"I'm Bright Enough to Do It, Even Though Sometimes I Feel I Can't Do It": Perspectives of High School Students with Learning Disabilities About Existing Supports to Achieve Graduation David J. Connor Hunter College, City University of New York Wendy Cavendish University of Miami, Florida Armineh Hallaran Hunter College, City University of New York Louis Olander Graduate Center, City University of New York

Keywords:

Learning Disabilities, Disability Studies, Disability Studies in Education, High School, Transition, Student Voice, qualitative research, families, communities, and school systems.

Abstract

Little evidence exists about how students with Learning disabilities (LD) recognize, understand, and utilize existing supports to ensure successful graduation from high school. In this article we ask: What are the supports available to high school students with LD that help them graduate? (a) What/who are some school-based supports they identify? (b) What/who are some non-school supports they identify? We share data from semi-structured interviews with forty high school students. Findings reveal: teacher support in the form of pedagogical choices, individualized support, and after-school support; counseling expertise in the form of academic advisement and emotional support; effective family-school collaboration; discrete family support outside of school; and various forms of self sustenance. Implications of these findings are discussed before recommendations are made to various stakeholders in the school community with the view to improving supports of students with LD toward helping them successfully graduate.


Graduating high school is viewed as an important personal milestone in life, verifying achievement of a general academic standard needed to enter college. It also signals a greater likelihood of securing employment and earning at least one third more than peers without diplomas (National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2018). Currently, while over 84% of non-disabled students graduate from high school, and only 65.5% of students with disabilities do, graduation rates have been steadily rising (US Department of Education, 2017). Over the last twenty years, the number of students with disabilities in college has also risen from 6% (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, & Technology, n.d.) to 10.9% (US Department of Education, 2017). Although these trends show a promising growth in the right direction, they may also obscure some important issues.

Students with a learning disability (LD) constitute 34% of all students with disabilities, making them the largest sub-group, accounting for 4.5% of all students in schools across the US (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2018). The majority of students with LD are now in general education classes for 80% or more of their day (NCES, 2018). In addition, they are also the largest group within colleges and universities. Rates of enrollment in post secondary education within eight years of leaving high school reveal students with LD are:

attending postsecondary education at the same rate as the general population; attending a two-year or community college at a rate more than double the general population; attending vocational, business or technical school at a higher rate (36 percent) than the general population (20 percent); attending a four-year college at a rate almost half (21 percent) that of the general population (40 percent) (National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2013, p. 28).

Given the academic challenges faced by many students with LD, preparing to graduate from high school can feel more challenging for them in comparison to non-disabled peers (Eckes & Ochoa, 2005), including when applying both to colleges (Milsom & Hartley, 2005) or for jobs (Tomlinson, 2012). They must also factor in personal considerations, such as the dilemma of self-disclosing to colleges for accommodations (Hadley, 2007), and cultural considerations, such as awareness of very real differences in levels of educational opportunity among racial groups with disabilities (Wald & Losen, 2003). In addition, the 34.5% of students who do not graduate face greater challenges in terms of transitioning into secure, motivating, and fairly-paid work (Moxley & Finch, 2003). Estimates on the number of students with LD who drop out of high school are 18% (National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2017) higher than their non-LD counterparts. It is clear that students with LD face high stakes in graduating and there is still some distance to go in terms of better supporting them in the challenging academic environment of high school.

Students with Learning Disabilities' Perspectives of Schools

It is a widely held assumption that schools are created for children and youth. However, while existing in educational research, student perspectives that explicitly seek to foreground their "voice" is noticeably limited. By voice, we mean student perspectives about critical issues that impact their lives. This can take many forms, from student interviews, such as in our study, to participatory action research in which students co-construct the research agenda (Halliday, Kern, Garret, & Turnbull, 2019). Recently, interest in student voice research has grown, including the establishment of academic journals such as Student Voice (https://ijsv.psu.edu/) whose slogan appears to be Disability Studies' original rallying cry of "Nothing About Us Without Us" (Charlton, 2000, p. 1) and the International Journal for Students as Partners (https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/ijsap).

In their meta analysis of 49 peer-reviewed articles published between 1990-2010, Gonzalez, Hernandez-Saca, and Artiles' (2017) claim that "student voice research is a promising field of study that disrupts traditional student roles by reorganizing learning spaces that center youth voices," and conclude, it is "rapidly opening up spaces and capacities for racial and ethnic historically marginalized youth to play key roles in school change and hybrid learning spaces" (p. 451). Yet there exists a relatively small number of studies about perspectives of school by secondary school students with LD. These include their: increasing awareness of personal potential and self-determination (Eisenman, Pell, Pudel, & Pleet-Odle, 2015); desired level of input in Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings (Cavendish & Connor, 2017); self-knowledge of accommodations needed to increase the potential of success in taking for high-stakes tests (Thompson, Thurlow, & Waltz, 2000); criticisms of lack of in-class accommodations and ineffective aspects of co-teaching (Leafstedt, Richards, LaMonte, & Cassidy, 2007); opinions on adaptations of report card grading (Bursuck, Munk, & Olson, 1999); recognition of different realities held by students, teachers, and administrators (Robins & Gilbert, 1998); challenging traditional definitions of LD and how school structures that "track" do not mirror the world outside of them (Cook-Slather, 2003) and; learning from other students with LD who have transitioned to college (Wren, 1987).

Although much has been written about what constitutes support for students with LD in high school (Deshler et al., 2002), there have been few studies that include perspectives of students themselves. For example, having been specifically taught to be proactive in IEP/transition meetings, students came to understand the benefit of more active roles in the before, during, and after stages of the process (Cavendish, Connor, & Rediker, 2016). In keeping with IEPs and transition planning, Cumming and Smedley (2017) contrasted the desires of students and parents with those of teachers. Echoing the phenomenon of dissonance between home and school perspectives of student desires, in their study of Latino students with LD, Keel, Cushing and Awsumb (2018) found that "teachers expressed a lack of cultural understanding regarding students' and parents' choices for after high school" (p. 88), mirroring Gonzalez et al.'s observations that new spaces are opening for different kinds of student and parent knowledge to be recognized. In foregrounding of perspectives of African-American males' labeled LD educated in special education, Craft and Howley (2018) share:

Students found the negative consequences of their special education placement to outweigh any benefits. The limited benefits of placement included interactions with responsive teachers and, in a few cases, more suitable instructional pacing. The negative consequences included the experience of being stigmatized by peers, making limited academic progress because of a slow-paced curriculum, and confronting barriers that kept them from returning to general education placements (para 1).

As can be seen, student perspectives have the potential to shed light on important—even contentious—issues in the field as they relate to the broad notion of support in general, such as overrepresentation of students of color in special education, cultural dissonance between professionals and families, and authentic IEP meetings. Indeed, narratives by students with LD of their lives in general, and educational experiences in particular, reveal their perspectives of living and learning in a world that is not configured with them in mind (Rooke, 2016). We believe that student perspectives can be useful in informing both pre-service and in-service teachers' supportive practices. Therefore, our research questions sought to find out student perspectives about existing supports to help them plan for graduation and transitioning into a post-school world.

Research Questions

The overarching research question that guided this study is: From a student perspective, what are the supports available to high school students with learning disabilities that help them graduate? Sub questions are: (a) What/who are some school-based supports they identify? (b) What/who are some non-school supports they identify?

Conceptual Framework

The theoretical framework for this study culls from Disability Studies in Education (DSE) (Connor, Gabel, Gallagher, & Morton, 2008). Disability Studies in Education foregrounds a socio-cultural-historic lens when considering all things relating to disability, including beliefs, attitudes, structures and systems that either enable or disable people within society's institutions (Baglieri, 2012). Several of the tenets of DSE are pertinent to our positionality as researchers, including the ways in which DSE: (1) "contextualizes disability within political and social spheres" (Connor, et al. p. 448); (2) privileges "the interests, agendas, and voices of people labeled with disability/disabled people" (p. 448) (3) promotes "social justice, equitable and inclusive educational opportunities, and full and meaningful access to all aspects of society for people labeled with disability/disabled people" (p. 448); (4) assumes competence and rejects deficit models of disability, and; (5) adheres to an emancipatory stance, conceptualizing research as working with people with disabilities as informed participants not "subjects." DSE also asserts that disability is a natural part of human diversity, not merely a deficit condition related to statistical norms that is often the case in traditional special education literature (Dudley-Marling & Gurn, 2010).

Generally speaking, over the past two decades, DSE has evolved as a distinct field of study to envision ways in which dis/ability could be taught and understood within the field of education (Danforth & Gabel, 2007). Part of DSE's mission has always been to generate counter-narratives to deficit-based medicalized notions of disability that have historically permeated the field of special education and are fiercely defended by traditional scholars wielding great influence (see, for example, Kauffman, Anastasiou, & Maag, 2017). DSE scholars interested in LD have attempted to engage the field in several ways including new historical renderings (Danforth, 2009), socio-cultural perspectives (Reid & Valle, 2004), critiques of ideologies and institutions (Skrtic & McCall, 2010), intersections with race and class (Blanchett, 2010), autobiographical interpretations (Granger, 2010), framings within teacher education (Baglieri & Moses, 2010), and calls to radically broaden methodologies within LD research (Connor, Gallagher, & Ferri, 2011).

In terms of our own positionality, one author identifies as being firmly aligned with DSE and three others identify as critical special educators who engage with, and value, DSE. We acknowledge that while much progress has been made in engaging with—and being critical of—special education, we believe DSE-grounded research in LD must continue to cultivate perspectives foregrounding the completeness of individuals negotiating disabling environments and attitudes, thereby providing valid alternatives to inaccessible social contexts and emphasizing deficit, disorder, and dysfunction. In other words, as we prioritize centering the voices of students as the primary source of knowledge, we seek to understand what they know, think, and feel.

Method

The research took place in a Northeastern city within the United States that is culturally, racially, ethnically, and dis/ability diverse. This paper is part of a larger study that explores how schools prepare students for graduation and post-school life in which a sample of forty high school students with LD in 10th, 11th, and 12th grades were included as part of the data collection. Education programs of all students primarily consisted of attending inclusive classes within general education for content area courses, while receiving supports through either co-teaching classrooms and/or resource room (usually one period a day of academic support in a segregated/separate setting).

Participants

We used purposeful sampling to select students with LD from three high schools within the same district. Students were identified via the database of each school's special education department and contacted by the research team at their school. Altogether, student demographics were approximately 5% Asian American, 40% Black/African American, 50% Latino, 5% White/European American, and approximately equal in proportion in terms of gender. Pseudonyms are used throughout this article.

Interview Protocol

Participants were interviewed using a qualitative semi-structured interview protocol comprising 11 open ended questions designed to facilitate greater depth of conversation between the researcher and students, including discussions to explore examples provided by students. In this article we focus upon the subdomain area of questions related to challenges and supports in terms of graduation such as "What do you feel is your greatest challenge for graduation?" and "What do you feel is the most help in supporting your moving towards graduation?" A complete listing of all questions can be found in Appendix A.

Procedures

Data collection took place over eighteen months. One or both of the first two authors conducted private interviews with individual students, lasting approximately an hour in length or two visits of thirty minutes. Interviews took place in available places such as unused classrooms, shielded sections within the school libraries, or administrative offices. All questions were read aloud. Student responses were audio recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim.

Data Analysis

First, utilizing a grounded theory approach (Creswell, 2015), each of the four researchers analyzed all transcripts by hand, relating individual observations to the research questions. Second, each researcher completed an individual coding grid for forty students listing observations and tentative categories across them based on data extracted from the transcripts. Third, two researcher dyads were created to gain consensus on tentative observations and nascent findings. In sum, after using an interpretive coding process that moved from concrete to more abstract levels of categorical themes using the constant comparative method (Strauss & Corbin, 1990), we came together to agree upon the determination of major categories. Data were divided into two broad areas that corresponded to our two research sub-questions, (1) student supports available in schools, and (2) non-school based supports identified by students. These areas were subsequently reviewed for related sub-categories, a form of axial coding. Using this process of analysis allowed data to be "segregated, grouped, regrouped and relinked in order to consolidate meaning and explanation" (Grbich, 2007, p. 21). A fourth and final round of analysis was undertaken for reflection, clarification, and a final sorting of codes into sub-themes under the two main categories of support in and out of school. In keeping with the central notion of voice, students are represented verbatim in excerpts from transcripts that provided best evidence to support the themes identified, described, and discussed.

Findings

In considering the research questions, we identified four areas that are discussed below: teacher support, availability of counselors, additional programming, and school and family connections. In addition, given the emphasis on seeing students through a strengths-based lens, we include a fifth area that revealed ways in which they supported themselves.

Teacher Support

The data yielded two areas related to teacher support. The first discusses pedagogical choices and instructional decision-making that supported student learning. The second focuses on teacher's provision of one-on-one support to students.

Pedagogical choices

Students perceived it beneficial to work with teachers who were flexible in their expectations and whose instructional decisions were responsive to student's individual needs. Tariq shared about his teachers, "They always let me know if I'm missing things and they let me make work up." In another instance, Omar explained how an empathetic teacher granted flexibility in turning in assigned work, "He knew what I was going through and he never gave up on me…He even gave me chances to turn in late assignments." These comments suggest that teachers aware of their students' situations were better prepared to offer support by alerting them when they were falling behind, and by adjusting due dates to allow students to receive credit for their work.

Several students discussed instructional supports designed to prepare them for high-stakes assessments. This was unsurprising given that students often referred to testing as a barrier to graduation. As Latrice explained, "My greatest challenge? Passing the Regents [compulsory state exit exams] that I'm taking…in June." In describing teacher supports related to test preparation Sherrel shared, "The teachers…usually spend…one to two days reviewing the material and some teachers…make an outline. Which is actually helpful, because… we can review the outline and we can score higher." Lamont noted how a teacher-generated "study sheet" helped prepare her for an assessment, whereas Fanon described how teachers used practice assessments to refine their teaching, "It's like practice tests for English or math…it's for the teachers to kind of get an understanding of where we're at, so they know what to teach us." These comments indicate that teachers spent considerable time preparing students for assessments with multiple students describing these efforts as helpful in promoting their performance. It is important to note that several students commented on the benefits of extended time for testing granted to them as an IEP accommodation. Michael shared:

I'm just in general a really bad test taker. I get nervous and I start to forget everything…I get waived time. So I get as much time as I need. And I take my time and…I try to do everything I can to the fullest extent.

Another student, Jeremy, explained tests are "hard …I get extra time…So I use that to my advantage." Both Michael and Jeremy recognize the value of additional time.

Finally, teachers' level of preparation emerged as another important factor impacting student learning. Students were keenly aware of their teacher's facility with the content and critiqued their ability to effectively communicate their knowledge to students. Some teachers were praised for their ability to convey information in ways that supported student learning. For example, Shavon noted how "My history teacher…made sure that the wording [on PowerPoint] was easy to understand for tenth graders…I really enjoyed the way he presented things and the way he spoke to the class." Conversely, she critiqued teachers who were disorganized or less familiar with content as less effective in supporting learning, "I think teachers who like can just talk to you about the subject. Versus if they have to look at their notes. That makes me nervous." In describing her underprepared teacher, Lucinda frankly stated, "We can't take her seriously." In brief, student perceptions of teacher preparedness impacted their ability to learn.

Individualized support

Students identified one-on-one instruction as particularly helpful in facilitating their understanding of course material, indicating their preference for individualized attention when teachers had time to walk them through challenging content. Leon explained, "If I need help in math they come over and…they sit there and … they help me work through problems," a situation echoed by Anthony, "They will sit down next to you and say okay this is why you got this wrong…They'll stop whatever they are doing, pull up a chair and explain it to you. Which I think is really helpful." Quality side-by-side time counted for a lot in the eyes of students.

While students described instances of one-on-one support occurring during class time, this type of instruction typically happened outside of class during lunch and after school. According to Evangeline, "When you're in a class, they don't really teach you… 'cause they have to go to other students. But if you go after school, it's like they kind of only focus on you." Aisha further explained, "They will offer you to come into the class after school…I think they also might be available during lunch…You get a one-on-one…they can just focus on you, and not the entire class. So, it helps." Other students remarked on how one-on-one instruction allowed them to work at their own pace rather than trying to keep up with the rest of the class. For example, Malcolm notes, "They dedicate time to you, like when they know you're struggling they don't just leave you and move on with the rest…nobody gets left behind."

Availability of Counseling

School counselors played a key role in supporting students with LD as they worked toward the goal of high school graduation. While counselors' roles, responsibilities, and workloads differed across schools, patterns emerged related to the types of supports provided to students.

Academic advisement

Participants indicated that counselors were instrumental in helping students with course selection and assisting students with scheduling changes when they experienced difficulty with their coursework. Tanya explained, "I have a class-related problem with a teacher or something like that, I'd go to a guidance counselor and tell them to…get me out of that class or…switch me around another period." Giles noted, "If you want to switch one class, you can go to the counselor, and she'll try her best to switch the class." In addition to course scheduling and changes, counselors helped students negotiate additional graduation requirements including testing. Aisha explained that she met with the guidance counselor to determine whether she was "taking the Regents this year."

Academic advisement also included advocating for students who demonstrated a need for additional support. As described by Jennifer:

"If a class is too hard, we talk to her [school counselor] to see how she can accommodate us…She would talk to the teacher, and me, and schedule…a good time that we can go over the material…so I can take the test and pass."

In this example, the counselor served as an intermediary between the student and teacher to ensure the student received needed academic supports. Counselors also attempted to motivate students when they encountered academic difficulties or needed encouragement. In another instance, Latrice described how her counselor urged her to "keep pushing forward" as she continued on her path to graduation. Tracy noted that counseling support, "Reminds me that I have to…pick my grades up; get things together…It reminds me to be more positive and just get my work done." Counselor support extended beyond academic advisement as they helped students navigate conflicts with peers and other personal problems that were impacting student's school success.

Emotional/behavioral support

Student comments suggested that counselors of high school students with disabilities provided additional support to meet student's emotional and behavioral needs. For example, Jeremy described a scenario where a counselor might address a student engaging in avoidance behaviors, "Say if you were skipping class…and you were just in the hallway," he continued, "If she sees you, she will tell you…this isn't good for your future because you must be in class getting an education so you can graduate and find a good job and…get out of high school." Here, Jeremy understands counselors assume disciplinary roles at times and encourage students to change behaviors that do not support academic growth.

Other students commented on seeking out counseling support to help with personal challenges. Brianna shared, "I've had a lot of casualties in my life…If I talked to my parents, I'm afraid that they're either gonna get sad or upset and I don't want to hurt them," she continued, "I will go to her [school counselor] and I will talk about it." Leon explained, "If it was a personal problem, I'd probably go to the guidance counselor." These comments illustrate that high school students benefit from school environments offering emotional support to students who grapple with both personal and academic challenges.

Students' descriptions often indicated that counselors were reliable sources of academic and emotional support and played central roles in student's lives as they worked toward graduation. In describing her counselor, Sherrel noted, "She's always there…she will always help you." Fanon, who met regularly with a counselor explained, "Once a week and that usually helps. Just sort of talk things through and see what's going on." In one instance, Kendall described the relaxed atmosphere created by the counselor where the two of them would "share a lot of…worldviews…so we talk and play Yahtzee." In sum, counselors helped students negotiate academic, personal, and social challenges as they progressed through high school.

Additional Programming

Student responses indicated they recognized the demands on teachers' attention during class and benefited from support outside of class time when teachers had the capacity to work alongside students individually and in small groups. In all three schools various programming options were available to support student learning outside of class.

After school support

Students frequently referred to attending after school programming to supplement classroom instruction. In some cases, teachers established weekly after-school schedules and required specific students to attend. In other instances, it was left to students to seek out after school help from teachers. Often, this time was used for tutoring or to allow students to catch up on classroom assignments and homework. Fanon stated that his teachers allowed him to "stay after school in order to get work done or get help on homework." Latrice explained, "You can stay after school…to make up the work if you're failing," and Sherrel shared, "I'll…get extra help after school…every time I don't understand." For all three students, after school support made the difference.

Student comments also revealed that after school support was often centered on preparation for high-stakes testing, in this case, Regents exams. Troy stated, "Every day there's like a program after school…today there's living environment prep…there was algebra prep yesterday…and there's global prep I think on Wednesdays." In describing after school Regents prep Jennifer shared, "We have prep at the end of the day…yeah that actually helps me." A pattern of overall satisfaction with teacher availability and instructional quality for after school help existed. Omar explained that, "The teachers…all work…hard to make sure that we get there." In brief, students appreciated the availability of after school support.

Saturday school

Schools also provided instruction to students on Saturdays to help them work towards graduation requirements. As Daniel explained, Saturday school served to prepare students for high-stakes testing, "Last year, I had an English Regents coming up, and that was my first time ever taking an English Regents. So, I attended all of Mr. R's…Saturday Academy." According to Melvin, Saturday School was also an option to catch up "If you're missing a credit." Leon stated, "I would…go to Saturday school to make up the credit if I failed." He noted how Saturday classes were supportive of students experiencing academic difficulties, explaining, "I could go to Saturday school or summer school. They…sit you down at school, say this is your grade, this is what you need to handle." While there were fewer references to summer school, several students also mentioned this program as a path to accumulating credits and accessing additional academic support.

School and Family Connections

Many students described how schools being receptive to parental input and parents engaged with school personnel provided a safety net of sorts.

School-family communications

Communication played a key role in family-school collaboration and that the use of online platforms, including email, facilitated parent contact with schools. Lamont described communication between his father and teachers centered on supporting his behavior in school, "Whenever I even acted up they would send him a message or something…My dad is always involved. Emails, text messages, phone calls, whatever." Evangeline commented on how her mother and teachers used email to help her stay on track with her assignments:

My mom…constantly emails…and the teachers…they're…forever emailing parents…so parents here know what their child's doing. Like, assignment has been given…we'll get the email and our parents get the email too…My mom's like well you got this math that's due Friday…she's on top of it.

Courtney shared how her mother used the Internet to monitor her grades, "After a parent-teacher conference, she's always checking online to see what my grades are." In this instance, formal family-school structures such as an IEP meeting encouraged continued parent involvement using online resources.

In response to questions about additional supports they would like from their families, Emili stated, "They can check up on me," and Claudia wanted her family to "be more helpful…with like homework and things that I need to do." Samantha explained, "My family members should start asking me more questions. Like…how are your grades…what are your strengths and your weaknesses right now?" Finally, student responses indicated only one instance of a parent participating in a formal group related to family-school involvement. Instead, collaboration appeared to be dependent on the efforts of individual parents and teachers.

Family support

We conceptualized this particular section as including examples of support from families that did not necessarily have to be directly initiated by the school. Many students conveyed the high expectations held by their parents, emphasizing that schoolwork was a priority. For example, Carlos shared:

They influence me to do my work … Sometimes when I go home they don't let me go outside 'til I done my homework. Sometimes if I get home during the day I'll go outside before they get home. When I go home I'll do my homework at night.

Here we see how Carlos' family helps to create routines and places schoolwork as a priority. They are "on his case," he observes, "Most of the time… in a good way. Work before play, let's put it like that." Other students talked of how the support was consistent, even relentless, with Sherryl shared how her father and boyfriend worked in unison stating, "They push me, they push me, they push me." Elizabeth spoke of a similar situation sharing, "my family supports me a lot…whatever has to be done, they do it. And I'm thankful for that." Curtis noted, "I guess academically they're very supportive. And so I think they're doing a great job. I have no complaints." Students drew great strength from their general family support, reflected in Tanya's comments:

"My family at home is a great family. I live with my grandma and my dad …I live with them and I've lived with them ever since I was four years old. And they've supported me through a lot of hard times and it's—it's a good thing."

Here, we see the obviously grounding nature of a student's sense of belonging to a family.

At the same time, several students described feeling support from their families as pressure to perform. Martin noted how his mother's disappointment in an older brother's dropping out of high school influences her treatment of both. He describes the situation:

He never finished high school and she gets mad at him. And she always puts a load on me, but pushes me to do it. And you know, says I'm bright enough to do it, even though sometimes I feel like I can't do it. So, honestly that'd be the best thing…to finish high school with a 90 average or above.

Here we see how Martin recognizes being pushed for his own good, encouraging him to believe in himself and negate self-doubts. Conversely, Joaquin shared that he felt too pressured by parents being "on his case" (not in a good way), to the point of feeling powerless in envisioning his own future saying, "They support me too much…They sit me down. They say… we are going to do this, we are going to—…they have already my entire life planned out for me."

Parents often initiate conversations about how students manage their school workload, including class assignments and homework. Omar shares how his mom frequently asks "…if I need anything or if I missed any assignments that I can make up. So yes, my mom helps and she pushes really hard." Several students described how their mother placed them in additional tutoring outside of school. For example, Alexa shares, "She's gonna put me in an SAT [prep course]… during this summer," explaining the strategic move because, "…we take it in junior year, towards the beginning of the year." In general, students appeared to accept—and appreciate—their parents checking in.

Students also spoke of family members who served as people they aspired to emulate, as well as those in whose footsteps they did not wish to follow. Simply put, they were aware of family members who had graduated versus those who had not. Interestingly, both family members who did not graduate and those who did, encouraged students directly and indirectly. Tony looked up to his sister who had made it to college and was supporting herself, proudly stating, "She's really smart…She's in college right now, in the Bronx. And she's also working in a frozen yogurt store." Jose spoke of his sister's attending college as a positive influence, sharing "She went to it and told me about it and it was pretty cool. I think she's getting her degree in psychology, something like that. She's graduating soon." Others spoke of parents who did not have the means or the opportunity to attend college and encouraged them to go and be the first-generation in the family. Other students spoke of family members who did not graduate, and how that influenced them. Giles shared, "Usually my sisters told me… do better than us, than we can, than we did," explaining, "They graduated I think middle school. But up 'til there, that's it. They just stopped going to high school." Whether by direct encouragement, or indirect example, students weighed insights from their own family members in regard to their own desires and motivation.

Self-Support

Although when originally developing this article we conceptualized support to students as external, students often spoke of supports they provided for themselves. These internal supports can be summarized around a hub of "the self," and include interrelated concepts such as self awareness, self-determination, self-regulation, and self-initiative. This section focuses on ways in which students think about self-support.

Self awareness

Many students were self-aware and highly motivated to leave high school, viewing graduation as the endpoint, and keeping their "eyes on the prize," so to speak. Evangeline summed up her desire and drive toward completing school, "I just wanna graduate here…and thank God. But I'm ready to graduate, you know." Sherrel shared:

The fact that I wanna get out of this school, it pushes me. Because I don't wanna be here. I see students that are seniors from three years ago. And it's sad, honestly. I don't wanna be like that. I wanna be successful. I wanna move on. I don't wanna be 30, 20 years old, trying to get a GED [General Education Diploma], trying to figure out what I want.

The self-realization of "it's time," weighed heavily on some students, especially those who knew others who have been around for too long and hence began to take the form of negative role models. Charles revealed his desire to be highly focused stating, "My greatest challenge is to pick up my grade and stay to myself. Not get into any trouble. So I see that high school diploma in my hands." Personal motivation helps students focus and stay on track.

Self-determination

Being self-directed was clearly linked to self-determination, keeping the end goal of graduation in sight. There existed a general level of motivation to get out of school by earning a diploma. Magali simply stated, "It's on me," expanding, "I know what I want… I support myself, study hard and do my homework all the time." In another instance, Maria shared, "My greatest challenge will be keeping my grades up in math and science. I'm completely not worried about English and History," recognizing, "…it's very important to me to have a good average to get into a good school. So I know I have to work hard. I work very hard in those classes. I just need to keep those grades up." At the same time, Maria shared going to the special education teacher for additional support, confessing, "even if I know I don't like it…because I don't sometimes. I have to go." In brief, Maria exhibits self-determination in her preparedness to work hard so she can get into a good college, pushing through any difficulties to reach her goals.

Lionel reflected upon his ability to focus on working toward passing classes and graduating, explaining, "I started to take my time and read and I actually started developing more." In yet another example, Shaniqua shared how she values teachers who are approachable, and the need for students to sometimes initiate a discussion explaining, "I think the most important thing for me is knowing I have support if I need it. So just being able to talk to [teachers] …and, that teachers know what…I'm going through." Shaniqua has the facility to initiate discussions and ask for assistance when needed, a skill that helps her succeed in school.

Self-regulation

General self-awareness is also related to the ability to self regulate. Many students were open about their challenges to paying attention in classes. Omar's goal was "Staying focused and not getting side tracked by what's going on, like, friends." Herve shared, "Well, I'm making sure I become more focused in class, so I could understand the content so my grades could get higher." Mayana revealed ways in which she self-regulated to maximize focus:

I've been switching my seats in all my classes, so I won't talk to anybody…or sometimes I go get a drink of water and then come right back into class and then focus more… Because sometimes, you know, it's hot in the classrooms, so you get a little bit sleepy.

Students are also cognizant of time management outside of class to study. Lydia identified a strength as "I budget my time. Try and pay attention more. Not talk to people as much. You know, just sort of have all my supplies ready with me and then set aside time when I get home for homework." Time management is also connected to self-regulating social time. Daniel shared his strategy of "maintaining average grades that are best for me and my future," because, "I know when it gets nicer out, I'm less inclined to do my work. I wanna go outside. I wanna play basketball. I wanna do a whole bunch of other stuff. Still being focused on the school." This observation shows a remarkable amount of self-awareness and the ability to use an internal locus of control. Troy stated that he always would "try hard":

That's the most important thing. I try, I to go all out in whatever I do. If I can't do then I'll ease it back and try it a little bit slower, more steady and I just keep going so, so I guess I succeed in something, if I do well on a test.

Again, this self-regulation reveals the reflective approach of some students in their quest to academically succeed.

Self-initiative

Students also shared instances in which they demonstrated self-initiative to ensure a supportive learning experience. Melvin revealed how aware he was of a situation not conducive to both his academic growth and ultimate success, and the steps he took to change it:

I was once in section A, where I felt that the working environment wasn't for me because it was a little bit distracting, how we all acted, 'cause we were all friends. So, it was just one big classroom with a bunch of people with ADHD. It was feeding off of one another like that. I requested to go into another class. So that made me work harder 'cause I had to prove them that I could handle it.

Here we see students working with teachers, taking in the conversations about what works best for them. Regardless of types and levels of external support, some students accepted full responsibility for graduating, Alex flatly stating, "'Cause it's all about me." He expands,

I have to make it…I'm gonna be the first one to go to college. And, that really stuck out to me. Like I wanted—I want to make it. So I can have my little brother—my younger siblings and my older sibling to look up to me, to see where I'm going.

Alex's desire to be a family role model is sufficient to compel him on his journey to graduation. Other students showed similar determination, even in the face of significant adversity. Some experienced great levels of anxiety that resulted in being stressed. Jeremy spoke of "basically being stressed out," and attempting to manage that stress by "jumping over obstacles… jumping over the stress to get to where I wanna be." Carla, who also reported high levels of stress, shared the mantra of "Try hard. Try hard," saying, "Even with the tears. I cried a lot this year… So many papers, so much stress. But, it's only a month, just a month left." Note that she is able to self-support by holding on to the fact that these trying times will soon be over. In another example, Tanya feared slipping behind in covering content in classes, explaining her situation, "Some days I just wouldn't be feeling well, so I wouldn't come to school. So I'm pushing myself to come to school more." These self-observations reveal many students know that "buck stops with them" and, through self-support—regardless of what schools and families can provide for them—ultimately, they are responsible for success.

Discussion

Our conceptual framework of DSE allowed us to center the people being researched and work with them in ensuring their perspectives are heard, a non-negotiable point made by the disability rights movement. DSE echoes literature on the general value of voice, supporting the notions that educators can "…use the information from students to make changes" (Ferguson, Hanreddy, & Draxton, 2011, p. 55) and reimagining schools as they are currently configured.

Negotiating Ableist Systems

In viewing student experiences through a DSE lens, it reveals ways in which ableist systems and structures persist in schools, creating barriers for student success. While supplementary supports were helpful to students, many of these efforts can be viewed as reactive measures put in place to address academic difficulties that are potentially avoided if curricular and programmatic decision-making prioritized inclusivity and planned for the naturally occurring variability of learners (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014). Instead, the current education system's lack of consideration for diverse student needs creates barriers to student success, and locates the blame for academic difficulty within students, rather than using a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach with a starting point of creating access for all students (Wilson, 2017) with particular approaches to engage students with dyslexia (Redford, 2017).

Interestingly, the self-support in many forms evidenced in students revealed a high level of awareness about their locus of control. Many recognized their abilities to be self-motivated within what is often a challenging environment. Graduation, after all, is the endpoint of an exam-driven curriculum that symbolizes society's stamp of approval in terms of possessing the knowledge of what is needed before transitioning into adulthood, either entering the workforce or moving into further education. Examples of student responses to adverse circumstances and challenging contexts, determination to pass all required classes and exams, and the ability to focus on moving closer and closer toward the goal of graduation were very much present in their words.

At the same time, there also existed palpable student anxiety over keeping up with the pace and expected standards from the high-stakes testing that drives the curriculum. As students with LD potentially face greater levels of anxiety (Eccles & Ochoa, 2005) related to struggles in academic work, they noted an intensity of pace that revealed fears of being left behind. School appeared to be an academic treadmill, difficult to sustain, despite a desire to graduate. Students therefore appreciated opportunities for second chances from teachers, seeing them as restoring faith in their work after having temporarily ceased to maintain the pace and intensity expected. In addition, many students availed themselves of school supports outside of the traditional school day, including supervised studying on weekends, help after class, and informal lunchtime check-ins—a testimony to their dedication and drive.

Individualism and Interconnectedness

The topic of individualization is important to the field of special education as it is part of the bedrock of guarantees within the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004). Individualization is also a contentious area as both inclusive (Kauffman & Hallahan, 1995) and special (segregated) settings (Cautson-Theoharis, Theoharis, Orsati, & Cosier, 2011) have been questioned related to the degree of actual individualization possible and what can be feasibly offered in spaces where everyone is interconnected to some degree. An important topic that surfaced was how much students recognized their need for individualized support and attention throughout the school day. When discussing teachers, students identified the most supportive as being noticeably hard workers, well-prepared (including materials, adapted to fit), knowledgeable of their students, and willing "to go the extra mile." Students also appreciated teachers who were also flexible and understanding in the student's struggles with time management of work assigned. In other words, they like reassurance that they have someone "on their side" who is part of the education system and can help them through it if need be.

In addition to teachers, student identification of counselors as highly trusted professionals who provide support reaffirmed their importance (Milsom & Harley, 2005). For many students an effective counselor who was readily available made a significant difference in how students felt supported by their school in general. Importantly, counselors who students felt confident they could "go to" and serve as a "go between" among teachers and other school personnel, reassured students that they had an advocate who could help them navigate challenges.

Another area of importance was having a two-way street for home-school partnerships that maximized student support. Schools that had authentic collaboration with parents rather than going through the motions of procedures mandated by law gave students the feeling that they were being looked out for. However, as important as school-home collaborations are, we were also left with the impression that authentic and effective home-school partnerships were insufficiently developed, and not as widespread as they could be, recognizing that both teacher(s) and parent(s) have to establish and maintain contact to make these systems work. Given that another tenet of IDEIA is formalizing family support to foster dialogue and consensus building, it behooves schools to ensure strong home-school relationships in order to monitor and support the success of students with LD. High expectations placed upon all students, and the pressure to perform academically, should be recognized by all parties involved in the home-school connection.

Limitations of the Study

Several thoughts came to mind regarding limitations of the study. First, having only one interview with the majority of students inhibited the level of rapport established and did not allow for follow up interviews in greater depth about the issues they shared. Second, we sometimes found the amount of time allotted for the number of questions could inhibit student voice in the sense of seeking more detailed responses. Third, we acknowledge that the purpose of our research was not to generalize, but rather to provide an in-depth understanding of social processes in the given context of students with LD in high schools. Nevertheless, we argue that because findings are from three schools within the same city, and the contextualized knowledge shared by students is relatable to general concerns of the graduation of students with LD in schools nationwide, there can exist a form of cautious recognition that the issues identified would likely resonate among students.

Recommendations

In closing, we have endeavored to explore the perspectives of students with LD in identifying and discussing existing supports for a successful graduation. Bearing in mind our findings, we make the following recommendations for practice and policy.

Considerations for Practice

In terms of practice, school leaders and teachers are encouraged to reflect on current supports available to students to identify areas of success and strength to build upon. Schools are urged to elicit student perspectives on supports and to consider their feedback and opinions when making programmatic decisions. Second, in evaluating existing programming, an analysis of supports geared toward strengthening student's internal supports (including self-awareness, self-discipline, and self-determination) is warranted. Schools may consider how to leverage the expertise of school counselors in promoting increased feelings of self-efficacy and awareness of student's locus of control. Third, given findings revealing student preferences for individualized support, it is recommended that schools explore options for increasing opportunities for students to work with teachers one-on-one and in small groups both during school and outside of the school day. While evidence indicates students will benefit from increased opportunities for individualized instruction, it is also recommended that schools consider the variability of learners from the start when designing curriculum (Rose et al., 2014.)

Considerations for Policy and Procedures

Schools are encouraged to disrupt deficit-based discourses of disability by incorporating a DSE stance into teacher professional development. Such an approach would provide teachers with opportunities to reflect on their perceptions of students with LD (and other disabilities), engage teachers in understanding the social model of disability and support them in finding ways to remove pedagogical barriers that diminish student's school experiences. It is also recommended that teachers bring students into conversations that push-back against dominant narratives of disability so students understand how they are positioned within oppressive education structures—that includes special education—as they learn to advocate for themselves both inside and outside of educational settings.

Finally, schools are encouraged to work with families to create increased opportunities for communication and partnership with the goal of promoting student progress toward graduation. School-based parent representatives may serve a critical role in fostering increased school-family engagement. School-family partnerships that are mindful of student's experiences across home, school, and societal contexts can help families and school personnel recognize spaces where students are successful and find ways to leverage these successes across and among all contexts.

Conclusion

In closing, we were struck by how experiences of students with LD were not much different than their non-LD peers: feeling pressure to perform academically, having an appreciation for flexible teachers and good counselors, wanting to be recognized as an individual. The quotation from Martin within the title for the article, "I'm bright enough to do it, even though sometimes I feel I can't do it," symbolizes the ambivalence students with LD feel in schools as they constantly negotiate deficit-drenched discourses on special education. However, given how high the stakes are, it is imperative that schools continue to work toward diminishing attitudinal and pedagogical barriers and continue working toward the ideal of an even playing field.

References

  • Baglieri, S. (2012). Disability studies in the inclusive classroom: Critical practices for creating least restrictive attitudes. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203837399
  • Baglieri, S., & Moses, A. (2010). "My name is Jay": On teachers' roles in the overrepresentation of minorities in special education and what teacher education can do. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2), https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v30i2.1243
  • Blanchett, W. (2010). "Telling it like it is: The role of race, class, and culture in the perpetuation of learning disability as a privileged category for the white middle class. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v30i2.1233
  • Bursuck, W. D., Munk, D. D., & Olson, M. M. (1999). The fairness of report card grading adaptations: What do students with and without learning disabilities think? Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 84-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259902000205
  • Cavendish, W. & Connor, D. J. (2017). Toward authentic IEPs and transition plans: Student, parent, and teacher perspectives. Learning Disability Quarterly, 41(1), 32-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948716684680
  • Cavendish, W., Connor, D. J., & Rediker, E. (2016). Engaging students and parents in transition focused Individualized Education Programs. Intervention in School & Clinic, 52(4), 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216659469
  • Causton-Theoharris, J., Theoharris, G., Orsati, F., & Cosier, M. (2011). Does self-contained special education deliver on its promises? A critical inquiry into research and practice. Journal of Educational Leadership, 24(2), 61-78.
  • Charlton, J. I. (2000). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Connor, D. J., Gabel, S. L., Gallagher, D., & Morton, M. (2008). Disability studies and inclusive education—Implication for theory, research, and practice: Guest editor's introduction. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(5-6), 441-457. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802377482
  • Connor, D. J., Gallagher, D., & Ferri, B. A. (2011). Broadening our horizons: Toward a plurality of methodologies in learning disability research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(2), 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871103400201
  • Cook-Slather, A. (2003). Listening to students about learning differences. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35(4), 22-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990303500404
  • Creswell, J. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
  • Craft, E., & Howley, A. (2018). African American students' experiences in special education programs. Teachers College Record, 120, (10), 1-35. http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 22260
  • Cumming, T. M., & Smedley, E. N. (2017). Life span transitions for a student with LD: Mother-daughter perspectives. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(3), 176-181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451216644826
  • Danforth, S. (2009). The incomplete child: An intellectual history of learning disabilities. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Danforth, S., & Gabel, S. (2007). Vital questions facing disability studies in education. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Deshler, D., Schumaker, J. B., Lenz, K., Bulgren, J. A., Hiock, M. F., Knight, J., & Ehren, B. J. (2002). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 96-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/0938-8982.00011
  • Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, & Technology (n.d.) https://www.washington.edu/doit/
  • Dudley-Marling, C., & Gurn, A. (2010). Troubling the foundations of special education: Examining the myth of the normal curve. In C. Dudley-Marling & A. Gurn (Eds.), The myth of the normal curve (pp. 9-23). New York: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-0039-0
  • Eisenman, L. T., Pell, M. M., Poudel, B. B., & Pleet-Odle, A. M. (2015). "I think I'm reaching my potential": Students' self-determination experiences in an inclusive high school. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38(2), 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143414537349
  • Eccles, S. E., & Ochoa, T. A., (2005). Students with disabilities: Transitioning from high school to higher education. American Secondary Education, 33(3), 6-20.
  • Ferguson, D., Hanreddy, A., & Draxton, S. (2011). Giving students voice as a strategy for improving teacher practice. London Review of Education, 9(1), 55-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2011.550435
  • Gonzalez, T. E., Hernandez-Saca, D., & Artiles, A. (2017). In search of voice: Theory and methods in K-12 student voice research in the US, 1990-2010. Educational Review, 69(4), 451-473. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1231661
  • Granger, D. (2010). A tribute to my dyslexic body, as I travel in the form of a ghost. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v30i2.1236
  • Grbich, J. (2007). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Hadley, W. (2007). The necessity of academic accommodations for first year college students with learning disabilities. Journal of College Admission, 195, 9-13.
  • Halliday, A. J., Kern, M. L., Garrett, D. K., & Turnbull, D. (2019). The student voice in well-being: A case study of participatory action research in positive education. Educational Action Research, 27(2), 173-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2018.1436079
  • Kauffman, J. M., & Hallahan, D. P. (Eds.) (1995). The illusion of full inclusion: A comprehensive critique of a current special education bandwagon. Austin, TX: ProEd.
  • Kauffman, J. M., Anastasiou, D., & Maag, J. W. (2017) Special Education at the crossroad: An identity crisis and the need for a scientific reconstruction, Exceptionality, 25(2), 139-155, https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2016.1238380
  • Keel, J. M., Cushing, L. S., & Awsumb, J. M. (2018). Post-school visions and expectations of Latino students with learning disabilities, their parents, and teachers. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 41(2), 88-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143417708997
  • Leafstedt, J. M., Richards, C., Lamonte, M., & Cassidy, D. (2007). Perspectives on co-teaching: Views from high school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 177-184.
  • Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing.
  • Milsom, A., & Hartley, M. T. (2005). Assisting students with learning disabilities transitioning to college: What school counselors should know. Professional School Counseling, 8(5), 436-441.
  • Moxley, D., & Finch, J. (Eds.). (2003). Sourcebook of rehabilitation and mental health practice. New York City, NY: Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/b105964
  • National Center for Educational Statistics (2018). https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64
  • National Center for Learning Disabilities (2014). The state of learning disabilities. http://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-State-of-LD.pdf
  • National Center for Learning Disabilities (2017). Executive summary. https://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Executive-Summary.Fin_.03142017.pdf
  • National Center for Learning Disabilities (2018). Executive summary. https://www.ncld.org/executive-summary
  • National Center for Learning Disabilities (2018). The state of learning disabilities. https://www.ncld.org/the-state-of-learning-disabilities-understanding-the-1-in-5
  • Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.) (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press: New York.
  • Redford, K. (2017). Dyslexia: Disability or difference? Educational Leadership, 74(7), 64-67.
  • Reid, D. K., & Valle, J. W. (2004). The discursive practice of learning disability: Implications for instruction and parent school relations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 466-481. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060101
  • Robins, M., & Gilbert, R. N. (1998). Welcome to our world: Realities of high school students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Rooke, M. (2016). Creative successful dyslexic: 25 high achievers share their stories. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley.
  • Skrtic, T. M., & McCall, Z. (2010). Ideology, institutions, and equity: Comments on Christine Sleeter's Why is there Learning Disabilities? Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2), https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v30i2.1230
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Thompson, S., Thurlow, M., & Walz, L. (2000). Student perspectives on the use of accommodations on large-scale assessments (Minnesota Report No. 35). https://nceo.info/Resources/publications/OnlinePubs/MnReport35.html
  • Tomlinson, S. (2012). Ignorant yobs? Low attainers in a global knowledge economy. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203119747
  • U.S. Department of Education, National Center of Education Statistics (2016). Digest of education statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016144.pdf
  • U.S. Department of Education, National Center of Education Statistics (2017). Digest of education statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017144.pdf
  • Wald, J., & Losen, D. J., (2003). Defining and redirecting a school-to-prison pipeline. New Directions for Student Leadership, 99, 9-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.51
  • Wilson, J. D. (2017). Reimagining disability and inclusive education through Universal Design for Learning. Disability Studies Quarterly, 37(2). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v37i2.5417
  • Wren, C. (1987). College and the high school student with learning disabilities: The student's perspective. Chicago, IL: DePaul University.

Appendix A: Interview Questions

Topic: Planning/Student Choice

  1. Do you get to pick the classes you take? What classes do you enjoy? What do you wish you could take? What classes are the most difficult for you?
  2. What type of diploma are you planning to get? Do you know of any other types of diplomas?
  3. What career preparation programs/activities are offered at your school?

Topic: Supports/Testing

  1. What are the tests that you take in school?
  2. Do you have a counselor at your school?
  3. What kind of help or support can you get at school if you're having trouble with a class?

Topic: Planning & Transition

  1. Do you attend your IEP/transition meetings? From your perspective, how are students included in your IEP/transition planning?
  2. Do you feel like your goals and opinions are included in your IEP/transition plan?
  3. Do you have a transition plan? How is the transition plan developed? What components are included?
  4. Do your parents attend IEP/transition meetings? How does the school involve them in the planning?
  5. How often do your teachers attend your IEP/transition meetings?

Note: Further prompts were included, for example: Can you tell us a little bit more? Can you share an example? Can you explain why you think….?

Return to Top of Page