![]()
1
INTRODUCTION
The importance of transition support in the lives of students with disabilities and their families has long been recognised both in the academic literature and in practice over recent decades. Historically, from the perspective of education and schooling, the phrase ‘transition services’ applied to students with disabilities from their mid to late teenage years, and referred to individually designed educational and vocational supports to prepare individuals for life after school (Crawford, 2012). These services generally consisted of an educational action plan that detailed the activities that were to be focused on to facilitate the movement of a student with disabilities from school to post-school life. Traditionally, these plans were individualised and strengths-based and aimed to foster the student’s self-determination skills by taking into account his or her interests. Transition plans and their corresponding activities involve not only the student, but the family, the school, the community and relevant outside agencies.
Across the English-speaking world, transition planning has been an important component of educational planning for students with disabilities for the last two decades; however the earlier and the later transitions in the lives of the members of this population were frequently ignored. These oversights can be seriously detrimental to individuals with disabilities, as these transitions have great impact (Gagnon & Richards, 2008; Hanewald, 2013; McIntyre et al., 2006). The first transition, from home to early childhood education, sets the tone for the child’s later school career and has in the past focused on chronological age rather than readiness. The literature emphasises several readiness variables, including cognitive, social emotional, physical and family factors (McIntyre et al., 2006). The second major transition that is largely ignored in the literature is the transition from primary to secondary school. This omission, both by researchers and practitioners, can have a serious impact on the lives of students with disabilities, as an ill-handled transition from primary to secondary school may mean the student’s abandonment of the educational system as such, or lost chances for education in mainstream schools (Forlin, 2013). Another important transition that is largely ignored but can be prepared for, even at the school level, is the transition to later life and retirement. If the purpose of schooling is to prepare students to lead quality lives, it is crucial that this area too not be ignored (Leinonen et al., 2012).
Attention should also be given to other important transitions within these traditional chronological and developmental transitions. The first of these, the transition between mainstream schooling and special schooling, is important because some students make the transition between these two environments several times during their school careers, and their success in either setting is dependent on their adjustment to, and the support provided in, that environment (Strnadová & Cumming, 2014). Schools themselves need policies and frameworks in place to allow teachers and other personnel within them to support effectively students and their families in coping with the changes that take place upon their entry into that specific setting (Standing Committee on Social Issues, 2012). The second important transition – for some individuals, anyway – is the transition of students from the juvenile justice system back into their previous home, community and school settings. It is especially important that all involved schools and agencies collaborate to make this a smooth and successful transition, and to coordinate continued support, in order to support the student and prevent recidivism (Gagnon & Richards, 2008).
Importance of quality transition planning and support
One cannot overestimate the value of quality transition planning and support. Times of transition are frequently challenging for all people, but these challenges may be greatly exacerbated for those with disabilities. There are several examples in the current literature of poor outcomes for people with disabilities, including: (1) poor post-school outcomes; (2) high rates of suspension and dropping out; (3) low or lack of participation in secondary education; and (4) high rates of unemployment (Crawford, 2012). Many of these outcomes can be traced back to disengagement from school early on, such as during the transition to secondary school (Hanewald, 2013). At the very least, these poor results indicate that a closer examination of current transition processes, as well as transition support practices that have proved to be effective, is warranted.
Research has shown that the most successful transition supports are those where there is a strong collaboration among the student, the school, families and other stakeholders (Sitlington et al., 2010). In practice, this is not always the case, especially when it comes to fostering a person’s self-determination skills by encouraging full involvement in the transition process. Crawford (2012) points out that, although the encouragement of student self-determination and involvement is typical in the USA, at least in contexts where policy requires it, in many systems the student is left out of many of the processes, including planning and important decision making. When implementing a team approach to transition assessment and planning, it seems only logical to include the student as the most important member of the team. In order for the student to participate fully in future planning, he or she must have the self-determination skills to voice his or her opinions and preferences, and the social skills to do so in an appropriate manner.
Good-quality transition practices include effective communication among all stakeholders. This should be fostered from the very first transition, when students are leaving home to enter school for the first time. Parents are often apprehensive about trusting others with the care and education of their children with disabilities, and the effective communication of information may go a long way in empowering them and allaying their fears (Hirst et al., 2011). This first transition is also of paramount importance to both students and parents, as it is their first experience with the education system and will impact heavily on their opinions and attitudes (Hirst et al., 2011).
When the transition takes place from one school to another, it is imperative that teachers from both schools communicate with one another as well as with the student, family and any other relevant service provider(s). Students should be introduced to and allowed to experience the new environment in advance. This will provide a sense of familiarity to students and assist staff in assessing both the student and the new environment to determine the supports that the student will require in order to be successful (Strnadová & Cumming, 2014).
Some of the most important, yet overlooked, transitions are the transitions from one setting to another. These include moving from a mainstream setting to a more restrictive, specialised setting and vice versa. The more restrictive setting could be a special education classroom or school, or a hospital or juvenile justice setting. These transitions can be fraught with challenges, many of which are connected to the increased amount of stakeholders and systems (education, health, justice) involved (Gagnon & Richards, 2008). The transition from the specialised setting back into the mainstream setting is particularly worth noting, as returning students to their original environments after incarceration or time in a mental health or drug treatment centre requires careful planning and support to ensure successful reintegration (Gagnon & Richards, 2008).
Despite being the most researched transition, the transition from school to post-school settings brings its own set of challenges. First of all, it is more than likely that there will be a variety of stakeholders involved, such as employers, universities, community colleges, vocational schools, social and medical services (Test
et al., 2009). Coordinating communication and planning at this level is often left to the school, and undertaken by special education teachers or transition specialists. Coordination of the important transition to post-school life can be difficult due to a fragmentation of services and a lack of information about what is actually available to students in regard to supports, and this can be detrimental because, without the appropriate planning and support, students are at risk of a range of poor outcomes (Test et al., 2009).
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model
The wide variety of lifetime transitions experienced by individuals with disabilities therefore requires a holistic perspective, one that considers all of the people, environments and institutions that are involved. Urie Bronfenbrenner (1994) developed the ecological systems theory, which was designed to explain how the quality and context of a child’s environment and interactions with others affect his or her development and quality of life. The resulting model offers a helpful guide when examining the importance of the environment as a whole to transition assessment and planning. Bronfenbrenner’s model consists of five nested systems, with the individual in the centre, radiating out to the chronosystem, or the larger culture’s attitudes and ideologies. In between these two extremes are the microsystem, which consists of the groups that impact the child the most, such as family and school, the mesosystem, the exosystem and the macrosystem.
If one views the student as being the core of, existing in and influenced by, these five systems, then each must be taken into account when assessing transitional needs (Figure 1.1). The individual lies in the centre of all of the systems, and is referred to as the ‘child’ (although the model also applies to adults, as the theory covers the lifespan and how people, systems, environments and life events influence the individual’s development). Characteristics of the child that will be considered in regard to transition include academic and social abilities, self-determination, attitudes, goals, needs and desires. The microsystem involves those people closest to the child, and when looked at through the lens of transitions, involves family and their hopes, expectations and plans for the child. The influence of family friends also figures in this system, as do the tenets of family culture and religious beliefs. For the purposes of lifespan transitions, this system also includes teachers, school peers, coursework, friends, employers, workplaces, co-workers, neighbours and people the individual encounters regularly in community settings.
Interactions between the various microsystems form the mesosystem. School–home communication and collaboration are good examples of a mesosystem process, as are the collaborative team efforts that go into designing individualised education plans (IEPs), individualised transition plans (ITPs), behaviour plans and adult community, employment and group home support plans. Transition planning not only results in an increase in the student’s microsystems, it also increases the number of environments that must communicate with one another in the mesosystem.
The child is influenced, as are the systems above, by the larger exosystem. This system includes entities that the child does not have direct contact with, albeit she or he is still influenced by them. These may include state and federal economic systems, the monies and resources available to schools for transition support, government and educational philosophies and support for transition processes, and laws regarding students and adults with disabilities. Taking this a step further outward is the macrosystem, which consists of the overarching values and beliefs about transition and quality of life for individuals with disabilities. These include society’s views, theories, research and existing evidenced-based transition processes in general.
The chronosystem is the overarching system of the ecological theory that affects the child’s development through transitional periods. This system encompasses all events over the course of a lifetime that reflect and influence the experiences of the individual. These environmental events and transition experiences include, but are not limited to, birth, diagnosis of a disability, entering school, moving from primary to secondary school, transitioning in and/or out of special placements, involvement with the police and justice system, employment, marriage, birth of a child, illness, death in the family, divorce and retirement.
Overall, Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model provides a holistic lens by which to view the different environmental factors that drive an individual’s development through his or her lifetime, particularly through the different transitions that he or she experiences. It offers teachers and other education professionals the impetus to view lifespan transitions from an ecological perspective and is an appropriate model to frame the various transitions covered in this book. Using the model, this book aims to offer an integrated overview of transitions experienced by people with disabilities across various environments, including schools, families, leisure time, community, vocational education and university.
Educational focus
Any discussion of lifespan transitions for students with disabilities must have education at its centre. Children spend much of their time during their developmental years in school, which is a primary part of the mesosystem during the ages 3–18 years. The principal focus of formal education is to prepare children to live independent, productive and quality lives. In order for this to take place, there is a set of knowledge and skill domains that individuals must develop. According to Sitlington et al.’s (2010) revised comprehensive transition model, these skills include: (1) communication; (2) academic; (3) social; (4) self-determination; (5) community participation; (6) health and fitness; (7) technology; (8) leisure and recreation; (9) mobility; (10) independent living; (11) work-readiness; and/or (12) university or college readiness. The purpose of any IEP and transition assessment and planning processes is to ensure that students receive instruction and support to provide them with the relevant skills to be successful in both present and future environments.
Thus, alignment between the IEP and the ITP is a crucial aspect of effective transition planning (Sitlington et al., 2010). In order to be successful in achieving transition goals, students must be able to access the curricula that will provide them with the knowledge and skills required for the settings they are transitioning to, whether this be another school, independent living, further schooling, employment or a combination of these. An examination of the student’s goals, along with an assessment of the student’s strengths and needs, is required, as is an ecological assessment of the requirements of the proposed setting(s). The results of these assessments can drive the educational planning process, resulting in an IEP designed to facilitate transitions by supporting students in acquiring the necessary knowledge and skills to be successful in the next setting (Sitlington et al., 2010).
A student’s IEP therefore, drives his or her education. Schools have traditionally responded to this with a continuum of placements and supports, along with a variety of specific educational options. These options range from schooling aimed at preparing students with disabilities for university study to teaching students basic life skills such as health, hygiene, homemaking, and mobility and community living. Cobb and Alwell (2009) conducted a review of transition studies, and found that career education, vocational training (particularly that which included real work experiences) and student-centred planning are the most effective educational processes in regards to preparing students for post-school life. Career planning, family involvement and transition supports were also shown to be crucial to success after school. The current call for educators to employ only practices that have a solid foundation in research stresses the importance of research that identifies effective educational transition practices. It is the importance of these evidence-based practices that provides the basis for this book.
![]()
2
TRANSITIONS
Historical perspectives and current practices
The history of transition
The history of transition processes is very much aligned with the history of disability reform globally. The international history of transition can be viewed through the lens of several prominent researchers. Neubert (1997) provides an extensive history of transition in the USA from the 1940s to the late 1990s. Mendelsohn (1979) covers transition support and history in his history of disability reform in Australia and Crawford (2012) describes the legislative framework that underpins the UK’s Education Act (Department of Education and Science (DES), 1993). Most of the printed history refers to the transition from secondary school to post-school options for students with intellectual disabilities, while laws and policies tend to support programmes and strategies for students with disabilities in general.
The USA
Prior to 1940, vocational and life skills educational efforts for individuals with disabilities included social skills, practical skills training, handiwork and manual arts (Neubert, 1997). Flexer et al. (2013) describe this as a time when vocational rehabilitation was emerging as a result of the need to rehabilitate wounded World War I veterans. Several policies and laws supporting vocational training, employment services and disability technology were enacted at this time. These included the Smith–Hughes Act (1917), the Smith–Sears Act (1918) and the Smith–Fess Act (1920). Although much of thi...
