No abstract

Background: Special education advocacy trainings, such as the Volunteer Advocacy Project (VAP), have the goal of training advocates who can eventually support families in accessing needed services for students with disabilities. In addition to the training goal of increasing participants' special education knowledge and advocacy comfort, it is unknown if the VAP improves other participant outcomes related to later advocacy. Specific Aims: In this study, we asked: (1) Do VAP participants improve from pre-to post-test on knowledge and advocacy comfort, as well as on role identity, involvement in the disability community, and empowerment?; (2) Do participants' roles and levels of education moderate improvements in these outcomes?; and (3) Do participants who are differentially higher or lower on any of these variables at the pre-test show greater improvement from pre-to post-test on one or all other variables? Method: Participants included 70 graduates of the VAP from 2014 to 2016. These participants completed pre-test and post-test assessments with measures on: special education knowledge, advocacy comfort, role identity, involvement, and empowerment. Findings: Results showed significant change in knowledge, comfort, involvement, and empowerment from pre-test to post-test. Only level of education significantly moderated the change in role identity from pre-test to post-test, with those with high school education increasing their role identity compared to those with a college degree or more. Empowerment was closely related to pretest levels and to change scores for all other variables. Discussion: Implications for future research and practice are discussed, including the need to better understand moderators of treatment effect and mechanisms of change for advocacy trainings.

Although social groups have “insiders,” this construct has not been measured within the disability advocacy community. Examining 405 individuals who applied for an advocacy training program, this study examined the nature of insiderness within the disability advocacy community and ties to individual roles. Participants showed differences in mean ratings across 10 insider items. A principal components analysis revealed two distinct factors: Organizational Involvement and Social Connectedness. Non-school providers scored highest on Organizational Involvement; family members/self-advocates highest on Social Connectedness. Themes from open-ended responses supported the factors and showed differences in motivation and information sources across insiderness levels and roles. Qualitative analysis revealed two additional aspects of insiderness not addressed in the scale. Implications are discussed for future practice and research.

BACKGROUND: Although parents and transition-aged students are critical stakeholders in Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, little is known about the extent to which both groups contribute during such meetings. OBJECTIVE: We examined the nature and extent of parent and student IEP meeting participation, similarities and differences in participation, and associated predictors for each group. METHODS: Responding to a national, web-based survey, 240 parents of transition-aged students (14– 21 years) completed a questionnaire related to their experiences at their child’s most recent IEP meeting. RESULTS: For both parents and students, participation items grouped into school and transition-related input. Overall, parents participated more than students and both parties contributed more toward school-related versus transition-related topics. Predictors of parent involvement included sharing input about the student before the IEP meeting and reviewing data on the student’s past performance during the IEP meeting. Student involvement was predicted by students actively leading their meeting. CONCLUSION: We offer recommendations for research and practice for facilitating parents and transition-aged students to actively participate in IEP meetings.