Is College and Career Readiness Adequately Addressed in Annual and Postsecondary Goals?

Abstract

In current special education law, the individualized education program (IEP) addresses the transition to adult life by mandating goal statements be written in employment, postsecondary education, and sometimes independent living. Although these broad areas encompass quality of life for adults with disabilities, they are not necessarily aligned with broader general education policies in college and career readiness (CCR). The current study addresses this disconnect by examining extant data consisting of IEP annual and postsecondary goals in the context of an organizing framework of CCR. IEP goals were coded for the presence of six domains of CCR: (a) academic engagement, (b) mindsets, (c) learning processes, (d) critical thinking, (e) interpersonal engagement, and (f) transition competencies. Findings illustrate the promise of a potential strategy to incorporate CCR into IEP goals. Implications for educators are discussed.

Policy and Practice Considerations to Support College and Career Readiness for Youth With Disabilities: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

“…The other three domains were less represented in the scholarly literature (i.e., process-oriented skills, interpersonal engagement, ownership of learning). These findings are consistent with a previous study where individualized education program (IEP) annual and postschool goals were analyzed by the same CCR framework, and the same two domains—academic engagement and transition competencies—were better represented in actual IEP goals as compared with the other domains (Lombardi et al, 2017). With regard to the gray literature, different patterns emerged that were slightly different from the scholarly literature review.…”

La evaluación de programas de preparación para la universidad: un pendiente en la educación latinoamericana

“…La búsqueda permitió encontrar ochocientos veintiún artículos, treinta y siete de los cuales se seleccionaron para lectura completa porque presentaban resultados de investigación sobre marcos conceptuales de preparación para la universidad (Hooker y Brand, 2010;Lombardi et al, 2012Lombardi et al, , 2017; validaban dichos marcos conceptuales (Lombardi et al, 2011(Lombardi et al, , 2013; aplicaban las dimensiones de preparación para la universidad en poblaciones específicas (Lombardi et al, 2018;Nagle et al, 2016); describían estándares, indicadores y pruebas psicométricas de preparación para la universidad (Brown y Conley, 2007;Lombardi et al, 2011Lombardi et al, , 2013Lapan et al, 2017) y diferenciaban entre la preparación para la universidad y la preparación para la vida profesional (Malin et al, 2017). Para esta revisión se eligieron diecisiete artículos que estaban centrados en evaluaciones de programas de preparación para la universidad cuya población eran estudiantes de bachillerato o en transición hacia la universidad, con los cuales se esperaba mejorar sus promedios académicos, el ingreso y el desempeño exitoso en pregrado.…”

The Importance of Centers for Independent Living Supporting Youth With Disabilities: A Critical Contribution to Maximize Transition Service Delivery

“…The three overarching service areas that appeared in this study fell under the following areas: Personal development, college and career, and independent living. Although each of these areas are all demonstrably important areas of transition support and well documented in the literature (e.g., Carter et al, 2021; Kohler et al, 2016; Lombardi et al, 2017; Roos & Sondenaa, 2020), the vast majority of the transition literature focuses on collaboration to maximize career success (Oertle & Seader, 2015; Plotner et al, 2017, 2020). The CIL scope of youth services reported in this study includes a wide array of services well beyond just independent living supports, which some transition stakeholders might believe is the only focus area of CILs.…”