Students with an educational classification of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) make up 1.1% of the total enrollment in public schools and 8.3% of the total number of students receiving special education services and is the fastest growing disability classification (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). As more students with these unique needs begin to age out of the educational system, the demand for quality transition planning services that address the spectrum of ability in this population increases. While IDEA (2018) provides some basic guidelines, there is significant room for interpretation and individualization within these mandates. As such, practitioners are often left searching the available literature to determine the best way to provide students, families, and school personnel with some guidance in interpreting and implementing federal law. Furthermore, the best practices literature is limited and often does not address some of the unique needs of students with ASD, given the core features of the classification (Wehman, 2013). The current study evaluates school program variables that predict postsecondary outcomes in education/training and employment for students with ASD and considers the individual student and family variables that vary with this relationship. Consistent with the literature (Kohler & Fields, 2003), results suggest that student focused-planning, student development, and interagency collaboration correlate with postsecondary education/training and employment outcomes. In addition, consistent with what we know about the broader population of students receiving special education services (Landmark, et al., 2010) and the theoretical work (Wehman, et al., 2014), the current study demonstrates that inclusion in the general education setting in an academically rigorous content area is also related to postsecondary success in education/training and employment. These findings not only highlight the importance of including students with ASD in the general education classroom as part of their transition programming, but it also speaks to the need for additional research about inclusion practices as part of the child’s transition plan for students with ASD. / School Psychology

The purpose of this study was to examine personal, family, and curriculum variables among high school dropouts with mild disabilities. The review of research literature on dropouts from general and special education assisted in the selection of the variables. The outcome variable (high school dropouts with mild disabilities) and the relationship to the following variables: personal (age, attendance, gender, and ethnicity); family (parents' economic level, parents' educational level, and one vs. two-parent households) and curriculum (academic credits, vocational credits, support credits, and work experience credits) were examined. The research examined the relationship of selected variables to dropouts. Dropout status among students with mild disabilities was found to be 29 percent. When age was examined, increased age was weakly associated with a higher likelihood of becoming a dropout. Increased absenteeism was moderately associated with a higher likelihood of dropping out. However, the strength of the relationship between gender and the drop out status was not significant across any of the three categories of mild disabilities. The analysis of ethnicity found that African-Americans with learning disabilities were more likely to drop out. In addition, the drop out rates for Caucasian youth were statistically significantly lower than drop out rates for other groups. Higher economic level was associated with a lower likelihood of dropping out. Increased educational level and households with two parents were also associated with a lower likelihood of dropping out among students with learning disabilities or mental retardation. The higher the number of credits, the lower the likelihood of dropping out. Dropouts took fewer credits which is not surprising since dropouts by nature have fewer credits. / Ph. D.