Abstract
Purpose. Federal requirements for special education and vocational rehabilitation funding has placed responsibility on states to collaborate for delivery of transition services. There has been no research to address the question of what is the best pattern of service delivery for students with specific learning disabilities as they transition from school to work. Given the federal directives the question is now whether, in fact collaboration and interagency transition services make a difference in student-clients employment outcomes. Methodology. Casual comparative, ex post facto research was used, utilizing the annual data collected by three different state agencies. The study covered three years (1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90). Using existing data, 5,742 students were assigned to one of three groups representing single, inter and sequential agency transition services. A stratified random sample of 900 subjects was selected for the study. The population of the study maintained the gender representation found in the total population. The study analyzed subjects' employment outcomes over 18, 30 and 42 months after completion of school. The two indicators for outcomes were annual wages and rate of employment during 1991. ANOVA and ONEWAY-TUKEY procedures were used to test for significant differences for each of the fourteen hypotheses. Findings and conclusions. The male subjects who had received single agency transition services over the time of the study were earning significantly higher annual wages. Interagency and sequential agency transition services resulted in more subjects working for less annual wage. Collaborative interagency transition services made no significant difference in employment outcomes. Each agency involved in this study have different underlying American values guiding their funding. The value for special education is equality, "maximize the potential of each student". The value for vocational rehabilitation is efficiency. More students with SLD are employed because of vocational rehabilitation's involvement in their school-to-work transition services. The results of this study indicates that each agency's services reflect the value behind their funding. This study supports previous findings of special education transition services resulting in: more males being served, males earning higher wages. Minimal comparisons can be made because of the different approaches used by previous studies for students with disabilities. Implications. Females, as consumers, have not achieved the same employment outcomes as indicated by studies of education, agency transition services. This study supports these findings and also documented that interagency and sequential service delivery systems result in similar employment outcomes. There are numerous issues which point to a lack of state and federal direction being given as funds are distributed for special education programming and research purposes.