Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Adolescence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado

Addressing career barriers for high risk adolescent girls: The PATHS curriculum interventionq Bonnie Doren a, *, Allison R. Lombardi b, Julie Clark a, Lauren Lindstrom c a

University of Wisconsin–Madison, USA University of Connecticut, USA c University of Oregon, USA b

a b s t r a c t Keywords: Adolescent girls Disability, Career development Curriculum intervention

The study evaluated a gender-specific comprehensive career development curriculum designed to target career barriers faced by high risk adolescent girls – those with disabilities and at risk for school failure. The goal of the curriculum was to promote social cognitive career and self determination outcomes associated with adaptive career development and adjustment. A pre-post control group design was used to evaluate the curriculum. Findings suggest that participation in the curriculum resulted in significant and large gains in autonomy and in disability and gender-related knowledge. Meaningful gains were noted in perceptions of social support and relevance of school. Participants in a high fidelity sample made significant and large gains in vocational skills self-efficacy and disability and gender-related knowledge. Meaningful improvements were noted in selfadvocacy, autonomy, and vocational outcome expectations. The findings suggest that the curriculum can improve important indicators of positive career development and adjustment in high risk adolescent girls. Ó 2013 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The systematic documentation of poor career outcomes for adolescents with disabilities within the United States contributed to the 1990, and subsequent amendments, of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requiring school districts to provide transition services as part of students’ individualized education program. Transition services include instruction, community experiences, and related services to facilitate the achievement of students’ postschool goals in employment, postsecondary education, and independent living. Furthermore, transition services, as all special education services, are to be received in regular classroom settings where students with disabilities learn alongside their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent possible. Prior evidence suggests a set of program and practice features associated with more positive career outcomes including, exposure to: career development activities, in-school work experiences, communitybased paid work experiences, interagency collaboration, and social support (Doren, Yan, & Tu, 2013; Karpur, Brewer, & Golden, 2013). These transition policies and practices have resulted in notable improvements in the postschool outcomes of adolescents with disabilities within the United States. Recent findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 indicate significant improvements in employment rates, access to postsecondary education, and independent living of students with disabilities over the past two decades (Newman et al., 2011). q This research was supported in part by Grant #R324B070038 by the National Center for Special Education Research within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), U.S. Department of Education. The content and positions in this article do not necessarily represent those of the funding agency. * Corresponding author. Rehabilitation Psychology and Special Education, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1000 Bascom Mall, Room 421, Madison, WI, 53706, USA. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Doren). 0140-1971/$ – see front matter Ó 2013 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.08.014

1084

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

While this progress is encouraging, data suggest that adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure within the United States are at a greater risk for experiencing poorer career outcomes than their male peers with and without disabilities and their female peers without disabilities (Doren & Benz, 2001; Kessler Foundation/National Organization on Disability, 2010; Newman, Wagner, Cameto, & Knokey, 2009). Females with disabilities and those with additional risk factors (e.g., early pregnancy) are more likely to be living in poverty, earn lower wages, and less likely to work in high skill high wage jobs, or to obtain employer-provided benefits than their male peers with disabilities (Newman et al., 2011; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Garza, & Levine, 2005). The differential outcomes based on gender suggest that interventions are needed to specifically address the unique career development and transition needs of adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure. However, there is little research reported on gender-specific interventions to address these needs. Therefore, the current study was undertaken to evaluate a gender-specific comprehensive career development curriculum intervention entitled PATHS (Postschool Achievement Through Higher Skills). The design of the curriculum was guided by prior research and theory in the areas of career development and self-determination. Literature review Conceptual frameworks Social cognitive career theory (SCCT; Betz & Hackett, 1997) and expectancy-value theory (Eccles, 1994; Eccles et al., 1983) each identify gender as a critical personal characteristic that combines with external (e.g., socialization experiences) and internal (e.g., expectancies) processes and factors to shape career development. Within both of these theoretical frameworks, socialization experiences are thought to restrict the range of career options that women will consider based on barriers they encounter due to their gender (e.g., sexual harassment, discrimination, or lack of social support). Research suggests that these socialization experiences result in lower career and vocational skills self-efficacy (i.e., confidence in one’s ability to perform well on career-related learning tasks), career outcome expectations (i.e., one’s expectations of success or one’s expectations that her efforts will lead to a positive career outcome), and a higher perception of career barriers, which in turn, negatively affects engagement in career exploration, planning, and choice activities (Betz & Hackett, 1997; Eccles, 1994; Luzzo & McWhirter, 2001). The career development of adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure may be further constrained by both gender and disability and/or risk status placing these girls in what has been labeled double jeopardy (Asch, Rousso, & Jefferies, 2001; Ferri & Connor, 2010). Although less is known about the role of disability and risk within career development frameworks, individuals with disabilities and those at risk may be similarly affected by socialization experiences based on disability and risk status (e.g., discrimination or lack of social support). There is accumulating evidence suggesting that vocational skills self-efficacy and outcome expectations are lower for adolescents with disabilities than those without disabilities (Osch & Roessler, 2004; Panagos & DuBois, 1999). Conceptual models of self-determination proposed by Wehmeyer and others (e.g., Powers et al., 2001; Wehmeyer, 1997, 1999) identify important dispositional characteristics and component skills that are associated with adaptive career development and adjustment for adolescents with disabilities. These dispositions and component skills include:






Self-realization: knowing what one does well and acting on this information; Self-knowledge: knowing one’s preferences, interests, skills, and needs; Autonomy: making choices and decisions based on knowing oneself without undue interference from others; Self-advocacy: describing one’s needs and requesting accommodations or supports to function effectively; and Self-efficacy and outcome expectations: believing in one’s ability to do certain tasks or behaviors and that one’s effort will lead to a successful outcome.

Self-determination is particularly salient for adolescents with disabilities as they transition from public high school where mandated supports and structures are provided to postschool environments where the level and type of supports are quite different. Higher levels of self-determination have been associated with better postschool outcomes in employment, independent living, and postsecondary education among adolescents with disabilities (Wehmeyer & Palmer, 2003; Wehmeyer & Schwartz, 1998). Career barriers Research findings within these conceptual frameworks suggest that adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure face unique external and internal barriers to career development and adjustment that are quite different then their male peers. External barriers Studies consistently document that adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure are less likely than their male peers to be engaged in occupational training or work experiences during their high school careers. When girls are

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

1085

engaged they tend to participate in restricted female and/or disability stereotypic career preparation experiences such as childcare, clerical, or other service occupations (Luecking & Wittenburg, 2009; Rabren, Dunn, & Chambers, 2002). The lack of exposure to a wide range of career opportunities and experiences during the transition process perpetuates a restricted range of career interests and goals considered by girls with disabilities and those at-risk (Gottfredson, 2005; Powers et al., 2005). In addition, career expectations by others, access to role models, and social support have been identified as important sources by which self-efficacy and outcome expectations are developed (Betz & Hackett, 1997; Brown & Lent, 1996; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2000). A number of studies have found that parents and teachers consistently report lower career expectations of adolescent girls with disabilities than their male peers (Powers, Hogansen, Geenen, Powers, & Gil-Kashiwabara, 2008; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, & Marder, 2003). Moreover, critical barriers to career development identified by both girls at risk for school failure and those with disabilities included lack of female role models and lack of social support from peers, teachers, and parents for their career goals (Hogansen, Powers, Geenen, & Gil-Kashwabara, 2008; Noonan et al., 2004). Prior theory suggests that these factors may be internalized by high risk adolescent girls in the form of negative perceptions or beliefs, thus lowering self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and subsequent engagement in effective career behaviors (Betz & Hackett, 1997; Eccles, 1994; Gottfredson, 2005). Internal barriers As noted within career development theories, perceived barriers to entry, success, or advancement in a career whether accurate or inaccurate has been linked to lower vocational self-efficacy and outcome expectations, which in turn, inhibits pursuit of career exploration and choices (Brown & Lent, 1996; Gottfredson & Lapan, 1997; Lent et al., 2000). Powers et al. (2008) reported that adolescent girls with disabilities perceived more barriers to gaining successful postschool employment than boys with disabilities. Moreover, numerous studies document that high risk adolescent girls, more so than their male peers, lack knowledge and dispositions related to higher levels of self-determination. High risk adolescent girls have demonstrated a lack of knowledge or inaccurate knowledge and perceptions about: (a) individual strengths, interests, and needs, (b) available career options, (c) resources and supports to facilitate transition to careers, or (d) rights and responsibilities in schooling and work environments as a person, including rights as a person with a disability (Hogansen et al., 2008; Lindstrom, Harwick, Poppen, & Doren, 2012; Powers et al., 2008; Trainor, 2007). Furthermore, findings indicate that adolescent girls with disabilities possess limited knowledge and component skills related to the ability to self-advocate compared to their male peers (Lindstrom et al., 2012; Powers et al., 2008; Trainor, 2007). The ability to self-advocate may be particularly important for high risk adolescent girls who often face unique issues in the workplace related to both gender and disability and/or risk status (e.g., sexual harassment, stereotypic expectations, Rousso & Wehmeyer, 2001). PATHS curriculum intervention The findings together suggest that career development may be uniquely impacted by both gender, disability and risk status. The purpose of the PATHS curriculum intervention was to develop a comprehensive gender-specific curriculum to target unique career barriers faced by high risk adolescent girls. The goal of the curriculum intervention was to promote proximal social cognitive career and self-determination outcomes that have been associated with adaptive career development and adjustment (Roger & Creed, 2011; Skorikov, 2007; Wehmeyer & Palmer, 2003; Wehmeyer & Schwartz, 1998). The PATHS curriculum intervention contained a total of 77 lessons divided into four modules described below. The lessons included overall learning objectives, vocabulary, materials, a set of structured core activities, instructions and additional resources for teachers. The lessons were designed to be interactive and to be taught daily within a 50-min class period over an 18-week semester. Module one: Self-awareness The first module contained 30 lessons that provided an introduction to the curriculum and presented concepts designed to build self-knowledge, vocational skills self-efficacy, and confidence. It included team building and self-awareness activities and focused on practicing critical self-determination and career-related skills, such as communication, decision-making, goal setting, time management, and anger management. At the conclusion of the module, participants worked through a sequence of lessons designed to help them identify and understand personal strengths and abilities. Module two: disability awareness Module two included 15 lessons designed to increase general disability knowledge and awareness, promote respectful treatment and communication about people with disabilities, and explore the impact of disability on identity. The lessons offered a broad overview of a variety of disabilities, and allowed students to explore disability issues and social barriers. For example, one lesson introduced famous people with disabilities providing a number of role models from politicians to popular singers who have identified disabilities. The module also included discussions and activities related to disability knowledge, information on legal rights and responsibilities in both education and employment settings, and a set of lessons that focused on disability disclosure and self-advocacy.

1086

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

Module three: gender identity Module three included 12 lessons. The purpose of this module was to introduce topics related to being a woman in the workforce, including gender roles and expectations, occupational segregation, and the gender wage gap. The lessons provided an overview of the changing roles of women over time, models of women in leadership roles, and information about responding to sexual harassment in education and employment settings. Lesson activities included exploring the impact of gender on career choice, learning about nontraditional occupations, and discussing healthy and unhealthy relationships. Adult women working in a variety of occupations served as guest speakers in several lessons, providing participants with female role models to expand career options to be considered.

Module four: career and college The final module included 20 lessons focused on planning and preparation for employment and/or postsecondary education. In this module, participants integrated the skills and knowledge learned in the first three modules about selfawareness, disability, and gender identity to career-related planning, exploration and choice. Other career and college preparation activities included, interest inventories, resume building, interview practice, reviewing skills for job success, visits to college campuses, and post high school planning. Current study There is scant research on interventions to improve the career development and outcomes of high risk adolescent girls. The purpose of the current study was to examine the impact of the PATHS curriculum intervention on proximal social cognitive career and self-determination outcomes. The study used a pre-post control group design in which participants were selected to receive the PATHS curriculum or in a comparison group in which they received typical transition services available within their high school. Three hypotheses structured the study. The first hypothesis was, that relative to participants in the comparison group, participants exposed to the PATHS curriculum would have larger gains in proximal social cognitive career (e.g., vocational skills self-efficacy) and self-determination (e.g., self-knowledge) outcomes. A second hypothesis was that fidelity of implementation (i.e., amount of exposure to the curriculum) would impact the magnitude of the effects on outcomes such that participants who received more exposure to the curriculum would have larger gains and additional benefits than participants who received less exposure. The third study hypothesis was that the curriculum would have robust effects across participant characteristics (e.g., type of disability, race/ethnicity). However, prior research has not fully specified how different types of disabilities, at-risk status, or ethnicity/race may differentially impact career development and outcomes in addition to gender. Therefore, the results may indicate a need to adapt the curriculum based on certain participant characteristics. Method Participants Participating students (n ¼ 111) were recruited from six high schools (Grades 9–12). Two of the high schools were located in a medium-size city and four in rural communities. All schools were located in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. Total student enrollment at the six high schools ranged from 160 to 1013 and between 29% and 68% of students qualified for free and reduced lunch. One high school agreed to support the implementation of the PATHS curriculum in two different classrooms, resulting in a total of seven intervention classrooms. A total of nine instructors participated in implementing the curriculum across the seven classrooms. Six PATHS classrooms were led by special education teachers and one by a school counselor. Three classrooms included additional instructional support from a qualified paraprofessional (e.g., teacher’s aide, transition specialist). All instructors were female and had experience teaching career-related instruction to students with disabilities within their respective schools. The mean years of instructional experience was 9.1 years (SD ¼ 5.25). Participants were adolescent girls identified by school personnel as either eligible for special education services or at risk for school failure. At-risk for school failure was defined as facing one or more barriers to learning, which included the following categories: academic (e.g., frequent absenteeism, suspension, or dropout history), family/living (e.g., homelessness, difficult family circumstances, foster care), employment (no prior work or volunteer experience), at-risk behaviors (e.g., previous/current substance abuse problem, prior arrests/jail time), and health (mental or chronic health issues). All participants were those that spent the majority of their school day within regular education classrooms. Over half of the participants were identified with learning disabilities and almost a quarter at risk for school failure. A smaller percentage of participants were identified with low-incidence disabilities such as Autism and intellectual disabilities. Table 1 provides an overview of the demographic characteristics of adolescent girls in the intervention and comparison groups. No statistically significant differences were noted among participant characteristics between the intervention and comparison groups.

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

1087

Table 1 Demographic characteristics by intervention and comparison groups. Total (n ¼ 111)

Group Intervention (n ¼ 72)

Comparison (n ¼ 39)

n

%

n

%

n

%

Ethnicity Hispanic Non-Hispanic

9 63

13 87

8 31

21 79

17 94

15 85

Race White Non-white

60 12

83 17

21 18

54 46

81 30

73 27

Disability Learning disability At-risk for school failure Autism Intellectual disability Other health impairment Orthopedic impairment Multiple disabilities

46 13 5 5 1 1 1

64 18 7 7 1 1 1

17 13 2 0 1 0 3

44 33 5 0 3 0 8

63 26 7 5 2 1 4

57 23 6 5 1 >1 4

Agea

16.07

a

1.41

16.13

1.15

16.10

1.28

Means and standard deviations are shown instead of N and percent.

Measures Outcomes Students were administered a set of direct assessments prior to the curriculum and after completion of the curriculum. Vocational skills self-efficacy. A 29-item scale was used to assess vocational skills self-efficacy. The items measured students’ confidence in performing accurate self-appraisals, engaging in career exploration and preparation activities, making educational and career-related plans, selecting goals, and engaging in appropriate work behaviors. The scale was adapted from the Vocational Skills Self-Efficacy Scale (VSSE, McWhirter, Rasheed, & Crothers, 2000) for the purpose of the current study and population. Items were reduced from 37 to 29 based on item clarity and complexity and the scale range was reduced from 9 to 5 choices. The response scale ranged from 1 ¼ no confidence at all to 5 ¼ complete confidence. McWhirter et al. reported a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.97 with a sample of high school sophomores. An alpha coefficient of 0.94 was obtained in the current sample. Vocational outcome expectations. Vocational outcome expectations were measured by the six-item Outcome Expectations Scale (McWhirter et al., 2000) that assesses students’ level of agreement with general career expectations (e.g., “I will be successful in my chosen career”). Responses are provided on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 ¼ strongly disagree to 4 ¼ strongly agree. McWhirter et al. reported a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83 with a sample of high school sophomores. In the current sample, a 0.88 alpha coefficient was obtained. Social support and relevance of school. The 6-item Peer Support and 5-item Future Aspirations and Goals subscales from the Student Engagement Inventory (SEI; Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006) were selected to assess perceptions of social support and relevance of school. The scales assess perceptions of peer support (e.g., “Other students at school care about me”) and importance of school for students’ future (e.g., “School is important for achieving my future goals”). The response scale ranged from 1 ¼ strongly disagree to 4 ¼ strongly agree. Appleton et al. reported a 0.82 alpha coefficient for the peer support subscale and 0.78 for the future orientation subscale. A coefficient of 0.90 was obtained in the current sample across both scales. Social efficacy. The 7-item Social Efficacy subscale from the College Self-Efficacy Inventory (CSEI; Solberg, O’Brien, Villareal, Kennel, & Davis, 1993) was used to assess students’ level of confidence in engaging in interpersonal and social interactions within a school environment (e.g., “Ask a teacher a question”). For the purpose of the current study, the words university and professor were replaced with school and teacher. The response scale ranged from 1 ¼ not at all confident to 6 ¼ extremely confident. Solberg et al. reported an alpha coefficient of 0.88 with a sample of 197 college students with disabilities. A coefficient of 0.86 was obtained in the current sample. Self-realization and autonomy. Self-realization was measured by a 15-item scale that assesses students’ level of self-awareness and self-acceptance (e.g., “I know how to make up for my limitations”). The response scale ranged from 1 ¼ never agree to

1088

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

4 ¼ always agree. Autonomy was measured by a 14-item scale that assesses the frequency students make choices or act on the basis of their beliefs, preferences, interests and abilities related to education, careers and adult life (e.g., “I work on schoolwork that will improve my career chances”). Student ratings were provided on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 ¼ not when I have the chance to 4 ¼ every time I have the chance. The subscales contained a reduced number of items from the Arc’s SelfDetermination Scale (Wehmeyer & Kelchner, 1995) Wehmeyer and Kelchner (1995) reported a 0.62 and 0.90 alpha coefficient for self-realization and autonomy in a national sample of students with disabilities 14–22. Coefficients of 0.78 and 0.81 were obtained in the current sample. Disability and gender-related knowledge. For the purpose of the current study, the researchers developed a six-item measure to tap students’ confidence in identifying or describing specific knowledge related to disability (“Describe disability related laws”) and gender (“Describe how being female impacts career choices”). An alpha coefficient of 0.91 was obtained in the current sample. Self-advocacy. Self-advocacy was measured by a six-item scale that assesses individual knowledge and actions related to selfadvocacy (e.g., “I know my rights and responsibilities as a student with a disability”). The items were adapted slightly from the College Students with Disabilities Campus Climate (CSDCC) survey (Lombardi, Gerdes, & Murray, 2011). For the purpose of the current study, the words university and professor were replaced with school and teacher. The response scale ranged from 1 ¼ strongly disagree to 6 ¼ strongly agree. Lombardi et al. reported a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80 with a sample of undergraduate students with disabilities attending a 4-year university. A coefficient of 0.88 was obtained in the current sample. Fidelity Exposure to the curriculum was assessed through daily attendance records kept by teachers. Exposure was scored as a percentage of the total number of lessons for which a student was present divided by the total number of lessons in the curriculum multiplied by 100. Procedures Project staff met with school administrators, special education teachers, transition specialists, and counselors to describe the purpose of the PATHS curriculum and study. Schools were asked to designate an instructor to teach the curriculum as a standalone credit bearing class for adolescent girls with disabilities or at risk for school failure. To support implementation, schools received training, copies of the curriculum, and a stipend that each school could use to offset the salary of the participating instructors and/or to support activities and materials that were related to implementing the curriculum. Participants were not randomly assigned; rather participants were referred to the PATHS curriculum intervention based on instructor or school counselor nominations and then assigned to the intervention or comparison group based on student scheduling needs and restrictions. Participants in the comparison group received typical transition services available in their school (e.g., online career exploration activities, vocational assessments). Participants in both groups and their parents completed an informed assent/consent process before instruction and data collection were initiated. The average number of girls per class was 10 and ranged from 7 to 13. Participating instructors attended an initial one and half-day training prior to teaching the curriculum. Instructors were provided with information about the unique career development needs and outcomes of girls with disabilities and those at risk for school failure, the purposes and anticipated outcomes of the curriculum, and module and lesson objectives. Instructors also were provided with opportunities to practice activities from sample lessons. After the initial training, instructors attended three 2-h sessions throughout an 18-week implementation period. During these sessions, implementation and student challenges were discussed and current modules and lessons reviewed. Baseline data were collected by project staff who attended each classroom to administer the direct assessment in a group format. Girls assigned to the comparison group were scheduled to complete the direct assessment during a lunch period. Project staff administered the assessment and provided lunch in a group format. At the end of the semester, follow-up data were collected using the same procedures used at baseline. Data analytic plan Test of the impact of the curriculum on the outcome measures required an analysis that accounts for the dependence of individuals nested within classrooms assigned to conditions. Thus, the impact of the curriculum was tested with mixedmodel analysis of variance (ANOVA) within the framework of hierarchical linear models (HLM; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002). These models partition variance into within- and between-classroom/school components for comparisons between intervention and comparison conditions, accounting for the dependence of individuals nested within classrooms/schools. The mixed-model ANOVA tests for condition effects of the change score of the outcome (posttest score minus the pretest score). Moderator analyses were conducted to determine if participant characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, type of disability) moderated the effect of the intervention on the outcome scores. The multiplicative interaction term between student participant characteristics and condition on outcome scores was added to the main effects model to test moderation. The

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

1089

impact of exposure to the curriculum on outcome scores was assessed through a separate analysis contrasting a “high fidelity” group that consisted of participants across classrooms who received 68% (median) or more of the lessons contained within the PATHS curriculum with the comparison group. Effect sizes were interpreted in the current study as they have been shown to be an indicator of practical and educational importance (Kirk, 1996; Thompson, 2001). Because multilevel models do not provide standardized regression coefficients, partial correlation coefficients, computed on the basis of t values and degrees of freedom (Rosenthal & Rubin, 2003) are provided as an estimate of effect size with 0.14 corresponding to small, 0.36 medium, and 0.51 a large effect. Results To bolster confidence in the internal validity of this nonrandomized pre-posttest control group design, group differences on baseline demographic characteristics were tested within the HLM framework. The results indicated that selection into the intervention and comparison classrooms resulted in initially equivalent groups. The results of the main effects analysis of the full sample are presented in Table 2. Overall, participants who were exposed to the PATHS curriculum showed statistically significant improvement on measures of autonomy and disability and genderrelated knowledge, whereas those in the comparison group did not show improvement in these areas. The study is only powered to detect large effects as evidenced by the large effect sizes associated with the statistically significant findings of autonomy (pr ¼ 0.55) and disability and gender-related knowledge (pr ¼ 0.68). Medium effect sizes correspond to approximately a 0.4 to 0.9 standard deviation increase in the outcome measure at posttest for the intervention compared to comparison classrooms and thus are worthy of noting. The social support/relevance of school scale showed a medium effect size (pr ¼ 0.48). The results of the moderation analyses indicated that the intervention functioned similarly across participants. No interaction terms reached statistical significance and all effect sizes were small. Fidelity analyses The high fidelity sample of participants exposed to 68% or more of the curriculum resulted in a reduced number of participants at level-1 (n ¼ 77) and classrooms at level-2 (n ¼ 12). The results are presented in Table 3 and indicate that participants in the high fidelity sample showed statistically significant improvement in vocational skills self-efficacy and in disability and gender-related knowledge compared to those in the comparison group. Large effect sizes were noted for vocational skills self-efficacy (pr ¼ 0.60), disability and gender-related knowledge (pr ¼ 0.77), and self-advocacy (pr ¼ 0.51). Scales that showed medium effect sizes were autonomy (pr ¼ 0.47), and vocational outcome expectancies (pr ¼ 0.45). Discussion The PATHS curriculum was designed to address the unique career development needs faced by high risk adolescent girls that have been identified by prior theory and research. The study examined the impact of the PATHS curriculum on proximal social cognitive career and self-determination outcomes. The findings supported the three study hypotheses to some extent. First, the results of the study suggest that, relative to participants in the comparison group, participants in the full sample exposed to the curriculum showed significant and large gains in self-determination outcomes related to autonomy and disability and gender-related knowledge. In addition, meaningful gains were noted in perceptions of social support and relevance of school. No other social cognitive career or self-determination outcomes differed between the two groups. The second study hypothesis was that large gains and additional benefits would emerge for participants exposed to a more complete version of the curriculum than those exposed to less. The results support this hypothesis and indicate that relative to participants in the comparison group, participants in the high fidelity sample made significant and large gains in vocational skills self-efficacy and disability and gender-related knowledge and showed meaningful improvements in self-advocacy, autonomy, and vocational outcome expectations as observed by the magnitude of the effect sizes. However, only a small

Table 2 Main effects of intervention- full sample. Intervention effect (g01)

Vocational self efficacy Vocational outcome expectancies Social efficacy Self-advocacy Autonomy Self-realization Social support/relevance Knowledge

Coeff.

SE

t-Value

p-Value

pr

0.272 0.532 0.422 0.151 0.214 0.715 0.167 0.685

0.328 0.460 0.336 0.345 0.097 0.995 0.092 0.225

0.829 1.156 1.258 0.440 2.212* 0.719 1.805 3.046*

0.425 0.273 0.235 0.668 0.049 0.487 0.098 0.012

0.24 0.33 0.35 0.13 0.55 0.21 0.48 0.68

Coeff. ¼ coefficient, SE ¼ standard error, pr ¼ partial regression coefficient (0.14 small effect, 0.36 medium effect, 0.51 large effect).

1090

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

Table 3 Main effects of intervention- high fidelity group. Intervention effect (g01)

Vocational self efficacy Vocational outcome expectancies Social efficacy Self-advocacy Autonomy Self-realization Social support/relevance Knowledge

Coeff.

SE

t-Value

p-Value

pr

0.354 0.243 0.031 0.370 0.154 0.068 0.138 0.858

0.151 0.151 0.304 0.200 0.092 0.301 0.129 0.226

2.344* 1.604 0.105 1.851 1.678 0.228 1.069 3.790*

0.041 0.140 0.919 0.093 0.124 0.824 0.311 0.004

0.60 0.45 0.03 0.51 0.47 0.07 0.32 0.77

Coeff. ¼ coefficient, SE ¼ standard error, pr ¼ partial regression coefficient (0.14 small effect, 0.36 medium effect, 0.51 large effect).

effect was noted in perceived social support and relevance of school. Third, the outcomes did not vary by participant characteristics providing support for the hypothesis that the curriculum would have robust effects. This finding is encouraging and suggests the PATHS curriculum is a comprehensive intervention that may meet the career development and transition needs facing a wide variety of adolescent girls with disabilities or at risk for school failure. Together, the findings are promising and suggest that the curriculum can improve a number of critical outcomes that have been linked to adaptive career development and adjustment, particularly under conditions of high fidelity of implementation. Several important limitations of the study need to be considered when interpreting the findings. First, the sample of the study was relatively small and was therefore underpowered to detect smaller but potentially significant effects. In addition the small sample limits the generalizability of the findings to other contexts or samples. Additional research is needed with a larger number of diverse classrooms, instructors, and at risk girls to more fully understand the impact of gender-specific career interventions under a wide variety of conditions. Second, although analysis suggested selection into intervention and comparison classrooms resulted in initially equivalent groups, the absence of random assignment limits the inferences that can be made about cause and effect relationships. Future research should include randomized-control trials to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of the curriculum. Third, future efforts should include longitudinal designs that include more distal outcomes to bolster the cause and effect relationships that can be attributed to the intervention. Despite these limitations, the PATHS curriculum showed promise for impacting key social cognitive career and self-determination outcomes associated with positive career development among high risk adolescent girls. Social cognitive career outcomes Prior research and theory suggests that perceived social support, vocational skills self-efficacy and outcome expectations are lower for students with disabilities and in particular for adolescent girls with disabilities and at risk for school failure due to differential socialization experiences based on disability/risk status and gender (Betz & Hackett, 1997; Eccles, 1994; Osch & Roessler, 2004; Trainor, 2007). The current study showed meaningful gains in perceived social support and relevance of school for future goals. Social support has been identified as a potential moderator of stressors related to socialization experiences of women and as an important factor to support self-efficacy and outcome expectations (Lent et al., 2000; Metheny, McWhirter, & O’Neil, 2008). Both perceived social support and relevance of school to future goals has been linked to improved school behaviors, task persistence, participation in school activities, and attendance, which in turn have been associated with academic achievement and school completion (Appleton et al., 2006). The curriculum was designed to provide students with encouragement and positive feedback, nurture safe interactions among peers and teachers, and to connect school performance and activities to postschool goals. Exposure to over two-thirds of the curriculum resulted in direct improvements in vocational skills self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Vocational skills self-efficacy and outcome expectations are thought to foster career interests and goals, which in turn facilitate productive career behaviors (e.g., career exploration and planning) and later adjustment (Creed, Patton, & Prideaux, 2007; Roger & Creed, 2011; Skorikov, 2007). However, findings suggest adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk appear to have less access to sources of information and experiences that foster self-efficacy and outcome expectations compared to their male and nondisabled peers (Hampton & Mason, 2003; Lent et al., 2000; Roger & Creed, 2011). The curriculum was designed to provide gender and disability specific information, exposure to a wide variety of career options, exposure to relevant role models, and foster social support to facilitate development of positive vocational skills selfefficacy and outcome expectations. Self-determination outcomes The curriculum also was designed to target dispositions and skills encompassed in models of self-determination developed within the context of the transition of adolescents with disabilities (Wehmeyer, 1997, 1999). Significant and large gains were observed in autonomy and participants’ knowledge and awareness about disability and gender. Within the high fidelity

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

1091

sample, large gains were observed in self-advocacy but did not reach statistical significance due to the small sample size in this subgroup analysis. These findings are important since high risk adolescent girls may require additional supports to function more autonomously and self-advocate within the context of career choice and decision-making (Hogansen et al., 2008; Lindstrom et al., 2012; Trainor, 2007). The basis of autonomous functioning and self-advocacy is self-knowledge, which includes knowing one’s preferences, interests, skills, and needs. The curriculum focused on general disability and gender issues as well as how each might impact one’s vocational identify. A clear and stable vocational identify has been associated with one’s confidence and ability to make career decisions which in turn is associated with increased career adjustment (Roger & Creed, 2011; Skorikov, 2007; Yanchak, Lease, & Strauser, 2005). In addition, lessons included content and activities to support participant’s knowledge and ability in making independent choices and to self-advocate (Wehmeyer, 1997, 1999; Wehmeyer, Field, & Thoma, 2011). Findings suggest that improvements in autonomy and self-advocacy during adolescence are associated with long-term benefits. Autonomy has been linked to more distal outcomes such as success in college, and psychosocial adjustment for adolescents in the general population (Smits, Soenens, Vansteenkiste, Luyckx, & Goossens, 2010; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2005; Turner, Chandler, & Heffer, 2009). Moreover, Doren, Gau, and Lindstrom (2012) reported that autonomy significantly predicted the likelihood that adolescents with disabilities would attend or complete college or be engaged in either work or college in a national sample of adolescents with disabilities. The ability to self-advocate also has been identified as a critical skill in college and career success among adolescents with disabilities in general and for adolescent girls with disabilities in particular (Getzel & Thoma, 2008; Lombardi et al., 2011; Wehmeyer et al. 2011). Conclusion Numerous calls have been made over the past two decades to develop interventions that target the career development and transition needs of adolescent girls, including those with disabilities and those at risk for poor outcomes (Betz & Hackett, 1997; Hogansen et al., 2008; Lusk & Cook, 2009; Noonan et al., 2004; Trainor, 2007). The current study adds to the research base by empirically evaluating the impact of a gender-specific career development curriculum. Together, the findings provide support to the study hypotheses and suggest that exposure to the PATHS curriculum can positively impact outcomes that shape the career development of adolescent girls with disabilities and those at risk of school failure. However, given the limitations of the current study, the findings should be considered preliminary. Additional research is needed on genderspecific interventions to improve career development and outcomes of high risk adolescent girls to better understand the potential effectiveness of such interventions across individuals, schools, and contextual variables.

References Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 427–445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002. Asch, A., Rousso, H., & Jefferies, T. (2001). Beyond pedestals: the lives of girls and women with disabilities. In H. Russo, & M. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double Jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education (pp. 13–48). Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1997). Applications of self-efficacy theory to the career assessment of women. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(4), 383–402. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/106907279700500402. Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1996). A social cognitive framework for career choice counseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 44(4), 354–366. http://dx. doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.1996.tb00451.x. Creed, P. A., Patton, W., & Prideaux, L. (2007). Predicting change over time in career planning and career exploration for high school students. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 377–392. Doren, B., & Benz, M. R. (2001). Gender equity issues in vocational and transition services and employment outcomes experienced by young women with disabilities. In H. Rousso, & M. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education (pp. 289–312). Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Doren, B., Gau, J. M., & Lindstrom, L. (2012). The relationship between parent expectations and postschool outcomes of adolescents with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 79(1), 7–23. Doren, B., Yan, M., & Tu, W. (2013). Key program features to enhance the school-to-career transition for youth with disabilities. The Prevention Researcher, 20(2), 11–13. Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585–609. Eccles (Parsons), J., Alder, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., & Meece, J. L. (1983). Expectation, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Perspective on achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 145–208). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Ferri, B., & Connor, D. (2010). ’I was the special ed. girl’: urban working-class young women of colour. Gender & Education, 22, 105–121. Getzel, E. E., & Thoma, C. A. (2008). Experiences of college students with disabilities and the importance of self-determination in higher education settings. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31, 77–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0885728808317658. Gottfredson, L. S. (2005). Applying Gottfredson’s theory of circumscriptions and compromise in career guidance and counseling. In S. D. Brown, & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 71–100). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Gottfredson, L. S., & Lapan, R. T. (1997). Assessing gender-based circumscription of occupational aspirations. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(4), 419–441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106907279700500404. Hampton, N. Z., & Mason, E. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender, sources of efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs, and academic achievement in high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(03)00028-1. Hogansen, J. M., Powers, K., Geenen, S., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., & Powers, L. (2008). Transition goals and experiences of females with disabilities: youth, parents, and professionals. Exceptional Children, 74(2), 215–234. Karpur, A., Brewer, D., & Golden, T. (2013). Critical program elements in transition to adulthood: comparative analysis of New York State and NLTS2. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2165143413476880. Advanced online publication March 4, 2013 as. Kessler Foundation/National Organization on Disability. (2010). Kessler foundation/NOD survey of employment of the Americans with disabilities. Retrieved from www.2010disabilitysurveys.org/.

1092

B. Doren et al. / Journal of Adolescence 36 (2013) 1083–1092

Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: a concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746–759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0013164496056005002. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: a social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 36–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36. Lindstrom, L., Harwick, R., Poppen, M., & Doren, B. (2012). Gender gaps: career development for young women with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 35(2), 108–117. Lombardi, A. R., Gerdes, H., & Murray, C. (2011). Validating an assessment of individual actions, postsecondary supports, and social supports of college students with disabilities. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(1), 107–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.2202/1949-6605.6214. Luecking, R. G., & Wittenburg, D. (2009). Providing supports to youth with disabilities transitioning to adulthood: case descriptions from the youth transition demonstration. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 30, 241–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2009-0464. Lusk, S. L., & Cook, D. (2009). Enhancing career exploration, decision making, and problem solving of adolescent girls with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 145–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2009-0484. Luzzo, D. A., & McWhirter, E. H. (2001). Sex and ethnic differences in the perception of educational and career-related barriers and levels of coping efficacy. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79, 61–67. McWhirter, E. H., Rasheed, S., & Crothers, M. (2000). The effects of high school career education on social-cognitive variables. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 330–341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.3.330. Metheny, J., McWhirter, E. H., & O’Neil, M. (2008). Measuring perceived teacher support and its influence on adolescent career development. Journal of Career Assessment, 16, 218–237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10690727707313198. Newman, Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Knokey, A. M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school. A Report From the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2009-3017). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A.-M., Marder, C., Nagle, K., Shaver, D., et al. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 8 years after high school. A Report From the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2011-3005). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Noonan, B., Gallor, S., Hensler-McGinnis, N., Fassinger, R., Wang, S., & Goodman, J. (2004). Challenge and success: a qualitative study of the career development of highly achieving women with physical and sensory disabilities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 68–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-0167.51.1.68. Osch, L. A., & Roessler, R. T. (2004). Predictors of career exploration intentions: a social cognitive career theory perspective. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 47(4), 224–233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00343552040470040401. Panagos, R. J., & DuBois, D. L. (1999). Career self-efficacy development and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 25–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/sldrp1401_3. Powers, K. M., Gil-Kashiwabara, E., Geenen, S. J., Powers, L., Balandran, J., & Palmer, C. (2005). Mandates and effective transition planning practices reflected in IEPs. Career Development of Exceptional Individuals, 28, 47–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08857288050280010701. Powers, K., Hogansen, J., Greenen, S., Powers, L. E., & Gil-Kashiwabara, E. (2008). Gender matters in transition to adulthood: a survey study of adolescents with disabilities and their families. Psychology in the Schools, 45(4), 349–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pits.20297. Powers, L., Turner, A., Westwood, D., Matuszewski, J., Wilson, R., & Phillips, A. (2001). TAKE CHARGE for the future: a controlled fieldtest of a model to promote student involvement in transition planning. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 24, 89–104. Rabren, K., Dunn, C., & Chambers, D. (2002). Predictors of post-high school employment among young adults with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 25(1), 25–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088572880202500103. Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Roger, M. E., & Creed, P. A. (2011). A longitudinal examination of adolescent career planning and exploration using a social cognitive career theory framework. Journal of Adolescence, 34(1), 163–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.010. Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (2003). requivalent: a simple effect size indicator. Psychological Methods, 8(4), 492–496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.8.4. 492. Rousso, H., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2001). Double jeopardy: Addressing gender equity in special education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Skorikov, V. B. (2007). Continuity in adolescent career preparation and its effects on adjustment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 8–24. Smits, I., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Luyckx, K., & Goossens, L. (2010). Why do adolescents gather information or stick to parental norms? Examining autonomous and controlled motives behind adolescents’ identity style. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(11), 1343–1356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10964-009-9469-x. Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2005). Antecedents and outcomes of self-determination in 3 life domains: the role of parents’ and teachers’ autonomy support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(6), 589–604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-8948-y. Solberg, V. S., O’Brien, K., Villareal, P., Kennel, R., & Davis, B. (1993). Self-efficacy and Hispanic college students: validation of the college self-efficacy instrument. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 15, 80–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/07399863930151004. Thompson, B. (2001). Significance, effect sizes, stepwise methods, and other issues: strong arguments move the field. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 80–93. Trainor, A. (2007). Perceptions of adolescent girls with LD regarding self-determination and postsecondary transition planning. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 1–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30035514. Turner, E. A., Chandler, M., & Heffer, R. W. (2009). The influence of parenting styles, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy on academic performance in college students. Journal of College Student Development, 50(3), 337–346. Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Garza, N., & Levine, P. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., Levine, P., & Marder, C. (2003). Going to school: Instructional contexts, programs, and participation of secondary school students with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Wehmeyer, M. L. (1997). Self-determination as an educational outcome. A definitional framework and implications for intervention. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 9, 175–209. Wehmeyer, M. L. (1999). A functional model of self-determination: describing development and implementing instruction. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 14, 53–61. Wehmeyer, M. L., Field, S., & Thoma, C. (2011). Self-determination and adolescent transition education. In M. L. Wehmeyer, & K. W. Webb (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent transition education for youth with disabilities. New York, NY: Routledge. Wehmeyer, & Kelchner. (1995). The arc’s self-determination scale. Arlington, TX: The Arc of the United States. Wehmeyer, M. L., & Palmer, S. B. (2003). Adult outcomes for students with cognitive disabilities three-years after high school: the impact of self-determination. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(2), 131–144. Wehmeyer, M. L., & Schwartz, M. (1998). The relationship between self-determination and quality of life for adults with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33, 3–12. Yanchak, K. V., Lease, S. H., & Strauser, D. R. (2005). Relation of disability type and career thoughts to vocational identity. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 48, 130–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00343552050480030101.