

ansi

tion

or d

esta

biliz

ing

pe-

riod

s

Cal

eer

mat

urity

des

crib

es a

bilit

yto

cop

e w

ith d

evel

opm

enta

lly-a

p-pr

opri

ate

affe

ctiv

e an

d co

gniti

vevo

catio

nal t

asks

Wor

k ro

le s

alie

nce

(com

mitm

ent

to w

ork

or c

aree

r) d

eter

min

es c

a-re

er m

atur

ity

Con

trib

utio

n to

Und

erst

andi

ngof

Car

eer

Beh

avio

r in

Spe

cial

Popu

latio

ns

Pers

onal

ity in

flue

nces

on

care

erin

tere

sts

and

choi

ce

Focu

s on

occ

upat

iona

l cho

ice

not

deve

lopm

ent

Wei

ghte

d fo

rmul

a fo

r in

flue

nce

ofge

netic

, cul

tura

l and

soc

ioec

o-no

mic

sta

tus

Prov

ides

a lo

ngitu

dina

l per

spec

-tiv

e th

at d

escr

ibes

pro

cess

(ev

o-lu

tion)

of

care

er c

hoic

e

Stag

es o

f ca

reer

dev

elop

men

tid

entif

y ap

prop

riat

e vo

catio

nal

taks

at v

ario

us a

ge le

vels

(lif

est

ages

)

Issu

es o

f oc

cupa

tiona

l sel

f-co

n-ce

pt im

port

ant f

or s

peci

al p

opu-

latio

ns

App

licab

ility

to s

peci

al p

opul

a-tio

ns h

as b

een

chal

leng

ed -

Wor

kro

le s

alie

nce

is m

ore

impo

rtan

t in

care

er d

evel

opm

ent t

han

gend

er.

race

, or

soci

oeco

nom

ic s

tatu

s

Impl

icat

ions

for

Pra

ctic

e

Pare

ntal

trai

ning

to p

ositi

vely

im-

pact

on

care

er in

tere

sts

Con

side

ratio

n of

the

vary

ing

de-

gree

of

infl

uenc

e of

iden

tifie

d fa

c-to

rs

Phys

ical

lim

itatio

ns a

nd im

pact

of r

ace,

gen

der.

and

soc

ioec

o-no

mic

sta

tus

can

be ta

ken

into

acco

unt w

hen

deve

lopi

ng p

ro-

gram

s or

pro

vidi

ng c

aree

r co

un-

selin

g

The

oret

ical

ori

enta

tion

for

care

ered

ucat

ion

and

tran

sitio

ngr

ams

Lon

gitu

dina

l per

spec

tive

(ele

-m

enta

ry th

roug

h yo

ung

adul

t-ho

od)

pro-

Cyc

lical

(no

t loc

kste

p) c

ouns

elin

gap

proa

ch ta

sks

and

guid

ance

Em

phas

is o

n in

divi

dual

ized

need

s an

d cl

arif

icat

ion/

impl

e-m

enta

tion

of s

elf-

conc

ept

Prog

ram

s sh

ould

em

phas

ize

am

ulti-

expe

rien

tial p

roce

ss b

ased

on c

ompo

nent

s of

aff

ectiv

e an

dco

gniti

ve c

aree

r m

atur

ity

(Con

tinue

)

24

The

orie

s of

Car

eer

Maj

or T

heor

etic

alB

ehav

ior

Con

cept

s

Soci

al L

earn

ing

The

ory

( K

rum

-II

Car

eer

deci

sion

-mak

ing

deve

lops

boltz

. 197

9; M

itche

ll &

Kru

m-

from

the

com

plex

inte

ract

ion

ofbo

ltz. 1

990)

psyc

holo

gica

l and

soc

iolo

gica

lfa

ctor

s (g

enet

ic p

redi

spos

ition

s,en

viro

nmen

t, pa

st le

arni

ng)

Car

eer

choi

ces

are

infl

uenc

ed b

ypo

sitiv

e (o

r ne

gativ

e) r

einf

orce

-m

ent o

f se

lf o

r ro

le m

odel

s

Impo

rtan

t iss

ue is

ski

lls a

cqui

si-

tion

and

use

in c

aree

r ch

oice

not

cont

ent o

f ch

oice

Soci

olog

ical

Per

spec

tive

(lio

tcki

ssC

aree

r de

cisi

on-m

akin

g an

d fu

l-&

Bor

ow. 1

990)

fillm

ent o

f ch

oice

are

con

stra

ined

by in

stitu

tiona

l and

impe

rson

alfo

rces

bey

ond

cont

rol

Bia

s an

d ba

rs ie

rs e

rect

ed o

n ba

-si

s of

rac

e, g

ende

r. o

r so

cial

cla

ssle

ad to

lim

ited

care

er a

ltern

ativ

esfo

r sp

ecia

l pop

ulat

ions

Sele

ctio

n fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ion

insc

hool

act

ivite

s an

d pr

ogra

ms

guid

ed b

y in

form

al p

vact

ice

of a

l-lo

catio

n ba

sed

on s

tude

nts'

soc

ial

stru

ctur

e (t

rack

ing)

25

Con

trib

utio

n to

Und

erst

andi

ngof

Car

eer

Beh

avio

r in

Spe

cial

Popu

latio

ns

All

indi

vidu

als

inhe

rit c

erta

inch

arac

teri

stic

s be

yond

con

trol

and

can

exer

t var

ying

deg

rees

of

cont

rol o

n en

viro

nmen

t (th

roug

hle

arni

ng)

Ack

now

lede

ges

the

diff

eren

tial

impa

ct o

f ge

nder

, rac

e, c

ultu

re, o

rso

cioe

cono

mic

sta

tus

(e.g

. eff

ects

of d

iscr

imin

atio

nr

pove

rty)

on

care

er-d

ecis

ion

mak

ing

Focu

s on

car

eer

deci

sion

-mak

ing

not o

n ca

reer

dev

elop

men

t pro

c-es

s

Ack

now

ledg

es p

ower

ful a

ffec

ts o

fdi

scri

min

atio

n, s

tere

otyp

ing.

cul

-tu

ral e

xpec

tatio

ns a

nd s

ocio

eco-

nom

ic s

tatu

s

Exp

lain

s di

spro

pori

onat

e nu

m-

bers

of

wom

en a

nd m

inor

ities

inlo

w -

pay

ing,

low

-pre

stig

e Jo

bs

Iden

tifie

s sc

hool

pra

ctic

es o

f ed

u-ca

tiona

l tra

ckin

g (a

nd s

elec

tion

to o

ther

pro

gram

s) o

n ba

sis

ofso

cial

pos

ition

or

prec

once

ived

Idea

(st

ereo

type

) of

-"a

ppro

pri-

ate

plac

emen

t

Impl

iCat

ions

for

Pra

ctic

e

Em

phas

ize

lear

ning

abo

ut s

elf

and

the

wor

ld o

f w

ork

(pro

cess

) -

accu

rate

obs

erva

tions

and

bel

iefs

Incl

usio

n of

rol

e m

odel

s, p

ositi

vere

info

rcem

ent,

strc

turi

ng w

ork

expe

rien

ces

for

succ

ess,

and

in-

divi

dual

izin

g le

arni

ng e

xper

i-en

ces

Impr

ove

qual

ity o

f sc

hool

exp

eri-

ence

s

Prov

ide

earl

y an

d fr

eque

nt o

p-po

rtun

ities

to e

xper

ienc

e vo

ca-

tiona

l suc

ess

Stre

ngth

en w

ork

rela

ted

atti-

tude

s, in

form

atio

n, a

nd s

kills

Dev

elop

abi

lity

to d

irec

tly c

onta

ctan

d us

e re

leva

nt c

omm

unity

re-

sour

ces

Can

not

cat

egor

ical

ly a

ssum

e th

atsp

ecia

l pop

ulat

ions

"be

long

" in

pred

eter

min

ed v

ocat

iona

l pro

-gr

ams

(elim

inat

e sy

stem

ic s

tere

o-ty

pes

and

disc

rim

inat

ion)

6

sion-making activities for adolescentswith special populations. Holland's the-ory of work personality and work envi-ronments holds several implications con-cerning the focus of career assessmentactivities and the role of professionals inthis process. In both cases, assessmentand training activities should supportself-appraisal and the acquisition ofknowledge about work environments. In-terestingly, these two areas have beenshown to be a problem for some adoles-cents from special populations. The re-sults of accurate assessments can assistcounselors and transition specialists inidentifying potenti...Aty congruent workenvironments.

Work adjustment theory (Dawis &Lofquist, 1984) emphasizes interactiverelationships between individual rein-forcement needs and reward structuresavailable in potential work environmentsto meet those needs. Information ob-tained from the assessment of individualneeds and work reward structures canguide practitioners in selecting congru-ent career options, training programs(e.g., cooperative education, on-the-jobtraining, JTPA programs, supported em-ployment). and employment sites foradolescents from special populations.Principles of work adjustment theory canalso identify and explain conflicts thatmight arise after initial job placement hasoccurred.

Consideration in ProgramDevelopment and Role ofPractitioners

Most career interventions seek toachieve the following goals: the facilita-tion of career development, building de-cision-making skills, and guidance inmaking career-related choices. Brooks(1990) argued that rather than adopt asingle perspective for developing careercounseling and transition programs, acombination of theories could be useddepending on individualized needs. Oth-ers have supported this multidiscipli-

nary, comprehensive approach. For ex-ample, Osipow (1390) suggested that"each theory has unique elements to offerresearch and practice while at the sametime building on what appears to be arelatively common base of concepts" (p.129). Points to consider in developingmultidisciplinary career interventionprograms are briefly reviewed next.

Trait-factor theories (Dawis &Lofquist, 1984; Holland, 1985) empha-size helping individuals gather sufficientinformation to make a career choice.Here, practitioners adopt an active, butprescribed, role "by determining data-collection methods or assessment de-vices to be used and by reviewing andinterpreting data" (Brooks, 1990, p.460). These theories have the most tooffer individuals experiencing career-choice problems. Work adjustment the-ory has an added emphasis on the work-place itself and can address adult workperformance and satisfaction (Osipow,1990).

In contrast, developmental theory di-rects practitioners to foster the careerdevelopment process, particularly by in-creasing one's affective and cognitive ca-reer maturity and work role saliencethrough exploratory experiences(Brooks, 1990). These specific elementsmight be considered in program develop-ment and counseling intervention. Super(1990) summarizes:

(Interventions) would recognize indi-vidual differences in career develop-ment and avoid lockstep curricula. Inthe elementary years it would seek tofoster curiosity and thus exploratorybehavior, autonomy, time perspective,and self-esteem. . . .Exploration inbreadth would normally begin in themiddle school, would phase into explo-ration in depth when the individualappeared ready to focus on one or twogroups of occupations (not at somepredetermined year) and would phaseback into exploration in breadth if

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 27 21

a

depth exploration proved unfruitful.(p. 243)

While vocational transition programsshould not exclude job selection andpreparation, developmental issues suchas formation of a positive self-concept,enhancing one's attitude toward work,and acquiring competence in locatingand securing employment must be inte-gral program components.

Social learning theory (Krumboltz,1979) seeks to improve self-observation,decision-making, and entry behaviorskills which are achieved through the useof role models, positive reinforcement,and structured work experiences. Fromthis perspective, maximum career devel-opment "requires each individual to havethe opportunity to be exposed to the wid-est possible array of learning experi-ences, regardless of race, gender, or eth-nic origin" (Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1990,p. 168).

Practitioners who adopt a sociologicalperspective strive to remove barriers thatlimit career choice and provide directadvocacy for individuals, e.g., educationon the use of available community re-sources to prepare for or obtain employ-ment. Other program considerationsfrom a sociological perspective would in-clude optimizing the chances for at-riskyouths to complete school andstrengthen work-related attitudes, infor-mation, and skills (Hotchkiss & Borow,1990).

Constraints Imposed byPsychological and SociologicalFactors

In recent years, several theories haveattempted to describe the interactive ef-fects of both psychological and sociologi-cal factors on career behavior. Thesetheories first acknowledge that geneticendowment (physical and mental charac-teristics beyond individual control) setlimits on career development potential(Neff, 1985). Factors such as gender,

race, disability, and socioeconomicstatus have a differential impact on ca-reer decision-making. Social learningtheory considers that economic and so-cial conditions interact with these factorsto reinforce or deter particular decisions(Mitchell & Krumboltz, 1990). The socio-logical perspective furthers this view byconsidering the powerful effects of dis-crimination and stereotyping on careerbehavior (Hotchkiss & Borow, 1990).

The career behavior and self-conceptof adolescents from special populationsappear to be especially sensitive to theeffects of discrimination, social attitudes,cultural expectations, and stereotypes(Strohmer, Czerlinsky, Menz, &Engelkes, 1984). Curnow (1989) notedthat negative cultural perceptions andsocial expectations tend to impose lowerstatus and a devalued role on individualswith special needs which, in turn, resultsin limited job or career choices, re-stricted opportunities and access totraining programs, and narrow, stereo-typical employment possibilities.

In this regard vocational special edu-cators, rehabilitation counselors, andtransition practitioners must seriouslyconsider their expectations, biases, andpreconceived ideas about the employ-ment potential of individuals with specialneeds and examine how these percep-tions might affect intervention programs.At issue is whether adolescents are al-lowed to actively develop career interestsbased on compromise between self-con-cept, individual needs, and occupationalinformation or if a system imposes cer-tain values and expectations on them.Evidence of bias or stereotyping mei befound in vocational-transition programswhere students can only choose from sev-eral limited employment options andstereotypical jobs (e.g., custodial, foodservice, or housekeeping occupations)that have been deemed most appropriate

22 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

28

for particular special populations.3

The impact of parental and teacherexpectations on career development andcareer choice appears to be significantlygreater for adolescents from specialpopulations (Conte, 1983; Curnow,1989; Osipow, 1976). "Parental aspira-tions are most influential during the first13 years of life. After that age, the aspira-tions of teachers seem to interplay withthe child's own aspirations" (Goldberg,1992, p. 169). As such, parents andteachers must acknowledge the poten-tially critical roles they play in the careerbehavior and choice of adolescents withspecial needs. Cox (1981) suggested thatpractitioners adopt the role of facilitator,thereby allowing individuals to make de-cisions and complete assignments as in-dependently as possible. At the sametime, practitioners must provide aguided, systematic process that mini-mizes chances for floundering or stagna-tion.

Despite the impact parents have on thecareer decision-making process of chil-dren from special populations, Smith(1975) noted that few parents are activelyinvolved in the career development proc-ess. It appears, then, that parental train-ing and support provided early in thechild's school experience would be bene-ficial (Roe & Lunneborg, 1990). Efforts ofthis nature could provide parents withspecific career-related information, in-terventions, and social support.

Conclusion

Professionals who provide career andvocational education to adolescents fromspecial populations must critically evalu-ate their response to the question, "Whydo we do what we do with regard toplanning career and vocational programsfor secondary-aged individuals from spe-cial populations?" The author of this ar-ticle has suggested that prominent theo-ries of career behavior may hold some ofthe answers. And, indeed, several impli-cations for practice drawn from careertheories were highlighted. Continued dia-logue is critical especially given the voidthat exists in the literature regarding theuse of theoretical perspectives to explainand predict the career behavior of adoles-cents from special populations.

A comprehensive understanding of thecareer behavior of adolescent with spe-cial needs will allow for a systematic,sequential, and purposeful approach tothe design and implementation of careercounseling interventions and vocationaltransition programs. However, addi-tional work is needed before a theoreticalframework for adolescents who arelearning disabled or economically disad-vantaged can be established. Even so, itis hoped that practitioners and re-searchers alike will consider the issuespresented in this discussion. For it isthrough scholarly investigation and de-bate that future directions for programdevelopment and intervention will beidentified and implemented.

3 A distinction is made between individuals who experience a learning disability or are economically disadvantaged and personswith moderate or severe mental retardation. It is assumed that the career development needs and behavior of these populationsare different. However, treatment of that topic is beyond the scope of this article.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 23

29

References

Bingham, C. (1980). Career maturity of learningdisabled adolescents. Psychology in theSchools, 17, 135-139.

Borgen, F. H. (1986). New approaches to theassessment of interests. In W. D. Walsh & S.H. Osipow (Eds.), Advances in vocationalpsychology, Volume I: The assessment of in-terests (pp. 83-125). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brooks, L. (1990). Recent developments in the-ory building. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.),Career choice and development: Applyingcontemporary theories to practice (2nd ed.,pp. 364-394). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, D. (1990). Summary, comparison, andcritique of the major theories. In D. Brown a.L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and develop-ment: Applying contemporary theories topractice (2nd ed., pp. 338-363). San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, D., & Brooks, L. (1990). Introduction tocareer development: Origins, evolution, andcurrent approaches. In D. Brown & L. Brooks(Eds.), Career choice and development: Ap-plying contemporary theories to practice (2nded., pp. 1-12). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming criti-cal. Philadelphia: Falmer.

Chase-Lansdale, P. L., Brooks-Gunn, J., &Paikoff, R. L. (1992). Research and programsfor adolescent mothers: Missing links and fu-ture promises. American Behavioral Scientist,35, 275-289.

Clark, G. M., & Knowlton, H. E. (Eds.). (1987).The transition from school to adt)lt life [Spe-cial Issue]. Exceptional Children, 53 (6).

Conte, L. E. (1983). Vocational developmenttheories and the disabled person: Oversight ordeliberate omission? Rehabilitation Counsel-ing Bulletin, 26, 316-328.

Coulton, C. J., & Pandey, S. (1992). Geographicconcentration of poverty and risk to childrenin urban neighborhoods. American Behav-ioral Scientist, 35, 238-257.

Cox, A. A. (1981). Career counseling with theeducably mentally retarded. Journal of Ap-plied Rehabilitation Counseling, 12, 123-125.

Cummings, R. W., & Maddux, C. D. (1987).Career and vocational education for themildly handicapped. Springfield, IL: Thomas.

Curnow, T. C. (1989). Vocational developmentof persons with disability. Career Develop-ment Quarterly, 27, 269-278.

Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psy-chological theory of work adjustment: An in-dividual differences model and itsapplications. Minneapolis: University ofMinnesota Press.

Dowdy, C. A., Carter, J. K., & Smith, T. E. C.(1990). Differences in transitional needs ofhigh schoJI students with and without learn-ing disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabili-ties, 23, 343-348.

Dudley-Marling, C., & Edmiaston, R. (1985).Social status of learning disabled children andadolescents: A review. Learning DisabilityQuarterly, 8, 189-204.

Gajar, A., Goodman, L., & McAfee, J. (1993).Secondary schools and beyond: Transition ofindividuals with mild disabilities. New York:Macmillan.

Garbarino, J. (1992). The meaning of poverty inthe world of children. American BehavioralScientist, 35, 220-237.

Gardner, D. C., Beatty, G. J., & Gardner, P. L.(1984). Career and vocational education formildly learning handicapped and disadvan-taged youth. Springfield, IL: Thomas.

Goldberg, R. T. (1992). Toward a model of vo-cational development of people with disabili-ties. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 35,161-173.

Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription andcompromise: A developmental theory of oc-cupational aspirations [Monograph]. Journalof Counseling Psychology, 28, 545-579.

Gottfredson, L. S. (1986). Special groups and thebeneficial use of vocational interest invento-ries. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.),Advances in vocational psychology, Volume I:The assessment of interests (pp. 127-198).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gottfredson, L. S., Finucci, J. M., & Childs, B.(1984). Explaining the adult careers of dys-lexic boys: Variations in critical skills forhigh-level jobs. Journal of Vocational Behav-ior, 24, 355-373.

Hackett, G., Lent, R. W., & Greenhaus, J. H.(1991). Advances in vocational theory and

24 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

research: A 20-year retrospective. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 38, 3-38.

Halpern, A. S., Benz, M. R., & Lindstrom, L.E. (1992). A systems change approach to im-proving secondary special education and tran-sition programs at the community level.Career Development for Exceptional Indi-viduals, 15, 109-120.

Hardman, M. L., Drew, C. J., Egan, M. W., &Wolf, B. (1993). Human exceptionality: Soci-ety, school, and family (4th ed.). NeedhamHeights, MA: Simon and Schuster.

Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocationalchoices: A theory of vocational personalitiesand work environments (2nd ed.). EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hotchkiss, L., & Borow, H. (1990). Sociologicalperspectives on work and career. In D. Blown& L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and devel-opment: Applying contemporary theories topractice (2nd ed., pp. 262-307). San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hudson, P. J., Schwartz, S. E., Sealander, K.A., Campbell, P., & Hensel, J. W. (1988).Successfully employed adults with handicaps:Characteristics and transition strategies. Ca-reer Development for Exceptional Individu-als, 11, 7-14.

Johnson, J. R., & Rusch, F. R. (1993). Secon-dary special education and transition services:Identification and recommendations for fu-ture research and demonstration. Career De-velopment for Exceptional Individuals, 16,1-18.

Kendall, W. S. (1981). Affective and career edu-cation for the learning disabled adolescent.Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 69-75.

Krumboltz, J. D. (1979). A social learning the-ory of career decision making. In A. 14.Mitchell, G. B. Jones, & J. D. Krumboltz(Eds.), Social learning and career decisionmaking. Cranston, RI: Carroll.

Lawrence, W., & Brown, D. (1976). An investi-gation of intelligence, self-concept, socioeco-nomic status, race, and sex as predictors ofcareer maturity. Journal of Vocational Behav-ior, 9, 43-52.

LoCascio. R. (1974). The vocational maturity ofdiverse groups: Theory and measurement. InD. E. Super (Ed.), Measuring vocational ma-turity for counseling and evaluation (pp. 122-

133). Washington, DC: Division of AmericanPersonnel and Guidance Association.

Manuele, C. A. (1983). The development of ameasure to assess vocational maturity inadults with delayed career development. Jour-nal of Vocational Behavior, 23, 45-63.

McDanielf,, C., & Gysbers, N. C. (1992). Coun-seling for career development: Theories, re-sources, and practice. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Mitchell, L. K., & Krumboltz, J. D. (1990).Social learning approach to career decisionmaking: Krurnhcitz's theory. In D. Brown &L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and develop-ment: Applying contemporary theories topractice (2nd ed., pp. 145-196). San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Navin, S. L., & Myers, J. E. (1983). A model ofcareer development for disabled adults. Jour-nal of Applied Rehabilitation C.Junseling,14(2), 38-43.

Neff, W. S. (1985). Work and human behavior(3rd ed.). New York: Aldine

Nevill, D. D., & Super, D. E. (1988). Careermaturity and commitment to work in univer-sity students. Journal of Vocational Behavior,32, 139-151.

Osipow, S. H. (1976). Vocational developmentproblems of the handicapped. In H. R.usalem& D. Malikin (Eds.), Contemporary voca-tional rehabilitation (pp. 47.62). New York:New York University Press.

Osipow, S. H. (1983). Theories of career devel-opment (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-tice-Hall.

Osipow, S. H. (1990). Convergence in theories ofcareer choice and development: Review andprospect. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36,122-131.

Phillips, S. D., Strohmer, D. C., Berthaume, B.L. J., & O'Leary, J. C. (1933). Career devel-opment of special populations: A frameworkfor research. Journal of Vocational Behavior,22, 12-29.

Reed, S., & Sautter, R. C. (1990). Children ofpoverty: The status of 12 million youngAmericans [Special Report). Phi Delta Kap-pan, 71, K1 -K12.

Roe, A. (1956). Early determinants of vocationalchoice..lournal of Coanseling Psychology, 4,212-217.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994%3.1

25

Roe, A., & Lunneborg, P. W. (1990). Personal-ity development and career choice. In D.Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice anddevelopment: Applying contemporary theo-ries to practice (2nd ed., pp. 68-101). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Rojewski, J. W. (1993a). Theoretical structure ofcareer maturity for rural adolescents withlearning disabilities. Career Development forExceptional Individuals, 16. 39-52.

Rojewski, J. W. (1993b). Influence of demo-graphic and at-risk factors on career develop-ment: Implications for tech prep andvocational preparation programs. Paper pre-sented to the American Vocational EducationResearch Association at the 1993 AmericanVocational Association National Convention,Nashville, TN.

Rosenthal, 1. (1989). Model transition programsfor learning disabled high school and collegestudents. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin,33(1), 54-66.

Rusch, F. R., Kohler, P. D., & Hughes, C.(1992). An analysis of OSERS-sponsored sec-ondary special education and transitionalservices research. Career Development forExceptional Individuals, 15, 121-143.

Sarkees, M. D., & Scott, J. L. (1986). Vocationalspecial needs (2nd ed.). Homewood, IL:American Technical.

Siegel, S., Gaylord-Ross, R., Greener, K., &Robert, M. (1990, Fall). The career ladderprogram. Interchange, 10(3-4), 1-3.

Smith, E. J. (1975). Profile of the Black individ-ual in vocational literature. Journal of Voca-tional Behavior, 6, 41-59.

Author:

Jay W. RojewskiDepartment of Occupational StudiesThe University of Georgia

Strohmer, D. C., Czerlinsky, T., Menz, F. E., &Engelkes, J. R. (1984). Vocational indecisionand rehabilitation clients. RehabilitationCounseling Bulletin, 28, 109-116.

Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of careers.New York: Harper & Row.

Super, D. E. (1974). Vocational maturity theory:Toward implementing a psychology of careereducation and guidance. In D. E. Super (Ed.),Measuring vocational maturity for counselingand evaluation (pp. 9-24). Washington, DC:American Personnel and Guidance Associa-tion.

Super, D. E. (1990). A life-span, life-space ap-proach to career development. In D. Brown &L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and develop-ment: Applying contemporary theories topractice (2nd ed., pp. 197-261). San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Super, D. E., & Nevill, D. D. (1984). Work-rolesalience as a determinant of career maturity inhigh school students. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 25, 30-44.

U.S. Department of Labor. (1993). Findingsone's way: Career guidance for disadvan-taged youth. Washington, DC: Employmentand Training Administration, Office of Stra-tegic Planning and Policy Development.

Westbrook, B. W., Cutts, C. C., Madison, S. S.,& Arcia, M. A. (1980). The validity of theCrites' model of career maturity. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 16, 249-281.

William T. Grant Foundation Commission onWork, Family, and Citizenship. (1988). Theforgotten half: Non-college youth in America.Washington, DC: Youth and America's Fu-ture, Author.

26 32 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 27-37© 1994 AHVA Publisher

Familiarity with the Service System andPerception of Needs at Transition

Richard I. Goldbaum, Ronald Rebore, Gary L. Siegel, Julie Gates Kindred

Beginning with the late 1960's and theconcept of "normalization," through theearly 1990's, the way people with devel-opmental disabilities were assisted andsupported in the community underwentsignificant paradigm shifts. Thesechanges evolved with such rapidity, thatoften-times the knowledge of teachers,consumers and families about new ap-proaches in programming lagged behindtheir implementation in the community.In 1990, the Congress of the UnitedStates amended PL 94-142 with the pas-sage of PL 101-476, the Individuals withDisabilities Education Act (IDEA), whichmandates planning for transition fromschool to adult life and requires that par-ents and their children participate asequal partners with teachers in the plan-ning process. Effective participation inthis process requires an accurate under-standing of the adult service system andinformation about community optionsavailable once special education ends.

Numerous national and state studieshave provided substantial documenta-tion of the difficulties individuals withdisabilities experience on leaving school(Bruininks, Thurlow, Lewis & Larson,1988; Johnson & Thompson, 1988;Halpern, 1985; Hazazi, Gordon, & Roe,1985; Roessler, Bro lin & Johnson,1990). For most individuals with disabili-

ties, living in the community followingtransition from school means long-termfinancial instability, family dependence,and isolation from other communitymembers (Gaylord-Ross, 1988; Hasazi &Clarke, 1988; International Center forthe Disabled, 1989).

The literature has shown consistentlythat, for youths with significant disabili-ties, meaningful parent involvement dur-ing the time of transition is essential (e.g.Hill, Wehman, Hill & Goodall, 1985; El-lison, 1991; Everson & Moon, 1987; Na-tional Council on Disability, 1989; Nis-bet, Covert & Schuh, 1992; Gerry andMcWhorter, 1990). And, unfortunately,such involvement has often been round tobe lacking (Stile, Cole & Gardner, 1984;Schutz, 1986), especially among familieswith fewer means and less education(Schutz, 1986). The importance of familyinvolvement as well as that of studentsthemselves is recognized in IDEA, yetonly r !cently have the views of parents ontransition, their preferences and choices,their familiarity with the adult servicesystem, and their knowledge about avail-able options been examined in any depth(cf. Dever, 1987; Ferguson. Ferguson, andJones, 1988; Halvorsen, Doering, Usil-son, Ferron-Davis and Sailor, 1989).

Special education teachers likewiseplay a pivotal role in the transition proc-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

3327

ess (Roessler, Brolin & Johnson, 1990;Rusch & Phelps, 1987; Wilcox, McDon-nell, Bellamy & Rose. 1988; Zigmond &Miller, 1992). However, research onteacher knowledge or attitudes abouttransition issues, or teacher familiaritywith the adult service system, a key ele-ment of transition planning, has alsobeen limited (Everson & Moon, 1987;Schmelkin & Berkell, 1989).

The Special School District of St. LouisCounty' (SSD) and the Productive LivingBoard for St. Louis County Citizens withDevelopmental Disabilities,2 two key or-ganizations in the developmental dis-abilities service system in St. LouisCounty, Missouri, were committed to as-sist teachers, consumers, and families inbecoming more effective participants inthe transition planning process and inbecoming informed of the adult serv-ice/support system. The determination ofthe present knowledge base for teachers,students, and families was needed in or-der to develop an effective program ofinformation dissemination and transi-tion programs. The objectives of thestudy reported on here were, therefore,practical. The study sought 1) to deter-mine the views of teachers, parents andstudents on the service needs of studentsas they leave school, and 2) to determinethe level of knowledge these groups haveof the local adult service system. Thisinformation was viewed as necessary forthe development of an effective transitionprogram and for the dissemination ofneeded information about transition is-sues.

Method

The study population consisted of 440special education students with develop-mental disabilities aged 16 to 21. Thispopulation included all students of theSpecial School District of St. LouisCounty between these ages at the time ofthe study who were attending school insegregated facilities or had special educa-tion teachers in separate home rooms.These groups were selected because itwas expected that a substantial majorityof them would subsequently qualify forservices from the adult system servingpersons with developmental disabilities.The study population did not include stu-dents with learning or behavioral dis-abilities unless developmental disabili-ties were also present.

Of the 440 students in the study popu-lation, 253 (58%) were boys, 186 (42%)girls; 262 (63%) were white/EuropeanAmericans, 181 (36%) African American;266 (60%) were from two-parent familiesand 174 (40%) from single-parent fami-lies. The large majority of the studentswere mentally retarded (365, 83%); andfor 323 (74%) of them this was theirprimary disability. The prevalence ofother developmental disabilities in-cluded 21 (8%) with cerebral palsy, 12(5%) with epilepsy, 12 (5%) with orthope-dic impairments, 9 (3%) with autism, and8 (3%) with spina bifida. Forty-three(17%) of the students were classified ashaving a learning disability in addition tohaving a developmental disability.

The families and teachers of all stu-dents in the study population were sur-veyed by mail. The surveys had two majorparts. The first part sought informationon the transition-related services stu-

1 The Special School District of St. Louis County provides special education services to over 21,000 students, aged 3 to 21, in

all 23 public school district., in the county.2 The Productive Living Board is responsible for administrating a special county-wide property tax which is used to develop an

array of services primarily for adults with developmental disabilities and their families. Over 3,700 county residents receive

services provided through 70 different community agencies funded by the PLB.

28 31Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

dents would need when they completedtheir school program. Items pertaining toliving and work arrangements. transpor-tation and recreation services were in-cluded. Parents and teachers were asked,for example, to select the type of work ortraining activity that best fit students'abilities and interests. In their survey,parents were also asked about additionalservice needs they or their children mayhave currently that were not being met. A33- item, scaled-response inventory wasdeveloped for this which sought to iden-tify specific need areas as well as therelative importance of individual needs.The items covered a wide range of possi-ble service needs across several dimen-sions, including immediate practicalneeds (such as medical care and respitecare), social psychological needs (such ascounseling for family members and cop-ing with stress), and planning and infor-mational needs (such as learning aboutpost-school options students have andplanning for a student's future financialsecurity). Parents were asked to indicatetheir relative need for each item on afive-point scale where "1" was defined as"not a need," and "5" was defined as "veryhigh need."

In the second part of the surveys par-ents and teachers were asked about theirknowledge of and experiences with thevarious elements of the adult service sys-tem. They were specifically asked abouttheir familiarity with 1) the local office ofthe state Department of Mental Health(DMH) which is responsible for providingcase management services and is asource of funding for some adult serv-ices, 2) other state agencies, such as Vo-cational Rehabilitation, through whichfunds for a range of services are distrib-uted, and 3) 15 local community provideragencies - such as the local Associationof Retarded Citizens (ARC) and UnitedCerebral Palsy Association-which delivermost adult services in the area. Parentsand teachers were asked to select one ofthree response categories to indicate

their familiarity with services providedby these agencies (not familiar, somewhatfamiliar, very familiar). Parents wereasked if they knew how to apply for theservices, whether their children had re-ceived services from the agencies, and ifthey had, whether they were satisfiedwith the services provided. Teacherswere asked if they thought their studentsin the study population were eligible forservices from the agencies and whetherthey had ever referred the students to theagencies.

Both parent and teacher groups wereasked if they were familiar with the termssupported living, supported employmentand respite care. Both groups were alsoasked how through what media theywould prefer to receive additional infor-mation about available services and thelocal service system. Teachers wereasked what transition-related issues theyhad discussed in meetings with thisgroup of parents during the last 12months. They were presented with a listof specific issues that arguably should beaddressed during transition meetingswith parents and students (see Halvorsenet al. , p. 258) and were asked if they haddone so within the last year. The surveyswere piloted on a small group of respon-dents prior to the first full mailing.

Following two mailings of the surveys,usable responses were received from 176(40%) families and 261 teachers (whowere the teachers of 60% of the studentsin the study population). Parents whohad not responded to the first mailingwere given the option of responding to thesurvey by telephone. Twenty -three of thesurveys were completed in this manner.

There were 110 students on whomcompleted surveys were received fromboth parents and teachers. These stu-dents were considered as possible inter-viewees. Having first obtained parentalpermission, in-home interviews wereconducted with 32 of the students.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 35 29

Results

Service Needs

Living Arrangements: Parents andteachers were asked to indicate the typeof living arrangement that would bestmeet the needs of their children whenthey are ready to leave home. Of the re-sponding parents, 73 (41%) selected in-dependent living with periodic assis-tance, 39 (22%) chose group homes, 12(16%) supervised apartments, and 23(13%) specialized facilities . The views ofteachers on the residential needs of theirstudents were diverse. Nearly half (122.47%) recommended independent livingwith assistance, 60 (23%) indicated grouphomes, 41 (16%) supervised apartments,and 14 (6%) specialized facilities. Whenasked their own views, 20 (63%) studentswho were interviewed said they preferred

(30, 17%); or a sheltered workshop (29,17%); or sought adult developmentaltraining programs (25, 14%). There wasa strong correlation between the level offunctional impairment and the type ofwork or training arrangement selected byparents. Parents of children with moresevere disabilities were less likely to viewsupported employment as appropriateand more likely to prefer sheltered work-shops or developmental training pro-grams (Pearson's r =.62, p < .001). Hold-ing the severity of disability constant,preference for supported employment ar-rangements was found to be significantlyhigher among the parents of boys, par-ents with more education and parents ofyounger children (ANOVA, f=5.40, 4.8,4.0, p<.01). About half (125, 48%) of theteachers surveyed considered supportedemployment as most suitable for their

Table 1. Living arrangements needed according to parents, teachers and students when stu-dent is ready to leave home

Parents Teachers Students

Independent living with assistances

Surpervised apartment

Group home

Specialized facility

73(.415)

12(.164)

39(.220)

23(.132)

122(.469)

41(.157)

60(.228)

14(.055)

20(.625)

3(.094)

* 5(.156) said they wanted to remain at home and 4(.125) said they could live without help.

independent living with assistance, 5(16%) said they wanted to remain athome, 4 (12%) said they could live alonewithout assistance and 3 (9%) said theypreferred a group home. (See Table 1.)

Employment and Training Options:More parents saw supported employ-ment as most suited to the abilities andinterests of their children than otherwork or training arrangements. althoughless than half indicated this option (79,45%). Other parents preferred that theirchildren worked along side other per-sons with disabilities in real work set-tings, such as a mobile crew or enclave

students as they initially transitional outof school; a larger number (152, 58%),saw it as appropriate within five years.Other teachers regarded enclaves (43,16%) or sheltered employment (28. 11%)as most suited for their students even

fter five years. Teachers of students withmore severe disabilities were more likelyto select sheltered work or enclaves overindividual supported employment. Allbut two of the students interviewed saidthey wanted to work once they are out ofschool. A sizable proportion of the stu-dents interviewed (22. 69%) believed theywould be ready to work when they corn-

30 36 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

pleted their school program and reportedthat they would prefer to work alongsidenondisabled coworkers in regular worksettings. Six students (19%) said theypreferred enclave arrangements. Two(6%) reported a preference for working insheltered workshops. Twelve (38%) indi-cated that they had had some prior paidwork experience. (See Table 2.)

Transportation Services: Only 13 (7%)parents reported that their childrenwould require no transportation assis-tance, although 53 (30%) indicated thattheir children could use public transpor-tation. Nearly half (83, 47%) said thattheir children would need special, door-to-door services. Eighteen (56%) of thestudents interviewed said they had usedpublic transportation. Eleven (34%) saidthey had received some training in usingpublic transportation.

Recreation Services: A large number ofthe parents surveyed (146, 83%) saidtheir children would want to participatein some organized recreation and lei-sure-time activities offered in the com-munity. The more familiar parents werewith the adult service system, the morelikely were they to be interested in suchactivities for their children (ANOVA,1=6.42, p<.01).

Additional Needs: In responding to the33-item inventory included in the surveyall parents reported a number of addi-tional service needs that were not beingsufficiently addressed. Although re-

sponses showed the uniqueness of eachfamily, distinct patterns were evident. Afactor analysis (SPSS/PC FACTOR, PCanalysis) of parent responses revealedfive general need areas:

1) needs related to service planningand information about services, espe-cially services that will be needed whenchildren are out of school;

2) needs related to stress experiencedin caring for children;

3) respite care needs;

4) health-related needs; and5) other specific services needed cur-rently.

The most frequently expressed needsinvolved Items in the first of these areasand related directly to the process oftransitioning from school and planningfor the future. There were six specificitems within this cluster that over half theparents described as a "very high need"and over 80 percent indicated some needfor. These six items are listed in Table 3.The table shows the proportion of re-spondents who reported the items to beeither not a need ("1" on the scale) orsome need ("2" through "5" on the scale).The overall response pattern to the inven-tory showed that while some familieshave needs, sometimes very great needs,for medical assistance or respite care orother services, nearly all parents share aperceived need for help with the crucialprocess of transition and future service

Table 2. Employ:aent and training arrangements needed according toparents, teachers and students.

Parents Teachers Students

Supported employment 79(.451) 125(.479) 22(.688)

Enclave 30(.165) 50(.191) 6(.188)

Sheltered Workshop 29(.171) 37(.142) 2(.063)

Developmental training 25(.140) 41(.157)

Other 12(.068) 9(.034) 2(.063)

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 37 31

and support planning.The higher the educwion level of par-

ents the more likely were they to report ahigh need for information about future

with the local DMH office (chi-square,p < .01). Thirty-three percent of the re-sponding parents said they were not fa-miliar with this key agency.

Thb le 3. Transition-related infirmation needs

learning more about the options student has in selecting ajob or training program once out of school

learning how to be an effective advocate for services forstudent once out of school

planning for student's future financial security

planning foi student's future service needs

learning to help student gain control of own future

learning more about options student has in livingarrangements

Not ANeed

21(.121)

19(.110)

28(.157)

25(.143)

23(.133)

30(.171)

SomeNeed

155(.879)

157(.890)

148(.843)

151(.857)

153(.867)

146(.867)

services (Pearson's r = .43, p<.01). At thesame time, parents who were less knowl-edgeable about services availablethrough the adult service system (sec be-low) were also more likely to report a highneed for this kind of information andplanning assistance (Pearson's r=.39,p<.01).

Familiarity with the Adult Service System

Of the 176 parent respondents, 119(67%) reported some familiarity with theservices of DMH, including 38 (22%) whosaid they were "very familiar" with theseservices. Parents who were "very famil-iar" with DMH services were more likelyto be those whose children are more se-verely disabled, have physical impair-ments, require specialized medical atten-tion and/or door-to-door transportationservices (chi-square, p < .01). Parents ofnon-minority students, older parents,and those in two-parent households weremore likely to be aware of DMH servicesthan their counterparts (chi-square,p <.01). These types of families were alsomore likely to have had some contact

Among parents, familiarity with otherstate agencies was low. For example, 40(23%) reported some familiarity with theagency providing legal and advocacy serv-ices, and 44 (25%) said they were familiarwith the agency funding vocational reha-bilitation services. Fifty-nine (33%) of theparents reported that they did not knowhow to apply to the Social Security Ad-ministration for financial assistance onbehalf of their children.

The level of awareness among parentsof the 15 local community agencies wasfound to be quite limited. Respondingparents were more often familiar with theARC (100, 56%) than any other commu-nity agency. Familiarity among parentsfor other agencies listed ranged fx om 6%to 28%. Parents of children with moresevere disabilities and parents withhigher levels of education tended to bemore familiar with community serviceagencies (Pearson's r =.41 & .38, p < .01).Teachers' awareness of community agen-cies varied considerably depending uponthe organization. Few displayed a com-prehensive understanding of the local

32 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

adult service system. For example, 243(93%) were aware of the local ARC, butless than half were familiar with most

discussed was found to increase with theage of students, many of the issues hadnot been addressed in such meetings.

Figure 1. Transition issues discussed

E&T options at transition7"""t"="77"t".7."

supports needed to work

job preferences

recreation options

family's role in transition

4

0 52%

47%11

recreation preferences 42%

transportation Issues 40%

longer-term work options

E&T providers-i

Wing options 129%

residential agencies 14 16%

future financial planning_) 12%

10 20

community agencies or parent assistanceassociations.

Familiarity with Terms. Over half of theparents who responded to the surveysaid they were not familiar with the terms"supported employment" (103, 58%) or"supported living" (97, 55%). Nearly athird (56, :..12%) said they were not famil-iar with the term "respite care." A largemajority of teachers (240. 92%) said theywere at least "somewhat familiar" withthese terms. About half (139, 53%) saidthey were "very familiar" with supportedemployment and supported living, and167 (64%) said they were "very familiar"with respite care.

Ransition Planning

Table 4 shows the percentage of teach-ers who said they had discussed specifictransition issues listed in the instrument.Although the likelihood of issues being

I) 39%

35%

60%74%

30 40 50 60 70 80percent

Items that were more likely to be dis-cussed included the employment andtraining options students have followingschool (74%) and supports needed inorder to work (60%). Items less likely tobe discussed included the role of familyand friends in the transition process(43%), the residential options the studenthas as an adult (29%), and sources offinancial assistance available to the stu-dent (16%).

Teachers who were more familiar withthe service system tended to discuss awider set of transition issues with par-ents. There was a significant positive cor-relation between these two factors (Pear-son's r=.41, p<.01). Teachers whodiscussed a wider set of transition issueswere also more likely to be familiar withthe terms "supported living" and "sup-ported employment" (ANOVA, f=5.7,p <.01). There was also a significant posi-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 33

39

tive correlation between teacher familiar-ity with the service system and the likeli-hood that a student had a transition plan(ANOVA, f =6.5, p<.01). Although thenumber of current students reported tohave transition plans was small (47,18%), they were more likely to have oneif their teacher was more knowledgeableof the adult service system.

Less than nalf of the teachers reportedthat they had ever discussed the servicesthat were available from specific stateagencies with the families of the studentsin the study population. Teachers re-ported discussing services available fromthe Vocational Rehabilitation agency with81 (46.0%) of the families. DMH serviceswere discs ssed with 71 (40.3%) of thefamilies, the Social Security Administra-tion with 41 (23.3%) and Protection andAdvocacy Services with 6 (3.4%).

Preferred Ways of ReceivingInformation

Parents and teachers were asked howthey would like to receive additional in-formation on the services available tothese children in the region. In general,parents preferred media that were moreprivate. Written materials, telephone in-formation and referral services and videotapes were preferred most often. Teach-ers, on the other hand, were open aboutequally to in-service training, presenta-tions or written materials. See Figure 2.

Discussion

With the passage of IDEA, parents areexpected to become full partners in thetransition planning process. Previous re-search has found that one reason for theineffectiveness of transition programs is"the absence of parent and family involve-ment in the determination of transitiongoals, service strategies, and serviceproviders" (Gerry and McWhorter, 1990,p. 507). With increasing emphasis beingplaced on making the process consumer

driven many will agree with Nisbet, Cov-ert and Schuh (1992) when they writethat "the assumption should be that par-ents are the leading members, the deci-sion makers, in planning for theirson/daughter" (p.407). The full participa-tion of the family in transition planning,not to say asserting a leadership role inthe process, requires an accurate under-standing of the service system and cur-rent approaches to service programming.

Based on the findings of the survey itwas clear that the knowledge not only ofmany parents but of many special educa-tors as well about the service system wasvery incomplete. Both parents and teach-ers were found to have basic informationneeds that required immediate attention.The results of the study indicated thatwhile some parents had a better workingknowledge of the adult service systemthan others, and individual parents haddifferent information needs, most par-ents of students in special education re-quired and should be provided compre-hensive information on a wide range oftransition-related issues. This includesinformation on the adult service system(e.g., types of services available, eligibilitycriteria, purpose of specific services, howservices are accessed, how to learn moreabout the service system and where tofind answers to their questions about it).Many parents also need information onthe options their children have as theycomplete their school programs, includ-ing short and long-term options regard-ing job/training programs and living ar-rangements when children are ready toleave their natural homes, as well as theavailability of recreational and leisuretime opportunities. Despite their com-mon usage among professionals, theterms supported living and supportedemployment are not accurately under-stood by many parents of children near-ing transition from school. Importantly,it is not clear how many parents, espe-cially parents of children with more se-vere disabilities, view these approaches

34 4Qissues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Figure 2. Preferred ways of receiving information

written materials

telephone 184R

video tapes

indiv counseling

presentations

support groups

audio tapes

in-service workshops

ltledreirfaCAXV&V410:04F.,#.1rotRti..XXVIL....

NraW"'"-40:405225M*-"wetrati

1

m7444;:sta:+-44:+:+Attasslassr

ralriffeir.S.N.V.KOTAz

0

least preferred

parents :1914,1"44 teachers

as suitable for their children. airther,most parents of students nearing thetime of transition have limited informa-tion on a wide set of factors likely todetermine whether the transition processwill be successful or not, including: howto be an effective advocate for adult serv-ices for their children; how to learn aboutand access financial assistance availablefrom governmental sources; how to planfor their children's futures, includingtheir future financial security and futureservice needs; and how to help their chil-dren become more independent and havemore control over their own future. More-over, a majority of parents surveyed werenot sufficiently knowledgeable of thetransition planning process itself or theirrole in it.

Historically, families have not lookedforward to the transition of their children

most preferred

with disabilities from school to adult life.Because of the Education of All Handi-capped Children Act students with dis-abilities have received comprehensiveservices while in school. Parents haveoften come to rely heavily upon their chil-dren's teachers. When it comes to transi-tion planning, many special educatorshave found that parents have continuedto rely upon them and to defer to theirjudgment. If parents are to take theirproper role in transition planning, teach-ers will often have to act as facilitatorsand catalysts of the process. It is all themore critical, therefore, that teachersthemselves become fully informed aboutthe post-school options their studentshave and ,:.bout the local adult servicesystem on which these young persons willhave to rely.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

4135

References

Bruininks, R.H., Thurlow, M.L., Lewis, D.R. &Larson, N.W. (1988). Post-school outcomesfor students in special education and otherstudents one to eight years after high school.In: R.H. Bruininks, D.R. Lewis, & M.L. Thur-low (eds.), Assessing outcomes, costs, andbenefits of special education programs(pp.99-111) (Project Report Number 88-1).Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Uni-versity Affiliated Program.

Dever, R.B. (1987). A survey of parental percep-tions of work training for their severely handi-capped children. Working Paper #87-6.COMPETE . Bloomington, In: Center for In-novation in Teaching the Handicapped.

Ellison, M.L. (1991). Testing family support andfamily empowerment: key findings across fourpilots . Human Cambridge, MA: Services Re-search Institute.

Everson, J.M., & Moon, M.S. (1987). Transitionservices for young adults with severe disabili-ties: Defining professional and parental rolesand responsibilities. Journal of The Associa-tion for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12,87-95.

Ferguson, P.M., Ferguson, D.L., & Jones, D.(1988). Generations of hope: Parental per-spectives on the transitions of their childrenwith severe retardation from school to adultlife. Journal of the Association for Personswith Severe Handicaps, 13, 177-188.

Gaylord-Ross, R., (ed.) (1988). Vocational Edu-cation for Persons with Handicaps. MountainView, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Gerry, M.H., & McWhorter, C.M. (1990). Acomprehensive analysis of federal statutesand programs for persons with severe disabili-ties. In: L.H. Meyer, C.A. Peck & L. Brown(eds.), Critical issues in the lives of peoplewith severe disabilities (pp. 495-527). Balti-more: Paul H. Brookes.

Halpern, A.S. (1985). Transition: A look at thefoundations. Exceptional Children, 51, 479-486.

Halvorsen, A.T., Doering, K., Usilton, R., Fer-ron-Davis, F., & Sailor, W. (1989). The roleof parents and family members in planningseverely disabled students transition fromschool. In: G.H. Singer & L.K. Irving (eds),Support for caregiving families: Enablingpositive adaptation to disability (pp. 253-268). Baltimore, MD: Brooks Publishing.

Hasazi, S., & Clarke, G., (1988). Vocationalpreparation for high school students labeledmentally retarded: Employment as a graduationgoal. Mental Retardation, 26, 343-350.

Hasazi, S., Gordon, L., & Roe, C. (1985). Fac-tors associated with the employment status ofhandicapped youth exiting high school from1979 and 1983. Exceptional Children, 51,455-469.

Hill, J., Wehman, P., Hill, M., & Goodall, P.(1985). Differential reasons for job separationof previously employment mentally retardedpersons across measured intelligence levels.Competitive employment for persons withmental retardation. From Research to Prac-tice. Volume I. Richmond: Virginia Common-wealth University, RRTC.

International Center for the Disabled (1989).The ICD survey III: A report card on specialeducation. New York: Author.

Johnson, D., & Thompson, S. (1988). Enhanc-ing opportunities for parent participation ininteragency planning for transition: a casestudy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota,University Affiliated Program.

National Council on Disability (1989). The edu-cation of students with disabilities: Where dowe stand ? Washington, DC: Author.

Nisbet, J., Covert, S., & Schuh, M. (1992). Fam-ily involvement in the transition from schoolto adult life. In F.R. Rusch et al. (eds.), Tran-sition from school to adult life: Models, link-ages, and policy (pp. 407-424). Sycamore, IL:Sycamore Publishing Company.

Roessler, R.T., Brolin, D.E., & Johnson, J.M.(1990). Factors affecting employment suc-cess and quality of life: A one year fol-low-up of students in special education.Career Development for Exceptional Indi-viduals, 13, 95- 107.

Rusch, F., & Phelps, L. (1987). Secondary spe-cial education transition from school to work:A national priority. Exceptional Children,53,487-493.

Schmelkln, L.P., & Berkell, D.E. (1989). Educa-tors' attitudes toward the employability of per-sons with severe handicaps. Career Developmentfor Exceptional Individuals, 12, 40-47.

Schutz, R.P. (1986). Establishing a parent- pro-fessional partnership to facilitate competitive

36 42Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

employment. In: F.R. Rusch (ed.), Competi-tive employment issues and strategies(pp.289- 302). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Stile, S., Cole, J., & Gardner, A. (1984). Maxi-mizing parental involvement in programs forexceptional children: Strategies for educationand related services personnel. Journal of theDivision of Early Childhood, 1, 68-82.

Valdez, K.A., Williamson, C.L., & Wagner,M.M. (1990). National longitudinal transi-tion study of special education students.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Educa-tion, Office of Special Education and Reha-bilitation Services.

Authors:

Wilcox, B., McDonnell, J.J., Bellamy, G.T., &Rose, H. (1988). Prepariang for SupportedEmployment: The Role of Secondary SpecialEducation. In: G.T. Bellamy, L.E. Rhodes,D.M. Mank, & J.M. Albin (eds.), SupportedEmployment: A Community ImplementationGuide (pp. 183-208). Baltimore: BrookesPublishing

Zigmond, N., & Miller, S.E. (1992). Improvinghigh school programs for students with learn-ing disabilities: A matter of substance as wellas form. In F.R. Rusch et al. (eds.), Transitionfrom School to Adult Life: Models, Linkages,and Policy (pp. 17-32). Sycamore, IL: Syca-more Publishing Company.

Richard I. Goldbaum, Ph.D.,Executive Director of the Productive Living Board for St. Louis Country Citizenswith Developmental Disabilities;Ronald Rebore, Ph.D.,Superintendent of the Special School District of St. Louis Country;Gary L. Siegel, Ph.D.,Director of the Institute of Applied Research, St. Louis;Julie Gates Kindred, M.Ed.,Director of Employment/Training Services with the Productive Living Board

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 43 37

Journal of Practical Approachesto Developmental Handicap

A publication concerningdisability practice and applied

research in the field ofrehabilitation.

The Journal is an international journal. Two issues appearannually with supplementary issues on occasion. Subscription

rates are for the calendar year ($ 14.00 in Canada; outsideCanada, Canadian $16.00 ). Back issues are available.

Manuscripts should be submitted in triplicate to the Editor.Conformity to the format of the American Psychological

Association is requested.

Roy I. Brown, EditorJournal of Practical Approaches

to Developmental Handicapc/o Rehabilitation Studies Program

4th Floor, Education TowerUniversity of Calgary

2500 University Drive NWCalgary, Alberta T2N 1N4

Canada

44

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 39-50©1994 AHVA Publisher

Avoiding Inappropriate Referrals ofMinority Language Learners to Special

Education: Implementing a Prereferral Process

Paul C. Kavanaugh

Abstract: Hispanic students, and especially Mexican American students, are vastly over-rep-resented in special education classes in Texas' public schools. It has traditionally beenassumed that the reason these students do not achieve their academic potential is because ofsome inherent cognitive deficiency within students themselves. The author of this paperchallenges the medical model upon which many such special education referrals are based.The author proposes that educators and school psychologists seriously investigate the waysthat the teacher, the curriculum and the schools fail language minority learners beforebilingual students are shuffled off to special education classes. One model of a prerefferalprocess will be offered that may be used by educators to better evaluate and ameliorate theacademic difficulties of bilingual students. Although this prerefferal process can and shouldbe used with minority language students of any ethnicity, nationality, or race, emphasis in thispaper will be placed on the experience of bilingual (English-Spanish speaking) Hispanicstudents, and Mexican American students in particular.

Introduction

It has been shown that there is a threehundred percent over-representation ofTexas Hispanics in the category "learn-ing-disabled" (Ortiz and Yates, 1983).What is more, this over-representation oflanguage minority children, and espe-cially Hispanic students, in special edu-cation classes, seems to be a widespreadphenomenon even outside Texas in thoseschool districts that have significantpopulations of Hispanic students (Ruiz,Figueroa, Rueda and Beaumont, 1992).Obviously, this situation is causing anumber of educational researchers toask serious questions about how lan-guage minority children are evaluatedand referred to special education classes.

At the present time if a student is av-ing difficulties in the mainstream class-room the tendency of teacl rs and ad-ministrators is to assume that it is theproblem of the student (Dunn, 1987).The student is referred to school psy-chologists, counselors, reading special-ists, etc. for testing to see what the stu-dent's problem is. During the first part ofthis paper the inadequacy of the medicalmodel as it has been used with Hispanicstudents (as well as many other students)will be demonstrated by reviewing therecent relevant research in this area. Inthe second part of this paper an alterna-tive to the medical model will be pre-sented which can be implemented atminimal cost and effort and with moreprobable success for both the school and

Volume 9, No.1, 1994 45BEST COPY AVAILABLE

39

the Hispanic students. The primary goalof this paper will be to clarify a refer -ral/placement process that will identifyHispanics with disabilities in a fair, ap-propriate manner which actively involvesparents.

The situation of bilingual Hispanic stu-dents has been emphasized in this paperbecause this is a clear example of a sig-nificant failure of the special educationsystem in the U.S. that needs to be recti-fied so that special education can servebetter all students in need of its services.

PART I

What is the Medical Model?

Among psychiatrists these days thereis a heated debate about the origins ofmany psychiatric illnesses such as de-pression, mania, and schizophrenia. Al-though this debate is very complex, it willbe presented in a much simpler form forthe sake of a more clear definition of themedical model. One group of psychia-trists believes that many, if not most,psychiatric problems a person has, iscaused by a chemical imbalance in theperson's brain. To rectify the situationone needs to take a drug in order tobecome less depressed, manic, or schizo-phrenic. Other psychiatrists believe thatan individual is genetically prone to suf-fer from one of a number of psychiatricillnesses. What is needed, in their opin-ion, is to identify and repair the defectivegene or chromosome through some typeof genetic engineering and the patient willbe cured. In both of these instances thepsychiatrists subscribe to the belief thata person suffers from psychiatric ill-nesses because of some internal problemor deficiency unique to that individual. Ineffect, they have based their diagnoses

and treatment on the medical model. Thepatient is ill because of a problem withinthe patient.1

Other psychiatrists and psychothera-pists believe that a person may be de-pressed, manic, or schizophrenic be-cause of something that has occurred oris occurring in a person's environment.This group of people believes that onecannot immediately blame the illness ofa person on some organic deficiencywithout also looking at the external fac-tors which may be contributing to anindividual's disease or illness (i.e. theexistence of some type of trauma or abu-sive/dysfunctional family relationship).These health practitioners would be criti-cal of those using the medical model be-cause they too easily dismiss or under-value the importance of an individual'senvironment in the diagnosis and treat-ment of the individual's disease.

When school counselors refer languageminority students to be "tested" in orderto evaluate whether they should be re-ferred to special education classes, with-out taking into consideration the stu-dent's environment (i.e. second languagelearning, the curriculum, experience ofthe teacher in teaching language minoritystudents), they are employing a medicalmodel rather than a socio-educationalmodel.

The Problem of Biased Research and theCase Against IQ Thsts

One cannot deny the fact that Hispanicchildren have traditionally scored belowaverage on standardized intelligence aswell as academic achievement tests. It isalso apparent that Hispanic studentsdrop out of school in disturbingly highnumbers. It is not uncommon for thedrop out rate for Hispanics to be above

1 For a more complete explanation of the medical model and its origins please refer to Andreasen (1984), especially pages 27-33.

40 4a Issues Special Education & Rehabilitation

t

40% in some school districts (Fields,1988). In the past, researchers and edu-cators have blamed these failures on His-panic students and their parents. One ofthe strongest criticisms of the intellectualcapacity and aspirations of Hispanicswas offered as recently as 1987 by aprominent psychometrician, L.M. Dunn,the creator of the Peabody Picture Vo-cabulary Test Series. In explaining whyHispanic students as a group consis-tently score lower on IQ tests thanWhites, Dunn makes some assertionsand assumptions that are really quiteshocking given the fact that he is an activeand respected scholar who once "ob-served that minority groups were over-identified as handicapped. (In 1968)Dunn believed this over representationwas caused by discriminatory intelli-gence and achievement tests" (Fuchs andFuchs, 1989, p. 303). By 1987, however,Dunn reversed his thinking and wrotethat Puerto Ricans and Mexican Ameri-cans are inherently less intelligent thanpeople from other ethnic groups (Dunn,1987).

In addition to these unsubstantiatedassertions Dunn also states quite cate-gorically that child rearing practices ofHispanic mothers and low educationalaspirations of Hispanic Americans (Fer-nandez, 1988) are all important reasonswhy Hispanics score lower on IQ andachievement tests than other ethnicgroups. Dunn believes that "It is time forthe Hispanic people to stop blamingteachers for their own lack of school suc-cess and other troubles, and set aboutworking harder to obtain a quality edu-cation for their children" (Fernandez,1988, p. 190).

The chairman of the Hispanic Re-search Issues of the prestigious Ameri-can Educational Research Association,Ricardo R. Fernandez, set the frameworkof those who vehemently oppose the con-clusions drawn by Professor Dunn.

A different perspective might have fo-cused not on who is to blame butrather on the structural factors thataccount for this sad state of affairs. ...In Dunn's world view (at least based onwhat he chooses to highlight in hismonograph) the cause of the low levelsof academic skills and consistentlypoor achievement of Hispanic (andother minority students) on stand-ardized tests cannot be attributed inany way to school-related factors. ...Dunn would have us believe that fail-ure to succeed, therefore should beattributed primarily to individual stu-dents and their families and, by exten-sion, to the collective group - the His-panic community (Fernandez, 1988,pp. 195-196).

Intelligence tests, however, are espe-cially fallible when it comes to measuringstudents' capacity to learn. Robert Ebel(now deceased) and David Frisbie, a re-searcher at the University of Iowa andsenior staff developer of the Iowa Test ofBasic Skills, a nationally used stand-ardized achievement test, warn teachersthat using IQ tests to evaluate any studentis extremely problematic (Ebel & Frisbie,1986).2

In the light of Ebel's and Frisbie's wellreasoned critiques of intelligence testsone can easily see the fallibility of Dunn'sargument since Dunn relied heavily on theresults of IQ tests to "prove" that "His-panic-Anglo differences in intellectual

2 Ebel and Frisbie base their conclusions on several factors; 1) There is extensive debate regarding what intelligence is and howone measures it. 2) It is impossible to build culture -free intelligence tests. 3)10 tests given to children at a young age do notpredict subsequent cognitive or intellectual development. 4) In practice, teachers and administrators have used IQ tests to denyopportunities to students rather than to develop better curricula or to promote learning. Please see Ebel and Frisbie, 1986, pp.302-312 for further elaboration of these issues.

Volume 9, No.1, 1994 41

47

NEM

performance are largely due to geneticdifferences in intelligence" (Valencia andAburto, 1991, p. 209).

A Critique of the Medical Mode!

Professor Jim Cummins, an interna-tionally respected scholar in bilingualeducation, is a strident critic of what hesees as the abuse of psychological testingon minority students and of the medicalmodel in general. When psychologicaltests alone are used to evaluate students'cognitive capacities they are being diag-nosed out of context. As a result, psy-chologists are ignoring variables (i.e. cur-riculum, pedagogy, possible racism,second language learning difficulties) thatmay have a real influence on why the childis not learning as he/she should be learn-ing (Cummins, 1986). As an illustrationof this point a team of researchers per-forming a longitudinal ethnographicstudy in one school district in Californiadiscovered that "Psychologists would testuntil the desired profile of scores (of astudent) met an eligibility requirement"(Ruiz, Figueroa, Rueda and Beaumont,1992, p. 361).

Cummins is convinced that the deckis stacked against the minority languagestudent from the moment that she/he is"sent for testing" to determine whyshe/he is experiencing learning difficul-ties at school.

Location of the "problem" within thechild is virtually inevitable when theconceptual base for the psychologicalassessment process is purely psycho-educational. If the psychologist's taskis to discover the causes of a minoritystudent's academic difficulties and theonly tools at his/her disposal are psy-chological tests (in either L1 or L2),then it is hardly surprising that thechild's difficulties will be attributed topsychological dysfunctions (Cum-mins, 1986, p. 7).School psychologists are not sociolo-

gists and they are not necessarily trained

in multicultural education or bilingualeducation. Their training and duties aremuch more narrowly defined than that.Cummins asserts that "discriminatoryassessment is carried out by individualpeople who have accepted a role defini-tion and a socio-educational system thatmakes discriminatory assessment virtu-ally inevitable" (1986, p. 10). He says thatpsychologists must begin to see them-selves and what they do in a completelydifferent light. "To the extent that individ-ual psychologists question the assump-tions underlying their role, they also chal-lenge the social and educationalstructures that disable students" (Cum-mins, 1986, p. 10).

Cummins is not alone in his concernabout the appropriateness of the mean-ings of psychological assessments anddiagnoses. It has been argued "for yearsthat the assessment procedures and testsused in special education are devoid oftechnical adequacy" (Ruiz, Figueroa,Rueda and Beaumont, 1992, p. 362).Rather than blaming the victim (i.e. thestudent), it is time to recognize that manyof the learning problems of language mi-nority students are the result of poorpedagogical practice and the social pa-thology which is reflected in the patternsof dominant-subordinate group rela-tions. If these variables were given theresearch attention that "minority defi-ciencies" are given by the special educa-tion establishment it would be found thatthese are precisely the conditions that"are the cause of the three hundred per-cent over-representation of Texas His-panics in the 'learning-disabled' categoryrather than any intrinsic processing defi-cit unique to Hispanic children" (Cum-mins. 1986, p.9).

Part II

Breaking Away From the Medical Model--Establishing a Prereferral Process

A number of special education re-

42 48 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

searchers are convinced that, in order tomove away from the medical model para-digm, it is essential to examine andchange the manner in which minoritylanguage students are referred to specialeducation classes in the first place. Theunderlying premise of the critics of themedical model is that sch' 's must sharethe blame for why Hispanic students arenot achieving as they should. Ortiz andGarcia (1988) note that many studentsdo not achieve their potential in the class-room because of ineffective curricula andpoor pedagogy.

The questions that Ortiz and Garciapose are on the opposite end of the spec-trum from the questions posed by theproponents of the medical model. Themedical model asks what is wrong withthe child. What is preventing him/herfrom learning? The questions asked bycritics of the medical model investigatewhat is wrong with the teaching environ-ment and the curriculum. They ask whyand how the school is failing the student.

For a number of special education re-searchers "the referral step was a majorfactor contributing to disproportionateethnic representation in special educa-tion" (Argulewicz and Sanchez, 1983, p.453). "Educators (were) frustrated intheir inability to determine which chil-dren have or have not been appropriatelyidentified for special education services"(Chinn and Hughes, 1987, p. 45). Forthat reason, Ortiz and Garcia (1988) andtheir associates developed a prereferralprocess which unambiguously requiresteachers to examine all that is donewithin the confines of the mainstreamclassroom and to make appropriatechanges in instruction and curriculumbefore a student is referred to be evalu-ated for a special education placement.The purpose of this prereferral processis to ensure that the students' difficultiesare not the result of cultural differencesand inadequate curricula but are indeedthe result of some internal deficiency inthe student.

The most notable characteristic of thiseight step process is that it could reason-ably be used to ensure equity for all stu-dents who are experiencing learningproblems, not just minority language stu-dents. In the case of the student who isculturally different this prereferral proc-ess is absolutely essential in order toavoid an inappropriate referral to specialeducation.

The prerefferal process, as articulatedby Ortiz and Garcia (1988), has eightsteps. lb begin the prereferral process(Step 1), the student's teachers and par-ents ask if the student is experiencing aca-demic difficulty. If that is the case, it mustbe determined whether the curriculum be-ing used is known to be effective for lan-guage minority learners (Step 2). Haveother language minority learners been suc-cessful learners with the curriculum whichis in place? If the answer is yes, the nextstep (Step 3) in the prereferral process isto ask whether the language minority stu-dent's problem has been validated.

This third step in the prereferral proc-ess is an extremely important elementand it is crucial to understand what aradical departure this is from past prac-tice and to examine the implications ofsuch an action. The first part of this thirdstep is to ask whether the child's prob-lems have been documented at home andat school by both teachers and parents.The importance of this collaboration withparents who observe their children indifferent contexts from those at school isclearly demonstrated in an ethnographicstudy of three Mexican American chil-dren who had been referred to specialeducation classes.

With two of the children parents didnot recognize their children as beingdifferent or having difficulty with com-munication. Yet, all three clinicianshad perceived these children as havingsome type of language-disorder. ... theclinicians were not aware of what thesechildren were capable of communicat-

Volume 9, No.1, 1994

843

4

ing with other children outside of thetherapy room. David and Lupita hadconversations with peers, siblings, andteachers. They were observed to taketurns and maintain the topic of conver-sation when the topic chosen was in-teresting to them and the addressee.Observations of Lupita suggested thatshe mastered more linguistic and con-versational ability than described bythe clinician. Lupita attempted to usequestions, playing with the language.... David and Lupita, who were per-ceived by the parents as not language-disordered, were observed to interactwith other children who possessedvarying communicative and academicabilities.

Pete. who was perceived to be languagedisordered by his parents and the cli-nician ... resortd to nonverbal behav-iors and voice inflection to request in-formation. (He) was observed to bedifferent by the other children, sib-lings, parents, teacher, and clinician.He did not have the linguistic, social,or discourse competencies to interactwith children of varying communica-tive abilities (Kayser, 1987, pp. 14-15).

As a result of the observations de-scribed above Lupita and David weretaken out of special education classesand returned to regular classes. Althoughthe scope of this study was limited it canbe said that two lives were potentiallyradically altered in a positive manner byits results. One must ask how many stu-dents, like Lupita and David, are mistak-enly placed in special education classesthroughout the United States. This eth-nographic study clearly demonstratesthat it is inappropriate and probably evenimmoral to evaluate language minoritylearners out of context.

The second part of this validationprocess is to ask whether the languageminority student's learning difficultiesare present both in the native languageand in English. In this regard there seems

to be general agreement that if a child ishaving learning difficulties in English butnot in his/her native language then a re-ferral to special education might be pre-mature. The child may be simply experi-encing the normal difficulties that anyonehas who is trying to successfully learn asecond language. The problem is that"unless regular educators understandsecond language acquisition, they will failto provide the necessary language devel-opment support these students need tobe academically successful" (Ortiz andGarcia, 1988, p. 16).

An additional finding by researchers isthat there is not the necessary amount oftesting to even determine what the stu-dent's dominant language is in the firstplace. Too much reliance is placed onanecdotal observations and intuition. De-termining a student's dominant languageis not as easy as it may appear at firstglance since the use of language is a mul-tifaceted phenomenon. It is quite appar-ent that some school districts do notemphasize this aspect of evaluation asmuch as they should (Benavides, 1988).

Clearly, much more needs to be doneto train education students to be able towork with diverse cultural and linguisticgroups and many more resources andincentives need to be offered so that goodteachers in the field may update theirskills to be able to work more effectivelywith a changing student population (Gar-cia and Yates, 1986; Fradd, Weismantal,Correa and Algozzine, 1988; & Cloud,1993).

During the third part of the validationstep in the prereferral process an evalu-ation is done to decide whether the stu-dent has indeed been taught but has notmade satisfactory progress. Teacherknowledge of students' previous learningcannot and should not be assumed tooeasily. There are many students to thepublic education system today who haveattended a number of schools in verydifferent districts. It cannot be automat-

44 issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

50

ically inferred by one teacher in oneschool that a particular student has al-ready been exposed to a particular topicof study. The educational history of astudent must be investigated to verifythese assumptions.

One of the most controversial elementsin the validation step of the prereferralprocess is the fourth part which is todetermine whether the teacher has thequalifications and experience to effec-tively teach the student. This is a sensi-tive point because researchers are advo-cating that it is appropriate to questionthe teachers' competence to teach lan-guage minority students. How can ateacher refer a bilingual Hispanic studentto special education if he/she knowsnothing about second language acquisi-tion? Is the teacher knowledgeable ordoes she/he exhibit an interest in thecultures of his/her students and try tostructure the curriculum to make it cul-turally sensitive? Is the teacher aware ofresearch on the cultural biases of teach-ers and how these biases affect studentlearning outcomes? Is the teacher awareof his/her own biases and how they mightnegatively impact the learning of cultur-ally different students?

Unfortunately, negative expectations ofteachers and teachers' biases do play animportant role in many referrals of lan-guage minority students to special educa-tion. This phenomenon, however dis-heartening it may be, must be recognizedand dealt with in teacher educationclasses as well as in in-service and staffdevelopment programs. The fact of thematter is that

...minority children are expected tohave higher incidences of handicapsthan other groups. ... minority chil-dren are judged as less competent thantheir peers. ... teachers tend to referchildren (to special education) whobother them. In some cases, migrantand immigrant children tend to be re-ferred sooner than other children, fre-

quently before they have had the op-portunity to adjust to the new de-mands and expectations of a new sys-tem (Sugai, 1988, pp. 66-67).

As the discussion of teacher compe-tence indicated, the potential for biasdoes exist, but it would be simplistic tosay that teachers are the only ones whomust be aware of this potential. Through-out the validation section of the prerefer-ral process parents, teachers, adminis-trators, psychologists and otherevaluators must be conscious of the factthat there are many possible ways thatbias can enter the referral process inspecial education (Bailey and Harbin,1980).

In order to avoid placing minority lan-guage students in special educationclasses inappropriately Bailey and Har-bin advise that decisions be made inteams and not by particular individuals.In this way various team members canquestion one another. This team mustthen determine what the necessary aca-demic skills are that students must ac-quire and the possible gap between stu-dents' current abilities and what theymust do to close the gap. Lastly, theyassert what a number of other re-searchers have already stated;

...the evaluation process must be con-ducted from an ecological perspective.This means that a child's performancemust be evaluated within the total con-text of the settings in which he or shefunctions. These settings include thehome, school, peer groups, and com-munity, as well as the interrelation-ships existing between them. (Baileyand Harbin, 1980, p. 595).

The validation or verification processwhich is Step 3 in the prereferral processis quite extensive, but if one were to askthe questions that Ortiz and Garcia pro-pose much more information could begained than if one were to simply use astandardized achievement test or intelli-gence test.

Volume 9, No.1, 1994 45

51.

According to Ortiz and Garcia (1988),during Step 4 in the prereferral processthe evaluator(s) would investigatewhether a systematic effort has beenmade to identify the origins of the stu-dent's learning difficulties and whetherinstruction or curriculum have beenchanged in order to improve the learningthat is occurring. The important point inthis step is that the teacher is being chal-lenged to try to see if he/she can do any-thing to improve his/her teaching meth-ods and materials. In Step 5 anevaluation is done to see if the particularstudent in question is still having prob-lems learning in spite of the fact that theteacher has made changes in his/her ped-agogy and instructional materials. If this isindeed the case, and the language minoritystudent is still not learning, teacher andstudent then move to Step 6 which is toinvestigate the appropriateness of pro-gramming alternatives. In the case of theHispanic child or other minority lan-guage learner the most promising op-tions may be ESL classes or bilingualeducation classes. In Step 7 it is deter-mined whether these other programshave been helpful to the student or not.If the student is still not progressing, areferral to special education might be themost appropriate course of action totake. This is Step 8.

At first glance the implementation of aprereferral process may very well seemto be a daunting and time consumingtask for the normal everyday teacher whois already overburdened with too manydemands on his/her time and emotionalenergy. Obviously, participating in a pre-referral process cannot be the responsi-bility of individual teachers. It must besomething that all of the personnel in aschool are committed to. But why shouldschool administrators, teachers, andsupport staff even want to support suchan endeavor?

First, regular education teachers aregiven a level of assistance that enablesthem to keep the student in the main-

stream and to avoid creating a "pull-out" situation. Second, the likelihoodof inappropriate and/or highly segre-gated placements can be reduced.Third, the quality of the educationalprogramming available in the generaleducation setting can be enhanced.Fourth, the focus of educational inter-ventions is retained in the regular edu-cation classroom or setting. Finally,the cooperative relationship betweenregular and special education is rein-forced (Sugai, 1986, p. 70).

School administrators especiallyshould be interested to note that one ofthe most important outcomes of a prop-erly implemented prereferral process isa reduction in financial expenditures(Benavides, 1988).

Metz (1988) summarizes the need forchanges that many special educationpractitioners are beginning to feel.

...there is a growing realization amongbilingual special educators 'that nei-ther the perfect test nor the perfectprocedure(s) can be found. One must,therefore, begin to look at the less tan-gible aspects of decision making toensure quality assessment (pp. 214-215).

Certainly, one of the least tangible butprobably most important aspects of deci-sion making in the special educationalreferral process must include the partici-pation of the parents of potential specialeducation students. As was mentionedbefore, parents are valuable but oftenuntapped mines of information abouttheir children. It is time that special edu-cators elevate the role of the parents inthe evaluation process. The importanceof such a step is discussed in the nextsection of this paper.

The Role of Parental Participation In theBilingual Special Education Evaluation

It was clearly illustrated in the ethno-graphic study of three Mexican American

46 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

52

children referred to special educationpreviously reported on in this paper thatparents had a significant amount ofknowledge about the cognitive abilities oftheir children that clinicians did not haveaccess to. Since it is the law that parentsmust consent to the referral of their chil-dren to special education classes (PL.94-132) it must be asked why Hispanicparents consented to their children's re-ferral to special education when they ob-viously had doubts about the nature andpurpose of the referral.

In a study comparing Hispanic, Black,and Anglo families and their impressionsof their children's special education pro-grams (Lynch and Stein, 1987) it wasreported that "Mexican American fami-lies were satisfied with their children'sspecial education programs, but theywere less knowledgeable and less in-volved in them than parents of Anglo andBlack students receiving special educa-tion services" (p. 109).

From this small bit of isolated informa-tion it could be tempting to infer that theparents of Mexican American childrenare not interested in the education oftheir children but this myth has beendispelled on a number of occasions. Thefact is that not only do Mexican Americanparents want their children to get muchmore education than they themselves re-ceived, but these parents also expecttheir children to postpone marriage andhaving children and wait for full-timeemployment until after they have finishedtheir college education (So, 1986). Ac-cording to Lynch and Stein (1987) theproblem with Mexican American parentsis that they trusted school personnel toomuch to make the correct decisionsabout the most appropriate placementfor their children.

One important factor that Lynch andStein do not mention, yet does figureprominently in the literature, is thatthere is significant historical evidencewhich demonstrates that Mexican Ameri-

can parents often have been discouragedfrom participating directly in the educa-tion of their children by authoritarianteachers or racist school personnel(Acuna, 1988). Lynch and Stein (1987)are absolutely correct when they say that"it is incumbent on the system to findways of encouraging families from thenon dominant culture to participate" (p.110) in the special education of theirchildren. School systems must also beaware , however, of the very negative his-tory between schools and Mexican Ameri-can parents (Acuna, 1988) and realizethat these historical precedents cannotbe overcome without considerable effortand persistence over a significant periodof time.

A recent ethnographic study of 12Puerto Rican families with children inspecial education classes produced simi-lar results to those studies examiningMexican American families. Most PuertoRican parents in the study denied thattheir children were having learning prob-lems because of some internal cognitivedeficiencies. These parents attributedtheir children's difficulties to externalfactors (Harry, 1992).

Most often the Puerto Rican parentsexplained their children's problems asbeing the product of confusion resultingfrom the difficulties in learning English.This would obviously confirm what anumber of bilingual special education re-searchers are discovering. It is difficult todifferentiate between an individual whois going through a normal process oflearning a second language and an indi-vidual who is demonstrating symptomsof a learning disability (Benavides, 1988).And parents, irregardless of their socio-economic status, ethnicity, or first lan-guage have an important contribution tomake when education professionals aredetermining the most appropriate refer-ral for their children (Harry, 1992).

In addition to the positive impact thatparental observations can have on the

Volume 9, No.1, 1994 47

53.

special education diagnosis and referralprocess, Beth Harry (1992) confirmswhat the majority of bilingual specialeducation researche'..+ cited in this paperassert; education professionals must beextremely cautious and conservativewhen it comes to referring language mi-nority learners to special education be-cause the most commonly used evalu-ation instruments and methodologies areextremely suspect. She says that "it istime for us to abandon our reliance on amodel whose main effect is to locate thesource of failure in the child" (p. 36).Harry and many others in this paper arecalling for nothing less than a "paradigmshift from decontextualized, acultural.and asocial interventions, toward condi-tions of high context, both in assessmentand instructional approaches" (Harry1992, p. 37).

ConclusionBecause Hispanic students are over-

represented in special education classesthere is evidence to indicate that the nar-row, decontextualized focus of quantita-tive testing and psychometric measure-ments, which are the foundation of themedical model, are not able to accuratelyand thouroughly describe what is goingon inside minority language learners. Inaddition, the author of this paper be-lieves that the problems that Hispanicstudents have encountered in the specialeducation system are not limited to themalone, but are shared by a large numberof other language minority students aswell, and possibly even those studentswho are English monolingual.

Bilingual special education researcherswithin the past ten years are developingmethodologies such as the prereferralprocess to examine all of those factorsthat are external to the Hispanic studentthat may be preventing the student fromlearning. Given all the information andresearch that is available the critics of themedical model have caused the specialeducation community to question the va-

lidity of referring minority languagelearners to special education classesbased solely on the testing that is cur-rently being done. As the number of His-panics and other language minority stu-dents in the school systems continues toincrease the inadequacies of the currentmedical model paradigm will becomemore evident.

The attacks that have been leveledagainst the medical model used to referstudents to special education classes willcause a number of special educators greatstress. However, a much more holisticparadigm is coming in to focus which ob-ligates special education professionals toview students in their entire context. As theelementary and secondary students in theAmerican public schools represent a muchmore diverse ethnic and racial mix it isimperative that the university students inspecial education teacher preparation pro-grams know something also about bilin-gual education, teaching English as a Sec-ond Language, and/or multiculturaleducation. This is not to suggest that allspecial education programs become bilin-gual special education programs. It is sim-ply suggested that special education pro-fessionals seriously consider and attemptto apply methodologies such as the pre-referral process in order to improve theeducation of all of their students.

It is also recommended that teacher in-service programs for special educators fo-cus much more on the learning problemsof language minority learners than hasbeen the case in the past. The rapidlychanging demographics in the most popu-lous school districts in the United Statesdemands that schools and teacher devel-opment and preparation programs re-spond to the new kinds of students that arein today's classrooms with new modelsand methodologies. The disheartening sta-tistics unquestionably prove that the oldassumptions and models (i.e. the medicalmodel) are not working in today's schoolswith today's students.

48

J4,Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

References

Acuna, R. (1988). Occupied America - A historyof chicanos (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Col-lins Publishers.

Andreasen, N.C. (1984). The Broken Brain. NewYork: Harper & Row Publishers.

Argulewicz, E. N. & Sanchez, D. T. (1983). Thespecial education process as a moderator offalse positives. Exceptional Children, 49(5),452-454.

Bailey Jr., D. B. & Harbin, G. L. (1980). Non-discriminatory evaluation. Exceptiot. :I-dren, 46(8), 590-596.

Benavides, A. (1988). High risk predictors andprereferral screening for language minoritystudents. In A.A. Ortiz & B. Ramirez (Eds.),Schools and the culturally diverse exceptionalstudents: Promising practices and future di-rections (pp. 19-31). Reston Va.: ERIC Clear-inghouse on Handicapped and GiftedChildren.

Chinn, P. C. & Hughes, S. (1987). Repre-sentation of minority students in special edu-cation classes. Remedial and SpecialEducation (RASE), 8(4), 41-46.

Cloud, N. (1993). Language, culture and disabil-ity: Implications for instruction and teacherpreparation. Teacher Education and SpecialEducation, 16(1), 60-72.

Cummins, J. (1986). Psychological assessmentof minority students: Out of context, out offocus, or out of control?. In A. C. Willig & H.F. Greenberg (Eds.), Bilingualism and learn-ing disabilities. Policy and practice for teach-ers and administrators (pp. 3-11). Sedona,Arizona: American Library Publishing Comp.

Dunn, L. M. (1987). Bilingual Hispanic childrenon the U.S. mainland: A review of research onthe cognitive, linguistic, and scholastic devel-opment. Circle Pines, Minn.: American Guid-ance Services.

Ebel, R. L. & Friable, D. A. (1986). Essentialsof educational measurement (4th cd.). Engle-wood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Fernandez, R. R. (1988). Introduction. HispanicJournal Of Behavioral Sciences, 10(3), 179 -

198.

Fields, C. (1988). The Hispanic pipeline -- Nar-row, leaking. and needing repair. Change,20(3), 29-33.

Fradd, S. H., Weismantal, M.J., Correa, V.I.,& Algozzine, B. (1988). Developing a person-nel training model for meeting the needs ofhandicapped and at-risk language minoritystudents. Teacher Education and Special Edu-cation, 11(1), 30-38.

Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L. S. (1989). Effects ofexaminer familiarity on Black, Caucasian,and Hispanic children: A meta-analysis. Ex-ceptional Children, 55(4), 303-308.

Garcia, S. B. & Yates, J. R. (1986). Policy issuesassociated with serving bilingual exceptionalchildren. In A.C. Willig & H.F. Greenberg(Eds.), Bilingualism and learning disabili-ties: Policy and practice for teachers and ad-ministrators (pp. 113-134). Sedona, Arizona:American Library Publishing Company.

Harry, B. (1992). Making sense of disability:Low income, Puerto Rican parents' theoriesof the problem. Exceptional Children, 59(1),27 - 40.

Kayser, H. (1987). A study of three MexicanAmerican children labeled language disor-dered. National Association of Bilingual Edu-cation Journal, 12(1), 1-2.

Lynch, E. W. & Stein, R.C. (1987). Parent par-ticipation by ethnicity: A comparison of His-panic, Black, and Anglo families. ExceptionalChildren, 54(2), 105 - 111.

Metz, I. B. (1988). The relative importance oflanguage and culture in making assessmentdecisions about Hispanic students referred tospecial education. National Association of Bi-lingual Education Journal, 12(3), 191-218.

Ortiz, A. A. & Garcia, S. B. (1988). A prereferralprocess for preventing inappropriate referralsof Hispanic students to special education. InA. A. Ortiz & B. Ramirez (Eds.), Schools andthe culturally diverse exceptional students:Promising practices and future directions(pp. 6-18). Reston, Va.: ERIC Clearinghouseon Handicapped and Gifted Children.

Ortiz, A. A. & Yates, J. R. (1983). Incidenceamong Hispanic exceptionals: Implicationsfor manpower planning. Journal of the Na-tional Association for Bilingual Education,7(3), 41-53.

Ruiz, N. T., Figueroa, R. A., Rueda, R. S., &Beaumont, C. (1992). History and status ofbilingual special education for Hispanic

Volume 9, No.1, 199449

handicapped students. In R. V. Padilla & A.

H Benavides (Eds.), Critical perspectives onbilingual education research. Tempe, Ari-zona: Bilingual Press/Editorial Bilingue.

So, A. Y. (1986). The barrio schools. EducationalResearch Quarterly, 10(4), 10-17.

Sugai, G. (1988). Educational assessment of theculturally diverse and behavior disorderedstudent: An examination of critical effect. InA.A. Ortiz & B. Ramirez (Eds.), Schools and

Author:

Paul C. Kavanaugh, Ph.D. StudentEducational Administration Department,College of Education,University of Texas at Austin,Austin, Texas

the culturally diverse exceptional students:Promising practices and future directions(pp. 63-75). Reston, Va.: ERIC Clearinghouseon Handicapped and Gifted Children.

Valencia, R. R. & Aburto, S. (1991). The usesand abuses of educational testing: Chicanos asa case in point. In R.R. Valencia (Ed.), Chi-cano School Failure and Success (pp. 203-251). New York: The Falmer Press.

50 6 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 51-60©1994 AHVA Publisher

Integration PLUS: A Community BasedSocial Learning Program for Youth with

Mental Retardation and Physical Aggression

Patrick J. Schloss, Sandra Alper, Charles Green

Abstract: This paper describes a supported living program for youths with mental retardationand challenging behaviors such as physical aggression. The program provides short-term(i.e., 3-6 months) community-based services with an emphasis on self-management trainingused to develop independent living and social skills. The development of structured environ-ments in the community that reduce disruptive social behaviors and promote self-control isstressed.

Introduction

Serving individuals with dual diagno-ses of mental retardation and mental ill-ness has long been an either/or situation.Many programs are designed to focus ononly one of these disabilities. As a result,many individuals with mental retarda-tion and challenging behaviors such asphysical aggression have been placed inrestrictive, segregated, residential treat-ment programs.

Landesman-Dwyer (1981) conductedan extensive review of the literature oncommunity living and deinstitutionaliza-tion. The most consistently reportedfinding in the literature she reviewed wasthat antisocial aggressive tendenciesoften lead to return to the institution.

Scanlon, Arick and Krug (1982) re-ported four areas of maladaptive behav-ior that distinguished persons with se-vere disabilities who were institutionalizedfrom those with severe disabilities whowere placed in the community. These ar-

eas were aggression, destruction of ob-jects, temper tantrums, and impulsivebehaviors. The same authors maintainedthat the success of community place-ments woald be enhanced by reducing oreliminating these behaviors.

Molony and Taplin (1988) pointed outthat the majority of successful programsfor management of challenging behaviorsreported in the literature are based ininstitutional settings. The same authorsnoted the relatively low number of theseprograms implemented in the commu-nity. They contended that implementingstructured programs in community set-tings should increase the number of per-sons with aggressive behaviors who canlive in the community.

Galligan (1990) described a center-based program specifically designed toserve individuals with mental retardationand mental illness. Fifty-eight adults par-ticipated in the program. They ranged inage from 18 to 71 years of age. Thirty-sixpercent had mild retardation: 27%, mod-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 57 51

erate; 27%, severe; and 10% of theseindividuals had profound mental retar-dation. Their psychiatric diagnoses in-cluded psychotic conditions, personalitydisorders, conduct disturbances andschizophrenia.

Galligan reported significant gains infunctional skills and significant de-creases in the frequency of problem be-haviors after one year in the program.She noted, however, that while these in-dividuals showed a great potential tomove to less restrictive settings in thecommunity, lack of residential and com-munity supports served as obstacles totheir further growth.

This paper describes an integrated so-cial learning residential program for chil-dren and youths with the dual diagnosesof mental retardation and mental illness.This program has been designed specifi-cally for individuals ranging in age from8 to 21 years. These youths have mild tomoderate levels of mental retardation. Inaddition, they have psychiatric diagnosesincluding conduct disorders, psychoticdisorders, and personality disorders. Allhave histories of physical aggression andinstitutionalization.

The Integration PLUS program empha-sizes the development of structured envi-ronments that reduce disruptive socialbehaviors and promote self-control. Spe-cific components of the program include:(a) a Self-Management Log that combinesthe use of a self-managed reinforcementsystem, contingency contracting, and an-tecedent control; (b) the 10 R aggressionmanagement system that includes resti-tution, positive practice, self-control, re-laxation training, social skill training,and inclusionary time-out; (c) curricu-lum strategies that include developmentof adaptive social behaviors, personalcare, money management, communityaccess, recreation skills, vocationaltraining and meal management; (d) fad-ing procedures that ensure that at anygiven time, youths are exposed to the

minimum amount of structure necessaryto maintain success; and finally, (e) moni-toring procedures used to make programdecisions. Each of these elements will bedescribed separately.

Self-Management Log

The Self-Management Log (see Figure1) is a focal point of the Integration PLUSprogram. It is the tool with which allelements of the residential program arebound together. The Self-ManagementLog is used both as a planning instru-ment that ensures that all goals are givenappropriate attention, and an implemen-tation instrument that is carried by theyouth throughout the day. The Self-Man-agement Log includes the following ele-ments.

Schedule periods. The residents andstaff record time periods in which dailyliving and educational activities occur.Schedule periods are sufficiently short toreflect the attention span and capabilitiesof individual residents. Highly dis-tractible residents (more severely dis-abled or less mature) are likely to havebrief schedule periods (e.g., 15 to 30minutes). Older and more focused learn-ers may have more ambitious scheduleperiods (e.g., 40 to 55 minutes).

Scheduled breaks for reinforce-ment. Thirty minute break periods arescheduled at two hour intervals. As willbe discussed later, breaks are earnedwhen residents complete assignments,remain in their assigned areas, and re-frain from exhibiting disruptive social be-haviors. Residents who fail to earnbreaks may be requested to "catch up" onassignments not completed duringscheduled periods, complete enrichmentactivities, or remain idle.

Goal areas corresponding with ha-bilitation goals. Goal areas (e.g., do-mestic care, social skill development,math, English, reading) are entered in the

52 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

58

DATE

NAME

TOTAL %

Figure 1. Self-Management Log

qo NC=noncompliance

qo VA=verbal aggression

qo PA=physical aggression

A=assault

AA=assigned area

PR=pers. responsibility

PERIOD ASSIGNMENT NC NA PA A AA PR

1 5 10 10 60 5 5

2 5

5

10

10

10

10

60

60

5

S

5

53

4 5 10 10 60 5 5

5 5 10 10 60 5 5

6 5 10 10 60 5 5

7 5 10 10 60 5 I 5

8 5 10 10 60 5 5

9 5 10 10 60 5 5

10 5 10 10 60 5 5

11 5

5

10

10

10

10

60

60

5

5

5

512

13 5 10 10 60 5 5

14 5

5

10

10

10

10

60

60

5

5

5

515

16 5 10 10 60 5 5

17 5 10 10 60 5 5

18 10 10 60 5 5

19 10 10 60 5 5

20 5 10 10 60 5 5

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

59 53

second column of th .; Self-ManagementLog. This is accomplished initially by thestaff establishing non-negotiable activi-ties and/or times. For example, personalcare may be scheduled from 7:00 to 7:30so that the resident has time to eat break-fast (7:30 to 8:00) and walk to school(8:00 to 8:30). Similarly, a resident maybe required to schedule two periods ofhome work. In this case the youth maychoose the time of day for homeworkactivities.

Residents may schedule remaininggoal areas (e.g., leisure activities) follow-ing consultation with the staff. Staff mayassist the resident in developing the mostenjoyable and productive schedule. Forexample, the staff may point out that goalareas involving sedentary activities thatrequire concentration and attention totask (e.g., writing to parents, meal plan-ning. etc.) are best scheduled early in theday. More active goal areas (e.g.. recrea-tion, shopping, etc.) are best scheduledlater in the day. Residents are also en-couraged to alternate pleasant and un-pleasant activities.

Assignments. Staff members recordspecific products that are expected toresult from the resident's participation inscheduled activities (e.g., wash dishes,complete math homework, clean bath-room, etc.). As will be discussed later,materials to complete these assignmentsare placed in a discrete area so that resi-dents can begin the activity with minimalassistance. Staff members also stipulateadditional pleasant activities available toresidents when assigned activities arecompleted prior to the end of a period.These generally include leisure activitiessuch as watching television, playing videogames, and bike riding.

Response Cost Areas. Behaviors thatresult in the loss of points used to earnbreak periods are identified near the up-per right-hand corner of the Self-Manage-ment Log. Response cost areas are stipu-lated in the habilitation goals for each

resident. Most often goals and corre-sponding response cost areas include thereduction of noncompliance, verbal ag-gression (e.g., yelling, cursing, insultinganother), physical aggression toward anobject, and assault directed at anotherindividual. Depending on the social char-acteristics of a resident, they may alsoinclude ,the reduction of stereotypic be-haviors, self-abusive behaviors, and us-ing others: possessions. The staff avoidindicating more than four reduction tar-gets at any one time.

Award area. Behaviors that result inthe acquisition of points used to earnbreak periods are identified in the upperright-hand corner of the Self-Manage-ment Log. Award areas correspond witheducation and habilitation goals that in-dicate the development of positive socialbehaviors. For a majority of residents inthe Integration PLUS program, the awardareas include assigned area and workcompletion. Alternative award areassuch as specific social skills are usedwhen indicated by the resident's habilita-tion plans. From two to five accelerativegoals are typically identified in theyouths' Self-Management Logs.

Point values. A handbook containingdockage and award areas. as well aspoint total required to enter break, isavailable to staff members and residents.An individualized economy is developedfor each resident. The economy balancesawards with dockages. Point totals re-quired to enter break reflect the qualityof prosocial behavior expected of resi-dents. In the most common case, workcompletion and remaining in assignedareas results in five points each for theperiod. If verbal aggression or physicalaggression occurs in the period, theyouth loses 10 points each. Noncompli-ance results in the loss of five points eachperiod. Assault results in the loss of 60points.

Residents possessing any number ofpositive points are eligible to enter break.

54Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

60

Extra points may be used to purchaseadditional privileges during break (e.g.,five points for each play of an electronicgame, 10 points for five minutes of ping-pong, 5 to 20 points for nutritionalsnacks). Under this economy, a youthmay receive all work and assigned areapoints for the four periods preceding thefirst break (i.e., 40 total points). If assaultoccurs any time during the five periods,the resident loses break privileges (40points for assigned area and work com-pletion minus 60 points for physical ag-gression). A resident may gain 10 pointsin a period for assignment completionand remaining in the assigned area.These points may be offset by a 10 pointdockage for verbal aggression or objectaggression.

Positive points cannot be carrie 1 overfrom one break period to the next. Thisis to avoid youths saving up sufficientpoints to earn a break even though theyrecently engaged in extremely disruptivebehavior. Similarly, negative points can-not be carried over. This is to avoidyouths losing so many points prior to onebreak period that there is no possibilityfor the youth to earn a subsequent breaklater in the day.

All dockage points in a category (e.g.,10 points, for verbal aggression) are takenfor any occurrence of the behavior untilthe next period. This provision reducesthe likelihood that a single chain of dis-ruptive behavior (excluding assault) inone period will result in the loss of incen-tive to regain control for the next period.

Finally, the only provision for regaininglost points results from residents earningprestated work and assigned area points.In some cases, a dockage may be so se-vere (e.g., assault, or verbal aggressioncoupled with noncompliance and objectaggression) that the remaining work andassigned area points are not sufficient toproduce break. In this case, the youthmust wait until the periods preceding thenext break to begin work toward break.

This provision avoids situations in whicha chain of disruptive and positive behav-ior is reinforced. For example, in thechain aggression - point dockage - apol-ogy and restitution - reinstatement ofpoints - the reinstatement of points maynot only reinforce apology and restitu-tion, but also the initial aggressive behav-ior.

All staff consistently implement Self-Management Log procedures. In addi-tion, all youths admitted to the programreceive a handbook describing the Self-Management Log and other social devel-opment procedures. A substantialamount of time is spent teaching theyouths these procedures. Specific imple-mentation rules are emphasized.

First, youths are told that they mayengage in scheduled assignments, pleas-ant activities resulting from the earlycompletion of scheduled assignments, ornothing. If room care is assigned and notcompleted, the youths are not permittedto engage in any other activity.

Second, scheduled periods are not al-tered once negotiated and agreed upon bythe youth and staff. Youths are taught thatmath occurs at a predetermined time andthat only the program director canchange the schedule. It is hoped that thisprovision will result in residents habitu-ally complying with their schedule. It alsoreduces the likelihood that residents willmanipulate the schedule using disruptivebehavior (e.g., engage in disruptive be-havior to avoid unpleasant activities).

Third, materials corresponding withSelf-Management Log assignments are lo-cated in a predetermined location of theresidence. Youths are taught to habituallyenter each new period by identifying theassignment, obtaining the necessary ma-terials, and beginning work. This provi-sion reduces transition time from oneactivity to another. It also reduces disrup-tions typically associated with unstruc-tured transition time.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 61 55

Fourth, residents are taught that warn-ings are not given prior to awarding ordocking points. The only exception is fornoncompliance which is defined as thefailure of a youth to comply with generalinstructions following one request.Points are docked immediately followingthe occurrence of the dockage behavior.To ensure that youths can accurately an-ticipate the consequences of any behav-ior, staff agree at least 80% of the time onwhat constitutes dockage and award be-haviors. This requires substantial dis-cussion between all staff regarding spe-cific award/dockage behaviors and theirdefinitions.

As an informal test of the staff's con-sistency in enforcing dockage and awardrules, two members of the instructionalstaff periodically score the youths' Self-Management Logs independentlythrough an entire day. At the end of theday, the number of agreements forawards and dockages is divided by thenumber of agreements PLUS disagree-ments. The resulting coefficient is ex-pected to be above 80% for each awardand dockage area. If it is not, the staffmembers discuss responses that createdconfusion and redefine the dockage oraward area (if necessary) to reduce futureconfusion.

Break Activities

Break activities are used to develop anunvarying relationship between positivebehavior and positive consequences. Atsuch time that residents no longer re-quire this structure, entry to break activi-ties becomes automatic, as in a typicalhome. Removal of "earned" breaks oc-curs as a result of the level system that isdescribed later.

Residents earning breaks may havefree time, participate in the anticipatedbreak activity, or buy special privilegeswith extra points. Youths not earningbreaks continue to do school or rest-

dence assignments. Unfinished workfrom the preceding periods and enrich-ment work are completed by youths notearning break.

Aggression Management Strategy

The Prosocial Response FormationTechnique described by Schloss (1984)is used as a back-up procedure for ensur-ing that youths do not use disruptivebehaviors to gain satisfying conse-quences or avoid unpleasant conse-quences. Further, the technique ensuresthat residents make restitution for physi-cal or emotional damage that resultsfrom their disruptive behavior. Also, itrequires that residents identify and prac-tice alternative prosocial responses thatmay replace the disruptive. behavior.

Following any aggressive action, thefollowing procedures are carried out bythe attending staff member.

1. Response cost. The ,resident willdock points from the Self-ManagementLog.

2. Relax. Aggressive reactions are typi-cally associated with heightened negativeemotionality. Negative emotional behav-ior is further heightened by the responsecost. Reducing negative emotional behav-ior will increase the likelihood that thechild or youth will benefit from sub-sequent socially enhancing activities.Therefore, the second step is to removethe youth from all sources of reinforce-ment until he or she is relaxed. The youthis required to enter a non-exclusionarytime-out area visible to other studentsand program staff until he or she is re-laxed for three minutes. Relaxed is de-fined as talking in a normal conversa-tional tone, keeping body parts still,breathing deeply through the nose, main-taining normal facial tone and expres-sion. Until the criteria for relaxation areachieved, all social interaction and otherpotentially reinforcing events are with-drawn from the youth. Once the criteria

56 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

62

are achieved, the youth may progress tothe next step.

3. Rectify. The resident is instructedto correct any physical or emotional dam-age caused by the aggressive behavior.Any reoccurrence of negative emotionalbehaviors at this time or later in theprocess automatically results in a returnto the relax condition.

4. Recognize. The resident will iden-tify the discrete and observable eventsthat led to the aggression. He or she isalso asked to identify alternative positivebehaviors that may have been used in thesituation. For example, a youth may indi-cate that he or she was verbally aggres-sive as the result of another youth callinghim or her names. He or she may alsoindicate that it would have been better toignore the youth or to ask the staff forassistance in resolving the problem.

5. Rehearse. Once the provokingevents and alternative prosocial behav-iors are identified, the resident will re-hearse the provoking situation using thealternative prosocial behavior.

6. Reinforce. The youth is thenpraised for engaging in the alternativepositive behavior.

7. Reflect. The resident is asked tocompare the consequences of two ways ofdealing with provoking stimuli. (a) He orshe will indicate the number of pointslost through inappropriate behavior. (b)He or she will indicate the associated lossof privileges and the required restitutionactivities. (c) For the alternative prosocialbehavior, the resident will indicate thatthere were no comparable negative con-sequences. (d) The resident will identifyfavorable consequences that follow theappropriate behavior.

8. Re-enter. The resident re-entershis/her daily schedule printed on the Self-Management Log at the most unpleasantactivity missed during the aggressive epi-sode. The schedule may subsequently bereadjusted to make up for the time spent

engaging in the preceding process. Read-justments typically take the form of elimi-nating the most pleasant activitiesmissed. This is to reduce the likelihoodthat residents engage in disruptive be-haviors to avoid unpleasant scheduledactivities.

9. Record. A narrative of each aggres-sive reaction is kept for each youth. Thenarrative includes a detailed descriptionof antecedents and consequences of eachresponse.

10. Repeat. This procedure is usedevery time an aggressive reaction occurs.It is carried out by any staff memberworking directly with the resident whenhe or she becomes disruptive. This isexpected to teach residents that all adultsare equally demanding of socially en-hancing behavior.

Relaxation Training

A large proportion of residents servedin restrictive seitings exhibit deficienciesin establishing or maintaining emotionalcontrol. Aggression and other nonadap-tive reactions often result from this lackof emotional control. Therefore, Integra-tion PLUS includes procedures designedto enhance emotional control. Progres-sive muscle relaxation exercises de-scribed by Bernstein and Borkovek(1973) are scheduled three days eachweek on each youth's Self-ManagementLog. Skills acquired during relaxationtraining are prompted daily as a preven-tive measure. In addition, relaxation re-sponses are prompted following aggres-sive reactions. This is expected to assistresidents in regaining emotional control.Specific relaxation skills include breath-ing deeply through the nose, talking in anormal conversational tone, keepinghands and body parts motionless, andmaintaining a normal facial expression.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 57

63

Social Skill Instruction

Many program residents do not pos-sess interpersonal skills expected in thecommunity. Specific deficits often in-clude appropriate responses to criticism,asking others to behave differently, com-plimenting others, greeting others, andnegotiating rather than fighting. A newsocial skill becomes the focus of instruc-tion in the residence as previous objec-tives are mastered. The first two weeks,for example, focus on appropriate waysto ask staff members for assistance. Thenext two weeks focus on reactions tocriticism.

Direct instruction in social skills isscheduled periodically on eac:i youth'sSelf-Management Log. Beyond this, per-sonnel continually strive to identify andpraise youths using target social skillsduring the day. As with relaxation skills,social skills are promoted as part of thepreceding aggression management proc-ess. Specific social skills are often indi-cated as the alternative prosocial behav-ior that is expected to replace aggressivereactions.

Fading Procedures

Extraordinary scheduling, instruction.and motivational procedures included inthe Self-Management Log and the prosocialresponse formation technique are fadedonce the youth demonstrates the ability LL,benefit from more traditional residentialconditions. The fading procedures are ex-pected to increase the likelihood thatyouths will make an effective transitionfrom the Integration PLUS program tonontherapeutic residential settings. Theprogram, therefore, includes levels ofstructure beginning with the most restric-tive and ending with the least restrictive.Youths enter the Integration PLUS pro-gram at a more restrictive level of struc-ture. Once youths meet predetermined be-havioral criteria, they progress to a lessrestrictive level. Specific levels include:

Level One - Standard Program.Level One involves the use of all programprocedures described in this paper.These include the full Self-ManagementLog, the prosocial response formationtechnique, social skills training, relaxa-tion training, and so on. Youths enter theprogram at Level One acid move to LevelTwo depending on their behavior.

Level Two - Unrestricted Residen-tial Program. Level Two involves thesame program procedures as Level Oneexcept that the response cost and awardareas are removed from the Self-Manage-ment Log. Also, breaks and privileges aregiven automatically. Residents in LevelTwo may plan trips to community recrea-tion and consumer settings. However,they must be "shadowed" (i.e., remainwithin visual contact of a supervisingstaff member). Youths enter Level Two byachieving 80% of their points in Level Onefor three consecutive weeks.

Level Three - UnrestrictedCommunity Access. Level Three in-cludes all of the elements of Level Two. Inaddition, residents may plan and carryout independent trips to the community.They may also remain in the home with-out supervision. Youths are eligible forentry to Level Three when they have hadno occurrences of unassigned area, non-compliance. verbal aggression, physicalaggression, or assault and have com-pleted over 80% of their assignments fortwo consecutive weeks.

Room Restriction

Youths remain in their bedroom imme-diately following incidents of assault. Thedoor to the room is left open and a staffmember is stationed in the room. Allprogram procedures are in effect exceptthat regardless of points earned for aperiod, the youth is not eligible for breakactivities. Also, social interactions arelimited to direct instruction by the staff.The youth must earn all assigned area

58 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

64

points and 80% of work points and notlose any noncompliance or aggressionpoints for the four hour shift followingthe incident to return to the general pro-gram.

Long-Term Incentives

As discussed previously, youths begineach period following break with 0points. Prior to each break, youths canhave up to 50 points, depending on theirbehavior. Point dockages and awards arenever carried over. Beyond these short-term incentives, we would like youths toeventually work toward long-term goals(e.g., grades every nine weeks). There-fore, percentages of points earned eachweek are computed. Youths earning over80% of available points gain a specialweekly privilege (e.g., Friday party, a spe-cial movie, a field trip).

Monitoring System

The daily percentage of points earnedfor assigned area and work and points lostfor each of the dockage areas are recordedon separate graphs for each youth in theprogram. As was discussed previously,these data are used to determine if a youthis ready to be advanced to a less restrictivelevel of the program.

This record also assists the staff in iden-tifying youths who are not responding tothe general program. When a youth's dataindicate that one or more of the targetbehaviors is not being changed in a positivedirection, the staff's first approach is todevelop an individualized managementprogram. Depending on the staff's impres-sion of why the youth is not progressing,the individualized program may includemore frequent break periods and morefrequent but shorter work periods, the useof primary reinforcement rather than sec-ondary reinforcement (i.e., points), modi-fications in scheduled activities, use ofmore severe consequences, and so on.

Summary

It has long been common practice toserve people with the dual diagnoses ofmental retardation and mental illness insegregated, institutionalized settings.While it is desirable to provide a fullcontinuum of placement options. ena-bling people to live in the least restrictiveand most normal setting is of highestpriority. Integration PLUS, the integratedsocial learning program described in thispaper, provides the supports necessaryto allow people who are physically aggres-sive to live in the community.

The major features of IntegrationPLUS have been described. First, the pro-gram is systematic and data-based. Thetool that allows for all of the programelements to be monitored is the Self-Man-agement Log. It is an instrument used inboth planning and implementation of theday's objectives. The Self-ManagementLog breaks up the resident's day intoshort, clearly defined periods of activity.The log also provides for reinforcingbreaks when the resident completes hisor her scheduled assignments. Some ofthe assignments are non-negotiable, suchas personal care, meals, or homework.These assignments most often corre-spond with goals stated in the resident'shabilitation plan. The remainder of theday's assignments may be chosen by theresident with minimal staff direction.Planning one's day in an appropriatefashion could be one of the goals includedin habilitation plans.

Second, the program is consistent.Managing aggressive behavior in commu-nity settings is best accomplishedthrough consistency. Residents shouldnever be allowed to gain satisfying conse-quences by displaying disruptive behav-iors. The Prosocial Response FormationTechnique used in this program ensuresthat disruptive behavior produces nopositive consequences and instead, leadsto making restitution for inappropriateactions. The technique also requires the

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

6559

identification and practice of alternativeprosocial responses to replace the dis-ruptive behavior. In addition, this tech-nique provides a consistent set of proce-dures for staff to follow after everyoct, arrence of disruptive behavior.

Third, the program includes relaxa-tion training. Maintaining emotional con-trol is a skill that is not in the repertoireof most people who are dually diagnosed.This loss of control is usually followed bya display of antisocial, sometimes aggres-sive and/or assaultive behavior. The Inte-gration PLUS program includes proce-dures to teach residents relaxation skillsthrough progressive muscle relaxation.

Fourth, Integration PLUS emphasizessocial skills training. Social skills deficitsmay be the foremost barrier to servingpeople in community-based facilities.Many times, occurrences of antisocial be-havior begin with a display of inadequatesocial skills. Direct instruction in socialskills is periodically included on a resi-dent's Self-Management Log. Skills aretaught in their natural settings and arecontinually promoted by staff.

Finally, as with all successful teachingmethods, structure is removed as thelearner demonstrates he or she no longerneeds it. The Integration PLUS programuses a level system beginning with themost restricted, level one, to the leastrestrictive, level three. Upon meeting be-havioral criteria, residents proceed to aprogressively less structured daily rou-tine. These levels of structure, and thecriteria for achieving them, are clearlydefined for the residents upon enteringthe program.

This program has been implementedsuccessfully across several settings. Itcan be used in schools, group homes,supported employment sites, and sup-ported living arrangements. The pro-gram is easily adaptable to the specificneeds of consumers and service provid-ers in any community. Keys to successfulimplementation include appropriate andcontinuous staff training, clear presenta-tion of procedures, goals, and objectivesto residents, and most importantly, care-ful and ongoing monitoring to ensureconsistency.

References

Bernstein, D. A., & Borkovek, T. D. (1973).Progressive relation training: A manual forthe helping professions. Champaign, IL: Re-search Press.

Galligan, B. (1990). Serving people who are du-ally diagnosed: A program evaluation. MentalRetardation, 28 (6), 353-358.

Landesman-Dwyer, S. (1981). Living in thecommunity. American Journal of Mental De-ficiency, 86, 223-234.

Molony, H. & Taplin, J. (1988). Deinstitution-alization of people with developmental dis-

Authors:

Patrick J. SchlossAssistant Vice President forGraduate Studies and ResearchBloomsburg UniversityBloomsburg, Pennsylvania

ability. Australia and New Zealand Journal ofDevelopmental Disabilities, 14, 109-122.

Scanlon, C. A., Arick, J. R., & Krug, D. A.(1982). A matched sample investigation ofnon-adaptive behavior of severely handi-capped adults across four living situations.American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86,526-532.

Schloss, P. J. (1984). Social development ofhandicapped children and youth. Rockville,MD: Aspen.

Sandra AlperProfessor and HeadDepartment of Special EducationUniversity of Northern IowaCedar Falls, Iowa

Charles GreenDoctoral StudentUniversity of Missouri-ColumbiaColumbia, Missouri

6066.

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

=0,

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 61-67®1994 AHVA Publisher

Striving for Development: An Overviewof Special Education in Mexico

Pedro Sfinchez-Escobedo

Abstract: This article attempts to provide the reader with a general idea of the state ofpastand current special education practices and trends in Mexico. Historical milestones, theperception and meaning ofdisability in Mexico, the incidence and nature ofdisabilities andthe principles and policies guiding ofspecial zducation practices are also briefly exposed anddiscussed. The current status of special education and rehabilitation practices in Mexico iscritically examined in an attempt to identify future trends and directions in this area.

Background

The origins of special education serv-ices in Mexico can be traced to the liberalgovernment of Benito Juarez in 1867. Atthat time, the Mexican educational sys-tem was declared officially as non-relig-ious in nature and compulsory for chil-dren under the age of 12. The first schoolfor the deaf was founded and three yearslater the National School for the Blindopened its doors.

Despite these early attempts to provideeducation for children with disabilities,special education services did not flour-ish until the early 60's, when the federalgovernment under the pressure of therecently approved educational reformlaws was forced to create the GeneralDirection of Special Education, an agencyhaving responsibility for development ofpolicy and resources to educate childrenwith special education needs.

This agency's first action was the es-tablishment of special education depart-ments in each of the 31 federal statesacross the country. These departmentscoordinate service delivery to childrenwith disabilities in accordance with fed-

eral and state policies. Their regionalautonomy facilitates decision-makingprocesses that take into account ethnic,social and cultural differences, as well asthe special conditions prevalent in thediverse regions of Mexico.

Mexico is a developing country ofroughly 2,000,000 kilometers and ap-proximately 90 million people, mostlyRoman Catholic. The average age is 16years old, and 40% of the population livein rural areas. The official language isSpanish. Mexican society is composed ofa multi-ethnic, Mestizo population. Sixtypercent of the adult population is dedi-cated to labor or agriculture.

Although the state allocates almost athird of its annual budget to education,the educational system presents manylimitations considering that nearly 24million Mexicans (1 out of 3.5) attend theschool system.

Services

The special education system has es-tablished special schools to meet a vari-ety of problems. For example, there are

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 61

67'

several special centers for perceptiveproblems (visual, auditory), psychomo-tor limitations, and schools for childrenwith mental retardation and cerebralpalsy.

Emphasis has been given in the lastfour years to the development of mul-tidisciplinary centers for screening, diag-nosis and referral of children who areidentified as having learning difficulties.Resource - rooms that function in theregular schools at various times havebeen strongly supported recently.

In addition to the basic services men-tioned above, early stimulation centershave been created in a multidisciplinarybasis with the purpose of providing earlyphysical, psychological and medical at-tention to newborn or young children,usually with congenital disabilities, aswell as orientation and support for theirparents.

Resource rooms are special situationsintegrated within the schools that focuson the support of children with learningdisabilities (68% of all children consid-ered with a disability). There are alsotraining facilities for older children, pro-tected industries and a few residentialfacilities, since the extended family struc-ture tends to embrace children with dis-abilities within the family (Sanchez,1992). Some private institutions or char-

ity driven residencies provide services tochildren with special needs, howeverthese centers attend to a relatively smallnumber of disabled adults and children(less than 1% of all students with disabili-ties).

Unfortunately, many children with spe-cial education requirements remain un-diagnosed in the primary school system,a fact that is believed to significantly ac-count for the outrageous 45% overalldrop out rate reported for the primaryschool level in 1990.

Table 1 summarizes the number ofcenters and the students attending thespecial education system in 1991.

In this table, it can be observed that thenumber of students registered in specialeducation services is very small consid-ering the number of children in theschool system in Mexico. Also, that thefederal government is responsible for ad-ministering about 87% of all services,and the few private facilities available. Asexpected the majority of these childrenare considered to present a learning dis-ability. For these children, speciallytrained staff (speech therapist, academicsupport and additional classes) are cur-rently available in one third of the pri-mary schools. Regarding other disabili-ties, it can be noted that almost 17% ofall children with disabilities receive serv-

Table 1. Special education in Mexico (1992)

SERVICES Federal State Private TOTALS

Early stimulation 35 2 12 49

Special schools 556 95 36 687

Fesource rooms 547 20 567

7.)sico-educational centers 438 67 9 514

Training centers 76 6 1 83

Diagnostic centers 36 4 1 41

TOTALS 1688 194 41 1941

62 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

66

Students

Area Federal State Private TOTALS

Mental retardation 29159 2696 580 32435

Auditory 5939 685 80 6704

Psychomotor 1552 167 218 1937

Visual 598 148 142 888

Behavior 1498 654 40 2192

Learning 118763 11610 461 130834

Language 8910 1152 84 10146

Others 5432 846 5 6283

TOTALS 171851 17958 1610 191419

ices designed for mental retardation.

Perception and meaning of disability

Some characteristics about the mean-ing and perception of disability Mexicocan be drawn from the works of Ameri-can researchers with Mexican familiesliving in the US, mostly in the borderarea, as well as from the few publishedworks by Mexican researchers in thisfield.

Smart and Smart (1991) studied Mexi-can families who emigrated to the US andsuggested four distinguishing featuresthat influence Mexicans' perception ofdisability: 1) a cohesive and protectivefamily; 2) stoic attitudes toward life ingeneral; 3) well defined sextr1 roles and4) a prevalence of religious attitudes.However, the literature regarding theMexican's perception of disability pro-duced outside of Mexico has failed todifferentiate personality from ideologicalfactors that characterize the individual'sbehavior towards the family. For exam-ple, Ramirez and Castaeda (1974) sug-gested that the Mexican adult's sensitivityto others and the desire for a collectiveharmony depend on specific psychologi-cal traits such as higher levels of field

dependence and lower levels of internallocus of control. However, Holloway, Gor-man & Fuller, (1987) did not confirmtheir hypothesized relation betweenhigher levels of efficacy and external at-tribution. Hence, cooperative behavior infamily members may be attributed toideological (values) factors, rather thanto personality traits. In this respect,Marin and Triandis (1985) supported thenotion that in Latin-American countriesthere is a trend toward a collectivism thatemphasizes values and goals of membersof the group as opposed to other devel-oped societies which are more :diocentricor oriented toward individualistic values.Holloway et al. (1987) suggested that inMexican families, the development of co-operative skills and sensitivity were moreimportant than independence and asser-tiveness.

Several other idiosyncratic attitudes inthe Mexican population need to be ac-knowledged as important in influencingattitudes toward disabilities. For exam-ple, Holtzman, Diaz-Guerrero &Schwartz (1975) characterized the atti-tudes of Mexicans as fatalistic, whileSmart and Smart (1991) described theattitudes of Mexican-Americans as stoic.In general, Mexican attitudes toward dis-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 6963

ability have been characterized as fatalis-tic, due to the belief in this populationthat what happens is predetermined, amatter of one's destiny, and must be ac-cepted (Holtzman, et al. 1975; Harward,1969).

Sanchez (1992) found that in ruralareas, Mexicans show magical attribu-tion to some disabilities, specificallymental retardation is seen as a conse-quence of God's will or alcohol abuse orcontraceptive practices; and Harper andSanchez (1993) found that children'sperceptions of peers with disability wasrelated to both gender and the socioeco-nomic status of the child. For example,Mexican children from low SES pre-ferred obese children over children fromhigher status and girls accepted moreobese children than boys.

Also important is the attitude of Mexi-cans and other Hispanics toward agen-cies and institutions. Fbr example, Cor-rea and Weismantel (1991) characterizedMexican-American attitudes toward spe-cial education as "...secondary to the fam-ily's hope of a cure for the disabled child"(p. 88). In Mexico, there is generally littlereliance on institutionalized services andmore dependence on the extended familyas means of social support (Rivera,1983). Shapiro & Tittle (1990), in theirstudy of Mexican families with childrenwith disabilities, warned that familymembers even take pride in their resis-tance to seek help from outsiders.

Regional cultural factors need to bealso considered in understanding Mexi-cans' perception of disability. For in-stance, Sanchez & Cantn (1993) identi-fied children with notable physicaldifferences attending the schools in thestate of Yucatan, and discovered a veryhigh incidence of" isual problems, amongthem strabismus, a condition well ac-cepted in the area, since for the Mayan,the ethnic group in this region, this wasa sign of beauty.

Despite these efforts to describe the

meaning of disability in Mexico, there isa lack of sufficient information to drawreliable conclusions regarding the atti-tudes of Mexicans toward disability. Thisis a complex phenomenon and researchhas yielded rather scattered findings andfailed to consider the wide diversity of theMexican population.

Principles and policies

Special education practices in Mexicoare better understood if one bears inmind the pedagogic and educationalguidelines underlying Mexican specialeducational policies.

The federal government has allocatedresources and promoted the consolida-tion of an institutional network of specialeducation in Mexico based on the generaleducational guidelines established by thethird article of the constitutional Act of1917: Education provided through stateinstitutions should strive to harmoni-cally develop all faculties of the humanbeing. In addition, educational practicesought to foster love and respect for thefatherland and the awareness of the needfor international consolidation with inde-pendence and justice (p. 21; GeneralBoard of Special Education (DGEE),1981).

The ministry of education, through theBoard of Special Education, has statedthe goals to be pursued in special educa-tion programs in Mexico as follows:

To enable the individual with specialneeds to fulfill himself as an autono-mous person facilitating his integrationand participation in his social milieu,so he can enjoy a fulfilling life.

To act in a preventive fashion in thecommunity, promoting the maximumlevel of psycho educational develop-ment of the individual since his gesta-tion and throughout his life.

To implement additional programs todevelop or compensate the handicaps

64 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

70

or limitations that affect the individual.

To elaborate curricula that promotepersonal independence, communica-tion, socialization and the ability towork and enjoy leisure time.

To promote the acceptance of personswith special education the require-ments of maintaining the principles ofnormalization and integration.

Special education guidelines in Mexicoare framed within a humanistic view ofeducational and psychological attentionand they account for the legal frameworkthat has required the special educationsystem to develop wide reaching pro-grams for students with disabilities. Le-gal precepts included in various codesand regulations prescribe general educa-tional guidelines, but the country stilllacks specific legislation for persons withdisabilities such as the Americans withDisabilities Act, in the US.

The three pillars of policy - making inspecial education in Mexico are: individu-alization, normalization, and integration.

Individualization refers to the idea thata particular psycho pedagogical profileshould be developed for each pupil withspecial needs. Such a profile must servea baseline of action, providing specificcriteria for the child's development. Normalization refers to the promotion of thechild's behavior within normal limits asfar as possible. Integration refers to thetendency to incorporate students withmild disabilities into regular schools ac-cording to the following hierarchicalmodel:

a) attention within the classroom withthe aid of a special education teacher thatacts as a supporting staff of the teacherand provides special strategies or addi-tional techniques for the child;

b) attention in the regular classroomwith additional assistance in an extraclass;

c) formation of special groups within

the regular school under the responsibil-ity of a special education teacher. Integra-tion is a concept similar to the term'mainstreaming' recently in vogue in theUS to connote the inclusion of childrenwith disabilities in the regular class.

Severely handicapped cases or thosewith multiple disabilities, as well as chil-dren with mental retardation, are re-ferred to special programs, residentialfacilities or hospitals. Thus, special edu-cation services are classified as comple-mentary with respect to stimulation andsupport programs and essential in rela-tion to special schools for severely dis-abled children.

Rehabilitation

There is still the extended belief inMexico that medical rehabilitation equalssocial and psychological adjustment.However, groups of professionals haverecently begun promoting a change offocus toward rehabilitation practices,emphasizing the value of prevention andearly stimulation and attempting toequate the importance of psychologicaland social adjustment to that of medicalrehabilitation. Generally speaking, thereare centers specializing in the treatmentof persons with perceptive problems, mo-tor limitations, physical rehabilitation,and mental retardation. But, outside themedical staff, there is a lack of well pre-pared professionals. The number of so-cial workers, psychologists, and educa-tors specifically trained to deal withpeople with disabilities is scarce. Fur-thermore, there is not a recognized pro-fession such as counseling, as exists inthe US and some European countries.

The National Health system providesspecial attention to persons suffering dis-abling diseases or accidents and incorpo-rates nearly 45 million Mexicans. Its pro-grams include medical rehabilitation, jobrelated accident insurance and otherbenefits. Unfortunately, the belief that

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

71.65

physical restoration equals psychologicalwelfare and social adjustment still pre-vails. Psychological assessment, counsel-ing and placement do not exist as alter-natives for intervention. In general, inMexico it is less costly for the State toassign a meager pension rather than fi-nance a full rehabilitation placement pro-gram for the individual.

Current developments

Since the early 80's multidisciplinarycenters for the diagnosis and attention ofdisabilities were opened across the coun-try. These centers are gradually extend-ing over the vast territory and are reach-ing rural and small communities. Forexample, in the Yucatan in the last 4years, five new centers have been openedbringing the total to 8, in eight differentregions of the state.

These centers have broadened theirrange of services to include newborn in-fants, preschool children and adults be-yond school age range. For example, earlystimulation centers, protected industriesand employment training centers areopening throughout the country. Morerecently, programs in the federal specialeducation system have been developedfocusing on gifted children. This is abreakthrough since this fact is a recogni-tion that special education servicesshould not only serve the disabled. Thisis an important event in overcoming thedeficiency model prevalent in specialeducation in Mexico.

Unfortunately, there are still manylimitations and restrictions in the specialeducation and rehabilitation practices inMexico. There are no reliable statisticsabout the number, location and types ofdisabilities also there is little research onspecial education issues and problemsand there is a troubling lack of highlyqualified professionals working in thisarea. In addition, beyond medical resto-ration, there is little concern for the per-

son's social and psychological well-being.

The special education system has suf-fered the same lack of budget and moti-vation, as has the rest of the educationalsystem due to both the level of economicdevelopment of the country and the mag-nitude of the educational system. Simi-larly, rehabilitation practices have failedto incorporate other disciplines in themanagement of persons suffering a dis-ability.

The future

The perspective of a free trade agree-ment in North America must have animpact on both special education andrehabilitation practices. Intense eco-nomic exchange will convey a trans-mission of values that are expected toprovide greater awareness of competi-tion at all levels. This event will requiremodernization and implementation ofcurrent educational practices in Mex-ico, including special educationalpractices due to the importance of pro-viding individual support for thosewith special education needs. Simi-larly, there is a hope for increasedawareness of the rights and contribu-tions of persons with disabilities whenMexicans observe the efforts of theAmerican people to facilitate access tomedia, public transportation and edu-cation.

Caution however should be exer-cised in order to carry out only thosechanges that fit the needs and the na-ture of the Mexican population andthat fully consider the professionaland institutional infrastructure avail-able, as well as the value system andresources of the Mexican society. Thereis a need to preserve the extended fam-ily structure, which provides an excel-lent support network for the individualand diminishes the need for institu-tional services. Attention should bepaid to cooperative attitudes charac-

66 72 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

teristic of the Mexican society that facili-tate the acceptance of persons with dis-abilities.

Moving towards the twenty first cen-tury, a second important trend is theincorporation of technology into specialeducation and rehabilitation practices tocreate better systems for screening, diag-nosis and reference and higher stand-ards of preparation for professionals inall areas of the special education servicenetwork.

Finally, an effort should be made inorder to prepare professionals able toresolve the many problems existing inrehabilitation and special education set-tings. More scientific research ought to bedeveloped in order to develop a reliabledescription of the needs and opportuni-ties for people with disabilities that fosterawareness on the rights and opportuni-ties given to the student with specialneeds.

References

Correa, V.I. & Weissmantel, J. (1991). Mul-ticultural issues related to families with anexceptional child. In. M.J. Fine (Ed.). Col-laboration with parents of exceptional chil-dren. (pp. 83-102) Brandon, VT: ClinicalPsychology Publishing Co.

Direccion General de Educacin Especial(1981). Educacin Especial. Boletin de la Se-cretara de Educaci6n Publica.

Harward, N. (1969). Socioeconomic and othervariables related to the rehabilitation ofMexican-Americans in Arizona. Final Report:Temple, Arizona State University.

Holloway, S.D., Gorman, K.S., & Fuller, B.(1987). Child rearing attribution and efficacyamong Mexican mothers and teachers. Jour-nal of Social Psychology, 127(5), 499-510.

Holtzman, W.H., Diaz-Guerrero, R., &Schwartz, J.D. (1975). Personality develop-ment in two cultures: Cross-cultural and lon-gitudinal study of school children in Mexicoand the United States. Austin, TX: Universityof Texas Press.

Marin, G. & Triandis, H.C. (1985). Allocen-trism as an important characteristic of the be-havior of Latin-American Hispanics. In. R.Diaz-Guerrero (Ed.), Cross-cultural national

Author:

studies in social psychology (pp. 85-104).North-Holland, VB: Elsevies Science publish-ers.

Ramirez, M. & Castaileda, A. (1974). Culturaldemocracy, bicognitive development, andeducation. New York: Academic press.

Sanchez, P. (1992). Caractersticas de familiascon nios con retraso mental en Yucatan. Re-vista de la Universidad Autnoma de Yucatan.185; 27-32.

Sanchez, P. & Canton, B. (1992). Caracteristicasde nios con discapacidad fisica en el sistemade educacin primaria regular de Yucatan. Re-vista de la Universidad Autnoma de Yucatan,186, 25 -31.

Sanchez, P. & Harper, D.C. (1993). ChildrenSocial preference for peers with physical dif-ferences. Unpublished research. UADY - TheUniversity of Iowa.

Shapiro, J., & Tittle, K. (1990). Maternal adap-tation to child disability in Hispanic popula-tion. Family Relations, 39, 179-185.

Smart, J.F., & Smart, D.W. (1991). Acceptanceof disability and the Mexican American cul-ture. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin,34(4), 357-367.

Pedro Sinchez-Escobedo, MD. PhD.College of Education, Autonomous University of Yucatan

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 67

7.3

Institute on Disabilites/UAPTemple University

People FirstA Guide To Communication About Disabilities

Sticks and StonesCan Break My BonesBut Names Can Really Hurt Me

Language is powerful! It reflects, reinforces, and shapes our perceptions of people. Words Michreflect positive attitudes and awareness help develop positive communications.

Words about disability have been strongly affected by legal medical, and political terms.

Consequently, our daily language is filled with technical terms Mich often do not convey our in-tended social message.

The suggestions found below are provided to improve language usage. Most suggestions arejust common sense, but others are a matter of becoming aware of appropriate, current terminol-ogy.

Using the right words can make a dramatic difference!

Inaccurate Terms and ExpressionsThese words and expressions have strongnegative, derogatory connotations. Avoid us-ing them and discourage use by others:

confined to is-NfieelCheir:crazy; iriearte

rippte, trip.ile nd dumla

iemod

desdefective or d

'invalid::'niter& :

*pat tic, epaZvkeelchair-bound

victim

Preferred Terms and ExpressionsThese mrds and expressions are preferredand reflect a positive attitude toward peoplewith disabilities.

blind, deafdevelopmentally disabled

hearing or or vision impairedemotionally disabled

person with mental retardationmobility impaired/physically disabled

nondisabledparalysed, paralysis

persons with cerebral palsypersons with disabilities

wheelchair

Incorporate these words into our language in a way that expresses the dignity of the person.

Prepared by The Institute on DisabilitiesPennsylvania's University Affiliated Program, Temple University, Philadelphia

PA 19122(215) 204-1356 (voice or TTD). (215) 204-6336 (fax)

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitatinn. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 69-781994 AHVA Publisher

Promoting Postsecondary Education forHigh School-Aged Youth with Disabilities:Influencing Teacher Attitudes, Developing

Teacher KnowledgeRobert J. Miller, Stephanie Corbey, Ramona L. Springis Doss

Abstract: Youth with disabilities are enrolling in postsecondary educatii.;: at rates much lowerthan their nondisabled peers. To address this issue a one day conference was designed aroundthe central themes of student empowerment and information dissemination. Results of thefindings of these conference questionnaires are reported and ramifications of these findingsare discussed.

Introduction

In a study of 8000 students with dis-abilities, Wagner (1989) reported fewerthan 15 percent of school exiters whowere out of school for more than one yearwere reported by their parents to haveparticipated in postsecondary education.This compares to a participation rate ofbetween 50 and 56 percent for studentswithout disabilities. Young adults withdisabilities are significantly underrepre-sented in postsecondary education andthese figures may well contribute to thepoor after high school quality of life forstudents with disabilities. This is of someconcern since postsecondary educationis related to opportunity. For example,significant relationships have been foundbetween level of educational attainment,occupational status, and employment ofan individual (Biller, 1987: Jencks,Crouse, & Muesser, 1983).

Why do so few persons with disabilitieschoose to participate in postsecondaryeducation? In a review of career develop-

ment literature and research regardingpersons with learning disabilities, Biller(1985) found adolescents with learningdisabilities to be less career mature.These adolescents were also found toexhibit an external locus of control, ex-hibit low self esteem, be poor planners,have difficulty in obtaining information,be weak in career decidedness and havea poor reality orientation. These charac-teristics may impact the students abilityto participate in postsecondary educa-tion as well as their capacity to plan fortheir participation in postsecondary edu-cation.

Consistent with these findings, Miller,Corbey, and Asher (1994) suggested sev-eral possible explanations which maylimit students with disabilities consid-eration of participation in postsecondaryeducation. First, students with disabili-ties may have a lack of knowledge regard-ing postsecondary education programsand opportunities. Second, students maynot have a knowledge of possible aca-demic accommodations available in post-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 69

secondary education. Third, studentsmay lack practice in using the kinds ofaccommodations available in postsecon-dary education while in high school.Fourth, students may not have the skillsto request the accommodations theyneed to be successful in postsecondaryeducation. Fifth, students may take a cur-riculum track in high school that doesnot prepare them for attendance at differ-ent types of postsecondary education in-stitutions. Ness (1989) also suggestedthat many students with disabilities mayassume that they are not capable of con-tinuing their education beyond highschool.

To address these issues, special educa-tion teachers must have the knowledgeand skills to address curriculum needsof students who desire to attend postsec-ondary education. These curriculumneeds may include: (a) teaching studentsto discuss their own educationalstrengths and limitations, (b) teachingstudents their rights and responsibilitiesunder the law in a postsecondary educa-tion setting, (c) teaching students to prac-tice the use of educational accommoda-tion strategies during high school toprepare for their use in the postsecon-dary environment. In addition, it is im-perative that special education teachersbelieve in their students' capacity to par-ticipate and be successful in postsecon-dary education. Harris, Rosenthal, andSnodgrass (1986) suggested that mostresearchers now acknowledge that teach-ers' expectations for their students' per-formance can influence the students'subsequent academic performance. In areview of the literature on self-fulfillingprophecy, Brophy (1983) stated theexistence of a teacher expectation for aparticular student's performance willmove in the direction expected, and notin the opposite direction" (p. 633). Bro-phy continues by suggesting that the ef-fects of teacher expectations are incre-mental and may only account for 5-10percent of the difference in student per-

formance. However, this is does not implythat the topic is unimportant. "Even a 5percent difference in educational out-comes is an important difference, themore so as it is compounded acrossschool years" (p. 635). We, as re-searchers, would hypothesize thatteacher expectancy (for students with dis-abilities to attend postsecondary educa-tion) is a concern potentially exacerbatedby disability label and impaired aca-demic ability. For example, Jenks et al.(1979) found adolescents with greateracademic ability are selectively encour-aged to have higher aspirations and toattend school longer. If this is true, thenstudents with less, or impaired academicability may be selectively discouraged toattend school longer. The purpose of thisstudy was to measure the effects of par-ticipation in a state-wide conference re-garding young adults with disabilities inpostsecondary education on the educa-tional personnel accompanying studentparticipants. What changes in knowledgeand attitudes occurred in special educa-tion teachers and support staff as a resultof participation in a conference where thefocus was the empowerment of highschool students with disabilities to par-ticipate in postsecondary education?

The Rocketing Into the Future con-ference was a statewide conference de-signed as a tool to begin to address theissue of participation of students withdisabilities in higher education. It washeld on the Mankato State Universitycampus in Mankato, Minnesota duringthe spring of 1993 and was sponsored bythe university and the Minnesota Depart-ment of Education, Interagency Office onTransition. The conference was designedto bring together: (a) students with dis-abilities who had been successful in post-secondary education; (b) representativesof Minnesota Private Colleges, the Univer-sity of Minnesota, Community Colleges,the State Universities of Minnesota, andTechnical Colleges; and, (c) secondary-age students with disabilities who wanted

70

76Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

to find out more about their participationin postsecondary education. The confer-ence goals included: (a) enabling and em-powering students to plan to participatein postsecondary education: (b) engagingstudents in frank discussions of theskills they would need to be successful inpostsecondary education; and, c) provid-ing information regarding postsecondaryeducation supports and options.

The conference was divided into fourmajor components including a keynotespeaker, break out sessions facilitated bycollege-aged students with disabilities,lunch and tours of the university campusfor conference participants, and breakout sessions with representatives of vari-ous postsecondary education institu-tions including sessions for educatorsconcerning the development of effectivetransition plans. The keynote speakerwas a person with a disability who fo-cused on issues of self-determinationand strategies to successfully addressone's own disability.

The second component of the confer-ence consisted of six break-out sessionsfacilitated by college-age students withdisabilities. These young men andwomen provided examples of studentswith disabilities successfully participat-ing in postsecondary education. Theyalso provided role models for secondarystudents to envision themselves in post-secondary education. Group discussionsby these presenters focused on three keyissues of self-determination, empower-ment and information dissemination: (a)How do you get admitted to and stay inthe college of your choice? (b) What skillsdo you really need to get in high school tosucceed in postsecondary education?and, (c) What kinds of supports and chal-lenges should students with disabilitiesexpect at college? The six student speak-ers represented a broad array of physicaldisabilities and learning disabilities.They also represented participation atfour-year colleges and universities, com-munity colleges, and technical colleges.

Each of these six presenters was paid anhonorarium to present at the conference.

The third component of the day waslunch and tours of the university cam-pus. Time was provided for conferenceparticipants to explore the campus andinteract with college-age students duringan unstructured lunch time. The StudentCouncil for Exceptional Children (ch.580), an organization of college studentstraining to become teachers of studentswith disabilities, provided tours of thecampus and were available to accompanyhigh school students to lunch and answerquestions regarding university life.

During the final component of the day,conference participants had the opportu-nity to attend three different 45 minutediscussions regarding the type of educa-tional institutions in which they weremost interested. They also could chooseto examine community resources (e. g.Social Security, Rehabilitation Services)which could provide the supports neededto participate in postsecondary educa-tion. Educators were offered the oppor-tunity to attend an additional session ondevelopment of transition plans as a por-tion of the Individual Education Plan(IEP).

As a part of the information sent toschools prior to the conference, educa-tors were asked to encourage their stu-dent participants to bring specific ques-tions to ask postsecondary educationpersonnel regarding their institutionsand support services for persons withdisabilities. The conference program alsoincluded sample questions to ask post-secondary providers such as: (a) Whatkinds of courses does this system offer?(b) What support services can you expecton campus? (c) How do you apply toparticipate? and (d) Who do you seeabout your disability to get the servicesyou deserve?

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 71

77

Method

ProceduresTwo thousand copies of the registra-

tion brochure discussing the conferencewere sent to secondary special educators,transition specialists and directors ofspecial education throughout the state ofMinnesota. Conference registration waslimited to the first 150 student partici-pants plus their teachers and other sup-port staff. Participation from each highschool was limited to a maximum of 10students plus accompanying educatorsto insure an opportunity for attendancefrom students representing many differ-ent communities. Pre and post confer-ence questionnaires were developed andadministered to secondary students par-ticipating in the conference. In addition,a conference questionnaire was devel-oped and administered to educators ac-companying student participants. Thepurpose of the educator questionnairewas to explore: (a) the attitudes of educa-tors regarding participation of their stu-dents with disabilities in postsecondaryeducation; (b) the knowledge of accom-modation strategies to assist students toprepare for participation in postsecon-dary education; and, (c) the knowledge ofeducators regarding support servicesavailable for students with disabilities inpostsecondary education.

The instrument was divided into threesections. Section one included ten state-ments of empowerment regarding the at-titudes and knowledge of educators toprepare students with disabilities forpostsecondary education. Educatorswere asked to read each of the ten state-ments and circle the response that bestrepresented their feelings regarding thestatement. Educators were provided aLikert type scale from 1 strongly disagree(with the statement), 2 disagree, 3 neu-tral, 4 agree, and 5 strongly agree (withthe statement). Section two asked partici-pating educators to identify the currentspecial education licensure area in which

they were teaching. The final section ofthe questionnaire asked participatingeducators to complete two open endedstatements regarding what they likedabout the conference format and sugges-tions for improving the conference.

Participants

One hundred fifty six students and 44teachers and support personnel attendedthe conference. Of these 44 educator par-ticipants, 31 (70.45%) returned the con-ference questionnaire. Of the 31 educa-tors returning the conferencequestionnaire, 26 (83.9%) were secon-dary special education classroom teach-ers, 3 (9.7%) were work experience coor-dinators, 1 (3.2%) was a schoolcounselor, and 1 (3.2%) was employed inthe capacity of paraprofessional. Theseeducators represented 26 rural and ur-ban high schools from throughout Min-nesota. Educators and students from 12(46.2%) of the schools represented at theconference were from communities ofless than 2,500 population.

Limitations

Three limitations must be addressedwhen considering this study. First, thisstudy was based on a single day confer-ence. While the results suggest positivechanges in knowledge and attitudes ofeducators regarding participation oftheir students with disabilities in post-secondary education, the longer term ef-fects of conference participation are un-known. Second, the survey instrumentused is not an assessment tool but ratherit is an evaluation tool to measure theeffects of the one day conference. No in-formation regarding the reliability or va-lidity of the survey instrument is avail-able. However, the instrument wouldappear to have good face validity in thatit addresses many of the underlying as-sumptions and concerns suggested bytheorist and researchers regardingpreparation of students in issues of self-

72

78Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

determination (e.g. Martin, Oliphint, &Weisenstein, 1994; Miller et al., 1994;Valenti, 1989) and of participation inpostsecondary education (e. g. Aune &Ness, 1991; Miller, Snider, & Rzonca,1990; Dalke & Schmidt, 1987). Third,due to limited sample size and to theexploratory nature of the conference, thedecision was made to present the datadescriptively.

Results

Table 1 presents the educator re-sponses to the ten statements of empow-erment related to success in postsecon-dary education. For each statement,educators were asked to circle the num-ber on a five point Likert type scale thatbest represented their feelings toward thestatement from 1 = strongly disagree to5 = strongly agree. Each educator couldalso choose to circlit "NA' if they believedthe statement did not apply to their edu-cational situation. (See p. 74)

Statements one and two in Table 1 areaffirmative statements relating to the at-titudes of educators regarding the par-ticipation of their students with disabili-ties in postsecondary education.Statement one asked educators if theirstudents could be successful in postsec-ondary education. Prior to the conferenceeight (25.8%) educators strongly agreedthat their students could be successful inpostsecondary education and trainingprograms. After the conference, 15(48.4%) educators, nearly twice the num-ber, strongly agreed with this attitudinalstatement. The importance of includingtransition related goals for students re-garding postsecondary education andtraining as a part of the Individual Edu-cation Plan was addressed in statementtwo. Prior to the conference, 19 161.3%)of educators strongly agreed with thisstatement regarding the importance ofinclusion of goals for participation inpostsecondary education in the IEP. Fol-lowing the conference, 26 (83.9%)

strongly agreed with this attitudinalstatement.

Statements three and four in Table 1are statements regarding the educator'sknowledge of skills that their studentswould need in order to reach postsecon-dary education and training goals (state-ment three), and the educator's knowl-edge of support services available inpostsecondary education and trainingprograms for students with disabilities(statement four). Prior to the one dayconference, six of the 31 (19.4%) educa-tors strongly agreed that they had knowl-edge of the skills needed by their studentsto attain their postsecondary educationgoals. Following the conference, 14(45.2%) educators, more than twice asmany, strongly agreed with this attitudi-nal statement regarding their level ofknowledge. Prior to the conference, eightof 31 (25.8%) educators strongly agreedthat they were aware of support servicesavailable for students with disabilities inpostsecondary settings.. Following theconference, 19 (62.3%) strongly agreedwith this statement.

Statement five in Table 1 was an af-firmative statement regarding the impor-tance of teaching students to advocate forsupports and accommodations that theywould need to be successful in postsec-ondary education. Prior to the confer-ence, 15 (48.4%) educators stronglyagreed with the importance of this state-ment. Following the one day conference,26 (83.9%) educators strongly agreedwith the importance of this statement.

Statement six in Table 1 asked educa-tors whether having a disability wouldinhibit their students from reaching theirpostsecondary goals. Prior to the confer-ence, six (19.4%) educators responded tothis statement with a neutral rating of 3on the Likert scale. Following the one dayconference, the number of educators thatrated this statement as neutral was re-duced to two (6.5%) educators. The num-ber of educators strongly agreeing that

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 73

79

1

112*IMCMIlmiNe.O.,

Table 1. Educator responses to statements of empowerment related to success inpostsecondary education

My students can be successful in postsecondary education and training programs

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

2 It is important that my students have postsecondary education and training goals ontheir Individual Education Plans

1 8 14 8

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 25.8 45.2 25.8

2 14 15

NA 1 2 3 4 5

6.5 45.2 48.4

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

3 I know what skills my students need in order to reach their postsecondary educationand training goals

1 11 19

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 35.5 61.3

2 3 26

NA 1 2 3 4 5

6.5 9.7 83.9

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

4 I know what support services are available in postsecondary education and trainingfor students with disabilities

1 1 8 1 6

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 3.2 25.8 48.4 19.4

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 51.6 45.2

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

1 1 9 12 8

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 3.2 29 38.7 25.8

12 19

NA 1 2 3 4 5

38.7 613

(Bible 1 continues)

74 issues in Special Education & RehabilitationG

(table 1 continued)

5 It is important that I teach my students how to advocate for the supports andaccommodations that they need to be successful in postsecondary education

6

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

Having a disability will inhibit my students from reaching their postsecondary goals

1 4 11 15

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 12.9 35.5 48.4

1 4 26

NA 1 2 3 4 5

3.2 12.9 83.9

Prior to the workshop

percentage

After the workshop

percentage

7 I am more likely to collaborate with other professionals (school guidance counselors,division of Rehabilitation Counselors, postsecondary support service providers) toplan for and prepare my students for postsecondary education based on myparticipation in this conference

2 4 10 6 8 1

NA 1 2 3 4 5

6.5 12.9 32.3 19.4 25.8 3.2

3 7 7 2 9 3

NA 1 2 3 4 5

9.7 22.6 22.6 6.5 29.0 9.7

8

3 4 8

NA 1 2 3 4

Percentage 9.7 12.9 25.8

My students benefited from this conference

1 2 10

NA 1 2 3 4

Percentage 3.2 6.5 32.3

9 Parcipation in this conference has increased the likelihood that my students willattend postsecondary education

Percentage

1

NA

3.2

1 2

5

3

16.1

18

4

58.1

10 I learned new skills that will help me prepare my students for postsecondaryeducation at this conference

NA 1

1

2

3.2

3

3

9.7

19

4

61.3

16

5

51.6

18

5

58.0

7

5

22.6

8

5

25.8

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 75

their students' disabilities would inhibittheir capacity to attain their postsecon-dary goals increase from one (3.5%) edu-cator to three (9.7%) educators. Thenumber of educators that strongly dis-agreed with this statement that disabilitywould inhibit their students from attain-ing their postsecondary education goalsalso increased from four (12.9%) educa-tors to seven (22.6%) educators.

As a result of participation in the con-ference, 24 of 31 (77.4%) educatorsagreed or strongly agreed that they weremore likely to collaborate with other pro-fessionals to plan for and prepare theirstudents for postsecondary education(statement seven). Twenty-eight of 31(90.3%) educators agreed or stronglyagreed that their students benefited thor-ough participation in this conference(statement eight). Twenty-five of 31(80.6%) participating educators agreedor strongly agreed that their studentswere more likely to participate in post-secondary education as a result of havingparticipated in the conference (statementnine). Finally, 27 of 31 (87.1%) partici-pating educators agreed or stronglyagreed that they learned new skills thatwould help them prepare students forpostsecondary education thorough par-ticipation in the conference (statementten).

Discussion

After participating in the conference,educators perceptions regarding the par-ticipation of their students in postsecon-dary education changed incrementally.We believe these incremental changes tobe of much importance in the educationand training of students with disabilities.Students with disabilities need specialeducation teachers who truly believe thatdisability label and impaired academicability does not necessarily eliminatethem from participation in postsecon-dary education. Students with disabili-ties need teachers who are committed to

providing a vision of the future that in-cludes the opportunity to participate inpostsecondary education as an impor-tant option in transition planning. Forthis vision to occur, educators must havethe knowledge, attitudes, and skills toprepare students starting early in thepublic school experience.

After participation in the RocketingInto the Future conference, educatorswere more likely to perceive their stu-dents as capable of being successful inpostsecondary education and training.Educators were more likely to perceivethe importance of including postsecon-dary education as a portion of a student'sIEP. Educators increased in their knowl-edge of the skills students will need to besuccessful in postsecondary education.Educators became more aware of thesupport services available to students inpostsecondary education settings. Edu-cators increased in their likelihood towork collaboratively with other profes-sionals to prepare students for postsec-ondary education settings. Thesechanges are informational (familiaritywith accommodation strategies), and at-titudinal (the perception that their stu-dents can be successful in postsecondaryeducation settings).

One of the interesting findings of theeducator questionnaire was the reduc-tion in ambiguity of educators regardingthe potential participation of their stu-dents in postsecondary education. As aresult of their participation in the confer-ence, educators were less likely to beneutral (3) when asked if the disability oftheir students would inhibit them fromattending postsecondary education. Afterattending the conference, some educa-tors perceived the disability of their stu-dents would be more of an inhibitor, oth-ers perceived the disability to be less ofan inhibitor. Both sets of educators couldmost assuredly be correct. The accuracyof information regarding a specific stu-dent's strengths and limitations mustmatch the requirements of specific post-

76 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

82

secondary educational institutions.Therefore, realistic appraisals of one'sself and the requirements of the institu-tion are needed. Accurate information isempowering in decision making for stu-dents and educators. It is imperativewhen deciding the course curricula to beco .npleted in high school for future par-ticipation in postsecondary educationsettings. This conference provided bothstudent participants and educators a re-alistic view of the opportunities and chal-lenges of attending college. Participationin education after high school is challeng-ing for all youth, and perhaps even morechallenging for students with disabilities(Miller et al.. 1994).

Too few students with disabilities com-plete high school and attend postsecon-dary education. This conference formatcombined disability, success, empower-

ment, and information dissemination ascomponents to assist students to learn toadvocate for themselves in preparationfor participation in postsecondary educa-tion. A second goal of the conference wasto assist educators to learn the knowl-edge and develop the attitudes to assiststudents in attaining their postsecondaryeducation goals. Mankato State Univer-sity and the Minnesota Department ofEducation, Interagency Office on Transi-tion are working collaboratively to ex-pand this conference into a yearly en-deavor. It is our hope to assist studentswith disabilities and educators to betteraddress planning for near and distantfutures. For many more students withdisabilities, we hope this planning willinclude involvement in postsecondaryeducation.

References

Aune, B., & Ness, J. E. (1991). Tools for transi-tion. Circle Pines, MN: American GudianceServices.

Biller, E. F. (1987). Career decision making foradolescents and young adults with learningdisabilities: Theory, research and practice.Springfield, II: Charles C. Thomas.

Biller, E. F. (1985). Understanding and guidingthe career development of adolescents andyoung adults with learning disabilities.Springfield, II: Charles C. Thomas.

Brophy, J. E. (1983). Research of the self-fulfill-ing prophecy and teacher expectations. Jour-nal of Educational Research, 75(5), 631-661.

Dalke, C., & Schmidt, S. (1987). Meeting theneeds of the college-bound students withlearning disabilities. Journal of Learning Dis-abilities, 20(3), 176-180.

Harris, M. J., Rosenthal, R., & Snodgrass, S.E. (1986). The effects of teacher expectations,gender. and behavior on pupil academic per-formance and self-concept. Journal of Educa-tional Research, 79(3), 173-179.

Jencks, C., Bartlett, S., Corcoran, M., Crouse,J., Eaglesfield, D., Jackso.i, G., McClel-land, K., Muesser, P., Olneck, M.,Schwartz, J., Ward, S., & Williams, J.

(1979). Who gets ahead? The determinants ofeconomic success in America. New York: Ba-sic Books.

Jencks, C., Crouse, J., & Muesser, P. (1983).The Wisconsin model of status attainment: Anational replication with improved measuresof ability and aspiration. Sociology of Educa-tion, 56, 3-19.

Martin, J. E., Oliphint, J. H., & Weisenstien,G. R. (1994). ChoiceMaker: Transitioningself-determined youth. Rural Special Educa-tion Quarterly, 13(1), 16-23.

Miller, R. J., Corbey, S., & Asher, G. (1994).Promoting postsecondary education for highschool-aged youth with disabilities: A modelof empowerment. Rural Special EducationQuarterly, 13(1), 57-63.

Miller, R. J., Snider, B., & Rzonca, C. (1990).Variables rcla:ed to the decision of youngadults with learning disabilities to participatein postsecondary education. Journal of Learn-ing Disabilities, 23, 349-354.

Ness, J. E. (1989). The high jump: Transitionissues of learning disabled students and theirparents. Academic Therapy, 25(1), 33-40.

Valenti, R. A. (1989). Developing self-advocacy:A pracitcal guide and workbook for preparing

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 77

83

the high school tearing disabilied student forpostsecondary school success. Columbia,MO: Hawthoren Educaitonal Serivices.

Wagner, M. (1989, March). The transition expe-riences of youth with disabilities: A report

from the national longitudinal transitionalstudy. Paper presented at the meeting of theCouncil for Exceptional Children annualmeetings, San Francisco, Ca.

Authors:

Robert J. MillerAssociate Professor, Special Education and RehabilitationMankato State University

Stephanie CorbeyTransition Specialist and Director of the InteragencyOffice of Transition ServicesMinnesota Department of Education

Ramona L. Springis DossMankato State University

78811

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 79-870 1994 AHVA Publisher

Characteristics of Services Provided byTwo-Year Colleges That Serve Students with

Learning or Cognitive Disabilities inHighly Effective Ways

John Gugerty

Rationale for Serving Individuals WithDisabilities in Two-Year Colleges

A frequent, though most often un-stated. question on the part of many col-lege faculty, administrators, and govern-ing board members is "why should wemake a special effort to serve individualswith learning disabilities or persons withcognitive disabilities in the regular main-stream college environment?" The mostappropriate response to this question istwofold. The first is to remind educatorsthat individuals with learning or cogni-tive disabilities:

have real disabilities, even though inmany instances they are not obviousnor visible;

can succeed in their programs ofchoice, given hard work on their partand specialized instructional supportand other assistance from staff; and

with appropriate, timely, and suffi-ciently intense support, will becomeproductive, tax-paying members of thework force.

The second element of this response is

to advocate the importance of three im-peratives supporting the need and desir-ability of this effort. These imperativesare a) moral, b) legal, and c) fiscal. Interms of the moral imperative, each indi-vidual has the moral right to receive anequitable and realistic opportunity tolearn skills needed to become occupa-tionally proficient and thus economicallyself sufficient. Mission statements andvision statements supporting this rightare not sufficient. They must be embod-ied in policies, procedures, and staffingpatterns that support the implementa-tion of that aspect of the school's mission.

The legal imperative stems from fed-eral and state affirmative action/nondis-crimination statutes such as section 504of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 asamended, the Americans With Disabili-ties Act, and applicable state and federalcourt decisions. These mandate not onlyphysical accessibility to programs andservices offered by or through a school,but also equitable instructional accessi-bility.

The fiscal imperative flows from thetruism that, as adults, individuals will

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

8579

either support themselves financially, orbe supported by others. The extremelyhigh unemployment and underemploy-ment rates of individuals with disabilities(Louis Harris and Associates, 1994)would seem to indicate that many of theseindividuals require the support of othersin order to assume fully the adult rolesdeemed desirable by the dominantAmerican culture. In addition, system-atic transition services that facilitate en-rollment, and effective academic and per-sonal support after enrollment, enhanceboth enrollment and completion rates ofindividuals with disabilities. In addition,structured assistance to obtain employ-ment or enroll in higher education aftercompleting a program enhances the like-lihood that post-enrollment follow-upstudies will generate positive outcomesfor both the school and the programs thatindividuals with disabilities completed.Positive enrollment, retention, comple-tion, and post program success data gen-erate additional Full Time Equivalent(FTE) enrollment numbers for the collegeand provide evidence of the program'squality, thus enhancing its survival,growth, and development.

To meet the learning needs of studentswith learning or cognitive disabilities,and thus address these three impera-tives, educators need a) a knowledge ofeffective ways to serve individuals withlearning or other disabilities in post sec-ondary environments; b) familiarity withlegislative and judicial rulings applicableto educating individuals with disabilitiesin post secondary settings; and c) the willto act on that knowledge by initiating,sustaining, and improving programs andservices that make post secondary edu-cation truly accessible to students withdisabilities.

In an effort to supply a portion of therequisite knowledge, staff at the Centeron Education and Work (CEW) appliedfor and received fun,:".og for three yearsfrom the U.S. Department of Education,Office of Special Education and Rehabil.

tative Services, to find, analyze, select,describe and disseminate informationabout exemplary approaches used bytwo-year colleges to serve students withlearning or cognitive disabilities in highlyeffective ways.

To address the project's goals, CEWsponsored a national competition amongtwo-year colleges to find those imple-menting prospective exemplary ap-proaches. National and state post secon-dary leaders, secondary administrators,and representatives from organizationsthat serve individuals with disabilitiesinitially received a brochure asking themto nominate two-year colleges that intheir judgment served students withlearning or cognitive disabilities in anexemplary fashion. The sixty-nine nomi-nees received a synopsis of the projectand a detailed questionnaire to completeand return for further consideration.Nineteen did so. On January 23 and 24,1991, a national panel of experts re-viewed and rated these detailed re-sponses. The panelists advanced sevennominees to the final step in the selectionprocesses a site visit. Two CEW staffor review panel members visited each sitein order to: a) determine whether or notthe programs/services described in thequestionnaire responses in fact existed;and b) discover any additional tech-niques or approaches used to providethese services that may have been over-looked by those responding to the ques-tionnaire. To accomplish these goals,evaluators reviewed documents anddata; observed classes, support groups,and other instructional and support serv-ices provided; and interviewed adminis-trators, instructors, support staff, stu-dents, employers, and human servicerepresentatives with these colleges. Theteam members concluded that all sevenschools did, in fact, provide exemplaryservices to students with learning or cog-nitive disabilities. CEW staff completedthe project by profiling each site in detail,disseminating this information through

RO 86 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

c

six national conferences, and document-ing these findings in the publication enti-tled Seven Exemplary Approaches Usedby Community, Technical and JuniorColleges to Educate Students With Learn-ing or Cognitive Disabilities (Gugerty,J.J., Tindall, L.W., Gavin, M.K., & Fago,B.G., 1993).

Findings

In the Seven Exemplary Approaches...,CEW project staff. in conjunction withstaff from each college profiled, de-scribed the methods used by these insti-tutions to serve students with learning orcognitive disabilities in highly effectiveways. The publication provides workingmodels to educators who wish to in-crease the enrollment, retention, andtransitions to employment or higher edu-cation of individuals with learning or cog-nitive disabilities.

The description of each exemplary ap-proach included in this handbook fol-lows a set format in order to help thereader understand and compare each in-stitution's organization and delivery ofservices for individuals with learning orcognitive disabilities. Each descriptionincludes:

goals and key features;

dernographicigeographic information;project description;financial data:

staffing patte, n;

students served:coordination activities:

program outcomes;figures and exAbits illustrating spe-cific examples to demonstrate howeach school designs and implementsits services for individuals with learn-ing or cognitive disabilities.

The hand book also describes pro-gram components unique to each site.

The following highlights illustrate uniqueaspects of the methods individualschools use to serve students with learn-ing or cognitive disabilities successfully.

Project SERVE, Chippewa ValleyTechnical College (CVTC), Eau Claire, WI

Project SERVE staff have organized athorough and extensive transition forhigh school students who wish to enrollin CVTC. They provide career explora-tion opportunities for students, as well ashelping them process administrative redtape. All special needs students are com-pletely mainstreamed. This total inclu-sion approach is feasible and effectivebecause the college maximizes staff re-sources with technology (i.e., computers,audio-visual materials, and scanners).SERVE staff provide in-class support,that is, they help students within actualvocational classes as needed. In addition,they minimize the stigma associated withvisible evidence of a disability by simplyintroducing the staff person providingsupport as another instructor who canhelp any student who asks for it. (Thistactic meets federal regulations regard-ing grants because it frees the vocationalinstructor to provide extra help to stu-dents with special needs.)

Project SERVE staff members havelearned that personal problems interferewith learning. Thus, they help their stu-dents address living arrangements, fi-nances, transportation, or other issuesneeded. Also, job placement and postemployment support occur through Pro-jects With Industry at the University ofWisconsin-Stout.

Student Support Services at BemidjiTechnical College, Bemidji. MN

Bemidji Technical College (BTC) oper-ates two separate support approachesunder the same administrative structure.One approach, the Occupational SkillsProgram, is a pull-out program for stu-dents whose chances of success would beminimal even with extensive support in a

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 81

87'

4

mainstreamed program. The othcf, enti-tled the Support Services Program, pro-vides services to mainstreamed studentsusing a case manager concept as its cen-terpiece.

The Occupational Skills Program pro-vides community based occupationalskills training and is a rare example ofcommunity college service to adults withcognitive disabilities. It individualizeseach program according to the student'sinterests. The program includes a formalcourse in self-advocacy. BTC does notscreen people out from its mainstreamofferings. If a student in this programdemonstrates sufficient effort and skillacquisition and wants to enroll in a main-stream option, he or she will receive thesupport to do so. Ideology does not pre-vent staff from meeting their students'needs in a context most conducive totheir success.

The Support Services Program devel-ops and implements Individual TechnicalEducation Plans (ITEPs) within the casemanager framework. The ITEP, similar tothe secondary level's IEP but not man-dated legally, becomes the vehiclethrough which services are delivered. Forexample, at enrollment time, all studentstake an entry exam (an adult basic edu-cation test). Students who score below aset cut-off receive individual counselingfrom a support services staff member(who then becomes their co-advisor/casemanager). An ITEP is then designed foreach individual student, who then ecomeeligible for support services if he or shedesires them. Accommodations needed,such as those for testing or exam proc-toring, are set up right away before thestudent falls behind. Self-advocacy com-ponents are woven into the ITEP for stu-dents in the mainstream. A detailed Stu-dent Support Services Policy Manual forstaff clearly outlines program services,courses developed within the program,and how to deliver various curriculummodifications such as tutoring, advocacy,and placement services.

Administratively, BTC demonstrates ahighly effective approach to proposal de-velopment. The special needs supervisorleads a five member team which appliesfor Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Ap-plied Technology Education Act funds.She is a key in its preparation and hasgreat influence on what is included in theproposal and what is subsequentlyfunded.

Southwest Virginia Center for theLearning Disabled, New River Commu-nity College, Dublin, VA

The Southwest Virginia Center for theLearning Disabled's Learning Achieve-ment Program (LEAP) staff were instru-mental in establishing the MontgomeryCounty, Virginia, Transition Council.This group has set up well organized andextensive processes for transition to itsmember schools, including New RiverCommunity College (NRCC). Its statedgoal is for everyone who needs transitionservices to get them. In particular, a Sum-mer Prep Program has helped preparestudents planning to enroll in NRCC. Thecenter maintains strong ongoing relation-ships with neighboring universities, ex-emplified by events such as Joint satelliteteleconferences and internships forteacher trainees.

Individual components of the Centerfor the Learning Disabled are rare, if notunique, at the post secondary level. Forexample, the note taker/tutor trainingservices provided for students with learn-ing disabilities operates through thesame department that runs these serv-ices for all students, but provides priorityservices to students with learning dis-abilities. As part of a speaker's bureauorganized by LEAP staff, current stu-dents with learning disabilities developtheir confidence and public speakingskills by engaging in three types of publicservice activities. First, they reach out tohigh school students by explaining thedifference between high school and col-lege, what happens when a student fails

82 88 Issues in Special education & Rehabilitation

to put in sufficient effort, and the benefitsof enrolling at New River. This strategynot only increases high school students'awareness of the program, but gives thespeaker poise and confidence. Second,they make presentations to faculty, sup-port personnel, and administrators ofNRCC. By speaking at staff developmentprograms, students with learning dis-abilities help staff understand the prob-lems they face and the value of alternativeapproaches to teaching and learning.Third, these students also speak to com-munity groups, such as the Chamber ofCommerce, Kiwanis, and others.

To provide models for new students,LEAP staff videotape students with learn-ing disabilities while they use variouslearning strategies. Post school follow-upevaluates former students' disabilitiesexperiences with support services itdocuments whether or not these serviceswere available and used.

Northeast Metro Learning Assis-tance/Gervices, Northeast Metro Techni-cal College, White Bear Lake. MN

As in Project SERVE, all students withspecial needs are fully integrated. North-east Metro can include students with dis-abilities into its occupational prepara-tion and other programs with particularease because of the competency-based,modular instructional approach usedwith all students. For example, the facultyhas developed three alternative writtencriterion exams for each task in eachmodule. This technique makes testingaccommodations feasible without com-promising the exam's validity.

Accommodation Teams exemplify thecooperation existing between regular fac-ulty and support staff. These teams con-sist of the student with learning disabili-ties, support staff and his or her regulareducation instructors. Students withlearning disabilities receive support serv-ices through Learning Assistance Teams.

Northeast Meta, also offers a compre-

hensive long-range staff developmentprogram. This program prepares admin-istrators and instructors to work withstudents with special needs in the main-stream. Participants can earn a master'sdegree in vocational special needs educa-tion from the University of Minnesota ifthey desire. In addition, the strategic planand mission statement thoroughly andeffectively address issues faced by specialneeds students.

Transition Program, Middlesex Com-munity College, Bedford, MA

The Transition Program is a two yearcertificate program for people who arehighly unlikely to succeed in the main-stream, even with extensive support. Theprogram prepares them to live inde-pendently, become employed, and suc-ceed in the work place. It develops thewhole person. The Transition Programfocuses on clerical and business supportskills. The Transition Program directoralso heads support services for studentswith learning disabilities in the main-stream. It is not a screen out program,but features a highly competitive applica-tion process in order to be enrolled.

Students do not receive college creditfor passing courses in the Transition Pro-gram. though the school receives stateaid based on the FTE enrollment of par-ticipants. Courses cover skills that stu-dents need to function independently, forexample, skills in life environment orhome maintenance as well as skillsneeded to work in clerical or businesssupport positions. Students work at in-ternships two out of five days per week.Once students complete the program,they participate in a support group whilethey look for work. Those who have se-cured employment receive the supportthey need to keep their jobs, and can takepart in a monthly post employment sup-port group.

Basic Food Service Training Pro-gram, Contra Costa Community College.San Pablo, CA

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 83

The Basic Food Service Training(BFST) Program is offered within theregular culinary arts courses. BFST stu-dents work with students enrolled in theCulinary Arts Program in the same kitch-ens and restaurants. Job coaches are anintegral part of the program and paidhigh enough wages to minimize job turn-over. The program targets the "better res-taurants" which pay higher wages as fu-ture employment options for its studentsrather than fast food outlets. This allowsgraduates to earn a living wage. The pro-gram also connects graduates with Cali-fornia's Workability III program so theycan receive job placement assistance andpost employment support.

Regional Center for College Studentswith Learning Disabilities, FairleighDickinson University, Teaneck, NJ

The Regional Center for College Stu-dents with Learning Disabilities at Fair-leigh Dickinson University (FDU) servesstudents in both the associate degree pro-grams offered through Edward Williams.College (part of FDU) and the baccalau-reate degree programs. The RegionalCenter for College Students with Learn-ing Disabilities maintains a high supportstaff to student ratio. All support staffhave extensive special education back-grounds and experience. Students mustsign a contract which spells out theircommitment to attendance, support ses-sion participation, and other compo-nents of support services offered. Fresh-man and sophomores with learningdisabilities who enroll in FDU's supportservices program are required to attendstudy and tutorial sessions with supportstaff. For instance, freshman must devoteone hour per course each week to study-ing and support services; sophomoresmust spend one hour per three courseseach week with support staff. Studentswho do not comply risk dismissal.

What Has Been Learned

Factors in the Success of TheseApproaches

In reviewing data and documents, ob-serving instruction and support services,and interviewing staff, students, admin-istrators and representatives of commu-nity based agencies associated with eachof the seven approaches selected throughthis project, CEW staff noticed that allschools manifested four factors eventhough many details of their organiza-tional structure and service delivery ap-proaches varied markedly. These com-mon factors were as follows:

1. Administrators, faculty, and sup-port staff display in deed as well as inword an attitude best expressed as:"Our mission is to help all our stu-dents find a path to individual suc-cess."

2. Comprehensive, well designedstrategies are developed and used toimplement that mission. These strate-gies are also carried out with sufficientintensity to achieve the desired out-comes for individuals with learning orcognitive disabilities: enrollment, re-tention, graduation, and transition toemployment or higher education.

3. Staff demonstrate very high levels ofskill, both in their professional spe-cialties and in their interpersonal and"political" skills; and their efforts andjudgements receive consistent andtimely administrative support.

4. Students with learning or cognitivedisabilities enroll, progress throughtheir chosen programs, graduate, andmake smooth transitions to work orfurther education.

These seven institutions were notblessed by once-in-a-lifetime circum-stances that allowed them to avoid barri-ers to effective service developnient anddelivery. Rather, factors one throughthree were developed assiduously by key

84 90Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

leaders and decision makers, resulting inthe emergence of the fourth factor.

Elements Common to Each Program

A more detailed breakdown of com-mon elements across all seven programsyields the following factors associatedwith a high degree of effectiveness:

1. Staff. Key staff demonstrated notonly high levels of interpersonal andtechnical skills, they possessed an ar-ray of formal credentials and a richexperiential background. Equally im-portant, they demonstrated a strong,genuine concern and sense of caringfor others, a sense of humor, and ahigh level of frustration tolerance.

2. Administrative support. The mosthighly skilled, caring staff in the worldeventually burn out in the absence ofadministrative support. In order forthese exemplary appi;Rches to de-velop and sustain themselves, admin-istrative involvement and support arecrucial.

3. Organizational structure. The serv-ice delivery approaches used by theseinstitutions reflect extensive planningand attention to detail. Loose ends arenot tolerated.

4. A focus on "customer service." Stu-dent success, not organizational con-venience is the driving force when serv-ices are developed or revised.

5. A focus on quality. Staff demandhigh-level performance from them-selves, their peers, and the students.

6. Persistence and a problem solvingorientation. Staff do not give up in theface of obstacles and setbacks. Theypersist, refining instructional or sup-port methods, adjusting procedures orintroducing alternative approaches toaddress and solve issues on the stu-dent level, the organizational level, andthe community level.

7. Flexibility and adaptability. Both in-

dividual staff and their organizationsdemonstrate this characteristic. Inevi-table "nasty surprises" are merelyspeed bumps on the road to attainingtheir goals.

8. Team effort. The most highly quali-fied individuals do not have the time,energy, or skill to address all of thecomplex, multifaceted needs of stu-dents they serve. In all seven of theseexemplary approaches, staff involvedas many "players" as possible, notleast of whom were the students them-selves, their families (if the familieswere still involved strongly in the stu-dents' lives), secondary school person-nel, adult service agency staff, employ-ers, and of course other staff from thecollege.

9. A highly refined understanding oforganizational politics within theirown institutions and among cooperat-ing agencies and businesses. The staffof these exemplary efforts display akeen grasp of "organizational politics"and its role in developing and improv-ing services to students with disabili-ties.

10. Valuing small successes. Staff real-ize that each student's progress mustbe measured against his or her pre-en-rollment status. Some make greatstrides, while others absorb a greatdeal of staff time and energy yet makeminimal progress as measured by thestandards of the larger society. Thestaff and organizational focus on theindividual's needs and goals allow par-ticipants to put all successes, bothgreat and "small," in proper perspec-tive.

Barriers

When discussing how two-year col-leges should design and implement ap-proaches that effectively recruit, enroll,retain, graduate, and transition indi-viduals with disabilities, typical barri-ers include attitudinal and organiza-

Volume. 9, No. 1, 1994 85

tional issues.

Attitudinal barriers include the "add-on/afterthought" syndrome, the "my stu-dent/your student" syndrome, the "wedon't have any money" syndrome, andfatalism. The "add-on/afterthought" syn-drome is displayed by decision makerswho totally forget to consider individualswith disabilities until reminded by oth-ers. Typically, they respond with an em-barrassed "oops I got caught" expression,and scurry anxiously to patch together anadd-on component designed as much toplacate those raising the issue as it is toaddress problems faced by students withdisabilities.

The "my student/your student" syn-drome manifests itself in regular faculty,support staff or administrators who at-tribute (or accept) total responsibility forthe performance of students with dis-abilities, as well as total responsibility forinstructing them. If these students are"mine" I must do everything for them. Ifthey are "yours" I don't have to do any-thing other than refer them to you, andget out of your way.

Most readers are probably surprisedto find the "we don't have any money"syndrome" listed under "attitudinal" in-stead of "organizational" barriers. In re-ality, though, "lack of money" is always anattitudinal issue, unless the entire or-ganization's budget is zeroed out. If atwo-year college has an annual budget of$92 million, is it ludicrous to claim that"we have no money." What is really im-plied is that we are unwilling to allocateor reallocate funds for appropriate sup-port services for individuals with dis-abilities in sufficient intensity to makethem effective, because we want to spendour $92 million on other things. Thiscould, however, be considered a variantof the "add-on/afterthought" syndrome:"if any resources are left after addressingall our higher priorities and desires, wewill assign them to address nee' As of spe-cial populations." In either casv:, attitude,

not lack of resources, is the driving fac-tor.

Fatalism is expressed by phrases suchas "we've always done it that way,""they're always like that," or "it will neverwork," to mention a few. Key features arethe actual or implied use of the words"always" and "never" coupled with sweep-ing, inclusive categories - "they," "we,"and so forth. Staff manifesting this atti-tude do not really believe that individualscan change, especially for the better, nordo they believe that as individuals theycan have any real impact on anything,especially to improve it.

Typical organizational barriers includepoorly trained staff; unclear, contradic-tory, or incompatible organizationalgoals; inefficient program design; ineffec-tive instructional approaches; dated cur-ricula; weak leadership, and factionalismamong staff, to mention a few. Ultimately,though, both sets of barriers can beviewed as manifestations of the one truebarrier to developing and implementingeffective educational and support serv-ices for students with disabilities at thecommunity college level: lack of commit-ment.

What Must Be Done

Organizationally, educators must in-vest the time and energy necessary tolearn about approaches with proven ef-fectiveness, and adapt or adopt them intheir own schools. A corollary of thisorientation to seek out and adapt provenapproaches is to cultivate an awarenessof what constitutes good research andevaluation, and develop the skills neededto translate research findings and evalu-ation results into tangible changes in thedaily behavior of school personnel.

Personally, educators must examinethemselves for manifestations of destruc-tive attitudes such as those mentionedabove, and take concrete steps embod-ied in individual's staff members' annual

86 92Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

contracts, performance evaluations, staffdevelopment options, and so forth toeradicate them; and empower studentsby instructing them in self advocacyskills, and making them true partners inthe educational process. Fostering a com-

mitment to serve the educational needsof students with disabilities is the start-ing point. From then on, most barriersbecome "technical" problems, andAmericans are at their best when solvingtechnical probl-ms.

References

Gugerty, J.J., Tindall, L.W., Gavin, M.K., &Fago, B.G. (1993). Serving students with learn-ing or cognitive disabilities effectively in two-year colleges: seven exemplary approaches.Madison, WI: Center on Education and Work.

Louis Harris and Associates. (1994). The Na-tional Organization On Lisability Survey ofAmericans With Disabilities. Washington,DC: National Organization On Disability.

Author:

John GugertyCenter on Education and Work, University of Wisconsin964 Educational Sciences Building1025 West Johnson St.Madison, WI 53706-1797Phone: 608/263-4151FAX: 608/7,2-9197

Volume 9, No. 1,1994 87

10 \ I (:1 I I 0) 10 10 I 1 0) I I II ( C 001

4.111V.AffirkAlt. AKA'SILILIL MORI

11W1111

II I .

II

I I

ir

'I

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 89-100cf.) 1994 AHVA Publisher

Postsecondary Vocational Education DoesIt Really Make a Difference?

Patricia L. Sitlington, Alan R. Frank, Rod R. Carson

Abstract: The authors of this study investigated the association between postsecondaryvocational education and adult adjustment of individuals with learning disabilities, behav-ioral disorders, and mental disabilities whose class had been out of high school for threeyears. The sample consisted of 130 individuals who had enrolled in postsecondary vocationaleducation and 4C7 who received no postsecondary training of any kind. These participantswere part of a statewide random sample of 50% of the graduates and dropouts from all specialeducation program models in the state of Iowa. Postsecondary vocational education consistedof enrollment in a vocational education program at one of the state's 15 community colleges.Results are presented in terms of: (a) the characteristics of individuals who pursued postsec-ondary vocational education versus those who pursued no postsecondary training, (b) theassociation between participation in postsecondary vocational education versus no postsec-ondary training and adult adjustment, and (c) the association between the type of postsecon-dary vocational education completed and current job area. Variables examined related togeneral adult adjustment status, general employment status, and occupational status ofcurrent job. Results indicated that the nature of the association between postsecondaryvocational education and adult adjustment varied according to disability area. Participantswith a match between postsecondary education progratn and current job area performedsubstantially higher in specific areas of adult adjustment than those whose vocational educa-tion program did not match their current job area.

Introduction

The Individuals with Disabilities Acthas identified postsecondary educationas one of the major outcomes of the proc-ess of transition from school to adult life.Both national and state level studies (Af-fleck, Edgar, Levine, & Kortering, 1990;Liebert, Lutsky. & Gottlieb, 1990; Neel.Meadow, Levine, & Edgar, 1988; Rogan &Hartman, 1990; Siegel, Robert, Waxman,& Gaylord-Ross, 1992; Sitlington &Frank, 1990; Sitlington, Frank, & Car-son, 1992; Wagner, D'Amico, Marder,Newman, & Blackorby, 1992; Wagner,Newman, D'Arnico, Jay, Butler-Nalin,Marder, & Cox, 1991) have argued thatpostsecondary vocational education is

one of the major means of empoweringindividuals with disabilities to move be-yond entry level employment that yieldsminimum or slightly above minimumwage compensation.

These same studies have documentedthat when compared to in& luals with-out disabilities, a much lower percentageof individuals with disabilities, even milddisabilities, go on for postsecondarytraining of any type. Other studies (Miller,Rzonca, & Snider, 1991; Miller, Snider,Rzonca. 1990: Vogel. Hruby, & Adelman,1993; Wagner et al., 1991; Wagner et al.,1992) have examined the characteristicsof individuals who choose postsecondaryeducation and the variables affecting the

Voiumc 9, No. 1, 1994 9589

choices individuals with disabilitiesmake related to postsecondary educa-tion. The authors of this current studycould find no studies which investigatedthe actual effect of postsecondary voca-tional education on the adult adjustmentof individuals with disabilities once theywere out of school for at least a shortperiod of time.

This investigation was a subcompo-nent of the Iowa Statewide Follow-upStudy, which was a five-year project de-signed to study a 50% random sample ofstudents of all disabilities receiving spe-cial education services through all pro-gram models. The authors designed thisstudy to investigate the association be-tween postsecondary vocational educa-tion and the adult adjustment of indi-viduals with learning disabilities (LD).behavioral disorders (BD), and mentaldisabilities (MD), once these individualshad been out of high school three years.For the purposes of this study, postsec-ondary vocational education consisted ofenrollment in a vocational education pro-gram at one of Iowa's 15 community col-leges, the major option for postsecondaryvocational education in the state. Thesecolleges serve merged geographic areasthroughout the state; most of these insti-tutions have both a liberal arts and voca-tional/technical component.

Specifically the authors of this studyinvestigated: (a) the characteristics of in-dividuals with disabilities who pursuedpostsecondary vocational educationvs.those who pursued no postsecondaryeducation, (b) the association betweenparticipation in postsecondary voca-tional education vs. no postsecondarytraining and adult adjustment, and (c)the association between the type of post-secondary vocational education com-pleted and current job area. Data wereanalyzed separately for individuals withLD, BD, and MD, and for separate voca-tional education program areas, wherenumbers justified analyses. We alsohoped to investigate the effect of those

whoSe secondary and postsecondary vo-cational training matched their currentjob. The number of individuals who metthe latter criteria, however, was too smallto permit analysis. Variables examined inall analyses related to general adult ad-justment status, general employmentstatus, and occupational status of cur-rent job.

Method

ParticipantsThe participants in the present inves-

tigation were drawn from the high schoolclass of 1985, surveyed one and againthree years after their class was gradu-ated (i.e., Summer 1986 and Summer1988). Each of the 15 Area EducationAgencies (AEAs) in the state of Iowa pre-pared a list of special education students(all exceptionalities) who were graduatedfrom, or aged out of, high school in 1985.A second list was prepared for specialeducation dropouts from the Class of1985. For each AEA, 50% of the studentson each list were randomly selected forinclusion in the sample. At Year 3, inter-viewers sought to survey the entire 50%random samples selected ac Year 1.

Of the total sample of approximately1,000 randomly selected former specialeducation students (of whom about 80%actually were interviewed), 130 (LD = 79,BD = 17, MD = 34) were interviewed atboth Years 1 and 3 and reported they hadattended a postsecondary communitycollege program, but were not a studentat the time of the Year 3 interview. Anadditional 407 (LD = 186, BD = 35, MD= 186) were interviewed at both Years 1and 3 and reported they had attended nopostsecondary program of any kind.These two groups constituted the partici-pants in the present investigation. Theremaining persons in the total sampleparticipated in some type of postsecon-dary education or training as follows:private training programs (35%), military

90 96 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

r

(23%), junior college (15%), four-year col-lege (12%), adult-based education (10%),and apprenticeships (5%). The individu-als in the latter categories were not a partof the present investigation.

Selected characteristics of partici-pants were obtained from their perma-nent school records (see Table 1). Themost commonly used test for assessmentof academic achievement was the Wood-cock-Johnson Psychoeducational Bat-tery (Woodcock, 1978). The reading andmath portions of this test were adminis-tered to the majority of participantswithin 3 years of the time they weregraduated from high school. (See p.92)

The term program model in Table 1 isused synonymously with type of specialeducation model attended by individualswhile in high school. Supplemental assis-tance refers to support services given tospecial education students attendingregular classrooms on a full-time basis.Students attended the model designatedresource teaching programs (RTP) for aminimal average of thirty minutes perday; these students attended regularclasses for the remainder of each schoolday. In the special class with integrationmodel (SCIN). students attended specialclasses for the majority of the school day,while participating in the general educa-tion curriculum in one or more academicsubjects. Students in special classes withlittle integration (SCli I-L) were integratedinto regular classes for limited participa-tion. Students in self-contained specialclasses (SSC) received all of their instruc-tion from a special education teacher.Institutional schools were segregated fa-cilities within institutional facilities. IowaDepartment of Education rules requirethat students labeled MD must have anIQ of at least 1 standard deviation belowthe mean (i.e., approximately 85 or be-low) on an individually administered in-telligence test and exhibit an -1daptivebehavior deficit. This definition encom-passes a higher functioning populationthan does the more common definition,

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

which uses a minus-2-standard-devia-tion cut-off point on intelligence tests.

Instrumentation

The survey Instrument was developedin collaboration with representatives ofthe 15 AEAs and selected schools in thestate of Iowa, then field-tested on a ran-dom sample of 878 participants through-out the state.

The survey instrument was completedby obtaining data from school recordsand through interviews with partici-pants. The following types of informationwere sought: background data (e.g., testscores from high school, disability label.program model); information pertainingto high school progi arn (e.g., number ofregular and special vocational educationcourses taken, extracurricular activi-ties); information about current life cir-cumstances (e.g., marital status, livingarrangements, leisure activities); and in-formation about past and current em-ployment (e.g., job experiences duringhigh school, location of current job,wages earned, and hours worked).

Procedure

Interviews were conducted by profes-sionals such as work experience coordi-nators, consultants, school psycholo-gists, and teachers from the participant'sschool district or AEA. Interviewers weresupervised by the follow-up project taskforce member from their respective AEA.In addition, project staff developed anin-depth interviewer handbook and sam-ple interview forms and conducted train-ing sessions to ensure consistency acrossinterviewees. The project director was oncall to answer any questions arising fromactual interviews. Where possible, inter-views were conducted face-to-face withthe former student. When an individualcould not be contacted either in personor by telephone, a parent or guardian wasinterviewed. Of the Year 3 interviews ana-lyzed in this study for participants with

91

Table 1. Selected characteristics of participants prior to exitingfrom high school

Subgroups

Variable

Gender a)Males

Females

Full Scale IQ

M

SD

Academic Achievement (GradeEquivalents)

Math

M

SD

Reading

M

SD

Program Model Attended (f o)

Supplemental Assistance

Resource Teaching

Special Class with Integration

Special Class with Little Integra-tion

Self- contained Special Class

Institutional School

Graduation Status (_cfo)

Graduated

Dro d Out

With Community College Training With No Postsecondary 'fralning

LD BD MD LD BD MD

76 65 47 78 69 53

24 35 53 22 31 47

96.9* 923 76.2* 92.6 883 69.0

9.5 12.3 5.4 8.6 11.9 14.4

7.7* 6.5 6.2* 6.9 6.7 4.9

23 3.0 2.3 1.9 2.4 1.9

7A* 8.8* 5.7* 6.2 7.0 4.5

2.9 2.2 2.2 2.1 23 1.9

1 6 0 0 0 0

80 41 33 79 31 22

18 29 61 18 31 43

1 0 6 3 17 27

0 18 0 0 20 7

0 6 0 0 0 1

95 77 97 89 77 91

5 23 3 11 23 9

s .05 when compared with mean score for same disability group without postsecondary training

92 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

community college training, 38% wereface-to-face with participants, 36% were-/ telephone with participants, 6% wereface-to-face with parents/guardians ofparticipants, and 19% were through atelephone interview with par mts/guardi-ans of participants. Of the Y. ar 3 inter-views analyzed for participants with nopostsecondary training, 42% were face-to-face with participants, 30% were bytelephone with participants, 10% wereface-to-face with parents/guardians ofparticipants, and 19% were through atelephone interview with parents/guardi-ans of participants. Data analyses wereconducted using routines described inthe SPSS-X User's Guide (1986).

Results

The first part of the Results sectionincludes information about the adult ad-justment three years out of school of thetwo primary groups of participants: (a)those who attended a postsecondary vo-cational education program at a commu-nity college after exiting high school, ana(b) those who did not attend any type ofpostsecondary training program afterhigh school. The second part of the Re-sults section presents data about theadult adjustment of two subsets of theparticipants who attended a postsecon-dary vocational education program at acommunity college: (a) those whose cur-rent job category (i.e., Trades & Industry,Agriculture, Health Occupations, HomeEconomics, or Office) did correspond totheir community college program cate-gory (same categories as for current job),and (b) those whose current job categorydid not match their community collegeprogram category. Throughout the Re-sults section the term "Community Col-lege Training" refer ; to postsecondaryvocational education provided in a com-munity college. As mentioned in the in-troduction, community colleges are themajor provider of postsecondary voca-tional education in the state of Iowa.

Participants with CommunityCollege Bylining

The most frequently attended commu-nity college program was Trades & Indus-try, where 69% of the individuals with LD,53% of the individuals with BD, and 45%of the individuals with MD participated.Other training programs and participa-tion levels included Agriculture (14% LD,7% BD, and 0% MD). Health Occupations(8% LD, 13% BD, and 31% MD), HomeEconomics (4% LD. 20% BD, and 21%MD), and Office (4% LD, 7% BD, and 3%MD).

A comparison of individuals whosecommunity college training matchedtheir current job category revealed that92% of the individuals with LD, 100% ofthe individuals with BD and 78% of theindividuals with MD whose current jobwas in the Trades & Industry categoryhad participated in a similar program ina community college. Eighty-nine percentof the individuals with LD and 0% of theindividuals with either BD or MD whosecurrent job was in Agriculture had par-ticipated in a corresponding communhycollege training program. Seventy -fivepercent of the individuals with LD, 0% ofthe individuals with BD, and 100% of theindividuals with MD whose current jobwas in Health Occupations had partici-pated in a related community collegetraining program. The percentages of in-dividuals whose current job and commu-nity college training both were in HomeEconomics were: LD, 29%; BD, 50%; andMD, 50%. Thirty-three percent of the in-dividuals with LD whose current job wasin Office work reported participating in acorresponding community college pro-gram, while none of the individuals withBD or MD who were employed in Officeoccupations had participated in a relatedcommunity college training program.

A comparison of individuals whosehigh school vocational education pro-gram matched their community collegetraining program revealed that 10% of

Volume 9, No. 1. 1994 93

99

the individuals with LD, 12% of the indi-viduals with BD, and 31% of the individu-als with MD who participated in a com-munity college Trades & Industryprogram also had participated in such aprogram while attending high school.Sixty percent of the individuals with LD,100% of the individuals with BD, and 0%of the individuals with MD who partici-pated in a community college Agricultureprogram had participated in a similarprogram while in high school. Seventeenpercent of the individuals with LD, 0% ofthe individuals with BD, and 22% of theindividuals with MD who participated ina community college Health Occupationsprogram also had participated in corre-sponding program while in high school.The percentages of individuals who re-ported participating in a community col-lege Home Economics program and acorresponding program in high schoolwere 100% for the individuals with LD,33% for the individuals with BD, and 50%for the individuals with MD. Sixty-sevenpercent of the individuals with LD whoreported participating in a communitycollege Office program participated in thesame type of program while in highschool, as did 100% of the individualswith BD and MD.

Comparison of Participants with Com-munity College Vaining vs. no Postsec-ondary Tkainiv

Table 2 presents data concerning thetypes of jobs (Job Status) held by partici-par.i.s. Job types were classified by theresearchers according to a procedure re-ported by Reiss, Duncan, Hatt, and North(1961).

Table 3 presents a comparison of adultadjustment information concerning thetwo groups of participants. When a differ-ence between two corresponding groups(e.g., LD with community college trainingvs. LD with no postsecondary training)was greater than or equal to 10% (or$0.50/Hour for Wages, or a change in JobStatus level), the cell for the group whichexhibited the more positive outcome wasshaded. Inspection of Table 3 reveals thatone substantial difference was foundamong participants with LD; more indi-viduals who had attended a communitycollege program held higher status jobsthan did individuals with no postsecon-dary training. A second comparison ofindividuals with BD shows that thosewho attended a community college pro-gram were succeeding at substantiallyhigher levels on two variables: percentemployed and percent receiving healthinsurance. However, the individuals with

Table 2. Job status of employed participants with community college training vs. those withno postsecondary training

Community College Training No Postsecondary Training

Job Status LD BD MD LD BD MD

Laborer 23 18 29 42 42 42

Service Worker 17 50 38 13 37 41

Operative' 19 0 4 19 5 12

Higher Statusb 41 32 29 26 15 5

Note. All numbers are percentages.

'E.g., meat cutter, truck driver, assembly line worker

bFarmer, craftsman, protective service, clerical, professional 2, other

94 100. Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

BD who did not participate in any post-secondary training were receiving sub-stantially higher wages and more oftenwere living Independently.

The majority of the substantial differ-ences were exhibited by participants withMD. Those who had attended a commu-nity college program had achieved sub-stantially higher levels of adult adjust-ment on the following variables:independent living, employment, propor-tion receiving no financial assistance,full-time work, wages, health insurance,vacation time, and at least 1 raise inwages. No substantial difference favoredparticipants with MD who had no post-secondary training.

Comparison of Subgroups ofParticipants with CommunityCollege fraining

In order to further explore the relationbetween participation in community col-lege training and adult adjustment, anadditional analysis was conducted inwhich individuals whose current job clas-sification matched their community col-lege training were compared to individu-als whose current job classification didnot match their community college train-ing. Individuals were placed into one ofthe following categories based upon theirdescription of their current job: Trades& Industry Agriculture, Health Occupa-tions, Home Economics, or Office. This

Table 3. Comparison of participants with community college training vs. those with no post-secondary training on key adult adjustment variables

Community College 'fralning No Postsecondary'fraining

Variable LD BD

General Status

Lives Independenty 46 29

Employed 87 71

Pays All Expenses 54 41

Receives No Financial Assistance 68 47

Employment Status

Full-Time Work 80 58

Wages/Hour $5.67 $3.73

Health Insurance 49 42

Sick Leave 29 8

Vacation 52 17

At Least 1 Raise 70 50

Job Status° 3 1

MI)

32

56".

8

$$.14 $5.61 $4.62 $3.29

LD BD MD

51 46- 39

82 54 68

54 37 33

74 51 33

86 63 56

57

36

64

'71

1

49 16 27

29 16 29

45 10 50

65 56 55

1 1 1

Note. All numbers are percentages. expect Wages /Hour and Job Status

a In Table 2, if Laborer + Service Worker z 10% over Operative + Higher Status, then Job Status = I. If differ.ence < 10%, then Job Status = 2. If Operative + Higher Status z 10% over Laborer + Service Worker, then JobStatus = 3.

Denotes a difference x 10%, a difference of $0.50111our for Wages, or a change in Job Status levelbetween corresponding groups., e.g.. LI) with community college training vs. LD with no postseco-dar trainin:. In each instance o a di erence, the shaded cell indicates a more iositive outcome.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

1 095

same procedure was used to categorize(same categories as for current job) par-ticipants based on the type of communitycollege training program attended . Indi-viduals for whom these two categorieswere identical were coded "CommunityCollege/Current Job Matched;" partici-pants for whom a match was not foundwere coded "Community College/CurrentJob Didn't Match." Table 4 presents dataconcerning the job status (Reiss et al.,1961) of individuals in both categories.Data for some participants for whomthere was a match between current joband community college training have notbeen reported here because fewer thanfive individuals were involved.

General and employment status datafor individuals included in this secondanalysis are presented in Table 5. Theprocedures for making comparisons be-tween groups were the same as thoseused in making comparisons betweenparticipants with community collegetraining vs. no postsecondary training,with one exception. Each comparison in-volved three groups rather than two (e.g.,LD vs. LD AG vs. LD TI in Table 5). In

order for a difference to be consideredsubstantial in favor of the "CommunityCollege/Current Job Matched" category,both disability-specific columns had tomeet the 10% rule. Only one comparisonfavored individuals in the "CommunityCollege/Current Job Didn't Match" cate-gory, where substantially more partici-pants with MD reported paying all of theirliving expenses. All other comparisonswhich revealed substantial differences fa-vored individuals in the "Community Col-lege/Current Job Matched" categcry. Twoof these differences were found for indi-viduals with MD (full-time work andhealth insurance), and two for individu-als with LD (raise in wages and jobstatus).

Discussion

The results of this investigation arediscussed in the following areas: (a) over-all comments on the process of studyingthe association between postsecondaryvocational training and adult adjust-ment, (b) characteristics of individualswith postsecondary vocational educa-

Table 4. Job status of employed participants with community college training that did notmatch their current job classification vs. those whose community college training matched

their current job classification

CommunityCollege/Current ilob

Didn't Match

Community College/Current Job Matched

Job Status LD MD LD AG LD T1 MD HO MD TI(a=14) (n=10) (n=8) (1=35) (n=5) (n =7)

Laborer 7 30 25 29 0

Service Worker 43 40 0 0 100

Operative 21 0 13 26 0 0

Higher Status 29 30 63 46

The number of individuals will. du was insufficient to conduct an analysis here.

Note 1. All numbers are percentages.

Note 2. LD AG = Individuals with LD who participated in Agriculture training programLD TI = Individuals with LD who participated in Trades & Industry training programMD HO = Individuals with MD who participated in Health Occupatons training proMD TI = Individuals with MD who participated in Trades & Industry training program

96 0 (4 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

'liable 5. Comparison of participants with community college training that did not matchtheir current job classification vs. whose community college training matched their current job

classification on key adult adjustment variables

CommunityCollege/Current Job

Didn't Match

Community College/Current Job Matched

Variable LD MD LD AG

General Status

Lives Independently 36 60 88

Employed 100 100 100

Pays All Expenses 50 88

Receives No Financial 71 60 100

Assistance

Employment Status

Full-Time Work 79 60 88

Wages/Hour $4.78 $4.23 $4.68

Health Insurance 50 20 38

Sick Leave 29 30 12

Vacation 57 50 12

At Least 1 Raise 43 70

Job Status* 2 1

LD TI

37

100

54

69

80

$6.59

57

26

60

MD HO MD TI

60 43

100 100

0 29

60 57

$4.42 $6.32

20

80

60

1

43

57

71

1

Note. All numbers are percentages, except Wages /Hour and Job Status.

a Table 2, if Laborer + Service Worker 10% over Operative + Higher Status, then Job Status = I. If difference<10%, then Job Status = 2. If Operative + Higher Status a10% over Laborer + . Service Worker, then Job Status =3.

Denotes a difference >10%, a difference of 50.50 /Hour for Wages, or a change in Job Status levelwithin a disabilitzsrot2le ID AG and LD TI, or MD vs. both MD HO and MD TI.

(c) the association between partici-pation in postsecondary vocational edu-cation vs. no postsecondary training andadult adjustment, (d) the association be-tween the type of postsecondary voca-tional education completed and currentjob area, and (e) recommendations forfurther study. These areas will be dis-cussed across the disability areas of LD,BD, and MD.

Overall Comments

Before we begin a dis:ussion of theresults, it should be pointed out that this

study must be considered exploratory innature. Although the study began with astatewide random sample of 50% of indi-viduals from special education (a sam-pling percentage larger than most state-level studies), there were relatively smallnumbers of students in a number of thecategories when we began to investigatespecific vocational preparation areas cor-responding with current job area. Thiswas particularly true for LD with agricul-ture training, and MD with health occu-pations and trades and industry training.Second, we have no evidence of how

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994103

97

many individuals completed training orany indication of how each individualperformed in the training program.Third, because this was a descriptive in-vestigation, we have not studied the ac-tual effect of a coordinated secon-dary/postsecondary training sequence onadult adjustment was not studies. Thus,associations between postsecondary vo-cational education and adult adjustmentare being examined. Finally, those indi-viduals who entered postsecondary voca-tional education had significantly higherreading levels, math levels, and IQ scores(as measured by past achievement and IQtests) than those with no postsecondarytraining (this was not true for IQ andmath scores of individuals with BD).Even with these limitations, however,there are a number of interesting findingsthat emerged from this study and deservediscussion and further investigation.

Characteristics of Individuals with Post-secondary Vocational Education

As mentioned in the previous section,individuals with LD and MD who choseto go on for postsecondary vocationaltraining scored significantly higher thanindividuals with no postsecondary train-ing on the latest measures of math, read-ing, and IQ that were administered whilethey were still in high school. Individualswith BD scored significantly higher thanthose with no postsecondary trainingonly in the area of reading. Although allof these differences were statistically sig-nificant, the differences in actual gradeequivalents or IQ score were often fairlysmall.

It is not surprising that the highestarea of postsecondary enrollment for alldisabilities was trades and industry. Thesecond highest program selection for MDwas health occupations and for BD washome economics, also an interestingfinding. It should be noted that the pro-grams with the highest percentages ofenrollment at the postsecondary levelhad the lowest relation to training at the

secondary level. Conversely, programswith the highest match between secon-dary and postsecondary training had thesmallest initial enrollment at the secon-dary level.

Postsecondary VocationalEducation vs. No Postsecondary Rain-ing and Adult Adjustment

The association between the presenceor absence of postsecondary vocationaleducation and adult adjustment appearsto vary according to the specific disabilityof the individual. Individuals with MDwho received postsecondary vocationaltraining did significantly better (as de-fined) than those with no postsecondarytraining on three of the four areas ofgeneral adjustment and five of the sevenareas of employment. Individuals withLD with postsecondary training were inhigher status jobs than those withoutpostsecondary training. The results forindividuals with BD were mixed, how-evey. with those having postsecondary vo-cational training doing better in terms ofemployment and health insurance, butnot in terms of living independently orwages. The training and other supportprovided by postsecondary vocational edu-cation programs appears to be most bene-ficial to individuals with MD who may havea harder time succeeding in adult life with-out additional preparation. The mixed re-sults for individuals with BD may be re-lated to the underlying problem of lack ofsocial and interpersonal skills that is oftenassociated with this group. Such problemsmay not have been alleviated through post-secondary vocational training.

Finally, it would interesting to surveythis same group five years out of school. Bythe very fact that individuals with postsec-ondary training remained in school longerthan their counterparts without postsec-ondary training, they have had less time toestablish themselves in a given job and ina living situation. The presence of postsec-ondary training did assist individuals withLD in obtaining higher status jobs. It also

98 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

104

assisted individuals with BD and MD inmoving in the direction of higher statusjobs, although the differences were notsignificant.

Postsecondary Vocational Education andCurrent Job Area

The association between correspondingcurrent job and postsecondary training ar-eas was significant for LD in the two up-ward mobility categories of job status andreceiving at least one raise in wages. Theeffect of a match also was significant forindividuals with MD in terms of full-timework and health insurance. These effectsare very possibly an interaction of the dis-ability and the type of vocational program,i. e., agriculture vs. health occupations andthe type of jobs associated with these fields.Individuals with MD without a match be-tween training area and current job, how-ever, did significantly better in paying allexpenses.

Recommendations for Further Study

As with all other areas of transit: onplanning and implementation, we mustthoroughly examine the effects of post-secondary vocational training on indi-viduals with disabilities and determinewhat aspects of this training are mostbeneficial for the youths and adultsserved are needed. Two of the limitations

of this study will be faced by anyone doingfuture research on this topic--low num-bers of individuals in specific vocationalareas and higher functioning level of in-dividuals going into postsecondary train-ing vs. no training. The authors belivethat it is critical to examine the effects ofpostsecondary vocational training foreach disability area and across voca-tional training areas. Many of the individ-ual results revealed in this study mayhave been lost by grouping individuals ofall disabilities or merging across all vo-cational areas. The effect of the matchbetween the vocational program area andcurrent job should be further explored.Is postsecondary training in any area ef-fective in aiding adult adjustment, or is itcritical that a match be made betweentraining and employment area?

The study of the effects of postsecon-dary training is a difficult one. The longeran individual is out of school, the moredifficult it is to say which education fac-tors have influenced adult adjustment.The study of this area will require inter-viewing individuals who have been out ofschool at least three years. It also willrequire a larger sample of individualsthan has been included in previous stud-ies, or a representative sample of indi-viduals that can be generalized to groupsas a whole.

References

Affleck, J., Edgar, E., Levine, P., & Kortering,L. (1990). Postschool status of students clas-sified as mildly mentally retarded, learningdisabled, or nonhandicapped: Does it get bet-ter with time? Education and Training inMental Retardation, 25, 315-324.

Liebert, D., Lutsky, L., & Gottlieb, A. (1990).Postsecondary experiences of young adultswith severe physical disabilities. ExceptionalChildren, 57, 56-63.

Miller, R, Rzonca, C., & Snider, B. (1991).Variables related to the type of postsecondaryeducation experience chosen by young adultswith learning disabilities. Journal of Learning

Disabilities, 24, 188-191.

Miller, R., Snider, B., & Rzonca, C. (1990).Variables related to the decision of youngadults with learning disabilities to participatein postsecondary education. Journal of Learn-ing Disabilities, 23, 349-354.

Neel, R., Meadows, N., Levine, P., & Edgar, E.(1988). What happens after special education:A statewide follow-up study of secondary stu-dents who have behavioral disorders. Behav-ioral Disorders, 13, 209-216.

Reiss, A., Duncan, 0., Hatt, P., & North, C.(1961). Occupations and social status. NewYork: Free Press.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 99

'105

Rogan, L., & Hartman, L. (1990). Adult out-comes of learning disabled students ten yearsafter initial follow-up. Learning DisabilitiesFocus, 5, 91-102.

Siegel, S., Robert, M., Waxman, M., & Gay-lord-Ross, R. (1992). A follow-along study ofparticipants in a longitudinal transition pro-gram for youths with mild disabilities. Excep-tional Children, 58, 346-356.

Sitlington, P., & Frank, A. (1990). Are adoles-cents with learning disabilities successfullycrossing the bridge into adult life? LearningDisability Quarterly, 13, 97-111.

Sitlington, P., Frank, A., & Carson, R. (1992).Adult adjustment among high school gradu-ates with mild disabilities. Exceptional Chil-dren, 59, 221-233.

SPSS-X User's Guide (2nd ed.) [Computer pro-gram manual]. (1986). Chicago: SPSS, Inc.

Vogel, S., Hruby, & Adelman, P. (1993). Edu-

Authors:

Patricia L. SitlingtonThe University of Northern Iowa

Alan R. FrankThe University of Iowa

Rori R. CarsonEastern Illinois University

cational and psychological factors in success-ful and unsuccessful college students withlearning disabilities. Learning DisabilitiesResearch & Practice, 8, 35-43.

Wagner, M., D'Amico, R., Marder, C., New-man, L., & Blackorby, J. (1992). What hap-pens next? Trends in postschool outcomes ofyouth with disabilities. The second compre-hensive report from the National Longitudi-nal Transition Study of Special EducationStudents. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

Wagner, M., Newman, L., D'Amico, R., Jay, E.,Butler-Nalin, P., Marder, C., Cox, R.(1991). Youth with disabilities: How are theydoing? The first comprehensive report fromthe National Longitudinal Transition Study ofSpecial Education Students. Menlo Park, CA:SRI International.

Woodcock, R. (1978). Woodcock-Johnson Psy-choeducational Battery. Circle Pines, MN:American Guidance Service.

Author NoteThis project was supported by the Iowa Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education, using EHA PartB discretionary funds. We gratefully acknowledge Merry Maitre, who originated the Iowa StatewideT'ollow-upStudy; Timothy Z. Keith, who helped refine the data gathering procedures; Valerie Cool, Linda Cooper, and RonCarson, who served as research associates for the project; and the special education directors, task force mem-bers, and interviewers, who made the project a success. Correspondence should be directed to Patricia L.Sitlington, Department of Special Education, The University of tVorthern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0601

100106.

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 101-112© 1994 AIWA Publisher

Effectiveness of Special EducationPrograms Deriving Empirical Strategies

for Efficient Resource Allocation

Howard L. Garber, Maurice McInerney, Raja Velu

Abstract: The authors report findings of a benefit-cost analysis of special education for youthwith disabilities. The cost of their public school instruction was evaluated in terms of theirpost school employment status. The analysis confirmed that the cost of their education is abouttwice that of non-disabled students. The authors also found that measures of social andprevocational competence were better predictors of post-school employment status than thetraditional measures of academic performance. An administrative plan to improve specialeducation through a reallocation of available resources is presented.

Two facts create a seemingly intracta-ble deterrence to the efficient administra-tion of special education school pro-grams. On the one hand, not only is theaverage cost of public instruction for achild with a. disability twice that of theirregular education peer (U.S. Departmentof Education, 1989) but the total cost ofsuch programs has risen steadily withincreasing numbers of students since thepassage of the Education for All Handi-capped Children Act (PL 94-142) (e.g.,Parrish, 1994). On the other hand,school administrators of special educa-tion programs have been unable to an-swer critics who argue that despite all oftheir costs, special education programsfor children with a disabilty are not par-ticularly effective. Over 200,000 adoles-cents and young adults with disabilitiesexit special education high school pro-grams each year (U.S. Department ofEducation, 1993) but more than half of

these youths fail to find appropriate jobs(Wagner, 1989). This inefficiency impliessevere criticism for the management ofspecial education school programs.

The present study examined the effi-ciency of public school special educationon the post-school employability ofyouths with a handicapping condition.Because we understand that youths withhandicapping conditions have difficultyin gaining employment in the early timeperiod after exiting school, we askedmore specifically whether the allocationpatterns of education resources in schoolcould be modified so as to increase therate of successful post-school adjust-ment. In other words, we examined thequestion of whether limited funds couldbe spent more effectively and thus moreefficiently. Our approach is to make spe-cial education more prevention-oriented.

This study's hypothesis was that theefficiency and effectiveness of special

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994

107101

education can be measured by relatingper-pupil program costs, not only to theamount, but also to how they are spent,to the post-school status of former stu-dents.

There are three key steps to evaluatethis hypothesis.

1. Identify Special Education ProgramCosts. Determine accurately what spe-cial programs cost and how that costis constituted in order to assess theimpact of these programs;

2. Evaluate Special Education Pro-grams. Analyze the post-school statusof students who exited from specialprograms with respect to that pro-gram's impact on their communitystatus, e.g., employment;

3. Identify Future Program Needs.Consider reallocating the program'sresource as a function of performanceoutcomes in order to develop optionsfor future program modification, e.g.,changing staffing patterns.

This hypothesis postulates that thepost school community status of specialeducation students can be differentiatedby both tl,e content of these youths' spe-cial edu ation program during highschool as well as their personal (socialand prevocational) characteristics asyoung adults. In turn, this information onthe present status of former students canbe translated into recommendations forimproving service delivery to current stu-dents. These data on special programcosts and post-school outcomes were ob-tained from a cooperating public schooldistrict in Stoughton, Wisconsin.

Step One: Identify Special ProgramCosts

Method for Cost Calculations

An accurate estimate of per studenteducational expense for his/her educa-tional program requires an accounting of

each student's supported activities atschool and cost of those activities. Basedon the available national statistics forschool costs at the state level, it is esti-mated that roughly two-thirdg of the vari-ation in per-pupil costs can be explainedby teacher salaries (National EducationAssociation, 1987). Thus, a precise esti-mation of teacher expenses can generallylead to a fairly good estimate of per-pupilcosts for different school programs.

In this paper, we generally followed aprocedure to estimate school costs assuggested by Raphael, Singer, & KleinWalker (1985). We aggregated all directteaching costs on a per special programbasis. This was done by identifying thesalaries and fringe benefits for eachteacher or aide with direct instructionalresponsibilities for a particular genericprogram. Salaries and fringe benefits ofsubstitute teachers as well as the cost ofmaterials and supplies were also in-cluded. We apportioned indirect costs forinstructional support and administrativeoverhead on a per-pupil basis.

Many special education studentsspend some of their time in regular edu-cation classrooms with their peers.Therefore, a portion of the salaries andfringe benefits incurred by regular educa-tion staff teaching these courses shouldbe allocated as expenses toward the cor-responding special program. In Wiscon-sin each school district is expected tocompile and report full-time equivalency(FTE) by educational category. FTE indi-cates the percentage of time spent by astudent in both special and regular edu-cation classroom settings. We used theFTE data to estimate the cost of main-streaming students who have a disability.

Characteristics of the SchoolDistrict

The per-pupil cost of each generic pro-gram of special education in our targetschool district was estimated for the1984-85 salool year. The district was

10210.8

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

selected because of its long history ofsuccessful special programs. The year1984-85 was selected because it markeda change in the delivery of special educa-tion services within the district. In par-ticular, special education at the highschool was modified that year to includenot only curricular options for basic aca-demic training, but also expanded oppor-tunities for vocational education practicaand on-the-job training of youths withspecial needs. This provided a naturallyoccurring basis for examining the effec-tiveness of these new program initiativesas well as efficiency in the related man-agement plans to allocate available re-sources. The total student population inthe district is moderate with approxi-mately 2,900 students. This is somewhathigher than the state average. There aretwo elementary schools, one middleschool, and one high school in the dis-trict. The student-teacher ratio was16.63 to 1. This is consistent with thestate average of 16 students to 1 teacher.The school community is a medium-sized town in Wisconsin with a totalpopulation of 8,700 people. The commu-nity supports a variety of small busi-nesses and shops. It is located in a semi-rural part of the state but in closeproximity to industrialized areas.

Cost Findings

Table 1 itemizes program costs forregular education and special educationstudents for the 1984-85 school year. Itcosts, on the average, $6,093 to educatea special education student. When main-streaming is taken into account, teachersalaries and fringe benefits accounted formost of the total cost (about 65.6%). Ad-ministrative and other overhead costsamounted to $1,368, or about 22.5% ofthe total cost. Instructional support costsmade up the remaining 11.9% of the ex-penses for this school year.

A further analysis of these cost figuresrevealed significant cost differencesacross special education programs.

Teacher salaries and fringe benefits rep-resent the largest share of the total costper student in each special program.However, these salaries on a per-studentbasis were different for different genericprograms. For example, the costs of edu-cating a "typical" student enrolled in aclass for the Emotionally Disturbed (ED)was $7,922 per year, while the cost was$4,691 for a "typical" Early Childhood(EC) student. In fact, it appears that itwas 69% more expensive to educate astudent in an ED class than an EC stu-dent. These observed differences in spe-cial program costs for our target schooldistrict were consistent with other litera-ture reports (e.g., Kakalik, 1979; McIn-erney, Kane, and Pelavin, 1992).

Large discrepancies in the cost of dif-ferent special programs can be explainedby a combination of factors. These in-clude (a) program needs for fixed equip-ment, (b) the student-teacher ratio, and(c) the degree of mainstreaming. Thesefactors are generally subject to local ad-ministrative review. For example, publicschool districts in Wisconsin have somelatitude in defining specific student-teacher ratios for particular special pro-grams. As such, from a managementplanning perspective, administrative de-cisions to allocate available resourcesacross various special programs could bereviewed in terms of these factors andmodified.

Step Two: Evaluate Special Programs

Method for Benefit Calculations

Using benefit-cost analysis to evaluateeducational programs is a relatively newapplication of a standard technique (e.g.,Kerachsky and Thornton, 1987; Nobleand Conley, 1987). In general, the analy-sis requires (1) specifying at least twoalternative options to deliver specialservices, (2) identifying all costs and allbenefits for each alternative, and (3) ex-pressing all identified costs and benefits

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 109 103

Table 1. Summary of Special Education Program Expenses by Special Education Category(1984-85)

Total Costs Costs by Special Education Category

Reg .Ed.N=2659

Sp. Ed.N=264

ECN=32

EDN=46

LDN=143

EMRN=21

TMRN=22

L Direct Teaching Costs $1,904 $4,354 $2,955 $6,185 $3,646 $5,517 $6,093

teacher salaries & fringebenefits

cost of mainstreaming

1,745

0

3,140

855

2,593

0

4,643

1,181

2,175

1,109

4,544

611

5,173

0

instructional supplies 159 362 362 362 362 362 362

II. Instructional Support 368 368 368 368 368 368 368

III. Administrathe Costs 1,368 1,368 1,368 1,368 1,368 1,368 1,368

Cost per pupil 3,640 6,093 4,691 7,922 5,382 7,253 7,829

Rate of Mainstreaming 0 48.8% 0.0% 67.4% 63.3% 34.8% 0.0%

Student per Teacher 16.1 11.5 9.1 4.8 15.9 8.4 3.7

Special education categories are: Early Childhood (EC), Emotionally Disturbed (ED), Learning Disabled(LD), Educable Mentally Retarded (EMR), and Trainable Mentally Retarded (TMR).ill

as dollar amounts. For each step, impor-tant methodological issues must be ad-dressed before observed benefit-cost ra-tios can be calculated and compared.

In most public school districts, onlyone option to deliver special education isavailable. Children are placed in a par-ticular special program only after formaldiagnosis of a particular exceptional edu-cational need. Because placement may, ineffect, be a proxy for severity of handicap-ping condition, no alternative programoption is available for benefit-cost com-parisons. The lack of a "true" controlgroup means that only hypothetical "posthoc" comparisons can be made.

Lewis, Bruininks, Thurlow andMcGrew ( 1988) addressed these metho-dologic concerns when evaluating pro-

grams of special education in Minnesotaand Vermont. These authors analyzed thebenefit-cost ratios of special programsagainst the hypothetical alternative of in-stitutionalization. This alternative wouldprovide each handicapped child witheight years of regular education and thenplace him or her in an institution, begin-ning at 14 years of age, for the rest of hisor her life. Many argue that institutionali-zation is neither an appropriate nor anecessary care option for most childrenwith handicaps (Lakin & Bruininks,1985). In fact, large institutions are clos-ing in most states (Braddock. 1986;Stephens, Lakin, Brauen, and O'Reilly,1990). This makes the hypothetical alter-native of institutionalization somewhatobsolete.

104 11 0 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Instead, we evaluated the special edu-cation programs in terms of post-schoolstatus of students who exited these pro-grams. We assumed that special programcosts were similar across the years ofenrollment for all the targeted formerstudents. Monetary benefit data wasbased on post-school employment histo-ries one year after high school exit. Weprojected lifetime earnings and acceptedlimitations due to discounting factors(e.g., expected mortality rates). All costand benefit data are adjusted for theirpresent values in 1985 dollars.

Characteristics of the StudentSample

The sample comprised 37 former stu-dents of special education programs inour target school district. As high schoolstudents, each student had been formallyevaluated and identified as handicappeddue to problems of learning and/or be-havioral adjustment. These were 16. 11and 10 students, respectively, in specialeducation classes for students with men-tal retardation, learning disabilities oremotional disturbance. This sample rep-resented 45% of a specified cohort offormer students. These youth had exitedhigh school between 1979 and 1984 andat the time of the survey (1985), the me-dian time since high school exit was threeyears. There were 22 males and 15 fe-males in the sample. There were sevenwho failed to graduate from high school.

Each youth was personally interviewedin his/her home using a standard sched-ule of instruments. The protocol pro-vided information on demographic char-acteristics, post-school employmenthistories and social and prevocationalcompetence as sung adults. We used alocus of control scale (Nowicki & Strick-land, 1973), a normed self-rating scale ofbehavior management (Behavior RatingProfile. Brown & Hammil, 1983) and anormed test of general young adultknowledge (Test of Practical Knowledge,Wiederholt & Larson, 1983). Their

school records were also searched for IQdata and school achievement data (read-ing and mathematics grade equivalentscores). This yielded estimates of theircognitive, reading, and mathematics skilllevels as high school students.

Benefit Findings

Information on the monetary benefit ofspecial education included five categoriesof post-school employment data: (1) typeof job, (2) number of jobs held since highschool exit, (3) number of months em-ployed, (4) hours worked per month inthe months employed, and (5) hourlywages. Approximately one-third of theformer students were never employed intheir first year after high school. Amongthose who were employed, half held un-skilled jobs. A high job turnover wasobserved as expected because of the na-ture of the jobs. Roughly one-third of theemployed former students had at leasttwo jobs in their first year after highschool. These youth did, however, workmost of the year. The median employ-ment was ten months. Most had workedalmost full-time during those months.

Table 2 presents benefit-cost calcula-tions for actual special program place-ments. We used the data entries in Table1 for the projections of special educationcosts in Table 2. These costs are some-what higher than special program costsas reported in Minnesota but are consis-tent with national estimates (e.g., Moore,Strang, Schwartz, and Braddock, 1988).

The average annual income is $2,578before taxes for all former students in oursample, while the average for employedyouth is $3,974. These averages aresomewhat lower than wages in Minnesotabut similar to wages in Vermont as re-ported by Lewis, Bruininks, Thurlow andMcGrew (1988). It is possible that rate ofpay for entry level positions are higher inlarge urban areas (e.g., Minneapolis)than in more rural settings in Wisconsinand Vermont.

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 105

111

Table 2. Benefit-Cost Comparison of Special School Program

Impact:

Benefits:

Analytical Perspective

Social Student Rest of Society

Earnings $37,376 $37,376 SO

Fringe Benefits 5,606 5,606 0

Taxes 0 (8,596) 8,596

Costs: Special Education (73,116) 0 (73.11G)

It follows from Table 2, the return onthe educational investment of these for-mer students still lags behind the cost ofeducating them. Their earnings in 85-86constant dollars is less than one-half ofthe total schooling cost. We may not beable to fully bridge this gap but we cancome up with alternative programs thatwill at least narrow this.

Factors Influencing Differential Benefits

Further analysis on the employmentdata revealed that the average monthlysalary for high school graduates ($250)is nearly four times larger than that ofhigh school drop-outs ($63) and thatmales ($249) tended to do better thanfemales ($169). Both Hasazi, Gordonand Roe (1985) and de Bettencourt, Zigmond and Thornton (1989) reportedsimilar high school graduation and gen-der differences in post-school employ-ment histories for youth with a handicap-ping condition living in rural areas. Wealso found that former students em-ployed at skilled jobs on the averageearned 30% more than former studentsemployed in unskilled jobs. In general.these data suggest that there is a differ-ential benefit, i.e., some youth did muchbetter than others.

This leads to a straightforward ques-tion: Why are some former students ableto find appropriate jobs and why are

others unsuccessful? In particular, weasked whether there were any differencesin either basic academic skills or socialand prevocational skill's among the em-ployed, underemployed, and unem-ployed youths in our sample.

We evaluated youths in terms of aver-age monthly earnings it the first yearafter school exit. Other authors (e.g.,Hasazi, Gordon & Roe, 1985; Richard-son, Koller & Katz, 1988) used percent oftime employed as the criterion variable.We chose earning because it reflected thequality of a job. Both school records (IQ,Reading, and Math scores) and social andprevocational tests (Locus of Control, Be-havior Rating Profile and the Test of Prac-tical Knowledge scores) were used as pre-dictors of average earnings. Earningswere adjusted to their 1985 present val-ues.

Table 3 summarizes the regression re-sults. The predictors in all explained53.4% of the total variance in the averageearnings. Of that amount, 43.7% was ac-counted for by the social and prevoca-tional tests, primarily locus of controlscores. School records accounted foronly 8.5% of the variance.

This analysis revealed that post-schoolmonthly wages were significantly relatedto social and prevocational competence,but were only marginally related to basic

106 Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

.00

academic skills. In fact, the basic aca-demic training program was effective ininfluencing post-school success only forthose former students with significantlyhigher social and prevocational testscores. Each of these youth had beenafforded a rather traditional high schoolspecial education program. Their special

(Step 2) is that the special program waseffective only for those former studentswith comparatively high social and pre-vocational test scores. These competen-cies, however, were not directly related tothe curricular content of these youths'special school programs, viz. basic aca-demic training. In other words, the spe-

Table 3. Regression Analysis of Average Earnings on Test Scores*

Test Scores Mean StandardDeviation

Coefficient t-ratio Sequential Sumof Squares

Monthly Earning 215 261

IQ Score 79 14 -3.100 0.99 49751

Reading Grade -4.4 2.3 7.000 033 22926

Mathematics Grade -5.6 23 -56.720 -2.82 164565

Locus of Control Score 56 15 12.032 4.19 954624

Behavior Rating Profile Score 57 26 -1.355 -0.96 32416

Test of Practical Knowledge Score 27.6 24.8 2.645 1.51 87333

Constant -4.950 -1.64

r2 = 53.4%

program featured basic academic train-ing requisites for diploma credentialing.The analyses clearly indicate that the tra-ditional special education program expe-rience does not train skills required forpost-school employment and relatedcommunity adjustment. Therefore, theemphasis of the special program, viz.basic academic training does not appearto be effective.

Step Three: Identify Future ProgramNeeds

Method for Comparing DeliveryModels

The final step in this exercise is toexamine how the information on formerprograms can be used for better instruc-tional needs among current students.What we found in the previous analysis

cial curriculum did not address requisiteskills for post-school employability. Whatis an alternative curriculum?

Specifically, based on our survey, wepostulate that poor social and prevoca-tional skills during high school lead topoor adjustment in the society. Suchauthors as Affleck, Edgar, Levine, andKortering (1990) and Kiernan and Stark(1985) have suggested that deficits inthese skill areas can be appropriatelyaddressed through direct training on corn-pethlve jobs. Accepting these recommen-dations, we further assumed that socialand prevocational competence among cur-rent students could be appropriatelytrained through expanded opportunitiesfor vocational education practica and com-petitive job training during the high schoolyears.

During the 1984-85 school year, theschool district cooperating in this study

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 107

113

began a new program of alternative learn-ing for handicapped and economicallydisadvantaged high school students. Theprogram itself was part of a larger initia-tive in Wisconsin to create school part-nerships with industry (Grover, 1986).The high school principal developed thealternative program by reassigning exist-ing staff to a special resource room.These teachers provided target studentswith basic academic tutoring and careercounseling at school and supervised so-cial and prevocational training on localjob sites. In its first year, the programserved approximately 100 youth and wasstaffed by one former special educationand three former regular educationteachers.

The alternative learning program wasan adjunct to the existing system to de-liver special education services. In otherwords, during 1984-85, the local highschool offered two distinct curricular op-tions for handicapped adolescents. Oneoption was traditional and featured basicacademic training toward a high schooldiploma; the other was an alternativelearning program which included ex-panded opportunities for pre-employ-ment experience, viz. vocational educa-tion practica and on-the-job training. Byexamining how teachers and studentsspent their time in each program option,it was possible to compare differentstrategies to allocate available school re-sources. This information, in turn, couldbe used to calculate more effective andefficient management plans to providefor the transition needs of current stu-dents.

Characteristics of the Sample

A sample of 22 teachers employed at thelocal high school during 1984-85 was ex-amined. Staff participation in the studywas voluntary. There were ten regular edu-cation and eight vocational educationteachers in the sample. Two special educa-tion teachers and two teachers assigned tothe new alternative learning program were

also surveyed. The sample comprised31% of the available instructional staff.

We analyzed how these 22 teachers andtheir students spent time during a typicalweek at school. The ceachers completed abrief survey questionnaire. The protocolspecified four different types of teacheractivity: (a) administrative record keeping,(b) daily lesson preparation, (c) group orsmall-group instruction, and (d) individual(one-to-one) instruction. These four activi-ties, in effect, reflected different job respon-sibilities. The teachers were asked to re-port how much time they spent in eachactivity during an average work week. Thepercent of time or effort expended to fulfill(note corrected spelling) a particular jobresponsibility was then calculated.

Student class schedules for 1984-85were also examined. These data revealedhow the students, taught by the teacherssurveyed, spent time at school. The infor-mation was aggregated with respect to per-cent of classroom instruction afforded byprograms of regular education, specialeducation, vocational education, as well asthe new alternative learning program.

Program Management Rndings

Table 4 contains a comparison of re-source allocation needs for the specialeducation program option of basic aca-demic training to the alternative optionwhich includes pre-employment experi-ence. The distribution of hours for anaverage work week for teachers (40hours) and students (35 hours) is sum-marized. Average hours are aggregatedwith respect to different teacher respon-sibilities for instruction and different stu-dent schedules for enrolled courses. Thisdistribution of teacher and student hoursbecomes the basis for comparing re-source allocation needs under the basicacademic versus alternative learningmodels.

Table 4 reveals that program manage-ment decisions substantially influencehow teachers allocate their time in an

108

114Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

average work week. Within the basic aca-demic model, teachers spend, on aver-age, half of their week fulfilling adminis-trative duties (record keeping and lessonplans) and half in direct instruction(group and individual). Under the alter-native learning model, this ratio changes.These teachers were required to spendconsiderable time off school grounds su-pervising job placement sites. As a resultof this management plan, teachers in thealternative learning program are enabledto spend more time in individual instruc-tion than their basic academic counter-parts.

Table 4 further reveals that differentmanagement options to deliver specialprograms also impact on how studentsspend their time at school. Students witha handicapping condition enrolled in ba-sic academic training spent 18 of 35 classperiods in regular education (52%), 12periods in special education (34%) andfive periods in vocational education(14%) each week. The large percent oftime in regular and vocational educationreflects an administrative decision at thedistrict level to mainstream handicappedstudents whenever possible.

Table 4. Comparison of Need for Allocation of Teacher and Student Resources Under the Ba-sic Academic Versus Alternative

Learning Program Models

Resource Allocation Needs

Distriburpon of Hours for an Average Work Week

Basic Academic Model Alternative Learning Model

A. Teacher Responsibilities

1. Record keeping 8 7

2. Lesson preparation 12 2

3. C ,,tip instruction 11 11

4. Individual instruction 9 20

Total Hours per Week 40 40

B. Student Class Schedule

1. Regular education 18 13

2. Special education 12 7

3. Vocational education 5 5

4. Pre-employment experience 0 10

Total Hours per Week 35 35

Note that data regarding distribution of hour was compiled from two sources, namely a) Teacher survey ques-tionnarics (N=22 or 31% of staff) and b) student class schedules (N=50 handicapped students or 100% of EENstudents fjr the 1984.85 school year)

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 109

..115

On the other hand, students enrolledin the alternative learning program spentten of 35 class periods per week (29%)receiving pre-employment experience onlocal job sites. This was accomplished byreducing the amount of time spent inboth regular and special education byone (50 minute) class period per day.Time spent in vocational education re-mained the same. These small shifts instudent time did not affect observed stu-dent-teacher ratios.

From a program management perspec-tive, it is important to note that the deliverysystem modification required to initiatethe new alternative learning programs wasaccomplished at little or no extra cost. Thekey was to modify the more traditionalacademic curriculum to anticipate thepost-school demands; specifically, com-petitive job training to increase social andprevocational competence. The programitself was developed through a manage-ment decision to reallocate existing re-sources by reassigning staff and modifyingtheir job responsibilities.

Final demonstration of the efficiency ofthe alternative program, of course,awaits an empirical analysis of the ad-justment success of these special educa-tion students in the community. Based onthe preliminary data, the delivery modelitself appears promising (Garber & McIn-erney, 1989). Similar initiatives for newalternative programs have been reportedto be successful in other school districtsin Wisconsin (Sherry & Gilles, 1987).These programs report, among otherfindings, increases in grade point averageand rates of high school graduation forprogram participants. Positive post-school evaluation results for the alterna-tive program in our target school districtwould further confirm the efficiency ofthis curricular option.

Discussion

This study generally confirmed that

special education costs for children witha handicapping condition are roughlytwice the cost of regular education young-sters, and cost data for 1984-85 in thecooperating school district was similar tocurrent national estimates, consistentwith research reports in Minnesota andVermont when urban-rural differencesare controlled.

These data also revealed that most for-mer special education students fail toattain satisfactory vocational placementsin the first 12 months after their highschool exit. An evaluation of the postschool status of the students revealed twocompeting profiles of vocatimally suc-cessful and unsuccessful youth. One sub-group generally found and maintainednearly full-time competitive jobs at self-sufficient wages. The remaining two-thirds of the sample, however, was oftenunemployed and at best underemployedat sub-minimum wage jobs for the firstyear after their high school exit. Mostimportantly, however, is the fact that theprofile of success or failure had little todo with the academic training program,presumedly directed toward the prepara-tion of these youth for post-school expe-riences.

This study demonstrated that themore successful former students ap-peared to benefit from factors in additionto or besides the special academic in-struction they received at school. Specifi-cally, we found that successful vocationaladjustment after high school is less re-lated to academic performance in schooland more related to measures of socialand prevocational competence. Perform-ance in these areas receives neither for-mal nor substantial emphasis on the spe-cial education program.

Accepting the need to train deficit so-cial and prevocational skills during highschool, we have argued that it is possibleto modify teaching responsibilities to de-velop an alternative program to meet stu-dents' special instructional needs. Be-

110

116Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

cause only existing staff are utilized, the no additional special education funds.required program modification required

References

Affleck, J.Q., Edgar, E.E., Levine, P., &Kortering, L. (1990). Post-school status ofstudents classified as mildly mentally re-tarded, learning disabled, and non-handi-capped: Does it get better with time?Education and Training in Mental Retarda-tion, 25 (4), 315-324.

Braddock, D. (1986). Federal policy towardmental retardation and developmental dis-abilities. Baltimore: Brooks.

Brown, L.L. & Hammil, D.D. (1983). BehaviorRating Profile (Test Protocols and ScoringGuidelinei). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Center for Education Statistics (1987). The con-dition of education. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office.

de Bettencourt, L.U., Zigmond, N. & Thorn-ton, H. (1989). Follow-up of postsecondary-age rural learning disabled graduates anddrop-outs. Exceptional Children, 56(1), 40-49.

Garber, H.L. & McInerney, M. (1989). Preven-tive rehabilitation. American Rehabilitation,14(4), 2-12.

Grover, H.J. (1986). Department of public in-struction's plan for implementing rules for thestandards and how at-risk youth will be af-fected Paper press fitc.ki at the Department ofPublic Instruction's Job Training and SpecialNeeds Conference, Education is a Form ofWork Work is a Form of Education, Madison,WI.

Hasazi, S.B., Gordon, L.R., & Roe, C.A. (1985).Factors associated with the employmentstatus of handicapped youth exiting highschool from 1979 to 1983. Exceptional Chil-dren, 51, 455-469.

Kakalik, J.S. (1979). Issues in the cost and fi-nance of special education. Review of Re-search in Education. Washington, D.C.:American Educational Research Association.

Kerachsky, S. & Thornton, C. (1987). Findingsfrom the STETS transitional employmentdemonstration. Exceptional Children, 53(6),515-521.

Kiernan, W. & Stark, J. (1985). Pathways to

employment for developmentally disabledadults. Baltimore: Brooks.

Lakin, K.C. & Bruininks, R.H. (Eds.) (1985).Strategies for achieving community integra-tion for developmentally disabled citizens.Baltimore: Brooks.

Lewis, D.R., Bruininks, R.H., Thurlow, M. &McGrew, K. (1988). Using benefit-costanalysis in special education. ExceptionalChildren, 55(3), 203-214.

McInerney, M., Kane, M., & Pelavin, S. (1992).Services to children with serious emotionaldisturbance. (U.S. Congress mandated study).Washington D.C.: Office of Policy and Plan-ning, U.S. Department of Education.

Moore, M.T., Strang, E.W.; Schwartz, M., &Braddock, D. (1988). Patterns in special edu-cation service delivery and cost. WashingtonD.C.: Decision Resources Corporation.

National Education Association (1987). Esti-mates of School Statistics. Washington, D.C.

Noble, J.H. & Conley, R.W. (1987). Accumulat-ing evidence on the benefits and costs of sup-ported and transitional employment forpersons with severe disabilities. Journal ofthe Association of the S'verely Handicapped,12(3), 163-174.

Nowicki, W. & Strickland, B.R. (1973). A locusof control scale for children. Journal of Con-sulting and Clinical Psychology, 40, 148-154.

Parrish, T.B. (1994). Fiscal issues relating tospecial education inclusion. Invited Paperpresented at the Wingsread Conference onBarriers to Inclusive Inclusion. Racine (WI).

Raphael, F.., Singer, J.D., & Klein Walker, D.(1985). Per-pupil expenditures on specialeducation in three metropolitan school dis-tricts. Journal of Education Finance, 11, 69-88.

Richardson, S.A., Koller, H., & Katz, M.(1988). Job histories in open employment ofa population of young adults with mental re-tardation:l. American Journal of Mental Re-tardation, 92(6), 483-491.

Sherry, W. & Gilles, S. (1987). End of yearevaluation results on the designated voca-

Volume 9, No. 1, 1994 111

117

4

tional instructor program. Madison: Wiscon-sin Department of Public Instruction.

Stephens, S.A., Lakin, K.C., Brauen, M., &O'Reilly, F. (1990). The study of programs ofinstruction for handicapped children andyouth in day and residential facilities. Wash-ington D.C.: Office of Special Education Pro-grams, U.S. Department of Education.

U.S. Department of Education (1989). Eleventhannual report to Congress on the implemen-tation of the Education of the HandicappedAct. Washington D.C.: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

Authors:

Howard L. GarberMilwaukee Center for IndependenceMilwaukee, Wisconsin

Maurice McInerneyChesapeake InstituteWashington, D.C.

Raja VeluCollege of Business and EconomicsUniversity of Wisconsin-Whitewater

U.S. Department of Education (1993). Fifteenthannual report to Congress on the implemen-tation of the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation Act. Washington D.C.: U.S. Gov-ernment Printing Office.

Wagner, M. (1989). The transition experiencesof youth with disabilities: A report from thenational longitudinal transition study. Cali-fornia: SRI International.

Wiederholt, J.L. & Larson, S.C. (1983). Test ofpractical knowledge (Test Protocols and Scor-ing Guidelines). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

1121,18

Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

nio.111)0.1

Israel

ROUND THE WORLD of-Special Edocation and...... .................WO ......................................................

Issues in Special Education & Rehabil "tation. Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994, pp. 113-116O 1994 All VA Publisher

Desktop Publishing Enterprise -Established by a Group of Physically

Disabled Enthusiasts

"AHVA', the Association of the disabledof Haifa and the North of Israel, wasfounded in 1979 as a non-profit organi-zation. It was started by a small group ofphysically disabled persons who wereunited by the goal to organize a socialclub for other persons with similarhandicaps and difficulties. Sincethen, the organization has grown andnow includes several hundredmembers. "AHVA" operates a variety ofsocial, cultural and educational activi-ties. It runs a transportation service formembers who have mobility difficulties,which is especially adapted for disabledpersons in wheel chairs. "AHVA' has achess team that participates in nationaland international competitions. Itprovides computer courses for disabledand multiply handicapped persons hohave additional disabilities such as sightor hearing impairment, brain d -image orwho have suffered a stroke. It offers spe-cial courses for new immigrants with dis-abilities In Hebrew, English and com-puter skills.

In April 1993, a desk top publishingenterprise was started. Eight graduatesof the computer courses, provided by the'AHVA' sociation formed the core of thenew company. The range of handicaps inthe group is quite wide; includingskeleto-muscular and neurological dis-orders, amputation, vision and hearingdisorders, a combination of physical dis-ability and mental illness. Three are con-

fined to wheelchairs. Two others wereemployed, one is an expert in desk topcomputer publishing, the other is theadministrator.

The initial budget that enabled thepurchase of up-to-date equipment camefrom a variety of sources: the JewishAgency, the National Insurance Institute,the Ministry of Welfare and private dona-tions. During its first year of operation ithas published magazines, brochures,commercial advertisements, and busi-ness correspondences. The companyaims at high quality publications whichdemand precision and sophisticateduse of computers. Soon after its opening,"AHVA" publishers were contacted bythe editor of the journal - Issues in Spe-cialblnv Education and RehabilitationUSER) with a request to be its publishers.

Towards the end of its first year ofoperation, the board of directors of the"AHVA" association conducted a surveyof the employees' perceptions of theirindividual progress in the mastery of so-phisticated computer work and satisfac-tion with their team work. They werealso asked to indicate their individualinterests in service training. The surveyconsisted of 4 parts - technical skills,occupational skills, social skills andpersonal satisfaction.

Results of the survey were as follows:Technical skills - all employees listedbetween one to four different types of newsoftware programs mastered and theyall learned to choose and use the mostsuitable software for a given task All em-ployees indicated that they have attainedmastery in designing and structuring aprinted page.

Occupational skills - 75 per cent of the

Volume 9, No 1, 1994

119113

team has had previous experience inworking fixed hours, while for the re-maining 25 per cent this was newlylearned behavior. Another importantskill which was indicated by 60 per centof employees, was the ability to establishoperational goals, and the ability to or-ganize the entire work process inde-pendently, from beginning to end.

Social skills - the most outstandingfinding was that all employees perceivedtheir team experience as very importantand emphasized the unique sense of mu-tual understanding and suppor resultingfrom their shared experience of having ahandicap. There were, however, differ-ences of opinion concerning the bestway to resolve work related problems.While 25 per cent of the employees sawteam meetings as an effective method ofalleviating and resolving problems, an-other 25 per cent regarded it as useless,and the remaining half considered it aseither useless or unnecessary. All em-ployees indicated their desire to be in-volved in public relations for the newlyformed enterprise.

Personal satisfaction - all employeesexpressed a sense of achievement andfeelings of satisfaction. They specificallyemphasized their new self-image asworkers and as belonging to a team witha goal.

The second part of the survey pre-sented the same four areas with the re-quest from the employees to indicatetheir individual desires for further train-ing.

In the area of technical skills, most(90%) wanted to learn more in the fieldof desk top publishing. They expressed astrong desire to learn everything newpertaining to desk top publishingequipment. They all indicated a desire tocontinue to learn and increase their mas-tery of new software programs, comput-erized graphic systems, the use of a scan-ner, and color printing. A third of theemployees stated that they are striving

for "achieving professional inde-pendence".

Several requests were made in thearea of occupational skills. A few (13%)indicated that they would have liked tohave had weekly goals and objectives setindividually, rather than the existingprocedure in which the administrativeand technical managers plan and estab-lish individual plans of work. Others(13%) felt that it should be the team'sprerogative to establish plans and objec-tives.

All employees expressed the desire tolearn more in the area of public relationsand to contribute to the visibility of"AHVA' publishers.

All employees expressed a strong per-sonal desire to continue their profes-sional growth.

It can be concluded from the results ofthe survey that the "AHVA' publisherteam has perceived its first year in opera-tion as beneficial and the membersstressed their sincere desire to continueto learn and grow so that they may thrivein the competitive market.

"AHVA"'s example highlights a changethat is taking place in rehabilitation,that is, a change from facility basedservices and programs created for peoplewith disabilities, to community basedoccupational choices, initiated and real-izediv by the people with disabilitiesthemselves (Brown et al., 1992)Such a transformation empowers work-ers, like "AHVA"s team to "speak forthemselves" effectively at governmental,agency, and community levels. The exam-ple of "AHVA" should encourage theself employment of other persons withdisabilities, whether individually or inteams.

References:

Brown, R., Bayer, P., & Brown, P. (1992). Em-powerment and Developmental Handicaps:Choices and Quality of Life. London: Chap-man and Hall.

114 6U Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

Correspondence should be sent toTibi Goldman,"AHVA" Publisher, 42 AllenbyRoad, 33056 Haifa, Israel.

Israel

"A dog brings hope"A Proffessional Kennels Run by

Members of "Kfar Tikvah"a Village for Persons with

Mental Handicapps

One does not argue with success, evenif it is not measured by research statis-tics. You can simply sit on the lawn inKfar Tikvah and witness a new form ofco-existence: people and dogs, trainersand trainees, another small step in thedirection pursued by the management ofKfar Tikvah since the 1970's - to bringthe mentally-handicapped as close aspossible to a normal life-style.

Kfar Tikvah was founded in 1964 as anon-profit public company. The intentionwas to found a permanent home andwork-place for this sector of the popula-tion, whilst providing a guarantee to par-ents that their children would be lookedafter all their lives. Kfar Tikvah is some-times the last hope for the mentallyhandicapped to live a social, productiveand healthy life.

Small houses, similar to those on theIsraeli kibbutz, the feeling of privacy inthe heart of green, hilly surroundings,and productive work eight hours a day,all provide members with a purpose forliving.

"I would like a wife and children. As apunishment from G-d, I have no chil-dren. The dogs are like my children" saysEyal, mentally-handicapped and suffer-ing from an emotional disorder, who isparticipating in the first project of itskind in the world in Kfar Tikvah, using

canine assisted therapy. Eyal adds, "Thedogs make my isolation easier to bear.When I tend them and play with them, itdefinitely calms me down."

Shuki Levinger, deputy administratorof Kfar Tikvah, tells us that the idea togive mentally-handicapped people dogsas a form of treatment was born when helived in the village with his family. Henoted that members who came to visithim formed great attachment to his dogs.Eyal, who was one of these visitors, askedLevinger for a dog to raise in his house inorder to ward off his loneliness. Afterreceiving a dog, there was a stunningimprovement in Eyal's condition. Thepsychotic attacks from which he sufferedceases and did not return, so far for aperiod of three years. His feeling of satis-faction with life also improved amazingly.Levinger says, "I have no doubt that thisis what saved Eyal. Today he can comehome irritable, angry and frustrated, butwhen he pats the dog and allows himselfto cry with her, he feels that she acceptsand loves him as he is, and this sootheshim."

"Normal" society is stigmatic, and thehandicapped person must fight all his lifeagainst misguided attitudes and socialjudgement. A dog on the other hand, pro-vides unconditional love, and it is easierfor all of us to love something that acceptsus as we are, without demanding com-parisons, exaggerated demands or strug-gles for control.

Research in Israel and abroad hasproved that handicapped people such asthose at frfar Tikvah, have the ability offorming deep relationships with animalsand especially dogs. The handicappedpeople can, like anyone, is thirsty forlove, touch, caresses and relaxation. Ca-nine care develops a feeling of responsi-bility, self-respect and independence inthe handicapped person.

In modern industrial society, with itsalienation, remoteness and retreat intoitself, a dog serves as a bridge in the

Volume 9, No 1, 1994

121115

building of social contact. Even exhibi-tions serve as a sport in which handi-capped people can participate. When thehandicapped person's dog wins, thehandicapped person also wins a chanceto bridge the social stigma surroundinghim, and to form integrative contactswith normal people.

'INvo years' experience with a numberof dogs and other members of the villagebrought results that far exceeded whathas been written on the subject in re-search papers. Long-standing membersof Kfar Tikvah have learned about work-ing with dogs and spend many hours inthe kennels and in the training yard.

Within a few months the influence wasfelt on their emotional condition, in thereduction of outbursts of rage, depres-sion and retreating into themselves. In-stead these patterns of behavior havebeen replaced by joy, concern, caring,and the desire to take responsibility andinitiative. Heart-warming relationshipshave arisen between the handicappedtrainer and the trainee dog.

In view of this success, it was decidedto set up proper professional kennels inthe village, to develop therapy throughthe training of dogs and to breed dogs forthe mentally-handicapped in Kfar Tikvahand outside.

The project includes two branches -one therapeutic and one occupational.The handicapped person supervises thepup in the kennels for half a year, becom-ing involved in the stages of its growthand development, and thus acquires ca-nine skills. When the pup has beenhouse-trained, it is transferred to themember's living quarters, into his careand supervision.

The whole process is supervised byprofessional veterinary doctors and psy-chologists. For part of the therapy, KfarTikvah uses miniature schnauzers thathave been found appropriate because oftheir size, health, easy disposition and

their being a "one-man" dog, and mostimportant of all, because of their abilityto give and receive affection.

The plan is to breed schnauzers thatwill be offered for sale to handicappedchildren and adults living outside thevillage, dogs that will perform a therapeu-tic fitnction based on the experience ac-cumulated in Kfar Tikvah.

The occupational branch was foundedout of the need for income to support thekennels in the therapeutic branch. Thebranch will include boarding kennelswith proper facilities for 40 dogs, a vet-erinary clinic, a dog parlor, dog training,a canine museum and canine exhibitionfacilities. Part of the funding for the ken-nels has already been found, but as Lev-inger points out, the needs are great andresources few. Therefore he turns to dog-lovers and collectors to supply exhibits,books, video cassettes, and trophies, andto veterinary doctors to supply the needsof the veterinary clinic, such as x-rayequipment. Also any donation will be wel-comed for the dog parlor, including abath that can be raised, shearing anddrying machines and hair-cutting tables.

The people at Kfar Tikvah responsiblefor this innovative project consider thatthe idea developed in the village can beused in other places throughout theworld. Everywhere society is becomingmore and more achievement-orientedand sophisticated, and people with limi-tations removing farther and fartheraway from the norm. Dog-breeding andcare can serve as a bridge between thehandicapped person and not malachievement-oriented society, counter-acting the problem of the handicappedperson's alienation in the modern worldin which the power if extended and sup-portive family has weakened.

Correspondence slzould be sent toShull Levinger,I? 0, Box 17, Kfar Tikvah. Tivon,Israel.

116 1° Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation

4

\ 1 ,:i 1 I c I ss

13 0 ( Ill 1 I C' ;

\ c v ,, to al 10 y I

13 (S) (S) L .... I 0) III II .3 Is

111 11.1110)11 \ N11110)1111( CIMICIlls;

9 . *1

--i---arw--

IffikAlt. ',AL41.1

WU III /111109.NA"I If FP ro

aII III I Z

a I

I

I

.

I