<%BANNER%>

An Examination of the Job Training and Job Experiences of High School Students as They Exit School

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042487/00001

Material Information

Title: An Examination of the Job Training and Job Experiences of High School Students as They Exit School
Physical Description: 1 online resource (121 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Andrews, Wilbur
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Special Education, School Psychology and Early Childhood Studies -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Special Education thesis, Ed.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: AN EXAMINATION OF THE JOB TRAINING AND JOB EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AS THEY EXIT SCHOOL The purpose of this study is to examine (a) the level of satisfaction that exiting high school students have regarding the job training they received in high school, (b) the work experiences during high school, (c) job training experiences during high school, and (d) current job status, including number of hours worked, wages earned, if the job was chosen by the student, if the student likes the job they have, and if the business where they work is owned by someone in their family. Participants include students in public schools in Florida who would be exiting school at the end of the semester the survey was completed. The results of this study provide information for those involved in the transition of students from school to employment, especially those developing programs and providing job training and work experiences.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Wilbur Andrews.
Thesis: Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Repetto, Jeanne.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042487:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042487/00001

Material Information

Title: An Examination of the Job Training and Job Experiences of High School Students as They Exit School
Physical Description: 1 online resource (121 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Andrews, Wilbur
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Special Education, School Psychology and Early Childhood Studies -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Special Education thesis, Ed.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: AN EXAMINATION OF THE JOB TRAINING AND JOB EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AS THEY EXIT SCHOOL The purpose of this study is to examine (a) the level of satisfaction that exiting high school students have regarding the job training they received in high school, (b) the work experiences during high school, (c) job training experiences during high school, and (d) current job status, including number of hours worked, wages earned, if the job was chosen by the student, if the student likes the job they have, and if the business where they work is owned by someone in their family. Participants include students in public schools in Florida who would be exiting school at the end of the semester the survey was completed. The results of this study provide information for those involved in the transition of students from school to employment, especially those developing programs and providing job training and work experiences.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Wilbur Andrews.
Thesis: Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Repetto, Jeanne.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0042487:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 AN EXAMINATION OF THE JOB TRAINING AND JOB EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AS THEY EXIT SCHOOL By WILBUR DREW ANDREWS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMEN T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DE GREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010

PAGE 2

2 2010 Wilbur Drew Andrews

PAGE 3

3

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I t takes more than one individu al to complete a dissertation. Just as with a successful transition, a dissertation involves a team that is willing to give direction and support from initiation to completion. My hope is that each of the individuals mentioned below realizes the gratitude that is intend ed. I am grateful to my committee chairperson, Dr. Jeanne B. Repetto; my committee members, D r. Maureen Conroy Dr. Cyndi Garvan, Dr. Su e McGorray, and Dr. Kris Webb. I also appreciate the services of Dr. Phil ip Clark until his retirement. Throughout my program, each me mber has provided guidance and supported I would like to thank the transition contacts, teachers and students that distributed, facilitated and completed the F lorida High School Exit Survey. Without their desire to know more about stud transition experiences, this work would not have been possible. I am very grateful to my colleagues and friends at The Transition Center. My thanks go to Sheila Gritz, Joyce Lubbers, Patric k Mulvihill, and Hua Wang, who made my work at The Transition Center memorable. Special thanks to Wilma Rogers, program assistant, at The Transition Center who has both encouraged and listened at just the right times. Thanks to t he Department of Special Education at the University of Florida staff, Shaira Rivas Otero, Vicki Tuc ker, and Michelle York, for all that they have done along the way to support my work at The Transition Center and completion of the doctoral program. I am grateful to Dr. Penny Co x, Graduate Coordinator for the department for all her assistance throughout this process. I would like to thank Michele Polland and Janet Adams with the Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services. The opportun ity to work with the Career Development

PAGE 5

5 Project at The Transition Center has changed my life and for that I am grateful. Without the fellow doctoral student who started t he doctoral program with me my experiences at the University of Florida would not ha ve been the same and far less exciting. Thanks go out to Dr. Penny Cox, Dr. Christie Stuart, and Dr. Ann Bingham Shoulders I would also like to thank my parents, Wilbur and Glenda Andrews, my first teachers, who taught me to care for and respect others. I have known throughout my life that I have their love and support. My children, Sondra, Andrea, Parker and Chason on into adulthood being unique. Their love and understanding during the times I ha ve worked on this project is greatly appreciated. I am proud of the adults that each of them have become. Lastly, I would like to thank the other friends and acquaintances that have, more than they will ever know, encourage d, supported, and listened Wh at a wonderful world we live in and how fortunate I am to have crossed their paths

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM ................................ ................................ .... 11 Required Transition Plann ing ................................ ................................ .................. 11 National And State Inquiry ................................ ................................ ...................... 12 Florida High School Exit Survey ................................ ................................ ............. 13 Statement Of The Purpose ................................ ................................ ..................... 14 Statement Of The Problem ................................ ................................ ..................... 15 Delimitations Of The Study ................................ ................................ ..................... 15 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................ ................................ ............ 17 Transition ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 17 Employment ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 20 Post School Outcomes ................................ ................................ ........................... 22 Employment ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 22 Race/ethnicity ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 23 Students With Disabilities and Students Without Disabilities ............................ 24 Gender ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 26 District size and location ................................ ................................ ................... 29 Collecting and comparing data from Students With Disabilities and Students Without Disabilities ................................ ................................ ........................ 33 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 34 3 METHOD ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 36 Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 36 Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 36 Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 37 Hypothesis 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 37 Hypothesis 4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 37 Subjects And Setting ................................ ................................ ............................... 37 Instruments/Data Collection ................................ ................................ .................... 38 Procedures ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 39 Experimental Design And Analysis Of Data ................................ ............................ 41 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 42

PAGE 7

7 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 45 Demographic Characteristics Of Participants ................................ ......................... 45 Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 45 Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 45 Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 46 Hypothesis 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 47 Hypothesis 4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 48 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 50 5 DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 65 Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 65 Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 67 Hypothesis 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 70 Hypothesis 4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 72 Characteristics with Significan t Differences ................................ ............................ 76 Gender ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 77 Disability ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 78 Race/Ethnicity ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 80 Year ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 82 District Location ................................ ................................ ................................ 83 District Size ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 85 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 87 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 88 APPENDIX A FLORIDA HIGH SCHOOL EXIT SURVEY ................................ .............................. 90 B LETTER FROM BUREAU CHIEF TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS ............................... 107 C INFORMED CONSENT FORM ................................ ................................ ............. 109 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 112 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 121

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page Table 3 1 Florida regions / school district size ................................ ............................ 44 Table 4 1 Question 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 53 Table 4 2 Question 10 ................................ ................................ ................................ 56 Table 4 3 Question 11 ................................ ................................ ................................ 59 Table 4 4 Question 12 ................................ ................................ ................................ 61 Table 4 5 Demographic characteristics ................................ ................................ ....... 64

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Do ctor of Education AN EXAMINATION OF THE JOB TRAINING AND J OB EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AS THEY EXIT SCHOOL By Wilbur Drew Andrews December 2010 Chair: Jeanne B. Repetto Major: S pecial Education The purpose of this investigation was (a) to determine the level of satisfaction that exiting high school s tudents felt regarding the job preparation and training they received in high school, (b) gather data on work experiences during high school, (c) gather data on job training experiences during high school, and (d) gather data on students current job status including number of hours worked, wages earned, if the job was chosen by the student, if the student likes the job he or she has, and if the business where he or she work s is owned by someone in their family. Data were collected using the Florida High School Exit Survey which was mailed to District Transition Contacts and then distributed to teachers in high schools. Participants included students in public schools in Flori da that were age eighteen or older and would be exiting school at the end of the semester the survey was completed. To cover all Fl orida school districts, a three year cycle was utilized, beginning with 2007 and ending with 2009. A total of 3,167 students participated in the survey. C omparison s were made between (a) students with a nd students without disabilities (b) male and f emale (c) race/ ethnicity, including Black, Hispanic, Other, and W hite (d) yearly results for 2007, 2008, and 2009 (e) the five Florida Department of Education

PAGE 10

10 (FLDOE) regions and (f) the five size classificati ons in the Florida Department of Education. The results of this investigation showed significant differences between students with and without disabilities, race/ethnic groups, wages earned per hour, and students working for a private business or company Fewer differences were found be tween Male and F emale students, FLDOE regions of the state students working for public government and having jobs in the community not as a part of school. Only a few differences were found between calendar years of data c ollection and district size The results of this investigation provide implications for those involved in the transition planning process, especially those developing programs and providing job training and work experiences.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION T O TH E PROBLEM Required Transition Plann ing The Individuals with Disabilities Educati on Improvement Act of 2004 (IDE A 2004) continues the secondary transition requirement that students with disabilities have a transition plan beginning at age sixteen that p rovides students a free and appro priate public education (FAPE). The driving force behind transition planning is the positive adult outcomes of students after exiting school. Although many areas are addressed in the transition plan, a primary goal of tho se involved in the transition planning process, due to the positive correlation to positive outcomes, is the gainfu l employment of students in full or part time jobs Acquiring gainful employment upon exiting school can success in other transition planning areas. A secondary goal of the employment planning process is that the occupation be s, preferences, and focus on To accomplish the employment goal, school syst beginning at age sixteen, or young er if necessary using the Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) Within the Individ ualized Educational Plan a measureable posts econdary goal is written for employment, education or training, and independent living when appropriate As school districts develop programs to meet transition requirements in the area of employment, a continuum of se rvices approach is often taken. Many school systems begin with career awareness activ iti es. Next, students explore speci fic careers that interest them. Following the awareness and exploration stages, students often have nonpaid job experiences through on the job training programs on the school campus or in the community As the student develops and learns job skills, the school

PAGE 12

12 helping the student secure a job in the c ommunity may be the next step. However, many students secure their own jobs while in school without the help of sc hool personnel or programs. The final goal is for studen ts upon exiting school, to be employed in a job that matches their strengths, interest s, and preferences National A nd State Inquiry The inquiry into the implementation of the requirements to provide needed transition service by school districts has focus ed on the nation al, state, and district level. At the national level, the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) was the f irst investigation into student s post school outcomes with a nationwide focus. The NLTS collected data on students with disa bilities that were in grades seven through twelv e during the 1985 1986 school year. A second collection of NLTS, known as NLTS2, was conducted in 2002. In the area of employment, the outcomes fo r students with disabilities did not improved to the degree expected. At the state level, the Flori da Department of Education uses the Florida Education and Training Placement Information Program (FETPIP) a data collection and consumer reporting system, ation, military or incarceration one year after exiting Florid a public schools The program provides follow u p data on Florida school students one year after exiting school The data collected describe civilian and federal employment and earnings, conti nuing education experiences, military service, along with other information. The data also include demographic and performance comparisons. Additionally, t rends over time can be monitored. All of the above mentioned, NLTS, NLTS2, and FETPIP collect inf ormation after students leave school. The NLTS and NLTS2 utilize phone and paper surveys to gather

PAGE 13

13 information from previous students and family members. The FETPIP utilizes state databases to collect information based on stud ent s social security number s. While NLTS and FETPIP provide important information about students after leaving school, the question remains as to what employment programs students have experienced while in school. With the requirements in IDE A that students to be involved in their transition planning and the Florida requirement that s elf determination training be included in the trans ition planning process, student s opinions, perceptio ns, and observations should be considered by school districts when making programmatic decisions. Information on student s satisfaction and perceptions of the tr ansition services provided while in school were identified as critical information by a research tea m at the University of Florida. To gather information from students in Florida, The Transi tion Center at the University, a project supported by the Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services, Career Development and Transition Project developed the Florida High School Exit Survey (FHSES ). Florida High School Exit Survey The Flori da High School Exit Survey (FHSES) ask students age eighteen and older, with and without disabilities leaving the pu blic sc hool systems in Florida to provide information on their transition experiences while in school This st udy will look at differences between students with and without disabilities, gender, race/ethnicity differences between three calendar years, location and size of school district where services were provided The FHSES was developed after a review of the literature and data collection methods being used by other states. T he survey was a paper document. Teachers were directed to instruct students on how to complete the survey on their own

PAGE 14

14 if appropriate If students needed assistance to complete the sur vey, directions were given for a school district employee to make accommodations to support st udent s completion of the survey. With the amount of paperwork that school district personnel are being asked to complete, the research team decided to collect t he data f r om the state over a three year cycle with each cycle including one third of the school districts in the state and an eq uitable number of districts differing in size classifications and region within the state Number of completed surveys from di stricts was based on the district size. Small / rural districts were asked to survey all of their exiting students with disabilities Small/middle, Middle, Large, and Very L arg e school d istricts were given a suggested number of surveys based to be complete d, based on a pe rcentage of their enrollment. For comparison information, school districts were asked to survey an equal amount of students without disabilities. A second version of the survey was designed for students without disabilities. The second s urvey included the same questions but did not contain questions about the ir I ndividualized E ducational P lan (IEP) p rocess that was contained in the survey for students with disabilities The FHSES collected student responses about their transition planning experiences while in public school. The FHSES provides valuable information from students about the transition services received by students before exiting school. This study will focus on student satisfaction with job pre paration, job training, and job experiences while in high school. Statement Of T he Purpose The purpose of this investigation was (a) to determine the level of satisfaction that exiting high school students felt regarding the job preparation and training th ey received in high school, (b) to gather data on work experiences during high school, (c) to gather

PAGE 15

15 data on job training experiences during high school, and (d) to gather data on students current job status when exiting from high school. Specific informa tion about the number of hours worked, wages earned, if the job was chosen by the student, if the student likes the job he or she and if the business where the student work ed is owned by someone in his or her family. The investigation used the Florida Hi gh School Exit Survey as the data source Statement Of T he Problem Employment is a required area of focus in the transition planning process; however, the way that this requirement is implemented in school districts varies greatly. Th is study was designed to investigate ction with the job training, differences in work experiences among different groups of s tudents employment status as they exited high school. This study was the first to survey students while still in school about satisfaction with the s ervices provided and specific information about the work experience while in school. Comparisons were made of d ifferences between gender, students with and without disabilities race/ethnicity groups school year of data coll ection district size and district location in the state of Florida Delimitations Of T he Study The scope of this study was limited in the following ways. First, because not all districts participated in the survey and some districts submitted small nu mbers of surveys, results may not be representative of th e state of Florida as a whole. Also, the voluntary nature of the surv ey and only inviting students eighteen years old and older to participate may not be representative of all exiting students. As with the N ational

PAGE 16

16 L ongitudinal T ransition S urvey 2 (NLTS2) study of perceptions and expectations of students with disabilities, caution should be used when interpreting the FHSES results: Analyses are descriptive and do not imply that factors are related t o or cause other factors. Surveys reflect how youth describe themselves and may not be accurate. disability group (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine & Marder, 2007).

PAGE 17

17 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Transition Career development and transition planning are vital to successful post school outcomes for students with disabilities. The understanding of these terms is critical to professionals having the knowledge and frameworks to supp ort student s through this process. Career Development was defined as sociological, educational, physical, economic, and chance factors that combine to shape the career of any give n individual over the life span ( Sears, 1982, p. 28 ) Career Developmen t stages were next described as: Schools provide opportunities for students to become familiar with the attitudes, information, and awareness needed in a work oriented society. Exploration Schools prov ide opportunities for students to investigate the aptitudes, interests, and requirements needed to obtain paid and unpaid work Preparation Schools provide opportunities for students to acquire and practice the attitudes and skills need for paid and unpai d work roles. Assimilation (Placement & Follow Along) The work role provides an opportunity to adapt to the demands and experience the rewards of labor. Continuing Education The community provides opportunities to gather more knowledge and skills to incr eas e the likelihood of job success ( Kokask a, Gruenhagen, Razeghi, & Fair, 1985) In 1994 the Council for Exceptional Children, Division on Career Development and Transition, developed a position statement on transition: Transition refers to a change in st atus from behaving primarily as a student to assuming emergent adult roles in the community. These roles include employment, participating in post secondary education, maintaining a home, becoming appropriately involved in the community, and experiencing satisfactory personal and social relationships. The process of enhancing transition involves the participation and coordination of school programs, adult agency services, and natural supports within the community. The foundation for transition should be laid during the elementary and middle

PAGE 18

18 school years, guided by the broad concept of career development. Transition planning should begin no later than age 14, and students should be encouraged, to the full extent of their capabilities, to assume a maximum amount of re sponsibility for such planning (Halpern, 1994). Elements of successful transition programs were next compiled by, Charner, Fraser, Hubbard, Rogers, & Horne (1995). They include: Administrative Leadership Commitment of Program Staff Cross Secto r Collaboration Fostering Self Determination in All Students School Based Learning Work Based Learning Students must have the opportunity to experience a range of appropriate work based learning experiences. Integration of Career Information and Guidance Build a Progressive System That Starts Before Grade 11 Ensure Access to Postsecondary Options Creative Financing The Taxonomy for Transition Planning, a framework of the transition process was developed by Paula Kohler (1996). The following portions foc us on career development relating to employment: Student Development Employment Skills Instruction Work related behaviors and skills training Job seeking skills training Occupation specific vocational skill training Career & Vocational Curricula Vocational assessment (includ ing situational assessment) Structured Work Experience Apprenticeships Paid work experience

PAGE 19

19 Work study program Job placement services (prior to school exit) Further studies included the review of transition research by Greene and Kochha r Bryant (2003) which identified 10 best practices in transition. They include: Interagency collaboration I nterdisciplinary collaboration Integrated schoo ls, classrooms, and employment Functional life skills curriculum a nd community based instruction Soc ial and personal skills development and training Career and vocat ional assessment and education Business and industry linkages with schools Development of effective Individ ualized Education Program Student self determination, advocacy, and in put in transi tion planning Parent or family involvement in transition planning Studies on transition planning report that the consideration of career development should begin at an early age (Weide nthal & Kochhar Bryant, 2007). Having the opportun ity to try careers This opportunity also allows them to experience what lies ahead. The personal components of satisfaction, comfort, identit y, and rewards associated with chosen career paths are needed by students during career development (Kochhar, West, & Taymans, 2000). Through career development activities, students create a profile of identity and begin to understand their abilities as t hey relate to their disabilities (Weidenthal & Kochhar Bryant, 2007). Completion of transition goals and career related work experiences have an increased association with improved graduation and positive employment outcomes (Benz et al. 2000). Transitio n programs that focus on work related goals have been linked with positive employment outcomes for students (Nurmi, Salmela Aro, & Koivisto, 2002 ). With the literature as a resource for information and frameworks providing best

PAGE 20

20 practices in transition ser vices, there is a need to examine how these practices are being implemented (Zhang et al., 2005) by school districts. Employment Employment is an important adult outcome for which students need to be well prepared. ty adult life. Employment provides a source of income, enhances self esteem, provides important social connections, and allows people to fulfi ll their duties as contributing, tax ( Rogan, Grossi, and Gajewski ,2002, p. 104). To be prepare d for careers in the twenty first century, students must complete a course of study and have a transition plan in place that will s econdary goal. Nationally, 61 % of students with disabilities take career and technic al course as compared with 80 % of students without disabilities (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, & Marder, 2003). Preparing individuals with disabilities to function effectively and experience success in the workplace presents many challenges that include ; the nature of the workplace that is constantly changing; the need for employees to have social, academic and occupational skills; and a curriculum that is often not addressing these areas (Benz et al., 1997). Many students are leaving high school unprepared for empl oyment even though transition programs are required to include employment as an area of focus Additional program components should include development of job seeking skills and opportunities to practice these skills (McDonnall & Crudden, 2009) Next, pr ograms should include work based learning, which involves using the workplace to gain hands on employment experience, and improves postsecondary employment outcomes among students with disabilities. Students need to have the opportunity to experience and learn about career paths and practice job skills (Luecking & Mooney, 2002).

PAGE 21

21 A study by Guy, Sitlington, Larsen & Frank (2009) addressed research questions that focus on patterns that exist in the employment preparation courses offered to second ary student s with disabilities. Patterns included: (1) numbers of courses offered; (2) subject areas in which these courses were offered; (3) percentage that were classroom based; (4) percentage that were work based; and (5) percentage that were a combination of cla ssroom and work based. Only 32 % of the classes offered in reporting districts had the focus of prepari ng students for employment (Guy et al., 2009). Additional research has indicated that when presenting the knowledge and skills needed by youth to effecti vely transition to employment, the focus should include: (1) occupational awareness and exploration; (2) employment related knowledge and skills; and (3) specific occupational knowledge and skills (Brolin & L l oyd, 2004; Clark, Carlson, onzo, 1991; Sitlington and Clark, 2006). Understanding the factors that promote positive employment outcomes can help the development of educational programs which better prepare students for the future (Doren et al., 2007). The successful transition of y ouths with disabilities to employment has consistently been associated with work experience while in school (Stodden, Dowrick, Gilmore, & Galloway, 2001). Unfortunately, employment preparation programs are decreasing even though they have been shown to be effective in preparing youth for employment after high school (Guy, Sit lington, Larsen & Frank, 2009). A review of the research found that students with and without disabilities report the lack of relevancy of the high school curriculum as the primary re ason for dropping out of school (Kaufman, Klein, & Frase, 1999; Lange & Ysseldyke, 1998; Lichtenstein, 1993). This study

PAGE 22

22 provides information from students about the job experiences that they have experienced prior to exiting school. Post School Outcome s Employment Engagement in work activities as a post school outcome has long been recognized as a positive achievement indicator for students with and without disabilities (Benz et al., 1997; DeStefano & Wagner, 1991). Few studies have followed students lon gitudinally after leaving high school and reported on their adjustment to adult life (Seo, Abbot, & Hawkins, 2008). The post school success of young adults is one outcome used to measure the success of the U.S. public education system (Doren et al., 2007) To ensure students with disabilities al so experience this outcome, IDE A 2004 has two major areas of focus the first, access to the general education curriculum and the second, preparation for adult living, post secondary education, and employment. Hig h school reform places emphasis on rigor and relevance with a closer connection with the preparation needed to enter employment (Barton, 2006). In many disabilities. The ( 2004 ) National Organization on Disability/Harris Survey of Americans with Disabilities found that 35 % of people with disabilities reported being employed full or part time compared to 78% of people without disabilities who reported being employed fu ll or part time. Only 43 % of students with disabilities are employed two years out of high school compared with 55 % of their nondisabled peers (Wagner et al., 2005). As youth with disabilities exit school, many experience un deremployment and unemploymen t. Almost 3 times as many people with disabilities live in poverty as those

PAGE 23

23 without disabilities. The Northwest Policy Center in 2001, projected that 60% of the job opportunities in 2010 providing a living wage would do so throug h short term training, i ncluding a combination of basic literacy and computer skills, occupationally specific instruction and on the job training, and work experience (Flannery et al., 2008). The National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center along with the Council fo r Exceptional Children, Division on Career Development and Transition identified evidence based secondary transition practices that predict improved post school employment outcomes for students (Test et al., 2009 ) Paid work experience was a moderate pred ictor for all disability categories. Students were more likely to be involved in post school employment if when they had 2 or more jobs during the last two year of school (Doren & Benz, 1998). Students in paid employment for one full year during high sch ool were 5 times more likely to be engaged in post school employment (Bullis et al., 1995) and students who were employed at the time of school exit were 5.1 times more likely to be found in post school employment (Rabren et al., 2002). When Wagner and co lleagues examined t programs (Wagner, Blackorby, Cameto, & Newman, 1993; Wagner, Blackorby, & Hebbeler, 1993), several school r elated factors were identified. They included (a) individualized tutoring and support needed to c omplete homework, class attendance, and a continual focus on school; and during the last two years of school, participation in (b) vocational education classes; and (c) community based work experience programs. Race/e thnicity Through research conducted by the National Center for Self Determination and 21 st Century Leadership a clearer perspective of the transition of youth who are culturally and linguistically diverse and young adults in the foster care system has been

PAGE 24

24 developed (Gil Kashiwabara et. a l., 20 07). Many students who are culturally or linguistically diverse, in foster care, and experiencing poverty, experience additional marginalization and disenfranchisement that reaches beyond bei ng a student with a disability. Often this leads to multiple le vels of discrimination, creating additional barriers to achieving positive post school outcomes (Gil Kashiwabara et a l., 2007). The U.S. Census Bureau (1997) reported more than 185,000 young Latina women wi th disabilities ages 15 to 24. Each year 20,000 o f the 513,000 children in foster care are discharged when the age of majority is reached (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006). The National Evaluation of Title IV E independent Living Programs reported that among youth emancipated from car e, 47 % had disabilities. These students were less likely to graduate from high school, be employed, and be self sufficient than were those students without disabilities (Westat, 1991) Students W ith Disabilities and Students Without Disabilities Student s perception of high school preparation has been identified as important to post school outcome research (Kortering & Braziel, 1999). To gain a better understanding of post school outcomes for youth, studying the outcomes of both youth with disabilities an d youth without disabilities is needed. bring deeper meaning and lead to a broader understanding of findings and provide a point of comparison to identify areas of concern (Chambers, Rabren, & Dunn, 2009). Chambers, Rabren & Dunn, (2009), studied the following questions using the Alabama Post School Transition Survey: Do students with and without disabilities report similar post school outcomes? Do students with and without disabilities report similar post school barriers?

PAGE 25

25 Do students with and without disabilities report similar perceptions of their high school preparation? Surveys were administered to students with and without disabilities who exited high school during the previous school year. The students with disabilit ies group contained 63 % male, 36 % female, and 1 % unknown. The students without disabilities group contained 47 % male, 51% female, and 2 % unknown. The survey consisted of 27 questions pertaining to three major areas: (1) high school programs and experienc es, (2) post school outcomes, and (3) curr ent quality of life indicators. Results showed the five most identified activities for students with disabilities as: spending time with friends, working, watching television, listening to music, and attending chu rch or community activities. Results revealed the five most identified activities of students without disabilities as: spending time with friends, working, studying, doing outdoor activities, and playing sports (Chambers, Rabren, & Dunn, 2009). Results f or both groups reflect common adolescent behaviors. The survey also showed f or students with an d without disabilities there were no significant difference s in the areas for participation in technical school, military, or General Equivalency Degree (GED) t raining. There were also no significant differences between the two groups in the area of employment status. When asked if school had prepared them for employment, 81 % of students with di sabilities, compared to only 63% of students without disabilities s aid that school prepared them to get a job. Over 60% of both groups reported bein g employed when leaving school. One yea r after leaving school, over 70% of both groups reported being employed. When asked what could improve their post school outcomes, st udents indicated that having a better job would improve their post school life in the community (Chambers, Rabren, & Dunn, 2009).

PAGE 26

26 Gender To better understand the differences in outcomes of students, comparisons of students is a valuable process. The issue of gender disproportionality in special education has been a concern for many years (Coutinho & Oswald, 2005). Female students usually have h igher academic performance and school completion rates However, female students outcomes continue to report lo wer wages, less likelihood of employment and job stability (Doren & Benz, 1998, 2001; Harvey, 2003; Valdes et al., 1990; Wagner et al., 1991). There are several disparate outcomes between young males and females in several transition domains, including em ployment (Trainor, 2007). Although several studies report that females with disabilities generally demonstrate higher rates of academic performance and school completion than their male peers with disabilities, post school outcomes include a less likelihoo d of employment, and less job stability (Doren & Benz, 1998, 2001; Harvey, 2003; Valdes et al., 1990; Wagner et al., 1991). Among students receiving special education services, females have less favorable outcomes than males. These outcomes include lower earnings for females and more occupational options for males (Benz, Doren, & Yavanoff, 1998; Doren & Benz, 2001; Lindstrom, Benz, & Doren, 2004; Wagner, Cameto, & Newman, 2003). There are both educational and economic disadvantages that are disproportion ately high among young females with disabilities (Rousso & Wehmeyer, 2001). The rate of employment for men and women with disabilities ages 16 to 64 is 41% and 34 % respectively, according to the U.S. Census Bureau (2004). Limited access and choice keep many females in low paying, traditional occupations (Kerka, 1999, Stephenson & Burge, 1997).

PAGE 27

27 Nationally representative information available through the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) collects information by dis ability, age, and race, not gender, limi ting the available information needed by educators to make comparisons between male and female students (C outinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). This includes the differences in graduation rates (U.S. Department of Education 2002). Young women with disabilities experience less opportunities to participate in employment activities and social activities during high school (Lindstrom, Benz, & Doren, 2004). Career d evelopment may be impacted by gender (Rojewski & Hill,1998; Rojewski & Yang, 1997). Gender roles and societal stereotypes often limit career aspirations of females with disabilities (Betz, 1994). In the transition domain of postsecondary employment, youth with disabilities that become parents during the adolescent years experience more outcomes that ar e negative (Trainor, 2007). One of the findings that favor females over males was the plan to graduate and move on to postsecondary school (Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). Another study by Lindstrom, Benz and Doren (2004) examined the major barriers and facilitators to career choices made by young wom en with learning disabilities. Variables included gender roles, disability, family and childhood experiences, and car eer exploration and counseling. Occupational attainment differences that still remain be tween genders are hours worked, wages, and types of jobs (Marder, Carduoso, & Wagner, 2005; NLTS2, 2005). Compared to males with disabilities, females with disabilities are less likely to work full time (37% vs. 68%). Compared to males with disabilities, females with disabilities are more likely to work part time (63% vs. 33%). Within the special education and lower achieving groups, more

PAGE 28

28 males than females left school with a high school diploma (Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). The National Association of State Directors of Special Education recently conducted a survey of state level data collection related to gender and special education. Gender data were collected by at least 41 states. Data are most often used to report to stakeholders, improve progr ams, conduct monitoring, and report to the public. Half of the states surveyed reported concerns with gender issues (Coutinho & Oswald, 2005). The likelihood of young women with disabilities being employed is less than young men with disabilities and you ng women without disabilities (Li ndstrom, Benz, & Doren, 2004). Of those who are employed, many work in low status occupations, earn lower wages, receive fewer benefits, and are less likely to experience career advancements, such as promotions. In high s chool and the workplace, young women continue to struggle against gender role assumptions, lower family expectations, and disability stereotypes (Lindstrom et al., 2008). When Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, ( 2006) reviewed data collected through the National E ducation Longitudinal Study (NELS) during 1994, they compared students with and without disabilities and gender. The purpose of the study was to determine gender differences within students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Students w ere divided into four groups: special education, low achieving, typically achieving, and gifted and talented. They found that among groups, students with disabilities and students without disabilities, more female students were employed in clerical posi ti ons than males. Male students reported more often to be in skilled or technical positions (Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). However, when looking at the number of months employed, males who had

PAGE 29

29 received special education services or who were lower achiev ing were employed more months than females in the same groups while males and females in the average achieving and gifted and talented groups were employed for the same number of months (Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). In all groups, males reported great er job satisfaction than females and were more likely to have employer provided medical benefits (Coutinho, Oswald, & Best, 2006). District size and l ocation school dist ri ct where the services are provid ed. Some of the first studies looking at school size were conducted i n New York by Kiesling (1968). Later Fowler (1989) expanded the work to look at number of schoo ls within each school district. Educational finance has worked for years to identify the cheapest school size or district size (Fox, 1981). Few of these studies assessed post school outcomes, more often focusing on academics. Average measurements for school size and school district size w ere reported by Jewel l (1989). For school district size, the average was 2,971 students. This number can be misleading when looking at the range in the United States. The District of Columbia with 87,000 students and an average of 271 students in Montana school districts pr ovide a wide range of school district sizes (Jewell, 1989). Florida and Maryland were states with the largest average district size of over 20,000 students. To make clear the differences between states, two measur es were used. The first being a verage di strict size and the second being number of students in districts with over 20,000 students. Very large districts are very likely to have very large schools (Jewell, 1989). District size had a negative relationship with S cholastic A ssessment T est (SAT)

PAGE 30

30 an d A merican C ollege T est (ACT) scores, while smaller school districts sco res were higher (Jewell, 1989). Graduation rates in larger districts with larger schools are lower than smaller d istricts with smaller schools. This is true even when the effects of minority enrollment ar e held constant (Jewell, 1989). Per pupil expendit ures appeared to be unrelated. Research suggest that transition from school to work, postsecondary education, and other postsecondary outcomes are affected by both school and communit y resources (Fairweather, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). Community resources include the availability of employment for students as they exit school (Bellamy, 1985). The Education of All Handicapped Children Act, Public Law 94 192 was passed in 1975. As the first students to have attended public school while this law was in effect began to exit school, public concern about the quality of secondary education and the transition from school to adult life provided to students with disabilities led to amendments a uthorizing new studies and programs (Public Law 98 199) to addres s these concerns (Will, 1984). One of the studies authorized by congress to provide information about students with disabilities was a longitudinal study of special education students from e ach of the 11 federal disabilities categories (Fairwea ther, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). The study consisted of two stages. The first stage of the survey was to identify the services tion from school t o adulthood. The second was to select a sample of special education students and follow them as they entered the post school adult environments. The second stage which looked at student entrance into adult environments was the first to describe district configuration relating

PAGE 31

31 to the provision of transition services to secondary special education students. Results showed that secondary programs that enhanced the transition of students included both transition in school programs such as mainstreaming, voca tional education, and support services as well as non traditional programs designed to assist students with the transition to employment through service agencies and the provision of job placement services (Fairweather, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989; Wehman, 198 3). A surve y of school districts programs that are likely to benefit special education students was developed based on literature review (Bellamy, Rose, Wilson, & Clarke, 1982; Bellamy, 1985; Brown et al., 1981; Brickey, Campbell, & Browning, 1985; Brolin 1972; Bullis & Foss, 1983; Davis, Anderson, Linkowski, Berger, & Feinstein, 1985; Flynn, 1982Halpern, 1985; Hasazi, Gordon, & roe, 1985; Hursh & Price, 1983; Kiernan, 1979; Moss, 1979; Pati & Morrison, 1982; Rusch & Mithaug, 1980; Schneider, Rusch, Hende rson, & Geske, 1981; Vautour, Stocks, & Kolek, 1983; Wehman, 1981; Wehman, Kregel, & Barcus, 1985; Wehman, Moon, & McCarthy, 1986; Wilcox & Bellamy, 1982; Wright, Cooperstein, Grogan Renneker, & Padilla, 1982; Zeller, 1980) The survey address ed the follo wing items: Whether the district provides service s (directly or through another agency) to secondary special education students in each federal disability category. The nature of the education agency responsible for providing services to secondary speci al education students (i.e., the school district itself, another district, a separate special education district or cooperative, or other intermediate agency). The number of secondary special education students served by the district directly or through another agency. The richness or paucity of school based resources available to secondary special education students, including the number of traditional and non traditional programs.

PAGE 32

32 The richness or paucity of community resources available to secondary special education students (e.g., adult serv ices, emplo (Fairweather et al., 1989 p. 420 421 ). Three variables were used to increase the accuracy of estimates: Region District enrollment District/community wealth Of the districts surveyed, 86 % of the very large districts were more likely to have staff whose job w as to help students find a job. This compares to 22 % of very small districts. Regionally, school resources did not vary. Also, district and community wealth did not aff ect school resources (Fairweat her, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). The size of the district is not strongly related to the availability of employment and other services in the community (Fairweat her, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). Community wealth is related to the availability of post school opportunities (Fairweather, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). Reform initiatives are not new to education, with the primary focus being the student and school outcomes (Sipple & Killeen 2004). Not as much attention has been placed on the flow of resources into school districts or the organization of the school d istrict itself until recently. Concerns over cost effectiveness, performance variables and equity have become more important ( Sipple & Killeen 2004). When looking at the c ontexts in which school districts operate, focusing specifically on districts response to state standards in New York, the study looked at: Are the poorest districts devoting more resour ces to the least able students? Does district size or geography re late to how resources are directed toward those students failing to ac hieve the heightened standards? (Sipple & Killeen, 2004 p. 458 ). resources, and leadership at

PAGE 33

33 deliver high quality instruction (Corcoran & Goertz, 1995; Darling Hammond, 1993; School district si ze influences school outcomes. Several studies looking at district size along with school size have accumulated and addressed this issue (Fowler, 1989). Larger school dis tricts report ed providing a greater number and variety of services to students with disabilities (Fairw e at her, Stearns, & Wagner, 1989). Do these programs being available to students impact the student s post school outcomes? It is easy for students to get lost or fall through the cracks in large organizations (Ornstein, 1990). Educational cost per student is higher in smaller and larger schools (McGuire, 1989; Monk, 1987), which are most often found in smaller and larger dist ricts. The efficiency of middle size districts is not well documented. Collecting and comparing d ata from Students With Disabilities and Students Without Disabilities The need for students with disabilities meaningful involvement in the tran sition process is well documented; however the involvement of students with disabilities in the evaluation of the transition plan ning services provi ded to them ha s not been documented. Student s perception of high school preparation has been identified as important to post school outcome research (Kortering & Braziel, 1999). To gain a better understanding of post school outcomes for youth, studying the outcomes of both youth with disabilities and youth without disabilities, males and females, students from different races/ethnic groups and students from districts of different size and located in different regions is needed, allowing a descriptive com parison to be made. Most studies collect input on students from teachers and parents, rather than the students themselves. Thi s process of leaving the student s input out of the evaluation may be

PAGE 34

34 omitting important information available from the student (Agran & Hughes, 2008). received while in high school can provide information on student s perception of being prepared for the future. Student s perceptions can a lso bring deeper meaning lead to a broader understanding of findings and provide a point of comparison to identify areas of concern (Ch ambers, Rabren, & Dunn, 2009). Agran and Hughes (2008) asked students with developmental disabilities about their pa rt icipation in the IEP process. Students were asked if they had received instruction to lead their IEP meetings. This study was the first in which students were asked for input on the instruction they received on how to lead their IEP meetings. Insight on the education received on self determination and IEP meeting participation, from the student, should be invaluable for program evaluation and development Some studies are finding students with and without disa bilities have similar outcomes. In Washingto n state students with learning disabilities at age 10 were followed until the ages o f 21 and 24 to evaluate student s post secondary education, employment, i ncome and receipt of public aid; and involvement in crime compared to a cohort group of students wi thout d isabilities (Seo et al., 2008). Results showed that students with learning disabilities did not have significant differences in outcomes from the cohort without disabilities except in the area of r eceiving public aid at age 21. Even this differenc e was not significant at age 24. Summary Job training and work experience is well documented as having a positive impact on post school outcomes. The requirement to include job training and work experience in the transition planning process is clearly def ined (IDE A, 2004) Still many school

PAGE 35

35 districts do not make job training a nd work experience a priority. This study will gather input from students who are exiting school They will be asked about their satisfaction with the preparation for employment, the job training that has been provided, the w ork experiences they have experienced and th eir current employment status. Comparisons will be made between students with and without disabilities, gender, race/ethnicity, calendar year of data collection di strict size, and district location.

PAGE 36

36 CHAPTER 3 METHOD This chapter presents the methods and procedures used to investigate four questions about students job experiences before and when exiting high school. This c hapter has been divided into five sec tions f or the purpose of presentation. The sections include descriptions of (a) the hypotheses, (b) the subjects and the setting, (c) the resear ch instrument, (d ) the procedur e, and (e ) the experimental design and analysis of data. Hypotheses This study was designed to exami ne (a) several areas of job experience, training and satisfaction that students experienced during high school; specifically, satisfaction with job training while in high school ; (b) participation in work experienc es (c) job training experiences (d) job experiences and (e) employment as they exit school For each of the above c ategories examination was made of the differences and similarities of students with and students without disabilitie s, gender, race/ethnicity, calendar year size of district and location of district The research questions for this study are expressed in null hypotheses that follow. Hypothesis 1 H 1 : There will be no significant difference in student satisfaction with high school preparation for (a) finding a job (b) learning job skills (c) knowing what work they will be good at (d) knowing what kind of job student will be good at comparing disability status, sex, race/ethnicity, calendar year, district size, and district location.

PAGE 37

37 Hypothesis 2 H 2 : There will be no significant difference in students having (a) done babysitting for other families while in high school (b) performed chores for other persons in their neighborhood while in high school (c) volunteered while in high school (d) worked in public govern ment while in high school (e) worked in private business or company while in high school comparing disability status, sex, race/ethnicity, calendar year, district size, and district location. Hypothesis 3 H 3 : There will be no statistically significant diff erence in students having (a) jobs at school as job training experiences (b) jobs in the community as part of school, as job training experiences (c) jobs in the community not as part of school, as job training experiences (d) any j obs as job training expe riences comparing disability status, sex, race/ethnicity, calendar year, district size, and district location. Hypothesis 4 H 4 : There will be no statistically significant difference in (a) students having a job or more jobs as they exit school (b) total ho urs a week that students work as they exit school (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit school (d) students having chosen the jobs they have as they exit school (e) students liking the job they have as they exit school (f) students working at a business that someone in his or her family owns as he or she exit s school comparing disability status, sex, race/ethnicity, calendar year, district size, and district location. Subjects A nd Setting The research study included h igh school st udents who are exiting high school Participants will be ide ntified as male and female, students with disabilities and students

PAGE 38

38 without a disability students from different race/ethnic groups The survey was administered during the 2007, 2008, and 2009 school yea r s School districts in Florida w ere identified for participation based on their student enrollment with an equal representation of Small, S mall/ middle, Middle, Large and Very L arge districts from each of the five different Florida Departme nt of Education sta te re gions. Yearly samples will be balanced with regard to students with and without disabilities, male and female students, district size and region thus representing the state student population as a whole. During the three years of the study data wi ll be collected form all Florida school districts. T he school district transition contacts were contacted through a letter invitin g participation in the survey. The number of students participating in the survey was base d on the size of the district. Sm all size districts were asked to survey all students with disabilities exiting and an equal number of students without disabilities f rom the same school locations. Small /middle, Middle, Large, and V ery L arge size di stricts were asked to survey a percentag e of students with disabilities and an equal number of students without disabilities from the same school locations. Instruments/Data Collection For this study, two Florida High Sch ool Exit Surveys (see Appendix A ) were developed. Surveys were paper pe ncil surveys with one survey for students with disabilities and one survey for students without disabilities. The difference in the surveys were question s for students with disabil ities about the ir involvement in their Individual Educational Plan. For ea ch survey, a list of teache r instructions and checklist were developed and distributed with surveys. Additionally, instructions and a checklist for Florida District Transition Contacts were developed for each participating district (see Appendix A) Long itudinal student surveys from the National Longitudinal

PAGE 39

39 Transitions Study (NLTS) and National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2) and nine states (Alabama, California, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and Washington) (National Center on Secondary Education and Transition & the Transition Coalition, 2003; NPSOC, 2009) were reviewed in preparation for designing the survey instrument. Questions from the reviewed surveys were classified into eight categories: employment, post secondary education and training, daily living, quality of life, agency connections, in school experiences, school work experiences, and transition planning. Questions included in the Florida High School Exit Survey were developed based on the reviewed questions in the state and national surveys. Initially, a pilot survey was conducted an d edits made based on feedback. Survey instruments were developed based on these categories, questio ns, and pilot survey feedback. Two paper pencil surveys were created, one for students with disabilities and one for students without disabilities. The resulting Florida High School Exit Survey has three sections: Demographics and General Student Information (15 questions); High School Experiences (15 questions for students without disabi lities and 22 questions for students with disabilities which included IEP related questions ) ; and The Future ( 6 questi ons ) Procedures The procedures for this exit survey consist of three yearly cycles. The three yearly cycles of surveys where distributed to districts in the second semester of school to be administered to students between February and May. Survey packets w ere mailed to participating Florida District Transition Contacts wit h instructions and a checklist. Each packet contain ed teacher instructions for survey administration, a

PAGE 40

40 teacher checklist, informed consent form for students, and an equal number of the two types of surveys, one for students with disabilities and one for students without disabilities. District Transition Con tacts w ere instructed to distribute the packets to teachers in their di strict for administration. District Transition Contacts w ere asked to choose a representative group of students with different disabilities and students without disabilities from the s ame school environments. The exit survey was administered individually or in groups and generally took 30 to 40 minutes to complete. Accommodations w ere used as needed (i.e., surveys where read to non readers). Study procedures will comply with profess ional research standards and the University of Florida Institutional Review Board (UFIRB) guidelines. For the purpose of this study, only questions focusing on job training experiences while in school and being employed when leaving school will be used. The questions used include : Question 3 : Are you satisfied with your high school education which prepared you for (1) finding a job? (2) Learning job skills? (3) K nowing what work you will be good at? (4) K nowing what kind of job you will be good at? Questi on 10 : Have you done any of the following work during high school? (A) Babysitting for other families (B) Performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood (C) Volunteered (for example: church, community agency job, etc.)(D) Worked in public governme nt (for example: school district, city or county job, etc.)(E) Worked in private business or company.

PAGE 41

41 Question 11 : Have you had any of the following job training experiences? (A ) Jobs at school, (B ) Jobs in the communi ty as part of school classes, (C ) Jobs in the community not part of school classes. Question 12 : (A) Do you have a job now? (B) About how many total hours per week do you work? (C) How much do you make on average per hour? (D) Did you choose your job yourself? (E) Do you like your job? (F) Do you work in a business that someone in your family owns? Experimental Design And Analysis O f Data The design of this study was a paper, pencil survey for high school students as they exit school. The subject pool consist of students throughout the state of Florida that are over the age of 18 and that will be exiting school the semester in which the survey was administered. The subject pool consisted of a representative group of students with a range of disabilities and students without disabilities. Bot h male and female studen ts participated in the survey. Students from each of the five Florida Department of Education regions were included. The regions include: Region 1, Northwest Florida; Region 2, Northeast Florida; Region 3 East Central Florida ; R egion 4, West Central Florida ; Region 5, S outh Florida The districts were identified by size into the five distr ict size classifications used by the Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services : S mall, Small/middl e, Middle, Large, and Very Large ( s ee T able 3 1 ) Descriptive data were compiled and preliminary district yearly, and summary reports genera ted. Initial data analyses consist ed of percentages of students with disabilities and students without disabilities responding to each question for each participating district and for the full (all years) sample. Statistical modeling will be used

PAGE 42

42 to examine each response for differences between students without disabilities a nd students with disabilities. A generaliz ed linear mixed model approach will be used to accommodate possible correlation within districts. Because students differed with regard to sex and race/ethnicity, all models will contain variables for group ( S tudents with D isabilities S tudents Without Di sabilities), sex (Male, F emal e), and race/ethnicity (White, B lack, Hispanic, O ther). This group of variables allows assessment of group differences without the confounding e ffect of sex or race/ethnicity. A p value of less than 0.01 will be considered sta tistically significant, and SAS, version 9.1.3 was used for all analyses. Summary Chapter 3 identified the hypotheses, methods, and procedures used in this study. The purpose was to determine the job training, work experiences, and job experiences of stu dents while in school. The data were collected in the semester that students would be exiting school. Information was collected on survey research that gathered transition information and the Florida High School Exit Survey was developed by a research te am at the University of Florida. The survey utilized a paper pencil and was distributed over a three year period to all school districts in the state of Florida (see Table 3 1). ences. Satisfaction with high school education asked students if they were satisfied with their preparation for finding a job, learning job skills, and knowing what work and job they would be good at. When asked about work they had done while in school, students were asked about babysitting or performing chores for neighbors, volunteering, working in public government or private business or a company. When asked about job training,

PAGE 43

43 students were asked about jobs at school, jobs in the community as part o f school, jobs in the community not as part of school, and if they had any job experience. Finally, students were asked about having a job now, at the exit of school, how many hours per week they were working, how much they were earning per hour, if they had chosen their job, if they liked their job, and if they worked in a business owned by a family member. Those students responding were categorized by gender, disability, race/ethnicity, calendar year, location and size of school district. The results o f the statistical analysis to test the hypotheses will be provided in Chapter 4. Further discussion is provided in Chapter 5.

PAGE 44

44 Table 3 1. Florida r egion s / school d istrict s ize District size Region 1 Northwest Florida Region 2 Northeast Florida Region 3 East Central Florida Region 4 West Central Florida Region 5 South Florida Very Large Duval (2) Orange (3) Hillsborough (2) Pinellas (1) Broward (2) Miami Dade (3) Palm Beach (2) Large Escambia (1) Volusia (2) Brevard (2) Osceola (2) Polk (3) Semino le (3) Lake (3) Manatee (1) Marion (3) Pasco (2) Sarasota (2) Collier (3) Lee (2) Middle Bay (3) Leon (2) Okaloosa (1) Santa Rosa (2) Alachua (3) Clay (1) St. Johns (2) St. Lucie (2) Hernando (1) Small/Middle Jackson (3) Walton (1) Columbia (2) Flagl er (2) Nassau (3) Putnam (1) Highlands (2) Indian River (3) Martin (2) Okeechobee (2) Citrus (2) Sumter (3) Charlotte (2) Hendry (3) Monroe (2) Small Calhoun (3) Franklin (2) Gadsden (3) Gulf (1) Holmes (1) Jefferson (3) Liberty (2) Madison (2) Taylor (3 ) Wakulla (2) Washington (3) Baker (1) Bradford (2) Dixie (3) Gilchrist (2) Hamilton (1) Lafayette (2) Levy (2) Suwannee (3) Union (2) Glades (2) DeSoto (1) Hardee (3)

PAGE 45

45 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Demographic Characteristics O f Participants The students responding to the Florida High School Exit Survey were over the age of eighteen and would be exiting school in the seme ster in which the survey was completed. All students a ttended a Florida Public School. A total of 3 082 students participa ted in the s urvey A complete description is provided in Table 1. Hy pothese s Hypothesis 1 H 1 : There will be no statistically significant difference in student satisfaction with high school preparation for (a) finding a job (b) learning job skills (c) knowing what work they will be good at (d) knowing what kind of job you will be good at. There were significant differences in (a) finding a job : Students with Disabilities and Students Without Disabilities, with Students with D isabilities responding that they were more s atisfied with their high school education preparing them for a job. Over calendar years, 69% of students in 2007 responde d that they were satisfied 59% in 2008, and 65% in 2009 When responding to their satisfaction with their high school education prep aring them for (b) learning job skills, 73% of S tudents with D isabilities responded as being satisfied while 58% of Students without D isabilities responded being satisfied. When asked about satisfaction with their high school education preparing them for (c) knowing what work you will be good at there was significant differences in students with disabilities and students without disabilities, with students with disabilities responding at 70% that they were satisfied with knowing what work they would be go od at while 58% of students without disab ilities were satisfied with knowing what they would be good at.

PAGE 46

46 In the race/ethnicity group, 73% of Black students were satisfied, 60% of Hispanic students 68% of O ther students and 62% of White students. When a sked about satisfaction with their high school education preparing them for (d) knowing what kind of job they would be good at, there were no significant differences found. Table 4 1 summarizes hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 H 2 : There will be no statistica lly significant difference in students having (a) done babysitting for other families w hile in high school (b) p erformed chores for other persons in their ne ighborhood while in high school (c) volunteere d while in high school (d) worked in public governmen t while in high school and (e) worked in private business or company while in high school. There were significant differences in (a) babysitting for ot her families between male, 37%, and female, 75 %, students When asked if they had (b) performed chores for other persons in their neighbo rhood 54% of W hi te students, 45% of students identifying as Other 44% of B lack students and 40% of Hispanic students reported they had. When asked if they (c) volunteered, 72% or Females and 65% of M ale s had volunteere d S tudents with D isabilities reported volunteering 60 %, and S tuden ts without D isabilities, 75 % Students reporting having (d) w orked in public government while in high school varied with Students with D isabilities reporting 29 % and S tu dents without D isa bilities 19 %. When looking at race/ethnicity, 37% of the B lack students 21% of the Hispanic students 21% of White students and 10% of students identifying as Other reported having worked for public government Students in Region 1 reported working for public government at 32%, Region 2, 25 %, Region 3, 23%, Region 4, 21%, and Region 5, 19 % Finally, st udents responding that they had (e) worked in private business or a company included significant differences between

PAGE 47

47 gender with 63% of the males and 55 % of the females. Differences were also significant between S tud ents without D isabilities where students responded at 65 % and 52% of S tudents wi th Disabilities. W hite students reported, 66%, O ther students 58%, Hispanic students 55 %, and B l ack students at 3 9%. There were also differences in calendar years with 63% of students reporting having worked in public government in 2007, 60% in 2008, and 50% in 2009. When looking at regions in the state, 65% in Region 4, 57% in Region 5, 56% in Region 2, 55% i n Region 3 and, 53% in Region 1. Table 4 2 summarizes hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 3 H 3 : There will be no statistically significant difference in students having (a) jobs at sch ool as job training experiences (b) jobs in the community as part of scho ol, as jo b training experiences (c) jobs in the community not as part of school, as job training experiences (d) any jobs as job training experiences. There were significant differences in the areas of (a) jobs at school as job training experiences with Students w ith D isabilities, 37 %, S tud e nts without D isabilities, 18%, Black, 35%, Other, 27%, W hite 25%, Hispanic, 2 3%, (b) jobs in the community as part of schoo l, as job training experiences Students with D isabilities, 39 %, S tud ents witho ut D isabilities, 24 %, (c) j obs in the community not as part of school as job training experiences, S tud ents without D isabilities, 63 %, S tudents with D isabilities, 54 %, O ther, 62 %, W hite, 62 %, B lack 53%, Hispanic, 48 % 2007, 78%, 2008, 74%, 2009, 65 %, R egion 4, 63 %, R egion 3 57 % R egion 1, 56 %, R egion 2, 56 %, R egion 5, 44 %, (d) any jobs as job training experiences 2007, 7 8%, 2008, 74%, 2009, 65 % Table 4 3 summarize s h ypothesis 3.

PAGE 48

48 Hypothesis 4 H 4 : There will be no significant difference in (a) students having a job o r more jobs a s they exit school (b) total hours a week that students work as t hey exit school (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit school (d) having chosen the job s they have as they exit school (e) students liking the jo b they have as they exit schoo l or (f) students working at a business that someone in their family owns as they exit school. There were significant findings in the areas of ; (a) students having a job or more jobs as they exit school with 64% of Students without D isabilities having a job compared to 51% of Students with D isabilities When comparing race 64% of W hite students had a job compared to 46% of the B lack students. Over the calendar years of the survey, 58% of students in both 2007 and 2008 had a job, compared to 64% in 2009 R egion 5 had the highest number of students with a job at 64 %, down to 46% in R egion 2. District size differences ranged from 64% for M iddle size districts to 46% for S mall size districts. Next the study reported (b) total hours a week that students w ork as they exit school Hours worked were broken down into three categories. The first category was 1 20 hours, the second, 21 30 hours and the third, more than 30 hours Results for category one, 1 20 hours were 49% F emale, 42% M ale. Over calendar year, 58% in both 2007 and 2008, 64% in 2009. For the second category of 21 30 hours F emal e and M ale students reported very similar hour s. Females reported 39 % while M ales reported 38%. For calendar years, in 2007, 41% of students reported working 21 3 0 hours 39% in 2008 and 29% in 2009. In the final category, more than 30 hours, M ales more often worked over 30 hours with 20% of the Males reporting and 12% of F emales. For calendar year, there was a steady decrease in the number of st udents working ov er 30 hours, b eginning with 20% in 2007, 15% in 2008 and 14% in 2009

PAGE 49

49 When reporting on (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit school three categories wer e used to divide student wages. The first category of less than $7.00 per hour, the se cond category of $7.00 to $7.99 per hour and the third category of $8.00 or more per hour Findings in the first category showed 26% of F emale s and 20% of M ale s of making less than $7.00 per hour Among race/ethnicity groups, Black students most often made less than $7.00 per hour at 33 %. Over calendar years, there was a steady decrease in the number of students making $7.00 or less, 29% in 2007, 20% in 2008, a nd 18%, 2009. Region 1 had the highest percentage at 36% of students making $7.00 or less an d Region 4 the fewest at 15 %. Small size districts has the largest percentage of students making $7.00 or less 32%, and L arge the fewest at 17 %. F or the next category of earning $7.00 to $7.99 per hour, F emale students were more likely to be found earni ng in this category at 38% c ompared to M ales at 33 %. Among race/ethnicity, 43% of B lack students compared to 33% of W hite students. Over calendar years results ranged from 47% in 2009 to 32% in 2007 Region 2 students reported earnings in this category at 39%, while students in Region 1 reported at 29 %. V ery large districts reported at 4 3%, M iddle size district 36 %, S mall size districts 36 %, S m all/middle, 35 %, and Large at 33 %. In the final category of wages at $8.00 or more per hour 47% of the M ale students compared to 36% of the female students made $8.00 or more. O ther students reported making $8.00 or more 48 %, while B lack students reported making $8.00 or more at only 2 4%. Calendar years varied from 45% in 2008, 39% in 2007, and 35% in 2009. S outh Florida regions had the highest percentage of students making $8.00 or more with 51% in Region 5, 50% in R egion 4, 42% in R egion 3, 35% in R egion 1, and 29% in R egion 2, 29 %. L arge size districts had

PAGE 50

50 the highest percentage of students making $8.00 or more at 50 %, followed by Small/middle districts at 43 %, V ery L arge at 35 %, M iddle size districts at 35 %, and the fewest in S mall districts at 32 %. Students (d) having chosen the job s they have as they exit school had significant findings in only two cate gories. S tud ents without D isabilities reported having chosen their job 92 % o f the time while Students with D isabilities only reported having chosen their job 83 % of the time. W hite students reported having chosen their jobs 91 % or the time, Hispanic stud ents 83 % of the time B lack, 81 % of the time and O ther, 80 % of the time In the areas of (e) s tudent liking the jo b they have as they exit school, there were no co mparisons that were significant. There were also no significant findings of (f) s tudent s w orking at a business that someone in their family owns as they exit school Table 4 4 summarizes hypothesis 4. Summary Chapter 4 will provided the results of the Florida High School Exit Survey questions about satisfaction with job training, work, and specific job information. When asked about satisfaction with high school preparation, Students with D isabil ities were more satisfied than Students without D isabilities. Although not a significant difference, F emales were more satis fied than M ales in ever y area, as were Black students Student in Region 1 and Small size districts were more satisfied in all but one area. There were no significant differences when looking at location or size. When asked about work done during school, some questions prov ide d the results expected with F ema les most often babysitting and M ales doing chores for neighbors. When asked about volunteering, significant differences were found, with Black, F emale Students without D isabilities volunteering more often. Black, F emale, Students with

PAGE 51

51 D isabilities, were more likely to be working for public government, especially in Region 1. Male, White, Student without D isabilities, were much more likely to work for private business, especially in Region 4, with percentages dropping sig nificantly in 2009. Students with D isabilities were twice as likely to have had a job as a part of school, more likely to have a job in the community as a part of school, and more likely to have had any job before exiting school. Students identifying as Ot her were more likely to have had a job in the community not as a part of school and to have had any job before exiting school. Black students were more likely to have had a job at school. A steady decline was reported from 2007 to 2008 and again in 2009, most likely a result of the economic decline. Students in Region 4 were more likely to have had a job in the community not as a part of school. District size was not a factor with significant differences; however, Small/middle districts had the highest percentages in all but one area, jobs at school. In the final question, students without disabilities more often reported having a job now, and more often reported working fewer hours. When asked about choosing your job, there were significant differen ces between Students with and Students without Disabilities, with Students without D isabilities more often choosing their job along with students identifying as White Calendar year 2009 had the highest number of students working 1 to 20 hours per week, the fewest students working 21 to 30 hours and more than 30 hours per week. The year 2009 also had the most students working in public government. Students in Small/ rural districts most often reported liking their job and choosing their job. These results show many differences in job training and work experiences for students in Florida. The purpose of collecting and analyzing the s e data

PAGE 52

52 has been to provide information to those involved in transition program development and program improvement. Many addit ional variables not reported may be impacting these results.

PAGE 53

53 Table 4 1. Question 3 Male Female Students without disabilities Students with disabilities Black Hispanic Other White Are you satisfied with your high school education which prepared you for 1. finding a job? 62.54 64.09 57.36* 69.23* 69.31 59.63 58.72 62.60 2. learning job skills? 64.72 67.17 58.01* 72.12* 71.84 58.75 63.91 64.31 3. knowing what work you will be good at? 62.80 65.27 57.76* 70.31* 72.51* 59.90* 67.65* 62.22* 4. kn owing what kind of job you will be good at? 66.16 68.32 61.79* 72.37* 73.25 65.89 71.68 65.18 p < .0001

PAGE 54

54 Table 4 1. Question 3 continued 2007 2008 2009 Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Are you satisfied with your high school educat ion which prepared you for 1. finding a job? 69.08* 59.11* 65.12* 67.79 63.60 61.43 62.29 60.38 2. learning job skills? 68.99 62.13 66.11 68.66 67.04 67.15 61.89 61.73 3. knowing what work you will be good at? 66.98 60.43 68.32 67.55 65.19 64.44 63.27 51.25 4. knowing what kind of job you will be good at? 67.51 64.46 72.68 68.69 68.34 70.38 64.92 62.66 p < .0001

PAGE 55

55 Tab le 4 1. Question 3 c ontinued Very Large Large Middle Small/Middle Small Are you satisfied with your high school education whi ch prepared you for 1. finding a job? 64.80 63.71 63.75 59.42 63.76 2. learning job skills? 62.70 65.49 65.92 63.30 66.82 3. knowing what work you will be good at? 63.91 64.87 64.68 58.80 66.59 4. knowing what kind of job you will be good at? 66.20 67. 57 67.97 62.74 70.35 p < .0001

PAGE 56

56 Table 4 2 Question 10 Male Female Students without disabilities Students with disabilities Black Hispanic Other White Have you done any of the following work during high school? A. Babysitting for oth er families 36.95 74.98 58.49 51.62 57.91 50.28 48.82 56.00 B. Performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood 52.99 45.72 51.90 46.92 43.81 40.00 44.91 53.56* C. Volunteered 65.03 71.88 75.3 9* 60.48 67.32 60.50 65.88 70.34 D. Worked in p ublic government 22.73 24.36 18.81 29.0 0* 37.04* 21.11* 10.43* 21.10* E. Worked in private business or company 63.10* 54.99 64.89 52.37 38.89* 54.70* 57.56* 65.89* p < .0001

PAGE 57

57 Table 4 2 Question 10 continued 2007 2008 2009 Region 1 Region 2 R egion 3 Region 4 Region 5 Have you done any of the following work during high school? A. Babysitting for other families 55.39 57.79 48.42 51.78 53.32 59.75 57.66 42.76 B. Performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood 49.69 51.21 45. 15 51.80 52.19 48.59 48.60 40.94 C. Volunteered 63.31 71.65 66.96 66.83 67.67 73.67 67.79 66.67 D. Worked in public government 24.69 22.36 25.13 31.97* 24.97* 23.14* 20.52* 19.46* E. Worked in private business or company 62.79* 60.30* 49.91* 53.25* 55.91* 54.5 2* 64.51* 57.05* p < .0001

PAGE 58

58 Table 4 2 Question 10 continued Very Large Large Middle Small/Middle Small Have you done any of the following work during high school? A. Babysitting for other families 51.17 57.92 50.88 56.63 56.37 B. Performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood 42.25 48.80 48.89 52.35 57.53 C. Volunteered 64.33 69.61 65.50 71.08 69.71 D. Worked in public government 21.79 22.88 22.05 22.04 30.81 E. Worked in private business or company 52.99 59.83 60.99 64.02 55.15 p < .0001

PAGE 59

59 Table 4 3. Question 11 Male Female Students without disabilities Students with disabilities Black Hispanic Other White Have you had any of the following job training experiences ? 5. Jobs at school 25.49 28.06 17.77* 36.72* 34. 62* 22.93* 26.79* 24.90* 6. Jobs in community as part of school 29.65 32.73 24.05* 38.70* 34.91 29.09 28.57 30.48 7. Job in community not as part of school 58.33 59.33 63.27* 53.55* 53.22* 47.63* 62.42* 62.35* 8. Any job 71.88 75.14 71.64 74.93 73.56 63.99 77.1 4 74.82 p < .0001

PAGE 60

60 Table 4 3 Question 11 continued 2007 2008 2009 Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Have you had any of the following job training experiences ? 1. Jobs at school 30.57 25.05 25.53 31.55 28.36 30.30 22.92 25.33 2. Jobs in community as part of school 34.70 28.26 32.98 32.14 30.11 30.71 31.27 31.33 3. Job in community not as part of school 60.95* 60.85* 49.55* 56.47* 56.46* 56.52* 63.48* 43.54* 4. Any job 78.03* 73.79* 64.97* 75.94 71.20 71.60 75.52 62.96 p < 0001 Tab le 4 3 Question 11 continued Very Large Large Middle Small/Middle Small Have you had any of the following job training experiences ? 1. Jobs at school 30.79 24.76 25.76 30.04 24.01 2. Jobs in community as part of school 31.91 32.18 29.0 0 34.23 25.37 3. Job in community not as part of school 51.19 60.40 59.87 63.02 56.31 4. Any job 69.76 74.75 73.62 76.86 68.60 p < .0001

PAGE 61

61 Table 4 4 Question 12 Male Female Students without disabilities Students with disabilities Black Hispanic Other White A. Do you have a job or more jobs now ? 57.89 57.67 63.88* 51.43* 45.76* 48.21* 54.02* 63.73* B. About how many total hours a week do you work? a. 1 20 42.44* 49.02* 47.01 43.27 42.18 42.17 53.61 45.83 b. 21 30 37.64* 38.54* 38.10 38.24 39.46 37.19 38.14 38.00 c. More than 30 19.92* 12.44* 14.89 18.49 18.37 20.10 8.25 16.17 C. How much do you make on average per hour? 1. Less than $7.00 19.98* 26.05* 20.20 26.11 33.45* 20.21* 16.84* 21.07* 2. $7.00 to $7.99 32.80* 38.0 2* 34.98 36.55 42.70* 39.36* 34.74* 33.25* A. $8.00 or more 47.22* 35.93* 44.83 37.34 23.84* 40.43* 48.42* 45.68* D. Did you choose your job yourself? 87.22 89.09 92.16* 82.82* 80.60* 83.08* 79.57* 91.42* E. Do you like your job? 78.20 82.93 80.35 80.02 76.27 75 .88 72.16 82.50 F. Do you work in a business that someone in your family owns? 17.43 11.96 13.80 16.54 16.22 14.95 19.59 14.22 p < .0001

PAGE 62

62 Table 4 4 Question 12 continued 2007 2008 2009 Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 A. Do you have a job or more jobs now ? 57.89 57.67 63.88* 51.43* 45.76* 48.21* 54.02* 63.73* B. About how many total hours a week do you work? a. 1 20 39.01* 45.54* 56.86* 50.00 42.64 54.55 41.87 51.81 b. 21 30 40.96* 39.24* 29.43* 31.15 40.22 31.62 42.25 28.92 c. More than 30 20.04* 15.22* 13.71* 18.85 17.14 13.83 15.88 19.28 C. How much do you make on average per hour? a. Less than $7.00 28.85* 20.49* 18.15* 35.90* 31.71* 19.50* 15.30* 15.58* b. $7.00 to $7.99 32.44* 34.18* 46.98* 28.63* 39 .47* 38.17* 34.96* 33.77* c. $8.00 or more 38.71* 45.33* 34.88* 35.47* 28.82* 42.32* 49.74* 50.65* D. Did you choose your job yourself? 90.70 88.61 81.19 87.03 88.43 84.27 89.45 86.25 E. Do you like your job? 83.16 79.50 76.90 86.36 79.87 78.43 79.47 76.54 F. Do y ou work in a business that someone in your family owns? 13.51 14.48 19.45 16.74 13.29 16.60 15.16 13.33 p < .0001

PAGE 63

63 Table 4 4 Question 12 continued Very Large Large Middle Small/Middle Small A. Do you have a job or more jobs now ? 57.89* 57.67* 63.88 51.43* 45.76* B. About how many total hours a week do you work? a. 1 20 44.56 42.17 46.31 51.41 44.68 b. 21 30 39.30 39.62 38.59 35.42 35.74 c. More than 30 16.14 17.67 15.10 13.17 19.57 C. How much do you make on average per hour? a. Less t han $7.00 22.43* 17.31* 28.96* 22.08* 31.62* b. $7.00 to $7.99 42.65* 32.69* 36.35* 35.06* 35.90* c. $8.00 or more 34.93* 50.00* 34.68* 42.86* 32.48* D. Did you choose your job yourself? 86.51 88.29 87.29 87.67 90.38 E. Do you like your job? 79.58 80.26 81.31 78.6 8 81.47 F. Do you work in a business that someone in your family owns? 14.03 14.88 12.29 18.15 15.81 p < .0001

PAGE 64

64 Table 4 5. Demographic characteristics Gender Disability Calendar year Male 1,644 53.34% Students with Disabilities 1,569 49.54% 2007 900 28.42% Female 1,438 46.66% Students without Disabilities 1,598 50.46% 2008 1620 51.15% 2009 647 20.43% Total 3,082 100% 3,167 100% 3,167 100% Table 4 5 Demographic characteristics continued Race/ethnicity District size District Locatio n Black 616 19.91% Very large 534 16.86% Region 1 444 14.02% Hispanic 400 12.93% Large 1,141 36.03% Region 2 830 26.21% Other 178 5.75% Middle 514 16.23% Region 3 433 13.67% White 1900 61.41% Middle/small 538 16.99% Region 4 1,286 40.61% Small 440 13.89% Region 5 174 5.49% Total 3,094 100% 3,157 100% 57 100%

PAGE 65

65 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION Findings and implications of the presen t investigation of high school education preparation for a job work experience, training experiences, and job information when exiting school are discussed in this chapter The research question s of this study were as follow : ( 1 ) Are you satisfied with your high school education which prepared you for finding a job, learning job skil ls, knowing what work you will be good at, and knowing what kind of job you will be good at? (2) Have you done any of the following work during high school; babysitting for other families, performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood, volunteer ed, worked in public government, or worked in private business or company? (3) Have you had any of the fol lowing job training experiences: jobs at school, jobs in community as part of school, jobs in community not as part of school, or any job? (4) Do yo u have a job or jobs now? About how many hours a week do you work? How much do you make on average per hour? Did you choose your job yourself? Do you like your job? Do you work in a business that someone in your family owns? Variables considered for e ach question were gender, disability, race/ethnicity, year, location, and size of district. Hypothesis 1 H ypothesis 1 stated that there wou l d be no statistically significant difference in student satisfaction with high school preparation for (a) finding a job (b) learning job skills (c) knowing what work they will be good at and (d) knowing what kind of job you will be good at. There were significance di fferences in all areas of this hypothesis between stud ents with and Students without D isabilities. I n each area Students with D isabilities responded more positively than Students without D isabilities. Another area

PAGE 66

66 of significance showed that Black students felt most prepared for knowing the job they would be good at. Part one of hypothesis 1 asked stu dents their satisfaction with high school preparation for (a) finding a job. Students with Disabilities responded that they were more satisfied responding at a rate of 69 %, than S tud ents without D isabilities, responding at a rate of 57 % This difference in responses may be a result o f the supports in many districts to help students with disabilities with finding employment a requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Edu cation Improvement Act (IDEA) 2004 There were also significant differences w hen looking at data from different yea rs. S tudent in 2007 responded with the highest level of sat isfaction, 69%, decreasing in 2008 to 59 % and in creasing 2009 to 65 % This difference may be a result of the economic downslide that began during this time. When responding to their satisfaction with their high school education preparing the m for (b) learning job skills, Students with D isabilities responded more positively at a rate of 72 % while S tudents with out D isabilities responded at a rate of 58 %. Thi s difference may be a result of the transition planning requirement to focus on post school employment. When asked about satisfaction with their high school education preparing them for (c) knowing what work you will be good at, there was significant diff erences in Students with Disabilities and S tude nts without D isabil ities. S tude nts with D isabilities responded that they were more satisfied with knowing what work they would be good at responding at 70 % than S tuden ts without D isabilities who responded at 58 %. In the area of r ace/ethni city, 73 % of B lack students responded that they knew what they would be good at. St udents identifying as O ther responded at 68 %, White students 62% and Hispanic students at

PAGE 67

67 6 0%. When asked about satisfaction with their hig h school education preparing them for (d) knowing what kind of job they would be good at, the only area with statistically significant findings was 72 % for Students with D isabilities who responded that they knew what job they would be good at compared to 62 % for Students without D isabilities Overall when looking at hypothesis 1 differences between students with disabi lities and students without disabilities were s ignificant in each area of satisfaction with high sc hool preparation at (a) finding a job (b) learning job skills (c) knowing what work they will be good at and (d) knowing what kind of job you will be good at. In each case, students with disabilities more often responded that they were satisfied with their high school education. Although n ot statistically significant, the categories with the highest percen tage of for each question were F emale and Black students. There were no findings with significance in the areas of district s size and districts location for this question however, in thre e areas Region 1 had the highest percentage of s atisfaction and in three areas S mall districts had the highest percentage of satisfaction. With this information we could make the assumption that Female Students with Disabilities who are B lack a nd live in a S mall district in R egion 1 are most satisfied with their high school education having prepared them for work. Ta ble 4 1 summarizes hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 H ypothesis 2 stated that t he re would be no statistically significant difference in students hav ing (a) done babysitting for other families while in high school (b) performed chores for other persons in their neighborhood while in high school (c) volunteered while in high school (d) worked in public government while in high school and (e) worked in private business or company while in high school. There were

PAGE 68

68 statistically significant differences in (a) babysitting for ot her families between M ale, 37%, and F emale, 75%. The large n umber of female responses may reflect the traditional practice of f emales caring for young er children. The data also show a large number of M ale students having done babysitting for other families. When looking at students having (b) performed chores for other pe rsons in their neighborhood, 54 % of the W hite students res ponded that they had performed chores for other families, 45 % of students identifying as Other 44 % of the B lack students and 40 % Hispanic students Although not significant, M ale students living in Regions 1 and 2 S mall districts had the highest respons es to having done chores for their neighbors This finding may be a reflection of the practice in more rural areas of adolescent males doing chores for neighbors. When asked if they had (c) volunteered, 72 % of F emales and 65 % of M ale s responded that they had volunteered. Anoth er area of significance was between S tu dents with D isabilities who responded at a rate of 60 % and Students without D isabilities who volunteered at a rate of 75 %. Although not significant, findings in R egion 3 and districts that are Small/middle and S mall had the highest percentage of students volunteering. Another area without findings of significance was race/ethnicity; however, students who are Hispanic were the lea s t likely to volunteer. When questioned if they had (d) worked in public government, 29 % of the Students with D isabilities responded while 19 % Students without D isabilities responded that they had worked in public government There was also a significant difference between race/ethnicity groups with 37 % of the B lack s tudents responding that they h ad worked in public government. This was finding considerably more than t he 21 % of

PAGE 69

69 Hispanic students 21 % of White students, an d 10 % of O ther students. Another significant difference was between regions. Students in Region 1 had worked in public government the most with a response of 32 %, followed by Region 2 at 25 %, Region 3 at 23 %, Region 4 at 21 %, and the fewest in Region 5 at 19%. This difference in working in public government may be due to the large number of Small an d S mal l/medium districts in Region1. Small and S mall/medium school districts would have smaller county government structures that might be more wel coming to students having work experiences in county government One question with several areas of signific ant findings was if the student had (e) worked in a private business or company. When looking at gender, 63 % of the M ales responded while 55 % of F emales responded. S tudents without D isabilities responded that they more often worked in private business, 6 5 % while Students with D isabilities responding 52%. Significant findings between race/gender showed W hite students at 66 %, O ther students at 58 %, Hispanic students at 55 % and significantly fewer B lack students at 39%. Each year of data collection declin ed starting with 2007 at 63 %, decreasing in 2008 to 60%, and again in 2009 to 50%. This difference may have been tied to the economy and the increase in the overall yearly unemployment rate in Florida. Another statistically sign ificant and interesting fi nding show s the southern regions of the state having a greater number of students working in a private business es or companies In R egion 4 the percentage of students working in a private business or company was 65 %, in Region 5, 57 %, in Region 2, 56 %, in Region 3, 55 % and in Region 1, 53 %. This finding may reflect the greater number of jobs and businesses in the southern region s Table 4 2 summarizes hypothesis 2.

PAGE 70

70 Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 3 stated that t here will be no statistically significant differenc e in students having (a) jobs at school as job training experiences (b) jobs in the community as part of school, as job training experiences (c) jobs in the community not as part of school, as job training experiences and (d) any jobs as job training ex periences. Findings showed t here was significance in the areas of (a) jobs at school as job training experiences with S tudents w ith D isabilities, 37 %, and S tudent s without D isabilities, 18%. This finding may be a result of the many on the job training pr ograms within transition programs for students with disabilities in school districts throughout Florida Another area with significant findings was race/ethnicity with B lack students having had a job as job training at school 35 %, which is significantly more than students identifying as Other 27 %, W hite students 25 %, and Hispanic students, 2 3%. This finding correlate s to the finding in Hypo thesis 2 where students who were B lack were least likely to have a job in a private business or company In both areas, Hispanic students participat ed les s. There were s ignificant findings when asked about (b) jobs in the community as part of school, as job training experiences Only 39 % of Students with D isabilities responded while even fewer, 24 % of S tudent s wit hout D isabilities reported having a job in the community as part of school. Although not significant in differences betwe en school districts the lowest percentage responses to jobs in the community as part of sc hool were in small districts. This may be due to the limited number of jobs outside of schoo l available in small districts. Another interesting find ing was the minimal difference in location between all five regions which ranged from 30% to 32 %.

PAGE 71

71 When asked about (c) jobs in the community not as part of schoo l, as job training experiences, Students without D isabilities responded at a rate of 63 %, while S tu de nts with Disabilities responded at a rate of 54 %. When looking at differences in race/ethnicity, students identifying as O ther reported worki ng at 62 %, followed by W hite students at 62 %, B lack students at 53 %, and Hispanic students at 48%. Here again Hispanic students are reporting working less than other race/ethnic groups. When looking at data over three years, in 2007 students reported ha ving had a job in the community, not as a part of school 78 %, decreasing in 2008 to 74 % and a gain decreasing in 2009 to 65%. This decline may be directly tied to the economic decline during this time. Significant differences were found between regions i n the state. When asked about having jobs in the community not as a part of school, 63 % of the s tudents in Region 4 responded positively while i n Region 3, 57 % of the students 56 % of the students in Region 1, 56 % of the students in R eg ion 2 and 4 4% in R egion 5. These results would support the findings in hypothesis 2 where students in Region 4 were more likely to have worked in a private bus iness or company during school. Although not significant, student s in Very L arge districts were the least likely to have had a job in the community n ot as part of school when compared to other size districts. Only one are a with statistical significance was found when asked about having (d) any j o bs as job training experiences. Students in 2007 responded at 78 %, few er students in 2008 responded at 74 %, and decreasing once again students in 2009 responded at 65 %. Although not significant, students the most likely to have had any job while in school were F emale Students w ith D isabilities, identifying as Other race/et hnic group, living in Region s 1 in a S mall/middle size school district Overall,

PAGE 72

72 Students with D isabilities more often responded to having ; (a) jobs at school as job training experiences (b) jobs in the community as part of school, as job training experi ences (c) jobs in the community not as part of school, as job training experiences, and although not significant, responded more often to having had (d) any job as job training experience. Table 4 3 summarizes hypothesis 3. Hypothesis 4 Hypothesis 4 stat es that t here will be no statistically significant difference in (a) students having a job or more jobs; (b) the total hours a week that s tudents work; (c) wages per hour earned ; (d) having chosen the jo bs they have; (e) students liking the j ob they have; and (f) students working at a business that someone in their family owns as they exit schoo l. T here was significance in the areas of (a) students having a job o r more jobs as they exit school. Results showed 64 % of Students without D isabilities responde d that they had a job compared to 51 % of Students with D isabilities reported having a job Differences between race/ethnicity showed 64 % of students who are W hite hav ing a job when exiting school 54 % of stud ents identifying as Other, 48 % of Hispanic stud ents and 4 6% of B lack students. Over the three years of data collection there were statistically significant findings with 64 % of student s in 2009 repor ting having a job declining to 58 % in 2007 and again to 58 % in 2008 Students in R egion 5 reported having a job when e xiting school at a rate of 64 %, followed by Regio n 4 at 54%, Region 1 at 51 %, Region 3 at 48 %, and the fewest in Region 2 at 46%. Among different size school districts, students in M iddle size districts reported being employed when leav ing school at 64 %, those in Very L arge, 58 %, student in L arge, 58 %, S mall /middle, 51 %, and students in S mall districts 4 6%. The only category without

PAGE 73

73 significant differences for t his hypothesis was gender with M ales reporting having a job at the rate of 58% and F emales reporting at 58 % the closest results of this study. One of the defining characteristics of employment and often unreported characteristic is the n umber of hours worked per week. When asked the (b) total hours a week that students work as they exit school, those reporting between 1 20 hours, with significant differences, were 49 % of F emale s and 42 % of M ale s. Over the years of collecting data 64 % reported working 1 20 hours per week in 2009 58 % in 2007 and 58 % in 2008 The next category of hours worked looked at s tudents reporting working 21 30 hours per week. Results showed 39 % of F emale and 38 % of M ale students worked between 21 to 30 hours per week When looking at data over years 41 % in 2007 39 % in 2008 and 29 % in 2009. When l ooking at students working more than 30 hours per week 2 0 % of M ale students reported, compared to12 % of F emale students. Over school years of data collection 20 % of students in 2007 reported working more than 30 hours 15 % in 2008, and 14 % in 2009. The year 2009 had the fewest numbers of students working 21 30 and 30 hours or more. This may be a result of the economic recession during that period of time. The data also shows that females more often worked a fewer number of hours per week and males wor ked a greater number of hours per week. The (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit school is a critical factor in determining the quality of l ife a student will experience. Three categories were The first category f or amount of pay for students was less than $7.00 per hour There were significant findings in the category of gender with F emale students reporting making $7.00 or less at 26 %, and

PAGE 74

74 M ale students reporting at 20 %. Students who are B lack reported most often making $7.00 or less at 33%, those who are White, 21 %, Hispanic students 20 %, and those reporting as O ther at a rate of 17 %. When looking at the year of reporting, in 2 007, 29 %, in 2008, 20 %, and in 2009 18 %. Between region s, 3 6 % of stud ents in R egion 1 reported making $7.00 or less, 32 % or students in R egion 2, 2 0% in R egion 3, 16 % in R egion 5, and 15 % in R egion 4. When looking at students earning $7.00 or less, by district size 3 2% of students in S mall districts 29 % in M idd le size districts 22 % in Very L arge districts 22 % in S mall/middle districts and 17 % in L arge districts $7.00 to $7.99 per hour, F emale students reported earning $7.00 to $7.99 per hour 38 % or the time while M ale students reported earni ng $7.00 to $7.99 per hour 33% of the time. Wages at $7.00 to $7.99 were reported by s tudents who are B lack, 43 %, Hispanic students, 39 %, stud ents identifying as Other, 35 %, and W hite students, 33%. Over the three y ears of collection, students in 2009 reported $7.00 to $7.99 at a rate of 47 %, while in 2008 it was 34% and in 2007, 32%. Among regions, students in R egion 2 reported making $7.00 to $7.99, 39 %, student in R egion 3, 38 %, students in R egion 4, 35 %, studen ts in R egion 5, 34 %, an d students in R egion 1, 29%. When looking at size, students in Very L arge district reported making $7.00 to $7.99, 43%, M iddle, 36 %, Small, 36%, Small/middle, 35%, L arge, 33 %. The largest rate of pay per hour for students $8.00 or more found 47 % of male students compared to 36 % of the female students making $8.00 or more per hour. Among race/ethnicity, students identifying themselves as Other responded at 48 %, W h ite students at 46%, Hispanic students at 40 %, Black students at 24 % r eported

PAGE 75

75 making $8.00 or more. Over years of data collection, the year with the greatest number of students making $8.00 or more per hour was 2008 at 45%. In 2007 39 % reported making over $8.00 and in 2009, 35 % reported making over $8.00 The pattern of the 2009 school year having the lowest rate of pay held consistent for all pay categories. Results showed 51 % of student in R egion 5 just over 50 % of students in R egion 4 42 % in R egion 3, at falling again to 35 % in R egion 1, and the fewest students mak ing $8.00 or more per hour being 29 % in Region 2 When looking at significant differences in district size, L arge districts had 50 % or their students making $8.00 or more per hour S mall/middle districts 43 %, Very L arge districts 35 %, M iddle size district s 35 %, and S mall districts 32 %. Although n ot statistically significant in the findings 45 % of Students without D isabilities reported making $8.00 or more while 37 % of Student with D isabilities reported making $8.00 or more per hour. Taking a look at all categories showed that Male Students without D isabilities, identifying as Other in the race/ethnicity category, in 2008, living in Region 5, in a L arge size district were making the most per hour The largest percentage of s tudents reporting making the w ages in the lowest category were Female Students with D isabilities, identifyin g as Black, in 2007, in Region 1 living in a S mall district. The largest percentage of students reporting making the wages in the highest category were male students without di sabilities, identifying as Other, in 2008, in Region 5 living in a L arge district. An important part of adult lif own choices. When asked if they have (d) chosen the jobs they have as they exit school, 92 % of Students without D isabilitie s reported having chosen the job they have while 83 % of S tudents wi th D isabilities reported having chosen the job they have. In the race/ethnicity groups, 91 %

PAGE 76

76 of s tudents that were White reported having chosen their job followed by Hispanic students 83 % B lack students 81 %, and O ther students, 80 %. Although not signif icant, F ema le students, in Region 4, in a S mall size districts, during the 2007 school year were more likely to have chosen the job they have as they exit school. When asked about (e) stud ents liking the job they have as they exit school, where there were no findings that were significant. Results did s how however that F emale White students living in Region 1, in a S mall district in 2007, were more likely to like their job The differe nce between S tudents with Disabilities and Students with out D isabilities was less than one percentage point. When looking at (f) students working at a business that someone in their f amily owns as they exit school, there were no comparisons that were stat istically significant. However, those most likely to work at a business that someone in their family owns were M ale, with a disab ility, in the Other category of race/ethnicity, in Region 1 in a S mall/middle district. Across years, 19 % of students worked in a business that someone in t heir family owned in 2009, 14% in 2008 and 14 % in 2007 Ove rall, Students with D isabilities reported (a) having a job or more jobs as they exit school and (d) having chosen the jobs they have as they exit school This findi ng may be a result of school dis tricts focus on employment for Students with D isabilities and the Florida requirement that students receive self determination training to support students making their own choices. Characteristics with Significan t Differenc es Four hypotheses were developed focusing on student satisfaction, job training, and work experience. To evaluate each hypothesis, the study compared student s using individual characteristics year s of collection, and district characteristics. The follo wing

PAGE 77

77 is a summary of findings in the areas of gender, disability, race/ethnicity, year, district location, and district size. Gender Extensive research has substantiated the fact that there are differences in education experiences and outcomes between Male and F emale students There were significant differences in certain questions within hypothesis 2. When students were asked have you done (a) babysitting for other families 37 % of the M al e student and 75 % of the F emale students said that they had. When asked if they had (c) volunteered, 72 % of the F emale s tudents said they had compared to 65 % of the M ale students. When asked if they had (e) worked in private business or company, 63 % of the M ales and 55 % of the F emales said they worked i n a private busi ness or company Hypothesis 4 also contained areas where gender differen ces were significant in the (b) total hours a week that st udents work as they exit school 49 % of F emales, and 42 % of M ale said they worked 1 20 hours per week. Between 21 30 hours pe r week 39 % F emales compared to 38 % M ales. Over 30 hours worked per week 2 0 % of the M ale s tudents responded they did and 12 % of the F emale s tudents These results show Females working fewer hours and M ales more hours per week. Another area with signific ant differences in responses was (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit school Those earning less th an $7.00 per hour included 26 % of the F emale students and 20 % of the M ale students. Those earning $7.00 to $7.99 per hour included 38 % of the F emale students and 33 % of the M ale students. Those earning $8.00 or more per hour included 47 % of the M ale students and 36 % of the F emale students. These results show more M ale students in the higher wage category.

PAGE 78

78 Although not statistically significan t, F emales were more satisfied with finding a job, learning job skills, knowing what work they would be good at and knowing what job they would be good at. They were more likely to work in public government and less likely to do chores for other persons i n their neighborhood. Females were more often found having had the following job training experiences of jobs at school, jobs in the community as part of school, jobs in the community not as part of school and having any job. F emales more often reported choosing th eir job, and liking their job. Males reported having a job when exiting school only 0.22% m ore than F emales at exit. Males were more likely to work in a business that someone in their family owned. Disability Within hypothesis 1 t here were sev eral area s with significant di fference s in (a) finding a job between Students with D isabili ties and S tu dents without D isabilities. S tud ents with D isabilities responded that they were more satisfied 69 %, than S tud ents without D isabilities, 57 %. When resp onding to their satisfaction with their high school education preparing them for (b) learning job skills, 73 % of Students with D isabilities responded while 58 % of S tudents without D isabilities responded positively When asked about satisfaction with their high school education preparing them for (c) knowing what work you will be good at, there was significa nce with Students with D isabilities responding that they were more satisfied 70 % with knowing what work they would be good at than Students without D i sabilities at 58 %. When asked about satisfaction with (d) knowing what kind of job they would be good at, 72 % of Students with D isabilities were satisfied in comparison to 62 % of Students without D isabilities All of these results show Students with D isa bilities reporting being more satisfied with their high school preparation for jobs in the future. This may reflect the transition planning focus on

PAGE 79

79 employment and students having post secondary goals for employment after high school. There we re significa nt differences in hypothesis 2 also. When asked if they had (c) volunteered, 60 % of the students with disabilities responded they volunteered while 75 % of the Students without D isabilities responded that they volunteered. When asked if they had (d) work ed in publi c government 29 % of S tudents wi th D isabilities while only 19 % of S tudents without D isabilities h ad worked in public government. When asked if they had (e) worked in private business or company 65 % of Students without D isabilities responded th at they had while 52 % of the S tud ents with D isabilities responded that they had. These findings may lead transition planners to look at all ca reer options for Students with D isabili ties and increase the focus of Students with D isabilities being involved i n volunteer activities that are typical for high school students without disabilities. Hypothesis 3 had significant findings f or Students with D isabilities. When asked about (a) jobs at school as job training experiences 37 % of Students with D isabilities compared to 18 % for Students without D isabilities When asked about (b) jobs in the community as part of school, as job training experiences 39 % of Students with D isabilities reported having had a job compared to 24 % of Students without D isabilities. When asked about (c) jobs in the community not as part of school, as job training experiences, 63 % of the Students without D isabilities responded more often than the 54 % of S tud e nts with D isabilities. These findings reflect the job training services prov ided to S tudents with D isabilities but also reflect t he large number of students who are not having job training experiences while in school.

PAGE 80

80 Hypothesis 4 had significant finding in two areas, both with findings that favored Students without D isabilities. T he first area was (a) students having a job o r mor e jobs as they exit school, where 64 % of Students without D isabilities reported having a job while 51 % of the S tud ents with D isabilities reported having a job. When asked if they had (d) chosen the job they have as they exit school, 92 % of the Students without D isabilities responded the y had chosen their job and 83 % of S tudent s with D isa bilities responded they had chosen the job they had. The first of these two areas of significance reflects the overall employment rate of people with disabilities lagging behind the general population and should continue to be an area of improved outcomes The s econd finding of Students with D isabilities having chosen their job le ss often than Students without D isabilitie s ma y reflect the practice of professionals and family members making choices for Students with D isabilities and not allowing them to make their own choices. This supports the continued need for students with disabilities to receive self determination tra ining. Race/Ethnicity When focused on satisfaction with their h igh school education preparation. Significance was found in only the question that asked students about their high school education having pre pared them for (c) knowing what work you will be good at Responses showed 73 % of the Black students know ing what they would be good at, 68 % of the Other students, 62 % of White students and 6 0% of the Hispanic students Although not statistically signific ant, Black students responded most often that they were satisfied with their high school education preparing them for (a) finding a job, (b) learning job skills, and (d) knowing what kind of job they would be good at.

PAGE 81

81 Hypothesis 2 had significant differenc es in work done during high school for responses to (b) performed chores for other pers ons in their neighbo rhood with White students, 54%, Other students, 45 %, B lack, 44%, and Hispanic, 40 % When asked if they had (d) worked in public government findings were 37 % of B lack students 21 % of Hispanic students 21 % of White students and 10 % of Other students. When asked if they had (e) worked in private busin ess or company, 66 % of W hite students said they had 58 % of O ther student s 55 % of Hi spanic students and 39 % of B lack students. Although not statistically significant, Black students were more likely to babysit for other families. White students were more likely to volunteer. Hypothesis 3 found significant responses in the areas of (a) jobs at scho ol a s job training experiences where findings were 35 % of B lack students 27 % of O ther, 25 % of W hite students and 2 3% of Hispanic students. When asked about having had (c) jobs in the commu nity not as part of school responses showed 62 % of O ther students 62 % of White students, 53 % of B lack students and 48 % of Hispanic students. Although not statistically significant, students who were Black were most likely to have had a job in the community as part of school as a job t raining experience. Students identify ing as Other were the most likely to have had any job. Hispanic students were the least likely to have had jobs at school, jobs in the community not as a part of school, or any job. For hypothesis 4 t here was significance in the areas of (a) students havi ng a job or more jobs as they exit school with 64 % of W hite Students 54 % of O ther students 48 % of Hispanic students and 4 6% of Black students responding they have a j ob or jobs as they exit school. Another area of significance was (c) wages per hour ear ned by students as they exit sch ool In the first category, less than $7.00 per hour, with 33 % of

PAGE 82

82 Black students 21 % of W hi te students 20 % of Hispanic students and 17 % of O ther students responding For wages of $7.00 to $7.99 pe r hour 43 % of B l ack stu dents 39 % of Hispanic, 35 % of O ther, and 33 % of W hite students. The highest wages categor y was $8.00 or more per hour and esponses for student s identifying as Other was 48 %, White 46 %, H ispanic, 40 %, and Black, 2 4%. The last area of significance where race/ethnicity is divided was students (d) having chosen the jobs they have as they exit school The responses showed 91 % of W hite students having chosen their jobs 83 % of the Hispanic students 81 % of B lack students and 80s % O ther students. Although no t statistically significant, information on how many hours a week students work showed over 20% of Hispanic students working over 30 hours per week. Another question without significant results for race/ethnicity was students liking their job with 83 % of white students responding. When asked do you work for a business t hat someone in your family owns, students iden tifying as Other responded 20 % that they did. Year There were significant findings in hypothesis 1 high school education preparing them for (a) finding a job with 69 % of students in 2007 being satisfied 59 % were satisfied, in 2008, 65 % were satisfied in 2009 In hypothesis 2 there were significant differences in work done during high school for those who had (e) worked in private business or company In 2007, 63 % of students surveyed had worked private business. In 2008 fewer students, 60 %, and in 2009, even fewer students 50 %. Hypothesis 3 had significant differences in the areas of (c) jobs in the co mmunity not as part of school, as job training experiences, between calendar years with 78 % of students in 2007, 74 % in 2008, and the fewest, 65 % in 2009. When asked

PAGE 83

83 about having (d) any jobs as job training experiences, again there was a steady decline w ith 78 % of students in 2007, down to 74% in 2008 and 65 % in 2009. In hypothesis 4 there were significant differences in the areas of (a) students having a job or more jobs as they exit school. In 2009, 64 % of students surveyed reported having a job in 2 007, 58 %, and in 2008, 58 %. When looking at (b) total hours a week that students work as they exit school, students working 1 20 hours in 2009 reported 64 %, fewer in 2007, 58 %, and even fewer in 2008, 58 %. Students working 21 30 hours also declined each year beginning with 41 % in 2007, 39 % in 200 8, and again declining in 2009 to 29 %. Students working more than 30 hours held to the same pattern with, 20 % in 2007, 15 %, 2008, and only 14 % in 2009. When looking at (c) wages per hour earned by students as t hey exit sch ool in the lowest category of less than $7.00 per hour 29 % of students in 2007, 20 % in 2008, down to 18 % in 2009. In the $7.00 to $7.99 per hour category, the largest percentage was 47 % in 2009, followed by 34 % in 2008, an d the lowest percen tage at 32 % of students making $7.00 to $7.99 in 2007. Students reporting making $8.00 or mor e per hour were at 45 % in 200 8, 39 % in 2007, and the lowest percentage of 35 % in 2009, which reflects the unemployment and underemployment trend as a result of th e economy. District Location District location was statistically sig nificant in hypothesis 2 where students were asked if they had (d) worked in public government Students responded at a rate of 32 % from R egion 1 students responded at a rate of 25 % from R egion 2, 23 % from R egion 3, 21% from R egion 4 and 19% from Regi on 5 Other findings that were significant were students that had (e) worked in private business or company Responses ranged from 65 % in R egion 4 to 57 % in R egion 5, 56 % in R egion 2, 55% in

PAGE 84

84 Region 3 and 53 % in R egion 1. Hypothesis 3 asked students about job training experiences. There was statistical significance in only the area of (c) jobs in the community not as part of schoo l, as job training experiences Students responded 63 %, in R egion 4, followed by 57 %, 56 %, 56 %, in R egion s 3, 1 2, respectively and 4 4% in R egion 5. Although not s tatistically significant, both Regions 1 and 4 had over 75 % of students responding that they had any job as job training experience. There were st atistically significant findings in hypothesis 4 also When asked about the job students have when ex iting school, specifically (a) students having a job or more jobs as they exit school, 64 % of the students in R egion 5 said they had a job followed by R e gion 4 with 54 % of students saying they had a job Region 1, 51 %, R egion 3, 48 %, and in R egion 2, 4 6% of students reporting they had a job as they exit school. Other significant findings were in the (c) wages per hour earned by students as they exit schoo l The larg est number of students earning les s than $7.0 0 per hour were in R egion 1 at 36 %, highest percentage of students reporting earning $7.00 to $7.99 per hour were from R egion 2 at 39 % a nd students earning $8.00 or more per hour were in R egion 5 a t 51 %, followed closely by R egion 4 at 50 % Althoug h not significant, students in R egion 1 were most satisfied with their high school education having prepar ed them for finding a job, reporting at 68 % and learning job skills, reporting at 69 % knowing w ha t they would be good at, reporting at 68 % Students in Region 1 also had the jobs at school as job training experiences, reporting at 32 % jobs in the co mmunity as part of school, reporting at 32%, and any job, reporting at 76 % Additionally, students in R egion 1 reported liking thei r jobs most among regions, 86 %, and most often working for a business that som eone in their

PAGE 85

85 family owns, reporting at 17 % Region 2 students reported having done chores for other persons in the neighb orhood during high school reporting at 52 % Region 3 students were most satisfied with their high school education preparing this for knowing what kind of job they will be good at, reporting at 70 % They had most often done babys itting for other families, reporting at 60% The y had al so most often volunteered, responding at 74 % When asked a bout hours worked per week, 55% of students in R egion 3 responded that they were working 1 20 hours per week, being the highest percentage bet ween regions and 14 % working more than 30 hours per week, being the lowest percentage between regions. Region 4 students were students were most likely to have chosen their job, responding at 89 % District Size S ignificant findings when comparing school district size were not found in hypothesis 1, 2, and 3. H ypothesis 4 had statistically significant finding in the areas of (a) students having a job or more jobs as they exit school with 64 % of students in M iddle size district reporting having a job 58 % of students in Very L arge districts having a job 58 % of the students in large districts having a job 51 % of students in S mal l/middle districts having a job and 4 6% of the students in S mall districts having a job. There were also significant findings in the areas of (c) wages per hour earned by stude nts as they exit school Students reporting earning s of less than $7.00 per hour were 3 2% in S mall size districts 29 % in M iddle size districts 22 % in Very L arge size district 22 % in S mall/middle size districts and 17 % in L arge size districts. The nex t earnings range was $7.00 to $7.99 per hour The highest percentage responses were 43 % from Very L arge size districts 36 % in M iddle size districts 36 % from S mall size districts 35 % from S mall/middle, and 33 % in L arge size districts. The highest earni ngs

PAGE 86

86 range option s was $8. 00 or more per hour Students in L arge size districts respond ed making $8.00 or more at 50 %. The next highest response came from S mall/middle size districts at 43 %, followed by Very L arge size districts at 35 % M iddle size distri cts at 35 %, and S mall size districts at 32 %. These facts support previous findi ngs reporting that students in S mall districts make l ower earnings than students in L arger size districts. Although not significant, students in S mall districts reported being the most satisfied with their high school education which prepared the m for learning job skills, reporting at 67 % knowing w hat they would be good at, reporting at 67 % and knowing what kind of job they would be good at, reporting at 70 % Students in S ma ll districts had most often done chores for other pers ons in their neighborhood, 58 %, and w orked in public government, reporting at 3 1% Students in S mall districts were the highest percentage among district sizes working over 30 hours per we ek, reportin g at 20% Additionally, 90 % of students in S mall districts said th ey chose their own job and 81 % liked their job, the highest response of any group. When asked about working during high school, 57% of students in Small/middle and 56% of students in Small districts had done babysitting for other families Student in S mall/middle districts most of ten reported volunteering, at 71 % having job training experiences of jobs in the community as part of school at 34 % job training in the commun ity not as part of school, 63 % and most often reported having any job at 77 % Students in S mall/middle districts also reported working the least number of hours, 51 %, and most often worked in a business that some one in their family owned, 18 % Students in Very L arge dist ricts reported at the highest percentage that they were satisfied with their high school education which

PAGE 87

87 prepar ed them for finding a job at 65 % and having a job at school as a job training experience at 31 % Limitations The limitations of this study rela te to: (1) dissemination of the survey, (2) district participation in the survey, and (3) student participation in the survey. Dissemination of the survey. The survey was mailed to District Transition Contacts in each district identified to participate i n the survey each year. District Transition Contacts were asked to distribute the Florida High School Exit Survey (FHSES), Form E, to high school students in their district that were exiting school and who were 18 years of age. Additionally, they were as ked to distribute the same number of Florida High School Exit Surveys, Form G, to students without disabilities that were comparable to the students with disabilities. A report on how this process was conducted was not requested. District participation in the survey. Participation in the survey was not uniform across all districts. Not all districts participated in the survey, and small numbers of surveys returned from some districts. A suggested number of participants chart was sent to each District Tr ansition Contact. Several districts did not return the number of surveys suggested for their district size. Student participation in the survey. The voluntary nature of student participation may have allowed students that were disenfranchised with their high school educational experiences to not participate. Also, only inviting students 18 years old and older to participate may not be representative of all exiting students, perhaps leaving valuable information unreported. Finally, directions were provi ded with surveys for accommodations to be provided for students that might need the survey read to them.

PAGE 88

88 The person providing the accommodations most likely would have been school district Caut ion should be used when interpreting the FHSES results used in this study as they may not be representative of all exiting students in the state of Florida. The perceptions and expectations of certain students with disabilities may vary from students with out disabilities. The survey reflects how youth describe themselves and may not be accurate. (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine & Marder, 2007). Summary Throughout this study training, work experiences and jobs were often identified and many times significant When looking at satisfaction with high school having prepared students for work, students with disabilities consistently reported more satisfaction with being prepar ed for work. Students with d isabilit ies also responded more often to havin g a job while in high school In many other areas, students with disabilities responses were not as positive as their peers. D ifferences in wo rk experiences between males and females, race/ethnic categories, an d the region of the state where students live show trends that most likely need to be considered by those in transition program improvement Students who have disabilities and are Black were far more likely to be working at school while students that are White and do not have disabilities were far more likely to work in private businesses or companies. Females were m ore likely to have volunteered a n d have babysat for neighbors. Males were more likely to make higher wages. The overall differences in hours w orked and wages earned refl ected the national economic downslide we experienced beginning in 2007 and continuing into 2009 Higher wages

PAGE 89

89 were reported by students in the southern regions of the state where salarie s and the cost of living are higher. Higher wages were also reported more by studen ts living in Large districts where more jobs are available, while lower wages were reported more often in Small rural districts where fewer jobs are available. Interestingly, s tudents in Middle sized districts most o ften reported having a job now, which may reflect the transition program provided to students in the district and the importance of being employed at the time of school exit. F inding of this study need to be considered by those involved in the transition process when looking at program improvement or evaluation At the stat e, district, and school level there is the need to strive to improve the transition programs offered to students as they move fr om school to adulthood. Our goal is continually improve ou tcomes for all students. Several specific areas warrant further research: A comparison study of employment programs by school district size and region for students with and without disabilities would offer insight into these finding and inform practice. A study comparing regional economic trends with these findings by region would further explain the change in the number of students employed. The differences in race and ethnicity should be further studied and compared to data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 to inform practice.

PAGE 90

90 APPENDIX A FLORIDA HIGH SCHOOL EXIT SURVEY High School Exit Survey 2008 Form E This su rvey asks you questions about your experiences in high school and your plans for the future. The information will be used to p lan high school programs that prepare students for adult life. Please help us improve programs and services for students attending Florida public schools by answering the following questions. Your answers will remain confidential Thank you. Directions Please answer all the questions. If you need help ask your teacher. State student ID* _______________________ Make sure this is about your state student ID, NOT your internal school ID Date of Birth __________________________ County: ______________ ___________________ Male Female 2. How old are you? If younger than 18 years old, STOP you cannot complete the survey. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3. Am erican Ind ian/Alaska Native A sian/ P acific Islander B lack Hispanic Multiracial W hite Other

PAGE 91

91 Part I. General Information 1 How many people includin g yourself live in your home? (Please check one.) 1 2 4 5 9 10 More than 10 2. Please describe your living situation: (Please check all that apply.) I li ve with both parents. I live with my mother. I live with my father. I live by myself. I live with my guardian(s). I live with grandparents. I live with other relatives. I live with friends. I live with one parent and one step pa rent. I live in an independent living program. 3 What is the highest education level achieved by your father ? (Please check one.) Less than high school High school graduate Some college College graduate 4. Wh at is the highest education level achieved by your mother ? (Please check one.) Less than high school High school graduate Some college College graduate

PAGE 92

92 5 Do you have a disabilit y ? Yes No If yes, please check all that apply: Learning disabilities Hearing impairment (including deafness) Speech or language impairment Visual impairment (including blindness) Emotional disturbance Orthopedic impairment (cerebral palsy, spina bifida, etc.) Autism Traumatic brain injury Mentally handicapped Other (Please list.)_______________________________________ If yes, how much does your disability affect your school achievement? Not at all A little Somewhat A lot 6 A. How is your health? Poor Fair Good Very Good Excell ent B. About how many hours do you sleep each night? Less than 4 4 to 5.9 6 to 7.9 8 to 9.9 10 or more 7. How many friends do you have? 0 1 to 2 3 to 10 11 to 50 more than 50

PAGE 93

93 8. What do you do the most in your free time? (Please check all that apply.) Watching TV Visit with friends and/or relatives Listening to music Church or religious activities Read Organizationa l/club activities Play video games Browse the Internet Sports or e xercise (for example: martial arts, team or individual sports, etc.) Outdoor activities (for example: camping, hunting, fishing, hiking, riding, going to beach etc.) Tal k on phone Mechanical (for example: car repair, building, etc. Community recreation/leisure activities (for example: movies, arcade, mall, etc.) Artistic activities (for example: play instrument, ballet, painting, etc.) 9. How much time do your spend in ESE classes? No ESE classes 1 ESE class per week 1 ESE class per day More than 1 ESE class per day to half day of ESE classes Half day or more of ESE classes but not all day All ESE classes 10. Please check your diploma option (Please check one.): Standard Special Diploma Option 1 Special Diploma Option 2 Yes No 12. Is public transportation available? Yes No If yes, do you use it? Yes No

PAGE 94

94 Part II. My High School Experiences 1. Who helped you to get ready for what you want to do after high school? (Please check all that apply.) Agency representatives Nurse Employer Parents/family members Friends/acquaintances S chool counselors General education teachers Special education teach ers Job coach No one I helped myself 2. Did you take classes in high school about Health and safety? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Vocational ? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Job training? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Career Education? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No FCAT Remediation ? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Recreation/leisure course (for example: tennis, art, dance, etc.)? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Social skills (for example: ma rriage, family living, etc.)? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No Independent life skills (for example: cooking, managing money, living on your own, getting a place to live, keeping house, etc.) ? Yes No If yes, was this helpful? Yes No

PAGE 95

95 3. Are you satisfied with your high school education prepared you Reading? Yes No Not Sure Writing? Yes No Not Sure Do ing math? Yes No Not Sure Finding a job? Yes No Not Sure Getting more education or training (like a college or vocational school)? Yes No Not Sure Receiving information about careers? Yes No Not Sure Learning job skills? Yes No Not Sure Knowing what work you will be good at? Yes No Not Sure Knowing what kind of work you want to do? Yes No Not Sure Deciding what you want to do with your life? Yes No Not Sure Knowing how to achieve what you want to do with your life? Yes No Not Sure Using computers? Yes No Not Sure Using community resources after graduation (like Social Security Administration, the Center for Independent Living, Vocational Rehab ilitation, or Agency for Persons with Disabilities)? Yes No Not Sure Using public transportation? Yes No Not Sure

PAGE 96

96 4. Do you know what a IEP or Transition IEP is? Yes No 5. Have you had training that prepared you to participate in your Transition IEP meeting? Yes No If yes, what type of training?__________ During the eighth (8 th ) grade? Ye s No During the ninth (9 th ) grade? Yes No During the tenth (10 th ) grade? Yes No During the eleventh (11 th ) grade? Yes No During the twelfth (12 th ) grade? Yes No 7. What did you do at your IEP or Transition IEP meeting? (Please check all that apply.) I understood the contents of the meeting. I talked in the meeting about my needs and interests. I asked questions at the meeting. I set educational and career goals for myself. I talked about my courses/credits at the meeting. I helped make the decisions. I talked about my FCAT scores. Nothing, others did all the talking.

PAGE 97

97 8. Did your IEP or Transition IEP include a desired Post School Yes No If yes, what was included in your statement? (Please check all that apply.) Work you want to do. Where you want to live. Social activities you want to d o. How you will be part of your community. How you will get around in your community. Further education you want to pursue. 9. Which agencies attended your Transition IEP meetings? (Please check all that apply.) Center for Independent Living Socia l Security Administration College or University Vocational Rehabilitation Community College Vocational Technical Education Center Agency for Persons with Disabilities The ARC Mental Health P rovider Health Care Provider Other (Please specify.)______________ 10. Have you done any of the following work during high school? A. Baby sitting for other families Yes No B. Performed chores for other persons in your neighborhood Yes No C. Volunteered (for example : church, community agency job, etc) Yes No

PAGE 98

98 D. Worked in public government (for example: school district, city or county job, etc.) Yes No E. Worked in private business or company Yes No 11. Have you had any of the following job training experiences? (Please check all that apply.) Jobs at school Yes No Jobs in the community, as part of your school classes Yes No Jobs in the community, not as part of your school classes Yes No 12 A. Do you have a job or more jobs now? Yes No (If no, go to q uestion 1 3 ) B. About how many total hours per week do you work? (Please check one.) 1 to 10 hours per week 11 to 20 hours per week 21 to 25 hours per week 26 to 30 hours per week 31 to 40 hours pe r week More than 40 hours per week C. How much do you make on average per hour? (Please check one.) $ 1.00 to $6.66 per hour $6.67 (minimum wage) to $6.99 per hour $7.00 to $7.99 per hour $8.00 to $9.99 per hour $10.00 or more per hour

PAGE 99

99 D. Did you choose your job yourself? If no, who chose the job for you? (Please check all that apply ) Parents/relatives Friends/acquaintances School employee (for example: teacher or job coach, etc.) Community Agency Yes No E. Do you like your job? Ye s No F. Do you work in a business that someone in your family owns? Yes No G. Who help ed you get your job? (Please check all that apply.) Myself Parents/relatives Friends/acquaintances School empl oyee (for example: teacher or job coach, etc.) Community Agency

PAGE 100

100 H. Please describe your job: (Please check all that apply.) Business (for example: office work, receptionist, filing, etc.) Child care (for example: babysitting, child care helper, etc.) Construction Automotive (for example: changing oil, changing tires, etc.) Computer repair Information (for example: data entry, customer services, etc.) Medical (for example: working in a hospital or assisted living facility, etc.) Food service (for example: waiter, waitress, hostess, cook, cashier, etc.) Retail (for example: stocking shelves, cashier, customer service, bagging groceries, etc.) Agriculture (for example: plant nurs ery, farm hand, etc.) Custodial Motel/hotel services Landscaping/yard work Construction work Entertainment (for example: movie theater, video arcade, etc.) Animal hospital/animal care Doctor/denta l office Self employed 13. What do your parents want you to do after high school? Work Continue education Stay at home No expectations

PAGE 101

101 14. Please check all extra activi ties in which you participated: (Check all that apply.) Service organizations (for exampl e: Key Club, Anchor Club, etc.) Special interest organizations (for example: FFA, HOSA, DECA, Spanish club, art club, etc.) Sports teams (for example: football, basketball, volleyball, etc.) Academic teams (for example: Odyssey of the Mind, academic competition team, math team, etc.) Music activities (for example: band, chorus, etc.) Student government JROTC None Other 15. Are you satisfied that other stud ents at your high school treated you with respect ? Yes No Not Sure 16. Are you satisfied that teachers at your high school treated you with respect ? Yes No Not Sure high school? Yes No Not Sure 18. Do your parents support your plans to continue your education after high school? Yes No Not Sure 19. Were your parents involved in your high school education? Yes No Not Sure

PAGE 102

102 20. A. I understand my strengths, interests, preferences, limits, and needs. Yes No Not Sure B. I discussed my choices of possible careers that match my abilities with teachers. Yes No Not Sure C. I have taken an active role with my family, school, and friends. Yes No Not Sure D. I understand the importance of taking responsibility for my actions. I understand my rights. I expres s my opinions. Yes Yes Yes No No No Not Sure Not Sure Not Sure E. I wrote goals and disc ussed with my teacher the steps needed to reach the goals. Yes No Not Sure F. I often read stories or see movies about people who needed and found help from others. Yes No Not Sure G. I write about how I feel when I am stressed or upset. Yes No Not Sure H. to use coping strategi es. Yes No Not Sure I. I feel comfortable expressing my needs and asking for help. Yes No Not Sure J. I believe that I will be successful in achieving my post school goals (for example: work, living, etc. ). Yes No Not Sure

PAGE 103

103 21. When I get a low score on an exam, I usually: (Please check all that apply.) Study harder Ask for teacher or others help Get frustrated Give up 22. If you attended an IEP meeting, what did you do?

PAGE 104

104 Part III. Future 1. What would you like to do after you leave high school? (Please check all that apply ) Attend 4 year College Work Full Time Attend 2 year College Work Part Time Attend Vocational or Technical sch ool Join the Military Get an Apprenticeship 2. If you have no plans, what are the main reasons for that? (Please check all that apply.) Financial or money issues Health issues Academic readiness Family issues Haven 3. After you leave high school, what problems do you worry about in the future? (Please check all that apply.) No place to live Lack of transportation Loss of benefits if I work (for example: SSI, etc.) Being bored Not enough money to live on No or too few friends Concern about independent living Health issues No problems 4. What things would you add or change in order to make your life better? (Please check all that apply ) Make more choices about my life Improve family situation Find solutions to personal problems Have more money Have a better job Finish high school Move into a place of my own Go to college or vocational/technical

PAGE 105

105 school Have more friends Have reliable transportation Learn to read Lose weight 5 What are your goals for the next year? 6. What are your goals for the next three to five years? To help us with future surveys: 1. How was this survey completed? By myself, with no assistance. By myself, with some assistance. If so, who assisted you: Other student Teacher School personnel Parent/Guardian

PAGE 106

106 Thank you so much for your time and effort Your participation will improve The Transition Center at the University of Florida G 315 Norman Hall PO Box 117050 Gainesville, FL 32611 7050 www.thetransitioncenter.org The SOARS High School Exit Survey is funded by the Proje ct Career Development and Transition as part of The Transition Center: Information and Services for Adolescent and Adults with Special Needs. Project Career Development and Transition is funded by the State of Florida, Department of Education, Division of Public Schools and Community Education, Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services, through federal assistance under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part B. If there is anything else you would like us to know about your high school experiences please attach your comments on a separate sheet of paper. If you have any questions, please call Hua Wang at (352)392 0701 ext 292 or e mail hwang@coe.ufl.edu Si necesita ayuda en espanol, envie un email a hwang@coe.ufl.edu o llame al (352)392 0701 ext 292

PAGE 107

107 APPENDIX B LETTER FROM BUREAU C HIEF TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS High School Exit Survey for Students with Disabilities/12th Grade Exit Survey Overview The Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services is required to report annual Progra ms. Indicators 2, 13, and 14 of the plan are being addressed through many of the activities conducted by the Career Development and Transition Project (The Transition Center) at the University of Florida. The project has developed and piloted a High Scho ol Exit Survey for Students with Disabilities as well as a 12th Grade Exit Survey for students who do not have disabilities for comparative purposes. Both instruments have been revised based on feedback from participating pilot districts and are ready for statewide implementation. To simplify the process, The Transition Center is planning a three year implementation survey implementation plan, which outlines pr oposed district involvement for 2006 2007, 2007 2008, and 2008 2009, is attached. The information gathered from the High School Exit Survey and 12th Grade Exit Survey will help our state, and your school district, in planning and delivering effective tran sition activities, which will in turn impact high student achievement. Copies of both surveys will be distributed at the annual conference Transition: The IDEA Way being held in Jacksonville, Florida, on February 14, 2007, and/or via mail in mid late February. Copies of the surveys are also available by contacting Drew Andrews, Director, The Transition Center, at (352) 392 0701, ext. 260 or by electronic mail at drewa@coe.ufl.edu For additional information, p lease contact Drew Andrews as indicated above, or Dr. Jeanne Repetto, Principal Investigator, by phone at (352) 392 0701, ext. 261 or by electronic mail at jrepetto@coe.ufl.edu Thank you in advance for your par ticipation in this important activity.

PAGE 108

108 Exit Survey Implementation Plan Schedule 2006 2007 School Year 2007 2008 School Year 2008 2009 School Year Baker Bradford Alachua Brevard Charlotte Bay Broward Citrus Calhoun Clay Columbia Collier DeSoto D uval Dixie Escambia Flagler Gadsden Franklin Glades Hardee Gilchrist Hillsborough Hendry Gulf Lafayett e Indian River Hamilton Lee Jackson Hernando Leon Jefferson Highlands Levy Lake Holmes Liberty Marion Manatee Madison Miami Dade Martin Monroe N assau Okaloosa Palm Beach Orange Okeechobee Santa Rosa Polk Osceola Sarasota Seminole Pasco St. Johns Sumter Pinellas St. Lucie Suwannee Putnam Union Taylor Walton Volusia Washington Wakulla

PAGE 109

109 APPENDIX C INFORMED CONSENT FORM High School Exit Su rvey Form E You are being asked to take part in a research study that is being conducted by The Transition Center at the University of Florida. This form provides you with information about the research purpose. Please read the information below and ask questions study. 1. Study Title: A Pilot High School Exit Survey for Student Outcomes and Analysis Reporting System (SOARS) Project 2. What is the purpose of the re search study? T he purpose of this study will be to acquire information related to factors that help 3. What will be asked of you if you choose to take part in the study? This su rvey asks you questio ns about your experiences in high school and your future plans. The information will be used to plan and improve high school transition programs and services that help preparation of students for adult life. The study also requests your permission to acc ess your school records maintained by the Florida Department of Education (DOE) and by school districts. To ask for your consent (permission) for release of the information about your school records, we are district data element to be accessed after getting your signature. The survey will not have the name of the participant. Educational records of survey participants to be released from Florida Department of Education and school board of district will not have the name of the participant either. Your state student ID only will be used in order to insure confidentiality. Thus, we request your Florida state student identification (ID) number on the survey questionnaire so tha t we will be able to associate survey data with the administrative records kept by the State of Florida and by school districts. 4. What is the time requirement associated with participating in this study? The survey takes approximately about 30 ~ 40 mi nutes to complete. 5. What are the possible discomforts and risks? We do not anticipate any discomfort or risks associated with participation in this study.

PAGE 110

110 You are free to withdraw from participation in this study at any time for any reason. Your par ticipation is strictly voluntary. 6. What are the possible benefits or compensation to you for participating in the study? There are no direct benefits or compensation for participating in this research. 7. What are the possible benefits to others? By participating in our research study, you will be helping us understand the factors that are associated with successful transition of students to adult life such as employment and enrollment in education after high school. 8. How will your privacy a nd the confidentiality of your research records be protected? This survey was designed by The Transition Center Research Team at the University of Florida for research purposes. No one except the researchers will have access to any of your responses. The survey will not have the name of the participant. Educational records of survey participants to be released from Florida Department of Education and school board of district will not have the name of the participant either. Your state student ID only will be used in order to insure confidentiality. Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. The survey data will not be available to anyone other than student and those who may completing the survey. The data will not be available to teachers, school administrators, or parents in order to respect the rights of participants. Completed surveys will be put in a sealed envelope and mailed directly to researchers to the Transition C enter at the University of Florida. No identifying information about students will be used in any written or oral report of this study. The final report will be presented to the Florida Department of Education and other constituents interested in transit ion outcomes of high school students, and educational journals and magazines for possible publication. 9. Do you have to answer every question in the survey(s)? You do not have to answer any question(s) that you do not wish to answer 10. Can you withd raw from this research study? Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. Please be advised that you may choose not to participate in this research, and you may withdraw from the study at any time. There is no penalty for not participating. 11. Whom should you contact if you have questions about the study? If you have any question about this study, you may contact the following principal investigators:

PAGE 111

111 Hua Wang, The Transition Center at the University, G315 Norman Hall, PO Box 117050, G ainesville, FL 32611 7050, Phone: (352) 392 0701 Ext.292, Fax: (352) 392 4443, hwang@coe.ufl.edu. Drew Andrews, The Transition Center at the University of Florida, G315 Norman Hall, PO Box 117050, Gainesville, FL 32611 7050, (352) 392 0701, Ext. 260 Fax (352) 392 4443, drewa@coe.ufl.edu. Dr. Jeanne Repetto, The Transition Center at the University of Florida, G315 Norman Hall, PO Box 117050, Gainesville, FL 32611 7050, (352) 392 0701, Ext. 261, Fax (352) 392 4443, jrepetto@coe.ufl.edu 12. Whom should you contact if you have questions about your rights as a research participant in the study? If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research subject, you may contact the UF IRB Office at the Un iversity of Florida at (352) 392 0433 or email UFIRB at irb2@ufl.edu 13. Agreement By completing the enclosed survey I give my agreement to participate in this research study.

PAGE 112

112 REFERENCES Agran, M., & education program involvement. Career Developmen t for Exceptional Individuals, 31 ( 2 ) 69 76. Asch, A., Rousso, H. & Jefferies, T. (2001). Beyond pedestals: The lives of girls and women w ith disabilities. In H. Rousso & M.L. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education (pp. 13 48, 289 312). Albany: State University of New York (SUNY) Press. Barton, P. (2006). High school reform and work: Facing labor mark et realities. Princeton, NJ: ETS. Bellamy, G. (1985). Transition progress: Comments on Hasazi, Gordon & Roe. Exceptional Children, 51 (6), 474 478. Bellamy, G., Rose, H., Wilson, D., & Clarke, J. (1982). Strategies for vocational preparation. In B. Wilcox & G. Bellamy (Eds.), Design of high school programs for severely handicapped students (pp. 139 152). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Benz, M., & Halpern, A. (1993). Vocational and transition services needed and received by students with disabilities during the ir last years of high school. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 16 197 211. Benz, M.R., Lindstrom, L., & Yovanoff, P. (2000). Improving graduation and employment outcomes of students with disabilities: P redictive factors and student perspect ives. Exceptional Children, 66 ( 44 ) 509 529, Sum 2000. Benz, M., Yavanoff, P., & Doren, B. (1997). School to work components that predict postschool success for students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63, 151 165. Benz, M.R. & Lindstro m, L.E. (1997). Building school to work programs: Strategies for youth with a special needs Austin, TX: PRO ED Benz, M., Doren, B., & Yavanoff, P. (1998). Crossing the great divide: Predicting productive engagement for young women with disabilities. Care er Development for Exceptional Individuals, 21 3 16. Betz, N. (1994). Basic issues and concepts in career counseling for women. In W. Walsh & S. Osipow ) (Eds.), Career counseling for women (pp 1 41). Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Brickey, M., Campbell, K., & Browning, L. (1985). A five year follow up of sheltered workshop employees placed in competitive jobs. Mental Retardation, 23 (2), 67 73.

PAGE 113

113 Brolin, D. (1972). Value of rehabilitation services and correlates of vocational success with the mentally retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 76 (6), 644 651. Brolin, D.E., & Loyd, R.J. (2004). Career development and transition services: A functional life skill approach (4 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Bro wn, L., Pumpian, I., Baumgart, D., Vandeventer, P., Ford, A., Nisbet, I., Schroeder, J., & Gruenewalk, L. (1981). Longitudinal transition plans in programs for severely handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 47 (8), 624 631. Bullis, M., & Foss, G. (198 3). Cooperative work study programs I vocational rehabilitation: Results of a national survey. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 26 (5), 349 352. Chambers, D., Rabren, K. & Dunn, C. (2009). A comparison of transition from high school to adult life of stud ents with and without disabilities. Career Developmen t for Exceptional Individuals, 32 ( 1 ), p42 52. Charner, I., Fraser, B.S., Hubbard, B.S., Rogers, A. & Horne, R. (1995). Reforms of the school to work transition. The Phi Delta Kappan, 77 ( 1 ) p40, 58 60, Se pt. 1995. development for students with disabilities in elementary schools: A position statement of the Division on Career Development and Transition. Career Development fo r Exceptional Individuals, 14, 109 120. Corcoran, T., & Goertz, M. (1995). Instructional capacity and high performing schools. Educational Research, 24(9), 27 31. Coutinho, M., Oswald, D. (2005). State variation in gender disproportionality in special educ ation: Findings and recommendations. Reme dial and Special Education, 26 ( 1 ) January/February 2005, 7 15. Coutinho, M., Oswald, D., & Best, A. (2006). Differences in outcomes for female and male students in special education. Career Development for Exceptio nal Individuals, 29 ( 1 ), pp. 48 59 Darling Hammond, L. (1993). Reframing the school reforming the agenda: Developing capacity for school transformation. Phi delta Kappan, 74, 753 761. Davis, S., Anderson, C., Linkowski, D., Berger, K., & Feinstein, C. (198 5). Developmental tasks and transitions of adolescents with chronic illnesses and disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 29 (2), 69 80.

PAGE 114

114 DeStefano, L. & Wagner, M. (1991). Outcome as sessment in special education: L essons learned Illinois Universi ty, Champaign : Secondary Transition Intervention Effectiveness Institute; SRI International. Doren, B., Lindstrom, L., Zane, C., & Johnson, P. (2007). The role of program and alterable personal factors in postschool employment outcomes. Career Developmen t for Exceptional Individuals, 30 ( 3 ), 171 183. Doren, B. & Benz, M. (1998). Employment inequality revisited: Predictors of better employment outcomes for young women with disabilities in transition. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 400 405, 425 433. Dore n, B., & Benz, M. (2001). Gender equity issues in the vocational and transition services and employment outcomes experienced by young woman with disabilities. In H. Rousso & M.L. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special educati on (pp. 289 312). Albany: State University of New York. Fairwather, J.S., Stearns, M.S., & Wagner, M.M. (1989). Resources available in school districts serving secondary special education students: Implications for transition. The Journal of Special Educat ion, 22 ( 4 ) 419 432. Flannery, K.B., Yovanoff, P., Benz, M.R., & Kato, M.McG. (2008). Improving employment outcomes of individuals with disabilities through short term postsecondary training. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31 ( 1 ) 26 36. Fl ynn, R. (1982). National studies of the effectiveness of conventional vocational education. In K. Lynch, W. Kiernan, & J. Stark (Eds.), Prevocational and vocational education for special needs youth: A blueprint for the 1980's (pp. 15 34). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Fowler, W.J., Jr. (1989). School size, school characteristics and school outcomes A paper presented to the American educational research association annual meeting March 31, 1989. Office of educational research and improvement, National center for education statistics. Fox, W.F. (1981). Reviewing economies of size in education. Journal of Education Finance, 6, 273 296 Galvin, P. (2001). Organizational boundaries, authority and school districts organization. In N.D. Theobold & B. Malen (Eds.). B alancing local control and state responsibility for k 12 education (pp. 279 310). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. Gil Kashiwabara, E., Hogansen, J., Geenen, S., Powers, K., & Powers, L. (2007). Improving transition outcomes for marginalized youth. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30 (2), 80 91.

PAGE 115

115 Greene, G. (2003). Best practices in transition. In G. Greene & C.A. Kochhar Bryant (Eds.), Pathways to successful transitions for youth with disabilities (pp. 154 197). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Guy, B., Sitlington, P., Larsen, M., & Frank, A. (2009). What are high schools offering as preparation for employment? Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32 (1), 30 41 Halpern, A. (1994). The transition of youth with disabilitie s to adult life: A position statement of the Division on Career Development and transition, the Council for Exceptional Children. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 17, 115 124. Halpern, A. (1985). Transition: A look at the foundations. Exce ptional Children, 51 (6) 479 486. Harvey, M.W. (2003). Comparison of postsecondary transitional outcomes between students with and without disabilities by secondary vocational education participation: Findings from the National Education Longitudinal Study Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 25, 99 122. Hasazi, S., Gordon, L., & Roe, C. (1985). Factors associated with the employment status of handicapped youth exiting high school from 1979 to 1983. Exceptional Children, 51 (6) 455 469. Hursh, N. & Price, F. (1983). Job tryouts in the work environment. In R. Lassiter, M. Lassiter, R. Hardy, J. Underwood, & J. Cull (Eds.), Vocational evaluation, work adjustment, and independent living for severely disabled people (pp. 96 133). Springfield, IL: Tho mas Jewell, R.W. (1989). School and school district size relationships. Education and Urban Society 21(February): 140 153. Kaufman, P., Klein, S., & Frase, M. (1999). Dropout Rates in the United States: 1997, Statistical Analysis Report. E ducation Statist ics Quarterly, 1 ( 2 ), 46 48. Kerka, S. (1999). Has nontraditional training worked for women? Columbus OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education. Kiernan, W. (1979). Habilitation: A dynamic system. In G. Bellamy, G. O'Connor, & O. Karan (Eds.), Vocational rehabilitation of severely handicapped persons: Contemporary service strategies (pp. 207 228). Austin, TX: PRO ED. Kiesling, H. (1968). High school size and cost factors Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, Bureau of Research.

PAGE 116

116 Kochhar, C.A., West, L.L., & Taymans, J.M. (2000). Successful inclusion: Practical strategies for a shared responsibility Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kohler, P.D. (1996). Taxonomy for Transition Program ming. Champaign: University of Illinois. Kokaska, C. J., Gruenhagen, K., Razeghi, J., & Fair, G. W. (1985, October). Brolin (Ed.) Proceedings of the International Conference on t he Decade of the Disabled: Transition to work and adult life, p. 28. Las Vegas, NV. Kortering, L.J. & Braziel, P.M. (1999). Staying in school: the perspective of ninth grade students. R emedial and Special Education, 20 ( 2 ) p106 113, Mar Apr 1999. Lange, C. M. & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1998). School choice policies and practices for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 46 ( 2 ) p255 270, Win 1998. Lindstrom, L., Johnson, P., Doren, B., Zane, C., Post, C., Harley, E. (2008). Career Connections: Building Opp ortunities for young women with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, Reston:Mar/Apr 2008, 40, Iss. 4, 66 71. Lindstrom, L.E., Benz, M., & Doren, B. (2004). Expanding career options for young women with learning disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 27, 43 63. Lichtenstein, S. (1993). Transition from school to adulthood: C ase studies of adults with learning disabilities who dropped out of school. Exceptional Children, 59 ( 4 ), p336 347 Feb 1993. Luecking, R.G., & Mooney, M. (200 2). Tapping employment opportunities for youth with disabilities by engaging effectively with employers. In Research to Practice Belief 1(3). Minneapolis: National Center on Secondary Education and Transition, University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://ncset.org/publications/viewdesc.asp?id=716 Marder, C., Carduoso, D., & Wagner, M. (2005). Employment among youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS), Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. McDonnall, M.C., & Crudden, A. (2009). Factors affecting the successful employment of transition age youths and visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blin dness. New York: Jun 2009.103 (6), 329 341. M cDonnell, L.M. & Elmore, R.F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 133 152.

PAGE 117

117 McGuire, K. (1989). School size: The continuing controversy. Education and Urban Society 21(February), 164 174 Monk, D.H. (1987). Secondary school size and curriculum comprehensiveness. Economics of Education Review, 6 (2), 137 150. Moss, J. (1979). Postsecondary vocational education for mentally retarded adults. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. Nati onal Longitudinal Transitions Study 2 (NLTS2), (2005). NLTS2 data tables. Retreived October 9, 2007 from https:// www.nlls2.org Nurmi, J.E., Salmela Aro, K. & Koivisto, P. (2002). Goal importance and related achievement beliefs and emotions during the transition from vocational school to work: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 241 261. reform. In CPRE policy br iefs: Reporting on issues and researching education policy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University. Ornstein, A.C. (1990). School size and effectiveness: Policy implications. Urban Review, 22(3 ), 239 245. Pati, G., & Morrison, G. (1982). Enabling the disabl ed. Harvard Business Review, 60 (4), 152 168. Rogan, P., Grossi, T.A., & Gajewski, R. (2002). Vocational and career assessment. In C.L. Sax & C.A. Thoma (Eds.). Transition assessment: Wise practices for quality lives (pp. 103 117). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooke s. Rojewski, J.W., & Hill, R.A., (1998). Influence of gender and academic risk: behavior on career decision making and occupational choice in early adolescence Journal of Educat ion for Students Placed at Risk, 3 265 287. Rojewski, J.W., & Yang, B. (1997) Longitudinal analysis of select influences on adolescents' occupational aspirations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 376 410. Rousso, H., & Wehmeyer, M.L. (Eds.) (2001). Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education Albany: State Un iversity of New York. Rusch, F. & Mithaug, D. (1980). Vocational training for mentally retarded adults: A behavior analytic approach. Champaign, IL: Research Press. Schneider, K., Rusch, F., Henderson, R., & Geske, T. (1981). Competitive employment for m entally retarded persons: Costs verses benefits. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Special University o f Illinois.

PAGE 118

118 Sears, S. (1982). A definition of career guidance terms: A national vocational guidance perspective. Vocational Guidance Quarterly (31) 137 143. Seo, Y., Abbott, R.D., & Hawkins, J.D. (2008). Outcome status of students with learning disabilities at ages 21 and 24. Journal of Learning Disabilities, A ustin: Jul/Aug 2008, 41 ( 4 ) p 300 314. Sipple, J.W., & Killeen, K.M. (2004). Context, capa city, and concern: A district level analysis of the implementation of standards based reform in New York State. Educational Policy, 18 (3), 456 490. Sitlington, P.L., & Clark, G.M. (2006). Transition education and services for students with disabilities (4 t h ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon Stephenson, M., & Burge, P. (1997). Eliciting women's voices: Vocational choice and educational climate for women in nontraditional occupational programs. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 22, 153 171 Stodden, R.A., Dowrick, P., Gilmore, S. & Galloway, L.M. (2001). A review of secondary school factors influencing postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. Honolulu National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational Supports, University of Hawaii at Manoa. Retrieved from http://www.rrtc.hawaii.edu/documents/products/phase1/043 H01.pdf The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 Transition Requirements: A guide for states, districts, schools, universities and families. Publication Office, Institute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota. Trainor, A. (2007). Perceptions of adolescent girls with LD regarding self determination and postsecondary transition planning. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30 (1 ), 31, 1 45 Win 2007 Test, D., Fowler, C., Richter, S., White, J., Mazzotti, V., Walke r, A., Kohler, P., & Kortering, L. (2009). Evidence based practices in secondar y transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals. 32 115 129. Test, D., Mazzotti, V., Mustian, A., Fowler, C., Kortering, L., & Kohler, P. (2009). Evidence based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students w ith disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals. 32 160 182. U.S. Census Bureau (2004). Disability characteristics: 2004 American community survey Retrieved September 19, 2005, from http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/STTable?_bm=y&qr_name=ACS_2004_EST_ GOO_S1801& geo_id=01000US&ds_name+ACS_2004_EST_GOO_& redoLog=true & format=& CONTEXT=st

PAGE 119

119 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, (2002). OCR 2000 Elementary and secondary school survey: CD ROM. Washington, DC. Valdes, K., Williamson, B., & Wagner, M. (1990), The national longitudinal transition study of spe cial education students: Statistical almanac (Vol. 1). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Vautour, J., Stocks, C., & Kolek, M. (1983). Preparing mildly handicapped students for employment. Teaching Exceptional Children, 16 (1), 54 58. Wagner, M., Blackorby, J., & Hebbeler, K. (1993). Beyond the report card: The multiple dimensions of secondary school performance of students with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transitional Study of Special Education Students Menlo Park, CA: SRI Interna tional. Wagner, M., Blackorby, J., Cameto, R. & Newman, L. (1993). What makes a difference? Influences on postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: The third comprehensive report from the National Longitudinal Transitional Study of Special Education Students Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, N., & Levine, P. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition St udy 2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wagner, M., Newman, L., D'Amico, R., Jay, E.D, Butler Nalin, P. Marder, C., et al. (1991). Youth with disabilities: How are they doing? The first comprehensive report from the national longitudinal transiti on study of special education students. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Newman, L. (2003). Youth with disabilities: A changing population. A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) and the Nati onal Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2) Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Marder, C. (2003). Going to school: instructional contexts, programs, and participation of secondary school students with dis abilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2) Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wehman, p. (1981). Competitive employment: New horizons for severely disabled individuals. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Wehman,P. (1983). Towar d the employability of severely handicapped children and youth. Teaching Exceptional Children, 15 (4), 220 225. Wehman, P., Kregel, J., & Barcus, J. (1985). From school to work: A vocational transition model for handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 5 2 (1), 25 37.

PAGE 120

120 Wehman, P., Moon, M., & McCarthy, P. (1986). Transition from school to adulthood for youth with severe handicaps. Focus on Exceptional Children, 18 (5), 1 12. Weidenthal, C., & Kochhar Bryant, C. (2007). An investigation of transition practice s for middle school youth. Career Developme nt for Exceptional Individuals 30 ( 3 ) 147 157. Wilcox, B., & Bellamy, G. (1982). Design of high school programs for severely handicapped students Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Will, M. (1984, March/April). Bridges from school to working life. Programs for the Handicapped, pp. 1 5. Wright, A., Cooperstein, R., Grogan Renneker, E., & Padilla, C. (1982). Local implementation of PL 94 142: Final report of the longitudinal study. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Zhang D., Ivester, J., Chen, L., & Katsiyannis, A. (2005). Perspectives on transition practices. Career Developmen t for Exceptional Individuals, 28 ( 1 ) 15 25. Zeller, R. (1980). Direction service: Collaboration one case at a time. In J. Elder & P. Magrab (Eds. ), Coordinating services to handicapped children: A handbook for interagency collaboration (pp. 65 97). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

PAGE 121

121 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH W. Drew Andrew s was born in Gainesville, Florida. Drew grew up in the New River community and attend ed elementary school in Brooker. Drew graduated from Bradford High School in 1982 and attended Lake City Community College. In 1983 he married, moved to the Fort Call area and soon after started a family. Sondra was born in 1985, Andrea in 1987, and Pa rker in 1989. In 1989 he returned to Lake City Community College and then transferred to the University of North Florida (UNF) in 1991 His second son, Chason was born in 1992. He graduated with a B achelor or Art in Special Education from UNF in 1993. After graduation, Drew began teaching special education at Lake Butler Elementary School in Lake Butler, Florida. At Lake Butler Elementary, Drew taught studen ts with learning disabilities. He also began taking courses through a distance education prog ram offered by UNF to earn his m He earned his m aster degree in educational l eadership in 1995. In 1996 he began teaching at Union County High S chool in Lake Butler, Florida. During the spring of 1998 Drew applied to the University of Florida, Department of Special Education, to begin a doctoral program. While serving as a graduate assistant in the Florida Network, Drew became the assistant director in the fall of 1999. The Florida Network became The Transition Center in 2000. Drew remained at the c enter until the summer of 2008. In the fall of 2008 Drew took a position as a special education teacher with the Bradford County School System and began teaching at the Bradford Middle School, which he attended as an adolescent. The fol lowing year he took a position at the Bradford Union Area Career Technical Center, where he is currently an Exceptional Student Education teacher with the Bradford Transition Academy.