national survey of transition services for dhh students dcdt international conference october 18,...

National Survey of Transition Services for DHH

Students

DCDT International Conference

October 18, 2007Pamela Luft, Ph.D.

Kent State University

October 2007 Transition Services Preparation & Training

Purpose

Present preliminary data from a national survey of programs serving Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students at secondary levels

Based on directory listing from the American Annals of the Deaf, 2007.All 50 states and DC


Study Rationale

Few systematic studies examine the extent and nature of transition services for DHH students Allen, Rawlings, & Schildroth (1989) was one of the last comprehensive reviews of these services.

Program, student, and counselor surveys

National Longitudinal Transition Surveys #1 and #2

Low response rate from programs


Study Rationale

Publications since have described transition concerns but have not collected program data

Have described transition issues and concerns.

Bowe, 2003; Danek & Busby, 1999; Luckner, 2002.


Study Rationale

Substantial enrollment changes since 1989.

1985: 61% of DHH students (16-22 yrs) served in special schools

2002: 28.5% of DHH students (18-21yrs) served in special schools (U.S. Dept of Educ., 2004)

13.8% DHH (6-21yrs)


Study Rationale

Strong vocational program emphasis in residential schools

What is the impact of placement change on transition preparation of DHH students—What are programs offering/not offering?


Methodology

State contacts:Program categorization

ResidentialLarge: 35 or more students, K-12Small: 34 or fewer studentsPrograms without accurate number listings are contacted and then categorized.

Random selection of 15% of programsFor each state and for each category, a 15% selection rate is identified, rounded to the nearest whole number.


Sample of Call Rule

No. Pgms Stat Calc To Call21 3.15 322 3.30 323 3.45 324 3.60 425 3.75 426 3.90 427 4.05 428 4.20 429 4.35 430 4.50 531 4.65 532 4.80 533 4.95 534 5.10 535 5.25 536 5.40 537 5.55 638 5.70 639 5.85 640 6.00 6

No. Pgms Stat Calc To Call1 0.15 12 0.30 13 0.45 14 0.60 15 0.75 16 0.90 17 1.05 18 1.20 19 1.35 110 1.50 211 1.65 212 1.80 213 1.95 214 2.10 215 2.25 216 2.40 217 2.55 318 2.70 319 2.85 320 3.00 3


Methodology

Random selection:Call rule used to determine number of programs to contact per category within each stateA random number generator produced a sequential (non-repeating numbers) list, according to the number of programs of each type, for each state

Generator: www.random.org/.


Methodology

Research assistants contact programs using the random numbers list until 15%, or at least one per program category responded.

Telephone contact using directory-Asked if willing to participate in online or telephone survey about transition program offeringsAsked for referral to person knowledgeable about DHH programs, if not as listed


Methodology

All contact information entered into spreadsheet by state, program type, contact info, and researcherConfidentiality:

Responses coded on separate form from contact formDemographic information on response form is voluntary


Survey Instrument

Literature review of transition survey instruments across 20 articles

Compilation across five categoriesEmployment PreparationPostsecondary PreparationIndependent LivingCommunity ParticipationAssessment

How information is collected regarding the students’ transition areas


Initial Survey Instrument

Response categories:Academic focusVocational focusMultiple disabilities


Initial Survey Instrument

Academic Focus Vocational Focus Multiple Disabilities

Employment Prep

Career Development-awareness of jobs & work expectations -exploration of job interests & skills -mentorships, apprenticeships, & internships -service learning projects

Community-Based Work -job shadowing on campus -job shadowing off campus >in preferred career area (Yes/No) -work experience on campus -work experience in the community >in preferred career area (Yes/No) -job placement: paid work in the community >in preferred career area (Yes/No)


Initial Survey Pilot

Respondents were not knowledgeable about all program areasSurvey was overly-lengthy

Quality of responses was reducedDanger of poor interview response rate


Final Survey Instrument

Short online survey using Silhouette (Flashlight Online)

Focused on key program componentsRadio-button responses with comments

Survey InstrumentOnline SurveyExcel Results

“Analyze” function of Silhouette


Preliminary Results

Under-response overallMore responses are being added and reminders sent out to

Overrepresentation in certain categories

Multiple initial contacts to address nonrespondersAdditional responses will be deleted from final analyses


Employment Preparation

Community-Based Work

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

J ob Shadowing Work

Experience

Preferred

Field

Paid

Employment

Career Development

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Career Awareness Career Exploration Work Experience Career

Advancement

Job Search & Maintenance

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

App

licat

ions

Dis

abilit

yD

iscl

osur

e

Inte

rvie

ws

Inte

rper

son

al S

kills

Job/

Car

eer

Cha

nge

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s


Comments: Employment Preparation

Most of my students take a Business class with a lot of career exploration.DHH teachers work closely with our Vocational Training Specialist and Transition Coordinator.We have a transition aide at each high school that works with all SWD.We are unable to take students off campus to job shadow.Our paid work experiences were canceled this year due to budget cuts.Our DHH students in the general educ curriculum have no access to these courses.Students participate in weekly employment related meetings with peers.We offer a comprehensive work training program, both on and off campus, including internships, supported employment, and job shadowing.


Postsecondary PreparationComputer Training

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Microsoft Word Excel PowerPoint Other:

Inter net Tr aining

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Email Searches Ethics & Security

Other: CAD, Photoshop & Publisher, desktop pub, WebCT, web dev & graphics

Entrance Procedures

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Entr

ance

Requirem

ents

Applic

atio

n

Pro

cesses

Fin

ancia

l Aid

Housin

g

Arr

angem

ent

sPerc

en

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s


Comments: Postsecondary Preparation

Our students have access to a nearby technical college and utilize the latest assistive technology.I help to set up tours, but I can’t take the students on tours.Our district believes that housing and college tours is a parent responsibility.For AP courses, most students are 16 yrs but functioning at K-1 grade reading.We are not allowed to have email for students.College Day is each Nov and we take field trips near the school.The high school guidance counselor provides information.They receive the same services as their non-disabled peers.My high school students do online research and gather information on colleges, their rights at college and the work place.


Independent LivingSelf-Determination

0%

20%

40%60%

80%

100%

TimeManagement

Legal Rights IEP Meetings Goal Setting

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s

Personal Accommodations

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Interpreters Assistive Technology Other

Daily Living Skills

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Hou

sing

Mar

riage

/Fa

mily

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Hea

lthca

re

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s

Other: VRS & Sidekicks


Independent Living

Functional Academics

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Lite

racy

&

Com

mun

icat

ion

Mat

h

Scie

nce

Soci

al S

tudi

es

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s

Adult Services and Supports:

VR, SSI, SSDI

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No


Comments: Independent Living

Our students play the lead role in their IEPs.Much of the content depends on their diploma option. We had more time and freedom to pursue functional skills before NCLB.Students only receive functional academics if they are intellectually disabled.We work with adult service agencies to develop plans and help students understand their future.We need to focus much more on orienting deaf youths to their rights as citizens. They take this with “mainstream” students and often this is not addressed to meet their needs.All is incorporated into their IEP transition plan.All of our seniors are required to take a class that includes budgeting, banking, insurance, relationships, child development, communication, etc.


Community Participation

Community Participation: Recreation & Leisure,

Socialization & Friendship, Community Involvement

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Pro

gra

ms


Comments: Community Participation

We don’t focus on leisure time and community participation. Some students take part in community Deaf theatre.This is incorporated into their IEP plan.All students must be involved in community projects. All students have recreational/athletic experiences. We pay registration fees for unique activities that some want.Students are welcome to join a non-school based “Teen Club”.We do touch on these areas but it is fairly minimal.Community skills are taught only in classes for intellectual disabilities.Students participate in a social group with deaf peers.Our students are connected in a variety of ways through contests, contacts, etc.


Transition Assessments

Types of Assessments

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%In

tere

stIn

vent

orie

s or

Che

cklis

ts

Apt

itude

Ass

essm

ents

Abi

lity

Ass

essm

ents

Voc

atio

nal

Ass

essm

ents

Tra

nsiti

onA

sses

smen

ts

Wor

k S

ampl

es

Wor

kA

djus

tmen

tPer

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s


Comments: Transition Assessments

We use the Magellan and WOIS interest tests, as well as nonverbal tests with some students.We use Choices, FACTS.org, Careers for Me, PLAN.Computer-based interest inventories and interviews.Having a Transition Coordinator, Vocational Training Specialists, as well as interpreters has really enhanced this portion of our program.Ability testing is not a part of determining DHH qualification to our program.We use the transition planning survey provided by our state dept. of educ.The assessments are taken in the 8th grade because of Carl Perkins and IDEA’s requirements.This is a strong suit of ours. We work with an agency that provides services to the Deaf.


Demographics

Survey Response Demographics

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Small: ≤ 34 Large: ≥ 35 Residential

Type of Program

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

rog

ram

s


Summary of Results

Employment PreparationMost programs provide:

Career awareness and explorationWork experience and information about job applications.

Fewer provide:Community work in a preferred field (34%)Career advancement (24%)Job and career change (27%)

Postsecondary PreparationMost provide basic computer training, postsecondary and entrance information.


Summary of Results

Independent & Community LivingMost programs provide:

Rights, IEP information, and accommodations (81-92%)Daily Living Skills and adult services (74-82%)Functional academics (89-95%)Community participation skills (76-85%)

Transition AssessmentsMost gave interest inventories (85%)Many gave transition assessments (58%)Few assessed work adjustment (24%)


Conclusions and Conundrums

Disability & rights issuesDisability disclosure (56%) vs. Legal rights (81%) and IEP meetings (90%) vs.Interpreters (92%) and AT (84%)

Global job market issuesCareer advancement (24%) &Job/career change (27%)

Postsecondary preparation for DHHSite visits (69%) and orientation (61%)

Evaluating disability services & supportsDigging deeper—beyond requirements and applications:

Financial aid (79%) and housing (44%)


What is the impact of educational placement change?

Comments were more revealing of limitations due to:

General education curriculumDiploma requirementsRural location

General program availabilityAvailability to all through generic school servicesSome programs were available, but not necessarily offered to all DHH students


Limitations and Further Work

Follow-up interviews How much do thorough programs provide in each area?

How far beyond superficial coverage?How broadly inclusive of bright vs. challenged students?

What are the challenges of limited programs?NCLBA and general education requirements?Funding and resources?

Follow-up comparisonsResidential vs. large vs. small programs


Questions and Comments

Contact Information:Dr. Pamela [email protected]

Project Website: http://www.educ.kent.edu/fundedprojects/TSPT/grant.htm


References

Allen, T. E., Rawlings, B. W., & Schildroth, A. N. (1989). Deaf students and the school-to-work transition. Baltimore, Paul H. Brookes.Bowe, F. G. (2003). Transition for deaf and hard-of-hearing students: A blueprint for change. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8, 485-493. Danek, M. M., & Busby, H. (1999). Transition planning and programming: Empowerment through partnership. Washington, DC: Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center, Gallaudet University. Available at http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/products/index.html Luckner, J. L. (2002). Facilitating the transition of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.NLTS2 accessed from http://www.nlts2.org/ Silhouette (Flashlight Online https://my.wsu.edu/portal/page?_pageid=177,74111&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL)U.S. Department of Education. (2004)Twenty-sixth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: author. Retrieved 9/7/07 from http://www.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2004/index.html

national survey of transition services for dhh students dcdt international conference october 18,...

Documents

nature of transition

transition concerns

transition issues

dhh programs

transition program offerings

yrs slide

number of programs

rule slide