Society has witnessed significant improvements in the lives of students receiving transition services over the past 30 years. The field of transition has developed an array of evidence-based interventions and promising practices; however, secondary school reform efforts have often overlooked these approaches for youth without disabilities. If we are to see improvements in postsecondary outcomes for all youth, reform efforts must begin with active participation of general and special educators and critical home, school, and community stakeholders. In this article, the authors discuss the evolution of transition in light of reform efforts in secondary education. They review and identify secondary educational initiatives that embrace transition principles. Finally, recommendations are provided for advancing alignment of transition services with secondary education reforms.
AlgozzineB.BrowderD.KarvonenM.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2001). Effects of interventions to promote self-determination for individuals with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71, 219–277.
2.
AlwellM.CobbB. (2006). A systematic review of the effects of curricular interventions on the acquisition of functional life skills by youth with disabilities. What works in transition: Systematic review project. Ft. Collins: Colorado State University.
American Youth Policy Forum. (2000). High schools of the millennium report. Washington, DC: Author.
5.
ArtilesA. J.TrentS. C.PalmerJ. (2004). Culturally diverse students in special education: Legacies and prospects. In BanksJ.BanksC. (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 716–735). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6.
BangserM. (2008). Preparing high school students for successful transitions to postsecondary education and employment. Washington, DC: National High School Center.
7.
BassettD. S.Kochhar-BryantC. (2006). Strategies for aligning standards-based education and transition. Focus on Exceptional Children, 39, 1–19.
8.
BatscheG.ElliottJ.GradenJ. L.GrimesJ.KovaleskiJ. F.PrasseD.. . . TillyD. W.III. (2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
9.
BerkleyS.BenderW. N.PeasterL. G.SaundersL. (2009). Implementation of response to intervention: A snapshot of progress. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 85–95.
10.
BradleyR.DanielsonL.DoolittleJ. (2007). Responsiveness to intervention: 1997 to 2007. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 8–12.
11.
BrozoW. G. (2009). Response to intervention or responsive instruction? Challenges and possibilities of response to intervention for adolescent literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53, 277–281.
12.
CarterE. W. (2010). Self-determination and transition-age youth with emotional or behavioral disorders: Promising practices. In CheneyD. (Ed.), Transition of secondary students with emotional or behavioral disorders (pp. 51–78). Champaign, IL: Research Press.
13.
CashmanJ. (2008, February). One system: Transition in P-16. Paper presented at the mid-winter conference of The Pennsylvania Association of Vocational Education Special Needs Personnel (PAVESNP), Hershey, PA.
14.
CobbR. B.AlwellM. (2009). Transition planning/coordinating interventions for youth with disabilities: A systematic review. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 70–81.
15.
CobbR. B.LehmannJ.Newman-GoncharR.AlwellM. (2009). Self-determination for students with disabilities: A narrative metasynthesis. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 108–114.
EpsteinJ. L.SheldonS. B. (2006). Moving forward: Ideas for research on school, family, and community partnerships. In ConradC. F.SerlinR. C. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook for research in education: Engaging ideas and enriching inquiry (pp. 117–137). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20.
FanX. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A growth modeling analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 27–61.
21.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39, 14–20.
22.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and high school. School Psychology Review, 39, 22–28.
23.
GeenenS.PowersL. E.Lopez-VasquezA. (2001). Multicultural aspects of parent involvement in transition planning. Exceptional Children, 67, 265–282.
24.
GeorgeP. S.McEwenK. C.JenkinsJ. M. (2000). The exemplary high school. Ft. Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
25.
HalpernA. S. (1985). Transition: A look at the foundations. Exceptional Children, 51, 479–486.
26.
HogansenJ. M.PowersK.GeenenS.Gil-KashiwabaraE.PowersL. (2008). Transition goals and experiences of females with disabilities: Youth, parents, and professionals. Exceptional Children, 74, 215–234.
27.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 2004. Sec. 602, Definitions, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
28.
JenningsJ. (1995). A brief history of the federal role in education: Why it began and why it is still needed. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
29.
JenningsJ. (2000). The future of the federal role in elementary and secondary education. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
30.
JeynesW. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42, 82–110.
31.
KimK.-H.MorningstarM. E. (2005). Transition planning involving culturally and linguistically diverse families. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 28, 92–103.
32.
KlineC.WilliamsE. (2007). Transitioning out of high school: A quick stats fact sheet. Washington, DC: National High School Center.
33.
Kochhar-BryantC. A. (2008). Collaboration and system coordination for students with disabilities: From early years to postsecondary. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
34.
Kochhar-BryantC. A.BassettD. S. (Eds.). (2002). Aligning transition and standards-based education: Issues and strategies. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
35.
Kochhar-BryantC. A.Vreeburg-IzzoM. (2006). The summary of performance as transition “passport” to employment and independent living. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32, 160–170.
36.
LindstromL. E.BenzM. R.DorenB. (2004). Expanding career options for young women with learning disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individual, 27, 43–63.
37.
LindstromL. E.DorenB.MethenyJ.JohnsonP.ZaneC. (2007). Transition to employment: Role of the family in career development. Exceptional Children, 73, 348–366.
38.
MartinJ. E.MarshallL. H.SaleP. (2004). A 3-year study of middle, junior high, and high school IEP meetings. Exceptional Children, 70, 285–297.
39.
MorningstarM. E. (2011, September). Aligning multi-tiered models of support in secondary schools with transition focused interventions. Paper presented at the Arizona Statewide Transition Conference, Phoenix, AZ.
40.
MorningstarM. E.ClarkG. M. (2003). The status of personnel preparation for transition education and services: What is the critical content? How can it be offered?Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 26, 227–237.
41.
MorningstarM. E.GaumerA. E.NoonanP. (2009, October). Multi-tiered transition education and supports. Paper presented at the Division of Career Development and Transition International conference, Savannah, GA.
42.
National Association of Secondary School Principals. (1997). Breaking ranks: Changing an American institution. Reston, VA: Author.
43.
National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2004). Breaking ranks II: Strategies for leading high school reform. Reston, VA: Author.
44.
National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2011). Breaking ranks: The comprehensive framework for school improvement. Reston, VA: Author.
NewmanL. (2005). Family involvement in the educational development of youth with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
47.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
48.
NewmannF. M.WehlageG. G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
49.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L.107–110.20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.
ReedD.VaughnS. (2010). Reading interventions for older students. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 143–186). New York, NY: Guilford.
52.
RumbergerR. (2009). What the federal government can do to improve high school performance. Washington, DC: Center on Educational Policy.
53.
SamuelsC. A. (2009). High schools try out RTI. Education Week, 28, 20–22.
54.
SilverbergM.WarnerE.FongM.GoodwinD. (2004). National assessment of vocational education: Final report to Congress: Executive summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary, Policy and Program Studies Service.
55.
SugaiG.HornerR. R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35, 245–259.
56.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.RichterS. M.WhiteJ.MazzottiV.WalkerA. R.. . . KorteringL. (2009). Evidence-based practices in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115–128.
57.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.ScrogginsL. (2011). Tool for tiered interventions and secondary transition planning for students with disabilities: 101. Charlotte: National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center, University of North Carolina, Charlotte.
58.
TestD. W.MazzottiV. L.MustianA. L.FowlerC. H.KorteringL.KohlerP. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181.
59.
U.S. Department of Education (2010, March). A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC.
60.
VaughnS.FletcherJ. M. (2010). Thoughts on rethinking response to intervention with secondary students. School Psychology Review, 39, 296–299.
61.
WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.LevineP.MarderC. (2003). Going to school: Instructional contexts, programs, and participation of secondary school students with disabilities. A Report of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
62.
WehmeyerM. L.FieldS.DorenB.JonesB.MasonC. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413–425.
63.
WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK.PalmerS.Williams-DiehmK.LittleT.BoultonA. (2012). The impact of the self-determined learning model of instruction on student self-determination. Exceptional Children, 78, 135–153.
WillM. (1984). OSERS programming for the transition of youth with disabilities: Bridges from school to working life. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
