Opening Oz's curtain: who’s really running the annual IEP meeting to discuss secondary transition issues?

Doronkin, Jamie L.; Martin, James E.; Greene, Barbara A.; Choiseul‐Praslin, Belkis; Autry‐Schreffler, Faye

doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12473

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study conducted by Cavendish and Connor (2018) features data from 17 teachers and focuses on factors influencing parent and student engagement in IEP and transition planning (i.e., older students). Doronkin et al, (2020) focused specifically on IEP involvement for middle and high school students with learning disabilities. On the other hand, the study conducted by Danneker and Bottge (2009) only focused on elementary school students.…”

Section: Barriers To Student-led Iep Meetingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Landmark and Zhang (2019) observed high school IEP meetings, finding that students spoke during 13% of time intervals.These low levels of student participation may be a result of traditional teacher-led IEP meetings, where school staff act as gatekeepers in a "chairman of the board" role. When IEP meetings are teacher-led, students are often given limited opportunities to contribute (Doronkin et al, 2020). From interviews with students, Munsell and Schwartz (2022) found that students often perceive IEP meetings as disciplinary, exclusionary, and anxiety-provoking.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Barriers to Implementing Student-Led IEPs

Scheef,

Yeager,

Deardorff

2023

Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional teacher-led individualized education programs (IEPs) typically provide limited opportunities for students receiving special education services to meaningfully participate in the process. Even with a significant body of literature supporting the benefits of student-led IEPs, many school-based personnel maintain the traditional teacher-led model. As such, this study explored barriers to student-led IEPs, including an analysis of the differences in perceptions between school personnel who currently report facilitating student-led IEPs and those who report not facilitating student-led IEPs. In total, 275 participants completed quantitative survey items, with 155 of these same participants providing responses to a qualitative open-ended question. Results suggest common barriers to student-led IEPs include factors related to (a) students, (b) systemic issues, and (c) other IEP team members. In addition, those who do not have students who lead IEPs were more likely to identify the following specific factors as barriers: student ability, teacher self-efficacy, personal interest, and the age of the student. Discussions about implications for practice and future research are included.

show abstract

Section: Barriers To Student-led Iep Meetingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to Implementing Student-Led IEPs

Scheef,

Yeager,

Deardorff

2023

Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research on parents' and pupils' participation in the IEP process, some of which involves pupils with intellectual disabilities, has focused on their participation levels [23] and regional discrepancies [24]; parents' experiences [25,26], input [27], and interactions during the IEP meeting [28]; pupils' roles [29]; and student-led IEP meetings [30]. However, this previous research has revealed a power imbalance between schools and families, which can lead to families having a diminished role in the process.…”

Section: Challenges and Collaboration In The Iep Goal-setting Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Families have often been left outside the decision-making process and decisions concerning goals might have been made before the meeting; see [17,27,28,[31][32][33]. In addition, pupils' participation has been reported as being notably sparse, especially among pupils with lower functional cognitive and social skills; see [23,29,[34][35][36][37].…”

Section: Challenges and Collaboration In The Iep Goal-setting Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Setting Individual Goals for Pupils with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities—Engaging in the Activity Area-Based Curriculum Making

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The activity area-based curriculum model (AACM) is used in the Finnish basic education to support pupils—most of whom have profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD)—who could benefit more from skills that advance independent life coping. Existing studies have concentrated mainly on the Individual Education Plan (IEP) goal-setting process for pupils with milder disabilities than PIMD and have consistently demonstrated significant barriers in the process. This study explores the collaborative IEP goal-setting process for pupils with the AACM. Sixty-five Finnish special education teachers using the AACM participated in the study. Semi-structured interviews were analysed with thematic network analysis. The groups involved in the IEP goal-setting process were divided into main and side mediators. The main mediators were described as significant collaborators with important knowledge of the pupil, while side mediators rarely participated in the process. The special education teachers appeared to be leading the collaboration and were positioned in the middle of the main and side mediators. Further research should focus on the implementation of parents’ collaborative positions. Furthermore, practices and methods should be developed to reinforce the positions of group home staff, special education teacher colleagues and pupils with the AACM or PIMD themselves.

show abstract

“…However, researchers must also further explore the dynamics of the transition planning process to identify other potential barriers to student involvement. For example, Doronkin et al (2020) conducted a phenomenological study of Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings for nine high school students with LD, finding that meetings tended to be teacher-led, rushed, and impersonal. This research confirmed and expanded prior quantitative research on students’ feelings of discomfort during IEP meetings (Martin et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition Perspectives of High School Students With Learning Disabilities: A Qualitative Metasynthesis

Yeager

Morgan

2022

Learning Disability Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student involvement is integral to transition planning for students with learning disabilities (LD). However, only a small body of research has examined the perspectives of high school students with LD related to this process. We conducted a systematic literature review and subsequent metasynthesis of 14 studies that met criteria and quality indicators for qualitative research in special education. Using a collaborative coding process, we identified five themes, including (a) differences in support from professionals, family, and peers for transition, (b) perspectives on transition planning vision, meetings, and documents (c) evaluation of transition activities related to academics and graduation, career, and college, (d) self-determination examples, barriers, and facilitators, and (e) awareness of influence that gender, race, and/or culture have on transition. We discuss implications for practice and future research.

show abstract

Opening Oz's curtain: who’s really running the annual IEP meeting to discuss secondary transition issues?

Cited by 6 publications

References 20 publications

Barriers to Implementing Student-Led IEPs

Barriers to Implementing Student-Led IEPs

Setting Individual Goals for Pupils with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities—Engaging in the Activity Area-Based Curriculum Making

Transition Perspectives of High School Students With Learning Disabilities: A Qualitative Metasynthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About