SERVICES, SUPPORTS AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES: AN ANALYSIS ACROSS SECONDARY EDUCATION POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT Robert A. Stodden, Ph.D., Professor Megan A. Jones, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Kelly B. T. Chang, Graduate Assistant Center on Disability Studies, University of Hawai’i at Manoa INTRODUCTION Purpose and Structure of the Paper The purpose of this paper is to suggest that discrepancies in the provision of modes of assistance to individuals with disabilities across the environments of secondary school, postsecondary school and employment present significant obstacles to their participation in postsecondary education and employment. “Modes of assistance” is defined as procedural, contextual or physical aspects of the environment that are provided or modified in order to make a setting more accessible to individuals with disabilities. In this paper, “modes of assistance” is the umbrella term that is used for words such as “services”, “supports”, and “accommodations”. This paper will seek to further clarify and describe the issue and to review the legal considerations related to the issue. The paper will: 1. Define and describe how the terms “services”, “supports” and “accommodations” are used, often in confusing and conflicting ways, in legal and practical contexts across the environments of secondary education and transition, postsecondary education, and employment. 2. Examine how discrepancies in the modes of assistance across these environments impact transition between environments and post-school outcomes for individuals with disabilities. 3. Recommend changes in policy and practice, as well as areas of further research, which could be used to address the problems created by these discrepancies and consequentially could improve the post-school quality of life of individuals with disabilities. Executive Summary Definition of the Problem There is increasing concern among special educators, individuals with disabilities and their supporters, and others in the field of disability about the poor educational and employment outcomes of youth with disabilities (Hasazi, Gordon et al. 1985; Benz and Halpern 1987; Blackorby and Wagner 1996; Thurow 1996; Wagner and Balckorby 1996b; Phelps and Hanley-Maxwell 1997; Gajar 1998; Stodden and Dowrick 1999; National Council on Disability 2001, June 14). Within the past twenty years, there has been striking and disturbingly persistent evidence that youth with disabilities are more likely to drop out of high school, less likely to pursue postsecondary education, and less likely to be employed than are youth without disabilities (Benz and Halpern 1987; Edgar 1987; Phelps and Hanley-Maxwell 1997; National Organization on Disabilities 1998; Stodden and Dowrick 2001). These poor outcomes exist despite the passage of laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that are supposedly designed to ensure equal access to and participation in society by individuals with disabilities. An increasing body of literature has pointed to the often substandard content of the secondary school curriculum for special education students as a significant barrier to the attainment of postsecondary education and employment goals for youth with disabilities (Edgar 1987; Fuchs and Fuchs 1994; Berliner and Biddle 1996; Hocutt 1996; Rojewski 1996; Hatch 1998; Rojewski 1999). However, little attention has been paid to how the kinds and components of support provision to individuals with disabilities may be impacting the success of these individuals in different environments. There is evidence that these modes of assistance are legislated and applied differently in secondary school, postsecondary school, and employment, which significantly affects an individual’s transition across these three environments. Namely: 1. The terminology that is used to describe assistance in both legal and practical contexts changes across the environments of secondary education, postsecondary education, and employment. For example, at the secondary school level, where the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandates the provision of assistance to youth with disabilities, assistance is geared around “services”. At the postsecondary and employment levels, where the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are the primary mandates for the provision of assistance, individuals with disabilities receive “accommodations” and “supports.” The same term, such as the term “service”, may even take on different meanings when it is applied in different environments. 2. There is a marked difference in the types of assistance that are offered across these environments, and in the entire process of accountability and decision-making concerning assistance provision. During secondary school, schools are responsible for identifying and assessing students with disabilities, and with developing an Individual Education Program (IEP) that outlines each student’s assistance needs. Because of the prescriptive nature of the IDEA, there is a tendency for secondary schools to place students with disabilities in special classrooms for all or part of their curricula, deemed a “direct service” (Malloy 1997; Fleischer and Zames 2001; Stodden, Stodden et al. Submitted). The district might also supplement special education or general education with “related services”. At the postsecondary level, students are no longer covered under IDEA and must identify themselves as having a disability and must provide the school with documentation of their disability. Postsecondary schools will tend to provide students with “accommodations” based on their type of disability (i.e., learning disability, visual impairment, etc.), and based upon a minimalist interpretation of the concept of “reasonableness”. Similarly, at the employment level an individual with a disability must self-identify. Employers have much discretion in the provision of assistance (O’Brien, 2001, Hazer & Bedell, 2000). There is a tendency at the employment level to provide assistance based on minimal job requirements and with minimizing cost. Impact of the Problem The critical issues outlined above have not yet been adequately described. This paper seeks to define these issues and concludes that: 1. The roles and accountability of various stakeholders shifts as youth with disabilities move across environments. Youth are often not adequately prepared in terms of the self-advocacy and self-determination skills that they need in order to successfully navigate this shift. Specifically, at the secondary level, school districts are required by law to be responsible for identifying students, determining outcomes, developing service plans and delivering direct and related services (IDEA). At the postsecondary and employment levels the individual with a disability has much more responsibility and institutions/employers are less accountable (Stodden and Dowrick 2000, Spring). 2. The kinds of assistance and modes of delivery that are appropriate in different environments change. Again, youth with disabilities are often not adequately prepared for these changes. At the secondary level assistance is organized very differently than at the postsecondary and employment levels. Youth with disabilities transition to post-school environments without the skills that are necessary to identify their support needs and to link their needs with desired outcomes (Blackorby and Wagner 1996; Benz, Doren et al. 1998; Izzo 2001, March). The level of support also decreases significantly as youth transition out of high-school, leaving them without the assistance they are used to. 3. The outcomes of assistance provision are focused upon immediate rather than upon long-term objectives. This means that while youth with disabilities may be able to function within their immediate environment, they may not be preparing to achieve in the long term. Because of the focus on meeting legal mandates rather than addressing individual success, the goals of assistance provision in all three environments are often short-sighted. The long-term goals of the individual with a disability are disregarded in favor of “quick fixes”. Recommendations Based upon the negative impact of discrepancies in modes of assistance as outlined in this paper, a number of recommendations are made, including the need to: 1. Examine differences in the intent of federal policies related to individuals with disabilities and how the language that stems from these intentions may be clarified to improve practice. 2. Better prepare youth with disabilities to make the transition between secondary, postsecondary and employment environments. 3. Define and link assistance with outcomes and future needs. 4. Conduct further research that will identify the effectiveness of various kinds of assistance in different environments and contexts. DEFINING MODES OF ASSISTANCE[K1][u2] The inconsistent and interchangeable use of “services”, “supports” and “accommodations” becomes important because of the relationship between how these terms are applied and how they are defined, or not, by legal mandates such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The meaning that is attributed to terminology, and the modes of assistance that they signify, appears to shift across secondary school, postsecondary school and employment, due in part to the prescriptiveness of the laws that govern these environments. Essentially, the degree to which a law is prescriptive translates into the practical components of assistance provision. Many practitioners are focused on following the letter of the law, in other words trying to define what they are obligated to provide, and ignore the actual needs of youth with disabilities (Colvert and Smith 2000). What is particularly interesting is that there appears to be no middle ground between the tight mandates of the IDEA and the looser mandates of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. In the case of secondary school environments, this means that youth with disabilities are often placed in special and segregated classrooms where a variety of services can be provided “directly” (Fleischer and Zames 2001). In the case of postsecondary school and employment environments, this means that students are offered a “menu” of services that are quite limited (Citrus College Online 2000; Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Disability Support Services 2002). The following section will explore differences in how terminology is used to describe assistance provision to individuals with disabilities across secondary school, postsecondary school and employment through an analysis of the terms “services”, “accommodations” and “supports.” The section is divided into legal and practical considerations. Legal Considerations[K3][u4] Introduction[K5][u6] As students with disabilities transition out of secondary education, there are significant changes in the type of assistance that Federal policy requires and the intent of the laws that govern policy. These changes include: - FAPE Versus Reasonableness - During secondary education, which falls under the umbrella of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), services and service plans for students with disabilities are based on the individual needs that must be met in order to ensure a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). Once students graduate from high school, the IDEA no longer applies and the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are the primary laws that govern the provision of assistance. Assistance under these laws is based upon what is deemed “reasonable” and does not extend an individual’s opportunities beyond those that are available to the average person. Students moving from high school to postsecondary education or employment may find themselves suddenly without the modes of assistance they are used to. - Benefit Versus Nondiscrimination – Since the IDEA is an educational act establishing Federal programs, the provision of assistance in secondary school environments under the IDEA is initiated and paid for by the government, and purposed to benefit the individual and improve post-school outcomes. As civil rights laws, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA are mainly aimed at equity and nondiscrimination. - Prescriptive Versus Flexible - The IDEA restricts the provision of assistance because it is too prescriptive in terms of defining the roles of stakeholders, fiscal responsibilities, and the processes that must be included in service delivery. The Rehabilitation Act and the ADA, by contrast, restrict the provision of assistance because they are too flexible and offer numerous opportunities for a variety of interpretations. - Services Versus Accommodations – The IDEA focuses on the “services” that must be provided at the secondary school level. The Rehabilitation Act and the ADA focus on the circumstances under which institutions and employers must “accommodate” individuals with disabilities. The sections below examine legal considerations for assistance provision as it relates to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Each [u7]section provides (a) an overview of a law, (b) an outline of the definitions of assistance that appear in the law, (c) a discussion of the environments to which the law applies, and (d) a summary of key points that are relevant to the law’s intent and use of terminology (See Table 1). TABLE 1: Comparison of Assistance Across Three Acts Act: Accommodation(s) IDEA USed only once - Provided for participation in statewide assessments ADA Used 48 times - "Reasonable" - assistance that does not impose "undue hardship" Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 USed 15 times - "Reasonable" Act: Service(s) IDEA Used 514 times - Supplementary - Transition - Related to special education - Designed to meet individual needs ADA Used 180 times. - What all individuals have a right to participate in because of their public nature - “Auxiliary aids and services” - communication-related Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 Used 680 times in the Act - Vocational rehabilitation centers - Based on individual needs - No mention of direct services in Sec 504 Act: Support(s) IDEA Used 67 times - Financial support - Support for service personnel ADA Does not appear Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 Used 130 times - Not well defined - Mixed with "Services" Act: Decision Making IDEA IEP and standards of the State education agency ADA Public and private entities Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 Any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance Act: What is Provided IDEA Services to help students with disabilities benefit from education ADA Reasonable accommodations that would not lead to undue hardship Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 Accessibility Act: Effective Practice IDEA - “Free and Appropriate” - “Least Restrictive Environment” ADA Providing extra services at a “greater level” is not prevented, but not required Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 No mention of effective practices in Sec 504 Act: Responsibility for Provision IDEA State and local agencies are responsible for provision. Federal government mandates, funds, and dictates provision. ADA Organization is responsible for provision. Federal Agencies are responsible for establishing and implementing regulations. Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 The Federally funded programs are responsible for provision. Federal Agencies are responsible for establishing and implementing regulations. Act: Initiation of Assistance IDEA The State ADA The organization for permanent modifications. Individuals for accommodations Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 The organization for permanent modifications. Individuals for accommodations Act: Roles of Stakeholders IDEA Partnerships - individuals with disabilities, parents, the State agency, administrators, teachers, paraprofessionals ADA No partnerships - organizations v. individuals with disabilities Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 No partnerships - organizations v. individuals with disabilities Act: Financial Responsibility IDEA The government ADA The entities (organizations) Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 The Fedarally-funded programs Act: Outcomes IDEA Measured by assessments Transition services ADA Violations Rehabilitation Act, Section 504 Violations, vocation End of Table 1 Overview IDEA is an education act establishing a Federal program, and therefore is much more prescriptive than are the Section 504 or the ADA about such factors as responsibility, funding, scope of provision, and definitions of terminology. School districts are responsible for identifying children with disabilities, assessing their needs, and providing them with services to enable “free appropriate public education (FAPE)”. The education agency is also responsible for assessment, involving parents in decision making, and creating a service and outcome plan, known as an Individual Education Program (IEP). Federal money is provided to state educational agencies for providing these services, along with competitive grants for improving services to students with disabilities. In the IDEA, definitions for IEP requirements, free appropriate public education, and various types of services (transitional, supplementary, etc.) are more elaborate than definitions of assistance in the ADA. The IDEA focuses on “services” and “related services” for children with disabilities and “supports” for families, teachers and staff. The term “services” is used to cover anything that helps students with disabilities benefit from their special education, enables them to participate in general education, enables them to attain general education standards (Thurlow 2001), or prepares them for transition out of secondary education. Although the IDEA lists many kinds of service providers, such as psychologists and doctors, it does not define what specifically should be offered. What and how services are offered is determined by the students’ IEP. IEP meetings consist of parents, teachers, agency representatives, service providers and the student, where appropriate. Each IEP is specific to individual needs and goals. It is important to remember that for the IDEA, the responsibility for meeting its mandates lies with the State, using public/taxpayer funds. If a student has a disability, the State is required to assess the disability and provide the services considered appropriate for the student to benefit from a free appropriate public education. The word “appropriate” is used by the IDEA often, and could be very subjective. State standards are supposed to determine what is appropriate. Although “appropriate” appears considerably more often than the term “best”, IDEA does provide financial incentive for improving services through special competitive grants. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA do not. A significant difference between the IDEA and the ADA and section 504 is that in the IDEA the purpose is aimed at benefiting the individual rather than conforming the organization. The individual with disabilities is supposed to benefit from the services provided under this Act. SEC 601(c)(5): (C) coordinating this Act with other local, educational service agency, State, and Federal school improvement efforts in order to ensure that such children benefit from such efforts and that special education can become a service for such children rather than a place where they are sent; (italics added) The IDEA only applies through secondary school and transition planning, until graduation or until the child reaches the age of 21. Once a student receives his or her high school diploma, the state is no longer obligated to provide a free appropriate public education or any services related to it. Definitions The term “accommodations” is used only once in the IDEA, in the context of special provisions for participation in statewide assessments. By contrast, “service” or “services” appears 514 times in the IDEA and is classified into many different sub-sets. According to the IDEA, a service is deemed to be beneficial if it is designed to meet the unique needs of the individual and if it prepares them for the future [Sec 601(d)(1)(A)]. Different kinds of services as outlined in the IDEA include: - Those related to special education (these can be services outside of the special education framework that assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education, ranging from transportation to therapy and recreation). SEC 602(22) - Those that are components of special education (specifically, specially designed instruction). SEC 602(25) and SEC 601(c)(5)(C) - Those provided by specific educational agencies - Those related to early intervention - Those related to media (closed captioning, accessible textbooks, etc.), SEC 687(c) - Those related to helping children and their families with technology SEC 602(2) - Those related to maximizing the integrated education of students with disabilities (supplementary services) SEC 602(29), SEC 612(a)(5) - Those related to transition, focused on post-school outcomes SEC 602(30) The term “support” or “supports” appears 67 times, most often in reference to financial support or support for service personnel. “Support” is distinguished from “direct services” [for example, in SEC 611(f)(3)(A)], perhaps suggesting that support is not direct. Supports are for the personnel that will be serving the child with a disability. The children get services; the service personnel get support. Most of the time the term “support” is used in reference to funding via grants from the government. Other important terms in the IDEA are “Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)” and “Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)”. It should be noted that though these concepts may be intended to direct youth out of special classrooms wherever possible, youth with disabilities still tend to be directed into direct services that are provided in special classrooms (Fleischer and Zames 2001). According to IDEA, 1997, - “free appropriate public education” means special education and related services that: A. Have been provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge; B. Meet the standards of the State educational agency; C. Include an appropriate preschool, elementary, or secondary school education in the State involved; and D. Are provided in conformity with the individualized education program required under section 614(d).” [Section 602(8)]. * “ least-restrictive environment” means: A. The presumption that children with disabilities are most appropriately educated with their non-disabled peers and that special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily [Section 612(a)(5)(A)] Application Across Environments IDEA only covers education through secondary school. The services and supports provided via this Act do not extend to postsecondary education or employment. The contrast between the relatively high level of assistance that is provided under IDEA and much lower level of assistance that is provided in postsecondary environments poses many transition issues for individuals with disabilities. Key Points Under the IDEA: - Schools are responsible for the identification, assessment, development of Individual Education Plans, delivery of direct and related services, and the educational outcomes of children and youth with disabilities. - There is a focus on services rather than on accommodations. - There is a focus on quality, least restrictive environment and the provision of a free, appropriate public education. - Federal funds are available for the provision of assistance. - The law only applies until a child graduates from secondary school or reaches the age of 21. Rehabilitation Act Overview Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act was the primary access law protecting individuals with disabilities in postsecondary educational institutions and employment before the Americans with Disabilities Act. In general, section 504 prohibits any program receiving Federal support from discriminating against individuals on the basis of their disability. It applies to public entities or entities receiving Federal funds (as opposed to the ADA, which extends protection to the private sector). The responsibility of meeting the mandates of section 504 is on the programs under its jurisdiction (including institutions of higher education). However, rather than receiving Federal funding for the purpose of assisting individuals with disabilities, programs are held accountable by litigation. It is up to individuals with disabilities or the Federal government to press charges if discrimination exists. See the section on the ADA for additional comments. Definitions The bulk of the Rehabilitation Act is dedicated to establishing vocational rehabilitation centers, and uses the term “services” to describe the function of these centers. Federal regulations based on section 504 refer to related services (to special education) and nonacademic services in relation to secondary education, and counseling services in relation to secondary and postsecondary education. “Services” is not used in relation to employment. The term “support” is used in this Act more than it is in the IDEA or the ADA. The definition of “support” is much more varied in this Act, used in terms like “support services,” “support staff,” “natural supports,” and “supported employment.” The distinction between “services” and “support” is ambiguous, since “support” is not limited to finances and can be direct to individuals with disabilities as well as indirect. In this Act, the term “support” may be a general term for any kind of assistance. The term “support” does not appear in section 504 or in section 504 Federal regulations for education and employment. The term “accommodations” does not appear frequently in the Rehabilitation Act, and not at all in section 504. However, “reasonable accommodations” is used in Federal regulations for employment based on section 504 in a manner consistent with its use in the ADA (45CFR Subtitle A § 84.12). Application Across Environments Section 504 covers secondary school, postsecondary school, and employment, as long as the programs in question receive Federal assistance. The Rehabilitation Act states that State Departments of Rehabilitation can be involved in the IEPs of students with disabilities, especially where transition services are concerned. Beyond that, secondary education is not mentioned in the Rehabilitation Act. Federal regulations for secondary education use language similar to that of the IDEA, where schools are required to pay for services that assist students with disabilities in acquiring a free and appropriate public education. The language in subpart D of 45CFR Subtitle A, Part 84, refers to related services, counseling and extracurricular services, but not to accommodations and supports. At the age of 16, vocational rehabilitation services are available to eligible adults with disabilities, but are aimed at supporting employment, not postsecondary education . In fact, institutions of higher education are mentioned in the Rehabilitation Act mostly in terms of vocational rehabilitation personnel training and research. Federal regulations for section 504 for postsecondary education and employment more closely resemble the ADA. Postsecondary institutions are required to make academic adjustments and provide auxiliary aids such as readers and accessible housing. The main premise of this subpart (45CFR Subtitle A, Part 84, Subpart E) is focused on nondiscrimination in the normal operations of postsecondary institutions such as admissions and financial aid. Regulations for employment (45CFR subtitle A, Part 84, Subpart B) defines “reasonable accommodations,” such as making facilities accessible, job restructuring, and interpreters, and also defines undue hardship based on the size, budget, and type of operation of the program. Again, the focus of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is on nondiscrimination in the normal operations of employment, such as recruitment, hiring, promotion, transfer, leaves of absence, fringe benefits, etc. Services, however, are not mentioned in section 504 Federal regulations for employment. Key Points Under the Rehabilitation Act: - Individuals with disabilities are responsible for identifying themselves, undergoing assessment and seeking out assistance. - Public institutions bear the cost of assistance provision. - There is a focus on services and supports. - There is a focus on nondiscrimination. - The receipt of Federal funds by public institutions is linked to compliance with the law. - The law applies across all environments but is applied mostly in postsecondary and employment environments. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Overview The ADA, a civil rights act, applies broadly across environments. It covers both the public and private sectors, and it is often applied in conjunction with other laws. As with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the ADA is much more open to interpretation than the IDEA. Under this Act, it is the responsibility of individuals with disabilities to self-identify, request assistance, and provide documentation of disability. In high school, under the IDEA, the needs of individuals with disabilities are assessed and a plan is designed for them. However, after secondary school, once an individual identifies his or her disability, the kind of assistance an organization provides is determined by what is “reasonable” and would not impose “undue hardship” on the organization. The term “accommodation” emerges in the ADA, where it was rarely used in the IDEA or the Rehabilitation Act. In particular, “reasonable accommodation” is the defining point in terms of what institutions “have to” provide and what they “might” provide. The term “services” is also used in the ADA, but mostly in terms of existing public services that need adjustment. Services for individuals with disabilities are required mostly in terms of “auxiliary services” (communication-related), which are defined much more narrowly than are services as defined by the IDEA. The word “support” does not appear in the ADA. Another interesting usage of terminology is “documented disability that significantly limits life activities”. This ambiguous phrase is another point of “have to” versus “might”. The courts are forced to interpret which activities are “life activities,” and how significantly they have to be “limited” in order to require an employer to provide accommodations (Thomas 2000; DeBettencourt 2002). Court interpretations of “disability” and “reasonable accommodations” have tended to be narrow, often in favor of the employers, rather than the employees (Fleischer and Zames 2001; O'Brien 2001). Definitions The words “accommodation” or “accommodations” appear 48 times in the ADA. “Accommodations” appears to be used to refer to any changes in normal operation or physical facility the entity might make for the individual with a disability. If an entity does not make reasonable accommodations, it is considered to be discrimination. SEC. 101 (9) DEFINITION: Reasonable accommodations “The term reasonable accommodation may include (A) making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; and (B) job restructuring, part-time or modified work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position, acquisition or modification of equipment or devices, appropriate adjustment or modifications of examinations, training materials or policies, the provision of qualified readers or interpreters, and other similar accommodation for individuals with disabilities.” The words “service” or “services” appear 180 times in the ADA. Most of the time “services” is not specific to individuals with disabilities. More often “services” refers to what all individuals have a right to participate in because of their public nature (i.e., public transportation, public education, etc.). The term “auxiliary aids and services” refers to direct assistance to individuals with disabilities. Auxiliary aids and services must be available in case an individual with a disability attempting to use the public service (i.e., eating in a dining car) requires them. “Accommodations,” on the other hand, are made when an individual with a disability requires them on a more regular basis (i.e., an employee or applicant). SEC. 3 (1) DEFINITION: Auxiliary aids and services “The term auxiliary aids and services includes (A) qualified interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments; (B) qualified readers, taped texts, or other effective methods of making visually delivered materials available to individuals with visual impairments; (C) acquisition or modification of equipment or devices; and other similar services and actions.” The word “supports” does not appear in the ADA. Application Across Environments Of the three Acts considered in this section, the ADA covers a broader range of environments for individuals with disabilities. The ADA is the primary protection of civil rights for individuals with disabilities in employment and in postsecondary education. In the secondary education environment, the ADA requires alterations to facilities and procedures (such as assessments). These requirements can overlap with the services provided under the IDEA. In the postsecondary education environment, students with disabilities, who are no longer covered by the IDEA, rely on the ADA to make higher education accessible. In postsecondary institutions there is no IEP developed for the student. It is the students’ responsibility to identify their disability and their assistance needs. Disability service programs in higher education are accountable to ADA mandates. Under the ADA, incentive for postsecondary institutions to provide assistance to students is based upon the threat of lawsuits rather than the reward of Federal grant money for improvements. In the employment environment, as in the postsecondary environment, it is the responsibility of individuals to identify their disabilities and assistance requirements. Employers, with some exceptions, could be guilty of discrimination if they do not make reasonable accommodations. Depending on an organization’s size, resources, operations, composition, structure, and functions of the workforce; the geographic separateness, administrative or fiscal relationship of the facility or facilities, and the estimated cost of accommodations required under the ADA, the organization may show that certain accommodations are not “reasonable” because they impose “undue hardship” on the organization. These terms are generally interpreted on a case-by-case basis in the courts, often resulting in summary judgments for the employers (Lee 1996; Thomas 2000). There have been few cases specifically about “undue hardship” (burden of proof lies first on the individual with a disability to prove that they are “disabled,” “otherwise qualified,” and require “reasonable accommodations” before employers are required to prove “undue hardship”). This fact, coupled with the findings that accommodations generally are free or of moderate cost, lead Lee (2001) to conclude that “employers should have little to fear from the ADA” (p. 236). However, employers still exhibit biases about accommodating disabled workers (McFarlin, Song et al. 1991; Eagleton Institute of Politics 1993a; Eagleton Institute of Politics 1993b; Lee 1996). Key Points Under the ADA: - Individuals with disabilities are responsible for identifying themselves, undergoing assessment and seeking out assistance. - Institutions and employers bear the cost of assistance provision. - There is a focus on accommodations rather than on services or supports. - There is a focus on nondiscrimination, reasonableness and undue hardship. - There is no link between Federal funds and compliance with the law. - The law applies across all environments. Practical Considerations Introduction How services, accommodations, and supports are defined and applied in practice differs across secondary school, postsecondary school and employment, mirroring to a great extent the intent of the policy that applies in each environment. At the secondary level: - “Services” and “related services” are applied much more frequently than are “accommodations” or “supports”. - The prescriptive nature of the IDEA means that services are used to encompass many, if not all, forms of “special” assistance to youth with disabilities in the school environment, including the provision of “special education” courses of study and classrooms designated for youth according to type or level of disability. Even though the provision of services as a “placement in a separate setting or special education classroom” is discouraged under the reauthorized IDEA (1997; Section 612(a)(5)(A))[K8] there is concern that this practice continues as a common methods of addressing the learning and behavior needs of youth with disabilities in secondary schools[u9]. - Other uses of the term “services” appear to offer a greater amount of flexibility in terms of course modifications, curriculum, staffing and environments than do related modes of assistance, i.e. menus of accommodations and supports, at the postsecondary and employment levels (Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Disability Support Services 2002). At the postsecondary level: - The term “accommodation” replaces “service” as a primary frame of reference. However, in most instances an accommodation at the postsecondary level cannot be equated with a service at the secondary level (Shaw, Brinkerhoff et al. 1990; Bursuck and Rose 1992; Gajar 1992; Deshler, Ellis et al. 1996; Gartin, Rumrill et al. 1996). - The looseness of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA means that terminology is applied quite differently across postsecondary institutions (See Table 2). However, seldom, if ever, are modes of assistance actually defined by postsecondary institutions. - Although how assistance is described may differ across postsecondary institutions, the actual types of assistance that are offered do not vary dramatically (See Table 2). - There is a divergence from the provision of individualized services to the offering of a set “menu” of services/accommodations/supports from which the student is assigned or chooses depending on their disability (i.e. whether they are blind, have a learning disability, etc.) (Citrus College Online 2000; Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Disability Support Services 2002). At the employment level: - There is little focus on disability “services” at the employment level, but rather a tendency for employers to express disability-related assistance as a means of “accommodating” or “supporting” one of many diverse groups (i.e. women, religious and ethnic groups) (Ford 2002; IBM 2002; McDonald's 2002). - Interpretations about what constitutes assistance to employees with disabilities are often left to the discretion of personnel officers (Society for Human Resource Management 1999), most of whom have little, if any, knowledge about disability (Colvert and Smith 2000). - For individuals with disabilities, the employment environment is a contradiction; where decisions about what kinds of assistance to provide are made on a person by person basis (similar to the secondary school level), yet where the focus upon the restrictive bounds of “reasonableness” becomes even more pronounced than at the postsecondary level (Hazer 2000). The sections below outline these practical considerations for assistance provision across the three environments of secondary school and transition, postsecondary school, and employment. Each section discusses components and examples of services, accommodations and supports in that environment. The degree of depth to which each term is discussed varies across environments because of the more prominent use of some terms over others, i.e. the use of “services” at the secondary level and “accommodations” at the postsecondary level. Secondary School and Transition Services Components of a service at the secondary school level. An important aspect of services is that they involve the addition or substitution of one means of delivering instruction for another ( i.e. a sign language interpreter would not normally be present in the classroom, adaptive physical education is substituted for regular physical education). Services are typically not a natural part of the environment, but are brought in/offered (by the provider) specifically for the youth with a disability (the customer) (McBurney Center 1998; Merriam-Webster Inc. 1999; Disability Services 2001; Office for Students with Disabilities). Services at the secondary level also tend to be on-going rather than short-term, in other words they are offered consistently over a span of months or years. Services in secondary school can include assignment to a special education classroom. Such classrooms often reflect a lower level of curriculum content[K10], referred to as “watered down”[K11], or the teaching of various life skills rather than addressing State Curriculum Content Standards that other students are asked to attain[K12] (Berliner and Biddle 1996; U. S. Department of Education 1996; Edgar 1998; Hatch 1998; Waldron and McLeskey 1998). Placement in a special education content classroom may include a number of differences (beyond content expectations), including reduced class size, increased attention to students on the part of the instructor, and less demanding work schedules. These types of service or special environments are not found in postsecondary education or post-school employment settings, thus further complicating the transition of youth with disabilities to those environments. Examples of services at the secondary school level. As stated above, “services” and “related services” are the terms most commonly used at the secondary school level to describe a placement or a program of activity, with various levels of assistance provided to youth with disabilities. Services encompass everything from identification as a child with a disability, to assessment for eligibility for special education services and determination of placement, to the detailed process of development of the Individual Education Program (IEP), and the eventual delivery of assistance or assignment to a special program of activity. Services might be direct, commonly composing of placement in a special education class or program, or related, composing of additional services or equipment that is brought in to the school. Direct Services: - Provision of a separate program of study within a “special class” assigned according to type/level of disability. This method of special education service delivery has historically been the method of choice for local school districts (Lipsky and Gartner 1999; McLaughlin, Fuchs et al. 1999; Stodden, Stodden et al. Submitted), and is known as the “least restrictive environment,” especially when addressing the needs of youth with significant disabilities. Services, focused upon separate classroom placement and/or a separate program of study based upon disability label or level, usually do not address the content standards or the support expectations placed upon other students in secondary schools[K13] (Berliner and Biddle 1996; U. S. Department of Education 1996; Edgar 1998; Hatch 1998; Waldron and McLeskey 1998). Youth with disabilities receiving this type of special education service often do not receive a high school diploma and do not participate in statewide tests taken by other students (Cheney and Harvey 1994; Balcazar and Keys 1997; Capital Publications Inc. 1997; Gronna, Jenkins et al. 1998; Vanderwood, McGrew et al. 1998; Stodden, Dowrick et al. Submitted; Stodden, Stodden et al. Submitted). - Provision of “special and separate content classes” assigned according to perceptions of student ability. This method of special education service delivery is applied to many youth with disabilities in secondary schools, especially for youth having difficulty participating or attaining satisfactory outcomes within the general education curriculum tracks. Such classes are offered in core academic areas, with the curriculum content rigor and/or amount reduced to fit the level of students placed in the courses (Berliner and Biddle 1996; Edgar 1998; Hatch 1998; Waldron and McLeskey 1998). Often special content classes have smaller teacher student ratios and a number of other supports available. Also, this service model often includes alternative instructional content and may involve youth participation in the community and other settings. Attempts have been made to structure special classes as a service that intensely supports youth to attain the same academic content requirements as do all other students. - Provision of “special services, including separate content” within the regular school classroom with other students. This method of special education service delivery is provided in the same setting as for all other youth taking courses of study, but may involve lower level or reduced content expectations for the course being taught. Also, such service approaches often involve the provision of additional personnel time (special education teacher or assistant) and special grading or monitoring criteria not applied to other students (McLaughlin, Fuchs et al. 1999). Related services might be separate or might be integrated into direct services. There are new Federal guidelines that state that “related services” must be related to the achievement of educational outcomes. Related Services: - Assessment of academic and service needs - Sign language interpretation - Physical therapy - Material conversion (i.e. from print to Braille) - Speech/language therapy/audiology - Tutoring - Provision of adaptive technology and instruction in the use of technology - Adaptive physical education - Transportation - Classroom aide (personnel) - Provision of assistance or special instruction from other paraprofessionals. There is debate around whether or not services that are related to transition should be included as direct/related services or should be labeled “transition services.” Transition services: - Training in social skills - Job skills - Daily living skills - Career and further education guidance - Mentoring - Supported employment. Accommodations Components of an accommodation at the secondary school level. Accommodations at the secondary school level can be defined as “changes in materials or procedures that provide access to instruction and assessments for students with disabilities”(Thurlow 2001). Where the provision of services might involve bringing in something that would not normally exist in the school environment, the provision of accommodations would involve altering something that already exists. Accommodations are used more in the case of youth with physical disabilities (structural accommodations) and youth with sensory disabilities. They are rarely applied to cases of youth with learning and behavior disabilities.[K14] The focus of special education in elementary and secondary school has historically been to provide a program of services, often focused upon separate settings and content[K16], rather than focusing upon providing different types/levels of accommodations and supports for youth with disabilities to achieve within regular classroom settings and with the same curriculum content standards[K17] as other youth[K18] (Malloy 1997; Lipsky and Gartner 1999; McLaughlin, Fuchs et al. 1999; Fleischer and Zames 2001; Stodden, Stodden et al. Submitted). Also, given such service provision at the elementary school level, youth with disabilities have often not learned the necessary pre-requisite skills and content to participate and succeed in secondary school curriculum (Stodden, Stodden et al. Submitted). For these reasons, secondary school personnel must continue separate and sub-standard direct service approaches rather than work to accommodate and support the participation of youth with disabilities within settings and curriculum applied to all students. Examples of accommodations at the secondary school level. Thurlow (2001) discusses the need for a link between “instructional accommodations” and “assessment accommodations.” Accommodations include changes in materials and curriculum such as alternative assignments and tape recorded versions of printed materials, changes in methods and strategies such as highlighting key points to remember and presenting material in multiple formats, changes in setting such as a separate room, changes in timing such as extended time, changes in scheduling, changes in presentation such as via sign language, and changes in response such as the use of reference materials. The term “modifications” also appears frequently in the literature. There is some confusion among practitioners about whether or not a “modification” can be equated with an “accommodation”. Some suggest that “modification” is a separate term that should be used to describe something that changes the construct of a procedure or means of assessment (i.e. transcription into Braille) (Thurlow 2001). Supports Components of a support at the secondary school level. In the secondary school environment, “support” does not necessarily differ significantly from how one would describe the process of teaching or supporting any child to learn or to transition to adult life. Examples of supports at the secondary school level. In the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) “support” is used to describe financial support to school districts or to describe support that is given to school personnel and families in order to increase their capacity to work with youth with disabilities. Support at the secondary level could be applied in goal setting as a rationale for the provision of services, i.e. “We will support the child to learn or to transition from secondary school to postsecondary school through the provision of specific services”. Postsecondary School Services Components of a service at the postsecondary level. Services at the postsecondary level tend to be geared for use by categories of students rather than by individual students (Center on Disabilities 2000; Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Office of Disability Services 2001). For example, a University might have a staff of sign language interpreters who provide interpretation services to all students who are deaf sign language-users on campus (Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Disability Services 2001; Office of Disability Services 2001; Disability Support Services 2002). Or notetaker services may be available to students who have difficulty accessing speech or print (i.e. students with visual impairments, hearing impairments or learning disabilities) (Center on Disabilities 2000; Disability Services 2001; Office of Disability Services 2001; Disability Support Services 2002). So on the one hand, by appearance, services are very general and can be equated with the services that are available to any student. But on the other hand, whereas any student can access financial aid services at a university, a student has to meet certain criteria (i.e. have a “documented disability”) in order to access interpreter services (McBurney Center 1998; Student Support Services Program 2001; Office of Disability Services 2002). Examples of services at the postsecondary level. The term “service” tends to be used by postsecondary institutions to describe the general activities of programs that are designed to assist students with disabilities, for example, “Services available to students with disabilities include…”(Citrus College Online 2000; Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Office of Disability Services 2001; Student Support Services Program 2001). The term is also likely to be used to describe assistance that involves interaction with another individual, for instance “interpreter services”, “transportation services” or “counseling services” (See Table 2). But, the use of terminology at the postsecondary level varies so that where one school might describe sign language interpretation as a “service”, another might describe it as an “accommodation” (See Table 2) (McBurney Center 1998; Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Office for Students with Disabilities 2001; Student Support Services Program 2001).[K19] Accommodations Components of an accommodation at the postsecondary level. The term “accommodation” is commonly used to describe assistance to students with disabilities at the postsecondary level. It is not uncommon for postsecondary institutions to use the term “reasonable accommodations” to categorize assistance (McBurney Center 1998; Disability Services 2001; Disabled Student Services 2001b), providing evidence that many postsecondary institutions use the ADA as a guide to the type and scope of assistance that they offer to students with disabilities. An interesting dimension of the link between the ADA and its application at the postsecondary level is that postsecondary schools will often describe what they do not provide and to whom they do not provide it. For example, a school may state that “reasonable accommodations” (Citrus College Online 2000) are provided only to students who are “qualified” or who have a “documented disability” or even, in the case of one school, are provided to students with “a documented disability which limits one or more major life activities and which imposes an educational limitation”(Citrus College Online 2000). A school may also state that they will provide a “determination of reasonable accommodation” for the student, and that they do not provide accommodations such as personal care attendants or assistance with the purchase of technology (Thomas 2000). This focus on “reasonableness” and “what we can and cannot provide for you” makes the accommodation process at the postsecondary level functional rather than interactive (i.e. “I will accommodate you”) and discretionary on the part of the provider (the school). The implication is that while the school has to “accommodate” the student by law, the school itself, rather than the student or even the law, will define the meaning of the term “accommodation.” Examples of accommodations at the postsecondary level. While some postsecondary institutions may not offer all of the accommodations listed below, few offer much more. Many schools appear to be focused upon meeting what is “reasonable” under the law rather than upon what an individual student may need in order to be successful at college (Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). Examples of accommodations as applied at the postsecondary level include exam modifications, priority enrollment, sign language interpretation or other communication assistance, access to adaptive technology, the provision of notetakers, tutoring, academic or career counseling, transportation bus lift, orientation, provision of accessible on-campus housing, lab and library assistance, the provision of readers, advocacy, peer mentoring, and transcription into alternative formats (See Table 2). Supports Components of a support at the postsecondary level. “Supports” are very vague in their application at the postsecondary level and the term is not used very widely. Section 504 and the ADA do not require that institutions “support” individuals with disabilities. Whereas at the secondary level it is clear that schools must provide individuals with disabilities with a “free and appropriate public education” through whatever means of support that entails, at the postsecondary level the line between the provision of assistance and “reasonableness” is much less clear (Thomas 2000; DeBettencourt 2002). Examples of supports at the postsecondary level. As at the secondary level, a support at the postsecondary level might be used in the context of describing services and accommodations in general, i.e., “support services”(Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities 2000; Disability Support Services 2002). TABLE 2: Examples of Accommodations, Supports and Services Listed on Websites of Five Postsecondary Institutions Michigan State Accommodations: Housing, Enrollment assistanc, Advising on need, Assistive tech, Orientation Peer networking, Transport options, Tactile maps, Interpreters, Accessible housing, Referral, Consult with faculty Support: N/A Service: Parking and transport, Consultation on programs, Assessing and addressing student needs Equipment provision, Access to print, ASL Interpreter services, Transportation University of Illinois, Chicago Acommodations: (Equates with Assistance) Assistive tech, Academic, ASL Interpreters, Readers, Lab Assistance Course and program mods, Exam mods, Note takers, Alternative formats, Info and referral Support: N/A Service: N/A Columbia University Accommodations: (Under services) Extended time on exams, Proctored exams, Readers, Tape recorder, Note-taker Books on tape, Use computer during exams Support: Academic skill development (i.e. tutoring, study skills) Service: Exam and class accoms, Peer networking, Access tours, Adaptive equip loan, Academic skill development, Personal and career counseling Resource library on disability University of Maryland Accommodations: Adaptive Tech, ALDs, Classroom access, Large Print, Extended Exam time, Interpreter services, Lab/lib assistance Support: N/A Service: Academic advising, Accom counseling, Advocacy, Mentoring, Note taking, Paratransit, Priority reg Recorded books, ASL interpreter, Study skills, Exam proctoring Citrus College Accommodations: N/A Support: N/A Service: Adapted physical ed, Adapted computer tech, Adapted testing, Campus and community referral, Counseling and advising Instructor liaison, LD program, Note-takers, Readers, Reg assistance, Sign lang interpreter, Adapted tech instruction End of Table 2 Employment Services Components of a service at the employment level. It is highly unusual for an employer to offer a disability-related “service” to an employee. The provision of a service for an employee with a disability would tend to involve contracting with an outside service-provider and is often framed as an accommodation. Examples of services at the employment level. An employer might contract to bring in an outside service, such as a sign language interpreter, job coach, or transcriber. Accommodations Components of an accommodation at the employment level. The desire to keep production costs down provides many employers with an incentive to use a minimalist interpretation of “reasonableness” as a means of defining accommodations for employees with disabilities (Hazer 2000). Employers will also vary in their understanding of and commitment to employees with disabilities (Luecking 2002, March). Essentially, employers are not bound to employ or to accommodate individuals with disabilities beyond what is required by law. They can interpret “accommodation” as loosely or tightly as an individual employee or the law will allow. In addition to the incentive of meeting legal mandates, employers do have an incentive to ensure that their employees are productive (Luecking 2000; Luecking 2002, March). The outcome of this dichotomy of incentives and disincentives is that depending on the employer, an employee with a disability will face widely different conceptions of their assistance needs and of an employers obligation to provide for these needs. Examples of accommodations at the employment level. Attempts to balance legal requirements with production costs and employee productivity creates extreme variability in terms of what kinds of accommodations employers will offer employees with disabilities (Hazer 2000). Examples of employment accommodations include readers, adaptive computer equipment for an employees individual use, modified work hours, and a modified job description and physical environment (Program on Employment and Disability 1999). Supports Components of a support at the employment level. The use of the word “support” at the employment level, whether it is equated with accommodations or represents other means of assisting an employee with a disability, appears at times to be intentionally vague. For example, the following quote comes from the Ford Motor Company web site (2000): “These company-sponsored Employee Resource Groups provide support and fellowship, identify barriers, contribute to employees' professional development, and provide organized activities for employees of diverse backgrounds.” Even many large national companies do not advertise the fact that they will provide employees with disabilities with “accommodations”, which bring to mind the obligation to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Rather they say that they will provide the “supports” that all employees need in order to be productive. A support can be much more broadly interpreted than an accommodation or a service. And while whether or not an employer is “accommodating” an employee with a disability is subject to interpretation by law, whether or not they are “supporting” them is much more ambiguous. Examples of supports at the employment level. The term “support” is sometimes substituted for the term “accommodation” at the employment level, and thus examples of “supports” would be similar to examples of accommodations. Some employers use the term “supports” to indicate assistance that involves the good will of other employees or that involves an attempt to bridge communication or attitudinal barriers (DiLeo, Luecking et al. 1995; Mank, Cioffi et al. 1997; Rogan, Banks et al. 2000; Targett West & Anglin 2001; Luecking 2002, March). Examples of such supports would be another employee taking notes for an employee with a hearing impairment at meetings (DiversityCareers 2001), arrangements for assisting an employee in a wheelchair to evacuate if the building is on fire (Esight Careers Network 2001), offering sign language classes to employees (DiversityCareers 2001), or offering disability awareness training (Department of Health and Human Services 2000). DISCREPANCIES IN THE PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE ACROSS ENVIRONMENTS Introduction An exploration of variables surrounding the different types of assistance (services, supports, & accommodations) found as youth with disabilities transition from secondary education to postsecondary education and employment is rare in the professional literature. More significant, there seems to be little understanding of the process of assistance provision during these transitions, or of the potential negative impact that is experienced by youth with disabilities as they seek to prepare for and successfully access adult roles of value in their community. There is little empirical evidence surrounding the value of specific types of assistance, or the transition of specific types of assistance from one environment to another. As youth with disabilities transition from lower education to higher education, they are significantly impacted by movement from the guidance of one Federal policy (IDEA) to policy that is much less prescriptive and focused upon participation in normal adult community roles (ADA; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act). The Federal policy shift experienced as youth depart lower education has significant impacts upon youth with disabilities as they seek assistance within postsecondary education and employment settings. Following are a listing of discrepancies in the provision of assistance that limit practice as youth with disabilities prepare for and make this transition: Discrepancies in Principle - Scope of Responsibility - Lower education often has a focus upon providing separate, special services and programs that address the numerous needs of a child[K25], whereas postsecondary education and employment settings more often focus upon making specific, reasonable accommodations that support persons with disabilities to function in the same environments and roles as all other persons[K26]. - Roles and Responsibilities of Participants - Lower education has a focus on taking complete responsibility for the planning, development and delivery of a service, whereas postsecondary education and employment settings focus upon “reasonable” and “specific” supports or accommodations (as applied to a specific course or activity) and the youth is responsible for planning and ensuring delivery. Discrepancies in Provision - Process of Determination - Lower education is charged with the management and coordination of special education and related services, whereas in postsecondary education and employment settings, youth with disabilities are fully responsible for obtaining and managing their educational and related supports across school, home and community. - Outcomes - Lower education is charged with responsibility for a student’s educational success, whereas postsecondary education and employment settings focus only on assisting access – youth become responsible for their own success. The section below outlines these discrepancies as they impact youth in secondary school, postsecondary school, and employment environments. Discrepancies in Principle: Roles and Responsibilities Introduction The types of participants and the expectations of those who participate in the process of deciding and providing assistance to youth with disabilities in secondary, postsecondary, and employment settings varies widely as youth transition across these environments (Brinckerhoff 1994; Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). These discrepancies contribute to poor outcomes for youth with disabilities. More specifically, these poor outcomes are the result of policy and practice in the sending environment and the failure to prepare youth with disabilities for the expectations of the receiving environment (Shaw, Brinkerhoff et al. 1990; U. S. Department of Education 1995; Berliner and Biddle 1996; U. S. Department of Education 1996, October; Edgar 1998; Waldron and McLeskey 1998). Two considerations are important to youth with disabilities, and their supporters, in this discussion: 1. Who participates in and is responsible for the decision making and provision process? 2. What are the responsibilities, roles, and expectations of those participating? These changing roles can have a negative impact upon youth with disabilities. Secondary School Scope of Responsibility The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) prescribes fiscal and institutional responsibility at each level of assistance provision at the secondary school level, from the identification of a child with a disability to the assessment of their needs to the development of the Individual Education Program (IEP) to the delivery of services (Kupper 1997; DeBettencourt 2002; Rosenfeld 2002). At each of these stages, the school district undoubtedly bears primary responsibility for ensuring that the requirements of the mandate are met (Kupper 1997; DeBettencourt 2002). States also receive Federal funds for the provision of special education and related services. Placing the burden of responsibility for the provision of assistance to students with disabilities with the State does not mean that every child who has a disability is actually identified and assessed before or at the secondary school level. However, it does mean that a majority of school-aged youth with disabilities should receive attention in this area. According to the IDEA the student with a disability and/or their parents are free to request that the student be assessed for identification of a disability and related needs. However, even if they do not make such a request it is still quite possible that the school district will initiate and provide these services (Kupper 1997; DeBettencourt 2002). Roles and Participant Responsibility The selection of participants in the process of determining and providing assistance to youth with disabilities in lower education is specifically detailed in the IDEA as the parent of a child with a disability (and/or an advocate), a special education administrator responsible for providing programs, and educational and related services personnel providing the program of services (Kupper 1997; National Center on Secondary Education and Transition 2001, December; DeBettencourt 2002). At age 16, under IDEA, the youth with a disability is encouraged to attend planning sessions and be involved in the development of their Individualized Educational Plan. However, few students are prepared for or choose to participate (Brinckerhoff 1994). The delivery of the plan and monitoring/follow-up of the activities to be provided becomes the sole responsibility of the local education agency and any contracted providers of related services. Roles and expectations of persons attending IEP meetings and those delivering special education and related services often remain the same from the time children are in pre-school programs on through high school or until age 21. Further, under IDEA, persons delivering educational and related services have a responsibility to ensure the impact of their services upon the success of the educational outcomes of children with disabilities (i.e., grades and test scores) (National Center on Secondary Education and Transition 2001, December). As children without disabilities proceed through the lower education years, their perception of roles and responsibilities, concerning themselves and their education, shift significantly as they enter adolescence in the high school years. They progressively are prepared for and provided the opportunity to contribute to real decisions about themselves and their educational program, with the accompanying accountability for the outcomes of their decisions. Given the prescribed nature of the educational assistance decision making and provision process mandates under IDEA, youth with disabilities do not always have the opportunity for this normal process of learning about and accepting increased responsibility and accountability for one’s own life decisions[K27] (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001). Many efforts over the past twenty years to teach youth with disabilities “self-determination” skills have been separated from the process where decisions are made and assistance is provided, with little focus upon what is involved in learning increased responsibility and accountability for making decisions about one’s own needs and actions (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001). Postsecondary School Scope of Responsibility Responsibility for the provision of assistance to students with disabilities at the postsecondary level is much less clear and universally applied than at the secondary school level. The Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) only state that the student must be accommodated “within reason” and that these accommodations should be, again within reason, at the expense of the institution (1990; Thomas 2000; Rosenfeld 2002). There is no designation about where funds should come from, what kinds of accommodations should be provided, where and by whom, etc. Funding for the provision of assistance to students with disabilities at the postsecondary level is a low priority with most institutions (National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June). As a result, funding for assistance is often inadequate and disability service units are put in the position of having to make decisions based upon cost rather than upon effectiveness (National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June). Postsecondary schools are also under no obligation to identify or to assess a student with a disability. Therefore “provision” begins and ends with providing a specific accommodation for a specific circumstance (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Rosenfeld 2002). Roles and Participant Responsibility The roles of participants who are involved with the determination and provision of educational assistance during the postsecondary school years are not as clearly defined as they are at the secondary level, and are determined more by the intent and advocacy of the youth with a disability (Brinckerhoff 1994; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). In most instances, disability support personnel are available on postsecondary education campuses, even though their level of expertise and ability to be of assistance will vary extensively across institutions (National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). Youth with disabilities are expected, as are all other students in postsecondary education, to take full responsibility for planning their own educational program – this includes asking for and obtaining any supports required to participate in that program (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). Deciding to make a request, as well as preparing and providing data to support the need for disability accommodations or assistance, is the primary responsibility of the student. Further, explaining one’s disability/educational needs and compensatory strengths to postsecondary disability support personnel and individual instructors is a primary responsibility and role of the student. It is the student’s responsibility to advocate for and obtain required educational assistance, manage and monitor the delivery of that support provision, and balance these with any needed related services and supports (i.e., transportation) (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). Many youth with disabilities, who have little or no preparation for this task, find the responsibilities that go with this role overwhelming and impossible, resulting in reduced course loads and much higher dropout rates than is seen with other youth (Blackorby and Wagner 1996; Wagner and Balckorby 1996b; National Organization on Disabilities 1998; Witte, Philips et al. 1998; Stodden and Dowrick 2001). Many youth with disabilities require family or peer support as they seek to move through the world of postsecondary education (Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). Even with extensive assistance from family members and peers, role expectations are that students will contribute to and make decisions about their needs for assistance, as well as understand and speak for themselves in situations where decisions are made and where follow-through is required. All youth possess a range of skills and experience in these areas, but it is evident that such skills and experience are even more important for youth with disabilities, given their additional needs for assistance and support (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). The implications of the shift of responsibility for identification and assessment from the school to the individual is that it becomes more likely that a student will either not receive disability-related assistance or will receive inadequate assistance, especially if (a) the student is unaware that they have a disability or is unwilling to identify themselves as having a disability, (b) the student is not aware that they are entitled to assistance or is unwilling to seek out assistance or, (c) the student is unable or unwilling to provide documentation of their disability (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001). The other issue is that in order for the student to receive the type and quality of assistance that they require for postsecondary success, they need to be aware of the implications that their disability has on their ability to function in the postsecondary environment (Brinckerhoff 1994; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001; Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). They also need to have knowledge about the kinds of services to which they are entitled and to posses the advocacy skills that they need in order to procure assistance (Brinckerhoff 1994; Stodden and Dowrick 1999; Izzo, Hertzfeld et al. 2001; Stodden, Whelley et al. 2001; Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). Employment Scope of Responsibility Employers, i.e. private agencies and institutions, are clearly responsible for providing assistance to their employees (1990). As a result, responsibility for the provision of assistance shifts from the public to the private sector. The term “reasonable” becomes an important indicator of responsibility at the employment level (1990). In fact what it is not “reasonable” for the employer to provide becomes the responsibility of the employee. If it is determined that a company cannot afford specific accommodations or if these accommodations would significantly interfere with the nature of their business, a.k.a. create an “undue burden”, then it may be left to the employee to either (a) fund an accommodation themselves (or seek funding elsewhere), (b) accept an accommodation that does not entirely meet their needs, (c) give up their employment, or (d) become involved in a time consuming and costly appeals process. Roles and Participant Responsibility Participant roles and responsibilities in the determination and provision of accommodations in employment settings are even less defined and are even more dependent upon the intent and advocacy of the youth with a disability than in postsecondary settings. For example, employment settings often have no single person with extensive knowledge of disability needs and employers are often characterized as having distrust and fear of disability issues (Hazer 2000; Luecking 2002, March). This situation requires the person with a disability to clearly describe and advocate their specific disability related needs and strengths that are directly related to the employment position under consideration. The role of the employer is to provide a “reasonable accommodation” (1990) in-relation to the person’s disability, thus supporting access within the workplace to required job functions. It remains the responsibility of the person with a disability to demonstrate success on the job and to obtain and manage all related supports that are necessary to function and to be successful within the employment setting (Luecking 2002, March). Many persons with disabilities are not prepared for or experienced enough to successfully fulfill the roles and responsibilities that are expected of them when seeking and participating in employment settings (Stodden and Dowrick 2001; Luecking 2002, March). There appears to be little opportunity in secondary or postsecondary school to develop these skills and obtain the experience to navigate the employment market. These skills are critical for all youth to participate in employment, yet for persons with disabilities, such skills are even more important given their additional accommodation and related service needs (Luecking 2002, March). Discrepancies in Provision: Process and Outcomes Introduction The process and basis for determining if and what educational assistance will be provided to youth with disabilities in secondary and postsecondary education and employment settings varies widely. Most important is the fact that youth with disabilities are impacted in negative ways as they transition across these environments and seek to successfully and meaningfully participate as an adult in their community of choosing. In particular: - The basis for determining the type and level of assistance to be received shifts significantly as youth with disabilities transition from lower education to postsecondary education and employment settings, and - The process used to determine the type and level of assistance to be received shifts full circle as youth transition from lower education to adult environments. Additionally, consideration of long-term outcomes, and thereby linkage with future needs, is problematic across all three environments. In particular: - The provision of assistance and the assessment of outcomes often focus upon current outcomes and needs and neglect linkages to future outcomes and needs. - There is a lack of clarity about the meaning of “positive outcomes”. Different stakeholders may have different goals for assistance provision. Secondary School Process of Determining Assistance The process for determining educational assistance for children and youth with disabilities in lower education is detailed very specifically in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) as the steps educators and parents must follow in the development of an Individualized Educational Program (IEP) (1993). The process is delineated as the Federally mandated steps to be followed to determine a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) for children with disabilities (1993). With the exception that youth with disabilities are encouraged to attend their IEP meeting during the secondary school years (indications are that few youth attend (Johnson 2001)), the IEP and assistance determination process as applied in pre-school and elementary school settings is frequently the same as that which is applied to adolescents in secondary school preparing to participate in adult environments[K28]. This can be true even with the requirement that districts develop an Individualized Transition Plan (ITP) for students that outlines the student’s post-secondary school plans and steps to be taken in order to meet these goals[u29]. The IEP process, as delineated in IDEA, requires the input of service providers and parents or their advocates into decisions concerning the types and levels of assistance to be received by the child (1993), but does little to model or prepare youth with disabilities for what to expect after leaving secondary school. As children without disabilities proceed through their lower education years, opportunities are made increasingly available for such youth to become aware of and explore their needs and interests related to post-school environments. Further, such youth are supported and expected to progressively contribute to decisions and plans for their course of study and to accept responsibility for moving toward the future. They learn the skills that are necessary to advocate for what they will need to be successful in post-school environments. For youth with disabilities, the place where such decisions are discussed and made is during the IEP. However, most youth with disabilities leave the IEP process with a complete lack of awareness or understanding of their own disability and/or the assistance needs they might have in order to successfully function in post-school environments (Grigal 1997; National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June). Further, most youth with disabilities leave the IEP process with few or no advocacy skills, or little understanding of how to advocate for their assistance needs in post-school environments (Grigal 1997; National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June). The basis for making decisions regarding the provision and type/level of assistance to be offered to a youth during the secondary school years is closely linked to the eligibility determination process under IDEA. This eligibility process is focused upon meeting specific criteria under numerous disability categories and may have little to do with one’s assistance needs (Grigal 1997; Stodden 2002). Thus, often data or information collected in this process is of little value to the youth or those attempting to assist or support their educational progress in secondary school. Also, youth with disabilities often have little concern or interest in the basis of their assistance because it is taken for granted that assistance will be provided based on Federal Mandates (Grigal 1997). Of greatest concern is what this process models and teaches youth with disabilities. They are ill-prepared in secondary school for the changes in thinking that they will encounter about why and if assistance is to be provided in post-school environments. Outcomes The IEP is one means of measuring accountability to the student and the school in that each year specific goals are developed for each student and the services that are needed in order for the student to meet these goals are outlined (Johnson; 1993). In theory, each year’s IEP must look back on the last and indicate whether the previous year’s goals were met (1993). In practice, this does not always occur (Grigal 1997). Nor does the fact that goals were met mean that these goals were necessarily the most appropriate for each student. Sometimes an IEP team is motivated by the need to be accountable so it creates goals for the student that it knows can be achieved irregardless of the quality of the services or supports that are linked with these goals (Stodden 2002). Consideration of outcomes for youth with disabilities at the secondary level often focuses upon immediate rather than long-term goals as a measure for success. For example, the IEP of a student with a learning disability might state that the student’s goal is to, “Pass all of his/her classes with at least a grade of ‘C’ or better”. In order for the student to meet this goal it might be recommended that the school provide three hours of tutoring a week, placement in a special classroom for math, and additional time for the student to complete exams. While at the end of the school year the student may actually have passed all of his/her classes with a “C”, there has been no means of measuring (a) whether the actual assistance that was provided is linked to the fact that the student received a grade of “C” or better, or (b) whether the goal that was set was appropriate to the student’s desires and capabilities, i.e. if the goal had been to achieve a grade of “B” or better would the student have been able to achieve this goal with the same level of assistance that was provided for a goal of “C” or better? [u30] The issue of focusing on short-term versus long-term goals often boils down to the goals of the individual versus the goals of the school. The achievement of long-term goals occurs in many steps. If short-term goals are not matched with long-term goals then long-term goals are often unachievable. For a majority of students the achievement of long-term goals is possible through their motivation to succeed. For students with disabilities, the achievement of long-term goals may also be dependent upon short-term goals that are decided by others and the assistance that the students do or do not receive from the schools (Grigal 1997; Stodden 2002). For example, suppose the student described above has a long-term goal of becoming a doctor and the way to become a doctor is to attend medical school and the way to attend medical school is to attend an undergraduate university of the caliber that only accepts students who have a “B” average and who have participated in at least two extra curricular activities? The school, on the other hand, has a goal of maintaining its accountability to the State and Federal governments through ensuring that (a) students receive a free and appropriate public education and that, (b) students with disabilities are given the same opportunity to a free and appropriate public education as are other students. Teachers and parents may also have minimal goals for a student that impact the IEP process (Grigal 1997; Stodden 2002). Postsecondary School Process of Determining Assistance The universal process for determining educational assistance for youth with disabilities in higher education is undefined, un-mandated, and varies extensively from one program setting to the next (Stodden and Dowrick 1999; Stodden 2002). Further, youth with disabilities become the entity or person wholly responsible for initiating, leading, managing, and following through with a process of determining assistance that might be provided by the postsecondary institution (Stodden and Dowrick 1999). Without the mandates of IDEA, nothing similar to an individualized planning process exists in postsecondary education settings. Typically, youth are expected to take the initiative to declare their status as a person with a disability, provide assessment data that would verify their specific disability, and then work with the disability support office to plan and participate in one or more of the accommodations or supports that might be available (Stodden and Dowrick 1999). Further determination of the extent to which the accommodation might be implemented must be negotiated between the student and each instructor. Given the lack of experience with disability among postsecondary instructional faculty, this process may require an extensive explanation of ones disability and justification for the proposed accommodation to be provided (Stodden and Dowrick 1999). This process often requires the student to have an understanding of the course content to be encountered and the range of teaching methods that each instructor may use – given this information the student is often required to speak specifically to their disability related needs and how they might be most efficiently addressed in each course. In postsecondary education settings, the process of determining educational assistance is often impacted by what the institution has available and is able to provide (National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports 2000, June). Typically a menu of possible accommodations and supports is used for discussion – the scope and depth of this menu is impacted by the extent of interest in supporting persons with disabilities at each institution and the amount of funding available for such services. Unlike lower education, postsecondary educational institutions often do not provide per capita funding for disability support services, so as increased numbers of youth with disabilities enter the determination process in postsecondary education, support budgets become thin and must impact decisions (Gajar 1998). Outcomes While there may be fiscal accountability to the State at public postsecondary institutions, institutions often are not held accountable for the achievement of specific goals or the provision of specific services unless through litigation under the ADA. Thus, at the postsecondary level there is little focus upon the long-term goals of the student in the determination of what types of assistance to offer the student with a disability (Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). In fact, there is often not even a focus on the student’s short-term goals. A student is assigned accommodations based on their category of disability and whether or not the student succeeds is viewed as the responsibility of the student (Stodden, Stodden et al. submitted for publication). There is very little empirical evidence that actually matches the provision of specific types of assistance with any type of outcome at the postsecondary level (Stodden and Dowrick 1999; Shaw 2002). For example, a postsecondary student who is blind might be provided with access to a computer that converts text to speech, given extra time to take exams, and encouraged to ask fellow students to take notes for them in class. It is more than likely that the determination of these assistance “needs” were based upon the fact that the student is blind and this type of assistance is “normally given” to students who are blind, rather than upon any evidence that these three types of assistance will help the student to meet any achievable goals. Employment Process of Determining Assistance The universal process of determining assistance for persons with disabilities in employment settings is often dependent upon the motivation of the applicant and the expectations and attitudes of the employer (Hazer 2000; Luecking 2002, March). The determination process is somewhat similar to postsecondary education settings, but often lacking the assistance of a specific office or knowledgeable person concerning what accommodations or supports might be required to complete the required job tasks. Further, the discussion of assistance needs must often be initiated by the person with a disability during the process of applying for a position, adding weight to the decision about whether or not to hire the individual (Hazer 2000; Luecking 2002, March). Typically the person with a disability is required to understand their own disability limitations and strengths and to be able to speak about them very clearly within the content of the requirements of the position under consideration (Hazer 2000; Luecking 2002, March). Employers may have little knowledge of disability needs or how to talk about them (Luecking 2002, March). Further, employer’s decisions may be influenced by fears concerning liability and potential additional costs that may be incurred through making accommodations (Hazer 2000). It is clear that the process for determining assistance for youth with disabilities as they prepare and transition across lower education, postsecondary education and employment settings changes significantly with the passage into and through each environment. Characteristics of this shift include movement from (1) a mandated, individualized, and parent/agency driven planning process to a youth initiated, undefined process without required procedures or mandated outcomes; (2) parent/agency driven responsibility for decision making to youth driven responsibility for initiation, management, and follow-through of the decision making process; and (3) decisions and expectations of a comprehensive program of services (lower education) to decisions about specific and separate accommodations and supports to be implemented in the same post-school settings within which all other persons seek to access and participate. Outcomes An employer is under no obligation to spend “x” amount of dollars for the provision of assistance to an employee, nor in most cases is there an entity outside of the organization to which the employer routinely must demonstrate that the provision of assistance to employees with disabilities is achieving specific goals and objectives. In the context of employment, the focus of assistance provision tends to be upon enabling the employee to perform the tasks that are necessary in order to complete the requirements of their position (Luecking 2000). The measure of outcome in this case would be whether or not the employee does in fact meet their job requirements. If the employee does not meet these requirements it is a matter of subjectivity on the part of the employer as to whether or not this failure to meet requirements was due to inadequate or inappropriate assistance or to some other intrinsic quality of the employee (Luecking 2000). At the employment level, it is generally dependent upon the employee to match their goals with their assistance needs and to advocate for the provision of such assistance (Luecking 2000). Often an employee with a disability is put into the position of having to accept accommodations that, while adequate for an entry level position, do not allow them to progress on a career path that is typical for employees without disabilities (Callahan and Mank 1998). IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the above review of the provision of educational and related assistance in secondary school, postsecondary school and employment, the following implications are evident: 1. Students with disabilities are currently not encouraged to develop the self-determination skills that they will need in order to function in post-school settings. Youth with disabilities are not adequately prepared in secondary school to participate in the process of determining, advocating for, or managing the types of assistance and methods of provision found in post-school environments. Youth with disabilities transition from a secondary school environment where they are often observers or passive participants in the process of determining and obtaining educational assistance. In post-school environments, they are expected to clearly describe and advocate for the supports they may require in specific learning and work environments. Often youth with disabilities are left to make this transition without the necessary knowledge or skills in self-advocacy, self-awareness or self-determination required to access post-school environments. 2. Students with disabilities often do not have an adequate understanding of their disability and related assistance needs. While an emphasis on high academic expectations is important for access and success in postsecondary education, equally important for youth with disabilities is the need for an understanding of their disability and the types of assistance that are required for them to function within a range of environments. If such knowledge and skills were taught in high school, youth with disabilities would be prepared to initiate discussions with admissions counselors in postsecondary education and employers in work settings, and advocate for the specific accommodations necessary for them to access and participate with all other students and employees. For youth with disabilities, poor post-school outcomes are often attributed to a lack of understanding that they may not receive the same specialized and individualized services and supports they received in high school. Often, parents and youth with disabilities are surprised to learn that the methods of disability assistance determination and the types of assistance provided change significantly after leaving secondary school. 3. Students, parents and teachers lack awareness about differences in the Federal policies that govern disability-related assistance provision in secondary school, postsecondary school, and employment settings. The varying levels of Federal policy prescriptiveness guiding assistance provision tend to be misunderstood or overlooked by educators and others preparing youth and their family members for transition. Federal policy during secondary school (IDEA) tends to be highly prescriptive, focused upon educational benefit and achievement. During the post-school years, the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA tend to be much less prescriptive and focus on basic access to settings and programs. Practitioners tend to focus on the provision of assistance as a quick fix or legal obligation rather than as preparing youth for future success in post-school roles. Recommendations for Improved Outcomes for Youth with Disabilities Recommendations for Improvements to Policy 1. Resources for research and training - There is a need to devote more resources to exploring the role of educational assistance provision for youth with disabilities as they prepare for post-school environments. These resources could be devoted to research and training to further explore how assistance is provided and what types of assistance are provided, and the impact upon outcomes for youth with disabilities in the transition process. 2. Terminology - There needs to be clarification of the language surrounding assistance provision in Federal policy so that language is used consistently across policies as youth with disabilities transition to post-school settings. Current policies, for example those stemming from IDEA, the Rehabilitation Act, and the ADA, use the terms “services”, “supports”, and “accommodations” inconsistently, creating barriers for youth with disabilities, their family members, and practitioners. These barriers could be eliminated by seeking consistency in the use of terminology and by focusing upon preparing youth to function in post-school environments. 3. Effective practice - Policy should emphasize research-proven effective practice (practice that is linked to positive outcomes), rather than minimum standards that satisfy prescriptive federal policy. When policy is guided by minimum standards of practice, such policies should be supplemented with incentives for the provision of assistance that is based upon effective practice. 4. Accountability - Assistance providers for individuals with disabilities in all environments should be more accountable for the long-term outcomes of assistance provision. This can be accomplished through incentives for the utilization of effective practices, and through policy directives that require better mapping of assistance provision and follow up. 5. Self-Determination - Federal policy at the secondary school level should incorporate requirements for the development of self-advocacy, self-awareness and self-determination knowledge and skills for youth with disabilities, ensuring effective preparation for post-school environments. This can be accomplished through policy that a) guides the development of additions and modifications to general education core curriculum, b) alters the role and responsibility of youth with disabilities in the IEP process, and c) takes a stronger stand on the importance of fully including youth with disabilities in the initiation, advocacy, and management of their own assistance provision process at an early age. Recommendations for Improvements to Practice 1. Research-Proven Practice - There is a need for increased efforts to apply research-proven practice when assessing the effectiveness of modes of assistance provision for youth with disabilities in secondary school. Currently, such decisions are often based upon the assessed deficits of the child and prescriptive federal policy, rather than upon the consideration of knowledge about the needs of the young person for transition to post-school environments. 2. Focus upon Post-school Outcomes rather than Minimal Compliance – With a focus upon mandated procedures of the IEP process as the method for determining modes of assistance for youth with disabilities in secondary school, there is little attention to preparation for post-school outcomes. The energy invested in the process of assistance provision is meaningless if it does not assist successful transition outcomes. Practitioners should consider individual assistance-related needs within the context of post-school environments, rather than fitting people and types of assistance into broad categories or focusing only upon the short-term educational needs of youth. 3. Teaching Responsibility to Youth with Disabilities – A major shift for all youth transitioning to adult roles in postsecondary education and employment is a sense of immediate and increased responsibility and independence. As most youth move through middle and secondary school they are given increasing responsibility for their own learning and the assistance they need to benefit from instruction. Often, youth with disabilities who have an IEP in place do not have the opportunity to experience this increased responsibility or learn the skills and knowledge necessary to assume such independence. Since the types of assistance provided for youth with disabilities in secondary school are decided as part of IEP planning, it is critical that such youth have an active role and an opportunity to make decisions which carry responsibility and consequences similar to the adult roles for which they are preparing. Secondary school personnel need to increase the participation of youth with disabilities in the planning and implementation of their own educational assistance. Given that currently many youth with disabilities have minimal or no involvement in the IEP process, there is also a need to improve the guidance and level of support that is offered to individuals with disabilities at the postsecondary and employment level. 4. Focus upon Transitioning Modes of Assistance – Currently little planning is conducted around the transition of disability services, supports or accommodations to post-school settings. Transition planning is often focused on a long-term career or community living goal, with little thought given to the modes of assistance offered within those settings. Personnel at the secondary school level should involve the student in a process of planning and mapping the level and types of assistance provision found within these post-school environments. Practitioners must think of where the youth with a disability is coming from and where they are going, and match the provision of assistance to these long-term goals. Recommendations for Further Research 1. Student participation and self-advocacy – There is a need to support research, training and project models that focus on enhancing student participation in the IEP and assistance provision process and on increasing student self-advocacy skills that can be applied to post-school environments. These projects should focus on the needs of students with disabilities in secondary school, as they prepare to transition into postsecondary school and employment. 2. Self-determination - There is a need to support research, training and project models that aim to increase students’ understanding of their disability and how different learning strategies and modes of assistance are linked to their disability. There should also be an emphasis on teaching students to effectively communicate this understanding, in the form of self-advocacy, in secondary, postsecondary and employment environments. 3. Preparation for success in post-school roles – There is a need to support research, training and project models that examine the relationship between modes of assistance and specific educational and post-school outcomes. These projects should emphasize high expectations and positive outcomes in the long-term rather than emphasizing short-term benefit. In order to promote a seamless transition between secondary school and postsecondary school/employment, there is also a need to support projects that increase student, parent and teacher awareness about the differences between the mandates and assistance-provision process’ in these three environments. SUMMARY The purpose of this paper has been to draw attention to the importance of the provision of assistance in the post-school success of youth with disabilities. Further, the paper has highlighted discrepancies in the provision of assistance that negatively impact this success. The key points that were made in regards to the provision of assistance across the environments of secondary school, postsecondary school and employment include evidence that: - There are inconsistencies in terminology in legal and practical contexts across environments. - There are inconsistencies in intent, application and processes of assistance provision across environments. This paper has addressed these issues by: - Describing in detail the definition and application of modes of assistance for youth with disabilities across secondary school, postsecondary school and employment. - Examining the impact of discrepancies in assistance provision that negatively affect the transition and participation of youth with disabilities in these three environments, and - Suggesting ways of improving the provision of assistance to youth with disabilities through improvements in policy and practice and through suggestions for further research. Youth with disabilities have the same right to be successful and to achieve their life goals as do youth without disabilities. Although policies such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are a positive step towards protecting this right, the application of these laws has not gone far enough towards giving youth with disabilities the same opportunities for postsecondary education and employment that are available to other youth. During secondary school there is a focus upon providing youth with disabilities with prescriptive, specialized services, often in segregated environments focused specifically upon learning or behavior deficit experienced by the student. Students with disabilities are not active participants in the decision making process around their supports. Thus, they leave secondary school without advocacy skills, without knowledge of the impact that their disability has upon their learning and the related modes of assistance that can help to mitigate this impact, and without an understanding of how to negotiate the “real world” where institutions are focused upon providing “reasonable accommodations” rather than upon meeting individual needs. BIBLIOGRAPHY (1990). Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. (1993). IDEA. 29. Balcazar, F. E. and C. B. Keys (1997). A comprehensive model to identify, train, and place Hispanic youths with disabilities who have dropped out of high school. Final report to the U.S. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. Chicago, Institute on Disability and Human Development, University of Illinois at Chicago. Benz, M., B. Doren, et al. (1998). "Crossing the great divide: Predicting productive engagement for young women with disabilities." Career Development for Exceptional Individuals 21(1): 3-16. Benz, M. R. and A. S. Halpern (1987). "Transition services for secondary students with mild disabilities: A statewide perspective." Exceptional Children 53: 507-514. Berliner, D. and B. Biddle (1996). "Standards amidst uncertainty and inequality." The School Administrator 53(5): 42-47. Blackorby, J. and M. Wagner (1996). "Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study." Exceptional Children 62(399-413). Blackorby, J. and M. Wagner (1996). "Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the national longitudional transition study." Exceptional Children 62(5): 399-413. Brinckerhoff, L. C. (1994). "Developing effective self-advocacy skills in college-bound students with learning disabilities." Intervention in School and Clinic 29(4): 229-237. Bursuck, W. and E. Rose, Eds. (1992). Community college options for students with mild disabilities. Transition from school to life. Sycamore, IL, Sycamore Publishing. Callahan, M. and D. Mank (1998). Choice and control of employment for people with disabilities: A white paper. The Importance of Income. T. Nerney. University of New Hampshire, The Self-Determination National Program Office of the Institute on Disability. Capital Publications Inc. (1997). "Graduation rates remain stagnant for disabled." Special Education Report 23(1): 1-2. Center on Disabilities (2000). Verification of disability, California State University, Northridge. 2001. Cheney, D. A. and V. S. Harvey (1994). "From segregation to inclusion: One district's program changes for students with emotional and behavioral disorders." Education and Treatment of Children 17: 332-346. Citrus College Online (2000). Disabled students programs and services, Citrus College, Student Services Website. 2001. Colvert, A. L. and J. W. Smith (2000). What is reasonable? Workplace communication and people who are disabled. Handbook of communication and people with disabilities: Research and application. D. O. Braithwaite and T. L. Thompson. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers: 141-158. DeBettencourt, L. U. (2002). "Understanding the differences between IDEA and Section 504." Teaching Exceptional Children 34(3): 16-23. Department of Health and Human Services (2000). Accessing opportunity: The plan for employment of people with disabilities in the Federal Government. 2001. Deshler, D. D., E. Ellis, et al. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities. Denver, CO, Love Publication. DiLeo, D., R. Luecking, et al. (1995). Natural supports in action: Strategies to facilitate employer supports to workers with disabilities. St. Augustine, FL, Training Resource Network, Inc. Disability Services (2001). Services for students with disabilities, University of Illinois at Chicago, Disability Services Website. 2001. Disability Support Services (2002). What exactly is the Disability Support Service?, University of Maryland, Disability Support Services. 2001. Disabled Student Services (2001b). Practices for the assessment and accommodation of students with learning disabilities, University of California, Los Angeles. 2001. DiversityCareers (2001). Companies today welcome deaf technical grads, DiversityCareers.com. 2001. Eagleton Institute of Politics (1993). Employing people with disabilities: The employer's perspecitive--Focus group discussions. New Brunswick, NJ, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. Eagleton Institute of Politics (1993). Employing people with disabilities:The employer's perspective--Quantitative survey. New Brunswick, NJ, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. Edgar, E. (1987). "Secondary programs in special education: Are many of them justifiable?" Exceptional Children 53: 555-561. Edgar, E. (1998). "Employment as an outcome for mildly handicapped students: Current status and future directions." Focus on Exceptional Children 21: 1-8. Edgar, E. (1998). "Employment as an outcome for mildly handicapped students: Current status and future directions." Focus on Exceptional Children 21: 1-8. Esight Careers Network (2001). Emergency plans that include workers with disabilities, esight.org. 2001. Fleischer, D. Z. and F. Zames (2001). The disability rights movement: From charity to confrontation. Philadelphia, Temple University Press. Ford (2002). Valuing diversity, On the Team Website. 2002. Fuchs, D. and L. S. Fuchs (1994). "Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform." Exceptional Children 60: 294-309. Gajar, A. (1992). Postsecondary education. Beyond high school: Transition from school to work. J. Chadsey. Belmont, CA, Wadsworth Publishing: 383-405. Gajar, A. (1998). Postsecondary education. Beyond high school: Transition from school to work. J. G. Chadsey. Belmont, CA, Wadsworth: 383-403. Gartin, B., P. Rumrill, et al. (1996). "The higher education transition model: Guidelines for facilitating college transition among college-bound students with disabilities." Teaching Exceptional Children 28(5): 30-33. Grigal, M., Test, D., Beattie, J. & Wood, W. (1997). "An evaluation of transition components of individualized education programs." Exceptional Children 63(3): 357-372. Gronna, S., A. Jenkins, et al. (1998). "Who are we assessing? Determining state-wide participation rates for students with disabilities." Exceptional Children 64: 407-418. Hasazi, S. B., L. R. Gordon, et al. (1985). "Factors associated with the employment status of handicapped youth exiting high school from 1979 to 1983." Exceptional Children 51: 455-469. Hatch, T. (1998). "How comprehensive can comprehensive reform be?" Phi Delta Kappan 79: 518-522. Hazer, J. B., K. (2000). "Effects of seeking accommodation and disability on preemployment evaluations." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30(6): 1201-1223. Hocutt, A. M. (1996). "Effectiveness of special education: Is placement the critical factor?" The future of children: Special education for students with disabilities 6(1): 77-102. IBM (2002). Valuing diversity: An ongoing commitment, IBM Diversity Website. 2001. Izzo, M. (2001, March). Self-determination and advocacy skills. 2001 National Capacity Building Institute, Honolulu, HI. Izzo, M. V., J. E. Hertzfeld, et al. (2001). "Raising the bar: Student self-determination + good teaching = success." Journal of Vocational Special Needs Educators: 1-28. Johnson, D., Sharpe, M. & Stodden, R. "The transition to postsecondary education for students with disabilities." Johnson, D. R. (2001). Current challenges facing the future of secondary education and transition services for youth with disabilities in the United States. Minneapolis, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. Kupper, L. (1997). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997: Curriculum., Office of Special Education Programs, National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities. 2001. Lee, B. A. (1996). "Legal requirements and employer responses to accommodating employees with disabilities." Human Resource Management Review 6(4): 231-251. Lipsky, D. K. and A. Gartner (1999). Inclusive education: a requirement of a democratic society. Inclusive Education. H. Daniels and P. Garner. London, Kogan Page: 12-23. Luecking, R. G. (2000). What employers are saying about recruitment and retention, The National Supported Employment Consortium, Virginia Commonwealth University. Luecking, R. G. (2002, March). Doing it the company way: Employer perspectives on workplace supports. National Capacity Building Institute, Honolulu, HI. Malloy, W. (1997). "Responsible inclusion: Celebrating diversity and academic excellence." Bulletin 64: 80-85. Mank, D., A. Cioffi, et al. (1997). "Analysis of typicalness of supported employment hobs, natural supports, and wage and integration outcomes." Mental Retardation 35: 185-197. McBurney Center (1998). McBurney Handbook, University of Wisconsin at Madison, McBurney Center Website. 2001. McDonald's (2002). Diversity at McDonald's. 2002. McFarlin, D. B., J. Song, et al. (1991). "Integrating the disabled into the work force: A survey of Furtune 500 company attitudes and practices." Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 4: 107-123. McLaughlin, M. J., L. Fuchs, et al. (1999). Individual rights to education and students with disabilities: some lessons from US policy. Inclusive Education. H. Daniels and P. Garner. London, Kogan Page: 24-35. Merriam-Webster Inc. (1999). Webster's New Explorer Dictionary and Thesaurus. Springfield, MA, Federal Street Press. National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports (2000, June). National survey of educational support provision to students with disabilities in postsecondary education settings: Technical Report. Honolulu, HI, NCSPES. National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (2001, December). IDEA 1997: Implications for secondary education and transition services. Minneapolis, MN, DeStefano, L., Hazazi, S. B., & Johnson, D. R. National Council on Disability (2001, June 14). National disability policy: A progress report, November 1999- November 2000. Washington, D.C., Louis Harris & Associates. National Organization on Disabilities (1998). 1998 N.O.D./Harris survey of Americans with disabilities. Washington, D. C., American Council on Education. O'Brien, R. (2001). Crippled Justice. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. Office for Students with Disabilities (2001). Teaching students with disabilities: A UCLA faculty guide, University of California, Los Angeles, Office for Students with Disabilities Website. 2001. Office for Students with Disabilities (2001). UCLA Disability Access Web, University of Californa, Los Angeles. 2001. Office of Disability Services (2001). Services & Programs, Columbia University, Office of Disability Services Website. 2001. Office of Disability Services (2002). How to register your disability with the university, Columbia University Health & Related Services. 2002. Phelps, L. A. and C. Hanley-Maxwell (1997). "School-to-work transitions for youth with disabilities: A review of outcomes and practices." Review of Educational Research 67(2): 197-226. Program on Employment and Disability (1999). Survey results summary: Implementation of the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Ithaca, New York, Cornell University, Society for Human Resource Management. Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities (2000). Services for persons with disabilities, Michigan State University, Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities Website. 2001. Rogan, P., B. Banks, et al. (2000). Workplace supports in practice. The impact of supported employment for people with disabilities. P. Wehman. Richmond, VA, VCU-RRTC on Workplace Supports. Rojewski, J. W. (1996). "Educational and occupational aspirations of high school seniors with learning disabilities." Exceptional Children 62: 463-476. Rojewski, J. W. (1999). "Educational and occupational aspirations of high school seniors with learning disabilities." Exceptional Children 62: 463-476. Rosenfeld, S. J. (2002). Section 504 and IDEA: Basic Similarities and Differences., LDOnLine. 2002. Shaw, S. (2002). Postsecondary supports for students with disabilities. National Capacity Building Institute, Honolulu, HI, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. Shaw, S., L. Brinkerhoff, et al. (1990). "Preparing students with learning disabilities for postsecondary education: Issues and future needs." Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2(1): 21-26. Society for Human Resource Management (1999). Implementation of the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Survey Results, Summary. Ithaca, NY, Cornell University. Stodden, R., Dowrick, P., Stodden, N. & Gilmore, S. (2002). A review of secondary school factors influencing postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. Honolulu, National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports. Stodden, R. A. and P. W. Dowrick (1999). "Postsecondary education and quality employment for adults with disabilities." American Rehabilitation. Stodden, R. A. and P. W. Dowrick (2000, Spring). "The present and future of postsecondary education for adults with disabilities." Impact 13: 4. Stodden, R. A. and P. W. Dowrick (2001). "Postsecondary education and employment of adults with disabilities." American Rehabilitation 25(3): 19-23. Stodden, R. A., P. W. Dowrick, et al. (Submitted). A review of secondary school factors influencing postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. Honolulu. Stodden, R. A., N. J. Stodden, et al. (Submitted). Review of Secondary Curricula Issues and Impact Upon Access and Participation of Youth with Disabilities in Postsecondary Education. Honolulu. Stodden, R. A., N. J. Stodden, et al. (submitted for publication). Review of secondary curricula issues an dimpact upon access and participation of youth with disabilities in postsecondary education. Stodden, R. A., T. Whelley, et al. (2001). "Current status of educational support provision to students with disabilities in postsecondary education." Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 16: 1-10. Student Support Services Program (2001). Disability support services, University of Hawaii at Hilo. 2001. Targett West & Anglin (2001). Corporate supports and mentoring in the workplace. Supported employment in business: Expanding the capacity of workers with disabilities. P. Wehman. St. Augustine, FL, Training Resource Network, Inc. Thomas, S. B. (2000). "College students and disability law." The Journal of Special Education 33(4): 248-257. Thurlow, M. (2001). Accommodations for students with disabilities in high school. Issue Brief: Examining Current Challenges in Secondary Education and Transition. Minneapolis, MN, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition. 1. Thurow, L. C. (1996). The future of capitalism: How today's economic forces shape tomorrow's world. New York, William Morrow. U. S. Department of Education (1995). Research in the education of individuals with disabilities. Innovation and development in special education. Washington, D. C. U. S. Department of Education (1996). What is a school wide program? Improving America's schools: A newsletter on issues in school reform. Washigton D.C. U. S. Department of Education (1996, October). What is a school wide program? Improving America's schools: A newsletter on issues in school reform. Washington, D. C. Vanderwood, M., K. McGrew, et al. (1998). "Why we can't say much about students with disabilities during educational reform." Exceptional Children 63: 359-370. Wagner, M. and J. Balckorby (1996b). "Transition from high school to work or college: How special education students fare." The future of children: Special education for students with disabilities 6(1): 103-120. Waldron, N. and J. McLeskey (1998). "The effects of an inclusive school program on students with mild and severe learning disabilities." Exceptional Children 64: 395-405. Witte, R., L. Philips, et al. (1998). "Job satisfaction of college graduates with learning disabilities." Journal of Learning Disabilities 31: 259-265. Callahan, M. M., David. (1998). Choice and control of employment for people with disabilities: A white paper. In T. Nerney (Ed.), The Importance of Income. University of New Hampshire: The Self-Determination National Program Office of the Institute on Disability. 1 The schools that were selected for representation in this table were chosen because of the comprehensiveness of the online description of their services and is not intended to critique or promote any particular institution. The table is meant to serve as an illustration of some similarities and differences that may exist across institutions in terms of support services to postsecondary students with disabilities. [K1]Perhaps a table for definitions will help to clarify why it’s important and reduce some text. [u2] We could do another table but too time consuming at this point (unless you have something quick in mind). Maybe save for future Briefs. [K3]Martha says the “first section” (here?) is good, but the subheadings should be reduced and the organization of the section should be made clearer. [u4]I disagree that there should be fewer sections – I think you need a lot of headings to guide people through legal stuff. I’ve added a, b, c at the end of intro to make the organization of the sections more clear. [K5]Martha says the “first section” (here?) goes from conclusions to evidence, when it should be the other way around. Not sure what to do about that. [u6]I don’t think you need to do anything here. It’s fine. [u7]Hi – I’ve highlighted in blue what I’ve changed. . You can use the editing tool now – I had to “accept changes” in order to no longer view previous changes. [K8]Cite section of the law [u9]We need to find a cite or two on this to use elsewhere too. I’ve toned down a bit. [K10]Citations [K11]Citation or reword [K12]Citation or reword [K13]Martha says this is untrue for SWDs in “standards-based settings”, which are becoming more common. 1) Find citations. 2) Include a statement that allows for exceptions. [K14]Need citations [K15]Martha does not like this whole paragraph. Too simplistic. Same setting does not always mean same curriculum…. 1) Reword. 2) Citations [K16]Citations [K17]Martha says that for the majority of SWDs there has been a focus on the regular curriculum content standards. [K18]Perhaps say: there have often been low expectations, and students have not often done very well, but they have continued to be exposed to the general curriculum, although often at a lower level than they should be. (Martha) [K19] Include an explanation of why certain schools were selected for Table 2. [K20] Martha says we need more tables at the same level of importance as Table 2, or not use this table. [u21]We don’t have time to fuss w/more tables. But I’ll explain in footnote. [K22] Explain why certain websites were selected for analysis. (They had the most information about company disability policy…) [K23] Martha says in this section she felt like she was reading the same thing over and over. She suggests organizing by topic instead of settings. [u24]I agree there is some redundancy, but we’re not going to reorganize because the organization of this section is consistent with the organization of the previous section (main topic, environment, sub topics). I will read through to see if there are places we could tighten it up, would be helpful Kelly if you could do the same, maybe highlight phrases that jump out at you as redundant and look back to see where it occurred before. [K25]Citations [K26] Citations [K27] Martha suggests hedging [K28] Not the same. Mention ITPs here.