The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Procedural Guidelines Michael L. Wehmeyer, Ph.D. © 1995, The Arc of the United States and Michael Wehmeyer (nonexclusive rights). All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced by any means without prior written permission from the publisher. August, 1995 Contents Acknowledgments v Permissions vi CHAPTER 1: Introduction and Overview 1 Use of The Arc's Self-Determination Scale 1 Improving the Validity of Self-Report Measures 3 Inappropriate Uses of The Arc’s Self- Determination Scale 5 Appropriate Uses of The Arc’s Self- Determination Scale 6 User Qualifications 8 CHAPTER 2: Theoretical Issues 11 Self-Determination: An Overview 11 What is Self-Determination? 12 Self-Determination as an Educational Outcome 14 Self-Determination Defined 17 Essential Characteristics of Self-Determined Behavior 18 Component Elements of Self-Determined Behavior 21 Why is Self-Determination Important? 35 Self-Determination and Quality of Life 36 Current Adult Outcomes for People with Disabilities 38 Inclusion, Normalization and Community Integration 41 Self-Determination and Youth with Mental Retardation 44 2 CHAPTER 3: Scale Construction and Development 51 Identification of Scale Domains and Subdomains 51 Procedures 51 Measuring Self-Determined Behavior 53 Measuring Essential Characteristics of Self-Determination 54 Analysis 58 Results 59 Item Identification and Question Generation 60 Autonomy 60 Self-Regulation 64 Psychological Empowerment 66 Self-Realization 66 Pilot-Testing of The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale 66 Field-Testing of The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale 68 CHAPTER 4: Administration 73 Tips for Administration of the Scale 73 CHAPTER 5: Scoring and Interpretation 77 Scoring The Arc's Self-Determination Scale 77 Autonomy 77 Self-Regulation 78 Psychological Empowerment 91 Self-Realization 92 Entering Raw Scores on Protocol: Scoring Steps 1 and 2 93 Converting Raw Scores: Scoring Step 3 94 Interpreting Scores: Scoring Steps 4 and 5 94 How to Use Scores from The Arc's Self-Determination Scale 95 CHAPTER 6: The Arc's Self-Determination Scale Norms 97 3 Sample Description 97 Scale Descriptive Statistics 100 Gender, Age and Type of Disability Effects 101 Statistical Analysis of Gender Differences 101 Summary of Gender Differences 102 Statistical Analysis of Age-related Differences 102 Summary of Age-related Differences 105 Statistical Analysis of Disability-related Differences 105 Summary of Disability-related Differences 107 CHAPTER 7: Reliability and Validity 109 Validity of The Arc's Self-Determination Scale 109 Concurrent-Criterion-related Validity 109 Construct Validity 111 Discriminative Validity 111 Factorial Validity 111 Other forms of Construct Validity 111 Reliability of The Arc's Self-Determination Scale 112 Internal Consistency Reliability 112 Item Statistics by Domain 112 REFERENCES 119 CONVERSION TABLES 129 4 Acknowledgments The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale was developed through Grant #H023J20012 from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Division on Innovation and Development to The Arc of the United States (formerly Association for Retarded Citizens of the United States). The contents of this scale in no way reflect the opinion or policy of the U.S. Department of Education. Tom Hanley, Ph.D. was the Program Officer for this project and The Arc would like to acknowledge his support in this effort. In addition, Michael Ward, Ph.D., Chief, Secondary Education and Transition Services Branch has provided ongoing support and impetus in the area of self- determination for youth with disabilities. A talented group of project staff contributed with their time and talent to the field- testing of the assessment, including Kathy Kelchner, M.Ed., project director, Sandra Richards, project advocacy specialist, Debra Ingram, project research associate and Lynda Sellars, project secretary. Sharon Davis, Ph.D., Director, Department of Research and Program Services at The Arc of the United States, has provided ongoing support and encouragement for The Arc’s work in self-determination. The project benefitted significantly from the input of an advisory committee comprised of Robert Beckett, The Arc of Arizona; Ruthie Marie Beckwith, Ph.D., People First of Tennessee; Brenda Doss, The Arc of Alabama; Sharon Field, Ed.D., Wayne State University; Ray Gagne, The Arc of the United States; Alan Hoffman, Ed.D., Wayne State University; James Martin, Ph.D., University of Colorado, Colorado Springs; T.J. Monroe, People First of Tennessee; Nancy Ward, People First of Nebraska. The Arc is grateful for their dedication and contributions. Finally, The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale was developed following a comprehensive evaluation of the self- determination of more than 400 adults with mental retardation and developmental disabilities. These individuals, members of self- advocacy groups around the country, and the advisors working for their groups, were generous with their time and patient with our efforts. To them we extend our sincere thanks. 5 Permissions Questions from Section 1 of The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale were adapted, with permission from the authors, from the Autonomous Functioning Checklist. This instrument, developed by David Reiss, M.D. and colleagues at The George Washington University, is in the public domain. The Arc gratefully acknowledges the generosity of the authors. Information about the AFC can be found in: Sigafoos, A.D., Feinstein, C.B., Damond, M., & Reiss, D. (1988). The measurement of behavioral autonomy in adolescence: The Autonomous Functioning Checklist. In C.B. Feinstein, A. Esman, J. Looney, G. Orvin, J. Schimel, A. Schwartzberg, A. Sorsky & M. Sugar (Eds.), Adolescent Psychiatry, Volume 15 (pp. 432 - 462). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Questions from Section 4 of The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale were adapted, with permission from the author, from the Short Index of Self-Actualization, which originally was published in a dissertation by Alvin P. Jones. The Arc extends its appreciation to Dr. Jones for his generosity. Information on the Short Index of Self-Actualization can be found in: Jones, A. & Crandall, R. (1986). Validation of a short index of self-actualization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 63 - 73. Portions of the Theoretical Issues chapter were adapted from the following book chapters: Wehmeyer, M.L. (in press). Self-directed learning and self-determination. In M. Agran (Ed.), Student -Directed Learning: A Handbook on Self-Management. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishers. Wehmeyer, M.L. (in press). Self-determination as an educational outcome: How does it relate to the educational needs of our children and youth? In D.J. Sands & M.L. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Self-Determination across the Lifespan: From Theory to Practice. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishers. Wehmeyer, M.L. (in press). Self-determination in youth with severe cognitive disabilities: From theory to practice. In L. Powers, G. Singer & J.A. Sowers (Eds.), Making Your Way: Promoting Self-Competence Among Children and Youth with Disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishers. 6 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale is a student self-report measure of self-determination designed for use by adolescents with disabilities, particularly students with mild mental retardation and learning disabilities. The Scale was constructed based on a definitional framework of self-determination as an educational outcome proposed by Wehmeyer and colleagues (Wehmeyer, 1992a, in press a, in press b; Wehmeyer, Kelchner & Richards, in press), described in the Theoretical Issues chapter of this guide. This framework defines self-determination as “acting as the primary causal agent in one's life and making choices and decisions regarding one's quality of life free from undue external influence or interference" (Wehmeyer, 1992a; in press b). An act or event is self-determined if the individual’s actions reflect four essential characteristics: (1) the individual acts autonomously; (2) the behaviors are self-regulated; (3) the person initiates and responds to event(s) in a “psychologically empowered” manner; and (4) the person acts in a self-realizing manner (Wehmeyer, in press a; Wehmeyer, Kelchner & Richards, 1994). These essential characteristics emerge as students develop and acquire a set of component elements of self-determined behavior (e.g., choice- making, decision-making, problem-solving, goal-setting and task performance, self-observation, evaluation and reinforcement, internal locus of control, positive attributions of efficacy and outcome expectancy, self-awareness, self-knowledge). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale operationalizes this framework to provide a tool for students with disabilities, educators and researchers. The remainder of this chapter discusses the potential use and misuse of the Scale, ways to improve the reliability and validity of self-report measures, and identifies user qualifications. The framework upon which the Scale is based is presented in the Theoretical Issues chapter. Use of The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale Assessment has multiple uses in education, including providing data for diagnostic and placement decisions, evaluating individual strengths and weaknesses, planning educational and treatment strategies, and evaluating intervention effectiveness. As with any such process, assessment can be used inappropriately, for example to exclude individuals from given services or to maintain outdated 7 or overly intrusive interventions or placements. When considering the assessment of self-determination, there is a need to be cognizant not only of the possible contributions of such an effort, but the potential limitations of the exercise as well. These issues are compounded when the assessment in question is a self-report measure. The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale was designed to be a tool to enable and empower students to become more self- determined by providing a vehicle by which they can, with appropriate supports and accommodations: (1) evaluate their own beliefs about themselves and their self-determination; (2) work collaboratively with educators and others to identify individual areas of strength and limitations related to self-determination goals and objectives; and, (3) self-assess progress in self-determination over time. In addition, The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale can benefit students by providing researchers a tool to evaluate which environments, instructional strategies and curricular materials enhance or impede self-determination. The voices of students with disabilities are often the least frequently heard or solicited voice in the educational planning, decision-making, and program implementation process. This is adequately illustrated by the current state of affairs regarding student involvement in educational planning meetings. The reality for too many students with disabilities is that they are, essentially, left out of this process (Gillespie & Turnbull, 1983; Van Reusen & Bos, 1990). The implementation of P.L. 94-142 opened the door for student involvement in educational planning and decision- making by requiring the participation of students in planning meetings, whenever appropriate. Unfortunately, as Gillespie and Turnbull (1983) pointed out, little effort was expended to determine just when whenever appropriate was and most students were either uninvolved in the process, or involved only peripherally. Van Reusen and Bos (1990) stated that “student involvement [in educational planning], even at the secondary level, is for the most part either nonexistent or passive” (p. 30). If this is true for student-involvement in the IEP meeting, it is equally the case for the educational program planning and implementation process, despite evidence that such involvement would benefit students and result in more positive educational outcomes. The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale was conceptualized as a vehicle to reverse this trend by providing a self-report indicator of self-determination. The intent of the process is first and foremost to provide a voice for students with disabilities in this important area. However, there is considerable debate regarding the use of self-report measures, particularly with students with mental retardation. The Scale Construction and Development chapter provides a detailed discussion of the procedures used to determine 8 the most reliable and valid formats to measure self-determination. However, an overview of the use of self-report measures, and methods to improve their validity, may be useful for individuals wanting to utilize the Scale. Improving the Validity of Self-Report Measures There is a growing recognition in educational research that the student is an active participant in the learning process and student- variables must be accounted for; students formulate goals, attend to selected events, employ strategies (effective or not), process information and apply their beliefs about themselves and their environments to the learning process (Schunk, 1992). While attention to student perceptions related to learning and success has increased steadily in the educational literature, this has often not been the case for students with cognitive disabilities. However, this too is changing and there is an emerging body of research addressing student perceptions of academic and other outcomes. One of the reasons this effort has lagged is the pervasive skepticism regarding the validity of perceptions from students with cognitive disabilities. It is widely recognized, for example, that students with mental retardation tend to be outerdirected, heavily influenced by adults, and overly acquiescent. The prevailing sentiment, based upon an assumption of deficits, has been that people with cognitive disabilities are not reliable or valid reporters of their own perceptions. When researchers and educators question the validity of the perceptions of students with cognitive disabilities, what they often mean is that these students hold unrealistic perceptions. While this may be true, this does not negate the validity of the student’s perception. A perception is invalid when it does not match the student's true beliefs or feelings, not when it is unrealistic. The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale has been constructed in such a manner to limit problems with reliability and validity. However, it should be recognized that it provides an indication of students’ perceptions of their self-determination. As the definitional framework upon which this assessment is based proposes, individual perceptions are critical aspects of becoming self-determined. Students can possess all the skills necessary to be self-determined, but if they are never allowed to employ these skills, may grow to believe that they are not capable. Thus, student perceptions become a particularly important aspect to understand when trying to promote self-determination. It is our belief that a presumption that students with disabilities are inaccurate in reporting the degree to which they are autonomous, self-regulating, psychologically empowered and self-realizing is 9 inaccurate and unfair. Unfortunately, there is little evidence to prove or refute this. Assor and Connell (1992) provided a number of suggestions for improving the validity of students’ self-reports: • Remember and communicate that what you want is for students to report what they truly believe about themselves. Accurate reports do not necessarily reflect real or actual performance. • Ask students in a way that helps them understand what you are after in the assessment process. There is nothing hidden or secret about the process. We are not seeking some psychologically defined variable but simply what the student feels or believes. • Emphasize that, no matter what students answer, as long as it is truly what they believe or feel it is the right answer. Ensure confidentiality and put students at ease. • Communicate to students what the information will be used for and why they are being asked these questions. Get the student involved in the interpretation process as well as the assessment process. • Groups with too many students are a problem because students feel that others might see their answers. Keep groups as small as possible. The key to ensuring valid self-reports is to convince students that what they believe is very important. In order to convince students, one must genuinely believe this. This means acting on students’ perceptions in a manner that is respectful, nonjudgemental, and promotes student involvement. Inappropriate Uses of The Arc's Self-Determination Scale The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale was designed for two principal purposes; (1) to assess individual student strengths and weaknesses in self-determination and facilitate student involvement in planning educational and treatment strategies; and, (2) as a tool to conduct research on self-determination. The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale has been constructed and normed with these uses in mind and other uses of the Scale are inappropriate. It is important to stress that the Scale is not a diagnostic or prescriptive tool. At the very least, the difficulties with reliability and validity from self-report measures make diagnostic, prescriptive, or placement decisions based on this data inappropriate and unprofessional. Although scoring provides opportunities for comparisons between the individual student and 10