Impact of Transition Preparation on Post-Secondary Success
Mary Morningstar, Patricia Noonan, Bruce Frey, Jennifer Ng, Dot Nary, Kendra Williams-Diehm,
Beth Clavenna-Deane, Perry Graves, Ryan Kellems, Zachary McCall, Mary Pearson, Diana K. Wade
3
Research Question
Is there a relationship between the quality of a
student’s high school transition preparation and:1. Knowledge of self-determination;
2. Perceived levels of self-determination;
3. College achievement (GPA);
4. Hope and motivation; and
5. Locus of Control?
4
Sampling
Characteristics of Institutions 12 Total Institutions 5 States (Kansas, Missouri, Texas, Utah, and Washington) Urban, suburban, and small city locations
Criteria for Participants Choice to participate Currently enrolled in post-secondary setting Had an IEP in high school Completed high school 1997 or later
New IDEA transition plan requirements
5
Sampling Process
Initial considerations KU Institutional Review Board (IRB) Contact with disability services facilitators IRB process at participating institutions
Data collection timeline Email to facilitators with flier and request to forward email to
students Facilitators sent email to students Follow up, follow up, follow up
6
Online Survey
Consists of 3 scales
The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale (Wehmeyer, 1995)
Psychological empowerment subscale
Secondary School Student’s Locus of Control Scale (Rehaflt, 2006)
The Adult Trait Hope Scale (Snyder, Harris et al., 1991)
7
Online Survey - Design
Accessibility issues
Challenging to find software that created surveys that were accessible.
EZSurvey by Raosoft
User Testing
8
Online Survey - LogicOnline survey utilized logic so we only collected data from our target population
11
Interview Purpose: To “quantify” the quality of transition program for self-determination Interview Questions
3 Areas of Focus1. Student Involvement in Transition Planning and IEP
Meetings
2. Skill Development & Opportunities for Self-Advocacy and Self-Determination
3. Post-Secondary Outcome Preparation
12
Step 1: Transition Quality Indicators AlignmentIndicators/Standards Reviewed:1. Quality Indicators for
Transition Assessment (Morningstar, 2005)
2. TransQual – (Cornell University, 2006)
3. Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1997)
4. Transition Planning Inventory (Clark & Patton, 1997)
5. Secondary Teachers Transition Survey (Morningstar & Benitez, 2005)
6. National Longitudinal Transition Survey 2 (http://www.nlts2.org/reports/2006_08/nlts2_report_2006_08_complete.pdf)
Alignment
1. Reviewed each assessment
2. Chose only those indicators matched to the 3 interview areas
3. Coded the indicators to align for recurring themes
4. Found emerging themes in the 3 areas from overlap of indicators
5. Used themes to develop questions
13
Step 2: Interview Protocol DevelopmentFirst
Reviewed literature about developing effective recall questions (Fowler, 1995)
Second Question and probe development
Third Question development to elicit memory recall
Fourth Develop the interview protocol (multiple edits)
14
Example: Interview Recall Questions
Example
of
Recall
Questions
What other kinds of things happened in your IEP meetings besides just talking about your goals for the future?
Probe: Some students have told us that during IEP meetings, the team came up with a plan for accomplishing their IEP and transition goals. Other students have said they really didn’t have much help during meetings in developing a transition plan. How did your IEP team work with you to develop a plan for your future goals?
15
Step 3: Rubric Rating Indicator Development
Reviewed rubric research (Arter & McTighe, 2001)
Reviewed rubric examples
Developed a Likert scale with indicators
Provided key words and descriptors for the Likert scale Exemplary – 5 Partial – 3 Poor – 1
16
Rubric Example: Post-Secondary Education and Preparation
Question 11: What kinds of things did you learn in
high school that helped you get ready for college?
5 - Exemplary: Described examples where student systematically (i.e., class sessions) learned the skills (.e.g. study skills, college applications, meeting with counselor, disability services, etc.).
3 – Partial: Described examples where student informally (i.e., help from teachers) learned the skills from the program (.e.g. study skills, college applications, meeting with counselor, disability services, etc.).
1 – Poor: Described few or no experiences (neither systematic nor informal) to learn the skills.
17
Step 4: Pilot Testing
July Interviews
Conducted Inter-rater Reliability
October Interview
Accessibility
18
Results – Preliminary Data
Demographics 94 total responded 21 responded with usable data Large, urban 4-year universities
19
Trends from Initial Survey RespondentsParticipants show high mean scores on all scales
Psychological Empowerment
X = 13.98 (out of 16)
Hope Total Scale Score
X = 6.18 (out of 8)
Locus of Control
X = 3.16 (out of 4)
20
Trends from Initial Survey RespondentsSignificant correlation between GPA and Agency subscale of Hope Scale R(19) = .493, p < .05
Significant correlation between GPA and Locus of Control Scale R(19) = .495, p < .05
Significant correlation between Locus of Control and Agency subscale of Hope Scale R(19) = .908, p < .01
21
Contact InformationBeth Clavenna-Deane
Perry Graves [email protected]
Ryan Kellems [email protected]
Zachary McCall [email protected]
Mary Pearson [email protected]
Diana K. Wade [email protected]
University of Kansas School of Education http://soe.ku.edu/
Mary Morningstar, PhD ~ [email protected]
Patricia Noonan, PhD ~ [email protected]