No abstract

This article provides a state-by-state analysis of state certification/licensure policies regarding transition. Twelve states were found to have licensure, certification, or endorsement options for Transition Specialists, Vocational Special Needs, Vocational Education, or Rehabilitation Counselors focusing on special education transition. Twenty-four states have transition-relevant standards for one or more of the areas in which special education credentials are available, and 14 states specify coursework requirements in transition for one or more of the areas in which special education credentials are available. Some states require teachers of students with disabilities to meet transition-relevant standards for some special education areas (e.g., high incidence disabilities) but not for others (e.g., low incidence or sensory disabilities).

In this article we summarize a study designed to assess the status of available IHE special education faculty positions from 1984-88 and projected faculty needs from 1989-94. Two hundred eighty-one IHEs reported 216 available positions in special education for 1984-88. Two hundred ninety-eight positions were projected by 209 IHEs for 1989-94. Results suggest that many of the IHE positions were filled by individuals already in higher education, creating a situation in which need shifts from institution to institution. Also, a substantial number of vacancies are filled by individuals previously employed at SEAs or LEAS. These findings suggest that a substantial number of potential applicants (i.e., supply) for IHE special education positions includes existing faculty and SEA/LEA personnel and, to a lesser degree, doctoral graduates. Implications for future research are discussed

A sample of The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) membership was surveyed to assess their attitudes about the 1983 Standards for Professional Practice in Advocacy, the levels and types of advocacy activities, and their school district or agency's response to these activities. The 530 respondents indicated that they supported the standards for advocacy and that they were active advocates. There were differences in the rate and type of advocacy activities for teachers, administrators, and those involved in other roles. Most teachers also felt that their district or agency was supportive of advocacy activities, but a substantial number felt that their district or agency was not supportive.

No abstract