• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Urban Adolescents' Postschool Aspirations and Awareness

Posted on: Wednesday, 25 June 2008, 03:02 CDT

By Scanlon, David Saxon, Karyn; Cowell, Molly; Kenny, Maureen E; Perez- Gualdron, Leyla; Jernigan, Maryam

The young adult years (approximately the age when one leaves high school to age 23) are pivotal to adult life success. They are the years when adolescents typically assume dramatic increases in responsibility for self-direction in areas such as socialization, independent living, citizenship, employment, education, and mental and physical health. From initial experiences in those years, the young adult lays foundations for how his or her life will progress in various domains. The purpose of the present study is to document urban adolescents' understanding of their aspirations and means for reaching them in their young adult years while still early in their high school years. The authors investigate whether there are differences based on if the students have a learning disability. Keywords: transition; adolescent; urban education

A young adult who, upon leaving high school, enters into employment, a postsecondary education to prepare for a profession, or a "churning process" of trying to determine what he or she would like to do (Osterman & Iannozzi, 1993, as cited in Lindholm, 2006), is more likely to establish initial well-being financially and in independent living than peers who do not. Population statistics indicate that those who earn a college degree are more likely to have year-round, full-time employment, earning on average $23,000 more than a high school graduate (Olson, 2007), are better prepared for financial security in their adult years, and have healthier interpersonal relationships (Scanlon & Mellard, 2002). Yet the allure of foregoing postsecondary education to earn money immediately after high school is hard to resist for many young adults, particularly those growing up in poverty (Lindholm, 2006).

Career, education, and family aspirations held by students in high school, especially in the earlier years of secondary school (Yun & Kurlaender, 2004), are significantly related to their later- life experiences (Constantine, Erickson, Banks, & Timberlake, 1998; Sirin, Diemer, Jackson, Gonsalves, & Howell, 2004). The opportunities presented to adolescents during high school, when they are preparing to enter the young adult years, greatly influence the directions they will take (Swail, Williams, Martine/, & Klopott, n.d.). Although many of those opportunities are in the form of intervention (see, e.g., Sirin et al., 2004) or outreach programs (Gullatt & Jan, 2003) administered by others (e.g., education agencies), at least some are in the control of the adolescents themselves. By identifying personal goals, setting and following plans, and monitoring progress toward goals (as well as recognizing and responding to unexpected opportunities that present themselves), the young adult can create opportunities for himself or herself and develop a positive self-concept (the organization of self in relation to the world; Sirin et al., 2004). Selecting from among course electives, seeking part-time work, and interacting positively with adults can all be examples of creating opportunities. Taking advantage of opportunities requires skill in recognizing them and evaluating their personal worth and cost, as well as the knowledge of how to take effective advantage of them. Avoiding detrimental risks and experiences is equally important to having and realizing attainable goals, however (Helwig, 2004), whether such barriers are only perceived or are in fact real (Albert & Luzzo, 1999).

Urban adolescents and those with learning disabilities (LD) have been characterized as having fewer opportunities and being less skilled at creating opportunities and avoiding detrimental experiences (Benz, Lindstrom, & Yovanoff, 2000; Constantine et al., 1998; Rojewski, 1996). Although students with LD are found in all types of school communities, they typically represent a greater proportion of the school population in urban communities, particularly in low socioeconomic and underachieving urban schools (Orfield, Losen, Wald, & Swanson, 2004).

Adolescents with LD and the Young Adult Years

Young adults with LD fare poorly in career and education attainment in comparison to their nondisabled peers, lagging far behind in both school and postschool achievement indicators (Benz et al., 2000). They are less likely to seek a postsecondary education and more likely to be unemployed (Lindstrom, Doren, Metheny, Johnson, & Zane, 2007); women with LD have even higher unemployment rates than men with LD do (Edgar, 2005; Rojewski, 1999). Moreover, when young adults with LD are employed, their jobs "hold fewer opportunities for advancement, require lower levels of skills, are more likely to be only part-time and provide lower pay, as well as are concentrated in lower prestige occupations including service, sales, and managerial fields" (Rojewski, 1999, p. 533; also see Frank & Singleton, 2000).

Young adults with LD are characterized as being less knowledgeable about the world of work than young adults without LD. Those with LD are generally less involved in the career decision- making process during and after high school and are more likely to rely on others in the school environment (Burchardt, 2004; Rojewski, 1996). Those students often lack career maturity, which is characterized as the ability to make and follow through with educational and/or career decisions; they also have difficulty with planning and acquiring education and career information (Biller & Horn, 1991; Rojewski, 1996).

Students with LD also struggle with recognizing their strengths and weaknesses, which may contribute to difficulty identifying barriers and choosing appropriate, realistic career paths and goals. In addition, students with LD oftentimes have lower self-esteem and self-concepts due to "repeated failure, limited social skills development, reduced success in living independently, and/or difficulty in acting as a self-advocate" (Rojewski, 1996, p. 100). This begins to affect their career choices (often choosing less prestigious occupations) from when they are as young as 3 years old (Helwig, 2004).

More disheartening is the drop-out rate for students with LD. About 40% never graduate from high school and of those who do, only about 25% go on to postsecondary education, with even fewer graduating from those schools and programs (Edgar, 2005). Moreover, "overall evidence of the life experiences of adults with LD . . . reflects limited quality in relationships and socialization, economic independence, and academic achievement" (Scanlon & Mellard, 2002, p. 239).

Urban Adolescents and the Young Adult Years

According to data from the National Assessment of Education Progress, urban students perform far below their suburban and rural counter parts, particularly in highpoverty urban schools (Olson & Jerald, 1998). Urban schools are much more likely to have low- income students than nonurban schools, resulting in areas of concentrated poverty, exposing students to a host of difficulties that include lack of access to regular medical care, singleparent households, increased crime rates, increased likelihood of becoming pregnant before reaching adulthood, inequities in school resources (Kenny, Blustein, Haase, Jackson, & Perry, 2006; Sirin et al., 2004), and "less access to informal networks that are necessary for education and social mobility" (Yun & Kurlaender, 2004, p. 146). Those difficulties contribute to even more problems for urban adolescents, severely affecting career development (Constantine et al., 1998). School completion is among their problems (Murray & Naranjo, this issue). In fact, only slightly more than half of urban students graduate from high school in 4 years (Olson & Jerald, 1998).

Urban schools are predominantly composed of minority students (Orfield et al., 2004); societal racism hits urban students particularly hard. Due in part to racism and classism, urban communities have fewer job opportunities and vocational role models to offer urban youth, leading to a lack of access "to institutional mechanisms of support and power that facilitate educational and occupational attainment" (Sirin et al., 2004, p. 439). Many urban students have to make career decisions in the context of indigenous support systems, leaving them conflicted about pursuing their educational and occupational goals or staying in their communities (Constantine et al., 1998). It is not surprising that urban students often feel that they have little social capital and few career choices and opportunities and they have lower expectations for themselves, although their dreams are just as lofty as their more privileged peers (Constantine et al., 1998; Sirin et al., 2004).

One of the most powerful predictors of academic achievement in high school is the rigor of courses taken. Students taking more intense academic loads are more likely to pursue higher education than those taking easier classes (Sirin et al., 2004; Swail et al., n.d.). Yet most urban students lack the quality teachers, curriculum, and expectations needed for higher achievement. Research has shown that urban youth completing vocational rather than college preparatory curriculums, as well as attending largely segregated schools, "may account for a large portion of the unavailability of educational and vocational resources for urban racial and ethnic minority youth" (Constantine et al., 1998, p. 4). Regardless of test scores, minority youth are more likely to be placed in noncollegebound curriculum tracks and special education, making success in postsecondary education or employment even more difficult to achieve (Constantine et al., 1998; Harry & Klingner, 2006). Urban and LD Adolescents' Roles in Preparing for the Young Adult Years and Adulthood

Urban adolescents and those with LD are in similar circumstances in terms of career and education aspirations following high school. Both populations are less likely to strive for postsecondary education and more likely to be unemployed than their peers, with fewer job opportunities and career choices. Despite their similarities in postschool outcomes, urban adolescents and adolescents with LD arrive at these circumstances through different avenues and for different reasons.

Despite causal differences, the two populations' needs to improve outcomes in the young adult and later years are similar. Both populations need more opportunities in secondary school to better prepare for postschool life. Such opportunities include, but are not limited to, greater access to rigorous curriculum, increased support in preparing for higher education or a career, and learning crucial skills needed to take advantage of opportunities and minimize the effects of barriers. Such skills include having goals, setting plans, following plans, having self-awareness, and being able to effectively self-advocate (Eisenman, 2007; Trainor, 2005). As none of these skills occur in isolation, it is important to analyze the acquirement of such skills in relation to one another. In addition, it is important to collect that information and begin to teach the skills at the start of high school (Yun & Kurlaender, 2004) so that there is more time to address the skills before negative factors and barriers begin to overwhelm the adolescents.

Research Purpose

Interviews were conducted with ninth-grade urban students, some of whom were identified as having LD. The students were asked to name and describe their postschool career and lifestyle aspirations, as well as to describe pathways and potential barriers for getting there. In addition, all participants were asked what, if any, influence a disability might have on attaining their aspirations. The findings from this study should be useful in informing educators on how to address the needs of urban high school students.

Method

A qualitative approach to data collection and analysis was used. The ninth graders participated in semistructured interviews regarding their postschool goals and plans. Because we were interested in specific domains of information, such as goals for work and goals for life more broadly, a semistructured interview process was used to ensure that students would be asked to comment directly on those topics. Consistent with the rationale for using a qualitative data collection process, a qualitative approach to data analysis was also used. Following Consensual Qualitative Research procedures (CQR) (Hill et al., 2005; Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997), we analyzed transcriptions of interviews in a process designed to identify trends in topics and comments raised by the students as well as the topics we were a priori interested in analyzing. The rigors of the CQR procedure responds to concerns that some qualitative data analysis techniques do not require thorough reviews of data and that evidence supporting findings and implications is not sufficiently transparent (Anfara, Brown, & Magione, 2002).

Participants

Thirty-nine ninth-grade students from an urban high school in a large U.S. Northeastern city participated in the study. Twenty-two of the participating students were identified with LD and were enrolled in special education with an individualized education plan. School district identification criteria included documentation of a significant aptitude-achievement discrepancy.1 The samples of students with LD and without LD were approximately equal in age and racial and ethnic representation, with greater proportional representation of females in the sample without LD (see Table 1). While 13 of those with LD were eligible for free or reduced lunch, 11 of the non-LD students were eligible.

Standardized achievement data were available for 12 of those with LD and 14 of the non-LD students (see Table 2). Although mean achievement levels in reading and math were similar between the groups, the students with LD had higher mean scores in both areas. A firstlevel score on the Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition (Stanford 9) reflects "little or no mastery of the most elementary knowledge or skills," whereas a secondlevel score would indicate "partial mastery of the knowledge and skills that are fundamental for satisfactory work." Thus, the achievement levels of both groups were below desirable scores. Achievement as measured by ninth-grade final semester grades in English and mathematics favored the students with LD.

The interviews were conducted by three doctoral students and one master's student, two who self-identified as Latina and two who self- identified as EuropeanAmerican female and male. Each of the interviewers had experience working with students in urban schools. At the interviewee's discretion, the interview could be conducted in either Spanish or English.

Data coders included two European-American faculty members, a woman in counseling psychology, and a man in special education, as well as a Latina doctoral student who served as an interviewer, a female African American doctoral student, and one female European- American doctoral student.

Instrument

The semistructured interview protocol was developed using Chaves's (2003) and Phillips, Blustein, Jobin-Davis, and White's (2002) protocols as models. The open-ended questions asked students to identify their postschool goals for work and living, as well as pathways and experiences for attaining those goals, possible barriers to their attainment, and pathways around those barriers. The Phillips et al. (2002) protocol was also used as a model for the final portion of our interview protocol. That portion included specific questions for each of the above-referenced domains; the interviewers asked to ensure that all students discussed the topics that we were interested in a priori (e.g., "You talked about reasons it might be hard for you to go to college. What about money-Will that affect whether you will go to college?"). The interview was piloted with ninth-grade students and the interviewers were first supervised when practicing the administration of the protocol.

Procedures

Students enrolled in a ninth-grade health class were invited to participate in the study. Consent was received for a total of 121 students. Of those students, 23 were identified in school records as having documented LD and being enrolled in special education. Data from those students and an equal number of randomly selected students without LD were used in the portion of the interview study focused on comparing urban students with LD to their peers, which is reported here. Due to incomplete data, one student with LD and six without LD were subsequently excluded from the final analysis. All interviews were conducted during school hours. Chi-square comparisons of the interview participants to their classmates indicated no significant differences for sex, age, or race and ethnicity. No group differences were found for ninth-grade final semester English or math grades, based on the Mann-Whitney nonparametric t test. The racial and ethnic representation of the study participants approximated that of the entire school (total high school enrollment [n = 1,203]: African American or Black, 44.6%; Asian or Asian American, 5.7%; Hispanic or Latino, 43.3%; Native American, 0.3%; White, 6.2%).

The interview transcriptions were analyzed following the procedures for CQR proposed by Hill et al. (1997) and Hill et al. (2005). First, topic domains (e.g., goal work) were generated by each data coder who independently read and coded all blocks of content in the transcriptions. Following discussion by the five coders, teams of two proceeded to review the transcripts and apply the domains, with the fifth member serving as an auditor; however, ultimate team consensus was required for each step of the coding process. Once domains were established, content within each domain was abstracted into core ideas by pairs of data coders in a process that again involved auditing and reaching final consensus among all coders. In the final step of the CQR method, cross-analysis, individuals, and the team-again including auditors and team consensusused the abstracts to categorize core ideas (e.g., get a scholarship) represented in the interviews within each domain. To establish coder stability, the analysis was initially conducted using 13 of the interviews. No new domains or categories were suggested by analyses of the remaining interviews; thus, the findings were judged as stable and as having reached the point of data saturation. As Hill et al. (1997) stated, CQR is a field- tested process that satisfies standards for rigorous scientific inquiry. Specifically, it relies on multiple coders striving to reach consensus and using multiple cases to attain categories of core ideas. In this way, the positivist standards of process and outcome validity are matched.

Results

Findings from the student interviews are reported here. They are categorized into five domains, including students' career plans after high school (goal-post), their life goals after high school (goal-life), barriers to their future success (barriers), plans and strategies to achieve their goals (path-goal), and whether a disability might affect their opportunities for success (role of disability). Because of unexpected disparities between school records and self-reports of which students had a learning disability, that domain is reported first. Domain One: Role of Disability

Out of the 39 students interviewed, 31 answered questions related to the impact of a disability, including 19 students with LD and 12 students without a district-identified disability. Of the 19 identified in school records as having an LD, 10 answered yes (they did have a disability), and 7 answered no (they did not have a disability). The 2 others either declined to answer or indicated not understanding the question. Out of the 12 students not identified as having an LD in school records, 5 said they had a learning disability, whereas 4 said they did not and 3 gave unclear answers. A re-review of school files confirmed the disparity between school records and selfidentifications. Throughout this report, "students with LD" refers to those identified in school records and "non-LD" refers to the 17 others. That is, comparisons are described between those enrolled in or not enrolled in special education at the time of this study. The students' responses in the Role of Disability domain are represented in four categories: description, services, impact school, and impact goal.

Description. When interviewers asked students identified in school records as having LD to describe their disability, two stated that they had ADHD and hyperactivity but that they do not have the disability any longer. One student said that his or her disability is sleepiness or laziness. One other student with LD said he or she learns slowly. Two described their disability as being easily distracted, one from main points in class and one when in large groups. One student said that having a disability made it hard to do codes on the computer.

One non-LD student said he or she has ADHD; the three others described conditions that may be similar to ADHD. One said that he or she learns slowly, one said that his or her mind wanders, and one other said that he or she gets bored when people talk a lot and when he or she has to do something or talk to someone. Interviewers did not probe as to how students know those characteristics are attributable to a disability, and they did not press students for a category label.

Services. When asked about disability-related services, two students with LD said that they were in small classes and one said that he or she was in small groups. One student with LD said he or she is supposed to have a special class but does not need it. Two students reported receiving special education instruction but did not specify what that instruction was. One student with LD and one non-LD student reported that they take medication.

Impact school. Affecting their ability to do codes on the computer, messing up grades because of sleeping, affecting their success because of distraction, and affecting social skills are all ways students said their disability affects school. All indications that the LD would affect schooling identified negative impacts only. Two others with LD indicated it would affect their achievement; the fourth student said it affects his or her socialization. Two non-LD students said that disability negatively affects school: one saying that he or she may fail the statemandated test and one other that it affects school in only a minimal way.

Impact goal. Of the seven students with LD who mentioned whether their disability would affect their future goals, three said that their disability would have no effect on future goals and three said that they did not know if their disability would affect their future, although one stated that it depends on how colleges react to his or her LD and one said that it will be harder to be a Web designer because he or she will not be able to do codes as well on the computer and it will probably affect his or her future success by "about 40%." Six non-LD students talked about their future being affected by their selfreported disability. Three students reported that their disability will interfere with their future success, whereas one student said it would not, and two said they were uncertain whether it would or not.

Domain Two: Goal-Post

The findings of this study show that the participating students have typical middle-class goals for work and living. Their plans for attaining those goals reflect accuracy and planfulness for typical attainment of such goals. The student responses informing this domain are organized into three categories: college, work, and activities or lifestyle (as shown in the appendix).

College. For all but one respondent, including students with and without LD, attending college is a goal after high school. Although only a couple of students named specific colleges, many noted that they want to attend 4-year schools and a few mentioned plans for graduate school. Approximately half noted the profession they would like to enter after they attend college, making a link between college education and career. In nearly all of those cases, they mentioned professional careers (e.g., physician, lawyer), which require an advanced degree.

Work. One non-LD student identified work as a goal for after high school instead of college. That particular student identified professional dancer as a career choice and did not believe that a college education would be needed. Five students with LD and four other non-LD students also identified work as their goal after high school but also mentioned going to college as a goal; some of them specifically named work as a way to first earn money for college. Three students mentioned work as a goal after college, although two of the three did not connect the profession they wanted to their college career.

Activities or lifestyles. Eight students, both non-LD and LD, identified completing high school, living or family arrangements, and career as other goals after high school, all of which were categorized as activities or lifestyle. Three non-LD students have post-high school plans related to career; of students with LD, none identified activities and lifestyle plans that included future careers. The three students indicated how a career would relate to their activities or lifestyles goals; one mentioned plans of owning his or her own business, one made reference to going into a career where he or she can talk to people, and one student said he or she is going to "make my own way." Of the five students with LD who named lifestyle or activities plans, two plan to take a year off after high school, one discussed living on his or her own, one planned to get married, and one planned to study "stuff I like" (that goal was not linked to a postsecondary education goal, however). One non-LD student also stated his or her intention to go into the military to earn money for college.

Domain Three: Goal-Life

Within the domain goal-life, the students identified their generalized visions for lifestyle beyond the high school years. Their responses were consistent with the postschool plans for education and careers named for the goal-post domain. That is, they generally reflected middleclass and family-centered living. Goal- life responses were organized into six categories: quality of life, family, friends, career, economic status, and amenities (see the appendix). Except as noted, trends did not differ between those with and without LD.

Quality of life. The category label quality of life is used to broadly reflect Halpern's (1993) concept for quality of life, encompassing some of the same aspects of adult living that he stressed as important. For both the students with LD and those without, approximately half indicated that they wanted to enjoy life as an adult and be happy. The other half of respondents in this category demonstrated uncertainty. Instead of stating a desired quality of life, they indicated that they were unsure of what their future will bring (e.g., "I don't know. First finish college, then see what happens-and you take it on from there."). In several instances they directly stated hoping that stress and problems will be minimal.

Family. Family frequently came up in responses in the goal-life domain. Again, approximately half of those with LD and half of those without made reference to their future families. Most of those references were to a spouse. None identified plans for an unmarried or same-sex partner, and only a single student expected to live with a friend. In one instance, a student with LD who was asked "And who do you think you'll live with?" replied "My mother." Another student with LD hoped to live with both parents, a sister, and an aunt because "I just like them a lot, I'd like having them." Several students identified having children in the future. Most of them simply identified planning to have one or more children, whereas one student specified that he or she planned to have a daughter when he or she was 23 years old and another stated a desire to have eight children. No respondent indicated expecting to live alone.

Friends. Friends were mentioned only half as frequently as quality of life or family responses. The one student who expected to live with a friend did not specify whether that would be an existing or new friend. In a few instances, students expected to have some of the same friends as they had in ninth grade. Two of the students without LD were wary of their current friends, however. They suggested that they wanted to only have friends who "will help me through life, not hold me back." One student with LD replied in response to "Who do you think your friends will be?" responded "My wife only."

Career. An interesting finding was that those without LD typically named their desired career whereas those with LD most often reported wanting a job (no student demonstrated making a distinction between job and career). Thus, although some students noted they wanted to get a job or "own my own business," a number of them named career options. Typically, those careers reflected middle- class aspirations. Careers named most often were lawyer and doctor; another student planned to "invest in homes," and one planned to be a model until age 30, all the while studying to then become a child psychologist. Several also specified that their career would have to be one that they would like; one already knew that would be a job designing and being creative and another knew it would be a career as a translator (demonstrating the planfulness that typified the students, that student planned to first translate in a court and later own a translation business). Economic status. Although the career aspirations of the students reflected middle-class occupations, their desired economic status as adults also reflected middleclass comfort in most cases. One student with LD explicitly stated a desire to be middle class, explaining that "rich, too many problems; poor, can't get what you want." One other student only indicated not wanting to be poor, whereas several students explained that the amount of money they would have would support their lifestyles. The remaining students stated that they hoped to "have a lot of money" or be "rich."

Amenities. To reflect their goals for life in adulthood, several students named the sorts of amenities they hoped to own. It was a car in nearly every instance, with some specifying vehicles such as a BMW or Lincoln Navigator. Only one student stated that having a car was not important. One student with LD wished to have a pool and another desired "good house; lot of money; nice, nice stuff." Although not categorized as amenities, we also noted that a number of students indicated that they wished to own their own homes. In a few cases, both summer and winter homes were desired, although consistent with our characterization of middle-class aspirations, those respondents planned to have jobs in warm climates during winter months and be back home in the summertime.

Domain Four: Barriers

Situations that students identified as limiting their chances of achieving their postschool goals are categorized in the domain barriers. As shown in the appendix, the domain is separated into 15 categories. The categories of barriers that students most often identified relate to school, lack of money, friends and family, and self-motivation.

There were some general trends found among the barriers based on disability status. Although students with LD identified self- motivation and general lack of support from others as barriers more commonly than non-LD students, all other barriers named by multiple individuals were named more often by non-LD students. An interesting finding was that no students with LD identified their learning disability as a barrier, although one nonLD student did. Non-LD students more often named unsupportive friends or others, dropping out of school, and bad influences in general as a barrier.

The barrier identified most often by students, both with LD (n = 14) and non-LD (n = 15), was school. Students identified their performance in school, such as poor grades, tardiness, or dropping or getting pushed out as a barrier, whereas others pointed to the system itself as a barrier; the system includes teachers and state- mandated tests. The specific barrier named most often within the school barriers category was the NCLB-mandated state test that is conditional to graduating high school. As one student stated, "tests like that could mess me up a lot ... I don't know, once you get the test is like if you forget everything."

Related to school is lack of skills or training that students thought would have helped them attain their career goals. Three with LD and six without named this barrier. Although none specifically stated that school did not prepare them with the skills or training they need, this identified barrier suggests that the students felt school was not teaching them the kinds of skills or providing training they would need to be successful in their career choices.

Lack of money. The second most commonly identified barrier to career aspirations among non-LD students was money, whereas the category friends fell closely behind it. That order is reversed for students with LD, with friends being the second most frequently mentioned barrier and money third. Students, both with LD and nonLD, said that not having money for college or for starting their own businesses would deter them from attaining the careers they want.

Friends. Friends were often cited as barriers and bad influences because of their ability to get students to "blow off" school and their tendency to get them into trouble, as well as influencing them to engage in harmful behaviors such as doing drugs or fighting. The students generally perceived their friends as discouraging their desire to study and work at school, making it more difficult to succeed in school and thus making it harder to accomplish their career goals. "(Friends) can keep me from reaching my goals 'coz they are kind of distractive ..." and "they might hold me back or get me into trouble ..." is how one student explained that friends can be barriers. One student specifically explained how his friends steer him away from doing the right thing in school: "Like people talking to me and doing little stuffs little things that could get me in trouble ..."

Family. Family problems is another category that both LD and non- LD students identified as a barrier to their success. The students said that a lack of support from their families as well as internal family problems such as death and financial difficulties are sometimes to blame for their decreased likelihood of fulfilling their career aspirations. Describing how this might be the case, one student stated, "... if someone in the family gets sick or something, I am kind of family, like I would miss school because of that."

Self-motivation. Although students identified many other sources as barriers to their success, they also recognized that they have some control over those influences. For example, they recognized that they are in control of how much influence their friends have over them or that they can control some of their school performance. Similarly, a number of students (eight with LD and seven non-LD) believed that they are sometimes their own barrier to attaining a successful career. Many students cited lack of motivation as the biggest self-imposed barrier, and characteristics such as being distracted or unfocused, sleeping in class or being lazy, and being too busy or not taking school seriously were also identified as barriers by students in both groups. Some students also identified consequences to their actions, such as pregnancy (six with LD and seven non-LD) or alcohol and/or drug abuse (four with LD and seven non-LD), as barriers. Several students also identified things they could have done differently if they had more motivation in school. For example, one student explained how a lack of motivation prevented him or her from doing well.

Domain Five: Path Goal

The plans and strategies of students in this study, both those with and without LD, conflict with previous contentions that students in these two populations do not have realistic goals, including plans of action or strategies needed to reach those goals. We document that the students do have plans to reach their goals. Based on their interview responses, the students overwhelmingly planned to do better in high school and go on to college, learn more about the career they are planning to go into, showcase certain personality traits, and find some way to earn money. Less frequently cited but still common plans included avoiding bad influences and ignoring friends, mapping out a plan and making decisions, and staying on track (see the appendix for the categories identified).

Education. Overall, the students were aware that critical components for succeeding in their career aspirations are to do better in high school and go on to college. Specifically, a majority of students with LD and half of the non-LD students mentioned getting good grades; nearly repeated proportions of both groups mentioned studying more, whereas 6 with LD and 3 non-LD mentioned paying more attention in class, and 11 with LD and 6 non-LD mentioned improving attendance and punctuality and/or staying in school among the things they planned to do in high school to achieve their goals.

Training and experience. The students were also aware that it is important to learn more about the job they want in the future, to get information about it, and see if they like it. Three students with LD and two non-LD students planned to get more information about a future job by researching the information they need to know about a particular job, whereas five students with LD and one non- LD student talked about getting a job at a place related to the type of job they want to have in the future.

Personality. In addition to knowing what they need to do to be successful, students were aware that there are certain personality traits that will help them in their future. However, the majority of students in either group did not comment on personality traits. Some of the traits discussed focus on how students relate to others, whereas others focus on internal qualities. Students (four with LD and one non-LD) stated that communicating with people in a polite way, getting along with others, and being respectful would help them advance in their careers. Internal qualities, such as "learning to be more focused,""make the right decisions,""staying motivated," and "never doubt yourself were also mentioned by a few students (two with LD and two non-LD).

Money. Money is considered necessary for success, and the lack of money has been identified as a barrier. Some students explained how they plan to get the money they need to go to college. They described plans of getting scholarships (eight with LD and one non- LD), applying for financial aid (one with LD), and working to make money to afford college (four with LD and two non-LD). Some students also planned to work while in high school and save money in addition to getting a job while they are in college. Discussion

Findings from the demographic profiles and interview analyses reflect high levels of similarities between the students with school identified LD and those without. First, the urban adolescents with LD and the non-LD urban adolescents were similar in their demographics and apparent awareness of postschool options. Second, postschool aspirations and understandings of what is involved in achieving their aspirations were also similar between the groups, and were realistic.

Demographics

The national populations of students with LD and urban students are both commonly recognized as including greater representations of racial and ethnic minority and ESL students, in addition to a greater representation of lower SES families, than their general education and suburban counterparts (e.g., Harry, Klingner, & Hart, 2005). Each of those characteristics has been isolated as a probable contributing factor to a student being identified as having a learning disability (Harry et al., 2005). Each has likewise been noted as a correlate with the typical profile of urban students as less academically prepared and lower achieving (Orfield et al., 2004). Sinclair, Christenson, and Thurlow (2005) have suggested that combinations of such factors increase the probability of risk for school failure and diminish outcomes in the young adult and adult years. The two groups of students we studied conformed to national profiles and resembled one another in demographics.

The two groups also look quite similar in their achievement profiles. As ninth graders, their reading and mathematics achievement levels as measured by the Stanford 9 reflect markedly lower literacy levels than desirable for a high school population. Their low achievement profiles nonetheless closely mirror those reported elsewhere for urban high school students (Olson & Jerald, 1998; Orfield et al., 2004) and those with LD (Fletcher et al., 2002). Given the importance of academic achievement for students remaining in secondary school, being admitted to and succeeding in postsecondary education, and for possessing the functional literacy skills necessary for competitive employment and independent living (Arbona, 2000), the students in this study would not be predicted to be successful young adults or adults. They do have to their advantage that they are still enrolled in school as ninth graders. Students with disabilities drop out at nearly twice the rate of the general education population (Thurlow, Sinclair, & Johnson, 2002), and urban students drop out at a much higher rate than their suburban peers (Orfield et al., 2004).

The similarities in the two groups' demographics in this study should not necessarily have been presupposed. Although urban student populations and students with LD typically share certain demographic characteristics, they are, presumably, different populations that only sometimes overlap. Nationally, students with LD represent approximately 5% of the public school population (U.S. Department of Education, 2006); although they represent a higher percentage of urban school enrollments (Orfield et al., 2004). Presumably, some set of underlying factors distinguishes students with LD from their counterparts in urban and other settings. Because our institutional review board permission to conduct the study did not include collecting intelligence data, but only identification of which students satisfied state and district criteria for an aptitude- achievement discrepancy and enrollment in special education, further cognitive profile data that may distinguish the two groups cannot be compared.

One potential implication of the similarity in reported demographics between the urban students with and without LD in this study is that there is not a compounding effect for the co- occurrence of a learning disability and status as an urban student. That is, a learning disability and urban status do not combine to result in an even more depressed achievement profile than that expected for either group alone. Of course, some urban students and some with LD are among the highest school achievers; thus, it also cannot be presumed that all of our study participants should have been low achieving.

The data set is less informative as to whether the combination of having LD and attending an urban school indicates a higher probability of being male, being a racial or ethnic minority, or being in low SES groups. If a theory for similarity between the two populations is accurate, it should be noted that students with LD are presumed to have a cognitive functioning profile that primarily accounts for their low achievement (Hale, Kaufman, Naglieri, & Kavale, 2006) or at least to persist in low achievement despite receiving instruction that is effective for their peers with no other known cause for their performance (Fuchs, Mock, Morgan, & Young, 2003; Stanovich, 2005). In contrast, internal, cognitive deficit explanations for the depressed achievement of urban adolescents have been ruled out in favor of recognizing familial and societal factors ranging from poor literacy foundations (Pan, Rowe, Singer, & Snow, 2005; Tenenbaum, Porche, Snow, Tabors, & Ross, 2007) to biases in educational services (Harry & Klingner, 2006; Orfield et al., 2004). Whether appropriate responses to the academic and transition needs of the two populations should vary cannot be theorized based on the present findings.

Awareness of Postschool Options

The students with and without LD who participated in this study uniformly exhibited awareness of options for post-high school education, employment, and living. In no instance did a study participant reveal that he or she was unaware of at least one option in each of those domains or that he or she had no thoughts about options in any of the domains. Although the study was not designed to assess the breadth of students' awareness, the range of responses for each domain indicates that members of the two groups were typically well informed. Two students expressed an interest in playing sports in college, and while one of those offered an interest in a career as a professional athlete as one lifestyle option, the students did not name options with low probability for attainment by any segment of the population, such as rap star or "a job like Indiana Jones" (as a community college applicant once reported to one of the authors). Approximately half of the students in both groups identified multiple career interests. The consistency in types of careers named when an individual student cited multiple career aspirations further reflects their commitment to their aspirations. Although cultural stereotypes of ethnic minority youth as denigrating academic achievement and middle-class and upper- class occupations in efforts to avoid "acting White" are prevalent (Ogbu, 2004), this study supports a significant body of research that documents high educational and career aspirations among adolescents of color (Fine, Burns, Payne, & Torre, 2004; Mickelson, 1990; Tyson, Darity & Castellino, 2005).

Postschool Aspirations

The students overwhelmingly named what we describe as middle- class aspirations for their postschool life. They seek professional careers such as business persons, doctors, and lawyers that depend on college educations, sometimes requiring graduate education. They also desire middleclass material goods such as owning their own homes, a car, and a second home in a few cases. A few of the students identified lifestyle options that included owning their own business, in one case so as not to have to be responsible to bosses. Notably rare were aspirations to become famous, own mansions, and the like. Although some students acknowledged the difficulties of rising in status from low socioeconomic status households and communities, they remained consistent in their aspirations.

Black or African American and Latino students were predominant racial groups in our samples; they have been described as more likely to live in extended family households in which multiple generations contribute to the economy and care for one another (Garcia Coll, Meyer, & Brillion, 1995; Harry et al., 2005; Kalyanpur, & Harry, 2004). The ninth graders in this study who mentioned living arrangements were less likely to mention living with an older relative (typically a parent when mentioned) or sibling as with a spouse or children.

Importantly, the goals the students stated for school, work, and lifestyle were highly compatible. The students recognized conventional pathways for attaining their middle-class goals, almost always including postsecondary education. secondary and postsecondary credentials are more important now to economic and social achievement than they have been historically (Schoon & Parsons, 2002).

Attaining Postschool Options

We use the term "realistic" to characterize the study participants' postschool aspirations and conceptions of pathways to those goals. The students accurately identified the postsecondary education requirements typically associated with their identified careers. Their material well-being and domicile goals were also consistent with the types of middle-class career aspirations that they identified. However, both students with LD and urban students have been profiled as typically being less successful as young adults and adults. They are less likely than their peers to attend and complete an array of postsecondary education options (Horn, Peter, & Rooney, 2002; Milsom & Hartley, 2005), they are typically lower wage earners who hold semiskilled or entry-level employment (Frank & Singleton, 2000), and at least in the case of those with LD, they are less likely to have satisfactory social and independent living statuses (Troiano, 2003; also see Mull, Sitlington, & Alper, 2001). Both populations are also reported as overrepresented in correctional populations (Quinn, Rutherford, Leone, Osher, & Poirier, 2005), which may be considered as inconsistent with attaining their middle-class goals. In the case of the students in this study, their low levels of achievement, in addition to statuses as urban, minority, and poor further predict that their aspirations are in fact not realistic for them. Perhaps the most curious finding of the study is that approximately half of students identified as having LD and enrolled in special education and their counterparts are unclear on their disability and special education status. At least some of those not identified as having LD may have been previously disenrolled from special education and thus were accurately identifying their disability status while school records only identified those currently enrolled in special education. Some of the students who described the impact of their claimed LD described attentional factors associated with attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder and thus may have had a different condition they confused with LD, although many with ADHD are either not served by special education at all or enrolled under the auspices of having LD (Barkley, 2000). Still, the percentages disagreeing with their official status make it likely that some students were unclear on their own status. Madaus, Bigaj, Chafaleous, and Simonsen (2006) reported that many students with LD are unaware of their own disability and accommodation needs. Without awareness of one's own condition, a student is unlikely to have accurate knowledge of her or his own learning strengths and needs or be aware of how to effectively self-advocate.

General Implications

Although the academic and societal challenges faced by urban young adults and those with LD are profound, schooling and social services practices targeted to their needs can help to counter lowered expectations for success (Kenny, Blustein, Chaves, Grossman, & Gallagher, 2003). Transition planning is essential to the process of preparing high school students to have success in their young adult years. Effective transition planning takes into account students' strengths, needs, and goals. The ninth graders in this study demonstrated that they begin their high school careers with clear goals and awareness of pathways to achieve those goals. Developing students' skills in selfdetermination (Browder, Wood, Test, Karvonen, & Algozzine, 2001; Wehmeyer, Palmer, Agran, Mithaug, & Martin, 2000) and self-advocacy (Skinner & Lindstrom, 2003; see also Milsom & Hartley, 2005) represent promising practices to countering the predictable failure for urban students and those with LD. Furthermore, careerplanning programs beginning at least by ninth grade may help urban youth to set and attain goals.

Note

1. Institutional Review Board approval for the study did not include permission to collect IQ data.

References

Albert, K. A., & Luzzo, D. A. (1999). The role of perceived barriers in career development: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77, 431-436.

Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M., & Magione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31, 28-38.

Arbona, C. (2000). The development of academic achievement in school-aged children: Precursors to career development. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 270-309). New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Barkley, R. (2000). Taking Charge of ADHD: The Complete, Authoritative Guide for Parents. NY: Guilford Press.

Benz, M. R., Lindstrom, L., & Yovanoff, P. (2000). Improving graduation and employment outcomes of students with disabilities: Predictive factors and student perspectives. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 509-529.

Biller, E. F., & Horn, E. E. (1991). A career guidance model for adolescents with learning disabilities. School Counselor, 38(4), 279- 287.

Browder, D. M., Wood, W. M., Test, D. W., Karvonen, M., & Algozzine, B. (2001). Reviewing resources on self-determination: A map for teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 22(4), 233-244.

Burchardt, T. (2004). Aiming high: The educational and occupational aspirations of young disabled people. Support for Learning, 19(4), 181-186.

Chaves, A. P. (2003). Urban minority students' conceptions of educational and vocational resources (Doctoral dissertation, Boston College, AAT 3103274). Retrieved April 1, 2008, from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Full-Text database.

Constantine, M. G., Erickson, C. D., Banks, R. W., & Timberlake, T. L. (1998). Challenges to the career development of urban racial and ethnic minority youth: Implications for vocational intervention. Journal of Multicultural Counseling & Development, 26(2), 82-94.

Edgar, E. (2005). Bending back on high school programs for youth with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(Spring), 171-173.

Eisenman, L. T. (2007). Self-determination interventions: Building a foundation for school completion. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 2-8.

Fine, M., Burns, A., Payne, Y., & Torre, M. E. (2004). Civics lessons: The color and class of betrayal. Teachers College Record, 106, 2193-2223.

Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Barnes, M., Stuebing, K. K., Francis, D. J., Olson, R. K., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, A. B. (2002). Classification of learning disabilities: An evidence-based evaluation. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 185-250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Frank, A. R., & Singleton, P. L. (2000). Young adults with mental disabilities-Does transition planning make a difference? Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 119-134.

Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 18(3), 157-171.

Garcia Coll, C. T., Meyer, E. C., & Brillion, L., (1995). Ethnic and minority parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (pp. 189-209). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gullatt, Y., & Jan, W. (2003). How do pre-collegiate academic outreach programs impact college-going among underrepresented students? Retrieved June 14, 2007, from www.pathwaystocollege.net/ pdf/PrecollegiateOutreachPrograms.pdf

Hale, J. B., Kaufman, A., Naglieri, J. A., & Kavale, K. A. (2006). Implementation of IDEA: Integrating response to intervention and cognitive assessment methods. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 753- 770.

Halpern, A., (1993). Quality of life as a conceptual framework for evaluating transition outcomes. Exceptional Children, 59, 486- 498.

Harry, B. & Klingner, J. K. (2006). Why are so many minority kids in special education? New York: Teachers College Press.

Harry, B., Klingner, J. K., & Hart, J. (2005). African American families under fire: Ethnographic views of family strengths. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 101-112.

Helwig, A. A. (2004). A ten-year longitudinal study of the career development of students: Summary findings. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82, 49-57.

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 196-205.

Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. Counseling Psychologist, 25(4), 517-572.

Horn, L., Peter, K., & Rooney, K. (July, 2002). Profile of undergraduates in U.S. postsecondary institutions: 1999-2000. Statistical analysis report. NCES 2002-168. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement,

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (2004). Impact of the social construction of LD on culturally diverse families: A response to Reid and Valle. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 530-533.

Kenny, M. E., Blustein, D. L., Chaves, A., Grossman, J. M., & Gallagher, L. A. (2003). The role of perceived barriers and relational support in the educational and vocational lives of urban high school students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(2), 142- 155.

Kenny, M. E., Blustein, D. L., Haase, R. F., Jackson, J., & Perry, J. C. (2006). Setting the stage: Career development and the student engagement process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(2), 272-279.

Lindholm, J. A. (2006). Deciding to forgo college: Non-college attendees' reflections on family, school, and self. Teachers College Record, 108(4), 577-603.

Lindstrom, L., Doren, B., Metheny, J., Johnson, P., & Zane, C. (2007). Transition to employment: Role of the family in career development. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 348-366.

Madaus, J. W., Bigaj, S., Chafaleous. S., & Simonsen, B. (2006). What key information can be included in a comprehensive summary of performance? Career Development for Exceptional Individuals.

Mickelson, R. (1990). The attitude-achievement paradox among Black adolescents. Sociology of Education, 63, 44-61.

Milsom, A., & Hartley, M. T. (32005). Assisting students with learning disabilities transitioning to college: What school counselors should know. Professional School Counseling, 8, 436-441.

Mull, C., Sitlington, P. L., & Alper, S. (2001). Postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the literature. Exceptional Children, 68(1), 97-118.

Ogbu, J. U. (2004). Collective identity and the burden of "acting white" in Black history, community, and education. Urban Review: Issues and Ideas in Public Education, 36, 1-35.

Olson, L. (2007). Linking learning to earning. Quality counts 2007: From cradle to career. Retrieved June 14, 2007, from http:// www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/01/04/17work-force.h26.html Olson, L., & Jerald, C. D. (1998). The urban picture. Quality Counts '98 Retrieved June 14, 2007, from http://counts.edweek.org/sreports/ qc98/challenges/tables/ta-n.htm

Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. B. (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth are being left behind by the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing Group.

Pan, B. A., Rowe, M. L., Singer, J. D., & Snow, C. E. (2005). Maternal correlates of growth in toddler vocabulary production in low-income families. Child Development, 76, 763-782.

Phillips, S. D., Blustein, D. L., Jobin-Davis, K., & White, S. F. (2002). Preparation for the school-to-work transition: The views of high school students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 202-216.

Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E., Osher, D. M., & Poirier, J. M. (2005). Youth with disabilities in juvenile corrections: A national survey. Exceptional Children, 71, 339-345.

Rojewski, J. W. (1996). Occupational aspirations and early career- choice patterns of adolescents with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19(2), 99-116.

Rojewski, J. W. (1999). Occupational and educational aspirations and attainment of young adults with and without LD 2 years after high school completion. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(6), 533- 552.

Scanlon, D., & Mellard, D. F. (2002). Academic and participation profiles of school-age dropouts with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 239-258.

Schoon, I., & Parsons, S. (2002). Teenage aspirations for future careers and occupational outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 262-288.

Sinclair, M. F., Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (2005). Promoting school completion of urban secondary youth with emotional or behavioral disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 465-482.

Sirin, S. R., Diemer, M. A., Jackson, L. R., Gonsalves, L., & Howell, A. (2004). Future aspirations of urban adolescents: A person- in-context model. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 77(3), 437-459.

Skinner, M. E., & Lindstrom, B. D. (2003). Bridging the gap between high school and college: Strategies for the successful transition of students with learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 47(3), 132-137.

Stanovich, K. E. (2005). The future of a mistake: Will discrepancy measurement continue to make the learning disabilities field a pseudoscience? Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 103.

Swail, W. S., Williams, A., Martinez, M., & Klopott, S. (n.d.). School reform and college access success: A summary of: How is school reform tied to increasing college access and success for low- income and minority youth? Retrieved June 14, 2007, from www.pathwaystocollege.net/pdf/HowIsSchoolReform_abridged.pdf

Tenenbaum, H. R., Porche, M. V., Snow, C. E., Tabors, P., & Ross, S. (2007). Maternal and child predictors of low-income children's educational attainment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28, 227-238.

Thurlow, M. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Johnson, D. R. (2002). Students with disabilities who drop out of school: Implications for policy and practice. Issue Brief, 2(2), 1-7. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, National Center on Secondary Education and Transition.

Trainor, A., (2005). Self-determination perceptions and behaviors of diverse students with LD during the transition planning process. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 233-249.

Troiano, P. T. (2003). College students and learning disability: Elements of self-style. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 404-419.

Tyson, K., Darity, W.A., & Castellino, D. (2005). "It's not a Black thing": Understanding the burden of acting White and other dilemmas of high achievement. American Sociological Review, 70, 582- 605.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Twenty-sixth annual report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.

Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., Agran, M., Mithaug, D. E., & Martin, J. E. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self- determination learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 439-453.

Yun, J. T., & Kurlaender, M. (2004). School racial composition and student educational aspirations: A question of equity in a multiracial society. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 9(2), 143-168.

David Scanion

Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA

Karyn Saxon

Randolph Public Schools, Randolph, MA

Molly Cowell

Maureen E. Kenny

Leyla Perez-Gualdron

Maryam Jernigan

Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA

David Scanlon, PhD, is an assistant professor of special education in the Lynch School of Education at Boston College. His research interests include content area literacy, strategic teaching and learning, and adolescent and adult populations with mild disabilities.

Karyn Saxon, PhD, is a third-grade teacher in Randolph, MA, and former graduate research assistant at Boston College. Her research interests include special education placement and instruction for students with disabilities.

Molly Cowell, MEd, is a PhD candidate in the field of curriculum and instruction in the Lynch School of Education at Boston College.

Maureen E. Kenny, PhD, is an associate dean for faculty and academics in the Lynch School of Education at Boston College and professor in the program in counseling psychology. Her research focuses on academic, social, and career development of urban high school youth.

Leyla Perez-Gualdron, MA, is a PhD candidate in counseling psychology in the Lynch School of Education at Boston College and a psychology intern at the Cambridge Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Her research interests focus on sociopolitical development and academic attainment in Lat

Source: Remedial and Special Education; RASE

More News in this Category