Interest in differences in outcomes for male and female students in special education has increased in recent years. Using the nationally representative, longitudinal National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS-88) data set, a logistic regression model was used to examine the extent to which outcome variables were differentially associated with gender for students participating in special education. Evidence was obtained for several differential effects, with most results favoring males. Among other findings, females as compared to males with disabilities were less likely to obtain a high school diploma, were less likely to be employed, earned less, and were more likely to be a biological parent. Recommendations are provided for improved transition services, the implementation of promising practices related to self-determination, and renewed emphasis on comprehensive and flexible life—career preparation to foster better outcomes among females with disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Benz, M., Doren, B., & Yovanoff, P. (1998). Crossing the great divide: Predicting productive engagement for young women with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21, 3—16.
2.
Doren, B., & Benz, M. (1998). Employment inequality revisited: Predictors of better employment outcomes for young women with disabilities in transition . The Journal of Special Education, 31, 425—433.
3.
Doren, B., & Benz, M. (2001). Gender equity issues in the vocational and transition services and employment outcomes experienced by young women with disabilities . In H. Rousso & M. L. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education (pp. 289—312). Albany : State University of New York.
4.
Fulton, S., & Sabornie, E. (1994). Evidence of employment inequality among females with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 149—165.
5.
Hasazi, S.B., Gordon, L.R., & Roe, C.A. (1985). Factors associated with the employment status of handicapped youth exiting high school from 1979 to 1983. Exceptional Children, 51, 455—469.
6.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1990).
7.
Lee, V.E., Chen, X., & Smerdon, B.A. (1996). The influence of school climate on gender differences in the achievement and engagement of young adolescents. Washington, DC: American Association of University of Women.
8.
Levine, P., & Edgar, E. (1994). An analysis by gender of long-term postschool outcomes for youth with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61, 282—300.
9.
Lindstrom, L.E., Benz, M., & Doren, B. (2004). Expanding career options for young women with learning disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 27, 43—63.
10.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (1994). National education longitudinal study of 1988, second follow-up: Student component data file user's manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
11.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq. (2001).
12.
Oswald, D.P., Coutinho, M.J., & Best, A. (under review). Individual, family, and school factors associated with the identification of female and male students for special education.
13.
Oswald, D.P., Coutinho, M.J., Best, A., & Nagle, H. (2002). Trends in the special education identification rates of boys and girls: A call for research and change. Exceptionality, 11, 223—237.
14.
Palmer, S.B., Wehmeyer, M.L., Gipson, K., & Agran, M. (2004). Promoting access to the general curriculum by teaching self-determination skills. Exceptional Children, 70, 427—439.
15.
President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. Washington, DC: Author.
16.
Rojewski, J.W., & Yang, B. (1997). Longitudinal analysis of select influences on adolescents' occupational aspirations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 376—410.
17.
Sitlington, P.L., Clark, G.M., & Kolstoe, O.P. (2000). Transition education and services for adolescents with disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
18.
Sitlington, P.L., & Frank, A.R. (1985). Are adolescents with learning disabilities successfully crossing the bridge into adult life? Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 13, 97—111.
19.
Smith, D.I., & Spraggins, R.E. (2001). Gender: 2000—Census 2000 brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
20.
Stephenson, M., & Burge, P. (1997). Eliciting women's voices: Vocational choice and educational climate for women in nontraditional occupational programs. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 22, 153—171.
21.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Twenty-fourth annual report to Congress. Washington, DC : Author.
22.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2004). Women in the labor force: A databook (Report 973). Washington, DC: Author.
23.
Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Newman, L. (2003). Youth with disabilities: A changing population. A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study—2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
24.
Wagner, M., Newman, L., D'Amico, R., Jay, E.D., Butler-Nalin, P., Marder, C., et al. (1991). Youth with disabilities: How are they doing? The first comprehensive report from the national longitudinal transition study of special education students. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
25.
Wehmeyer, M.L., Field, S., Doren, B., Jones, B., & Mason, D. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413—425.
26.
Wehmeyer, M.L., & Schwartz, M. (2001a). Gender equity issues in the vocational and transition services and employment outcomes experienced by young women with disabilities . In H. Rousso & M. L. Wehmeyer, (Eds.), Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education (pp. 289—312). Albany : State University of New York.
27.
Wehmeyer, M.L., & Schwartz, M. (2001b). Disproportionate representation of males in special education services: Biology, behavior or bias?Education & Treatment of Children, 24, 28—45.
