Evidence-Based Secondary Transition Practices for Enhancing School Completion

Abstract

Approximately 28% of students with disabilities do not complete high school (National Longitudinal Transition Study-2, 2005). This increases the likelihood that these students will experience low wages, high rates of incarceration, and limited access to postsecondary education. This article reviews evidence-based secondary transition practices that show promise for enhancing school completion of students with disabilities. For conceptual purposes, the article uses and describes evidence using the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996) which includes (a) student focused-planning, (b) student development, (c) interagency collaboration, (d) family involvement, and (e) program structures. Suggestions for practice and future research are provided.

Introduction

One of the more significant transitions in a person's life is being graduated from high school and pursuing a productive adulthood. While data from a representative national sample indicate dropout rates in 2003–2004 between 4.0% (event) and 10.3% (status; National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2003; NCES, 2004) for all students, the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) reported that 28% of students with disabilities did not complete school (NLTS2, 2005). Further, 35.4% of students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) and 61.2% of students with emotional or behavior disorders (EBD) exited high school without documentation (U.S. Department of Education, 2006). NLTS2 data indicated that the 2003 school completion rate for students with disabilities of 72% was a 17% increase from 1987; however, these data continue to be troubling considering the impact of a high school diploma on future success. For example, research indicates that students who do not graduate have higher rates of unemployment or underemployment (U.S. Department of Labor, 2003) and experience higher rates of unexpected parenthood (Coley, 1995) and drug use (Swaim, Beauvis, Chavez, & Oetting, 1997). While Bost and Riccomni (2006) also noted the recent increase in high school completion for students with disabilities, they concluded that “school dropout remains one of the most serious and pervasive problems facing students with disabilities nationally” (p. 301).

Given the impact of school completion on adult outcomes, it is not surprising that researchers have attempted to determine strategies that improve graduation rates for students with high-incidence disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities, emotional or behavior disorders). Two recent reviews of the literature on dropout prevention provide an overall sense of this literature.

First, Prevatt and Kelly (2003) conducted a literature review on dropout prevention strategies. Based on 259 articles published between 1982 and 2002, the most frequent intervention strategies were categorized as academic engagement, psychosocial skills development, mentoring, and parent/teacher behavior management training. While the literature review did not indicate a particular best practice, the more promising practices appeared to involve academic or multi-component programs.

Second, Cobb, Sample, Alwell, and Johns (2006) identified 16 studies involving 791 youth with specific learning disabilities, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or behavioral disorders that empirically supported the use of cognitive-behavioral interventions across educational environment, disability, age, and gender in reducing dropout rates. This type of intervention is characterized by a “combination of behavioral and cognitive approaches to teach students to identify difficult situations, think the situation through, and exhibit appropriate responses” (Riccomini, Bost, Katsiyannis, & Zhang, 2005, p. 1). The behavioral approaches typically include social or tangible reinforcers for a target behavior. The findings by Cobb and colleagues were similar to earlier literature reviews: recommending cognitive-behavioral strategies as a dropout prevention strategy (Kashani, Jones, Bumby, & Thomas, 1999; Whitaker, 1993).

While existing reviews of the literature on dropout prevention and school completion do suggest a variety of strategies that can be used to increase school completion, including academic skill development, mentoring, and cognitive-behavioral strategies, no review has specifically focused on the area of secondary transition services and practices for students with disabilities. While dropout prevention and the resulting school completion are important to future success, it is critical that students who obtain a diploma also have skills necessary for adult life. Bost and Riccomini (2006) concluded that in designing dropout prevention programs schools need to focus on offering relevant courses as a part of a comprehensive approach to increasing student engagement in school.

Since balancing instruction in academic and life skills can be difficult, adopting what Kohler (1998) called “transition-focused education” may address this balance. Transition-focused education guides students toward productive adult outcomes using academic, career, and extracurricular instruction as well as activities aligned with local context and student need. Therefore this article conducts a review of the literature to identify evidence-based secondary transition practices that promote school completion for students with high incidence disabilities.

METHOD

The following search procedures were used to obtain the literature for this review. First, we searched a bibliography of 156 sources on post-school outcomes from the National Post-School Outcomes Center for journal articles on dropout prevention. Next, we conducted electronic searches using Cambridge Scientific Abstracts of ERIC and EBSCO Host's Education Research Complete databases. Search terms included dropout prevention, school completion, graduation, and disabilities. Finally, we conducted a hand search of 2002 through August 2008 issues of prominent special education journals, including Exceptional Children, Behavioral Disorders, Intervention in School and Clinic, Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, Preventing School Failure, and Remedial and Special Education.

Articles included for review met the following inclusion criteria: (a) published, data-based journal article; (b) dependent variable, outcome variable, or primary topic was dropout prevention or school completion; and (c) participants were individuals with high incidence disabilities (i.e., SLD, BED, other health impairment under Section 504 [OHI], or mild intellectual disability [ID]). Finally, the independent variable, predictor variable, or practice described aligned with the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996).

Identification of interventions, predictor variables, or descriptions of practices that aligned with the Taxonomy for Transition Programming was determined by examining the five primary areas of the taxonomy (Kohler, 1999; Kohler & Chapman, 1999). The five areas include: (a) student-focused planning, which focuses on using assessment information and facilitating student involvement in their own educational planning based on their post-school goals; (b) student development, which encourages life, employment, and occupational skill school and work-based instruction; (c) interagency collaboration, which emphasizes involvement of various community participants through the use of interagency agreements; (d) family involvement, which includes planning with parents and families and facilitating family involvement in transition planning and transition-focused-education through training and empowerment; and (e) program structure, which focuses on attributes of school structures and policies that reflect and support transition focused education for all students. The list of specific practices within each area (Kohler, 1996) and reflective questions (Kohler, 1999; e.g., individual education program development training for students within student-focused planning; job seeking skills training within student development; respite care provided within family involvement) were used to accurately link the practices described in the literature reviewed with the taxonomy areas. This process assisted authors in determining the inclusion of research in the review as a secondary transition practice that supports school completion. The Taxonomy for Transition Programming was used to organize identified practices since it is widely accepted as a framework for comprehensive secondary transition education and services in this field. The Taxonomy for Transition Programming was originally developed from four research and evaluation studies and has been reevaluated with the secondary transition research in 1999 (i.e., Kohler & Chapman) and 2003 (i.e., Kohler & Field).

While the initial three-part search process resulted in 62 potential articles, after a full review of each article, only 11 articles met the criteria for inclusion in the literature review. Articles were eliminated due to inconclusive results that did not indicate positive or negative findings regarding the practice and student school completion. Articles were also excluded because they did not include students with high-incidence disabilities, lacked a research design or specific literature search procedures, or did not align with any area of the Taxonomy for Transition Programming.

RESULTS

Eleven articles met our criteria for inclusion and are summarized in Table 1. Effective transition practices, which aligned with dropout prevention, emerged in all five areas of the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996).

TABLE 1 Evidence-Based Secondary Transition Studies that Address Dropout Prevention

Citation	Purpose	Design	Population	Evidence-Based Practices	Taxonomy for Transition Programming Category
Kemp (2006)	To expand the literature on practices and policies used in secondary schools regarding students with and without disabilities who drop out of school	Survey—descriptive analysis	156 secondary public school principals	Providing (a) career awareness, (b) counseling, (c) vocational education/ technical training, (d) extracurricular activities	Student Development: Life Skills Instruction, Career & Vocational Curricula
Sinclair, Christensen, & Thurlow (2005)	To investigate the effects of the check and connect model of student engagement with urban high school students with E/BD	Longitudinal experimental, with random assignment	144 ninth graders from two cohorts (1996 & 1997) in one district (71 in treatment condition) students with E/BD, 84% male, 64% AA, 70% free-reduced lunch	Establishing routine, year-round monitoring of attendance (at school and work), suspensions, and academic credits Helping students develop a relationship with an adult in the school Providing students with a persistent message that an adult in the school cares about their academic performance Developing a case management approach to students and their families Providing time (individualized levels) for instruction on a cognitive-behavioral problem solving approach regarding conflict resolutions and solutions to other barriers	Student Development: Life Skills Instruction, Support ServicesFamily Involvement: Family EmpowermentProgram Structure: Program Structure, Program Evaluation, Resource Allocation
Dunn, Chambers, & Rabren (2004)	To examine student perceptions of their school experiences and student demographic factors that predict dropping out	Correlational with statistical modeling	1654 former students, 57% SLD, 43% ID, 14% had dropped out (nequals; 228)	Helping students identify a (1) helpful person, (2) helpful class, and (3) believe that school prepared them for post-school	Student Development: Support Services
Corbett, Clark, & Blank (2002)	To investigate the theory that vocational education for students with E/BD will help such youths remain in school	Correlational with statistical modeling	398 former students, E/BD who were in the eighth grade in the 1989–90, 1990–91, 1991–92, or 1992–93 school years, 83% male, 33% minority ethnicity, 24% graduates, 66% dropouts, 10% unknown	Participating in any form of vocational education (a) generic [employability skills], (b) occupationally specific [trade preparation], or (c) work-based [academic credit for successful employment]	Student Development: Employment Skills Instruction, Career & Vocational Curricula
Kortering, Braziel, & Tompkins (2002)	To examine secondary program features for students with E/BD that students perceive as affecting the quality of the services provided	Qualitative	33 ninth, tenth, or eleventh graders from 2 high schools, 82% male, E/BD, 76% C, 18% AA, 4% H, 4% API	Helping students value school and earning a diploma as a means to accessing better education or better employment after high school Having more elective courses (e.g., occupation specific, ROTC), receive academic and behavioral support, and provide flexibility in policies such as suspension rules Providing individual attention from a teacher (e.g., individual instruction, encouragement, additional explanation of material)	Student Development: Employment Skills Instruction, Career & Vocational Curricula, Support ServicesProgram Structure: Program Structure
Martin, Tobin, & Sugai (2002)	To improve understanding of factors related to dropping out of school and to gather descriptions of dropout prevention programs and practitioners' reactions to ideas from the literature	Descriptive review of the literature and subsequent survey of practitioners	Administrators, workforce development leaders, and Council for Children with Behavior Disorders members in Oregon	Providing universal interventions for students with and without disabilities (e.g., advisory programs for 9th and 10th graders, engagement in extracurricular activities) Providing vocational education for students with E/BD Using functional behavior assessment to design positive behavior supports for struggling students with and without disabilities Using successful students as mentors for younger high school students Training in community settings for basic skills such as computer literacy and job seeking Providing paid work experiences Changing service delivery (e.g., reduced class size, alternative education programs) Collaborating with potential postschool employers through career exploration opportunities and postschool relevant curriculum planning	Student Development: Life Skills Instruction, Employment Skills Instruction, Career & Vocational Curricula, Support Services, Assessment, Structure Work ExperienceInteragency Collaboration: Collaborative Service DeliveryProgram Structure: Program Structure, Program Evaluation, Program Policy
Benz, Lindstrom, & Yovanoff, (2000)	To examine the relationships between education and transition outcomes for students with disabilities, andTo examine the program factors and staff characteristics perceived as most important to education and transition goal attainment	Correlational with statistical modeling	709 participants, 440 males, 61% SLD, 11% ID, 10% EBD, 4% OHI, 4% SLI, 3% HI, 3% OI, 2% TBI, 1% AU, 1% VI; 87% C, 5% H, 3% AA, 3% A/PI, 2% AI	Participating in two or more career-related, paid jobs while in school Completing four or more student-identified transition goals	Student Focused Planning: IEP Development, Student ParticipationStudent Development: Structured Work Experience
Bounds & Gould (2000)	To identify rationale for dropping out and to determine strategies that encourage returning and graduating	Questionnaire; themes presented with percentages of respondents	60 students with disabilities who dropped out of school, 72% Male, 73% SLD, 23% E/BD, 2% OHI, 1% OI; 69% C, 14% AA, 14% H, 3% AI	Providing better communication with staff Decreasing staff size Providing flexible scheduling	Student Development: Support servicesProgram Structure: Program policy
Malian & Love (1998)	To examine school services needed and received by students with disabilities	Survey, longitudinal-Statistical analysis	1,015 graduates, 270 drop outs, 67% male, 71% SLD, 14% MR, 8% E/BD, 2% OI, 1% HI; 69% C, 23% H, 4% AI, 3% AA, 1% A/PI; Plus parents and teachers of each student	Providing instruction in money handling skills Providing vocational instruction Providing community-based instruction Having a job during last year of high school Choosing coursework	Student Development: Life Skills Instruction, Employment Skills Instruction, Support Services, Structured Work Experience
Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, & Hurley (1998)	To investigate the effects of the check & connect model in grades 7 to 9 on preventing students with LD or EBD from dropping out	Group experimental, with random assignment	94 students with SLD or EBD; 68% male, seventh, eighth, and ninth graders, Mequals; 13 years, 4 months at start of study; 59% AA, 71% free/reduced lunch	documenting student risk factors implementing staff allocation policies that meet the needs of students reducing student suspensions providing meaningful instruction	Program Structure: Program Policy
Repetto, Pankaskie, Hankins, & Schwartz (1997)	To identify a set of practices from the fields of transition and dropout prevention that would be effective in keeping high-risk students (e.g., mild disabilities) in school	Survey—use of a Delphi method with 3 phases (open-ended responses, forced responses, and coding of themes based on previous research)	10 experts in the field of dropout prevention for students with disabilities	Encouraging student involvement in the IEP process Teaching students life skills such as conflict management, goal setting, leisure training, study skills, and self-advocacy Supporting families through referrals to community health agencies and counseling Developing interagency agreements Practicing school-community collaboration and encouraging parent participation Training staff across disciplines and departments in team building and teamwork Developing a program structure that is based on student-centered services Providing services in the most integrated settings possible Formalizing case-management services for at-risk students Developing and providing instructional programs for all students that are relevant to outcomes	Student Focused Planning: Student ParticipationStudent Development: Life Skills InstructionFamily Involvement: Family EmpowermentInteragency Collaboration: Collaborative Service Delivery, Collaborative FrameworkProgram Structure: Program Structure, Program Evaluation, Strategic Planning, Program Policy, Human Resource Development
Note. AAequals; African-American, AIequals; American Indian/ Alaskan Native, A/PIequals; Asian/ Pacific Islander, Cequals; Caucasian, Hequals; Hispanic, AUequals; Autism, E/BDequals; Emotional or Behavioral Disorder, HIequals; Hearing Impairment, IDequals; Intellectual Disability; OHIequals; Other Health Impairment, OIequals; Orthopedic Impairment, SLDequals; Specific Learning Disability, SLIequals; Speech Language Impairment, TBIequals; Traumatic Brain Injury, VIequals; Visual Impairment.

Student-Focused Planning

Student-focused planning includes individual education program (IEP) development, student participation, and planning strategies. Two articles provided evidence-based support for student-focused planning for increasing school completion of youths with disabilities.

First, Repetto, Pankaskie, Hankins, and Schwartz (1997) conducted a multi-phase survey to examine effective practices in dropout prevention, including students with mild disabilities. The first phase of the survey asked 10 experts in dropout prevention to list practices they deemed effective. After analyzing these responses, participants ranked 186 practices regarding their feasibility and validity, resulting in a list of 180 valid practices (124 considered feasible). Finally, researchers analyzed the list in comparison to the literature and organized the list into themes that were then validated by participants. This Delphi survey methodology resulted in practices that are effective across the Taxonomy for Transition Programming, including support for student participation in the development of their IEP as a student-focused planning practice.

Next, Benz, Lindstrom, and Yovanoff (2000) reported findings that examined the relationship between student outcomes (e.g., school completion, employment) of students with disabilities and components of the Youth Transition Program. Findings indicated a positive correlation between student-focused planning strategies and high school completion. The authors concluded that promoting student-centered planning and individualized services were key factors in preventing students with disabilities from dropping out of high school. Specifically they recommended (a) ensuring IEP teams identify and engage responsible agencies, resources, and accommodations required for a student to successfully achieve positive post-school outcomes; (b) promoting the value of preparing for, and participating in, postsecondary education; and (c) identifying specific types and levels of accommodations and supports a student will need to participate in post-school environments.

Student Development

According to Kohler (1996), student development includes activities related to life skills instruction, employment skills instruction, career and vocational curricula, support services, assessment, and structured work experiences. Ten studies provided an evidence base for student development practice methods for increasing school completion of youths with disabilities.

First, Repetto et al. (1997) conducted research to demonstrate that instruction across a variety of the component skills of self-determination, including self-advocacy, goal setting and attainment, and problem solving (life skills instruction) were critical to student school completion. Further, their survey findings determined that leisure skill instruction and employment skills instruction also prevent dropping out.

Second, Benz, Lindstrom, and Yovanoff (2000) investigated predictors of dropout related to student development. Specifically, lack of employment experiences, inability to sustain employment, and attainment of employment goals were related to employment skills instruction and career and vocational curricula, which are essential to student development. Furthermore, the need for instruction in independent living skills and social skills, and attainment of independent living, leisure, financial, postsecondary, and transportation goals were related to students' preparation for adult life through life skills instruction, which are also components of student development.

Third, Corbett, Clark, and Blank (2002) presented data on 398 former students with EBD investigating the relationship between enrollment in vocational education and increased school completion rates among students with disabilities. Results indicated statistically significant negative correlations between all types of vocational education (i.e., generic, occupationally specific, and on-the-job training) and dropout status. Specifically, odds of a male or female student with EBD dropping out of school if they did not attend any vocational classes was calculated as 132:1, while the rate decreased to 73:1 for students who participated in one year of generic vocational education, and to 32:1 for students who participated in one each of three types of vocational courses including (a) generic vocational programming which consisted of classes that focused on employability skills across a variety of occupations; (b) occupationally specific programming, which reflected preparation for a specific trade, such as carpentry or plumbing; and (c) on-the-job programming in which students earned credits for being in competitive employment with periodic monitoring conducted by a vocational teacher.

Fourth, Kortering, Braziel, and Tompkins (2002) conducted interviews with 33 high school students identified as EBD regarding their perceptions of (a) the “best” and “worst” parts of school; (b) advantages or disadvantages to school completion; (c) school, family, or personal changes that improve school completion; and (d) personal value of a high school diploma. Students' responses to questions indicated that students saw a connection between completing high school and being able to obtain a better job than without a high school diploma.

Fifth, Martin, Tobin, and Sugai (2002) conducted a study that combined a review of research on dropout prevention with feedback from school administrators and workforce development leaders on effective prevention strategies. Interventions that were recommended by practitioners and described in the literature included having a curriculum that was relevant to post-school environments, opportunities for career exploration, and making connections with post-school settings and school-to-work programs.

Next, Dunn, Chambers, and Rabren (2004) conducted a study to identify the demographic characteristics and perceptions of students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) and mental retardation (MR) that predicted dropping out of school. Students' responses indicated that the presence of a “helpful class,” a “helpful person,” and perceived preparation for adult life were predictors of school completion.

Similarly, Sinclair, Christensen, and Thurlow (2005) implemented a five-year longitudinal experimental study with 144 students labeled with a primary or secondary label of emotional or behavioral disorder specifically focused on transition planning within the check and connect process. Seventy-one students were randomly assigned to the check and connect treatment from two cohorts of ninth graders (graduating classes of 2000 and 2001) across a school district. Students in the treatment group were statistically less likely to drop out of school and more likely to attend school persistently and be enrolled in school after four years in the study. Further, students in the check and connect intervention were more likely to have IEPs and more likely to have transition components, including articulated postsecondary goals regarding education, community participation, and recreation activities and transition services in the IEP (e.g., job-seeking activities, postsecondary education application preparation, identification of community resources, daily living skill instruction at school).

Kemp (2006) surveyed 293 secondary school principals to identify dropout prevention strategies for students with and without disabilities. Statistically significant predictors related to student development included seeking full-time employment, having a relevant curriculum, receiving career awareness instruction, and having career and vocational curricula.

Malian and Love (1998) surveyed students, parents, and teacher to examine school services needed and received by 1,015 graduates and 270 dropouts with disabilities. Statistically significant differences between completers and dropouts included completers receiving more money handling skills instruction, more community-based instruction, more vocational instruction as well as having a paid work experience, and more opportunity to choose their courses.

Finally, Bounds and Gould (2000) investigated perceptions of dropping out among 60 individuals with disabilities. Results indicated that students dropped out primarily due to school factors including poor academic achievement, discipline problems, problems with peers, and adverse feelings about the school and personnel. Respondents stated that better communication with staff could have prevented their dropping out.

Interagency Collaboration

Interagency collaboration includes having a collaborative framework and a collaborative service delivery system to involve community agencies, businesses, and organizations. Two studies provided evidence to support the use of interagency collaboration for increasing school completion of youths with disabilities.

In the Martin et al. (2002) and Repetto et al. (1997) studies the literature reviews and the practitioner surveys supported using wraparound services. Results suggested collaboration between school staff and community agencies to wrap services around a student and his or her family, including behavior programming or additional support to school staff from additional service providers to reduce suspensions (Martin et al.) as well as community agency referral services for families (Repetto et al.). Practitioners surveyed also supported ideas of working with community businesses so that curricula are relevant to post-school employment and to connect students with post-school settings while in school through collaboration with community agencies.

Repetto et al. (1997) specifically recommended teamwork and team-building instruction for school and community personnel and a clear effort to coordinate and integrate academic and vocational services. Further, survey results indicated that courses that are integrated across disciplines may increase their relevance for students and decrease student dropout rates.

Family Involvement

Family involvement includes family participation, family empowerment, and family training. Two studies supported family involvement practices as an evidence-based strategy for increasing school completion of students with disabilities.

First, Sinclair et al. (2005) provided case management services to families of students in the check and connect program, including transportation to meetings and home visits to develop relationships with family members in an effort to remain connected and engaged with the student. Services were provided by a monitor who held a caseload of approximately 25 to 30 students. Next, Repetto et al. (1997) also noted the importance of empowering families through advocacy activities and attention to family needs such as mental health services and other medical services as an important component of dropout prevention for students with disabilities.

Program Structures

Program structure includes program philosophy, program evaluation, strategic planning, program policy, human resource development, and resource allocation. Six articles provided evidence that program structures may increase school completion rates of students with disabilities.

First, Kortering et al. (2002) interviewed students with EBD. Students suggested that (a) more interesting classes, “like welding, agriculture, or ROTC” (p. 148); (b) more classes with age peers without disabilities; (c) creative approaches such as “pay me for … coming to school” (p. 148) or shortened school days; (d) alternatives to in and out of school suspensions, which remove students from instruction; and (e) additional academic and behavioral support from school staff might contribute to school completion. Second, Bounds and Gould (2000) also indicated program structures including decreased class size and flexible schedules were important strategies for helping students to complete school.

Next, Martin et al. (2002) provided support for the program structures of providing flexible programming to meet the needs of individual students by allowing them to recover credits through participation in a program that included small-group instruction with tutors was effective. Further, using student academic performance, attendance, and behavioral data to determine a student's need for additional supports could reduce the dropout rate. Finally, the literature and practitioners indicated the need for administrative support of new practices or policies aimed at reducing dropout through the use of program structures, such as outcome-based curricula or vocational education for students with disabilities or paid work experiences is critical to its effectiveness.

Sinclair, Christenson, Evelo, and Hurley (1998) used a group experimental study to investigate the impact of sustained implementation of the check and connect program with 94 middle school students with LD and EBD on (a) students' engagement in school, (b) school attendance in ninth grade, and (c) assignment completion. Students in the control group received instruction related to the check & connect program for two years in seventh and eighth grades. Students in the experimental group received one additional year of the check and connect program in ninth grade. Results indicated that students in the experimental group were more likely to be “enrolled in” school, more likely to be enrolled at the end of the school year, and more likely to complete assignments. Recommendations for practitioners include documenting student risk factors, implementing of staff allocation policies that meet the needs of students, reducing of student suspensions, and providing instruction that is valuable and meaningful to students.

Results from Sinclair et al. (2005) also included program structures that supported flexible programming to allow individualized interventions (e.g., monitoring meetings of minutes or hours) based on students needs, a longitudinal approach to planning, and program evaluation components to continuously examine student performance data and outcomes of interventions related to transition components of students' IEPs. Further, allocating resources to fund monitors year-round, have flexibility to provide transportation and community-based services, and provide professional development on problem-solving interventions and community resources were also identified.

Finally, dropout prevention strategies identified by Repetto et al. (1997) related to program structures reflected student-centered services that focused on outcomes for students. These included allowing and encouraging student participation in curricula that will prepare them for their postsecondary goals; supporting career development and transition planning beginning in the middle grades across general, vocational, and special education; continually assessing needs regarding secondary programming; engaging in strategic planning regarding long-term outcome goals; staff development activities; and services necessary to reduce school dropout and human resource development in job development, program marketing, effective instruction, curriculum modifications, and progress monitoring.

DISCUSSION

This literature review identified 11 articles with evidence-based secondary transition strategies for improving school completion of students with high incidence disabilities. The practices identified in this review were linked to all five areas in the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996). Linking practices to this comprehensive framework for secondary transition education and services may provide educators with a means for considering program needs and strengths and the intersection between their school completion and secondary transition education efforts. The majority of strategies identified in this review related to student development and program structure.

Recent literature reviews on school completion and dropout prevention have identified a variety of promising practices, including increasing academic engagement, developing psychosocial skills, providing mentoring opportunities, and delivering parent/teacher behavior management training (Prevatt & Kelly, 2003), as well as empirical support for the use of cognitive-behavioral strategies (Cobb et al., 2006). The current review provides additional support for mentoring (Dunn et al., 2004; Kemp, 2006; Sinclair et al., 2005; Sinclair et al., 1998), academic engagement (Corbett et al., 2002), and cognitive-behavioral strategies (Martin et al., 2002). In addition, findings provide evidence-based support for a variety of secondary transition practices that promote school completion and/or dropout prevention including (a) completing vocational education coursework including career awareness, career exploration, generic and occupationally specific coursework, and paid employment (Benz et al., 2000; Corbett et al., 2002; Kemp, 2006; Malian & Love, 1998; Martin et al., 2002); (b) involving students in their IEP/transition planning process (Benz et al., 2000; Sinclair et al., 2005); and (c) changing program structures such as adding electives (Kortering et al., 2002) as well as reducing class sizes and increasing opportunities for alternative education programs (Martin et al., 2002).

Limitations

Results of this review are limited by the following factors. First, we did not include articles that focused on academic intervention strategies (e.g., Bost & Riccomni, 2006; Denti & Guevin, 1999) because quality academic skill instruction is not a specific secondary transition service for students with disabilities, but is a generic strategy which should be in place for all students. However, it is clear that using effective academic interventions is an important factor in helping students to complete school (Bost & Riccomini, 2006; Raskind, Goldberg, Higgins, & Hermann, 1999). Second, we did not include research-based discussion articles (e.g., Eisenman, 2007; Harvey, 2001; Zhang & Law, 2005) that recommended secondary transition strategies based on the literature since they did not include a description of search procedures. Finally, we did not include results that identified correlations between school completion and student demographic characteristics alone (e.g., Dunn et al., 2004) because while these factors are important information, they are beyond the control of educators.

Implications for Practice

In addition to strategies identified in previous literature reviews (Cobb et al., 2006; Prevatt & Kelly, 2003), the evidence-based secondary transition strategies in Table 1 should be adopted by programs trying to increase school completion and reduce dropout rates for students with disabilities. The findings provide practitioners with a framework for planning (i.e., the Taxonomy for Transition Programming areas) and information on effective strategies within that framework (e.g., involving students in education planning, career education). Using these findings should encourage implementing a transition-focused education structure that may improve the likelihood of school completion for students with high incidence disabilities.

Educators may use the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996) linked to school completion to consider strengths and needs in their current program or curriculum. Further, they may implement strategies identified with the confidence that they are evidence-based practices linked to increased rates of school completion. There is a caution in the implementation of any strategy, however; that it is implemented with fidelity if similar results are anticipated.

Implications for Future Research

Given that only 2 of the 11 articles were experimental studies (Sinclair et al., 2005; Sinclair et al., 1998), there is a need for research investigating the effects of secondary transition strategies on school completion and dropout rates for students with disabilities. Researchers need to make efforts to conduct rigorous studies that include adequate descriptions of their interventions, report data on fidelity of implementation, as well as reliability and validity of measures used so that educators may replicate the outcomes of their interventions.

The evidence-based strategies recommended from correlational research provide potential independent variables for future experimental research studies. In addition, the Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996) includes many additional strategies whose effects on school completion could be investigated. Finally, since research indicates demographic variables such as gender, ethnicity, and disability category impact school completion and dropout rates, future studies should be conducted to investigate the effects of secondary transition strategies across these and other demographic variables.

In conclusion, given the personal and societal implications of not completing high school, it is imperative that educators use evidence-based strategies available with fidelity to make sure students with disabilities complete high school. Results of this literature review provide additional strategies from the secondary transition literature. By combining secondary transition strategies with academic and cognitive-behavioral interventions, it may be possible to achieve the proper balance between academic and life skills instruction and provide students with disabilities with the relevant curriculum needed to help them complete high school.