School-to-Work Perspectives
Strategies, Practices and Resources to Include Youth
with Disabilities in School-to-Work Systems
Summer 1997
Lessons Learned from Transition Systems Change
As we know, hind sight is 20/20. If we had a crystal ball that could tell us the best way to establish a school-to-work system for all students, we probably wouldn't hesitate to use it. The next best thing may be learning what we can from those who have gone before us. Regardless of where our insights come from, resources, strategies, and effective practices can be modified to help with the creation of new systems. This issue of School-to-Work Perspectives shares lessons that have been learned from states implementing Transition Systems Change Projects over the past six years. Ideas about how you can begin to apply these effective practices, strategies, and resources are included to assist with improving your school-to-work system.
In 1991, the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS) initiated a special grants program. This program made federal funds available to support a series of five-year Transition Systems Change Projects. These projects focus on improving services and supports to ensure successful outcomes from school to adult life for young adults with disabilities. By the fall of 1996, a total of 46 states had been awarded Transition Systems Change grants, 12 of which have recently completed their fifth and final year. The specific goals of these projects are to facilitate within their state the following outcomes:
In 1983, the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) identified transition from school to work as one of the major federal priorities of special education programs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA - P.L. 101.476) requires that formal transition planning occur for youth with disabilities at age 16, or earlier if appropriate. To facilitate the implementation of the new transition requirements, Section 626(e) of IDEA authorized a special grants program to make federal funds available to support a series of five year state systems change projects on transition. These state level projects are cooperative efforts, jointly undertaken by state education and vocational rehabilitation agencies to facilitate change in the service system to ensure the successful transition of youth with disabilities from school to community.
States implementing Transition Systems Change projects have learned valuable lessons when it comes to creating new systems. In the final year of their systems change projects, representatives from 10 states gathered in Washington, D.C. to review their activities and identify factors which had helped them to promote systems change. The factors that were most commonly identified are listed below. Your state might want to consider these as you develop and implement a school-to-work system in your state.
· Key stakeholders must be involved in every step of the process from development to implementation to evaluation. Key stakeholders must include students and their families.
· Local teams and partnerships need to be provided with some guidelines regarding partnership structure, goals, expectations for outcomes, best practice information, and assistance with resolving problems.
· Local teams and partnerships must be allowed to struggle with developing their own practices to meet local community needs. Developing local ownership and participating in that process is the glue that bonds members together and establishes long-term commitment toward reaching goals. Flexibility is the key.
· Perception is everything. Although a barrier may actually be at the local level, local partnerships may perceive the barrier as being at the state policy level. Open communication between local, regional, and state levels is essential.
· Financial incentives must be carefully considered. Start-up funding can be helpful to local partnerships, but limits for funding must be made clear and gradual reduction of support for local activities is important. Local partnerships must learn to take ownership and create self-sufficiency for supporting the changes they want to see happen.
· Marketing project activities and team success is important throughout the grant period. A strong message that the grant will end is very important. Teams can then focus their energy on creating momentum for long-lasting change, utilizing and refining existing systems, and promoting sustainability.
· Ownership at every level is the key to systems change. Long-lasting change is really the result of changing the perspectives of those involved from the old way of thinking to the new.
· Turf issues must be identified and resolved. Use common terms and language, avoid jargon, and demonstrate the benefits of collaboration through reducing duplication and increasing efficiency.
· Involve students and parents in the development of a common vision, regardless of the level of targeted change. Working directly with students and parents throughout the process of change helps to keep the focus on the young adults and their actual needs and reminds us why we are involved.
· Realize that changing attitudes, values, and systems takes time. Events will happen that you did not anticipate and consider reserving some resources to act as reinforcements if needed.
· The experiences of local partnerships during the first few years of the grant should guide changes in policies and procedures. The level where changes are needed should then be agreed and acted upon by all agencies (stakeholders).
· Clarify meaning when using terms such as legislation, policy, and procedures. These terms have different meanings for each person and at different levels.
· Policies, procedures, and legislation should incorporate state agency language and work toward alignment across all agencies at a state and local level.
· Remember that within-agency barriers to communication can be just as formidable as across-agency barriers. Establish a regional and local system of communication, use common language that even those not involved in your system will understand, and concentrate on how to share information across systems.
· Clear and open communication with local partners regarding the development, implementation, and impact of activities is essential to successful systems change and should be formalized early.
· The importance of marketing your efforts to the community at large cannot be understated. Go to the press every day/week/month with success stories and updates on your activities.
· Inducements for change have the greatest impact when used to assist changing the local service delivery. Training, materials, resources, stipends, and sub-contracts help to make change happen.
· Cross training and representation of non-traditional partners in the development, implementation, and evaluation of local activities results in more wide-spread change than isolated activities targeted to traditional, segregated groups.
· It is very important to establish that all stakeholders are on a level playing field and that collaborative efforts will benefit all students. Once people believe in and see the benefits of change, they will want to participate.
· The involvement of students and parents is essential to systems change and will result in much better service delivery.
· It is important to realize that service providers may feel uncomfortable by empowered students and parents. To help build trust and break down barriers that prevent collaboration, employ flexibly scheduled training that provides consistent information to everyone.
States that have implemented Transition Systems Change Projects have had much experience when it comes to developing successful strategies and effective practices to make their visions become reality. Project directors share some of their most successful strategies/activities when it comes to effective systems change. These are real life examples of the ideas shared above.
California / Judy Reichle
Since the start of our systems change project, the nine state agency partners that governed it were "equal" and all decisions were made by consensus. This allowed the partners to trust the process and work together differently than they had before. Including families and students as equal partners allowed agencies the opportunity to listen directly to their customer and let their experience guide the change process.
Colorado / Susan McAlonan
We have several strategies which have been effective in creating Transition System Change in Colorado. Several statewide trainings occurred focusing on the IEP and shifting the process to more effectively promote student empowerment and self-determination. The direct education of parents through the NEXT STEPS training workshops facilitated the development of case management skills in families. These workshops are held regionally and are open to parents of children with all types of disabilities, as well as educators and service providers. Local ownership was imperative to the sustainability of change. We facilitated local educational agency and adult service agency ownership through a community needs assessment and action planning based on common outcome indicators. Through the alignment of transition with other educational reform initiatives, we attempted to impact statewide policies to create a more seamless system of services for youth.
Iowa / Roberta Ginavan
We started a train-the-trainer model on self-determination that evolved into a statewide awareness and commitment. Local teams of parents, students, and teachers located across the state were trained on self-determination, and in turn went back to their communities to train others. Simultaneously, the Systems Change Project was inservicing teachers on how to incorporate self-determination within their curriculum. Such interest and excitement arose about this topic that when another project collaborated with the Iowa Systems Change Project to offer Pilot Self-Determination Projects, 14 out of the 15 regions in Iowa requested to participate. What made this truly a success was the use of a top-down, bottom-up approach.
Minnesota / Sandy Thompson
We found that focusing on changing one thing within a system proved more successful than a "shotgun" approach of varying activities which failed to create a lasting impact. One of the main accomplishments of this project was to have Transition Planning incorporated into the states Individualized Education Plan. Strategies successful in obtaining this goal included (a) having a singular goal which everyone understood and could work toward, (b) approaching the goal from multiple levels (e.g., local community to state government) and angles, and (c) training that was student-focused, as opposed to information on how to fill out paper work.
Vermont / William Sugarman
We developed and implemented "Local Core Transition Teams" which consist of educators and adult service providers who come together monthly in their communities to address the needs of students currently preparing to exit school. By meeting monthly, it not only saves time for both groups, but more importantly, the information that is exchanged results in more comprehensive transition services for the students. Referrals occur that may not have necessarily happened previously. Recommendations are made by both groups as to how to provide better services in order to make the transition from school to the adult world as smooth as possible. The success and continuation of these teams are due to the benefits that they create for all parties involved. Student related changes are immediate, time is saved on the part of both the teachers and adult service providers, and teachers are able to make connections and explore options for students who may not traditionally receive adult services.
Included here is a list of resources that may be helpful to your state with implementing systems change in your school-to-work system.
Charner, I., Fraser, B.S., Hubbard, S., Rogers, A., & Horne, R. (1995). Reforms of the school-to-work transition: Findings, implications, and challenges. Phi Delta Kappan, 77 (1), 40, 58-60.
Jenlink, P. M., Reigeluth, C. M., Carr, A. A., & Nelson, L. M. (1996). An expedition for change: Facilitating the systemic change process in school districts. TECHTRENDS (January/February), 21-30.
McDonnell, L.M., & Elmore, R.F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9 (2), 133-152.
Mithaug, D. E. (1994). Equity and excellence in school-to-work transitions of special populations. CenterFocus (6).
National School-to-Work Office. (1995). The school-to-work template. National School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue SW, Room 210, Washington, DC 20024, (800) 251-7236.
National School-to-Work Office. (1996). Parent involvement in school-to-work. Resource Bulletin. National School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue, SW, Room 210, Washington, DC 20024, (800) 251-7236.
National School-to-Work Office. (1996). Serving youth with disabilities within school-to-work systems. Resource Bulletin. National School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue, SW, Room 210, Washington, DC 20024, (800) 251-7236.
Paris, K. A. (1994). A leadership model for planning and implementing change for school to work transition. (Vol. 1). Madison, WI: Center on Education and Work, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Thiers, N. (Ed.). (1995). Successful strategies: Building a school- to-careers system. Alexandria: American Vocational Association.
Tilson, G. P., Luecking, R.G., & Donovan, M.R. (1994). Involving employers in transition: The bridges model. CDEI, 17 (4), 77-89.
We'd like to thank the following for their contributions to this article: Judy Reichle, California School-to-Work Interagency Transition Partnership; Susan McAlonan, Colorado State University; Roberta Ginavan, Iowa Department of Education; Sandy Thompson, Minnesota Department of Children, Families, and Learning; and William Sugarman, University of Vermont.
School-to-Work Perspectives is a quarterly fact sheet produced for the National Transition Alliance by the National Transition Network to promote the inclusion of youth with disabilities in school-to-work systems. To request additional copies or suggest topics for upcoming publications, contact:
Editors include Megan Dushin, Pam Stenhjem, Shauna McDonald and Teri Wallace at the National Transition Network.
This document is available in alternative formats upon request and is copyright free. We encourage you to reproduce and share it or any part of it.
The National Transition Alliance is funded through the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs (Cooperative Agreement Number H158M50001) and the National School-to-Work Office. Contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Departments of Education or Labor, nor does the mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
Collaborators of the National Transition Alliance are equal opportunity employers and educators.
NTN Home Page | School-to-Work | Transition Systems Change | Teleconferences | Publications | State Contacts
URL: http://ici2.umn.edu/ntn/pub/perspectives/summer97.html