International Journal Special Education

More documents

Recommendations

Info

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol 26, No: 3, 2011included youths’ instruction and accommodations, their school programs, youths’ engagement in school,and teacher competencies. The summary in Table 1 below shows that the predictors of employmentoutcomes for youths with disabilities varied when compared to their counterparts without disabilities.Other Findings: Parent Satisfaction and ExpectationsOn average, 88% of Tobago parents were very dissatisfied with the special education services theirstudents with disabilities received and 44% were dissatisfied with their academic education. Amongparents’ expectations, only 10% expected their children to earn a regular high school diploma, 7%expected that their children would graduate from a 2-year college and there were no parent expectationsthat any child with a disability will graduate from a 4-year college. However, 41% of parents expectedtheir children will eventually live away from home, 45% expected their youths to get paid jobs, and 34%of parents felt that youths will earn enough to support themselves.Table 1: Comparisons of Predictors of Employment between Participants with and withoutDisabilities in TobagoParticipants with DisabilitiesParent Expectations predicted training scoresParents with higher expectations resulted inhigher school training experiences.Teachers’ Level of Education predictedtraining scores and school- and communitybasedwork experiencesTeachers with at least a Bachelor’s degreeresulted in higher school training scores andschool- and community-based work experiencesthan participants whose teachers had only aprofessional or teacher’s diploma.School Experiences, particularly Interactionwith Friends predicted hours and wagesParticipants having more interactions withfriends reported working more hours and earningbetter wages.School Program predicted job characteristics aswell as hours and wagesParticipants with a combined program ofacademic and vocational education reportedmore positive job characteristics, worked morehours and earned better wages than those whoreported only academic or only vocationaleducation preparationParticipants without DisabilitiesTeachers Level of Education and Participants’School Experiences predicted training scores.Participants with more qualified teachers andgeneral education school experiences reportedbetter pre-employment preparation.Levels of Social Interaction and Marital Statuspredicted Hours and Wages.Having many friends and being married resulted inmore working hours and higher wages.Instruction and Type of pre-employmentpreparation predicted Job characteristics.Participants who took a technical, vocational, orbusiness class reported more positive jobexperiences.Household Characteristics, mainly InsuranceBenefits predicted Job Characteristics.Participants who reported having work-relatedinsurance benefits reported more positive jobexperiences.ConclusionThis study on Tobago outcomes for this sample of students and youth with disabilities was the firstinquiry to address a need continually cited by the EFA Global Monitoring Reports (2006-2010). Thesereports indicated that limited knowledge of learning outcomes was a major obstacle that resulted inbelow level expectations and progress by member countries towards achieving the goals of Education forAll (UNESCO, 2010). The results from this first study indicate that Tobago is not yet there inadequately meeting the needs of her citizens with disabilities both in education and in employment,especially when the twin-island Republic has more resources to buttress the program than many otherdeveloping countries in the Caribbean region.Findings in this study responded to important questions about the school and post-school outcomes ofstudents with learning disabilities, speech language impairments and intellectual disabilities in Tobago.This study provides data that are not only relevant to establish a foundation for full-scale research on anational level, but also will contribute to educational reform in the country, as well as add to the body of204
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION Vol 26, No: 3, 2011literature on educational outcomes for students with disabilities. The results of this study provide acomprehensive overview of the participants’ characteristics in terms of background and school factorsand the influences of these factors on academic and employment outcomes. Comparative analyses amongdisability groups in the US and Tobago as well as between students and youths with and withoutdisabilities in Tobago found significant differences. Multivariate analyses identified several relationshipsbetween the independent variables and the outcomes.In the absence of outcomes data for students with disabilities in Trinidad and Tobago, the firstimplication of this study was the identification of differences between Tobago (part of a developingcountry) and the US (a developed nation) as a yardstick for assessing the country’s goal in the directionof acquiring developed nation status. Although not optimal, this comparison helps to contextualize theresults of this study as it identifies the factors that account for the differences between the two countriesand indicates whether the differences are germane to improving the outcomes for students and youthswith disabilities globally. The comparisons made here should be interpreted cautiously, for while the USresults can be generalized on a national level, the Tobago results were based only on the Tobago sampleof convenience, and not the entire country of Trinidad and Tobago.To make proximal comparisons between the US and Tobago, data from the most recently published USnational outcomes studies were used. The student sample was compared to the SEELS-Wave 3 (2006)outcomes while the youth sample was compared to the NLTS2 – Waves 2 - 4 (2003 – 2009) outcomesstudies, where applicable. The results indicated several differences between the educational practices inthe US and Tobago, including instructional settings, instructional methods and curriculum that may haveinfluenced the outcomes.It is important to note that the US practices prior to PL94-142 that mandated free and appropriate publiceducation for students with disabilities in the least restrictive settings, were very similar to currentpractices in Tobago. The US history of special education moved from institutionalization where personswith disabilities received no formal education but were isolated as a form of protection from theinsensitivities of society in residential facilities to being slowly integrated into residential schools, mainlycatering to persons with sensory impairments such as blindness and deafness (Winzer, 1986). The early19 th century saw the first attempt to educate students with intellectual disabilities (mental retardation) andother behavioral disorders (Kauffman & Landrum, 2006).Similarly, the humanitarian sentiments of groups that advocated for more humane treatment andeducation opportunities for persons with disabilities in the US can be seen as analogous to the Tobagohistory of disabilities where missionaries and non-governmental organizations stepped in to improve thelives of children with disabilities. Professionals in the fields of medicine, psychology, sociology, socialwork and education, collectively with parent advocacy groups, played an active role in making the casefor special education In the U.S. This collaborative advocacy resulted in landmark legislations thatensure the right to education for, and the removal of the barriers of discrimination of persons withdisabilities in the US. Tobago, as well as Trinidad are not yet at this juncture.A primary difference between the US and Tobago was that students with these disabilities in the US,received academic instruction in a wide variety of settings, including general education inclusionclassrooms, resource rooms, and specialized self-contained classrooms. In principle and practice, Tobagostudents who were identified as having learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities and speech/languageimpairments received all of their instruction in special schools, which are comparable only to specializedself-contained settings in the US. The US practices today require that students with disabilities beeducated to as far an extent as possible with their peers without disabilities. Students in the US withsimilar disabilities as those participants in the Tobago study were mostly educated in inclusiveclassrooms. This was a significant difference between the US and Tobago whose shorter history ofspecial education does not yet practice inclusion of students with disabilities in general education settingsand does not yet provide opportunities for students with disabilities to experience the full continuum ofplacement options that are available in the US.Furthermore, limited exposure to the full general education curriculum raises some concerns based on thedifferences between the US and Tobago with regard to the instructional practices and curriculum used toeducate students with disabilities. In accounting for the influences of instructional practices onacademic outcomes, the SEELS (2007) study found that students who received more of their academic205
Page 1 and 2:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL ED
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
StronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgre
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Percent Correct (as of TA) .Percent
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL ED
Page 203: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPECIAL ED
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295:
show all

International Journal Special Education

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?