Abstract
Starting with a constructive critique of legal articles in special education journals concerning transition services under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), this article presents an empirical analysis of relevant judicial rulings for the period 1990–2016 that shows a prevailing prodistrict approach that is not otherwise evident in the prior articles. The findings include an increased frequency of these judicial rulings generally in accord with the trajectory of special education litigation and, more significantly, an approximate 3:1 district–parent ratio in the outcomes of these rulings that, with up-and-down variation, prevails for the entire period. The conclusion is that the time is ripe for an elevated substantive standard for law-based articles in special education journals as well as a continued, but differentiated, rigorous normative standard for transition services.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
