Capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment predicted students' self-reported self-determination, but degree of inclusion in general education did not¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2007 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Students' capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment each predicted their self-reported level of self-determination, whereas the degree to which students were included in general education did not. → Shogren 2007
Evidence¶
Shogren 2007¶
Shogren, K.A., Wehmeyer, M.L, et al. (2007) Examining individual and ecological predictors of the self-determination of students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 488-509. https://hdl.handle.net/1808/10983
q2 · i? · associational · r?
SEM analysis of baseline data from the multistate longitudinal intervention-evaluation project tested individual and ecological predictors of self-reported self-determination. The article reports that "Capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment predicted students' self-reported level of self-determination" while general education inclusion did not. No coefficients are printed in the available text.
"Capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment predicted students' self-reported level of self-determination, but the degree to which students were included in general education did not."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Teachers rated students' capacity for self-determination differently by level of cognitive impairment, but rated opportunities for self-determination similarly across impairment levels — related
- The study targeted students with learning disabilities, mild and moderate mental retardation, and other health impairments — related
- Baseline data from a multistate longitudinal self-determination intervention project were analyzed with structural equation modeling — a broader claim this one bears on
- The pattern of predictive relationships for self-determination differed significantly depending on which measure of self-determination was used — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
capacity-opportunity-empowerment-predict-self-determination-not-inclusion |
title |
Capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment predicted students' self-reported self-determination, but degree of inclusion in general education did not |
description |
Capacity, opportunity, and transition empowerment predicted students' self-reported self-determination, but degree of inclusion in general education did not |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2007 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — shogren-2007 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.