Jim Martin, Ph.D. University of Oklahoma Zarrow Center 405-325-8951 Email: jemartin@ou

1. Using the Student-Directed Transition Planning Lessons to Build the Student-Directed Summary of Performance Jim Martin, Ph.D. University of Oklahoma Zarrow Center 405-325-8951 Email: jemartin@ou.edu Web: http://education.ou.edu/zarrow/

2. Agenda • Purpose of Special Education • Student-Directed Summary of Performance to Frame Transition Assessment and IEP Transition Page Construction • Building the SD-SOP using the Student-Directed Transition Planning Lessons

3. Seven Transition Steps • Students become involved in IEP Planning Process • Students complete a three-part transition assessment process. • Students write present level of academic achievement and functional performance • Students develop course of study • Students develop postschool linkages • Students work on attaining IEP and personal goals • Students build their Summary of Performance

4. Student Participation In Transition Discussions • Spirit behind IDEA encourages students to become actively involved in discussions IEP transition discussions. • We need to teach students how to become involved in these discussions. • Need to provide opportunities for students to become involved in these discussions.

5. Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., Christensen, W. R., Woods, L. L., & Lovett, D. L. (2006). Direct observation of teacher-directed IEP meetings: Establishing the need for student IEP meeting instruction. Exceptional Children, 72, 187-200.

6. IDEA 2004 Requires the Summary of Performance • Schools will provide students a summary of academic achievement and functional performance • includes recommendation on how to assist the child in meeting postsecondary goals • Must be done when students exit school.

7. SOP • Teacher-Directed SOP • Designed for educators and agency • Prepared by educators for use by students • Nationally created SOP • www.ldaamerica.org/aboutld/adults/docs/SOP_Template.doc • Student-Directed SOP • Designed for students, family, and agency • Prepared by students for use by students and family • OSDE Form 15 (Go to www.state.ok.us, then special education services, OSDE Forms, then to Form 15)

8. The Sections of the SD-SOP As Adopted by Oklahoma

9. My Summary of Performance • My Postschool Goals for One Year After High School • My Perceptions of My Disability • The School’s Perspective on My Disability • School Produced Summary of My Academic and Functional Performance

10. Summary of Performance • Section 1 • Students describe their postsecondary goals to attain within one year of leaving high school, and the school’s recommendations to achieve each goal, and suggested accommodations and supports to assist in achieving the goals.

11. Summary of Performance • Section 2 • Students describe their disabilities, how their disability affects their performance, and useful high school supports and accommodations.

12. Summary of Performance • Section 3 (Area of Functioning) • Completed in the junior year of high school. • School staff describe how the young adults’ disabilities affect their performance and useful accommodations and supports.

13. Summary of Performance • Section 4 • School staff will complete and review annually with the IEP team to determine goals, and if additional assessments will be needed to facilitate attainment of transition goals.

14. SD-SOP Examples • Albuquerque Public School • Irving I.S.D. (near Dallas, TX) • What is YOUR school doing?

15. Teaching Students To Develop Their Own SD-SOP Student-Directed Transition Planning Lessons and Materials

16. Student-Directed Transition Planning • Purpose:To increase student involvement in transition planning discussions • U.S. Department of Education grant to develop lessons and research their effectiveness • Infuse best practices for reaching the largest number of students including those who are culturally and linguistically diverse

17. Self-Determination Concepts

18. http://education.ou.edu/zarrow/

20. Pat is creative, and prepares lessons well ahead of time so that he is successful teaching at Sunday school. I work on and plan my Sunday school lessons each night after doing my home- work. The kids like my lessons. Pat works very hard to do well in math. Pat is taking a more active role In his IEP, and is learning what accommodations work best for him. We’ll arrange a visit to the community college. Further Education Strengths • Pat and his teacher combined information from the three sections into a summary statement. • Pat again looked for similarities, and shortened some phrases. • He wrote his strengths into a summary statement. My family, teachers And I agree that I Will start out at our Community college. I’m learning what accommodations work best for me.

22. How Will This Work at Your School? • Who needs to be involved to develop and implement a transition education process? • What needs to occur for students to have opportunities to engage in the process? • What needs to happen to allow time for educators to facilitate the process? • What needs to happen for families to be involved in the process? • When will these happen in your school?

23. The Purpose of SPED . . . a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet students’ unique needs and to prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living.

24. SDTP Research • Phase 1 • Does SD-TP increase student knowledge? • Does SD-TP increase student and family self-efficacy in the transition planning process? • Phase 2 • Does combining the SD-TP and the Self-Directed IEP increase student and family participation in transition planning discussions at IEP meetings compared to either intervention alone?

25. Phase 1 Study - Method • Setting & Participants • 3 secondary schools • 35 students • 5 teachers • Random assignment into control & intervention groups • True/False & Multiple Choice Pre and Post-Tests • Student and Family Pre and Post Self-Efficacy Measures

28. Phase 1 Study - Results ANCOVA was conducted to evaluate if there was a knowledge gain as a result of the lessons. The scores on the Pre-Test were significantly related to the scores on the Post-Test, F(1, 32) = 18.36, p < .01. There was a significant difference between intervention and control groups on the Post-Test after controlling for the effect of the Pre-Test, F(1, 32) = 4.58, p =.04. Effect Size Partial Eta Squared = .125 (approaching large effect using .01= small, .06 = medium, .10 to .14 = large)

29. Pre/Post Test Mean Scores While the difference in the scores on the pre-test was not statistically significant, this gap may indicate a difference in the groups despite the random assignment. There was a noticeable statistically significant effect on the Post-Test, with a corresponding moderate to large effect size.

30. Student Self-Efficacy • Post-test comparison shows significant increase for students in the intervention group with moderate effect size • Significant increases for students in the intervention group on 7 of 10 self-efficacy statements • Student Intervention group mean scores increased on all statements • Mean scores for students in the Control group stayed about the same pre to post

31. Intervention Group Self-Efficacy Results

32. Phase 2-Research Question • Will participation in both the Student-Directed Transition Planning (SDTP) lessons and the Self-Directed IEP lessons help students, families, and the IEP team learn how to actively participate in the transition planning process, compared to those who participate in either the Self-Directed IEP or the SDTP lessons alone?

33. Collaborative Effort

35. References Field, S., Martin, J., Miller, R., Ward, M., & Wehmeyer, M. (1998). Self-determination for persons with disabilities: A position statement of the division on career development and transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21(2), 113-128. Martin, J. E., van Dycke, J. L., Christensen, W. R., Greene, B. A., Gardner, J. E., & Lovett, D. L. (2006). Increasing student participation in IEP meetings: Establishing the Self-Directed IEP as an evidenced-based practice. Exceptional Children, 72, 299-316. Martin, J. E., & Marshall, L. H. (1995). ChoiceMaker: A comprehensive self-determination transition program. Intervention in School and Clinic, 30(3), 147-156. Martin, J. E., Marshall, L. H., Maxson, L., & Jerman, P. (1997). Self-Directed IEP. Longmont, CO: Sopris West. Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J., D’Ottavio, M., & Nickerson, K. (2007). The student-directed summary of performance: Increasing student and family involvement in the transition planning process. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals,30(1), 13-26. Van Dycke, J. L. (2005). Determining the impact of Self-Directed IEP instruction on secondary IEP documents. Unpublished Dissertation.

36. For More Information Contact: Jim Martin University of Oklahoma Zarrow Center for Learning Enrichment Carpenter Hall Room 111 Norman, OK 73019 Phone: 405-325-8951 E-mail: jemartin@ou.edu Web: http://education.ou.edu/zarrow/