This article reports on factors that influence the sustainability of secondary transition innovations in local schools. We used a two-stage research process, which combined broad survey methods and an embedded case study design, to investigate the sustainability of a specific school-to-community transition model for youth with disabilities. We found that sustainability of comprehensive secondary transition innovations is increased when local programs (a) have the support of at least one key administrator, (b) produce positive student outcomes that are valued by school and community stakeholders, and (c) create a clear and unique role for their services that meets identified needs within the district. Program staff and administrators can increase the likelihood of these events occurring and of local programs being sustained. Implications for developing secondary transition innovations to support greater integration and sustainability in local schools are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Benz, M.R., Lindstrom, L., & Latta, T. (1999). Improving collaboration between schools and vocational rehabilitation: The youth transition program model. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 13, 55—63.
2.
Benz, M.R., Lindstrom, L., & Yovanoff, P. (2000). Improving graduation and employment outcomes of students with disabilities: Predictive factors and student perspectives. Exceptional Children, 66, 509—529.
3.
Benz, M.R., Yovanoff, P., & Doren, B. (1997). School-to-work components that predict postschool success for students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63, 151—165.
4.
Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. (1976). Implementation of educational innovation. The Educational Forum, 40(3), 345—370.
5.
Blackorby, J., & Wagner, M. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399—413.
6.
Conley, D. (1993). Roadmap to restructuring: Policies, practices, and the emerging visions of schooling. University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon: Eric Clearinghouse on Educational Management .
7.
Cuban, L. (1988). A fundamental puzzle of school reform. Phi Delta Kappan,69, 341—344.
8.
DeLone, R. (1990). Replication: A strategy to improve the delivery of education and job training programs. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
9.
Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
10.
Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press .
11.
Fullan, M.G. (1996). Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan,77(6), 420—423.
12.
Fullan, M.G., & Miles, M.B. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn't . Phi Delta Kappan,73(10), 745—752.
13.
Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enhancing sustained use of research-based instructional practices. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 445—457.
Hall, G.E., Wallace, R.C., & Dossett, W.A. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions (Report No. 3006). Austin: The University of Texas at Austin, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED095126)
16.
Halpern, A.S., & Benz, M.R. (2001). The rise and fall of the Community Transition Team Model. In J. Woodward & L. Cuban (Eds.), Technology, curriculum, and professional development: Adapting schools to meet the needs of students with disabilities (pp. 203—225). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
17.
Halpern, A.S., Yovanoff, P., Doren, B., & Benz, M.R. (1995). Predicting participation in postsecondary education for school leavers with disabilities. Exceptional Children , 62, 151—164.
18.
Hasazi, S.B., Furney, K.S., & DeStefano, L. (1999). Implementing the IDEA transition mandates. Exceptional Children, 65, 555—566.
19.
Heal, L.W., & Rusch, F.R. (1995). Predicting employment for students who leave special education high school programs. Exceptional Children, 61, 472—487.
20.
Horne, R.L., & Hubbard, S. (1995). The Youth Transition Program: Case study report . Washington, DC: National Institute for Work and Learning, Academy for Educational Development .
21.
Johnson, D.K. (1997). School to work in special education: A qualitative study of the Youth Transition Program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene.
22.
Kohler, P.D. (1993). Best practices in transition: Substantiated or implied?Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 16, 107—121.
23.
McGrew, K.S., Bruininks, R.H., & Thurlow, M.L. (1992). Relationship between measures of adaptive functioning and community adjustment of adults with mental retardation. Exceptional Children, 58, 517—529.
24.
McLaughlin, M.W. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9), 11—16.
25.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
26.
National Center on Secondary Education and Transition [NCSET]. (2000). Current challenges facing the future of secondary education and transition services for youth with disabilities in the United States. Minneapolis, MN: Author.
27.
National Council on Disability. (2000). Transition and post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities: Closing the gaps to post-secondary education and employment. Washington, DC: Author.
28.
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29.
Qualitative Solutions and Research. ( 1997). QSR NUD*IST: Software for qualitative data analysis [Computer software]. Melbourne, Victoria: Author.
30.
Rogers, A., Hubbard, S., Charner, I., Fraser, B.S., & Horne, R. (1995). Learning from experience: A cross-case comparison of school-to-work transition reform initiatives. Washington, DC: National Institute for Work and Learning, Academy for Educational Development.
31.
Rogers, E. (1995). Di fusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press .
32.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Twenty-second annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
33.
Wagner, M., Blackorby, J., Cameto, R., & Newman, L. (1993). What makes a di ference? Influences on postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities. The third comprehensive report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
34.
Wehmeyer, M., & Schwartz, M. (1997). Self-determination and positive adults outcomes: A follow-up study of youth with mental retardation or learning disabilities . Exceptional Children, 63, 245—255.
35.
Will, M. (1984). OSERS programming for the transition of youth with disabilities: Bridges from school to working life. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
36.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
