Career E d u c a t i o n for S t u d e n t s in Special Education D o n n Brolin Robert Loyd

The career education movement of the 1970s was hailed by many special educators as a significant need and approach that should be extensively implemented in their programs. The national organization for special educators, The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), responded by instituting a Division on Career Development (DCD) in 1976. Since its inception, DCD has spearheaded the development of the career education concept in special education by conducting state, regional, national and international conferences, by organizing 26 state units to work at the grass roots level, and by publishing its own newsletter, journal, and special documents to enhance the research and knowledge base of the field. But, what is the current status and nature of career education in the field of special education? Is it still alive and well or diminishing as some seem to think? In the opinion of these authors, this important educational concept is alive but struggling with much left to accomplish if important changes are to occur in the current educational system. There are problems that m a y inhibit its implementation that transcend beyond the field of special education itself and are linked to the total educational system, the efforts at mainstreaming and least restrictive environment, and the divided opinions and attitudes of professionals about the emphasis that should be given in educating exceptional individuals. But, there are also many positive indicators Donn Brolin is Professor, Educational & Counseling Psychology Department and Director, Life-Centered Career Education (LCCE)/Employability Enhancement Project at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Robert Loyd is Assistant Professor, Educational & Counseling Psychology Department and Assistant Director, Life-Centered Career Education (LCCE)/Employability Enhancement Project at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Journal of Career Development, Vol. 15(4), Summer 1989 © 1989 Human Sciences Press

265

266

J o u r n a l of Career Development

t h a t career education is becoming recognized as an important need for educating students in special education. The purpose of this article is to present some of the major indicators of career education activity and accomplishment on behalf of students in special education. It is the authors' hope t h a t the reader will be apprised of some significant efforts t h a t are being expended by special educators and others who believe in the importance of career education for these individuals.

The Current Status a n d Nature o f Career E d u c a t i o n The term "career education" is still used by m a n y professionals in special education but often interchangeably with such terms as vocational education, vocational preparation, prevocational training, work experience programming, life skills education, transitional programming, work study, and the like. The broad concept of career education as defined by Hoyt (1974, . . . the totality of experiences through which one learns about and prepares to engage in work as part of his or her way of living), encompassing both paid and unpaid efforts, is not being implemented as widely as m a n y of us in the field would like. In a recent article entitled "A Nation at Risk or a Policy at Risk? How about Career Education" in the DCD journal, Elrod and Lyons (1987) expressed grave concern over the National Commission on Excellence in Education which formulated an educational reform policy directed toward the college-bound student but doomed special education and other at-risk students to failure. They recommended a recommitment to the career education concept by (a) infusing career education components into the regular curriculum which would make the five new basics more relevant to all students, (b) expanding career exploration opportunities, (c) providing career counseling in high schools, and (d) offering of an alternative, rather t h a n adjusted diplomas, which would be a regular diploma with a vocational education endorsement. Clark and White (1985) identified two major existing problems in delivering career and vocational education programs to special education students, especially in rural areas: (a) career/vocational prog r a m m i n g for handicapped students is not a program priority in special education, and (b) personnel who are given the responsibility for organizing, developing, or providing instruction in this area essen-

Donn Brolin and Robert Loyd

267

tially work in isolation and are very aware of the low priority placed on it. However, they believe rural school districts have several positive features that can make career education successful, viz., the rural work ethic, the traditions of mutual support among families, the early exposure of children to work experiences, and the direct involvement of families in determining community programs. Thus, career educators must understand how they can use these positive features to provide quality career and vocational education programs to special education students in rural settings. A study conducted by the Colorado Department of Education (Mithaug & others, 1985) revealed some interesting career education findings. A mail questionnaire was sent to teachers in 20 school districts who were asked to indicate which of 187 career education indicators were important for their students. Although the respondents indicated that 66 items were important to provide their students, they seldom translate these career education needs into instructional goals. They concluded that special educators need more direction and training on how to relate the relevance of the outside world to their day-to-day classroom activities. Roessler (1988) reviewed factors associated with implementing career education and concluded that many supporting systems and materials and a curriculum model are required to improve career education. He identified five major barriers to implementing career education for exceptional students: (a) reliable and valid student assessment materials covering the areas of daily living, personal-social, and vocational competencies; (b) planning; (c) curriculum materials; (d) generalization and maintenance; and (e) system commitment to the effort. In the eighties, the term "career education" has been somewhat supplanted by the term "transition." The 1983 Amendments to the Education of the Handicapped Act, Section 626 of Public Law 98-199, entitled "Secondary Education and Transitional Services for Handicapped Youth," authorized the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to spend $6.6 million annually in grants and services to enhance the transition of handicapped youth from secondary school to post-secondary programs, adult services and employment. The result has been a large number of grant awards in such categories as: Service Demonstration Models, Cooperative Models for Planning and Developing Transitional Services, Demonstrations in Post-Secondary Education, Youth Employment Projects, Transition from School, or Institution to Work Projects.

268

Journal of Career Development

Because of the transition initiative, the federal special education agency has helped move the career education concept forward although attention has been on the secondary to post-secondary employment aspect. Hence, vocational education has been a major focus. This has been facilitated even further by the passage of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act (P.L. 98-524) which clearly reinforces the special education legislation and provides funds to implem e n t some of the basic career education principles for special education students. For example, this law requires t h a t the annual state plans include assurances for: (a) expenditures for career guidance and counseling (Sec. 113c,15); (b) coordination between vocational education and special education (Sec. 294amB); (c) information provided to students and parents about vocational education o p p o r t u n i t i e s . . , no later t h a n 9th grade (Sec. 204b); (d) assessment of interests, abilities and special needs; (e) guidance and counseling services; (f) career development activities conducted by professionally trained counselors (Sec. 204c) . . . prevocational program experience fits into the career development process as exploration (Sec. 302b,2,3,4)); and (g) Grants for Career Guidance and Counseling . . . to assist individuals to acquire self-assessment, career planning, career decision-making . . . (Sec. 331). From this review, it can be concluded t h a t career education is still a substantial effort in special education but is basically being conducted under the guise of other terminology. However, the efforts being expended are not nearly enough and the K-12 focus t h a t is so important is not being implemented very extensively. However, m a n y special educators believe the total career education concept should be reinstituted in special education and there are m a n y indications in the field t h a t this is starting to unfold.

Research, Development, and Implementation Efforts Much of the research being conducted by career/vocational education persons relative to exceptional individuals is focusing on parts of the career education concept. There is a preponderance of focus on the vocational aspects of career education and limited amount on the broader dimensions (e.g., non-paid work roles) t h a t characterize the approach. Most of the research presented below addressed the broader concept of career education r a t h e r t h a n the more traditional vocational education aspect.

D o n n Brolin and Robert Loyd

269

A major career education research and development effort is currently being conducted by the authors at the University of MissouriColumbia in conjunction with the Arkansas Research & Training Center in Vocational Rehabilitation at the University of ArkansasFayetteville. The purpose of this project, called the Life-Centered Career Education (LCCE)/Employability Enhancement Project, is to demonstrate how the LCCE Curriculum (Brolin, 1983, 1989) can be comprehensively implemented into high school programs for students with mild intellectual and specific learning disabilities and to demonstrate that its usage will result in better occupational, daily living, and personal-social adjustments of the students after they leave school. The project sites are utilizing the LCCE Inventory consisting of a Knowledge and a Performance Battery and newly developed instructional units consisting of series of lessons plans for teaching each of the 97 subcompetencies comprising the LCCE Curriculum. Currently, six school districts are involved in the project which is funded by OSERS for the period 1987-1991. The LCCE Curriculum has gained considerable recognition throughout the country as a more functional curriculum approach for preparing special education and other students with special needs for successful adult adjustment. Weisenstein and Elrod (1987) recommended that public schools adopt the LCCE Curriculum because it is already a well-accepted approach with general transitional goals. The curriculum has been published by The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) since 1978 with considerable revisions and additions of activity books and, in the near future, the LCCE Inventory. In the opinion of many regular educators, the LCCE Curriculum also has application for most of their students. Another important research and development effort being conducted in the late eighties has been the Secondary Transition Intervention Effectiveness Institute at the University of Illinois. This fiveyear OSERS project has been funded to study the issues and problems related to secondary education and transitional services through 1990. The Institute's mission is threefold: (a) to conduct interrelated applied research focusing on problem solutions to the broad system existing at the individual level, small group level, community level, and societal level; (b) to conduct these five program evaluation activities centering on information on the model programs mentioned previously, analyses and comparisons of models, identification of appropriate student assessment measures, determination of transition outcomes of students, and a review of appropriate evaluation method-

270

Journal of Career Development

ology; and (c) to provide technical assistance to model programs so they can conduct needs assessments and program evaluation strategies (Rusch and Phelps, 1987). At the local level, there have been several attempts to make career education a viable approach for special education students. Recognizing that special education programming at the secondary level is pointless when not linked to a career and vocational program appropriate to their needs, D'Alonzo, Marino, and Kauss (1984) developed the Mesa Public School Comprehensive Career and Vocational Education Program for Disabled Students. The career education portion of the program has five components: (a) a curriculum with commercial and project developed materials; (b) career guidance and placement involving school counselors; (c) Community Resource Service with speakers, tours, telelectures, work experiences, and volunteers; (d) staff development orienting participants to career education; and (e) program evaluation involving teachers in interviews and community surveys. The Barnstable Instructional Career Education Program (BICEP) of the Barnstable (MA) Public Schools (Duffy, 1981) provides another excellent example of how career education is being disseminated and implemented in public schools. BICEP provides an exportable career development model and materials to other school systems and provides workshops, training programs and consultation to help teachers, counselors, and administrators assess their career education needs, implement career education programs, organize career education resource centers, establish community involvement programs and program evaluation. An impressive array of curriculum products has been developed to conduct K-12 programs in career education. Other exemplary examples of research and development work that should be mentioned are the work of Tindall, Gugerty, Heffron, and Goadar (1988); Greenan (1987); and Berkell (1987). Tindall and associates conducted a Jobs Replication Project which identified hundreds of jobs performed in business and industry by persons with different disabilities. Their publication, Replicating Jobs in Business and Industry for Persons with Disabilities, is an important contribution to the field and should be utilized by persons with disabilities, special and vocational educators, rehabilitation and placement counselors, school counselors, employers, teachers, educators, and parents. Greenan is studying the area of generalizable skills, i.e., those cognitive, affective, and psychomotor skills that are basic to success in vocational programs and occupations. His research focuses on the

D o n n Brolin and Robert Loyd

271

development, validation and evaluation of essential curriculum and instructional interventions applicable across a wide variety of vocational exploration, preparation, and work-related settings. The research identified 115 skills in four areas: mathematics, communications, interpersonal relations, and reasoning. These skills must be taught if special needs learners are to be successfully mainstreamed in regular vocational programs and work settings. Greenan's research has provided additional data and information to assist personnel improve the delivery of career and vocational education to students. Berkell directed a unique career education effort for youth with autism called READDY (Real Employment Alternatives for Developmentally Disabled Youth). The program consists of a career development curriculum which includes training in job skills, interpersonal social skills, and job-related activities of daily living skills. Job sites are carefully analyzed before placing the students. The students are prepared to function at the job site and teachers spend time beforehand actually working at the site learning the job. This successful program, which involves parents and agencies, has demonstrated that with appropriate instruction these students can become productively employed.

Conclusion

The impact and implementation of career education with special education students has been moderately achieved. There is a professional organization devoted to the concept, a professional journal with many pertinent research and development activities, federal and state support and funding to carry out its basic tenets, and many local school districts who still recognize and demonstrate its importance through continued implementation. Also, The Council for Exceptional Children continues to endorse the career education concept and publish many materials, including the LCCE Curriculum and its related documents, which have become one of the organization's best sellers (J. Nazarro, personal communication, January 22, 1988). But problems still exist! Follow-up research on graduates of special education have consistently revealed that their post-school adjustment is generally poor (Browder, 1987; Mithaug, Horiuchi, & Fanning, 1985; Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985). Bucher, Brolin, and Kunce (1987) found, however, that students who acquired more of the LCCE

272

Journal of Career Development

competencies had a better occupational adjustment than those who acquired fewer. However, this research did reveal a generally poor overall outcome for the group studied. Greenan, Miller, and White (1985) noted that the field of career education has changed substantially over the past 10 years but indicated that future changes are essential to promoting a more appropriate education for special education students. Their study found DCD members believing in the importance of promoting the improvement of interdisciplinary communication and cooperation among and between programs. They concluded that in an age of accountability, career education must be able to demonstrate that it knows its own agenda, follows it, and believes the outcomes will be beneficial. Much still remains to be done if special education students are to be successful while in school as they move into community living and employment. We believe the career education approach offers the greatest hope for successfully preparing these students to become productive and satisfied adults. Many professionals will continue working towards this end by enhancing and refining our research and development efforts. This review has provided enough evidence of the continued need to move forward so that future outcomes will find almost every child with a handicapping condition leaving school for a meaningful job and acceptance as a worthwhile member of their community.

References Berkell, D.E. (1987). Career development for youth with autism. Journal of Career Development, •3(4), 14-20. Brolin, D.E. (ed.) (1983, 1989). Life-centered career education: A competency based approach. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children. Browder, P.M. (1987). Transition services for early adult age individuals with mild mental retardations. In R. N. Ianacone & R.A. Stodden (Eds.), Transition issues and directions, pp. 77-90. Reston, VA: Division on Mental Retardation, The Council for Exceptional Children. Bucher, D.E., Brolin, D.E., & Kunce, J.T. (1987). Importance of life-centered career education for special education students: The parent's perspective. Journal of Career Development. 13(4), 63-69. Clark, G.M. & White, W.J. (1985). Issues in providing care and vocational education to secondary-level mildly handicapped students in rural settings. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 8(1), 42-49. D'Alonzo, B.J., Marino,,J.F., & Kauss, M.F. (1984). Mesa public schools comprehensive career and vocational education program for disabled students. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 71(1), 22-29. Duffy, P.L. (1981). The what, why, and how of bicep implementation. Hyannis, MA:

Donn Brolin and Robert Loyd

273

Barnstable Instructional Career Education Program (BICEP) Career Education Resource Center. Elrod, G.F. & Lyons, B.A. (1987). A nation at risk or a policy at risk? How about career education. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 10(1), 10-14. Greenan, J.P. (1987). Association between handicapped student self-ratings and teacher ratings of generalizable mathematics skills. Journal of Career Development, •3(4), 30-37. Greenan, J.P., Miller, S.R., & White, M. (1985). Research and development problems of delivery of career development programs for exceptional individuals. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 8(1), 33-41. Hasazi, S.B., Gordon, L.R., & Roe, C.A. (1985). Factors associated with the employment status of handicapped youth exiting high school from 1979 to 1983. Exceptional Children, 5•(5), 397-404. Hoyt, K. (1974). An introduction to career education: A policy paper of The U.S. Office of Education, Washington, D.C., Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Mithaug, D.E., Horiuchi, C.N., & Fanning, P.N. (1985). A report on the Colorado statewide follow-up survey of special education students. Exceptional Children, 5•(5), 397-404. Roessler, R.T. (1988). Implementing career education: Barriers and potential solutions. Career Development Quarterly. 37(1), 22-30. Rusch, F.R. & Phelps, L.A. (1987). Secondary special education and transition from school to work: A national priority. Exceptional Children, 53(60), 487-492. Tindall, L.W., Gugerty, J.J., Heffron, T.J., & Godar, P.G. (1988). Replicating jobs in business and industry for persons with disabilities (Volume 4). Madison, WI: The Vocational Studies Center of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Weisenstein, G.R. & Elrod, G.F. (1987). Transition services for adolescent age individuals with mild mental retardation. In R. N. Ianacone & R. A. Stodden (Eds.), Transition issues and directions, pp. 38-48. Reston, VA: Division on Mental Retardation, The Council for Exceptional Children.