Peer Support Arrangements to Promote Positive Postschool Outcomes

Abstract

The use of peer support arrangements can be an effective strategy to improve educational services for students with disabilities, including those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). When developing peer support arrangements, secondary teachers should consider aligning these services with evidence-based predictors of positive postschool outcomes to help students with ASD achieve transition-related goals. This article presents research-based strategies as well as evidence from peer support arrangements program implemented at a rural high school.

Keywords

peer support autism transition postschool outcomes inclusion

Special education teachers at the secondary level are tasked with providing appropriate and effective programs to support students as they transition to postschool life (Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004). Implementing peer support arrangements may be an effective strategy to improve services to help students gain skills and achieve goals. This may be particularly true for students with mild to moderate disabilities, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Although models may differ between schools, peer support arrangements or interventions involve providing one or more typical peers with training and guidance from adults to support students with disabilities in skill development (Carter & Kennedy, 2006). The body of research exploring the effectiveness of peer support arrangements points to a multitude of benefits related to the practice, including (a) improved social skills, (b) increased opportunities for the development of relationships, (c) academic gains, (d) improved attitudes of nondisabled peers, and (e) ease of implementation (Carter, Asmus, & Moss, 2014). Even though peer support arrangements may be used to support the goals of individuals with ASD of all ages, it may be particularly valuable in secondary schools where the logistics of students moving from class to class can present a myriad of challenges (Milley & Machalicek, 2012). These can include potential inconsistencies in teachers, locations, and schedules. In addition, peer support arrangements may be especially effective in promoting skill development to increase the likelihood of positive postschool outcomes.

With this in mind, aligning literature that describes peer support arrangement practices with predictors of improved postschool success identified by Test et al. (2009) demonstrates how this practice may provide lifelong benefits for students with disabilities, including those with ASD. In addition to supporting these practices with previously published literature, this article includes evidence from a peer support program. A rural high school in the Northwest of the United States serves as an example for this article; with approximately 740 students, it supports a thriving peer mentorship program with approximately 30 peer mentors per semester. Quotes from student-written reflection papers represent the voices of student mentors to complement the content of this article. Connecting these evidence-based predictors of positive postschool outcomes with peer support strategies may help practitioners provide more effective services for their students with disabilities, including those with ASD.

Implementing Peer Support Arrangements

Practitioners interested in developing peer support arrangements may appreciate guidance in program development. Carter et al. (2015) provided a detailed six-step plan for developing peer support arrangements, which included (a) observing and evaluating current support arrangements to develop a plan that outlines the roles of each party, (b) identifying potential peers and inviting them to be involved in the process, (c) training selected students so that they understand their roles and responsibilities, (d) providing the peer with opportunities for hands-on guided practice with a teacher or paraprofessional, (e) transitioning adult support staff to a less hands-on role as facilitator, and (f) evaluating and reflecting on the effectiveness of the peer support arrangement.

It can be especially useful to create a peer mentoring course that allows students to earn credits for their experience. In the example high school, this has helped with scheduling (i.e., finding time to implement the arrangement) and recruiting potential peer mentors. In addition to receiving training and engaging in the peer support activities, students enrolled in the peer mentoring course are given additional assignments that allow them to better serve their classmates with disabilities. Assignments allow the students to (a) reflect on their experiences, (b) understand confidentiality, (c) learn to use person-first language, (d) create a video model to teach a student new skills, (e) simplify an existing recipe to accommodate their partner student, and (f) research a disability. Students complete weekly reflection journals, which serve many functions, including a formative assessment tool to evaluate the effectiveness of the peer support arrangement. In addition, performance evaluation rubrics are completed by both the supervising adult and the peers themselves as a self-evaluation.

Predictors of Postschool Success

Test et al. (2009) reviewed relevant literature to identify school-related factors that predict positive postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Through this process, 16 factors were identified. Even though the peer support practices can be effective in many situations, specific connections to seven of the predictors identified in Test et al. are the focus of this article. These included (a) inclusion in general education, (b) self-advocacy/self-determination, (c) social skills, (d) self-care/independent living skills, (e) student support, (f) community experiences, and (g) paid employment/work experience. Table 1 presents an alignment of the overarching goal of improved postschool outcomes with objectives (i.e., predictors identified by Test et al., 2009) and specific examples of activities and procedures.

Table 1.

Alignment of Predictors of Positive Postschool Outcomes With Peer Support Arrangements.

Objectives (why?)	Sample activity (what?)	Materials/protocols (how?)
Inclusion in general education	Foster inclusive environment by reducing direct paraprofessional support	Train paraprofessional to alter role from direct to indirect student support
Self-advocacy/self-determination	Peers guide students through self-determination curricula and activities	Self-determination curriculum, self-determined learning model of instruction (SDLMI)
Social skills	Peer support arrangements naturally result in increased social engagement	Train peers to implement strategies to support social skills unique to the student
Self-care/independent living skills	Peers can facilitate activities to improve capacity for independent living; these activities are generally enjoyable for both students involved	Arrange related activities to occur during the time at which students are with peers; provide opportunities for video modeling
Student support	Spending time outside of the school day may increase long-term viability of the relationship	Provide activities to promote engagement outside of school hours (e.g., club activities)
Community experiences	Peers have knowledge of their community and enjoy sharing these experiences with students	Arrange community-based activities (e.g., shopping) when peers are available; ask peers for activity ideas
Paid employment	Peers can serve as job coaches to support students who are engaged in work experience	Train students to provide time-limited supports; encourage them to share strategies with coworkers

Inclusion in General Education

Perhaps the factor for which a peer support arrangement can have the greatest impact is the extent to which a classroom or school embraces and practices inclusion. Although school staff may have the most influence on the extent to which a student with a disability may access content from the general education curriculum, peer involvement may ultimately play a large role in determining the extent to which a classroom is inclusive (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2001) . Genuine inclusion cannot be forced but rather is fostered through relationships and interactions.

Carter, Sisco, Brown, Brickham, and Al-Khabbaz (2010) found that students with disabilities had the lowest level of interaction with peers when receiving one-on-one instruction from an adult staff member. Although paraprofessionals are valuable in supporting student success for students with disabilities in general education settings, overreliance on school staff may hinder opportunities for relationship development (Giangreco & Broer, 2005). In addition, overreliance of paraprofessionals may (a) lead to general education teachers to rely on paraprofessionals to deliver instruction of curricular content, (b) physically isolate students with disabilities form their peers, (c) limit development of independent skills, and (d) impede naturally occurring peer-to-peer interaction (Barrio & Hollingshead, 2017; Carter et al., 2015; Giangreco & Broer, 2005). When peer support arrangements are utilized, the role of the paraeducator moves from delivering instruction directly to the student to more of a facilitator and support role (Carter et al., 2015). Such arrangements may allow paraprofessionals to support more students throughout the classroom, allowing for inclusion to thrive.

In addition to providing a framework that allows paraprofessionals to lessen their direct support to students, there are other ways in which the peer mentoring program impacts inclusivity. For example, general education teachers may be more open-minded toward the idea of an inclusive classroom when peer mentors are involved. In addition, running a peer support program over multiple years can have a cumulative effect. In the example high school described in this article, classrooms now have multiple students who have previously served as a peer mentor, thus increasing the number of students who have an understanding of peer supports.

Self-Advocacy and Self-Determination

At first glance it may seem counter intuitive to associate peer support arrangements with self-determination; the latter involves an individual deciding or influencing his or her own course of action or fate (Rowe et al., 2015). However, many self-determination curricula and strategies may be able to be delivered by well-trained peers. Carter, Sisco, and Lane (2011) found that although paraprofessionals commonly provide opportunities for students to make choices, opportunities to develop other skills related to self-determination are limited. Fewer than half of the paraprofessionals surveyed indicated that they often provided instruction in “decision-making, goal setting and attainment, self-advocacy and leadership, and self-awareness and self-knowledge” (Carter et al., 2011, p. 6). As a facilitator in a peer support arrangement, the paraprofessional may have the opportunity to train peers to help students with ASD to develop the aforementioned skills. Peers may be especially well suited to engage in the conversations as students with ASD may feel more comfortable having these discussions with someone their own age rather than an adult staff member.

In the high school described in this article, under the supervision and guidance of a special education teacher, peers assist and then lead activities from self-determination curricula, such as Whose Future Is It Anyway? (Wehmeyer, Lawrence, Garner, Soukup, & Palmer, 2004) or I’m Determined (Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education, 2008). Activities relating to the self-determined learning model of instruction (SDLMI) may also work well for peer support arrangements. The three phases of SDLMI answer the broad questions (a) What is my goal? (b) What is my plan? and (c) What have I learned? (Wehmeyer & Shogren, 2017). Peers can be trained to facilitate activities relating to each of these components.

Social Skills

Peer support arrangements are an evidence-based practice for increasing opportunities for social interactions, which may potentially result in increased social skills for students with disabilities, including those with ASD (Brock & Huber, 2017). Watkins et al. (2017) identified peer-mediated interventions as being an effective strategy to promote effective practices for social skill instruction. This may be particularly true for adolescent years, a time when many individuals begin to make the transition to spending more time with peers than their family. Peer interactions may be especially important in the development of social skills during these years. In the high school featured in this article, recognizing his unique role as a peer mentor, one student acknowledged his responsibility in aiding character development by noting, “I am the one who gets to come alongside students and teach them to be high-schoolers. And there is little in my mind more rewarding that that.”

Carter et al. (2017) highlighted multiple studies which suggest that peer support arrangements lead to increases in the extent to which students with ASD engage in social interactions when compared to adult-led teaching structures. Furthermore, these interactions may extend to other peers beyond the assigned mentor (Carter et al., 2011). These increased opportunities for authentic social engagements have the opportunity to improve postschool outcomes. Such interactions may be especially helpful for students whose postschool goals involve employment in a setting that requires interaction with customers. Increased comfort and facility in social situations also may allow an individual with ASD to be a more active participant in their community.

Self-Care and Independent Living Skills

Due to the extensive nature of this predictor category, instruction for students with disabilities may vary greatly in both content and scope. Peer support arrangements may be effective in addressing some of these need areas for students with ASD. For example, developing kitchen skills is an area that is particularly well suited for a peer support arrangement. Peers may enjoy spending time in the kitchen and sharing the basic cooking skills that they possess. For example, peers enrolled in the example program featured in this article are required to simplify an existing recipe so that is it well suited for their student. This resulted in an extensive collection of recipes to use with students with disabilities, including those with ASD.

In addition, many of these self-care or independent living skills may be well suited for video modeling (Bellini & Akullian, 2007; Hall, Hollingshead, & Christman, 2017). When a student with a disability has developed a comfort with a peer, video models featuring these peers demonstrating a skill may be especially powerful. As the lack of time to produce individualized video models may a notable barrier for teachers considering implementing such strategies (Marino & Myck-Wayne, 2015), recruiting peer mentors for the development and production may increase the extent to which they are used. In the featured peer mentoring program, students are required to produce a video model to support the learning of a student.

Student Support

Peer intervention strategies have the potential to extend a student’s support network. While this is helpful in high school, the relationships formed through peer mentoring may extend beyond the school. Carter et al. (2011) found that most typically developed peers who were supporting students with disabilities planned on continuing their interactions in the future. As such, relationships have the potential to increase a student’s friendship network, circles of support, community participation, and employment opportunities. To promote these positive long-term outcomes, students enrolled in the peer mentoring program described in this article were required to work with students both during school hours and outside of the school day. One student shared, “The students [with disabilities] honestly act so different with the teachers than with the peers; I’m sure it is for obvious reasons, that we are students just like them, and we want to be able to have fun with them.”

In addition, such arrangements can be helpful to special education teachers who may face a shortage of adult support for their students. Even though paraprofessionals may still be required, they may be able to support more students with ASD in their new role with the peer support arrangement. Peer arrangements reduce or eliminate the need for one-on-one adult supports to students with significant needs (Carter et al., 2011). In addition, implementing peer support strategies may (a) increase peer-to-peer interactions during class, (b) avoid situations where students develop relationships with paraprofessionals that are counterproductive to inclusion, (c) reduce the stigma associated with regular presence of adult support, (d) increase opportunities to become more independent and self-determined, and (e) provide students with options of support, potentially leading to reduced levels of challenging behaviors (Carter, Asmus, & Moss, 2014).

Community Experiences

As postschool life for students exists outside of school grounds, community-based instruction may be an essential component of an instructional program in a secondary school. Having knowledge of and access to one’s community can help individuals with disabilities, including those with ASD, avoid social isolation. Although peer support arrangements may traditionally be focused on classroom-based skills, teachers should consider providing opportunities for these partnerships to exist outside the classroom. Peers may hold knowledge that can make community-based learning experiences more relevant for students with disabilities. Carter, Common, et al. (2014) emphasized that “[adolescents] know where and how students enjoy spending time together in a community” (p. 98). In addition to supporting skill development, peer support arrangements have the potential of fostering lasting relationships that go beyond the school. Friendships developed through these partnerships may increase an individual’s lifelong access to the community. Peers from the featured high school who worked with students in the community identified these as some of their most valued experiences. One shared, “I love going out into the community with them, and helping them learn social skills and how to act in public towards the people in our community.”

Paid Employment and Work Experience

Curricula for secondary students with disabilities may be delivered in authentic community settings, including work experiences. Although it is desirable for individuals arranging paid work experiences to explore and identify natural supports in the work place to support students with disabilities (e.g., coworkers), this may not always be possible. Training peer mentors to support students with disabilities at job sites may increase the number of opportunities students may have for employment training. Including peer mentors in facilitating work experience opportunities may be especially useful when finding employers; these students may have connections in the community and could be effective lobbyists when finding placements. This may be especially true when the peer is or has been employed at the job site and is aware of the workplace culture and tasks associated with the jobs. In the example high school, peer mentors often serve as job coaches. One student reflected on the value of being able to support the student in the workplace, noting, “When Samuel is [at work] he becomes a completely different person. He isn’t treated like a kid that’s at school . . . he acts like a full-on adult and participates in all of those things with the other workers.”

Conclusion

Peer support arrangements are an effective strategy to support skill development for students with disabilities. Special education teachers who work with secondary students may find the peer support arrangements are especially well suited for developing skills the promote positive postschool outcomes. When developing a system for providing peer supports for students with disabilities, special education practitioners are encouraged to consider how these arrangements could best be facilitated to target and promote the predictors discussed in this article. Peer support arrangements are useful in supporting these practices that lead to positive postschool outcomes for students with disabilities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Andrew R. Scheef

References

Barrio

Hollingshead

(2017). Reaching out to paraprofessionals: Engaging professional development in rural communities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 36, 136–145.

Bellini

Akullian

(2007). A meta-analysis of video modeling and video self-modeling interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 73, 264–287.

Brock

M. E.

Huber

H. B.

(2017). Are peer support arrangements an evidence-based practice? A systematic review. Journal of Special Education, 5, 150–163. doi:10.1177/0022466917708184

Carter

E. W.

Asmus

J. M.

Moss

C. K.

(2014). Peer support interventions to support inclusive schools. In McLeskey

Waldron

N. L.

Spooner

Algozzine

(Eds.), Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice (pp. 377–409). New York, NY: Routledge.

Carter

E. W.

Common

E. A.

Sreckovic

M. A.

Huber

H. B.

Bottema-Beutel

Gustafson

J. R.

. . . Hume

(2014). Promoting social competence and peer relationships for adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 91–101. doi:10.1177/0741932513514618

Carter

E. W.

Gustafson

J. R.

Sreckovic

M. A.

Dykstra Steinbrenner

J. R.

Pierce

N. P.

Bord

. . . Mullins

(2017). Efficacy of peer support interventions in general education classrooms for high school students with autism spectrum disorder. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 207–221. doi:10.1177/0741932516672067

Carter

E. W.

Kennedy

C. H.

(2006). Promoting access to the general curriculum using peer support strategies. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 284–292.

Carter

E. W.

Moss

C. K.

Asmus

Fesperman

Cooney

Brock

M. E.

. . . Vincent

L. B.

(2015). Promoting inclusion, social connections, and learning through peer support. Teaching Exceptional Children, 50, 9–18. doi:10.1177/0040059915594784

Carter

E. W.

Sisco

L. G.

Brown

Brickham

Al-Khabbaz

Z. A.

(2010). Peer interactions and academic engagement of youth with developmental disabilities in inclusive middle and high school classrooms. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 113, 479–494. doi:10.1352/2008.113

10.

Carter

E. W.

Sisco

L. G.

Lane

K. L.

(2011). Paraprofessional perspectives on promoting self-determination among elementary and secondary students with severe disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 36, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.36.1-2.1

11.

Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education. (2008). I’m determined: Self-determination checklist. Retrieved from http://www.imdetermined.org/files_resources/109/selfdeterminationcheckliststudentself-assessment.pdf

12.

Giangreco

M. F.

Broer

S. M.

(2005). Questionable utilization of paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 10–26.

13.

Hall

Hollingshead

Christman

(2017). Implementing video modeling to improve transitions within activities in inclusive classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1053451217736870

14.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).

15.

Marino

Myck-Wayne

(2015). The technological barriers of using video modeling in the classroom. Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 4, 1–15.

16.

Mastropieri

M. A.

Scruggs

T. E.

(2001). Promoting inclusion in secondary classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 265–274.

17.

Milley

Machalicek

(2012). Decreasing students’ reliance on adults: A strategic guide for teachers of students with autism spectrum disorders. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48, 67–75. doi:10.1177/1053451212449739

18.

Rowe

D. A.

Alverson

C. Y.

Unruh

D. K.

Fowler

C. H.

Kellems

Test

D. W.

(2015). A Delphi study to operationalize evidence-based predictors in secondary transition. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 38, 113–126.

19.

Test

D. W.

Mazzotti

V. L.

Mustian

A. L.

Fowler

C. H.

Kortering

Kohler

(2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving post school outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181. doi:10.1177/0885728809346960

20.

Watkins

Kuhn

O’Reilly

M. F.

Lang

Sigafoos

Lancioni

G. E.

(2017). Social skills. In Singh

N. N.

(Ed.), Evidence-based practices in behavioral health (pp. 493–510). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

21.

Wehmeyer

Lawrence

Garner

Soukup

Palmer

(2004). Whose future is it anyway? A student directed transition planning process. Retrieved from http://www.ou.edu/content/dam/Education/documents/wfc-guide-final.pdf

22.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Shogren

K. A.

(2017). Self-determination and choice. In Singh

N. N.

(Ed.), Evidence-based practices in behavioral health (pp. 561–584). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.