Aligning Transition Services With Secondary Education Reform: A Position Statement of the Division on Career Development and Transition

an article by Mary E. Morningstar and Michael L. Wehmeyer (University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA), Diane S. Bassett (University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, USA), Carol Kochhar-Bryant (The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA) and Joanne Cashman (National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Alexandria, VA, USA) published in Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals Volume 35 Number 3 (December 2012)

Abstract

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 post-secondary 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.

Hazel’s comment:
Yes, this is about research in the USA but those who can get hold of the article without too much difficulty may well benefit from reading about the changes that are being made in the United States.

---

Every child matters? An evaluation of “Special Educational Needs” programmes in England

an article by Francois Keslair and Eric Maurin (Paris School of Economics (PSE), France) and Sandra McNally (University of Surrey and Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, UK) published in Economics of Education Review Volume 31 Issue 6 (December 2012)

Abstract

The need for education to help every child has become more important for policy in the US and the UK. Remedial programmes are often difficult to evaluate because participation is usually based on pupil characteristics that are largely unobservable to the analyst.

We evaluate programmes for children with ‘Special Educational Needs’ in England. We show that the decentralized design of the policy generates much stronger differences across schools in access to remediation resources for children with moderate learning difficulties than for children with either no difficulties or severe difficulties.

However, these differences are not reflected in subsequent educational attainment – suggesting that the programme is ineffective for children with moderate learning difficulties. Also, we use demographic variation within schools to consider the effect of the programme on whole year groups. Our analysis is consistent with no overall effect on account of the combined direct and indirect (spillover) effects. 

Highlights

► We evaluate programmes for children with moderate ‘Special Educational Needs’ in England.
► There is significant variation in access to resources across children of similar ability.
► This is not reflected in subsequent educational attainment.
► Also, the programme does not generate spillover effects.
► We conclude that the programmes are not working.

JEL classification: I2

Figures and tables from this article are available

---

‘The odd couple’: an FE educator’s perspective of the management of behaviour of ‘special needs’ learners in the Lifelong Learning Sector

an article by Lydia Spenceley (Co-ordinator for Teacher Education Programmes, Grantham College, UK) published in Research in Post-Compulsory Education Volume 17 Issue 3 (September 2012)

Abstract

The term ‘Special Needs’ is one which is poorly defined in general and particularly nuanced in the Lifelong Learning Sector, where its meaning has been extended to incorporate economic and social needs in addition to the more ‘traditional’ interpretation of the term.

Although the sector apparently operates inclusively, welcoming learners with special needs, there are differences in the management of the behaviour and relationships of students, which are arguably generated by the varying definitions applied to the type and level of the challenges they face.

This paper explores these differences by examining them from the philosophical standpoints of Bourdieu and Foucault.

---