We examined the effects of a computer-based strategy to develop self-advocacy skills for 15 middle school students with mild and moderate disabilities. A pre- and posttest experimental design with random assignment to treatment and wait-list control groups was employed to investigate changes in student participation and level of self-determination. The strategy addressed essential self-advocacy skills including knowledge of self and communication. Results showed significant differences in favor of the treatment group concerning student participation, as measured by student responses to the Self-Advocacy Self-Report. Generalization data indicated positive results for student participation, as measured by student use of SHARE behaviors, a set of social skills necessary for effective communication, in informal meetings with special education teachers. Implications for practice, limitations, and future research are discussed.
AlveroA. M.StrussK.RappaportE. (2008). Measuring safety performance: A comparison of whole, partial, and momentary time-sampling recording methods. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 27, 1–28.
2.
AnohinaA. (2005). Analysis of the terminology used in the field of virtual learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 8, 91–102.
3.
Cease-CookJ.TestD. W.ScrogginsL. (2013). Effects of the CD-Rom version of the Self-Advocacy Strategy on quality of contributions in IEP meetings of high school students with intellectual disability. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 48, 258–268.
4.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
6.
HallT. EHughesC. A.FilbertM. (2000). Computer assisted instruction in reading for students with learning disabilities: A research synthesis. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 173–193.
7.
HammerM. R. (2004). Using the self-advocacy strategy to increase student participation in IEP conferences. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 295–300.
8.
HattieJ. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
IBM Corp. (Released 2016). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows(Version 23). Armonk, NY: Author.
10.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446.
KazdinA. E. (2011). Single-case research designs. Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
15.
KeyesS. E.CartledgeG.GibsonL.JrRobinson-ErvinP. (2016). Programming for generalization of oral reading fluency using computer-assisted instruction and changing fluency criteria. Education and Treatment of Children, 39, 141–172.
16.
LancasterP. E.SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (2002). The development and validation of an interactive hypermedia program for teaching a self-advocacy strategy to students with disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 277–302.
17.
LeeY.VailC. O. (2004). Computer-based reading instruction for young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20, 5–18.
18.
LoniganC. J.DriscollK.PhillipsB. M.CantorB. G.AnthonyJ. L.GoldsteinH. (2003). A computer-assisted instruction phonological sensitivity program for preschool children at-risk for reading problems. Journal of Early Intervention, 25, 248–262.
19.
MacarusoP.HookP. E.McCabeR. (2006). The efficacy of computer-based supplementary phonics programs for advancing reading skills in at-risk elementary students. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 162–172.
20.
MazzottiV. L.RoweD. A.CametoR.TestD. W.MorningstarM. E. (2013). Identifying and promoting transition evidence-based practices and predictors of success: A position paper of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 140–151.
21.
MazzottiV. L.TestD. W.MustianA. L. (2014). Secondary transition evidence-based practices and predictors: Implications for policymakers. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 25, 5–18.
22.
MazzottiV. L.TestD. W.WoodC. L.RichterS. (2010). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on students’ knowledge of postschool options. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33, 25–40.
OkW. M.Pedrotty BryantD.BryantB. (2019). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the research. Exceptionality. doi:10.1080/09362835.2019.1579723
25.
PalmerS. B.WehmeyerM. L. (2003). Promoting self-determination in early elementary school. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 115–126.
26.
RoweD. A.AlversonC. Y.UnruhD. K.FowlerC. H.KellemsR.TestD.W. (2015). A Delphi study to operationalize evidence-based predictors in secondary transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38, 113–126.
27.
SchellingA. L.RaoS. (2013). Evaluating self-advocacy strategy instruction for students with an intellectual disability using an interactive hypermedia program. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4, 1–10.
28.
SeoY-J.BryantD. P. (2009). Analysis of studies of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance of students with learning disabilities. Computers & Education, 53, 913–928.
29.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D.GarnerN.LawrenceM. (2007). Examining individual and ecological predictors of the self-determination of students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 73, 488–509.
30.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D.GarnerN.LawrenceM. (2008). Understanding the construct of self-determination. Examining the relationship between the Arc’s Self-Determination Scale and the American Institutes for Research Self-Determination Scale. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 94–107.
31.
ShogrenK. A.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.Forber-PrattA.LittleT. J.LopezS. (2015). Causal agency theory: Reconceptualizing a functional model of self-determination. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50, 251–263.
32.
SitlingtonP. L.NeubertD. A.ClarkG. M. (2010). Transition education and services for students with disabilities (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
33.
StangK. K.CarterE. W.LaneK. L.PiersonM. R. (2009). Perspectives of general and special educators on fostering self-determination in elementary and middle schools. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 94–106.
34.
TestD. W.BartholomewA.BethuneL. (2015). What high school administrators need to know about secondary transition evidence-based practices and predictors for students with disabilities. NASSP Bulletin, 99, 254–273.
35.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.WoodW. M.BrewerD. M.EddyS. (2005). A conceptual framework of self-advocacy for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 43–54.
36.
TestD. W.MasonC.HughesC.KonradM.NealeM.WoodW. M. (2004). Student involvement in Individualized Education Program meetings. Exceptional Children, 70, 391–412.
37.
TestD. W.NealeM. (2004). Using the Self-Advocacy Strategy to increase middle graders’ IEP participation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 135–145.
38.
Van ReusenA. K. (1985). A study of the effects of training learning disabled adolescents in self-advocacy procedures for use in the IEP conference(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence.
39.
Van ReusenA. K.BosC. S. (1994). Facilitating student participation in Individualized Education Programs through motivation strategy instruction. Exceptional Children, 60, 466–475.
40.
Van ReusenA. K.BosC. S.SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (1994). The self-advocacy strategy: For enhancing student motivation and self-determination. An education and transition planning process (2nd ed.). Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises.
41.
Van ReusenA. K.DeshlerD. D.SchumakerJ. B. (1989). Effects of a student participation strategy in facilitating the involvement of adolescents with learning disabilities in the Individualized Educational Program planning process. Learning Disabilities, 1, 23–34.
42.
WehmeyerM. L. (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Procedural guidelines. Washington, DC: The Arc Of the United States.
43.
WehmeyerM. L. (2004). Self-determination and the empowerment of people with disabilities. American Rehabilitation, 28, 22–29.
44.
WehmeyerM. L. (2015). Framing the future: Self-determination. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 20–23.
45.
WehmeyerM. L.KelchnerK. (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Adolescent Version. Arlington, TX: The Arc National Headquarters.
46.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.ShogrenK.Williams-DiehmK.SoukupJ. H. (2013). Establishing a causal relationship between intervention to promote self-determination and enhanced student self-determination. The Journal of Special Education, 46, 195–210.
47.
WeidenthalC.Kochhar-BryantC. (2007). An investigation of transition practices for middle school youth. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30, 147–157.
48.
WirthO.SlaveJ.TaylorM. (2014). Interval sampling methods and measurement error: A computer simulation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 83–100.
49.
WolmanJ.CampeauP.DuboisP.MithaugD.StolarskiV. (1994). AIR Self-Determination Scale and user guide. Palo Alto, CA: American Institute for Research.
50.
WoodC. L.MustianA. L.CookeN. L. (2012). Comparing whole-word and morphograph instruction during computer-assisted peer tutoring on students’ acquisition and generalization of vocabulary. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 39–47.
