Factors Associated with the Employment Status of Handicapped Youth Exiting High School from 1979 to 1983

Hasazi, Susan Brody; Gordon, Lawrence R.; Roe, Cheryl Ann

doi:10.1177/001440298505100601

Cited by 397 publications

(199 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

178

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Female students have been found to be less likely than their male counterparts to take courses in agricultute and industry, and they are more likely to receive training in home economics, health care, and clerical jobs (Blackorby, 1993;Wagner, 1992). Researchers also have found that young women with disabilities exit school with less wotk experience than young men with disabilities (Doren & Benz, 1998;Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985;Wagner), which may contribute to underemployment and unemployment as adults.…”

Section: Winter 2008mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition Goals and Experiences of Females with Disabilities: Youth, Parents, and Professionals

Hogansen

Powers

Geenen

et al. 2008

Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Winter 2008mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition Goals and Experiences of Females with Disabilities: Youth, Parents, and Professionals

Hogansen

Powers

Geenen

et al. 2008

Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In Vermont, Hasazi and her colleagues reported that 34% of mildly handicapped public school youth were not completing a high school education (Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985). The reported dropout rate of handicapped youth in several school districts in Florida was pegged at 31 % (Fardig, Algozzine, Schwartz, Hensel, & Westling, 1985).…”

Section: Dropout Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking Secondary School Programs for Students with Learning Disabilities

Zigmond¹

1990

focusXchild

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nearly 15 years have passed since enactment of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) and the federal government's assurance of a free and appropriate public education for students with handicaps. During that time the numbers of students served in special education programs has grown to nearly 4.5 million, an increase of 21 % over 1976-77 counts.Nowhere has the change in size and scope of special education services been more astounding than in the field of learning disabilities (LD). In the 15 years just passed, the numbers of students identified and served in programs for students with learning disabilities has increased by more than 145%. Every state in the nation has seen an increase in service rates in learning disabilities, with the service rates for students of secondary school age accounting for the greatest change. According to the Eleventh Annual Report to Congress (U.S. Department of Education, 1989) 1,025,010 students 12 to 17 years old have been diagnosed as LD and are receiving special education services.Before passage of PL 94-142, only a small body of literature specifically addressed the characteristics and needs of adolescents with learning disabilities. It is not that learning disabilities were not thought to exist in adolescents and young adults. Indeed, early descriptions of students with dyslexia and related learning disabilities often included case studies of students in the age range of 12 to 21 years (see Critchley, 1964, pp. ix-xi; Johnson & Myklebust, 1967, pp. 229-232). But secondary school-aged students with learning disabilities were not considered a distinct popl!lation with distinct characteristics and programming needs.Dr. Zigmond is affiliated with the Department of Instruction and Leaming, University of Pittsburgh.

show abstract

“…The probability of future employment for students with disabilities decreases over time. For part-and full-time work combined, most studies report about a 60% employment level for persons with disabilities (Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985; Wagner, 1989Wagner, , 1991. Also, according to data provided by NTLS (1990), only 1.8% of the graduating students with learning disabilities go to four-year universities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning Self-determination: Lessons from the Literature for Work with Children and Youth with Emotional and Behavioral Disabilities

Ackerman

2006

Child Youth Care Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children and youth with disabilities perform more poorly in transitional outcomes than their non-disabled peers. Programs are facing many changes because of these outcomes. Definitions are being revised, and new categories of exceptionalities are being recognized. Accountability measures are being put in place for people with disabilities.However, there is an important, current issue identified by researchers and individuals with disabilities -the issue of self-determination. This article explores how selfdetermination can and should be taught to children and youth with disabilities.LEARNING SELF-DETERMINATION 3 TEACHING SELF-DETERMINATION TO CHILDREN AND YOUTH WITH EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL DISABILITIES Coleman (1966) states that a sense of purpose and destiny facilitates positive outcomes. Successful people assess their needs, determine their goals, plan actions, act, monitor their performance, and make any needed adjustments (Mithaug, Martin & Agran, 1987). Mithaug (1996) argues that few children succeed because of the instruction they receive. These children succeed because adults identify them as having a sense of purpose for their lives. They know what they like, what they can do, what they want and how to get it. Unfortunately, many children and youth leaving our special education programs lack a sense of purpose and destiny (White et al, 1982). They do not advocate for their own goals and interests (Allen, 1989). They often are not seen as being selfdetermined.The Council for Exceptional Children (1994) reports 37% of youths with disabilities who participated in the National Longitudinal Transition Survey (NLTS) were living independently three to five years after graduation. This figure is 60% for the general population. Only 37% of the youths with disabilities surveyed had enrolled in postsecondary school as compared with 68% of youths without disabilities. Although the NLTS found that employment levels were about the same for general population as for youths with disabilities five years after graduation from secondary school, these youths were earning less than $12,000 per year for full-time, year-round employment.Students with disabilities have only a 35% to 45% chance of finding full-time work after leaving school. The probability of future employment for students with disabilities decreases over time. For part-and full-time work combined, most studies report about a 60% employment level for persons with disabilities (Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985; Wagner, 1989Wagner, , 1991. Also, according to data provided by NTLS (1990), only 1.8% of the graduating students with learning disabilities go to four-year universities. The number is somewhat higher for two-year postschool institutions.However, most students complete only a few courses. After more than three decades of federal involvement in the education of children and youths with disabilities, these disturbing post school outcomes have led practitioners, policymakers, researchers, and parents of young people with disabilities to conclude that sp...

show abstract

Factors Associated with the Employment Status of Handicapped Youth Exiting High School from 1979 to 1983

Cited by 397 publications

References 11 publications

Transition Goals and Experiences of Females with Disabilities: Youth, Parents, and Professionals

Transition Goals and Experiences of Females with Disabilities: Youth, Parents, and Professionals

Rethinking Secondary School Programs for Students with Learning Disabilities

Learning Self-determination: Lessons from the Literature for Work with Children and Youth with Emotional and Behavioral Disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About