Concurrent Session Notes
Improving Results for Youth with Disabilities:
What Can We Learn from NLTS2?
June 14, 2005
3:15-4:30pm
Dr. Susan Hasazi, Moderator
Dr. Mary Wagner, Director, Center for Education and Human
Services, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA
Dr. Wagner presented selected findings of the National Longitudinal
Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). NLTS2 is a congressionally mandated,
OSEP-funded study to assess over a 10-year period the characteristics,
experiences, and results of a nationally representative sample
of secondary school-age youth who were receiving special education
services in 2000 and who will transition to young adulthood over
the course of the study. The study includes more than 11,000
students in 12 special education disability categories who were
ages 13 to 16 when the study began in 2001. Percentages are weighted
to be representative of students as a whole and in every disability
category. Data are collected through surveys of parents, youth,
general education teachers, and other school staff, as well as
from student transcripts.
Dr. Wagner said the most important transition goals reported
by NLTS2 student participants are to gain competitive employment,
live independently, attend college, and get postsecondary vocational
training. Other NLTS2 data highlights relevant to the five NASET
National Standards framing areas are presented below.
Schooling
- Ninety-nine percent of students with disabilities take academic
courses. More than 90% take language arts courses, and more
than 90% take mathematics courses.
- Between 1986 and 2002, academic course taking by students
with disabilities increased significantly (an 11% increase
for math, 13% for social studies, 21% for science, and 25%
for foreign languages).
- Eighty-eight percent of special education students took at
least one course in a general education setting, and 27% took
all courses in general education settings. At the same time,
70% took at least one course in special education and 9% took
all courses in special education settings.
- From the original NLTS to NLTS2, there was a 9% increase
in academic course taking in general education settings and
an 11% decrease in academic course taking in special education
settings. During the same period, there was a 27% increase
in non-academic course taking in special education settings
and a 10% decrease in non-academic course taking in general
education settings.
- Students with learning disabilities, speech impairments,
and other health impairments (e.g., attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder) have higher rates of general education course taking
than do students in other disability categories.
- Some modification of the curriculum is done for 52% of students
with disabilities in general education academic classes. The
extent of modification in general education academic classes
varies greatly by disability category.
- Ninety-three percent of students with disabilities in general
education academic classes get some type of accommodations
or modifications; 75% get more time in taking tests.
Career Preparation
- Thirty-four percent of students with disabilities took prevocational
education and 52% took occupationally specific vocational education
courses in a single semester.
- From 1986 to 2002, vocational education course taking decreased
7% for all disability categories.
- Eighteen percent of high school students with disabilities
received no vocational services or supports, 51% received career
skills assessments, and 44% received career counseling.
- Sixty-four percent of students with disabilities had some
kind of regular paid employment in the prior year; 16% of students
were paid $4.50 or less per hour.
Youth Development/Leadership
- Nearly 60% of youth with disabilities who were able to respond
strongly agreed that an adult at school cares about youth,
and more than 30% strongly agree that they feel part of school.
- Two-thirds of schools did not require community service for
either general education or special education students.
- In a given semester, 72% of students took physical education,
48% took fine arts, 35% took life skills/social skills, and
10% took self-advocacy training.
- Fifty-one percent of students received reproductive health
education or services, 39% received substance abuse education
or services, and 27% received conflict resolution/anger management
training. More than half of teachers reported that students
not participating in these programs should be participating
in them.
- Youth who are out of school and could respond themselves
largely perceived that they are able to make their own decisions,
express themselves, get what they want by working hard, make
good choices, make choices that are important to them, and
know the services they need to deal with their disabilities.
- At least one-half of students perceived that they knew how
to get the information they need, could get school staff to
listen to them, felt useful and important, could tell others
their age how they feel if others upset them, and could handle
pretty much whatever comes along.
Transition Planning
- According to school representatives, transition planning
is done for about nine-tenths of students with disabilities,
about two-thirds of students with disabilities have received
instruction in transition planning, and three-fourths of students
with disabilities have a course of study likely to achieve
transition goals.
- School representatives reported that 69% of students with
disabilities took a leadership role or provided some input
into transition planning.
- Eighty-five percent of youth with disabilities had a parent/guardian
and 97% had a special education teacher participate in transition
planning.
- One-third of parents and one-third of students said they
wanted to be more involved in individual education plan (IEP)
and transition planning decision making.
Connecting Activities
- One-fourth of students with disabilities reported having
case-management support, but the percentage varied across disability
categories.
- According to school representatives, the most frequently
identified post-high school service needs of youth with disabilities
were postsecondary education accommodations and vocational
services.
Contacts made in transition planning for youth with disabilities
were most often made with vocational rehabilitation programs, other
vocational training programs, colleges, postsecondary vocational
schools, and job placement agencies.
Return to Presentations
|
