“Learning to Be Myself”: Paths 2 the Future Career Development Curriculum for Young Women With Disabilities

Why Focus on Young Women With Disabilities?

Longitudinal studies tracking postschool employment outcomes for youth enrolled in special education have consistently documented that regardless of disability type, young women earn lower wages, are less likely to work in high-skill/high-wage jobs and are more likely to live in poverty than their male peers (Doren, Gau, & Lindstrom, 2011). Previous studies have also documented gender differences in parental expectations for postschool employment and independence for youth with disabilities, with parents being more likely to expect male children to get a job and live on their own as young adults (Newman, Wagner, Cameto, & Knokey, 2009; Powers, Hogansen, Geenen, Powers, & Gil-Kashiwabara, 2008).

This complex process of career development and transition to adulthood for young women with disabilities is impacted by a number of individual and structural barriers. Individual attributes, such as low self-esteem, limited self-efficacy, and a lack of self-advocacy skills, can constrain the ability to fully explore a wide range of career options (Lindstrom, Harwick, Poppen, & Doren, 2012; Trainor, 2007). In addition, adolescent girls with disabilities often have restricted opportunities for career exploration (Ferri & Conner, 2010) and are less likely than their male peers to enroll in vocational courses or participate in community work experiences during high school (Hogansen et al., 2008). This restricted set of opportunities and experiences translates to a narrow range of career interests and aspirations ultimately resulting in poor long-term educational and employment outcomes (Doren et al., 2011).

Paths 2 the Future (P2F) Curriculum

In order to address pervasive gender and disability barriers and improve career development opportunities for young women with disabilities, we developed a curriculum called P2F (Lindstrom & Post, 2015). P2F is a gender-specific curriculum that was designed and pilot tested through an iterative development process. First, we analyzed existing state and national data sets, reviewed career development literature relevant for this population, and conducted focus groups and individual interviews to identify gender differences and critical career development needs for females with disabilities (Lindstrom et al., 2012). Using a design experiment process, we then developed and tested the P2F curriculum with special education teachers in four high school classrooms. After revising lessons and activities based on teacher and student feedback as well as classroom observations, we conducted a pilot study with 110 participants in six high schools. Although underpowered, the pilot study showed promising results including improvements in vocational skill self-efficacy, self-advocacy, autonomy, and career outcome expectations (Doren, Lombardi, Clark, & Lindstrom, 2013).

P2F is currently being tested through a randomized controlled trial in 26 high schools in a Northwestern state. One of the major goals of P2F is to promote self-efficacy and break down socially constructed barriers associated with gender and disability. The P2F curriculum includes 75 lessons divided into four modules: (a) self-awareness, (b) disability knowledge, (c) gender identity, and (d) career and college readiness. (See Table 1 for complete list of modules, lesson topics, and learning outcomes.) The modules are designed to be taught in sequence within a group/classroom setting in the course of the school day and participants receive high school credit for completing the class. The P2F curriculum is also interactive: Teachers are responsible for presenting information, leading activities, and engaging young women in small group discussions. The P2F curriculum modules are grounded in special education and career development literature and include:

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Paths 2 the Future Curriculum Modules, Lessons, and Outcomes.

Modules and Lesson Topics	Learning Outcomes
Module 1: Self-awareness (30 lessons) Lessons include self-awareness, communication, skills for success, and identifying personal strengths	Increase self-awareness and self-efficacy Increase self-advocacy skills, including proactive communication Improve personal autonomy and self-determination skills including internal locus of control, ability to make choices, and ability to set and achieve goals Develop core skills for success including problem-solving, critical thinking teamwork, and time management
Module 2: disability knowledge (16 lessons) Lessons include disability exploration, disability sensitivity, education rights and responsibilities, and self-disclosure	Increase knowledge and awareness of a variety of disabilities Increase knowledge of disability related laws including Americans with Disabilities Act and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Develop individual awareness of disability (disability identity) including ability to describe strengths and limitations and identify needed accommodations
Module 3: gender identity (12 lessons) Lessons include women in history, women leaders/role models, gender and wages, and healthy relationships	Increase knowledge of women in society including gender roles, expectations, and stereotyping Be able to identify benefits, barriers, and opportunities for women in the workplace Increase awareness of female role models and mentors and strategies for balancing work and family roles
Module 4: career and college readiness (17 lessons) Lessons include career exploration, postschool options, and skills for obtaining/maintaining employment	Explore postschool employment and education opportunities Identify personally meaningful and relevant career options Demonstrate positive job-seeking behaviors Develop skills for maintaining employment

Procedures

Special education teachers and school counselors at each school were asked to identify a sample of young women to participate in the study based on the following inclusion criteria: (a) identify as female; (b) currently enrolled in grades 9, 10, 11, or 12 in a participating high school; and (c) eligible for special education services with a high incidence disability including: learning disability, other health impairment (including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/Attention Deficit Disorder), autism spectrum disorder, speech/language disability, and emotional disability. The P2F lessons require fifth- to sixth-grade reading, writing, and language skills, and thus students with more significant cognitive disabilities were not included.

Prior to implementing the P2F curriculum, all participating teachers attended a 1-day workshop to learn about curriculum components, classroom materials, and data collection procedures. Once parent consent and student assent were obtained, teachers began implementing the lessons and activities as outlined in the P2F curriculum guide (Lindstrom & Post, 2015). Young women attended the class daily and received high school credit upon completing the 75 lessons. All students completed an online survey at two time points (preintervention and postintervention). Students took between 15 and 60 min to complete the survey, and P2F research team members were available to answer any questions the students had about the survey. There were 49 participants who completed the pretest and 41 who participated in the posttest for a retention rate of 83.6%. Further, there were no differential rates of attrition by group condition in the study to date.

Teachers provided information about the student’s diagnosis qualifying them to receive special education services and indicated if each participant experienced any barriers to academic success and future employment. Barriers were assessed in five main areas: academic, family, health, work, and other risk behaviors. Academic barriers included whether the student was credit deficient or on track for a modified diploma as well as if the student demonstrated a pattern of absenteeism, suspensions/expulsions, detention, or a history of dropping out of school. Family/living issues included difficult family circumstances, homelessness, living in foster care, a history of moving a lot, and a lack of transportation. Barriers to employment included no prior volunteer or work experiences, or work responsibilities exceeding 20 hr/week. Risk behaviors included prior arrest, substance abuse, and pregnancy or parenting responsibilities. Health challenges were assessed by the presence of mental health issues (e.g., anxiety, depression) or chronic health conditions (e.g., diabetes, asthma).

To assess the social validity of the intervention, after completing the postsurvey, all students were invited to participate in a focus group at their high school. Members of the research team conducted the focus groups, which lasted approximately 1 hr. All focus groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Of the 49 young women who participated in the P2F curriculum, 33 were present for the year-end focus groups.

Participants

A total of N = 136 participants were recruited in year 1 of the study and n = 49 were randomized to the intervention group. Young women ranged in age from 14 to 20 years old and the majority (81.6%) identified as White. Primary disability categories included specific learning disability (63.3%), intellectual disability (8.2%), other health impairment (8.2%), and emotional disturbance (6.1%). There were six participants (12.2%) who did not specify a disability. Participants were most likely to experience the following teacher-reported barriers: (a) difficult family circumstances (55%), (b) mental health issues (55%), (c) no prior work or volunteer experience (46.9%), (d) chronic absences (36.7%), or (e) behind in completing credits toward graduation (32.7%). Teachers reported four participants (8.2%) did not experience any barriers while the majority of participants (75.5%) experienced more than one barrier.

Measures

Data Analysis

The mixed-method analyses involved two primary approaches. First, we conducted within-intervention group, paired sample t tests to determine whether there were statistically significant mean differences between pre- and posttest scores on career development outcome scales and the overall construct. Because the data for this report are within-intervention group for the first of three cohorts, we employed directional one-tailed hypotheses with expectations that intervention students would exhibit gains. Our procedures to handle missing data were as follows: When computing scale scores, at the item level, each scale was required to have 70% of the items present. In cases retained with missing data, scale scores were computed by taking the average of the present items.

Second, we analyzed the focus group transcripts following a multiple-stage process for qualitative analysis recommended by Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2013). First, we reviewed all the transcripts and developed a list of broad codes based on the interview protocol and major themes that emerged from the transcripts. We used these descriptive codes, such as “career planning” or “self-awareness” to assign concrete labels to individual passages of text. To ensure that analysis and interpretations were not idiosyncratic or biased, all interview transcripts were coded by two members of the research team following a common coding scheme using a web-based qualitative software program (http://dedoose.com). We did not attempt to resolve coding differences. Instead coders reached initial agreement on the definition of each code and multiple codes were assigned to each text passage to allow for flexible yet consistent data interpretation (Anfara, Brown, & Mangione, 2002). Next, we summarized and confirmed the key findings within each group and conducted a cross-case analysis to document themes that emerged from all focus groups. Only themes that were confirmed across all four groups are presented here.

P2F Survey Findings

Table 2 includes means, standard deviations, and results of the paired sample t tests for each construct. The primary hypothesis was supported for three of the seven disability and career development subscales as well as for the total mean composite score. Thus, students who enrolled in the P2F curriculum demonstrated significant improvement in roughly half of the individual outcome domains.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Paired Sample t tests for Paths 2 the Future Intervention Students.

Subscales	Fall			Spring			n	T
	Pretest			Posttest
	M	SD	α	M	SD	α
Autonomy	2.75	.39	.70	2.81	.42	.79	40	.99
Career expectancy	3.24	.52	.86	3.29	.53	.90	39	.56
Disability and gender awareness	2.98	.88	.80	3.39	.95	.87	39	2.67**
Student engagement	3.09	.49	.88	3.09	.57	.93	40	0.05
Self-realization	2.72	.43	.75	2.83	.35	.74	40	2.00*
Self-advocacy	3.56	.70	.73	3.59	.80	.79	40	0.28
Vocational self-efficacy	3.31	.92	.97	3.50	.83	.97	40	2.15*
Career development total	3.31	.92	.87	3.50	.83	.89	40	1.84*

Note. Tests are directional one-tailed hypotheses.

**p < .01. *p < .05.

Among the individual focal scale outcomes, students enrolled in the P2F curriculum improved in their reported disability and gender awareness (M = 2.98 and 3.39, p < .01), self-realization (M = 2.72 and 2.83, p < .05), and vocational self-efficacy (M = 3.31 and 3.50, p < .05). Similarly, there was a one-tailed improvement for the overall career development composite mean score (M = 3.31 and 3.50, p < .05).

Four of the individual subscales showed no within-intervention group change: autonomy, career outcome expectancies, student engagement, and self-advocacy.

Focus Group Findings

Through our focus groups with young women with disabilities who participated in the P2F curriculum, we gained a more in-depth and richer understanding of the impact of the intervention on vocational identity and career aspirations. Three major themes emerged that helped provide preliminary confirmation of the uptake of intended curriculum content. These themes focused on gender identity, self-awareness, and a sense of self-advocacy and empowerment. Themes reported here were consistently expressed by students from all four participating high schools.

Gender Issues and Learning Experiences

Over the last several decades, researchers have consistently documented gender differences in school experiences and postschool outcomes for adolescents with disabilities identified for special education services (e.g., Doren & Benz, 1998; Doren et al., 2011). Findings from this study provide preliminary evidence that these differential experiences influence both self-perception and learning opportunities for young women with disabilities. Consistent with previous literature describing the many faceted challenges adolescent females with disabilities face in high school (Ferri & Connor, 2010; Hogansen et al., 2008), we found that young women with disabilities often felt invisible or were overshadowed by the demands of outspoken male peers. While Hogansen, Powers, Geenen, Gil-Kashiwabara, and Powers (2008) noted that male students in special education may receive more attention and services, our study documented constraints for females with disabilities enrolled in general education classes, including fear of being ridiculed for speaking up in class and anxiety over the perceptions of male classmates.

Participants in P2F also strongly endorsed the benefits of a “girls only” curriculum and survey findings documented significant increases in both gender and disability awareness. Providing young women with a safe space to explore their strengths and develop their skills was a very powerful and affirming experience. Although the literature on the benefits of single sex classes is mixed (Novotony, 2011), our study provides initial evidence of the importance of offering lessons and activities designed specifically to support career development for young women with disabilities. The P2F intervention also responds to calls from previous studies (e.g., Novakovic & Fouad, 2012; Trainor, 2007) to design interventions that specifically address the unique career development needs of adolescent girls with and without disabilities.

Self-Efficacy and Self-Awareness

Most adolescent girls start out with lower hopes for their careers and tend to be less confident than male peers in their skills and abilities. As a result, they often avoid entering high-prestige or nontraditional occupations. For young women with disabilities, the lack of self-esteem and self-confidence results in lower expectations that influence career planning and postschool trajectories (Hogansen et al., 2008). In contrast, women with learning disabilities who display high levels of self-determination, motivation, and self-efficacy are more likely to achieve their career goals and express overall satisfaction within their chosen occupations (Author, 2002).

Results from this study suggest that targeted learning experiences designed to focus on strengths and build skills can influence self-efficacy beliefs for young women with disabilities. Although we did not find significant changes in self-advocacy or career outcome expectancy scores, young women who completed the course demonstrated significant increases in both self-realization and vocational skill self-efficacy. These findings reflect changes in self-acceptance and also increased confidence in specific career development knowledge and skills such as identifying career interests and understanding how to set short- and long-term goals. While the standardized measure of self-advocacy did not reveal significant changes, the open-ended focus group discussions provided an opportunity for participants to describe the learning process in their own words and demonstrate the capacity for self-reflection. Participants in the focus group expanded on these core concepts, describing changes in their self-awareness, self-confidence, and ability to articulate personal strengths. In a unique contribution to the literature, focus group data provided initial evidence that self-awareness seemed to bolster a sense of personal empowerment and voice for young women with disabilities who completed the class. With newfound self-confidence and a stronger sense of voice, participants were able to more clearly articulate and envision future career opportunities.

Limitations

This study has a number of limitations that should be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings. First, the study drew from a small homogenous sample in one state and was not representative of the population of youth receiving special education services nationally. Due to the community demographics of the schools participating in cohort one of the study, P2F participants were primarily White (81.6%). In contrast, 13% of students receiving special education services identify as White (Kena et al., 2016). Also, the majority were identified as students with learning disabilities (63%), while 35% of youth receiving special education services are served under the category of learning disability (Kena et al., 2016). We anticipate that race/ethnicity and disability data from the full sample will be more representative. In addition, all data collected relied on self-report (which may have been shaped by social desirability bias), and we did not collect long-term follow-up data to document changes over time.

Second, although statistically significant improvements were observed, data presented here were within-intervention group only. Efficacy of the intervention will need to be established in future studies including control group comparison schools. Finally, only 33 of the 49 young women who completed the surveys were available to participate in the focus groups. Despite these limitations, the findings contribute to the sparse literature base describing career development experiences for young women with disabilities and extend our knowledge in the field by reporting on the initial impact of a gender-specific curriculum on key social and career constructs.

Implications for Research and Practice

Findings from this study also have important implications for research and practice. Although these results are preliminary, it seems that participation in a gender-specific career development curriculum has important and unique benefits for young women with disabilities who are in a crucial stage of developing their vocational identities. We recommend that educators create “girls only” classes or programs to encourage personal development and build awareness of career opportunities. If gender-specific offerings are not logistically possible, we believe that teachers should still find ways to reflect the unique needs of young women with disabilities in coeducational career services and coursework and that counselors need to be aware of potential gender limitations and stereotypes during the career planning process.

In terms of future research, it is critical to continue to identify and explore gender differences in school experiences, career planning, and postschool outcomes for young women with disabilities receiving special education services. More specifically, single sex career development interventions should be examined with larger and more diverse samples, taking into account race/ethnicity, language, and disability status to understand potential differential impact with a variety of participants. It would also be useful to compare P2F results with young women enrolled in traditional coeducational career and transition programs. In addition, we believe that it is critical to collect longitudinal data from young women with disabilities in order to document longer term changes in career development outcomes as well as enrollment in postsecondary education and engagement in employment.