A major instructional focus of interventions designed to promote self-determination, such as the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI), is to engage students in learning to set their goals, identify action plans, and evaluate their performances. However, little is known about how students define their goal attainment outcomes, or the degree to which students and teachers agree the attainment of goal set using the SDLMI in inclusive general education classes. This study examined the relation between student and teacher ratings of goal attainment during the first semester of a longitudinal, cluster randomized controlled trial of the SDLMI, as well as the impact of student disability status and teacher supports for implementing the SDLMI (i.e., online resources vs. online resources + in-person coaching) on goal attainment. Findings suggested the feasibility of engaging students with and without disabilities in rating their goal attainment process during SDLMI in secondary schools, with kappa analysis indicating that, when credit is given for at least partial agreement between students and teachers, there is a fair amount of interrater agreement using conventional interpretation criteria. Importantly, however, conclusions drawn about the impact of student (i.e., disability status) and teacher factors (i.e., teacher implementation supports) on goal attainment outcomes are impacted by whether student or teaching ratings of goal attainment are utilized as the outcome measure. Implications for future research and practice are described.
Opportunities and experiences for all students, including students with intellectual and developmental disabilities, to build self-determination abilities and skills are critical to enable positive postsecondary outcomes (e.g., competitive and integrated employment, community access participation). However, racially and ethnically marginalized students with disabilities might experience fewer opportunities to build self-determination due to systemic issues (e.g., absence of policies emphasizing equity and racial justice, lack of understanding of students' social and cultural capital). The present study is an initial, exploratory analysis to determine if students with disabilities from racially and ethnically marginalized backgrounds reported different self-determination outcomes as they engaged in the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI) in inclusive, general education classrooms. Findings suggested African American/Black students with and without disabilities as well as Hispanic/Latinx students without disabilities scored highest in self-determination at the beginning of the academic year (baseline) and that including disability status crossed with race/ethnicity as a predictor of self-determination baseline improved understanding of the data patterns. Implications for systemic changes to enable equitable education across research and practice are discussed.
Previous research reported differences in student self-determination based on disability status. Specifically, students without disabilities consistently self-report higher self-determination compared with their peers with disabilities, suggesting differential opportunities and supports for self-determination exist within school contexts. To further examine potential differences in student self-determination, the present study examined the impact of an evidence-based practice designed to promote student self-determination, the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI), on student self-determination outcomes when implemented in inclusive, secondary core content classrooms as a universal (i.e., Tier 1) support across an academic year. Findings suggested a relatively small change in overall self-determination during the first year of a multiyear study, but consistent patterns across students with and without disabilities. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
Promoting self-determination is essential to effective transition services and supports. The Goal Setting Challenge App (GSC App) was developed to deliver self-determination instruction via technology, building on the evidence-based Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI). This article presents data on goal attainment outcomes for students with disabilities who participated in a small, cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT) of the GSC App during the 2020 to 2021 academic year and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Findings suggest it is highly probable the GSC App enhances student transition goal attainment outcomes after one semester, with students three times more likely to attain their self-identified transition goals in the GSC App than in the business-as-usual condition. The impact of COVID-19 on implementation and sample loss is described, as are implications for research and practice.
This study evaluated the effects of a blended learning instructional experience for sixth-grade students in an English/language arts (ELA) course. Students at two treatment schools participated in a blended learning instructional paradigm, and their ELA test scores were compared to one comparison school that used a face-to-face delivery. Other variables of interest were gender status, disability status, and student reading efficacy. The results of the analysis indicated that no significant changes in reading achievement were found that could be attributed solely to treatment versus comparison, to gender, or to disability status. Perhaps of greater significance to practitioners and researchers is the identification of person and programmatic-level factors that influence adoption and implementation of effective blended instruction. Implications are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.