[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-598197-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-598197-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","ieptransition-planning-participation-among-students-with-the-most-significant-cognitive-disabilities-findings-from-nlts-2012","IEP/Transition Planning Participation Among Students With the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities - Findings From NLTS 2012","","This study used data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) to examine individualized education program (IEP)/transition planning participation and roles of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, compared with students with other disabilities. Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities were identified through autism, intellectual disability, and multiple disabilities categories using alternate assessment. The analysis related participation to functional, communication, self-advocacy skills, and student–teacher relationships. Despite greater overall limitations, other-disability students faced similar challenges; implications emphasize engagement, self-determination, and student leadership.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/ieptransition-planning-participation-among-students-with-the-most-significant-cognitive-disabilities-findings-from-nlts-2012/598197/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/ieptransition-planning-participation-among-students-with-the-most-significant-cognitive-disabilities-findings-from-nlts-2012/598197.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Mafia Boss","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-06","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How did the study identify students with the most significant cognitive disabilities (SCDs)?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities were included in three disability categories—autism, intellectual disability, and multiple disabilities—who took an alternate assessment.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What data source did the study use to analyze transition planning participation?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study used data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) to examine participation and the roles of these students in IEP/transition planning.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which participation factors did the study analyze in relation to student engagement?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Participation was analyzed in relation to functional skills, communication skills, self-advocacy, and student–teacher relationships.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},598197,1792166252,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962090760730,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","IEP/Transition Planning Participation Among Students With the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities:  \nFindings From NLTS 2012  \nCareer Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals  \n2020, Vol. 43(4) 226–239  \n© Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2020 Article reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[DOI: 10.1177/2165143420952050](DOI: 10.1177/2165143420952050)[ ](DOI: 10.1177/2165143420952050)[cdtei.sagepub.com](cdtei.sagepub.com)  \nDavid R. Johnson, PhD 1, Martha L. Thurlow, PhD 1, Yi-Chen Wu, PhD 1, John M. LaVelle, PhD 1, and Ernest C. Davenport, PhD 1  \nAbstract  \nThis study used data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) to explore the individualized education program (IEP)/transition planning participation and role of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, compared to students with other disabilities. We viewed students with the most significant cognitive disabilities as those included in three disability categories—autism, intellectual disability, and multiple disabilities—who took an alternate assessment. The study also included an analysis of student’s participation in relation to their functional, communication, and self-advocacy skills, and student–teacher relationships. Although students with the most significant cognitive disabilities experienced greater limitations overall, students with other disabilities were experiencing similar challenges. Implications for practice were discussed from the lens of student engagement, self-determination, and student’s leadership role.  \nKeywords  \ntransition assessment or planning, transition area, high school, contexts, autism, disability groups, intellectual disability, disability groups, multiple disabilities, disability groups  \nActive student and parent participation in transition planning has been advocated for more than three decades (Benz & Halpern, 1987; Martin et al., 2004; Test et al., 2009) . The evolution of federal special education legislation since the 1975 passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA, P.L. 94-142) has been steadily strengthening the intent that parents be full partners with school staff in educational planning for their children with disabilities and that students with disabilities meaningfully participate in planning their own posthigh school transition so that their preferences and goals can guide the planning process (Wagner et al., 2012) . Since the initial inception of the EHA in 1975, parent and student participation in individualized education program (IEP)/transition planning meetings has become an important component of federal special education policy with the goal of supporting all students with disabilities in achieving positive postschool outcomes.  \nThe first requirements pertaining to student participation in IEP meetings when transition goals are to be considered were initiated with the 1990 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) . The IDEA 1990 required for the first time that transition services be included in IEP planning discussions for students 16 years of age and older. The  \n1997 amendments to IDEA expanded the transition service requirements of the 1990 Act by lowering the age when students were to be invited to IEP/transition planning meetings from 16 to 14 years. The IDEA was again reauthorized in 2004, with the intent of further strengthening students’transition from school to adult life. However, the IDEA 2004 removed the requirement that IEP teams begin transition planning at age 14. Section 300.320(b) shifted the transition planning to “not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child is 16 . . .” The IDEA 2004 regulations did not limit a state’s interest in continuing to address the transition service needs of the student beginning at age 14 (or earlier), and several states have chosen to retain age 14 as the point at which the state r","cbCaipPPhRwmQy9T","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaipPPhRwmQy9T","pdf",446478,14,"English","# Abstract\n# Background and Policy Evolution\n## IDEA Requirements for IEP Participation and Transition Services\n# Study Rationale and Scope\n## Focus on Students With the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities (SCDs)\n# Definitions and Legislative Context","[{\"question\":\"How did the study identify students with the most significant cognitive disabilities (SCDs)?\",\"answer\":\"Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities were included in three disability categories—autism, intellectual disability, and multiple disabilities—who took an alternate assessment.\"},{\"question\":\"What data source did the study use to analyze transition planning participation?\",\"answer\":\"The study used data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS 2012) to examine participation and the roles of these students in IEP/transition planning.\"},{\"question\":\"Which participation factors did the study analyze in relation to student engagement?\",\"answer\":\"Participation was analyzed in relation to functional skills, communication skills, self-advocacy, and student–teacher relationships.\"}]","IEP/Transition Planning Participation Among Students With the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities - Findings From NLTS 2012 | PDF",1792086467,35]