pro 2

 

For this Course Project, you will complete the following:
Section 1: You will demonstrate how you will apply your philosophy of education and practice through a district newsletter presentation.
Section 2: You will outline a proposed research study. You will only outline the elements of the study. You are not to conduct any actual research for this response.
Section 3: A 2- to 3-paragraph reflective conclusion
Section 4: APA-formatted Reference Page. Cite all scholarly resources used to complete MA 5. All references, unless seminal, should be from the past 5 years.

Course Project Directions

Include the following:

• Title Page: Assessment of Disposition and Content Knowledge (title page does not count toward the number of total pages required for the Course Project)
• Body (10–15 pages total, excluding title and reference pages):
• Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation: Philosophy of Education and Practice (2–3 pages)
• Section 2: Content Study (7–10 pages)
• Section 3: Write a 2- to 3-paragraph reflective summary regarding how your philosophy of education influenced you to select your possible study topic and how this process may influence your future practice.
• Section 4: APA-Formatted Reference Page. Cite all scholarly resources used to complete MA 5. All references, unless seminal, should be from the past 5 years.

Section 1: Theoretical Framework of Educational Philosophy

For Part A of Section 1: You have just been hired by a new school district as the Director of Special Education. The principal has asked you to outline your philosophy of education for the school newsletter. The newsletter is read by all teachers, staff, district leadership, parents, and guardians in the district. Complete a 2- to 3-page newsletter presentation that addresses your philosophy of education. All four categories (i.e., Professional Conduct, Professional Qualities, Communication, and Collaboration) of Walden’s dispositions must be infused into your philosophy of education presentation. Besides addressing each of the four categories, you should also address each of the following key questions.

• Why are dispositions important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education? Use theory and research to make your case.
• What are your dispositions, and how are they evident in your philosophy of education?
• In what way will your philosophy impact future activities that will promote social change in the district?
• In what way will your philosophy impact future research activities that you may wish to pursue in the district to promote the best possible education for all students. (Note: In Section 2, you will outline a study about a topic of interest. Feel free to mention this topic in your response to this question.)

Section 3: Write a 2 to 3-paragraph reflective summary regarding how your philosophy of education influenced you to select your possible study topic and how this process may influence your future practice.

Section 4: APA Reference List. Be sure to identify the references by the section in which they are used, i.e., Section 1 references, Section 2 references, and Section 3 references.

Submit this Assignment Day 7 of Week 10.

Submission Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “MD6Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Module 6 Assignment link.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “MD6Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:
Module 6 Assignment Rubri 

For this Course Project, you will complete the following:
Section 1: You will demonstrate how you will apply your philosophy of education and practice through a district newsletter presentation.
Section 3: A 2- to 3-paragraph reflective conclusion
Section 4: APA-formatted Reference Page. Cite all scholarly resources used to complete MA 5. All references, unless seminal, should be from the past 5 years.

Course Project Directions
Include the following:
Title Page: Assessment of Disposition and Content Knowledge (title page does not count toward the number of total pages required for the Course Project)
Body (10–15 pages total, excluding title and reference pages):
Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation: Philosophy of Education and Practice (2–3 pages)
Section 2: Content Study (7–10 pages)
Section 3: Write a 2- to 3-paragraph reflective summary regarding how your philosophy of education influenced you to select your possible study topic and how this process may influence your future practice.
Section 4: APA-Formatted Reference Page. Cite all scholarly resources used to complete MA 5. All references, unless seminal, should be from the past 5 years.
Section 1: Theoretical Framework of Educational Philosophy
For Part A of Section 1: You have just been hired by a new school district as the Director of Special Education. The principal has asked you to outline your philosophy of education for the school newsletter. The newsletter is read by all teachers, staff, district leadership, parents, and guardians in the district. Complete a 2- to 3-page newsletter presentation that addresses your philosophy of education. All four categories (i.e., Professional Conduct, Professional Qualities, Communication, and Collaboration) of Walden’s dispositions must be infused into your philosophy of education presentation. Besides addressing each of the four categories, you should also address each of the following key questions.
Why are dispositions important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education? Use theory and research to make your case.
What are your dispositions, and how are they evident in your philosophy of education?
In what way will your philosophy impact future activities that will promote social change in the district?
In what way will your philosophy impact future research activities that you may wish to pursue in the district to promote the best possible education for all students. (Note: In Section 2, you will outline a study about a topic of interest. Feel free to mention this topic in your response to this question.)

Section 2: In Section 2, you will apply your content knowledge and philosophy of education to create an outline for a proposed study that you would like to conduct at some point in the future.

You will include the following elements:

Problem Statement
Provide a 1- to 2-paragraph statement that is the result of a review of research findings and current practice and that contains the following information:

• A logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem must be clearly identified and supported by current literature.
• Preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Provide three to five key citations that highlight the relevance and currency of the problem.

Purpose
Present a concise, 1-paragraph statement on the overall purpose or intention of the study, which serves as the connection between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study.

Significance
Provide 1 or 2 paragraphs, informed by the topic in the problem statement, that describe the following:

• How this study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement: What original contribution will this study make in the local setting?
• How this research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site: Who benefits from your findings/project deliverable and how? How might the potential findings lead to positive social change?

Background Literature
Provide a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement, highlighting their relationship to the topic—for example, “this variable was studied with a similar sample by Smith (2013) and Johnson (2014)” or “Jones’s (2012) examination of campus leaders showed similar trends.” Some of these resources may have already been mentioned in the first sections of the prospectus and can be included here, also. Citations provided within the prospectus document should include approximately 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources, presented in APA 6th-edition format, as well as any evidence provided to support the existence of the local problem.

Research Question(s)
List the question or a series of related questions (i.e., 1–3 maximum) that are informed by the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.

Possible Types and Sources of Information or Data
Provide a list of possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database.

Possible Analysis
Offer some possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Your analysis may be generated by using quantitative, qualitative, or other types of formal analysis process. Please use the information from your research courses to aid you in completing this section. The key to this section is to match your possible analysis to the research questions and the data that you may obtain.

Other Information (Optional)
Include any other relevant information, such as challenges or barriers that may need to be addressed when conducting this study. You may provide any concerns related to feasibility or potential risks and burdens placed on research participants under this heading.

Section 3: Write a 2 to 3-paragraph reflective summary regarding how your philosophy of education influenced you to select your possible study topic and how this process may influence your future practice.
Section 4: APA Reference List. Be sure to identify the references by the section in which they are used, i.e., Section 1 references, Section 2 references, and Section 3 references.
Submit this Assignment Day 7 of Week 10.
Submission Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “MD6Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Module 6 Assignment link.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “MD6Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Module 6 Assignment Rubri

COHERENCE Chapter 5

Securing Accountability

Internal Accountability Simply stated, accountability is taking responsibility for one’s actions. At the core of accountability in educational systems is student learning. As City, Elmore, Fiarman, and Teitel (2009) argue, “the real accountability system is in the tasks that students are asked to do” (p. 23). Constantly improving and refining instructional practice so that students can engage in deep learning tasks is perhaps the single most important responsibility of the teaching profession and educational systems as a whole. In this sense, accountability as defined here is not limited to mere gains in test scores but on deeper and more meaningful learning for all students. Internal accountability occurs when individuals and groups willingly take on personal, professional, and collective responsibility for continuous improvement and success for all students (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2009).

External accountability is when system leaders reassure the public through transparency, monitoring, and selective intervention that their system is performing in line with societal expectations and requirements. The priority for policymakers, we argue, should be to lead with creating the conditions for internal accountability, because they are more effective in achieving greater overall accountability, including external accountability. Policymakers also have direct responsibilities to address external accountability, but this latter function will be far more effective if they get the internal part right.

Existing research on school and system effectiveness and improvement (DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Marzano, 2003; Pil & Leana, 2006; Zavadsky, 2009) and our own work with educational systems in the United States and internationally (Fullan, 2010; Hargreaves & Fullan,). suggests that internal accountability must precede external accountability if lasting improvement in student achievement is the goal. Richard Elmore (2004) conducted a series of intensive case studies of individual schools—some that failed to improve and some that improved their performance. Relative to the former, schools that failed to improve were not able to achieve instructional coherence, despite being in systems with strong external accountability. A minority of schools did develop internal coherence together and showed progress on student achievement. The main feature of successful schools was that they built a collaborative culture that combined individual responsibility, collective expectations, and corrective action—that is, internal accountability. Transparent data on instructional practices and student achievement were a feature of these cultures. As these cultures developed, they were also able to more effectively engage the external assessment system. Highlighting the fundamental role of internal accountability on school improvement, Elmore (2004) pointed out the following: It seems unlikely to us that schools operating in the default mode—where all questions of accountability related to student learning are essentially questions of individual teacher responsibility—will be capable of responding to strong obtrusive accountability systems in ways that lead to systematic deliberate. improvement of instruction and student learning. The idea that a school will improve, and therefore, the overall performance of its students, implies a capacity for collective deliberation and action that schools in our sample did not exhibit. Where virtually all decisions about accountability are made by individual teachers, based on their individual conceptions of what they and their students can do, it seems unlikely that these decisions will somehow aggregate into overall improvement for the school. (p. 19). Internal accountability is based on the notion that individuals and the group in which they work can transparently hold themselves responsible for their performance. We already know that current external accountability schemes do not work because, at best, they tell us that the system is not performing but does not give a clue about how to fix the situation. As Elmore (2004) observes, if people do not know how to fix the problem and so cannot do so, then the following will occur: Schools will implement the requirements of the external accountability system in pro forma ways without ever internalizing the values of responsibility and efficacy that are the nominal objectives of those systems. (p. 134) Elmore (2004) then concludes this:

investments in internal accountability must logically precede [emphasis added] any expectation that schools will respond productively to external pressure for performance. (p. 134) “Logically precede,” yes, but more to the point of our framework, internal accountability must strategically precede engagement with external accountability. This is why focusing direction, cultivating collaborative cultures, and deepening learning precedes accountability in our Coherence Framework. There are two messages here: One is that policymakers and other leaders are well advised to establish conditions for developing cultures of internal accountability. The second is that there are things other people can do when the hierarchy is not inclined to move. The answer is to “help make it happen in your own situation”—that is, develop collaborative work with your peers and push upward for this work to be supported. The history of the teaching profession is laced with assumptions of and conditions for isolated, individual responsibility. But atomistic responsibility, detached from any group, can never work. In a nutshell, the cultural shift needed is to shift to collaborative cultures that honor and align individual responsibility with collective expectations and actions. Elmore discusses several schools that he and his team studied. Most of them exemplify the individualistic model. Teachers work away on their own and periodically grapple or clash with external accountability requirements. But Elmore also discusses two cases where the schools have developed more or less “collaborative” cultures. The first case is St. Aloysius Elementary School Without exception, teachers described an atmosphere of high expectations. Some stressed a high priority on “reaching every child” and “making sure that no one is left behind” while others referred to a serious and supportive environment where everyone is expected to put forth excellent work. (Elmore, 2004, p. 164) It sounds ideal, but what happens when things don’t go as expected? At another school, Turtle Haven, Elmore (2004) asked teachers, “What happens when teachers do not meet the collective expectations?” He reports that “most teachers believed that a person who did not meet . . . expectations, or conform to a culture created by those expectations would first receive a great deal of support from the principal and other colleagues” (p. 183). If this approach failed to produce results, most Turtle Haven teachers said that the teacher in question would not be happy at the school and eventually would either “weed themselves out [or]. . . if there was a sense in the community that a certain number of children were not able to get the kind of education that we say we’re committed to providing . . . we would have to think whether the somebody belongs here or not” (Elmore, 2004, p. 183). This kind of culture is not foolproof, but we would say it stacks up well against the external accountability thinking that creates demands that go unheeded or can’t be acted on. In the collaborative cultures, the internal accountability system is based on visible expectations combined with consequences for failure to meet set expectations.

Such cultures, says Elmore (2004), are much better equipped to deal with external accountability requirements, adding that a school with a strong internal accountability culture might respond to external assessments in a number of ways, “including accepting and internalizing it; rejecting it and developing defenses against it, or incorporating just those elements of the system that the school or the individuals deem relevant” (p. 145). What is coming through in this discussion is that collaborative cultures with an eye to continuous improvement establish internal processes that allow them to sort out differences and to make effective decisions. At the level of the microdynamics of school improvement, Elmore (2004) draws the same conclusion we do at the system level: investing in the conditions that develop internal accountability is more critical than beefing up external accountability. The Ontario Reform Strategy, which we discussed in previous chapters, offers an illustrative example of the importance of internal accountability preceding external accountability systemwide. The Canadian province of Ontario, with 4,900 schools in 72 districts serving some two million students, started in 2004 to invest in building capacity and internal accountability at the school and district levels. The initial impulse for the reform came from leadership at the top of the education system—Dalton McGuinty, the premier of the province at the time—through the establishment of a small number of ambitious goals related to improvements in literacy, numeracy, and high school retention. However, the major investments focused on strengthening the collective capacity of teachers, school principals, and district leaders to create the conditions for improved instructional practice and student achievement (Glaze, Mattingley, & Andrews, 2013). There was little overt external accountability in the early stages of the Ontario Reform Strategy. External accountability measures were gradually introduced in the form of assessment results in grades 3 and 6 in literacy and numeracy, and in high school, retention numbers, transparency of data, and a school turnaround support-focused policy called Ontario Focused Intervention Program (OFIP) for schools that were underperforming. This system has yielded positive and measurable results in literacy that has improved dramatically across the 4,000 elementary schools and in high school graduation rates that have climbed from 68 percent to 84 percent. across the 900 high schools. The number of OFIP schools, formerly at over 800, has been reduced to 69 schools even after the criteria to identify a school as in need of intervention had widened to include many more schools (Glaze et al., 2013; Mourshed, Chijioke, & Barber, 2010). An evaluation of the reform strategy in 10 of Ontario’s 72 school districts that concentrated particularly on the special education aspects of the reform pointed to a significant narrowing of the achievement gap in writing scores for students with learning disabilities (Hargreaves & Braun, 2012). Concerns were expressed among teachers who were surveyed about some of the deleterious consequences of standardized testing in grades 3 and 6— that the tests came at the end of the year at a point that was too late to serve a diagnostic function, that they were not sufficiently differentiated in order to match differentiated instructional strategies, and that principals in some

The most intriguing finding though was that special education resource teachers, whose role was moving increasingly to providing in-class support, welcomed the presence of transparent objective data. They saw it as a way of drawing the attention of regular classroom teachers to the fact and the finding that students with learning disabilities could, with the right support, register valid and viable gains in measurable student achievement. Together, these findings point to the need to review the nature and form of high-stakes assessments—more differentiated, more just-in-time, and more directed at the needs of all students, perhaps—but also to the value of having transparent data that concentrate everyone’s attention on supporting all students’ success along with diagnostic data and collaborative professional responsibility for all students’ learning, development, and success A similar approach to whole system improvement can be found in U.S. districts that have been awarded the prestigious Broad Prize for Urban Education, granted to urban school districts that demonstrate the great- est overall performance and improvement while reducing achievement gaps based on race, ethnicity, and income. In her in-depth study of five such districts, Zavadsky (2009) finds that, while diverse in context and strategies, these districts have addressed the challenge of improving student performance systemwide following remarkably similar approaches: investing in, growing, and circulating the professional capital of schools (what they term building capacity) to improve instructional practice by fostering teacher collaboration and collective accountability. These successful schools set high instructional targets, attracting and developing talent, aligning resources to key improvement priorities, constantly monitoring progress, and providing timely targeted support when needed.

The solid and mounting evidence on the fundamental impact of internal accountability on the effectiveness and improvement of schools and school systems contrasts sharply with the scarce or null evidence that external accountability, by itself or as the prime driver, can bring about lasting and sustained improvements in student and school performance. There is, indeed, a growing realization that external accountability is not a capable driver of school and system effectiveness. At best, external accountability does not get its intended results. At worst, it produces undesirable and sometimes unconscionable consequences, such as the cheating scandal in Atlanta (Hill, 2015). We frequently ask successful practitioners that we work with how they themselves handle the “accountability dilemma” (direct accountability doesn’t work; indirect may be too soft). What follows are a few responses that we have personally received to this question: What is effective accountability? Not surprisingly, these views are entirely consistent with Elmore (2004): Accountability is now primarily described as an accountability for student learning. It is less about some test result and more about accepting ownership of the moral imperative of having every student learn. Teachers talk about “monitoring” differently. As they engage in greater sharing of the work, they talk about being accountable as people in the school community know what they are doing and looking to see what is changing for students as a result. And as they continue to deprivatize teaching, they talk about their principal and peers coming into their classrooms and expecting to see the work [of agreed-upon practices] reflected in their teaching, their classroom walls, and student work. (Anonymous, personal communication, November 2014).

Teachers and administrators talk about accountability by deprive- sizing their practice. If everyone knows what the other teacher or administrator is working on and how they are working on it with students, it becomes a lot easier to talk about accountability. When everyone has an understanding of accountability, creating clear goals and steps to reach those goals, it makes it easier for every- one to talk and work in accountable environments. (Elementary principal, personal communication, November 2014).

I spoke with my staff about accountability versus responsibility in brainstorming, about what is our purpose and who is responsible for what . . . being explicit and letting teachers collectively determine what our responsibilities are. (Secondary school principal, personal communication, November 2014) We are moving to define accountability as responsibility. My district has been engaged in some important work that speaks to intrinsic motivation, efficacy, perseverance, etc., and accountability is seen as doing what is best for students . . . working together to tackle any challenge and being motivated by our commitment as opposed to some external direction. (Superintendent, personal communication, November 2014).

When you blow down the doors and walls, you can’t help but be evermore accountable. (Superintendent, personal communication, November 2014) I do believe that a lot of work remains to be done on building common understanding on the notion of accountability. Many people still believe that someone above them in the hierarchy is accountable. Very few take personal accountability for student learning and achievement. There are still those who blame parents and students’ background for achievement. (Consultant, personal communication, November 2014) In one school, the talk about accountability was pervasive as the school became designated as underperforming. The morale of the school went down significantly, and the tension was omnipresent at every meeting. The team switched the conversation to motivation, innovation, and teamwork and the culture changed. The school is energized and the test scores went up in one year. The team is now committed to results and continuous improvement. (Consultant, personal communication, November 2014) In short, internal accountability is far more effective than external accountability. The bottom line is that it produces forceful accountability in a way that no hierarchy can possibly match. We have shown this to be the case for teachers, and we can make a parallel argument for students. If we want students to be more accountable, we need to change instruction toward methods that increase individual students’ responsibility for assessing their methods that increase individual students’ responsibility for assessing their own learning and for students to work in peer groups to assess and provide feedback to each other under the guidance of the teacher. We still need external accountability, and we can now position it more effectively.

External Accountability

External accountability concerns any entity that has authority over you. Its presence is still essential, but we need to reposition external accountability so that it becomes more influential in the performance of individuals, groups, and the system as a whole. We first take the perspective of external authorities and then flip back to local entities. External Authorities The first thing to note is that if the external body invests in building widespread internal accountability they will be furthering their own goals of greater organization or system accountability. The more that internal accountability thrives, the greater the responsiveness to external requirements and the less the externals have to do. When this happens, the center has less need to resort to carrots and sticks to incite the system to act responsibly. Dislodging top-down accountability from its increasingly miscast role has turned out to be exceedingly difficult. People at the top do not like to give up control. They cling to it despite obvious evidence that it does not work. And attacks on the inadequacy of top-down accountability have failed because they have only focused on the “from” side of freedom. Critics seem to be saying that accountability requirements do not work, so remove them. That is not the complete solution because it takes us back to nothing. The answer is found in our argument in this chapter—rely on developing the conditions for internal accountability and reinforce them with certain aspects of external accountability. In particular, central authorities should focus their efforts on two interrelated activities:

1. Investing in internal accountability

2. Projecting and protecting the system

By the first, I mean investing in the conditions that cause internal accountability to get stronger. The beauty of this approach, as we have seen, is that people throughout the system start doing the work of accountability. Though indirect, this form of accountability is more explicit, more present, and, of course, more effective. We have already suggested its components:

• A small number of ambitious goals, processes that foster shared goals (and even targets if jointly shaped)

• Good data that are used primarily for developmental purposes

• Implementation strategies that are transparent, whereby people and organizations are grouped to learn from each other (using the group to change the group)

• Examination of progress in order to problem solve for greater performance

The center needs to invest in these very conditions that result in greater focus, capacity, and commitment at the level of day-to-day practice. They invest, in other words, in establishing conditions for greater local responsibility. In this process, the center will still want goals, standards, assessment, proof of implementation, and evidence of progress. This means investment in resources and mechanisms of internal accountability that people can use to collaborate within their units and across them.

With strong internal accountability as the context, the external accountability role of the system includes the following:

1. Establishing and promoting professional standards and practices, including performance appraisal, undertaken by professionally respected peers and leaders in teams wherever possible and developing the expertise of teachers and teacher-leaders so that they can undertake these responsibilities. With the robust judgments of respected leaders and peers, then getting rid of teachers and administrators who should not be in the profession will become a transparent collective responsibility.

2. Ongoing monitoring of the performance of the system, including direct intervention with schools and districts in cases of persistent underperformance.

3. Insisting on reciprocal accountability that manages “up” as well as down so that systems are held accountable for providing the resources and supports that are essential in enabling schools and teachers to fulfill expectations (e.g., “failing” schools should not be closed when they have been insufficiently resourced, or individual teachers should be evaluated in the context of whether they have been forced into different grade assignments every year or have experienced constant leadership instability).

tors of student performance and well-being. These would include measures of social capital in the teaching profession such as extent of collaboration and levels of collegial trust. Outcome measures for students should also, as previously stated, include multiple measures including well-being, students’ sense of control over their own destiny (locus of control), levels of engagement in learning, and so forth. The Perspective of locals

4. Adoptingandapplyingindicatorsoforganizationalhealthasacontext for individual teacher and leader performance, such as staff retention rates, leadership turnover rates, teacher absenteeism levels, numbers of crisis-related incidents, and so on, in addition to outcome indicators of student performance and well-being. These would include measures of social capital in the teaching profession such as extent of collaboration and levels of collegial trust. Outcome measures for students should also, as previously stated, include multiple measures including well-being, students’ sense of control over their destiny (locus of control), levels of engagement in learning, and so forth.

The Perspective of locals

We have drawn on numerous relatively successful examples in this book. They all established strong degrees of internal accountability (people being self and group responsible) that served them well in the external ).

accountability arena. Such systems strengthened accountability by increasing focus, connecting dots and otherwise working on coherence, building capacity (so people could perform more efficaciously), being transparent about progress and practices, and engaging the external accountability system. As districts increase their capacity, they become stronger in the face of ill-advised external accountability demands as the following two extended examples reveal from Laura Schwalm, former superintendent of Garden Grove).

Example One: garden grove Handles External Pressure In the words of Laura Schwalm: Shortly after we completed our audit and instituted a district-wide mandate and system to place students in college prep (a–g) courses, Ed Trust and several other advocacy groups, with support from the California Department of Education (CDE), began “calling out” the low college readiness statistics in large urban districts in California. Every large urban district, including Garden Grove, was called out (rightfully so) with one exception of a district in the north, which was held as a model solution because they had made the age requirement mandatory for every student and claiming they had eliminated all other courses with absolutely no effect on their graduation rate. Based on this example, the advocacy groups started a very public campaign and got a majority of school boards, including LAUSD, to adopt the policies of this northern district with the pledge that they would achieve 100 percent a–g achievement with no increase in dropout rate within four to five years. When Garden Grove refused to comply (Long Beach did as well), we were more strongly targeted and pressured (the approach we had adopted was to not eliminate all support courses that were not college prep but rather to eliminate a few and to align the rest in a way to provide an “on ramp” to college prep courses while at the same time using individual student-by-student achievement data, rather than the former practice of “teacher recommendation” for placement in college prep courses) (one of the shameful things our audit revealed, which did not surprise me, was that if you were an Asian student with mean achievement on the California Standards Tests, you had about a 95 percent chance of being “recommended for placement in a-g courses”—conversely, if you were a Latino male with the exact same scores, you had less than 30 percent chance of being recommended for placement in these courses). As the pressure continued to adopt a policy of mandating an exclusive a–g curriculum, I met with a few of the key advocates and explained that while we shared the same goal of increasing our unacceptably low a–g completion rate, we strongly felt the approach they were suggesting was ill advised. Putting students in a course for which they were absolutely not prepared, based on very objective data, and then expecting them to pass the course with a grade of C or better was unfair to both students and teachers. They kept focusing on the district up north, which led me to point out to them that the data from that district did not support what they were claiming. If their approach was truly working, then their achievement scores, as measured by the state, should be outperforming ours, and in fact, they fell far short of ours, for all subgroups. Additionally, a neighboring district that had adopted the same policy now claimed a 90 percent a–g completion rate, yet 65 percent of their high school students scored below the mean on the state standards test. It clearly pointed out that all was not as it looked on the surface, and while I had no desire to criticize another district’s approach, I was not about to follow it. That caused the advocates to pause and finally to leave us alone. Our rate, both in terms of a–g completion and student achievement data by subgroup, continued to climb. Within a few years, we surpassed all the others, and over time, the policy the CDE and advocates had pushed into districts quietly vanished.

Example Two: garden grove Deals With the bureaucracy Again in Schwalm’s words:

Another example occurred during one of the CDE’s three-year systemwide compliance reviews. While I accepted the state’s responsibility to oversee that we were not using specially designated funding for inappropriate uses, as well as to assure we were following laws around equity and access for all students, the process they had was unnecessarily burdensome, requiring us to dedicate significant staff to collecting, cataloging, and preparing documentation that filled dozens and dozens of boxes. When the state team came—usually about 10 to 12 people, each looking at different programs with one person loosely designated as team lead—the expectation was that you treat them like royalty and that they had enormous authority. My view was somewhat different. I respected that they had a job to do, but just because they did not like the way we displayed something did not mean we needed to do it differently or because they would have used another approach—our approach if appropriately supported with data—was not out of bounds. At one of the first reviews early on in my superintendency, we drew a particularly weak but officious team with a very weak lead. They came up with some particularly lame findings (i.e., one team member commended us on how we used data to identify areas of focus for targeted groups of students, while another team member marked us as noncompliant in this area because we did not put it on a form that she had developed—and other equally ludicrous examples). At the end of the process, the superintendent was required to sign an agreement validating the team’s findings as well as a plan and timeline to bring things into “compliance.” I very professionally told them that I did not agree with their findings and thus could not sign either document—I was not going to pretend to fix something that I had no intention of doing because there was nothing wrong with it in the first place. What I did do was sign a document, which we drafted, acknowledging that the team had, in fact, been there and that we agreed to a couple of specific areas where we needed to and would make some changes, but I did not agree with the majority of the report and would not agree to take any action other than what was previously specified. This seemed pretty fair to me, but apparently it shocked them and the system, which was the beginning of my unpopularity with many in CDE. Probably this was made worse when the story got out (not by my telling), and other superintendents realized that they could do the same thing (although I advised those who contacted me—and a number did—that their life would not be particularly easy for a while and also that they should have the data and results to back their stand) (L. Schwalm, personal communication, 2014). You can see why in another book (where I cited an even more egregious example of defiance), I referred to Laura as a “rebel with a cause” (Fullan, 2015). There are two lessons here with what I have called both the freedom-from problem and the freedom-to problem. You need to attend to both. The freedom-from problem is what Laura did—refusing to comply with ridiculous demands. But she was backed up by her freedom- to actions in which she built a culture of coherence, capacity, and internal accountability. If you do the latter, you are in good shape to contend with the external accountability system, including acting on external performance data that do show that you need to improve,

In California as a whole, they currently face the freedom-to problem. The wrong drivers are on the way out the door. Jerry Brown, the governor, has suspended all statewide student tests for at least two years on the grounds that it is better to have no tests than to have the wrong test. So far so good, but getting rid of bad tests is not enough for securing accountability. New tests—Smarter Balanced Assessment Curriculum (SBAC)— are being piloted relative to CCSS. Districts would be well advised to use our Coherence Framework to build their focused accountability. They will then perform better and be in a better position to secure their own accountability as they relate to the ups and downs of external accountability. External accountability as wrong as it can get sometimes is a phenomenon that keeps you honest. Leaders need to be skilled at both internal and external accountability and their interrelationship.

Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 49 (2018) 45–57
DOI:10.3233/JVR-180953
IOS Press

45

CIRCLES: Building an interagency network
for transition planning

Tiana C. Povenmire-Kirka , David W. Testa,∗, Claudia P. Flowersa , Karen M. Diegelmanna ,
Kimberly Bunch-Crumpa , Amy Kemp-Inmana and Crystalyn I. Goodnightb
a University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA
bUniversity of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC, USA

Revised/Accepted August 2017

Abstract.
BACKGROUND: Best practices in transition planning include interagency collaboration during the planning process. While
IDEA 2004 requires interagency collaboration in the IEP process, getting all the right people to the table can be difficult.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate stakeholder perceptions of interagency collaboration resulting from Communicating Intera-
gency Relationships and Collaborative Linkages for Exceptional Students (CIRCLES).
METHODS: Using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, we explored stakeholders’ interagency collaboration expe-
riences with CIRCLES.
RESULTS: Data indicated high levels of interagency collaboration and satisfaction from students, parents, teachers, and
agency personnel.
CONCLUSIONS: CIRCLES may help transition personnel overcome many of the barriers to successful interagency
collaboration.

Keywords: Transition, transition planning, youth with disabilities, interagency collaboration

1. Introduction

A successful transition to post-school education,
employment, community engagement, and indepen-
dent living are goals of most high school students.
For many students, high school has become a time
of identifying goals and networking with friends
and supports to make those goals a reality whether
they involve preparing for postsecondary education,
choosing a career, or making decisions about where
they want to live. For students with disabilities, this
process can be difficult without the help of school
personnel and adult service providers (Kohler, 1996).

∗Address for correspondence: Dr. David Test, Department of
Special Education and Child Development, University of North
Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Blvd., Charlotte, NC
28223, USA. Tel.: +1 704 687 8853; Fax: +1 704 687 1625;
E-mail: dwtest@uncc.edu.

Federal laws including the Individuals with Disabili-
ties Act (IDEA, 2004) and the Workforce Innovation
and Opportunity Act (WIOA, 2015) stipulate guide-
lines for education systems and adult service agencies
in assisting youth with disabilities in this transition
process. IDEA (2004) mandates that each student
with disabilities have a transition component in
their Individual Education Program (IEP), based on
their individual interests, strengths, and needs, in
place by their 16th birthday. IDEA (2004) further
mandates that the transition component must con-
tain a coordinated set of outcome-related activities
which will guide the student through the transition
from high school to adult life. WIOA (2015) uses
this same terminology to define transition services
and to address service providers who work with
these students to connect them with opportunities
for postsecondary education and employment. These
coordinated services imply that these two systems

1052-2263/18/$35.00 © 2018 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

mailto:dwtest@uncc.edu

46 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

work together to build a smooth transition. Mak-
ing and maintaining these connections across the
education system/adult service providers divide is
fundamental to ensuring positive post-school out-
comes for students with disabilities.

Kohler, Gothberg, Fowler, and Coyle (2016) in the
Taxonomy for Transition Programming 2.0 (Taxon-
omy), categorized this connectivity and intention of
educators and adult service providers (e.g., vocational
rehabilitation counselors, community rehabilitation
agencies, and providers of independent living) in
working together to assist in the successful transi-
tion to adult life for students with disabilities as
Interagency Collaboration. Within interagency col-
laboration, various stakeholders including parents
and students work together with transition teach-
ers and adult services providers to problem-solve
to develop student-centered transition activities to
be implemented through the student’s IEP (Webb,
Repetto, Seabrook-Blackmore, Pattersons, & Alder-
fer, 2014). Interagency Collaboration is pivotal
for increasing post-school outcomes for students
with disabilities (Noonan, Morningstar, & Gaumer
Erickson, 2008). In a systematic review of correla-
tional literature to identify in-school predictors of
post-school outcomes, Test, Mazzotti, et al. (2009)
identified interagency collaboration as a predictor of
positive post-school outcomes.

Even with guidelines (Kohler et al., 2016; Noo-
nan et al., 2008), and mandates (IDEA, 2004; WIOA,
2015), researchers have found building collabora-
tion across agencies is often difficult as educational
systems and adult service agencies may work with
different mindsets, such as specialized definitions and
policies for collaboration and assisting students with
disabilities in achieving their transition goals (Oertle,
Plotner, & Trach, 2013). For example, in a secondary
analysis of data from the National Longitudinal Tran-
sition Study-2 (NLTS2), vocational rehabilitation
(VR) counselors were found to have very little par-
ticipation in transition planning for students with
intellectual disability, as well as other disabilities
(Grigal, Hart, & Migliore, 2011). On one hand, transi-
tion teachers may find themselves overwhelmed with
the tasks of transition planning, wondering why the
vocational rehabilitation counselors are not partici-
pating, while on the other hand, VR counselors may
be waiting in the wings to be invited to the transition
planning table (Trach, 2012).

Unfortunately, research on effective strategies for
interagency collaboration has been sparse (Landmark
& Zhang, 2010; Oertle et al., 2013). In fact, Test,

Fowler, et al. (2009) found no evidence-based prac-
tices in the category of interagency collaboration in a
review of secondary transition literature. This lack
of research has been recognized by others. First,
in a position paper of the Council of Exceptional
Children Division of Career Development and Tran-
sition (DCDT), Mazzotti, Rowe, Cameto, Test, and
Morningstar (2013) called for researchers to focus
on interagency collaboration and identify evidence-
based practices in this area. More recently, Haber
et al. (2016) conducted a second meta-analysis of
in-school secondary transition predictors and found
interagency collaboration was a predictor of postsec-
ondary education and, even though there were few
studies investigating the topic, interagency collabo-
ration showed strong effects, suggesting the need for
effective strategies for promoting interagency collab-
oration. To date, current research has focused on three
areas (a) potential barriers to successful collabora-
tion, (b) perceptions of levels of collaboration, and
(c) successful models of interagency collaboration.

1.1. Barriers to collaboration

Reisen, Morgan, Schiltz, and Kupferman (2014)
conducted a Delphi study to investigate possible bar-
riers of transitioning from school to work for youth
and young adults with disabilities. Forty-six transi-
tion professionals (i.e., special educators, vocational
rehabilitation counselors, community rehabilitation
providers) across one state, identified and rated bar-
riers of school to work in 11 domains including
interagency collaboration. Within this category, lack
of continued supports after high school and lack of
knowledge of available supports ranked as having
the highest impact on youth and young adults with
disabilities.

Next, Meadows, Davies, and Beamish (2014)
conducted a confirmatory analysis of Beamish,
Meadows, and Davies (2012) data to ascertain special
educators’ level of locus of control over commonly
used interagency collaboration practices. Comparing
scores from rating scales on implementation levels of
15 interagency collaboration practices (Meadows et
al.) and a survey inquiring on teachers’ perceptions
of locus of control for each of the practices, results
indicated a positive correlation between teacher’s
perception of locus of control (i.e., school-based v.
regional/systemic) and level of implementation of the
practice.

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 47

1.1.1. Perceptions of levels of collaboration
To understand perceptions of interagency collabo-

ration among VR counselors and transition teachers,
Taylor, Morgan, and Callow-Heusser (2016) uti-
lized two surveys to determine level of collaboration
and satisfaction with collaboration practices. This
four-state study found many of the responses by
VR counselors and transition teachers were some-
what aligned, reporting low levels of collaboration
in several areas, such as teachers providing student
information to VR counselors, teachers inviting VR
counselors to IEP meetings, and VR counselors par-
ticipating in the IEP meetings. One area of responses
showed a large difference across participants. VR
counselors regarded themselves as an essential part
of the transition planning process for students with
disabilities, while transition teachers indicated VR
counselors played much less of a role.

1.2. Successful models of interagency
collaboration

Other research has examined what is working
in interagency collaboration. For example, Noo-
nan, Gaumer Erickson, and Morningstar (2013)
investigated the level of high-quality interagency col-
laboration of 73 members of community transition
teams who received training and support for inter-
agency collaboration for one year. Members were
assessed before and after the first year using the
Transition Collaboration Survey which measured 11
essential components of interagency collaboration
(Noonan, et al., 2008). The 11 key strategies identi-
fied including (a) flexible scheduling and staffing, (b)
follow-up after transition, (c) administrative support
for transition, (d) using a variety of funding sources,
(e) state-supported technical assistance, (f) ability to
build relationships, (g) agency meetings with students
and families, (h) training student and families, (i) joint
training of staff, and (j) meeting with agency staff
and transition councils. Results revealed school staff
had an increase in all 11 components of high-quality
interagency collaboration, while agency staff had
increases in most of the components except adminis-
trative support for transition and training time.

In another study using the Levels of Collaboration
Scale (Frey, Lohmeier, Lee, & Tollefson, 2006) and
social network analysis, Noonan, Erickson, McCall,
Frey, and Zheng (2014) examined changes in collab-
oration among members of a state-level interagency
education team over a three-year period. Directors
of state-level agencies who worked with youth and

adults with disabilities, rated their own level of col-
laboration with the group, as well as their perception
of other agencies’ level of collaboration. In this study,
participants were given results of the analysis each
year and had the opportunity to generate and discuss
strategies for improving the collaboration, resulting
in increased levels of collaboration from networking
to cooperation over the three-year period.

Additionally, Povenmire-Kirk et al. (2015) con-
ducted focus groups with school district personnel
and adult service providers to investigate the
successes and challenges from the first-year imple-
mentation of a three-tiered model of interagency
collaboration. Stakeholders including school district
and agency personnel who were involved in plan-
ning or participating in Communicating Interagency
Relationships and Collaborative Linkages for Excep-
tional Students (CIRCLES) were asked to reflect
on the first year of implementation in their dis-
tricts. Themes for successes included increased levels
of networking and collaboration among agency and
school participants, improved communication about
services across stakeholders, and the esoteric gratifi-
cation of helping students develop self-advocacy and
self-determination by teaching them how to lead their
own School Level Team (SLT) meetings.

This review of literature, while offering essen-
tial characteristics (Lee & Carter, 2012, Noonan
et al., 2008) of quality interagency collaboration,
also presented ongoing challenges and suggestions
for improvement (Lee & Carter, 2012; Noonan
et al., 2012; Reisen et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2016).
One research-based model that schools can use to
effectively implement interagency collaboration is
CIRCLES. The CIRCLES model of interagency col-
laboration, which has been successfully implemented
for four years in 12 school districts, addressed many
of these challenges and suggestions. In addition, in a
randomized control trial investigation of the efficacy
of the CIRCLES model, Flowers, Test, Povenmire-
Kirk, Diegelmann, Bunch-Crump, and Kemp-Inman
(2018), found students who went through CIRCLES
experienced higher levels of self-determination and
participation in their IEP meetings.

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use
mixed methods (i.e., qualitative and quantitative)
to investigate the full implementation of the CIR-
CLES model of interagency collaboration. Using
grounded theory method, focus groups were con-
ducted to collect data on the perspectives of four
different stakeholder groups (i.e., students, parents,
teachers, agency personnel) to determine success

48 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

and challenges throughout implementation of CIR-
CLES. Quantitative data were also gathered using
surveys to examine different stakeholders’ perception
of involvement in CIRCLES. The following research
questions were addressed:

1. What are CIRCLES students’ perception of
their preparedness, involvement in planning and
setting goals for post-secondary education, job,
and living in the community?

2. Are parents involved in planning and preparing
their child for post-secondary education, job,
and living in the community?

3. What are interagency members’ perception of
collaboration among schools and other agen-
cies?

2. Method

2.1. Description of CIRCLES service delivery
model

CIRCLES involves three levels of interagency col-
laboration including Community Level Team, School
Level Team, and IEP Team. While each team has
a specific purpose, they work together to address
transition planning needs and issues of individual
students with disabilities to improve both in-school
and post-school outcomes of students with disabil-
ities (Aspel, Bettis, Quinn, Test, & Wood, 1999;
Povenmire-Kirk et al., 2015). CIRCLES targets stu-
dents with disabilities who may need support from
multiple adult service providers to experience suc-
cessful post-school outcomes. For example, students
with a mild learning disability who have family issues
including poverty, homelessness, or high-risk parents
could benefit from services available through CIR-
CLES team members. On the other hand, similar
students who have a strong family system of support,
are college bound, and have no other specific needs
may not benefit from the interagency team involve-
ment that is the hallmark of CIRCLES. In summary,
CIRCLES allows agencies to provide support ser-
vices directly to students and families who need
involvement from multiple adult service providers
using three levels of teaming.

2.1.1. Community Level Team
The Community Level Team (CLT) is comprised of

administrators and supervisors of every agency able
to provide support for transition from high school to

adult life. This team could include Vocational Reha-
bilitation, Department of Social Services, Health
Department, The Arc, Easter Seals, Autism Society,
residential service providers, and any other local ser-
vice providers. The CLT is organized and convened
by district-level school staff (e.g., special education
director, program coordinator, transition specialist)
to address community-level needs for services. The
CLT meets two to four times per year to identify gaps
and overlaps in services, and work together to change
policy and practice to better serve youth with disabil-
ities. As the CLT works to identify and address areas
of need in their community, this can result in changes
in policies, services, budget allocations, or commu-
nity outreach and education. One of the key roles for
CLT members is to appoint a direct service represen-
tative from their agency to serve on their School Level
Team (SLT). As such, administrative-level buy-in is
vital to success of CIRCLES.

2.1.2. School Level Team
The School Level Team (SLT) is what makes

CIRCLES different than other models that uti-
lize interagency transition teams; while interagency
community-level transition teams exist, the SLT,
brings adult agency representatives together to meet
directly with students and their families. The SLT
is comprised of direct service providers (e.g., case
managers, counselors, care coordinators, etc.) from
each agency represented on the CLT; these are adult
service professionals special educators might tradi-
tionally invite to attend IEPs for students in need in
the more traditional model. These are also represen-
tatives who, because of the size of their catchment
area, are often unable to attend IEP meetings of every
student in need. Instead of inviting these representa-
tives to attend every IEP meeting, district-level school
staff responsible for convening CIRCLES meetings
invite them to attend one full-day meeting a month
during the school year, in which they see multi-
ple students and address post-school goals in areas
of transition, specifically, postsecondary education,
employment, and independent living. Rather than
spending time calling agency members to invite them
to IEP meetings, in the CIRCLES model, special edu-
cators prepare their students individually to present
information about themselves, including their post-
secondary goals and needs to SLT members. Students
use technology (e.g., PowerPoint, Voki, Wobook,
GoAnimate) to describe their strengths, areas of need,
and post-school goals. Student presentations typi-
cally take three to eight minutes. For the remaining

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 49

time allotted (20 – 40 minutes per student), members
of the SLT talk with the student, his or her family,
special educators, and one another to determine how
best to deliver transition services to each student. In
addition to giving each student, parent, and special
educators a personal contact to associate with each
agency, the SLT format also allows time for appoint-
ments to be made and questions to be answered by
agency members. Families can discuss any needs they
may have as a unit (e.g., poverty, homelessness, trans-
portation, food insecurity, guardianship assistance,
etc.). Agencies negotiate with one another and the
student and family to create the most comprehensive
plan to meet each student’s specific needs. After each
student is seen, agency members prepare to hear the
next student presentation during a 5–10 minute break,
and then start the process over for each new student.
SLTs typically see between six and 10 students per
meeting day. To ensure follow-through of the service
plans developed at these meetings, and because the
SLT’s main purpose is to develop transition activ-
ities and services for the student with a disability,
the minutes of each SLT meeting are distributed to
every member of the SLT, the IEP team via the spe-
cial education teacher, the student, and his or her
parents.

2.1.3. IEP team
The IEP team is the final level in the CIRCLES

multi-level approach. After the SLT meeting, spe-
cial education teachers take the minutes and decisions
made at the SLT meeting back to their IEP meeting
and write transition components based on the ser-
vices agreed upon at the SLT. This process enables
the IEP team to write other components of the IEP
with end goals of each student in mind and plan
for transition activities and supports that exist and
are available to each student. Because the district-
level school staff are responsible for convening both
CLT and SLT meetings, time special education teach-
ers typically spend inviting folks to IEP meetings
is freed up for preparing students for SLT and IEP
meetings. Student assessments and interviews that go
into developing their presentations to the SLT are all
part of what should be standard operating procedures
for preparing for transition components of any IEP
meeting. The only activity that may not be part of
standard procedures is the training of the technol-
ogy tools to help students present. However, many
districts require students to present a portfolio their
senior year, and use the students’ SLT presentations
as both a practice activity and a starting point for

this larger portfolio presentation. In some schools,
teachers used technology their students utilize as part
of CIRCLES as “technology instruction” needed to
meet criteria associated with graduation. Figure 1
illustrates the relationships of these teams to one
another, the student, and the community.

2.2. Focus groups

2.2.1. Setting
We conducted focus groups at regular meetings

of CLT and SLT team members for agency person-
nel, and at high schools for parents, students, and
teachers. Although we offered focus groups to each
district, six of the 12 districts participated in all four
focus groups, giving us a total of 24 focus groups
(i.e., 4 = agency personnel, 4 = parents, 4 = students,
4 = teachers). The six districts that participated in
focus groups represented a range of demographics at
district and school level. One district was classified as
urban, two as suburban, and three as rural. Of the six
schools which participated in focus groups within the
districts, three schools had enrollment greater than
1000 students and five schools had more than 50%
free/reduced price lunch. Finally, during the grant,
two schools had school staff turnover, but there was
no agency staff turnover. District reasons for not par-
ticipating in focus groups included scheduling issues
and District Level Team leadership changes.

2.2.2. Participants
Each of the six districts held four focus groups

that included a total of 175 participants. Focus groups
varied from 3 to 18 participants. Overall, 62 district
and agency personnel, 40 teachers, 31 parents, and
42 students participated. We did not collect individ-
ual demographic information at these focus groups
as the unit of interest was the district’s experience of
CIRCLES, not the individual.

2.2.3. Instruments
We used IRB approved focus group questions

developed to maximize the use of focus groups versus
individual interviews (Morgan, 1996). We devel-
oped open ended, but guiding questions, designed to
maximize conversation between the members of the
various groups. Instruments used for each group are
available from the first author.

2.2.4. Data collection
Each separate focus group was facilitated by a

member of the CIRCLES project staff trained in

50 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

Fig. 1. CIRCLES.

probing questions to glean more information in
response to the questions on our focus group pro-
tocols. All focus groups were audio-recorded and
transcribed by a professional transcriptionist.

2.2.5. Data analysis
Two members of CIRCLES project staff coded

transcripts of each focus group separately, begin-
ning with a general list of themes related to our
questions, regarding supports, barriers, and needs
moving forward. During the coding process, they
used grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1968) and
allowed themes to emerge from the data, creating
new codes as these themes emerged. After coding
each transcript once, each coder returned with the
new list of themes generated by the data and coded
a second time. After all coding was complete, the
coders met to review their codes and generated con-
sensus. These codes were entered into N-Vivo and
code reports were developed. Coders then returned to
the code reports and wrote summaries of our findings,
again, reaching consensus. Focus group data were
gathered from participants from six districts for each

focus group category providing triangulation and
confidence in trustworthiness and credibility of the
data.

2.3. Student, parent, and interagency surveys

2.3.1. Participants
Surveys were administered to students and parents

who participated in CIRCLES and agency members
who attended the SLT or CLT meetings. There were
143 students, 72 parents, and 52 interagency members
who completed the surveys. All participants were
asked to complete the survey online at the end of the
school year. All 12 school districts were represented
in the samples. The return rate was 46% for the stu-
dent survey, 23% for the parent survey, and 88% for
interagency survey.

2.3.2. Instruments
Three surveys were administered to three stake-

holder groups, students, parents, and participating
interagency teams. Student and parent surveys were
administered at the end of the year after participating

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 51

Table 1
Student Perception of Preparedness

Item Agree

M %

1. I am prepared for school (e.g., college, university, training) after high school. 2.58 64
2. I am prepared for a job after high school. 2.72 78
3. The school was helpful in preparing me for school (e.g., college, university, training) after high school. 2.87 84
4. The school was helpful in preparing me for a job after high school. 2.80 82
5. The school was helpful in preparing me for living in the community after high school. 2.70 66
6. I know what agencies/adult service providers will help me after high school (vocational rehab, social security,

department of social services, etc.).
2.62 70

7. I have been involved in preparing myself for school (college/university) after high school. 2.64 74
8. I have been involved in preparing myself for a job after high school. 2.78 83
9. I have been involved in preparing myself for living in the community after high school. 2.57 71
10. I have been involved in preparing goals for my future. 2.92 91

Table 2
Parent Perception of Student Preparedness

Item Agree/Strongly
Agree

M %

1. I understand the process of preparing my child for life after high school. 3.54 98%
2. I have had an active role in the process of preparing my child for life after high school. 3.66 97%
3. I communicate on a regular basis with school personnel on the process of preparing my child for life after high school. 3.36 92%
4. I understand my child’s needs and goals. 3.64 100%
5. The school is doing a good job preparing my child for employment after high school. 3.60 96%
6. The school is doing a good job preparing my child to live in the community after high school. 3.54 95%
7. The school is doing a good job preparing my child for education after high school. 3.62 96%

in CIRCLES and examined the perceptions of the
students’ preparedness to transition out of high
school. The survey to interagency teams examined
the extent of the collaboration across the different
agencies.

The student survey had 10 items that asked students
to rate using a 3-point scale (1 = disagree, 2 = not sure,
& 3 = agree) their perception of preparedness (see
Table 1 for the items). Parents responded to seven
items, using a 4-point scale (1 = Strongly Disagree,
2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, & 4 = Strongly Agree), about
their perception of their child’s preparedness (see
Table 2). The agency member survey included 27
items asking respondents to rate (a) the extent their
transition collaborative team coordinated, imple-
mented, or collaborated on a series of transition
activities and (b) rate their organizations collab-
oration with other organizations (see Table 3 for
items).

2.3.3. Data analyses
Descriptive statistics are used to summarize all

participants’ responses. Specifically, means and per-
centages were used to summarize student and parent
survey results. For the agency members’ survey,

frequencies and percentages were reported for each
item.

3. Results

3.1. Focus groups

After analysis, we found themes discussed by focus
group participants fit into one of three categories (a)
Successes and Supports, (b) Challenges and Barriers,
and (c) Needs Moving Forward.

3.1.1. Successes and supports
Most agencies agreed that the CIRCLES process

was successful in several areas, including promoting
collaborative relationships that allowed community
agency members and school-level personnel to bet-
ter understand what each agency can offer students
and can better point families in the right direction for
services. The collaborative nature of CIRCLES also
motived team members, as they were able to hear
about successes of students and families getting the
services they need as a result of their efforts – they
felt that they had made a difference. Some aspects of

52 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

Table 3
Interagency Collaboration Ratings

To what extent does your transition Very Small Somewhat Great Very
collaborative team: Small Great

1. Coordinates requests for and dissemination of information (e.g., to parents,
employers)

4% 6% 21% 47% 23%

2. Reduces systematic barriers to collaboration 4% 8% 13% 62% 13%
3. Implements collaborative funding of transition services 6% 12% 37% 29% 16%
4. Implements collaborative staffing of transition services 8% 4% 21% 50% 17%
5. Collaborates in the development and use of assessment data 8% 13% 17% 54% 8%
6. Coordinates and shares delivery of transition-related services 2% 4% 12% 58% 25%
7. Disseminates agency and service delivery systems information among

cooperating agencies
0% 0% 17% 52% 31%

8. Reflects collaborative program planning and development, including
employer involvement

2% 12% 29% 47% 10%

9. Reflects collaborative consultation between special, “regular,” and
vocational educators

10% 13% 25% 33% 19%

10. Reflects collaboration between post-secondary education institutions and
the school district

4% 4% 19% 45% 28%

What best describes the extent of your organization’s general collaboration:
11. Partner organizations take your organization’s opinions seriously when

decisions are made about the collaboration.
0% 0% 6% 58% 36%

12. Your organization brainstorms with partner organizations to develop
solutions to mission-related problems facing the collaboration.

0% 0% 9% 62% 28%

13. You, as a representative of your organization in the collaboration,
understand your organization’s roles and responsibilities as a member of
the collaboration.

0% 0% 36% 51% 43%

14. Partner organization meetings accomplish what is necessary for the
collaboration to function well.

0% 2% 15% 53% 30%

15. Partner organizations (including your organization) agree about the goals
of the collaboration.

0% 2% 11% 45% 42%

16. Your organization’s tasks in the collaboration are well coordinated with
those of partner organizations.

8% 4% 19% 46% 23%

17. The collaboration hinders your organization from meeting its own
organizational mission.

68% 17% 2% 9% 4%

18. Your organization’s independence is affected by having to work with
partner organizations on activities related to the collaboration.

64% 17% 8% 9% 2%

19. You, as the representative of your organization, feel pulled between trying
to meet both your organization’s and the collaboration’s expectations.

55% 17% 9% 11% 8%

20. Partner organizations (including your organization) have combined and
used each other’s resources so all partners benefit from collaborating.

0% 4% 28% 42% 26%

21. Your organization shares information with partner organizations that will
strengthen their operations and programs.

0% 0% 11% 57% 32%

22. You feel what your organization brings to the collaboration is appreciated
and respected by partner organizations.

0% 0% 9% 45% 45%

23. Your organization achieves its own goals better working with partner
organizations than working alone.

0% 0% 10% 38% 52%

24. Partner organizations (including your organization) work through
differences to arrive at win-win solutions.

0% 0% 8% 55% 38%

25. The people who represent partner organizations in the collaboration are
trustworthy.

0% 0% 2% 40% 58%

26. My organization can count on each partner organization to meets its
obligations to the collaboration.

0% 0% 15% 49% 36%

27. Your organization feels it worthwhile to stay and work with partner
organizations rather than leave the collaboration.

0% 0% 4% 32% 64%

CIRCLES seemed to be critical for success, including
clearly assigning responsibilities for follow-up and
providing reminders to each person involved, provid-
ing complete student profile sheets to agencies ahead
of time, and having teachers present in meetings to
help guide and support students as they presented.

Collaborative relationships. Meeting with other com-
munity agencies allowed all team members to better
understand what each one can offer students and
can better point families in the right direction for
services. Collaboration also has improved commu-
nication between the different agencies.

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 53

“Through collaboration in CIRCLES meetings,
I learned what other agencies are out there and
what they do; it’s incredibly beneficial.” – Agency
Member

“ . . . I’ve learned from everybody around the
table and I’m able to help families better, point
them in directions.” – Special Education Teacher

“I like getting out with and networking with other
team members and seeing what these kids are
doing.” – Agency Member

When team members heard success stories,
“ . . . You feel like you’re making a difference.” –
Agency Member

The collaborative nature of CIRCLES meetings
was something enjoyed by agency members, teach-
ers, and families, alike.

“I really enjoyed having the teacher in there while
the student was presenting. It seems to make the
student a lot more comfortable.” – Parent

Developing systems for follow-up. One team member
at the SLT meetings wrote down what each student,
agency, and teacher had agreed to do and gave each
party a copy. Email reminders also helped for one
district.
Provide adequate student information in SLT. Giv-
ing the agencies student profile sheets ahead of time
was crucial for agencies to best know what would
be a good fit for each student, and to have some
background on the students.

“It’s just helpful to have a little background [from
the teacher] before we’re in front of the students.”
– Agency Member

“And the student profile sheets, having those
ahead of time helped you, as well, know the
student’s capabilities because some present dif-
ferently than their ability indicates or their IQ
indicates.” – Agency Member

3.1.2. Challenges and barriers
Despite the successes reported throughout the

CIRCLES process, team members perceived several
challenges and barriers that may need to be addressed
to produce optimal student outcomes. Primarily, these
challenges and barriers can be described in three
areas: understanding the process, getting everyone to
the table, and follow-up.
Understanding the process. During initial training,
some confusion occurred because team members

were not sure about many of the details of the process.
It sometimes was difficult for the transition team to
decide how to prioritize students, whether based on
age or need.

“So the training, you can sit in and you can listen
to what all it entails but you’re really not going to
understand it very well until you actually come
and sit down with the students and hear their
presentations.” – Transition Educator

“I think the training was not as clear because I
didn’t totally understand the difference between
the community level and the school level.” –
Agency Member

“So if I’m a mom walking in with my child I kind
of want to know what I’m walking into, and I’ve
seen looks of surprise . . . It’s a little bit intimi-
dating. I think the comfort level would be better
if they knew what to expect.” – Special Education
Teacher

Getting everyone to the table. When implementing
the CIRCLES process, it was sometimes challenging
to get parents and agencies to the SLT and CLT meet-
ings due to scheduling, agencies not responding to
meeting invitations, and parents feeling intimidated
to meet with a room full of professionals. Parental
participation in IEP meetings and other school-based
meetings has been documented to lag as students
get older; CIRCLES meetings are no exception. It
was challenging to get families to attend SLT meet-
ings, possibly because the situation is intimidating
for them, and often available meeting places were
not conducive to setting up an inclusive environment
(e.g., one big table).

“One of the hardest things to do when you set
up these meetings each month is to get participa-
tion from family members.” – Special Education
Teacher

Getting everyone together at one time is chal-
lenging due to agencies not responding and also
remembering to invite the right people.

“I guess the other part would be able to get
everybody together at one time, is always the
challenge.” – District Transition Specialist

Follow-up: Several factors also seemed to affect
follow-up on contacts after SLT meetings, includ-
ing a lack of clearly defined responsibility allocation
between parents and agencies, as well as privacy
concerns that prevented agencies from initiating the

54 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

follow-up contact with parents. When agencies pro-
vided contact information and waited for families to
follow up, often families did not contact agencies
to follow through on plans made at the SLT. Who
is responsible for follow-up was not clearly defined
during the meetings. The information parents receive
also can be overwhelming, so it was difficult for them
to know where to start.

Furthermore, the outcomes from SLT meetings did
not always get transferred to the IEP’s transition plan.

“We give them our information and our business
cards and are kind of waiting for them to get in
contact with us, so I think that contact piece is
really the most difficult part.”- Agency Member

3.1.3. Needs moving forward
Several suggestions for meeting needs going for-

ward emerged that may help guide school districts in
implementing CIRCLES with optimal student out-
comes. These included establish responsibility for
follow-up, increase parental awareness and partic-
ipation, improve agency participation with careful
planning by individual student needs, ongoing train-
ing for teachers, and report successes and actions of
SLT back to CLT.
Responsibility for follow-up. First, it is critical to
clearly define who is responsible for making contact
for follow up, parents or agencies, and to obtain any
necessary parent permissions for agency follow-up.

“It’s sort of your pat on the back and your motiva-
tion when you hear that oh, they really did follow
through with that and they really are already con-
nected with VR.” – Special Education Teacher

Increase parental awareness. Second, parental
awareness and understanding of the CIRCLES pro-
cess should be promoted, possibly through brochures
given during IEP transition discussions, parent train-
ings and/or discussions about the process, formal
parent invitations to SLT meetings, and posting
resources on the school website. Provide parents with
information/brochures ahead of time, and provide
parents with some type of training to help them under-
stand the CIRCLES process. Also, increase parent
familiarity with CIRCLES by mentioning it or dis-
cussing it to some extent at every parent meeting,
and emphasize CIRCLES during the IEP meeting
when discussing transition. Send formal invitations
to parents about their child’s SLT meeting. Schools
could add a prominent link with CIRCLES resources
to their websites.

“If you meet with your freshman parents that
would be a good time to start talking with them.”
– Transition Specialist

“Possibly with training and them understanding
the benefit for their child would result in more of
them participating.” – Special Education Director

Improve agency involvement with careful planning.
Third, consider improving agency involvement by
identifying ahead of time those agencies that might
most support a particular student, and provide agen-
cies with student profiles prior to the SLT meetings
so the agencies can better prepare to meet their
needs.

“It creates buy in and yeah I would think that
it would create more participation.” – Agency
Member

Ongoing training for teachers. Fourth, training
should be ongoing as new teachers and agencies join
the CIRCLES process. Continue training new teach-
ers about CIRCLES, providing an overall perspective
of the program and each team level’s responsibil-
ity, and how to best prepare students for the SLT
meeting. Additionally, if teachers knew at the begin-
ning of the year all the dates for the meetings, they
could plan accordingly with their students. Set meet-
ing dates ahead of time, and provide reminders and
follow-up contact to agency members who miss a
meeting.
Report successes and actions of SLT to CLT. Finally,
a reliable system should be developed to report back
to the CLT team any decisions made at the SLT to
maintain motivation and effective decision-making at
the CLT level. These could include presenting a brief
stakeholder evaluation or survey of the SLT process,
SLT meeting notes, or even invite a student to present
at the CLT on occasion.

“It would be motivating for the CLT members to
hear success stories of students who connected
with agencies and continued this relationship
after the SLT. A brief evaluation of the SLT pro-
cess could be taken back to the CLT meeting, as
well as parent input and notes from the SLT meet-
ing. Perhaps a student could present at the CLT
meeting on occasion.” – Agency Director (CLT
member)

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 55

3.2. Student, parent, and interagency surveys
results

3.2.1. Student perception of preparedness
The items, means, and percentage of students who

agreed with each item (1 = disagree; 2 = not sure;
3 = agree) are reported in Table 1. All means were
above 2.5, and the percentages of students who agreed
ranged from 64% (I am prepared for school (e.g., col-
lege, university, training) after high school to 91% (I
have been involved in preparing goals for my future).

3.2.2. Parent perception of child’s preparedness
Table 2 displays the means and percentage

of parents who agreed or strongly agreed with
the items (1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree,
3 = Agree; 4 = Strongly Agree). All means were at or
above 3.36, with most parents agreeing or strongly
agreeing with statements, ranging from 92% (I com-
municate on a regular basis with school personnel on
the process of preparing my child for life after high
school) to 100% (I understand my child’s needs and
goals).

3.2.3. Interagency collaboration survey
The frequencies and percentage for all survey items

can be found in Table 3. At least 50% of respondents
rated items great or very great for all items expect
item 3 (Implements collaborative funding of transi-
tion services). The highest rated items (i.e., greater
than 90% rated great or very great) suggested respon-
dents collaborated, developed solutions, understood
their roles and responsibilities, felt trustworthy, and
felt worthwhile in working with partner agencies (i.e.,
items 11, 12, 13, 22, 24, and 27).

4. Discussion

While previous research (Flowers et al., 2018)
has demonstrated the positive impact of CIRCLES
on student self-determination and IEP participation,
findings from the current study indicate high lev-
els of stakeholder satisfaction with CIRCLES. For
example, both students and parents felt they had
been actively involved in the transition planning pro-
cess and that students were prepared for post-school
life. In addition, stakeholders indicated high levels
of interagency collaboration as a result of CIRCLES.
These findings extend the literature on interagency
collaboration in a number of ways. First, this study
appears to be one of the first to collect perceptions

of students and parents on their satisfaction with the
interagency collaboration provided. Second, the cur-
rent findings support previous research (Noonan et
al., 2014; Noonan et al., 2013; Taylor et al., 2016)
indicating agency satisfaction with specific intera-
gency collaboration strategies.

Other key findings from the study included strate-
gies for overcoming the barriers to interagency
collaboration noted in previous research (Meadows et
al., 2014; Reisen et al., 2014) including implementing
procedures for follow-up after SLT meetings, pro-
viding training to parents on what to expect from
CIRCLES, improving communication with agency
members, and continuing ongoing training for teach-
ers. These findings confirm those of Povenmire-Kirk
et al. (2015) and also extend the knowledge in the
field. For example, Noonan et al. (2013) named
establishing follow-up procedures for students and
providing training of families as two of the 11 key
strategies for successful interagency collaboration.
Another key strategy listed was training of teachers
and staff (Noonan et al., 2013), which may improve
teachers’ perception of locus of control, leading
to increased interagency collaboration (Meadows et
al., 2014). In addition, Noonan et al. (2014) noted
the importance of communication among agency
providers leading to higher levels of collaboration
and cooperation. The respondent groups in this study
included parents, teachers, and students, in addition
to the agency and district personnel who participated
in Povenmire-Kirk et al. (2015). It is encouraging to
find the same positives and supports identified across
all four groups, confirming what agency members
reported in 2015.

4.1. Limitations

One limitation of this study, as in many focus group
analyses, is that there may be undue influence of some
members of the group that stifle the input of a few. A
second limitation is that focus groups tend to attract
people who either really like or really hate a pro-
gram or entity. Third, because the focus of this study
was on district-level experiences with CIRCLES, par-
ticipant demographic were not collected. Together,
these limitations may have resulted in a sample not
representative of the whole.

4.2. Suggestions for future research

Results of this study indicated need for future
research in a number of areas. First, future research

56 T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning

should collect stakeholder demographic data to
ensure representativeness. Second, although most
items on the interagency collaboration ratings (see
Table 3), were positive, 55% rated collaborative
funding of transition services as “very small” to
“somewhat.” As a result, future research is needed
to investigate ways to braid funding. It is possible the
pre-employment transition services and memoran-
dum of understanding required by WIOA (2015) will
provide an opportunity for this research to emerge.

Third, future research should consider gathering
pre-post data on consumer satisfaction and levels of
collaboration. Without these data, it is difficult to
claim a causal relationship between an intervention
and changes in satisfaction and collaboration.

Fourth, future research in the area of secondary
transition and interagency collaboration should con-
sider using social network analysis (SNA; Knoke &
Yang, 2008). SNA would allow researchers to exam-
ine changes in the strength of collaboration between
agencies over time.

Finally, while findings from the current study
indicate CIRCLES had a positive impact on local
community levels of interagency collaboration simi-
lar to Noonan et al. (2013), future research is needed
for strategies of both the local and state levels (cf.,
Noonan et al., 2014).

4.3. Implications for practice

Results of this study indicate CIRCLES may
improve the collaborative transition planning efforts
of teachers, parents, students, and agency members,
including vocational rehabilitation counselors. As
such, they point to several implications for practice.
First, as previous research has noted, teacher lack
of knowledge of available post-high school supports
(Reisen et al., 2014) and lack of information sharing
and VR involvement in the IEP process (Taylor et al.,
2016) are often barriers to successful interagency col-
laboration. It appears these barriers can be overcome
through the SLT process by having stakeholders learn
about the support each community agency can pro-
vide. This increased awareness can be then be shared
with other teachers and parents to extend the col-
laboration. Second, agency members, including VR
counselors should collaborate with other agencies
to expand their knowledge of what is available and
what each agency can provide to increase collabo-
ration. Third, school transition personnel should use
this model to implement a “CIRCLES-type” tiered
interagency collaboration program in their district

by first building a CLT. This can be accomplished
by connecting with an existing community team or
establishing a new one. The CLT can also provide
necessary training for teachers on preparing students.
With a CLT in place, the SLT can then bring students,
families, teachers, and agencies together to help stu-
dents transition seamlessly into their adult life after
high school.

5. Conclusion

When used with fidelity, the CIRCLES model
can ensure the right people are involved in transi-
tion planning process of students with disabilities.
Results of this study indicate CIRCLES may be
used to overcome many barriers to successful intera-
gency collaboration identified by previous research.
With careful planning and training, students, par-
ents, teachers, and agencies can all work together to
develop a collaborative plan for transition services
for each individual student.

Author note

This document was produced under U.S. Depart-
ment of Education, Institute for Education Sciences
Grant No. R324A110018 awarded to Dr. David W.
Test and Dr. Claudia Flowers at the University of
North Carolina at Charlotte. The opinions expressed
are those of the authors and do not represent views of
the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

Conflict of interest

None to report.

References

Aspel, N., Bettis, G., Quinn, P., Test, D. W., & Wood, W. M. (1999).
A collaborative process for planning transition services for all
students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional
Individuals, 22, 21-42.

Beamish, W., Meadows, D., & Davies, M. (2012). Benchmarking
teacher practice in Queensland transition programs for youth
with an intellectual disability and autism. The Journal of Spe-
cial Education, 45, 227-241. doi: 10.1177/0022466910366602

Flowers, C. P., Test, D. W., Povenmire-Kirk, T., Diegelmann,
K. M., Bunch-Crump, K., & Kemp-Inman, A. (2018).
A demonstration model of interagency collaboration
for students with disabilities: A multi-level model.

T.C. Povenmire-Kirk et al. / Building an interagency network for transition planning 57

The Journal of Special Education, 51, 211-221. doi:
10.1177/0022466917720764

Frey, B. B., Lohmeier, J. H., Lee, S. W., & Tollefson, N.
(2006). Measuring Collaboration among grant partners.
American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 383-392. doi:
10.1177/1098214006290356

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L., (1968). The Discovery of Grounded
Theory. Chicago, IL, Aldine Publishing Company.

Grigal, M., Hart, D., & Migliore, A. (2011). Comparing the tran-
sition planning, postsecondary education, and employment
outcomes of students with intellectual and other disabilities.
Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 34, 4-17.

Haber, M. G., Mazzotti, V. L., Mustian, A. L., Rowe, D. A.,
Bartholomew, A. L., Test, D. W., & Fowler, C. H. (2016).
What works, when, for whom, and with whom: A meta-
analytic review of predictors of postsecondary success for
students with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 86,
123-162.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004,
20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (2004).

Kohler, P. D. (1996). A taxonomy for transition programming:
Linking research and practice. Urbana-Champaign, IL: Tran-
sition Research Institute.

Kohler, P. D., Gothberg, J. E., Fowler, C., & Coyle, J. (2016). Tax-
onomy for transition programming 2.0: A model for planning,
organizing, and evaluating transition education, services,
and programs. Western Michigan University. Available at
www.transitionta.org.

Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2008). Social network analysis. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.

Landmark, L. J., Ju, S., & Zhang, D. (2010). Substantiated
best practices in transition: Fifteen plus years later. Career
Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 33,
165-176.

Lee, G. K., & Carter, E. W. (2012). Preparing transition-age
students with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder for
meaningful work. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 988-1000.
doi: 10.1002/pits.21651

Mazzotti, V. L., Rowe, D. A., Cameto, R., Test, D. W., & Morn-
ingstar, M. E. (2013). Identifying and promoting transition
evidence-based practices and predictors of success: A position
paper of the division on career development and transition.
Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individu-
als, 36, 140-151. doi: 10.1177/2165143413503365

Meadows, D., Davies, M., & Beamish, W. (2014). Teacher
control over interagency collaboration: A roadblock for
effective transitioning of youth with disabilities. Interna-
tional Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 61,
332-345.

Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus Groups. Annual Review of Sociology,
22, 129-152.

Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A.-M., Marder, C., Nagle, K.,
Shaver, D., . . . Schwarting, M. (2011). The post-high school
outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 8 years after

high school: A report from the National Longitudinal Transi-
tion Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2011-3005). Menlo Park, CA:
SRI International.

Noonan, P. M., McCall, Z. A., Zheng, C., & Gaumer Erickson,
A. S. (2012). An analysis of collaboration in a state-
level interagency transition team. Career Development and
Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 35, 143-154. doi:
10.1177/2165143412443083

Noonan, P., Gaumer Erickson, A., McCall, Z, Frey, B. B., & Zheng,
C. (2014). Evaluating change in interagency collaboration of
a state-level interagency education team: A social network
approach within a utilization-focused framework. Educational
Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26, 301-316. doi:
10.1007/s11092-014-9193-2

Noonan, P. M., Gaumer Erickson, A., & Morningstar, M. E. (2013).
Effects of community transition teams on interagency collab-
oration for school and adult agency staff. Career Development
and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 36, 96-104.

Noonan, P. M., Morningstar, M. E., & Gaumer Erickson, A. (2008).
Improving interagency collaboration: Effective strategies used
by high-performing local districts and communities. Career
Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31, 132-143.

Oertle, K. M., Plotner, A. J., & Trach, J. S. (2013). Rehabilita-
tion professionals’ expectations for transition and interagency
collaboration. Journal of Rehabilitation, 79(3), 25-35.

Povenmire-Kirk, T., Diegelmann, K., Crump, K., Schnorr, C., Test,
D., Flowers, C., & Aspel, N. (2015). Implementing CIRCLES:
A new model for interagency collaboration in transition plan-
ning. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 42, 51-65.

Reisen, T., Morgan, R., Schultz, J., & Kupferman, S. (2014).
School-to-work barriers as identified bt special educators,
vocational rehabilitation counselors, and community rehabili-
tation professionals. Journal of Rehabilitation, 80, 33-44.

Taylor, D. L., Morgan, R. L., & Callow-Heusser, C. A. (2016) A
survey of vocational rehabilitation counselors and special edu-
cation teachers on collaboration in transition planning. Journal
of Vocational Rehabilitation, 44, 163-173.

Test, D. W., Fowler, C. H., Richter, S. M., White, J., Mazzotti, V.,
Walker, A. R., Kohler, P., & Kortering, L. (2009). Evidence-
based practices in secondary transition. Career Development
for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 115-128.

Test, D. W., Mazzotti, V., Mustian, A. L., Fowler, R., Kortering,
L., & Kohler, P. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition
predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with
disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals,
32, 160-181. doi: 10.1177/0885728809346960

Trach, J. S. (2012). Degree of collaboration for successful transi-
tion outcomes. Journal of Rehabilitation, 78(2), 39-48.

Webb, K., Repetto, J., Seabrook-Blackmore, J., Patterson, K. B., &
Alderfer, K. (2014). Career development: Preparation, integra-
tion, and collaboration. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation,
40, 231-238. doi: 10.3233/JVR-140688

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2015, P. L. 113-128,
29 U.S.C. Sec. 3101, et. seq.

www.transitionta.org

Copyright of Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation is the property of IOS Press and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

TRANSITION PROGRAM
OISD SPED

CIRCLES

Agenda
Introduction/ breaking the ice/common ground activity
School members introduction
History of Transition
Facts and Data
Define Transition Services in Texas
Introducing CIRCLES/ short video
CIRCLES Teams
Guiding Questions

I Introduction
Form equal sized teams of 3-6 players. Give each team a sheet of paper and a pencil. Tell teams their challenge is to list everything they can think of that all team members have in common.
Tell teams they have three minutes to create their lists, so they need to work quickly. To add to the excitement, tell the teams when they have 1 minute left, thirty seconds, and so forth.
When time is up, find out which team has the longest list and ask them to read the similarities they listed. Then ask teams whose similarities have not already been
How easy was it to discover something in common with another group member?
• How can similarities draw us closer together? read aloud to read some of theirs.
Introduction to the Team members
Define Stakeholders
Introduce IEP participation measures

History Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
IDEA 1990
Driven by parents
Concede that children
given FAPE
BUT graduating to
WHAT??
Transition mandated
Linkages to agencies
Is based on the individual student’s needs, taking into account the student’s preferences
and interests; and
3. Includes —
(i.) Instruction;
(ii.) Related Services;
(iii.) Community Experiences;
(iv.) The development of employment and other post-school adult living objectives; and
(v.) If appropriate, acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational evaluation.

Texas Requirements
All Texas Public School Districts Including Charter Schools
Students Receiving Special Education Services
By Primary Disability
PEIMS Data 2018-2019
Statewide

Primary Disability
OI OHI AI VI DB ID ED LD SI AU DD TBI NCEC
3,593 76,291 7,028 3,884 310 56,886 31,789 163,688 107,668 71,951 25 1,325 7,553

Transition planning begins no later than age 14

Through the Years
at OISD
Middle School
Career Exploration
General Knowledge of Careers
Development of
Social Skills
Decision making
Self determination
Self-advocacy
Development of work ethic and responsibilities
Identify preferences, needs, and interests
Development of Transition Plan (Age 14)
Graduation options discussion

Through the Years
at OISD
High School
Career Preparation
Demonstration of general knowledge of careers
Implementation of
Social Skills
Decision making
Self determination
Self-advocacy
Demonstration of work ethic and responsibilities
Implementation of Transition Plan
Graduation Path Determined (end of 8th grade)

OISD Special Education
Vision
OISD Develops responsible citizens by creating equal opportunities for all students through personal relationships that foster innovative leaders prepared to be successful in a global society.
Demographics of SPED students
9% of the students in OISD are SPED.
Elementary School: 3% SPED students including Speech Impairments students who are instructional settings.
Ethnicity: 98% White 1.5% Hispanic 0.5 % other races
Middle School/JR High: 3% of the students are SPED.
Race/Ethnicity: 99% White 1% other races
High School: 3% SPED ED. 98% White and 1% Hispanic and 1% other races.
Students for transition services for the 2019-2020 who turned 14 and older
Total students: 91
After High School planning is very important
Community College, College, or University
Competitive Employment
Supported/Integrated/Customized Employment

DATA to Review
The student transition planning supplement
annual IEP documents
transition goals and objectives
parents’ input
informal and formal vocational assessments
student’s interviews

IEP Meeting

SPED Students Transition Services at OISD
coordinated set of activities
promotes movement from school to post-school activities
outcome-oriented process
individual student’s needs
student’s preferences and interests
Examples of Transition Activities
Practice self-advocacy skills
Participate in community service, in-school work
experiences, or job shadowing
Learn shopping, cooking, housekeeping skills

Welcome to the CIRCLES

Multi-Level Approach to Transition Planning for Students with Disabilities
Community Level Team
School Level Team
IEP Team

Community Level Team
Agencies/Service Providers
In Texas/ Southeast Texas:
Texas Workforce
Spindletop Center : A community mental health and intellectual and developmental disabilities center located in Southeast Texas.
Lamar University three branches/Disability centers and services.
Discuss policy/braid together resources
Collaborate for service delivery
Do NOT work directly with students
Meet 2-4 times/year

APPOINT a Representative to Serve on School Level Team

Community Level Team

School Level Team

Work DIRECTLY with students/families

Collaborate to provide services to INDIVIDUAL students

See students from multiple schools for transition planning

Meet Monthly

AND – pre-plan transition goals for the IEP team

What is a Team?
group of two or more people who work together interdependently in order to address common needs and to pursue common goals. Over time and with much hard work, the group will become a team.
Teamwork occurs when 1) roles are clearly understood, 2) goals are clearly understood; 3) structures and practices are understood and agreed upon; and 4) interdependent relationship.
What is Collaboration?
Collaboration is about delivering results across boundaries. It requires: a) letting go and trusting your partners; b) going beyond your own tribe; and c) recognizing that you can’t control complex systems. (Archer & Cameron, 2009)
OUR TEAMS: comprised of direct service providers (e.g., case managers, counselors)
Junior High: School counselor, diagnostician, administrator, Sped ed director.
High School: School counselor, diagnostician, administrator, CTE teachers, sped ed director.
The SLT members will be trained in what CIRCLES is, and what is expected from them. Let them know the schedule for the SLT meetings for the year (developed with Teacher and District Staff input).

Student Level or IEP Team
School Personnel, Related Services Personnel Specific to Individual Students
Prepare students to present at the School Level Team meeting
Bring pre-planning from School-Level Team back to the IEP meeting to
Write transition goals

Community
Team

IEP Team

School Team

Post School Outcomes for Students with Disabilities

Sharing Cake
Collaboration is about sharing resources, problem-solving, and ensuring access to available services.
Why is CIRCLES a good idea?
Interagency collaboration is supported by research
CIRCLES facilitates and enhances the process of transition planning
CIRCLES supports IDEA
CIRCLES provides evidence for Indicator 13
CIRCLES assists in overcoming barriers to interagency collaboration

CIRCLES Supports IDEA
A coordinated set of activities for a student with a disability that is designed to be within a results-oriented process that is focused on improving the academic and functional achievement of the child with a disability to facilitate the child’s movement from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education, vocational education, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation (300.42(a)(1).
IDEA: School System Accountability For Agency Follow-through
If a participating agency fails to provide agreed-upon transition services described in the IEP of a student with a disability, the public agency must reconvene the IEP team to identify alternative strategies to meet the transition objectives for the child set out in the IEP (300.324(c)(1).
If the transition component indicates that an adult service provider is going to provide a service and the agency fails to follow-through – it is the responsibility of the IEP team to reconvene and determine a strategy for obtaining an alternative strategy. – CIRCLES makes people feel more accountable.
It is important to have adult service input PRIOR to making them the “responsible person” on the transition component for a service or activity – A School Level Team provides this opportunity.

Guiding Questions
Where does the student want to go?

The desired post-school outcomes of the student are stated, including
Post secondary education/training
Employment
Community living
Residential
Participation
Recreation/leisure
What will the student learn and be able to do?
Within this multi-year plan, the IEP team must decide what specific transition activities in which the student will participate each year to achieve
each year to achieve the post-school outcomes.

Team
Problem Solving
Shared Decision Making
Student/Family/School/Community
Families as Equal Partners
Recognizing the Critical Role of Families in All Transition Activities.

Thank You for Being a Part of My CIRCLES

References
Archer. D., and Cameron, C. (2014). Collaborative Leadership: Building Relationships, Handling Conflict and Sharing Control (2nd ed.). Human Resource Management
International Digest, 22
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
Povenmire-Kirk, T. Diegelmann, K.M., Test, D.W., Aspel, N., and Everson, J.M. (2015). CIRCLES: An Implementation Guide. Retrieved from
https://circles.uncc.edu/
Texas Education Agency (2018). Special Education Reports. Retrieved from
https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/adhocrpt/adser.html

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name:

 

EDDD_8075_Module6_Assignment_Rubric

Description: EDUC 8075 Course Project
Assessment of Dispositions and Program Knowledge

• Grid View
• List View

 

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Philosophy of Education and Practice, Four Disposition Categories
Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration.

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Dispositions and Philosophy of Education I
Describes why dispositions are important to developing and sustain a philosophy of education.

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Dispositions and Philosophy of Education II

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Personal Dispositions
Describes personal dispositions and explains how they are evident within their personal philosophy.

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.
Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.
Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research II

Points:

.5 (1.19%)

Information regarding how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students is limited or missing.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Problem Statement I
Describes a logical argument to address an identified gap in practice and evidence that justifies that the problem is meaningful to special education.

Section 2: Content Study – Problem Statement II

Section 2: Content Study – Purpose
Explains the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study.

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I
Explains how the study will fill a gap in practice, make an original contribution to the local setting, and support professional practice. Explains who would benefit from the study and how it may lead to positive social change.

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I

Section 2: Content Study – Background Literature I
Provides a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement, highlights their relationship to the topic, and supports the existence of the local problem.

Section 2: Content Study – Background Literature II

Section 2: Content Study – Research Questions
1-3 research questions are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.

Section 2: Content Study – Possible Types and Sources of Information or Data
Lists possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s).

Section 2: Content Study – Possible Analysis
Explains possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously and is aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected.

Section 3: Reflective Conclusion – Philosophy of Education and the Influence on Research and Practice.
Summarizes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice.

Content/Information
Clarity of purpose; Critical and original thought; Use of examples

Mechanics , Syntax, Organization
Communicates ideas clearly;
Demonstrates knowledge of writing conventions (grammar, syntax, spelling, sentence variety)

Sources and Evidence
Use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas in correct APA format

Novice	Emerging	Proficient	Advanced
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, or collaboration is limited or some of the components are not addressed. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Briefly describes philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Brief statements are made to address each component. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Details are provided regarding the importance of specific elements of each component in implementing philosophy of education. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Details are provided regarding the importance of specific elements of each component in implementing philosophy of education. Examples from personal experience and evidence from research is used to support the analysis. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding why dispositions are important to developing and/or sustaining a philosophy of education is limited or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies why dispositions are important to developing and/or sustaining a philosophy of education. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes why dispositions are important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Critically analyzes why dispositions are important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education. Examples from personal experience are used to support the response. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) No examples from theory and/or research are cited to support the description. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Cites one example from theory and/or research are cited to support the description. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Cites at least two examples from theory and research are cited to support the description. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Cites more than two examples from theory and research are cited to support the description. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding personal dispositions and how they are evident within their personal philosophy is limited or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Lists less than 3 personal dispositions and briefly identifies how they are evident within their personal philosophy. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes 3 personal dispositions and explains how they are evident within their personal philosophy. Clear connections between each disposition and personal philosophy are made. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Describes, with extensive detail, 3 or more personal dispositions and analyzes how each one is evident within their personal philosophy. Clear connections between each disposition and personal philosophy are made including examples of how each disposition can be applied in professional practice. Feedback:
	Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students is limited or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies how personal philosophy of education can impact a future activity that will promote social change. Connections between philosophy of education and social change are not clear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change. Clear connections are made between the philosophy of education and social change. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Critically analyzes how different aspects of personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change. Clear connections are made between the philosophy of education and specific areas of social change. Feedback:
Points: 1 (2.38%) Briefly states how personal philosophy of education can impact a future research activity to promote the best possible education for all students. Connections between philosophy of education and research activity are not clear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students. Several examples of research are provided and clearly connected to the philosophy of education. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice is unclear, minimal, or missing. Support from current literature is missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Lists a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is loosely identified. Some pieces of literature are cited but they do not support the gap in practice or are not current. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is clearly identified and supported by current literature. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Describes a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is clearly identified with extensive details including the impact of the problem on students as well as educators and is clearly supported by current literature. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED is unclear or missing. Citations are missing or they do not highlight the relevance and/or currency of the problem. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies preliminary evidence that provides loose justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Provides less than three key citations that highlight the relevance and/or currency of the problem. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Provides three to five key citations that highlight the relevance and currency of the problem. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Several pieces of evidence are described and clearly support the problem. Provides five or more key citations that highlight the relevance and currency of the problem. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding the overall purpose or intention of the study and connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study are minimal or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Lists the overall purpose or intention of the study. The connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study are not clearly aligned. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes several clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study. Purpose is supported with research or examples. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and the original contribution this study may make in the local setting is limited or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and lists the original contribution this study will make in the local setting. Limited details are provided and the connection between the elements is unclear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and describes the original contribution the study will make in the local setting. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and describes the original contribution this study make will in the local setting supported with examples and research. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site is minimal or missing. Information regarding who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and how they benefit is minimal or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site. Lists who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and how they benefit. Limited details are provided and the connection between the elements is unclear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Describes how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site. Explains who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and describes how. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes how the research will support professional education practice and allow practical application at the local site. Analyzes who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and describes how. Analysis is supported with examples and research. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding how the potential findings might lead to positive social change is unclear or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Lists how the potential findings might lead to positive social change. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains how the potential findings might lead to positive social change. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes how the potential findings might lead to positive social change. Several examples are provided. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) A representative list of scholarship and findings that support and/or clarify the main assertions in the problem statement is missing or not complete. Information regarding their relationship to the topic is missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Provides a brief list of scholarship and findings that support and/or clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and the relationship to the topic is unclear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Provides a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and highlights their relationship to the topic. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Synthesizes the main points from a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and highlights each of their relationship to the topic. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Less than 15 peer-peer-reviewed journal sources are presented and are not within the last 5 years. APA sixth edition format is not used or used incorrectly. Evidence to support the existence of the local problem is minimal or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Less than 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Minimal evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Includes 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Includes more than 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Extensive evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Research questions are missing or are not connected to the study problem and purpose which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) 1-3 research questions are provided however they are not clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and/or how it will be accomplished. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) 1-3 research questions are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) 1-3 research questions grounded in the background literature are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s) is limited or missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies possible types or sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database, however, the connection between the types or sources and the research questions are not clear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Lists possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s) such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Describes possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database. Several types and possible sources are provided. Clear connections between the types and sources of data and the research questions. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously is minimal or missing. Alignment to research questions and the possible data that will be collected is missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Lists possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Information is not clearly aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Explains possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Explanation is aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Explains possible ways to organize, analyze, and present the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Explanation is clearly aligned to each research question and the possible data that will be collected. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Information regarding how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic is unclear or missing. Information about how this process may influence future practice is missing. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Identifies how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic. Information about how this process may influence future practice is unclear. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Summarizes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Analyzes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice. Examples are provided and clear connections between the philosophy and the topic are made. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Central idea and clarity of purpose are absent or incompletely expressed. Displays little or no evidence of critical, careful thought or analysis and/or insight. Provides too few, or no examples and evidence or they are mostly irrelevant. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Central idea and purpose are expressed but may be vague or too broad. Displays some evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight. Provides general examples and evidence, loosely tied to central idea and purpose. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Central idea and clarity of purpose are generally evident throughout the assignment. Displays adequate evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight. Provides relevant supporting examples and evidence tied to central idea and purpose. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Central idea is well developed and clarity of purpose is exhibited throughout the assignment. Displays strong evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight throughout the assignment. Provides relevant and specific examples and evidence tied directly to central idea and purpose. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Pervasive and serious grammatical errors impede the focus and effectiveness of the assignment. Pervasive and serious spelling and punctuation errors impede the flow and clarity of the assignment. Writing is brief, underdeveloped, and disorganized with very weak transitions and closure. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Frequent grammatical errors detract from the focus and effectiveness of the assignment. Frequent spelling and punctuation errors detract from the flow and clarity of the assignment. Writing is confused and loosely organized. Transitions are weak and closure is ineffective. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Minor or infrequent grammatical errors do not detract from the focus and effectiveness of the assignment. Minor or infrequent spelling and punctuation errors do not detract from the flow and clarity of the assignment. Writing includes a beginning, middle, and end, with some transitions and good closure. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors in the assignment. Writing includes a strong, beginning, middle, and end with clear transitions and a focused closure. Feedback:
Points: .5 (1.19%) Demonstrates minimal effort to use sources to support ideas in the writing. Missing multiple APA formatting requirements and/or not using APA format & structure. Failed to cite sources or inability to find sources due to incorrect citation. Major, multiple errors in citation formatting. Feedback:	Points: 1 (2.38%) Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing. Missing one or two of the APA formatting requirements. and/or not using APA format & structure, Multiple errors in citation formatting. Feedback:	Points: 1.5 (3.57%) Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate to the discipline and genre of the writing. Minor errors in APA formatting requirements and/or APA format and structure. Minor errors in citation formatting. Feedback:	Points: 2 (4.76%) Demonstrates consistent use of high-quality, credible, relevant sources to fully develop ideas that are relevant and innovative for the discipline and genre of the writing. Meets all APA formatting requirements and APA format and structure. No errors in citation formatting. Feedback:

Show Descriptions

Show Feedback

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Philosophy of Education and Practice, Four Disposition Categories
Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, or collaboration is limited or some of the components are not addressed.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Briefly describes philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Brief statements are made to address each component.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Details are provided regarding the importance of specific elements of each component in implementing philosophy of education.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Explains philosophy of education addressing professional conduct, professional qualities, communication, and collaboration. Details are provided regarding the importance of specific elements of each component in implementing philosophy of education. Examples from personal experience and evidence from research is used to support the analysis.

Feedback:

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Dispositions and Philosophy of Education I
Describes why dispositions are important to developing and sustain a philosophy of education.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding why dispositions are important to developing and/or sustaining a philosophy of education is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies why dispositions are important to developing and/or sustaining a philosophy of education.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes why dispositions are important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Critically analyzes why dispositions are important to developing and sustaining a philosophy of education. Examples from personal experience are used to support the response.

Feedback:

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Dispositions and Philosophy of Education II–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

No examples from theory and/or research are cited to support the description.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Cites one example from theory and/or research are cited to support the description.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Cites at least two examples from theory and research are cited to support the description.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Cites more than two examples from theory and research are cited to support the description.

Feedback:

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Personal Dispositions
Describes personal dispositions and explains how they are evident within their personal philosophy.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding personal dispositions and how they are evident within their personal philosophy is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Lists less than 3 personal dispositions and briefly identifies how they are evident within their personal philosophy.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes 3 personal dispositions and explains how they are evident within their personal philosophy. Clear connections between each disposition and personal philosophy are made.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Describes, with extensive detail, 3 or more personal dispositions and analyzes how each one is evident within their personal philosophy. Clear connections between each disposition and personal philosophy are made including examples of how each disposition can be applied in professional practice.

Feedback:

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.
Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.
Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research I
Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change as well as impact future research.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies how personal philosophy of education can impact a future activity that will promote social change. Connections between philosophy of education and social change are not clear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains how personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change. Clear connections are made between the philosophy of education and social change.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Critically analyzes how different aspects of personal philosophy of education can impact future activities that will promote social change. Clear connections are made between the philosophy of education and specific areas of social change.

Feedback:

Section 1: District Newsletter Presentation – Impacts on Social Change and Future Research II–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Briefly states how personal philosophy of education can impact a future research activity to promote the best possible education for all students. Connections between philosophy of education and research activity are not clear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes how personal philosophy of education can impact future research activities to promote the best possible education for all students. Several examples of research are provided and clearly connected to the philosophy of education.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Problem Statement I
Describes a logical argument to address an identified gap in practice and evidence that justifies that the problem is meaningful to special education.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice is unclear, minimal, or missing. Support from current literature is missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Lists a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is loosely identified. Some pieces of literature are cited but they do not support the gap in practice or are not current.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is clearly identified and supported by current literature.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Describes a logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in practice. The problem is clearly identified with extensive details including the impact of the problem on students as well as educators and is clearly supported by current literature.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Problem Statement II–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED is unclear or missing. Citations are missing or they do not highlight the relevance and/or currency of the problem.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies preliminary evidence that provides loose justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Provides less than three key citations that highlight the relevance and/or currency of the problem.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Provides three to five key citations that highlight the relevance and currency of the problem.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the field of SPED. Several pieces of evidence are described and clearly support the problem. Provides five or more key citations that highlight the relevance and currency of the problem.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Purpose
Explains the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding the overall purpose or intention of the study and connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study are minimal or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Lists the overall purpose or intention of the study. The connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study are not clearly aligned.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes the overall purpose or intention of the study and makes several clear connections between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study. Purpose is supported with research or examples.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I
Explains how the study will fill a gap in practice, make an original contribution to the local setting, and support professional practice. Explains who would benefit from the study and how it may lead to positive social change.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and the original contribution this study may make in the local setting is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and lists the original contribution this study will make in the local setting. Limited details are provided and the connection between the elements is unclear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and describes the original contribution the study will make in the local setting.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes how the study will contribute to filling the gap in practice identified in the problem statement and describes the original contribution this study make will in the local setting supported with examples and research.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site is minimal or missing. Information regarding who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and how they benefit is minimal or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site. Lists who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and how they benefit. Limited details are provided and the connection between the elements is unclear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Describes how the research will support professional education practice or allow practical application at the local site. Explains who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and describes how.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes how the research will support professional education practice and allow practical application at the local site. Analyzes who benefits from the findings/project deliverable and describes how. Analysis is supported with examples and research.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Significance I–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how the potential findings might lead to positive social change is unclear or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Lists how the potential findings might lead to positive social change.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains how the potential findings might lead to positive social change.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes how the potential findings might lead to positive social change. Several examples are provided.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Background Literature I
Provides a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement, highlights their relationship to the topic, and supports the existence of the local problem.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

A representative list of scholarship and findings that support and/or clarify the main assertions in the problem statement is missing or not complete. Information regarding their relationship to the topic is missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Provides a brief list of scholarship and findings that support and/or clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and the relationship to the topic is unclear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Provides a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and highlights their relationship to the topic.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Synthesizes the main points from a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement and highlights each of their relationship to the topic.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Background Literature II–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Less than 15 peer-peer-reviewed journal sources are presented and are not within the last 5 years. APA sixth edition format is not used or used incorrectly. Evidence to support the existence of the local problem is minimal or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Less than 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Minimal evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Includes 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Includes more than 15 recent (within the past 5 years) peer-reviewed journal sources are presented in APA sixth edition format. Extensive evidence is provided to support the existence of the local problem.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Research Questions
1-3 research questions are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Research questions are missing or are not connected to the study problem and purpose which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

1-3 research questions are provided however they are not clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and/or how it will be accomplished.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

1-3 research questions are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

1-3 research questions grounded in the background literature are provided that are clearly connected to the study problem and purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Possible Types and Sources of Information or Data
Lists possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s).–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s) is limited or missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies possible types or sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database, however, the connection between the types or sources and the research questions are not clear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Lists possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s) such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Describes possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified school records, or information from a federal database. Several types and possible sources are provided. Clear connections between the types and sources of data and the research questions.

Feedback:

Section 2: Content Study – Possible Analysis
Explains possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously and is aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously is minimal or missing. Alignment to research questions and the possible data that will be collected is missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Lists possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Information is not clearly aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Explains possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Explanation is aligned to research questions and the possible data that will be collected.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Explains possible ways to organize, analyze, and present the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. Explanation is clearly aligned to each research question and the possible data that will be collected.

Feedback:

Section 3: Reflective Conclusion – Philosophy of Education and the Influence on Research and Practice.
Summarizes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice.–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Information regarding how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic is unclear or missing. Information about how this process may influence future practice is missing.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Identifies how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic. Information about how this process may influence future practice is unclear.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Summarizes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Analyzes how their philosophy of education influenced them to select the possible study topic and how this process may influence future practice. Examples are provided and clear connections between the philosophy and the topic are made.

Feedback:

Content/Information
Clarity of purpose; Critical and original thought; Use of examples–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Central idea and clarity of purpose are absent or incompletely expressed.

Displays little or no evidence of critical, careful thought or analysis and/or insight.

Provides too few, or no examples and evidence or they are mostly irrelevant.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Central idea and purpose are expressed but may be vague or too broad.

Displays some evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight.

Provides general examples and evidence, loosely tied to central idea and purpose.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Central idea and clarity of purpose are generally evident throughout the assignment.

Displays adequate evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight.

Provides relevant supporting examples and evidence tied to central idea and purpose.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Central idea is well developed and clarity of purpose is exhibited throughout the assignment.
Displays strong evidence of critical, careful thought and analysis and/or insight throughout the assignment.
Provides relevant and specific examples and evidence tied directly to central idea and purpose.

Feedback:

Mechanics , Syntax, Organization
Communicates ideas clearly;
Demonstrates knowledge of writing conventions (grammar, syntax, spelling, sentence variety)–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Pervasive and serious grammatical errors impede the focus and effectiveness of the assignment.
Pervasive and serious spelling and punctuation errors impede the flow and clarity of the assignment.
Writing is brief, underdeveloped, and disorganized with very weak transitions and closure.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Frequent grammatical errors detract from the focus and effectiveness of the assignment.

Frequent spelling and punctuation errors detract from the flow and clarity of the assignment.
Writing is confused and loosely organized.
Transitions are weak and closure is ineffective.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Minor or infrequent grammatical errors do not detract from the focus and effectiveness of the assignment.
Minor or infrequent spelling and punctuation errors do not detract from the flow and clarity of the assignment.
Writing includes a beginning, middle, and end, with some transitions and good closure.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors in the assignment.
Writing includes a strong, beginning, middle, and end with clear transitions and a focused closure.

Feedback:

Sources and Evidence
Use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas in correct APA format–

Levels of Achievement:

Novice
.5 (1.19%) points

Demonstrates minimal effort to use sources to support ideas in the writing.
Missing multiple APA formatting requirements and/or not using APA format & structure.
Failed to cite sources or inability to find sources due to incorrect citation.
Major, multiple errors in citation formatting.

Emerging
1 (2.38%) points

Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing.
Missing one or two of the APA formatting requirements.
and/or not using APA format & structure,
Multiple errors in citation formatting.

Proficient
1.5 (3.57%) points

Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate to the discipline and genre of the writing.
Minor errors in APA formatting requirements and/or APA format and structure.
Minor errors in citation formatting.

Advanced
2 (4.76%) points

Demonstrates consistent use of high-quality, credible, relevant sources to fully develop ideas that are relevant and innovative for the discipline and genre of the writing.
Meets all APA formatting requirements and APA format and structure.
No errors in citation formatting.

Feedback:

Total Points: 42

Name: EDDD_8075_Module6_Assignment_Rubric

Description: EDUC 8075 Course Project
Assessment of Dispositions and Program Knowledge