Navigating Transition Planning for Students with Individual Education Plans : Perspectives of Transition Coordinators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transitioning to adulthood can be challenging for students with disabilities, who experience poorer post-high school outcomes compared to their non-disabled counterparts; yet transition planning is not well studied in Canada. This qualitative study examined the perspectives of transition coordinators, or the educators responsible for coordinating transition- planning services for students with documented disabilities necessitating Individual Education Plans (IEPs). Our two main research questions were: (a) What do transition coordinators believe to be best practices regarding transition planning? and (b) What are the actual practices of transition coordinators in high schools? To answer these questions, we conducted semi- structured interviews with four transition coordinators in independent high schools in Metro Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), and systematically coded the interview transcripts using thematic analysis. The main themes that emerged were (a) transition coordinator training and experience, (b) favourable conditions created by the independent school, (c) transition-planning process that starts in early high school and proceeds logically, (d) a student-centred approach to transition planning, (e) effective curriculum and instruction for students with disabilities, and (f) effective collaboration within the school and with external parties. It was found that the four transition coordinators’ conceptions of best practices and actual practices were largely congruent with the practices recommended in the research literature; however, due to our small sample size these results are not generalizable to other contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".