European Journal of Special Needs Education, 2015

Vol. 30, No. 3, 412–421, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2015.1009704

SHORT REPORT
Self-determination of women with disabilities
Eman Al-Zboona* and Jamil Smadib
a
Queen Rania Faculty for Childhood, Special Education Department, Hashemite University,
Zarqa, Jordan; bDepartment of Counseling and Special Education, The University of Jordan,
Amman, Jordan
(Received 21 September 2014; accepted 18 December 2014)

The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of self-determination among
women with disabilities in Jordan. Participants of the study were 141 women
with disabilities such as intellectual, hearing, visual, and physical impairments.
They were purposefully selected from seven major vocational rehabilitation cen-
tres in Jordan. A scale was developed depending on Wehmeyer previous work; it
consisted of 60 items divided among four domains; psychological empowerment,
autonomy, self-regulation and self-realisation. Validity and reliability of the scale
was achieved using many methods. Frequencies and one-way analysis of vari-
ance was used to investigate the level of self-determination in addition to any
differences according to the type of disability. Results showed average levels of
self-determination across the four domains; furthermore, significant differences
were found between the three sensory disabilities (hearing, visual and physical)
and women with intellectual disabilities. Findings are discussed and further
recommendations are provided for future investigation.
Keywords: self-determination; women with disability; empowerment

Introduction
There has been an increased interest within the field of special education in many
concepts related to quality of life and the promise of a better life for persons with
disability, empowering of disabled people in making their own decisions and
actions, enhancing their independence, and becoming self-determined. Taylor,
Richards, and Brady (2005) mentioned that American association of intellectual
disabilities identified six visions for a better future of individuals with disability; one
of these important visions was self determination.
The vague term of self-determination and other similar terms (e.g. autonomy,
empowerment) appeared since 1975 as central terms and concepts in the disability
service, based on the assumption that all adult individuals are able to control their
life, therefore, the society should offer them this right (O’Brien, Revell, and West
2003). Furthermore, to explain such terms, several theories contributed to a better
understanding of self-determination (e.g. self-determination theory, self-regulation
theory, social-ecological theory, and functional theory of self-determination)
(Ackerman 2006; Wehmeyer et al. 2007).
Wehmeyer (2002), Lee and Wehmeyer (2004) and Taylor, Richards, and Brady
(2005) mentioned that the definition of self-determination is the act of person as the

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

 European Journal of Special Needs Education 413

primary causal agent in his life and his choices, and making decision, which achieve
better quality of life QoL, without any external impact or intervention. Meanwhile,
Field and Hoffman (2002) defined self-determination as ‘the ability to identify and
achieve goals based on a foundation of self-knowledge and self-evaluation’.
Many recent studies demonstrated the importance of self-determination, making
it a central concept in most post-secondary programs for all of students with
disabilities, through their life stages, starting from pre-kindergarten to adulthood
(Field, Sarver, and Shaw 2003).
This importance can be seen as a part of most teacher education programs that is
based on the accreditation of the council for exceptional children. Some of the stan-
dards required include the focus of teachers to improve students’ self-determination
skills (Carter et al. 2008).
In a national survey conducted by Wehmeyer, Agran, and Hughes (2000) for
special education teachers in secondary schools, two-third of teachers stated that
they deploy some goals targeted to self-determination (i.e. decision-making, goal
setting and self-management) in the individualised education and transition plans
(Carter et al. 2008). Most of the educational literature related to self-determination
states that when identifying life goals for an individual, this will help to improve
adult outcomes. Furthermore, the successful person is a person, who evaluates his
need, chooses his goals, puts action step to achieve, implements, observes his perfor-
mance and modifies his goals accordingly (Powers 2010).
Policies and actions can be considered as the strongest and most influential indi-
cator of self-determination. Having clear policies especially in relation to vocational
and transition services provide support to more funding to improve self-determination
as a major component, in addition to developing resources and other different materi-
als to support instruction, whether it was curriculums, guidelines, books, methods
and strategies, and any other person-centred planning programs.
In summary, literature revealed positive correlation between academic achieve-
ment and self-determination, where students with characterised self-determination
achieve much more positive outcomes, have an improved social status, and a better
quality of life than their peers who are not (Lee and Wehmeyer 2004, O’Brien,
Revell, and West 2003). Furthermore, self-determination correlates highly with moti-
vation where self-determination effects the student decision to stay or leave school.
Also individuals with low level of self-determination face mal-adaptation, isolation,
change in mood and social communication problems (Nota et al. 2007).
The literature suggests, however, that women with disabilities face double jeop-
ardy (e.g. Doren and Benz 2001; Erten 2011; Schwartz et al. 2009). Many women
suffer from discrimination just because of their gender, and with existence of the dis-
ability, the situation becomes more troubled. In addition to their suffering of the low
level of social and economic status (Nagata 2003), they face other problems related
to marriage, employment and sexual issues. Different studies revealed that the status
of women with disabilities can be described as isolated, marginalised with low
value, having a greater chance to be exposed to physical, sexual and emotional
abuse than women without disability (Martin et al. 2006). Chappell (2003) added
another dilemma faced by abused women with disabilities in comparison with other
women without disabilities, which is reporting their exposure to abuse or suppress-
ing this traumatic experience and leaving the aggressor to hunt other victims.
Nationally, Al-Zboon (2013) mentioned that Jordanian women with disabilities
suffer from discrimination and difficulty in employment, marriage and education.
414 E. Al-Zboon and J. Smadi

For instance, United Nations (1994) reported that the participation of Jordanian
women with disabilities in labour force is still very narrow. Furthermore, they are
provided with vocational training courses, which they are described as too traditional
and of low value (Nagata 2003).
Furthermore, in our country, the percentage of women with disabilities who
attending higher education institutions was lower than the equivalent rate of men
with disabilities. From other angle, most of women with disabilities were single
(United Nations 1994). According to Lakkis (1997), in Arab region, if there is more
than one individual with disability in same family, a male with disability take advan-
tages in treatments and available opportunities, as going to school and providing
secure a wheelchair.
According to the previous studies, results show that women with disabilities are
in great need to improve self-determination skills, to advocate their rights, and to
improve their decision-making skills to help them achieve proper decisions in their
life.
Strnadova and Evans (2012) explored women with intellectual disabilities per-
ceptions about quality of life and self-determination level. Fifty-five women from
Sydney, Australia, and Prague, Czech Republic, were recruited to the study, and
each participant completed a semi-structured interview, based on a grounded theory
approach, a series of themes were identified common across all women. The stron-
gest theme identified throughout the interviews was the lack of control participants
perceived over their lives.
Verdugo et al. (2011) conducted a descriptive study, aimed to identify the effec-
tiveness of the Caja Madrid SE Program, on self-determination and quality of life
for people with disabilities. The sample consisted of (1111) workers. Results indi-
cated that workers with disabilities obtained a very high mean (96.99) in the self-
determination scale, and there are five personal variables that generated statistically
significant differences: (1) age: people aged between 16 and 45 show greater auton-
omy and psychological empowerment than younger people (16–25 years) and older
people (over 46 years); (2) main disability: people whose disability is other than
intellectual score higher in all the scales, and the differences are statistically signifi-
cant in the autonomy, psychological empowerment and self-awareness scales; (3)
severity of intellectual disability: workers with a mild intellectual disability achieved
higher scores in all the dimensions of the scale; these being statistically significant
where in autonomy and self-regulation compared with moderate intellectual disabil-
ity; (4) degree of disability: workers between 33 and 44% disability achieved higher
and statistically significant scores in all the scales measured by the evaluation tool;
(5) whether or not there are behavioural problems: people who do not present any
behavioural problems scored higher in all the dimensions, although these differences
were only significant with regard to psychological empowerment
Gills (2011) investigated the role that self-determination played in the transition
process for young African American women with disabilities who exited high school
with a special diploma and participated in a local transition program. This examina-
tion of the perceptions of the transition process of young African American women
with disabilities involved in-depth interviews with five young women and their par-
ent or guardian. Additionally, the Arcs Self-Determination Scale (ASDS) and the
Parent Self-Determination Practice Survey were administered. Results showed that
the young women were able to use self-determination in a variety of settings. Three
of the five participants demonstrated high levels of self-determination as measured
 European Journal of Special Needs Education 415

by the ASDS when compared to the normative sample. Also, the parent or guardian
of the young women provided multiple opportunities for them to practice self-
determination in their homes and employment settings. Furthermore, young women
discussed several factors that they perceived to be strengths and challenges to using
self-determination throughout and beyond the transition process.
Recently, there is increasing interest in Jordan on person with disabilities, that is
crowned by issuing the disability individuals right act (2007), one of its primary
foundations is the respect of individuals with disabilities rights, dignity, freedom of
choice, respect their own independence and their participation in decision-making in
planning and programming (disability individuals right act 2007), all the preceding
can be considered as the foundation and cornerstone of self-determination rights.
In spite of all the previous, the real practices in the field of special education and
rehabilitation in Jordan do not provide the right opportunities for individuals with
disability to practice self-determination, with respect to their choices or involve them
fully in choosing their own style of life.
Therefore, this study is conducted to explore self-determination, for a margina-
lised group, women with disabilities, whom need to improve self-determination,
enhance their status and their position in the society, and to enhance their quality of
life.

Problem statement
Although most educational literature related suggests the positive effect of
self-determination in improving quality of life and enhancing transition into adulthood.
There has been little research that has examined the in-depth concept of self-determination
for women with disabilities, including sensory disabilities such as hearing, visual and
physical impairments. Furthermore, there is not any Arabic or Jordanian study that has
been conducted to investigate the concept of self-determination for individuals with
disability in general, or women with disability in specific.
Schwartz et al. (2009) indicated that females have lower level of QoL than man.
Al-Zboon (2013) stated that women with disabilities experience discrimination due
to contextual factors, such as our traditions and observances that put restrictions on
woman opportunity to marriage, Al-Khteeb (2010) attributed this problem in mar-
riage because of the suspicion about hereditary causes of disability and social stan-
dards about women who could provide marriage opportunities. While Hajras (2013)
attributed this problem because of external appearance factor, it is considered as a
passport to women to success and social acceptance. Our community gives priority
to man in employment, as he is responsible for providing financial demands for fam-
ily. In addition, we live in eastern community which is described as a reserved reli-
gious community, which put limitation on women to protect them. Also, the
restriction on women has been deeply rooted in the cultural and social contexts
where they were raised.
Consequently, women with disabilities suffer from lack of services, opportunities
and services provided. This situation of women in our country usually affects their
life skills consisting of important skills like self-determination and decision-making.
Abery and Stancliffe (2003) mentioned that women with disabilities face ecological
barriers to developing self-determination. This research will enable them to be more
effective, more able as individuals in the society, and will enhance their quality of
416 E. Al-Zboon and J. Smadi

life by improving their independence and autonomy, and accordingly change

negative attitudes in society towards them.
Based on the previous and consistent with the current trends in Jordan that
encourages the care of individual with disabilities, the current study aimed to
identify the level of self-determination for women with disabilities by answering:

 What is the level of self-determination of women with disabilities in Jordan?

 Are there any significant differences in self-determination related to the type
of disabilities?

Methodology
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study was to explore the levels of self-determination among
Jordanian women with disabilities and explore the effect of disability on it.

Design
This research employed a descriptive method design, where a survey was used to
gather data about the level of self-determination. The survey attempted to explore
the different level of self-determination and the sublevels included within (i.e.
self-realisation, self-regulation, autonomy, and psychological empowerment). The
collected data helped in drawing a large picture of the different categories and the
current level of self-determination according to the sample.

Participants
The sample of this study was selected as a purposeful sample that consisted of 141
women with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 43, mainly focusing on the
following disabilities: intellectual, hearing, visual and physical; the sample was
gathered from seven vocational rehabilitation centres in Jordan. Table 1 reflects their
distribution according to type and severity of the disability.

Instrumentation
The survey of this study was developed based on Wehmeyer (1996) work, which
was expanded based on the functional model of self-determination. The survey

Table 1. Distribution of the sample based on the disability type.

Severity
Type of disability Mild Moderate Severe Total
Intellectual disability 17 33 0 50
Hearing impairment 0 16 20 36
Visual impairment 1 8 21 30
Physical impairment 2 22 1 25
Total 20 79 42 141
 European Journal of Special Needs Education 417

consisted of two sections: the first section requested demographic information (i.e.
age, disability, and severity). The second section consisted of 60 items: ‘I advocate
my rights’, ‘I select gifts which I want to present to my friends’, ‘I am an important
person for many people’ and ‘I choose the vocation which I want to train on it’.
Each item was scored using a five-point Likert-type scale. Women with disabilities
were asked to rate their perception of self-determination levels, on a scale of
1 = always, 2 = almost always, 3 = usually, 4 = almost never, 5 = never. This section
was organised as four categories: (1) – self-realisation, (2) – self-regulation, (3) –
autonomy and (4) – psychological empowerment.
To establish the content validity of the instrument, fifteen experts and reviewers
were asked to review the items and provide feedback to authors. Items were revised
until there was 100% agreement among the reviewers on both the content validity
and the wording of each item.
To add more validity to the construct of the survey factorial analysis was also
conducted. Despite the small sample size used, still it can be considered as an indi-
cator of the construct of the instrument. Accordingly, a principal component analysis
was conducted on the 60 items incorporated into the survey to check for distribution
of items according to the four domains. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure verified
the sampling adequacy for the analysis, KMO = 0.83, with orthogonal rotation
(varimax) used for a more proper distribution.
The reliability of the instrument was determined using Cronbach’s alpha and
test–retest reliability. The coefficient alpha statistics and test–retest reliability for
self-determination scale were 0.90 and 0.96, respectively, reflecting good levels of
internal consistency.

Procedure
The survey was constructed and applied on a pilot sample of 30 women; this sample
was for validation purposes and not integrated within the final sample of this
research. The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of social development in
Jordan were contacted to provide a list of the vocational rehabilitation centres.
Consequentially, 141 women with disabilities between the ages of 14 and 43 were
purposefully selected. Survey instruments were gathered later on from centres and
analysed using the SPSS package.

Analyses
A variety of statistical techniques were used to analyse the research data. These tech-
niques included means, standard deviations and one-–way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) to check for any significant mean difference according to the type of
disability.

Results
To answer the first question, means and standard deviation were obtained. Results of
data indicated an average level of self-determination among women with disabilities,
the scale used to measure the sample responses was divided into three categories:
low level of self-determination with a range of (1–2.33), average level of
self-determination ranged (2.34–3.66) and high level of self-determination ranging
418 E. Al-Zboon and J. Smadi

Table 2. Means and standard deviations of women with disabilities’ perceptions regarding
self-determination according to type of disability.
Hearing Visual Physical Intellectual
Domains Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Psychological empowerment 3.59* 0.39 3.67* 0.41 3.46* 0.50 3.03* 0.71
Autonomy 3.76** 0.57 3.61* 0.62 3.69** 0.46 2.78* 0.60
Self-realization 3.39* 0.54 3.44* 0.68 3.41* 0.41 2.98* 0.72
Self-regulation 3.18* 0.48 3.37* 0.29 3.46* 0.36 2.86* 0.59
Total 3.54* 0.45 3.54* 0.45 3.55* 0.40 2.88* 0.56
*Average level of self-determination.
**High level of self-determination.

Table 3. One-way ANOVA results to determine the influence of type of disability on the
total self-determination level.
Source of Total of Mean of F
variance squares df squares value Significant
Within group 13.956 3 4.652 19.667 0.000
Between group 32.405 137 0.237 – –
Total 46.361 140 – – –

(3.67–5.00). Women perceptions of level of the self-determination fell within the

average range according to the previous scale.
Table 2 shows the women with disabilities’ perceptions regarding the
self-determination. As is indicated, all of women with disabilities cited average level
of self-determination in all domains of self-realisation, self-regulation, autonomy
and psychological empowerment.
The previous table demonstrates a mild level of self-determination among
women with disabilities; it can be seen that first three disabilities hearing, visual and
physical scored higher means than women with intellectual disabilities.
To further investigate any differences among the different disabilities, a one-way
ANOVA was used to help determine the influence of the type of disability on the
total self-determination level for the three groups of the sample separately. The
omnibus ANOVA statistic for this analysis revealed statistically significant differ-
ences due to type of disability. To further check for differences, Tuckey (HSD) post-
hoc analyses was used, where hearing, visual and physical disabilities had significant
difference in comparison with intellectual disabilities, Table 3 shows the results.

Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore the level of self-determination that women
with disabilities have in Jordan. Findings suggested that participants cited an
average level of self-determination in total score, and in all four domains: autonomy,
self-regulation, self-realisation and psychological empowerment. These findings are
promising, they in line with Gills (2011) results, which indicated that women with
disabilities have high level of self-determination. This results can be attributed
 European Journal of Special Needs Education 419

by what was mentioned by Rousso and Wehmeyer (2000) that this level of
self-determination is referred to early opportunities and experiences of household
responsibilities and care which female takeover. In addition, Verdugo et al. (2011)
indicated that the self-determination can be higher in ages (16–45) especially for
those who receive vocational training and employment services. However, this is the
situation of our study sample. This can be due to the many factors that can increase
the possibility of improvement in self-determination. Women within this age range
may receive several services such as vocational, educational and psychological
counselling, where all the previous usually help in improving self-determination. The
issuing of the disability individuals right act of (2007) was a primary base in respect
of rights and regulations of individuals with disability, freedom of their choices,
respect of their own life’s, and their participation in decision-making in planning their
programs (disability individuals right act 2007).
On the other hand, the results revealed statistically significant differences due to
type of disability on the total self-determination level, where hearing, visual and
physical disabilities had significant difference in comparison with intellectual dis-
abilities. This finding is reasonable and supported by what educational literature
showed that the most important factor in self-determination is cognitive ability level
(e.g. Stancliffe, Abery, and Smith 2000; Strnadova and Evans 2012; Wehmeyer
1996; Wehmeyer and Garner 2003). Consequentially, it was expected that women
with intellectual disabilities score less than other women without intellectual disabili-
ties in most if not all domains related to self-determination. This could be attributed
due to constrains related to the disability itself, most of the domains need a proper
level of intellectual abilities to be comprehended and acted upon, women with intel-
lectual disabilities are usually taught these kind of skills, therefore, if no appropriate
training was offered to them they cannot express the needed level of self-determina-
tion like the other disabilities.
Furthermore, this result is consistent with results of Nota et al. (2007) study
which revealed that women with intellectual disability have moderate level of
self-determination. Overall, this result replicated established research on self-
determination of women with intellectual disability (e.g. Carter et al. 2008; Nota
et al. 2007; Strandova and Evans 2012; Trainor 2007; Verdugo et al. 2011;
Wehmyer and Palmer 2003).
Results revealed that there are not any differences between hearing, visual and
physical disabilities in level of self-determination. This result is rationale, as self-
determination correlates with other critical factors such as values, culture, opportuni-
ties, beliefs and tradition (Shogren and Turnbull 2006; Turnbull and Turnbull 2001;
Wehmeyer and Garner 2003), which leads to other factors that needs to be incorpo-
rated to clearly explain the differences in scores among all women with disabilities.
This finding is similar to this of Crosnoe (2004), who reported big effect of context in
which individual with disabilities (school, family and community) and mainstreaming
opportunities. However, as Shogren et al. (2007) mentioned, there is limited and
sparse research in related of effect of type of disability on self-determination.
Depending on the results of this study, there is an urgent need for policy makers
and trainers to consider the topic of self-determination, in all regulations and laws
not forgetting the need for training courses and workshops especially in relation to
vocational rehabilitation which enables the inclusion and integration of women in
the society later on, despite all beliefs and values in any society women with disabil-
ity should have the ability of choice and self-determination for their own future.
420 E. Al-Zboon and J. Smadi

All related parties in Jordan should seriously pay attention to this vital
concept including the need for further participation of women in direct experiences
related to help women explore and achieve self-determination individually. We also
recommended for further research to explore other factors effecting the level of
self-determination (e.g. gender, age and cognitive ability level), and furthermore,
use qualitative research to explore in-depth knowledge regarding self-determination
for individuals with disabilities.

References
Abery, B. H., and R. J. Stancliffe. 2003. “An Ecological Theory of Self-determination:
Theoretical Foundation.” In Theory in Self-determination: Foundation for Educational
Practice, edited by M. L. Wehmeyer, B. H. Abery, D. E. Mithauf, and R. J. Stancliffe,
25–42. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Ackerman, Beth. 2006. Learning Self-determination: Lessons from the Literature for Work
with Children and Youth with Emotional and Behavioral Disabilities. Child and Youth
Care Forum 35 (4): 327–337.
AL-Khteeb, J. 2010. Current Trend in Special Education. Amman: Dar Wa’el for Publish.
Al-Zboon, E. 2013. Current Trends and Issues in Special Education. Amman: Dar Al-Fiker
for publish.
Carter, E. W., K. L. Lane, M. R. Pierson, and K. K. Stang. 2008. “Promoting Self-determina-
tion for Transition-age Youth: Views of High School General and Special Educators.”
Exceptional Children 75: 55–70.
Chappell, M. 2003. Violence against Women with Disability. Vol. 2007. British Columbia:
Institute against Family Violence.
Crosnoe, R. 2004. “Social Capital and the Interplay of Families and Schools.” Journal of
Marriage and Family 66: 267–280.
Doren, B., and M. Benz. 2001. “Gender Equity Issues in the Vocational and Transition
Services and Employment Outcomes Experienced by Young Women with Disabilities.”
In Double Jeopardy: Addressing Gender Issues in Special Education, edited by H. Rousso
and M. Wehmeyer, 289–312. Albany: SUNY Press.
Erten, O. 2011. “Facing Challenges: Experiences of Young Women with Disabilities
Attending a Canadian University.” Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability
24 (2): 101–114.
Field, S., and A. Hoffman. 2002. “Preparing Youth to Exercise Self-determination Quality
Indicators of School Environments that Promote the Acquisition of Knowledge, Skills,
and Beliefs Related to Self-determination.” Journal of Disability Policy Studies 13 (2):
113–118.
Field, S., M. Sarver, and R. Shaw. 2003. “Self-determination: A Key to Success in
Postsecondary Education for Students with Learning Disabilities.” Remedial and Special
Education 24 (6): 339–349.
Gills, La Tonya L. 2011. “Self-determination In Young African American Women With
Disabilities During The Transition Process.” PhD thesis, University of South Africa.
Hajras, H. 2013. “Woman with Disability and Family Building in Light of Rights and
Traditions.” In Second Regional Conference for Woman with Disability, edited by
N. Mekawe, 27–49. Cairo, Egypt: League of Arab States.
Lakkis, S. 1997. “Mobilizing Women with Physical Disabilities: The Lebanese Sitting
Handicapped Association.” In Gender and Disability: Women’s Experiences in the Middle
East, edited by L. Abu-Habib, 28–35. Oxford: Oxfam Publication.
Lee, S., and M. L. Wehmeyer. 2004. “A Review of the Korean Literature Related to
Self-determination: Future Directions and Practices for Promoting the Self-determination
of Students with Disabilities.” Korean Journal of Special Education 38 (4): 369–390.
Martin, J. E., J. L. Van Dycke, B. A. Greene, J. E. Gardner, and D. L. Lovett. 2006.
“Increasing Student Participation in IEP Meetings: Establishing the Self-Directed IEP as
an Evidenced-Based Practice.” Exceptional Children 72 (3): 299–316.
Nagata, K. 2003. “Gender and Disability in the Arab Region: The Challenges in the New
Millennium.” Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal 14 (1): 10–17.
 European Journal of Special Needs Education 421

Nota, L., L. Ferrari, S. Soresi, and M. Wehmeyer. 2007. “Self-determination, Social Abilities
and the Quality of Life of People with Intellectual Disability.” Journal of Intellectual
Disability Research 51: 850–865.
O’Brien, D., G. Revell, and M. West. 2003. “The Impact of the Current Employment Policy
Environment on Self-determination of Individuals with Disabilities.” Journal of
Vocational Rehabilitation 19 (2): 105–118.
Powers, Jennifer. 2010. “Understanding the Development of Self-determination in Youth with
Disabilities in Foster Care.” PhD thesis, Portland state university.
Rousso, H., and M. L. Wehmeyer. 2000. Double Jeopardy: Gender Equity in Special
Education. Albany: SUNY Press.
Schwartz, E., M. Keyl, P. Marcum, and R. Bode. 2009. “Helping Others Shows Differential
Benefits on Health and Well-being for Male and Female Teens.” Journal of Happiness
Studies 10: 431–448.
Shogren, K. A., & Turnbull, A. P. 2006. “Promoting Self-determination in Young Children
with Disabilities: The Critical Role of Families.” Infants and Young Children 19 (4):
338–352.
Shogren, K. A., M. L. Wehmeyer, S. B. Palmer, J. H. Soukup, T. D. Little, N. Garner,
and M. Lawrence. 2007. “Examining Individual and Ecological Predictors of the Self-
determination of Students with Disabilities.” Exceptional Children 73 (4): 488–509.
Stancliffe, R. J., B. H. Abery, and J. Smith. 2000. “Personal Control and the Ecology of
Community Living Settings: Beyond Living-unit Size and Type.” Mental Retardation
105: 431–454.
Strnadova, Iva, and Evans David. 2012. “Subjective Quality of Life of Women with Intellec-
tual Disabilities: The Role of Perceived Control over their Own Life in Self-determined
Behaviour.” Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 25: 71–79.
Taylor, R., S. Richards, and M. Brady. 2005. Mental Retardation: Historical Perspectives,
Current Practices and Future Directions. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
The disability individuals right act. 2007. The Official Journal, the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan rule no. 31.
Trainor, A. 2007. “Perceptions of Adolescent Girls with LD Regarding Self-determination and
Postsecondary Transition Planning.” Learning Disabilities Quarterly Journal 30: 31–45.
Turnbull, A. P., and H. R. Turnbull. 2001. Families, Professionals, and Exceptionality:
Collaborating for Empowerment. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hail.
United Nations ESCWA. 1994. “Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia.” Pro-
ceedings of ESCWA Regional Seminar on the Role of the Family in Integrating Disabled
Women into Society, Amman, October 16–18.
Verdugo, M., A. Martín-Ingelmo, F. B. Jordán de Urríes, C. Vicent, and M. C. Sánchez.
2011. “Impact on Quality of Life and Self-determination of a National Program for
Increasing Supported Employment in Europe.” Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 31:
55–64.
Wehmeyer, M. L. 1996. “A Self-report Measure of Self-determination for Adolescents with
Cognitive Disabilities.” Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmen-
tal Disabilities 31: 282–293.
Wehmeyer M. 2002. “Self-determined Assessment: Critical Components for Transition Plan-
ning.” In Transition Assessment: Wise Practices for Quality Lives, edited by C. L. Sax,
and C. A. Thoma, 25–38. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Wehmeyer, M. L., M. Agran, and C. Hughes. 2000. “A National Survey of Teachers’ Promo-
tion of Self-determination and Student-directed Learning.” Journal of Special Education
34: 58–68.
Wehmeyer, M., and N. Garner. 2003. “The Impact of Personal Characteristics of People with
Intellectual and Developmental Disability on Self-determination and Autonomous
Functioning.” Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 16: 255–265.
Wehmeyer, M. L., and S. B. Palmer. 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: 131–144.
Wehmeyer, M. L., S. B. Palmer, J. H. Soukup, N. W. Garner, and M. Lawrence. 2007.
“Self-determination and Student Transition Planning Knowledge and Skills: Predicting
Involvement.” Exceptionality 15 (1): 31–44.
Copyright of European Journal of Special Needs Education is the property of Routledge and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.