Abstract
IDEA 2004 mandates a transition plan be part of students with disabilities’ Individual Education Plan (IEP) from the age of 14 through the time they leave their secondary education [IDEA 2004, §300.320 (b)]. Despite the letter of the law and transition plans being implemented, the post secondary outcomes for students with mild to moderate disabilities continue to be dismal in comparison to their general education peers (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2003). Many special education teachers at the secondary level have little to no training in the complex and critical process of planning and implementing the transition piece of the IEP (Test, 2009). The purpose of this study was to determine the level of training and involvement of secondary special education teachers in the Elk Grove Unified School District in five identified components of the Transition planning process for students with mild to moderate disabilities with an Individual Education Plan. The secondary purpose of the study was to determine what effect, if any, these teachers’ pre-service and in-service training had on their level of involvement in each category. A 35-item questionnaire regarding Transition Involvement and Competency was distributed to all members of the target sample. The questionnaire rated secondary special educators’ levels of involvement in five identified components of a transition plan and asked respondents questions about their pre-service and in-service training regarding the five components. The results of the survey suggested secondary special education teachers are most involved in the transition planning components in which they have received the most training and least involved in those who had received little to no training. District Special Education Administrators should consider creating in-service opportunities for their secondary special educators based upon the identified components in which pre and/or in-service training was lacking. The in-service should include a handbook/guide in conjunction with the areas where competency is lacking to be used as a resource and reference. Future research should be conducted to see if the trends and correlations shown in this study have further implications with a broader sample population of secondary special educators and determine if this study’s findings can be generalized.