Emerging Trends in Youth Engagement During Transition: Youth as Interdisciplinary Partners

Abstract

PurposeDespite federal legislation requiring youth engagement in their transition planning, students with disabilities continue to be passive partners in this transition process, under informed about the process and future possibilities, and with goals misaligned with their hopes. Students with specific disabilities and those who are English learners, Black, Indigenous, and from communities of color are even more impacted by the lack of active opportunities to provide direction on their futures.MethodThe authors conducted a scoping literature review of youth engagement in the transition process for students served under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.ResultsA shift towards active engagement for students in the transition process is critical. Inequitable experiences in that process exist for students based on individual and environmental characteristics. Active engagement will require direct, deliberate instruction and amelioration of structural barriers.ConclusionsAs a bridge between school years and adult environments, vocational rehabilitation counselors have an important role in supporting the engagement of students in transition planning as they learn and practice self-determination and self-advocacy skills to lead planning towards their future.

Building Equity Into Transition Practice and Service Delivery: A Call for Systemic Changes in the Field of Transition

“…As an example, aspirational capital moves transition practitioners to consider the hopes and dreams of the future at the core of all transition planning by celebrating resiliency and capacity to dream. While family involvement is a predictor of positive post-school experiences (Hirano et al, 2018), family and youth continue to not be effectively included in the transition planning process (Cavendish et al, 2020; Kucharczyk et al, 2022), thus hampering the opportunities to critical aspirational capital families and youth possess. Social capital, the network and resources by people (Yosso, 2005), is a critical component of transition planning.…”

A Critical Systematic Literature Review of Global Inclusive Education Using an Affective, Intersectional, Discursive, Emotive and Material Lens

“…For example, in Sub-Saharan Africa, Singal et al [35] used existing United States special education dis/Ability categories and infrastructure (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, etc.) from the medical model of dis/Ability, while [36] in the United States, focused on the existing conceptualizations of transition programming, planning and outcomes for Black, Indigenous and Students of Color from IDEA [20,21]. In turn, both Singal et al [35] and Kucharczyk et al [36] did not include any specific theoretical framework.…”

“…from the medical model of dis/Ability, while [36] in the United States, focused on the existing conceptualizations of transition programming, planning and outcomes for Black, Indigenous and Students of Color from IDEA [20,21]. In turn, both Singal et al [35] and Kucharczyk et al [36] did not include any specific theoretical framework.…”

“…The studies' global inclusive education researchers took the time to contextualize their country's history of inclusive education and policy for national development [39]. The majority of the researchers conceptualized dis/Ability in exploring their research questions about inclusive education through the medical and/or social model of dis/Ability [25,28,33,36]. There were three additional ways in which the researchers conceptualized dis/Ability in exploring their research questions about inclusive education:…”

“…These levels included national and local contexts that involve student, teacher and other staff and service personnel interactions [28] and attitudes [34] as well given inclusive education policies, practices and contexts and the lack of connection between research and inclusive practices, skills, knowledge and professional collaboration [30,34,56]. Such dynamics demonstrated both constraints and affordances given the current ways the educational and societal systems have been historically, culturally and socially constructed regarding dis/Ability along other markers of differences and power relations [29,32], in particular how Global North ideologies dominate and do not account for Global South ecologies [36].…”