Articulating Roles and Responsibilities in the Transition Planning Process: A Practice Aimed at Figuring Out How to Work Together

It is clear that the intention of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act require both the Education Agency and the Vocational Rehabilitation Agency (VESID, in New York State) to jointly participate in the development of transition plans for students with disabilities as they prepare for employment after high school. Yet, we find certain barriers to school and vocational rehabilitation (VR) collaboration, such as: poor or inaccurate perceptions of vocational rehabilitation; and conversely of schools and youth in transition by VR staff; as well as nonexistent or ineffective procedures to support collaboration between district and VR staff. This brief will highlight specific steps and strategies designed and implemented by a regional workgroup to remedy these barriers. Transition Articulation Agreements has improved procedures and communication among the partners. This brief will review the specific barriers faced, and interventions taken to remove barriers and create measures of success

Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies

A systematic search of the research literature from 1996 through July 2008 identified more than a thousand empirical studies of online learning. Analysts screened these studies to find those that (a) contrasted an online to a face-to-face condition, (b) measured student learning outcomes, (c) used a rigorous research design, and (d) provided adequate information to calculate an effect size. As a result of this screening, 51 independent effects were identified that could be subjected to meta-analysis. The meta-analysis found that, on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. The difference between student outcomes for online and face-to-face classes—measured as the difference between treatment and control means, divided by the pooled standard deviation—was larger in those studies contrasting conditions that blended elements of online and face-to-face instruction with conditions taught entirely face-to-face. Analysts noted that these blended conditions often included additional learning time and instructional elements not received by students in control conditions. This finding suggests that the positive effects associated with blended learning should not be attributed to the media, per se. An unexpected finding was the small number of rigorous published studies contrasting online and face-to-face learning conditions for K–12 students. In light of this small corpus, caution is required in generalizing to the K–12 population because the results are derived for the most part from studies in other settings (e.g., medical training, higher education)