Item
Relationships Between Self-Determination and Postschool Outcomes for Youth With Disabilities
Metadados
Título
Relationships Between Self-Determination and Postschool Outcomes for Youth With Disabilities
Descrição
The Journal of Special Education - © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2013
Autor
Karrie A. Shogren, PhD1, Michael L. Wehmeyer, PhD2, Susan B. Palmer, PhD2, Graham G. Rifenbark, MA2, and Todd D. Little, PhD2
Língua
Ano que foi publicado
2013
País de Origem
Tipo de pesquisa
Metodologia
This article reports the results of a follow-up analysis of 779 students with disabilities who participated in group-randomized, control group studies designed to examine the efficacy of self-determination interventions in secondary school to examine the relationship between self-determination status when exiting high school and adult outcomes 1 and 2 years post-high school.
Amostra
Participants were 779 students with disabilities recruited from six states (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas) and 50 school districts. Participants were involved in a large-scale project examining the impact of self-determination curricula described previously (Wehmeyer et al., 2011; Wehmeyer et al., 2013). Any par ticipant who was in high school and contributed data to the large-scale project was eligible to participate in the present study. In total, 779 individuals contributed at least one data point to the large-scale project and were included in the present data analysis. At the start of project, participants ranged in age from 14.3 to 21.8 (M = 17.1; SD = 1.5). All participants had Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) while they were in secondary school, and the majority was served under the categorical label of learning (37%) or intellectual disability (30%). Additional demographic infor mation is in Table 1.
Método de Pesquisa
Participants were initially recruited to participate in a longi tudinal study examining the impact of interventions to promote self-determination in secondary school (Wehmeyer et al., 2011; Wehmeyer et al., 2013). The project also involved a 2-year follow-up to explore the impact on adult outcomes, the results of which are reported here. Informed consent was obtained for both phases of the project at the start of the study. To identify participants, project personnel contacted school districts, and districts that agreed to partici pate (n = 50) identified high school campuses to participate. As further described in Wehmeyer et al. (2011) and Wehmeyer et al. (2013), each campus that agreed to participate was assigned to be a “treatment” or “control” campus. The first 3 years of the project involved the implementation of a self determination or control intervention (i.e., family involve ment strategies) on the high school campus. The 2-year follow-up study involved project staff mailing an adult out comes survey to students 1 and 2 years post-school. After initial consent and assent to participate were obtained, base line data were collected prior to study implementation. Baseline data consisted of demographic information and measures of self-determination, including The Arc’s Self Determination Scale (SDS).
Principais Descobertas
Findings suggest that self-determination status upon exiting high school predicts positive outcomes in the domains of achieving employment and community access 1 year post-school, and that exposure to self-determination interventions in secondary school may lead to more stability in student outcomes over time.
Comentário Avaliativo
Clearly, there are several limitations to the present study. First, the sample was not a national sample, although it did represent diverse geographic regions in the Midwest and South. Second, students with diverse personal characteristics were included in the sample, but because of power issues, we were not able to undertake analyses exploring the degree to which these personal characteristics impacted the results. Relatedly, although there was possible nesting within the data (e.g., students nested within schools) because of the sample size and the complexity of the current analyses given the missing data, we were unable to explore the potential impact of the nesting. Third, there were large amounts of missing data. Best practices to address missing data were used; however, exploring additional ways to track student outcome data will be important in future research. Fourth, we chose to include all students who contributed data at any point during the large-scale intervention study. This choice meant that students who provided data for the adult outcomes survey may have been exposed to the intervention for varying periods of time. This influences the interpretation of the treatment group’s outcomes, and indicates the need for fur
ther research exploring the relationship between exposure to self-determination interventions and outcomes. Finally, we were only able to explore a limited number of postschool out come variables because of the need to keep the postschool
outcomes survey brief. While we were able to represent outcomes as latent constructs providing additional insight into how multiple variables cluster together to define outcomes, some latent constructs were difficult to define, particularly at
1 year post-school.
Despite these limitations, this study does suggest that self determination impacts adult outcomes. The manner and degree of impact needs to be further explored in future research; however, when considering the multiple personal and environmental factors that impact adult outcomes, the consistent positive relationship across research studies between self-determination and employment is very prom ising. It suggests that, in practice, teachers can consider self-determination interventions a useful component of their limited instructional time, particularly to promote employment and community access in adulthood.