pro

Data Analysis

Randa Sfeir

Walden University

Data Analysis

Special Education services envisioned to provide individualized support to students with disabilities as they work their way through the education system. Currently, post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities measured by the level of engagement in three areas: postsecondary education or training, employment, and independent living (Povenmire-Kirk, Diegelmann, Test, Aspel, and Everson, 2015). Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act

(IDEA, 2004) Requires a written plan charting services and activities for transitioning students with disabilities from high school to adult life be written in the individualized education program (IEP) no later than the student’s 16th birthday. IDEA 2004 further says the schools should base the transition planning process on the student’s strengths and needs. Representatives from agencies that will provide adult services to the student during or after transitioning out of school are part of their IEPs. One research-based model that schools can use to implement interagency collaboration effectively is CIRCLES. CIRCLES makes the work of both school and agency staff more effective and efficient. Transition to postsecondary vocational training is more successful when participants and their families, special education teachers, and vocational rehabilitation counselors and agencies work together

Analysis of the Data Collected

I began representing the school district as the transition specialist. In Texas, my title is the Transition and Employment Designee (TED). I have to make sure that the ARD Committee is addressing the student with disabilities the movement from school to post-school activities. It should include postsecondary education, vocational education, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation. The data examined were: The student transition planning supplement, annual IEP documents, transition goals and objectives, parents’ input, informal and formal vocational assessments, and student’s interviews. The data also contained sections that covered demographic information, members of the ARD Committee’s participation in transition planning and activities, and the SPED teachers' input and their satisfaction with TEDs' involvement.

Strengths of the Data

The input from the teachers revealed that they have concerns about the roles of stakeholders in transition planning. They believe that the collaboration between school personnel and agencies is ineffective. Teachers and parents stated that there is no involvement and expected responsibilities of agencies in transition meetings. When interagency collaboration occurs in partnership with teaching, students self -determination skills, student involvement in school level and IEP team meetings will increase, which leads to improved in-school and post-school outcome (Povenmire-Kirk et al. 2017). Teachers and parents highlighted the value of vocational rehabilitation in the transition planning of students with disabilities.

Needs

The data form the IEP transition supplements was not explicit for many students. In the participation measures section, there was no signature for the student, and there was no level of participation. The agency questionnaires were missing, and there were no formal or informal vocational assessments. Parents did not participate in the majority of the ARD meetings.

Fullan’s Four Elements

Purpose Driven

Collaboration between crucial agencies in transition planning, particularly special

education and vocational rehabilitation is a critical element for successful post-secondary

outcomes of students with disabilities.

Goals That Impact

Every effort to collaborate between schools and agencies is necessary. The goal is to achieve the desired outcomes for the students and effectively utilized so we can help them and their parents develop a positive future. According to Tayloe (2013), several strategies are critical for interagency collaboration for effective practices in schools: follow-up after the transition, administrative support for transition, using a variety of funding sources, agency meetings with students and families, and training students and families

Clarity of Strategy

Fullan and Quinn (2015) stated, “leaders must develop a shared understanding of people's minds and collective action” (p.10). Coherenceturn into a function of the relationship between the growing explicitness of the strategy and the changing culture. Fullan and Quinn, 2016). Transition is more successful when participants and their families, special education teachers, and interagency collaboration work together. When all relevant school personnel and service agencies are involved, there will be improved education and employment outcomes for students with disabilities.

Change Leadership

There are numerous models to provide transition planning services, but most fall short of accomplishing the goal of seamless service provision that truly prepares students for life after high school (Povenmire-Kirk et al., 2015). The CIRCLES model involves three levels of interagency collaboration, including a Community Level Team, a School Level Team, and an IEP Team. The program will allow agencies to arrange, offer, and facilitate support services directly to students and their families. The schools' administrators buy-in is vital for CIRCLES to be successful in schools. They are “a powerful force for braiding together of resources, identifying gaps and overlap, and streamlining the processes available in a given district for transitioning to better outcomes for people with disabilities” (Povenmire-Kirk et al., 2015, p. 14).

Student outcomes will improve when all stakeholders invest in focusing on better collaboration. The inherent strength of full team building, administrative support, consistent training efforts, clear expectations, time commitments, and measurement of outcomes of interventions will serve to increase the results for the post-secondary life of students with disabilities.

References

Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts, and systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).

Povenmire-Kirk, T. Diegelmann, K.M., Test, D.W., Aspel, N., and Everson, J.M. (2015). CIRCLES: An Implementation Guide. Retrieved from

https://circles.uncc.edu/

Texas Education Agency (2018). Special Education Reports. Retrieved from

https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adser.html

Taylor, D. (2013). Interagency Barriers and Facilitators in Transition Planning for Students with

Disabilities. Retrieved from

file:///C:/Users/rasfe/Documents/Interagency

Appendix B

�Nice job on the written portion of your paper. Thank you for including headings to organize your paper.

�Nice job here as well. You would have had Advanced, but you needed to go more in depth on the first component. If you would have included more details, 2-3 sentences, I would have scored you Advanced here.

�Thank you for including this after the reference page. Well done on your presentation.

�I didn’t see where you addressed the second prompt in the presentation.

Presentation includes district strategic plan and/or program goals. If your program does not have any goals or plans, list key topics/quality indicators to discuss with the stakeholders that would help drive your discussions on program effectiveness.