arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Substantiated Best Practices in Transition: Fifteen Plus Years Later

Leena Jo Landmark et al.

Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals2010https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728810376410article
ABDC C
Weight
0.69

What the paper says

Since the transition movement in the 1980s, numerous transition practices have been developed. Kohler (1993) provided a comprehensive review and analysis of transition best practices and divided them into substantiated and implied practices based on the existence of empirical evidence. Since that review was published, the field of transition has changed. The purpose of this article is to provide an updated review of transition best practices since Kohler’s study. A total of 29 documents were collected that substantiated best transition practices. The resulting most- to least-substantiated practices were paid or unpaid work experience, employment preparation, family involvement, general education inclusion, social skills training, daily living skills training and self-determination skills training, and community or agency collaboration.

259 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728810376410

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{leena2010,
  title        = {{Substantiated Best Practices in Transition: Fifteen Plus Years Later}},
  author       = {Leena Jo Landmark et al.},
  journal      = {Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals},
  year         = {2010},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728810376410},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Substantiated Best Practices in Transition: Fifteen Plus Years Later

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.69

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact1.00 × 0.4 = 0.40
M · momentum0.41 × 0.15 = 0.06
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.