Youth and Parent Participation in Transition Planning in the U.S.A.: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to use data from the United States' National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) to present descriptive information on youth and parent participation and youth's role in required Individualized Education Program (IEP)/transition planning meetings by disability category and age groupings (14-22 year olds, 14-15 year olds, and 16-22 year olds). The study found that youth and parent attendance in IEP/transition planning meetings was high across disability categories, but the extent to which youth and parents met with teachers to discuss transition goals was much lower. Data from NLTS 2012 and a previous U.S. study, the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2), were compared for youth's participation with school staff in discussing transition goals. A significant decline in participation was found over the past decade. Logistic regression analyses illustrated differences in youth and parent participation and youth's role by disability category.

An Intersectional Examination of Economic Hardship and Individualized Education Program Meeting Participation

“…Finally, youth's role in the IEP meeting (the only variable for which it was possible to test equivalent thresholds) was found to function very differently across disability categories. Echoing these results, previous studies noted differences in IEP participation based on disability (Davenport et al, 2022;Johnson et al, 2022). As Davenport et al (2022) suggested, we intentionally did not group students with high-incidence disabilities together in order to better understand the differences by category.…”

“…However, in other studies focused on transition planning, researchers did explore student differences based on disability category (Davenport et al, 2022;Johnson et al, 2022;. Both Johnson et al (2022) and used logistic regression to examine differences in transition planning by disability.…”

“…However, in other studies focused on transition planning, researchers did explore student differences based on disability category (Davenport et al, 2022;Johnson et al, 2022;. Both Johnson et al (2022) and used logistic regression to examine differences in transition planning by disability. Johnson et al (2022) examined all 12 IDEA-recognized disability categories, whereas studied specifically students with significant cognitive disabilities.…”

“…Both Johnson et al (2022) and used logistic regression to examine differences in transition planning by disability. Johnson et al (2022) examined all 12 IDEA-recognized disability categories, whereas studied specifically students with significant cognitive disabilities. Both studies found differences in whether the student took a leadership role in their transition-planning meeting based on disability category.…”

“…Both studies found differences in whether the student took a leadership role in their transition-planning meeting based on disability category. Specifically, for youth with autism, intellectual disability (ID), and multiple disabilities, the odds of meeting with school staff to set transition goals and taking an active role in their transition-planning meeting were far lower compared with those for youth with specific learning disabilities (Johnson et al, 2022). similarly found that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities were less likely to be invited and take a leadership role in their transition-planning meetings.…”