Developing Quality Special Education Teachers

Need for a Seamless, Longitudinal Approach

Mary T. Brownell Center for Personnel Studies in Special Education

The Case for Seamless Teacher Education

 Beginning special education teachers (SETs) need ongoing support to become highly qualified because they. .  Are less likely to be fully prepared for their job and more likely to be completely unprepared    Are expected to perform all aspects of job capably and alone Experience less collegiality than senior colleagues Have fewer curricular and technological resources Boe, Cook, & Sunderland, 2006; Griffin, Winn, Otis-Wilborn, & Kilgore, 2003



The Case for Seamless Teacher Education

Even when beginning SETs are knowledgeable, they struggle to enact that knowledge.

 In a quantitative study of beginning special education teachers, teachers were rather knowledgeable about how to teach reading, but struggled to enact that knowledge.

 Additionally, beginning SETs demonstrated stronger classroom management and generic practices than reading practices.

Brownell, Bishop, Gersten, Klingner, Dimino, Haager, Penfield, Menon, & Sindelar (2007)

   

The Case for Seamless Teacher Education

Although some beginning SETs provide highly engaging instruction, most are uneven in their practices.

Beginning SETs indicate being well-prepared in special education, but less well-prepared to teach students with disabilities reading.

SETs, in co-teaching situations, are often relegated to a teacher’s aide position in the classroom.

Experience is often touted as the most important factor, but this finding is actually not consistent Bishop, Brownell, Klingner, Menon, Galman, & Leko, 2007; Scruggs,Mastropieri, & McDuffie, in press; Seo, Brownell, Bishop, & Dingle, 2007; Wayne & Youngs, 2003

Seamless teacher education

 Involves high quality:   Initial preparation Induction into the field  On-going professional development

High Quality Initial Preparation

 Even though the research base is limited, these characteristics seem to define quality preparation:   More extensive in terms of coursework and field experiences Includes appropriate coursework in pedagogy for teaching content  High degree of coherence between coursework and fieldwork  Professional collaboration is valued and emphasized Brownell, Ross, Colon, & McCallum, 2005; Hoffman, Roller, Maloch, Sailors, Duffy, Beretras, 2005

High Quality Induction

 Why is it essential?

    Beginning teachers are more vulnerable Can improve teacher retention Can improve teacher quality Costs less than replacing a teacher Brownell, Hirsch, & Seo, 2004; Griffin, Winn, Otis-Wilborn, & Kilgore, 2003; Ingersoll & Kralik, 2004; Strong, 2005; Strong, 2006

High Quality Induction

 Attributes of effective, comprehensive programs:  Supportive school culture and collective responsibility    Opportunities for collaborative interactions Quality mentoring by well-trained mentors that are a good match in terms of subject taught, grade level taught, and personality Explicit goals for improving teaching

High Quality Induction

 Attributes of effective, comprehensive programs:  Instructional and psychological support   Mentors engage in formative assessment not evaluation Political and fiscal support   Extend beyond the first year Consider difficulty of initial placements, particularly critical for AR route participants

    

Examples of High Quality Induction Programs

The Connecticut Beginning Teacher Support Program New Teacher Center at the University of California Santa Cruz California’s Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment Program Toledo District Induction Program Additionally, there are the CEC guidelines for effective mentoring

High Quality Professional Development

  Structures for learning must be in place that promote more extended, deeper learning The duration of the learning activities matters, but only when they. .  provide opportunities for active learning and are  aligned with teachers’ goals, curriculum standards, and professional communications

 

High Quality Professional Development

Collective participation of teachers from the same school, department, and grade level is important.

Content focus of the staff development effort matters, particularly when it. . .

 provides opportunities to learn about the curriculum  helps improve teachers’ knowledge of content, content specific pedagogy, and how students acquire content

High Quality Professional Development

 Promotes active learning on four dimensions:     observing and being observed teaching, planning classroom implementation, presenting in and leading staff development efforts, and . . .

analyzing and reviewing student work

High Quality Professional Development

 Fosters coherence by:     being consistent with teachers’ learning goals building on information and skills previously acquired being aligned with state and district standards and assessments providing communication opportunities that enable teachers to confront implementation issues and share solutions

   

What will be essential to support a seamless system?

Well-articulated standards that promote a cohesiveness between teacher preparation, induction, and professional development Tiered licensing system that encourages teachers to continually work at professional standards Valid and reliable indicators of teacher quality, as evaluation of teachers is critical Securing adequate political will to change and fund such a system

Questions for Our Field

 Consideration of how special education will be incorporated into this larger system  What does it mean to successfully socialize and educate beginning special education teachers?

  How must larger teacher quality efforts be adjusted to suit the needs of beginning special education teachers?

What do high quality special education teachers look like and know? What are we aiming for? Should we insist on only playing certain roles in schools? If not, how will efforts to prepare and support special education teachers be focused?

References

     Bishop, A., Brownell, M., Klingner, J., Menon, S., Galman, S., & Leko, M. (2007). Understanding the Influence of Personal Attributes, Preparation, and School Environment on Beginning Special Education Teachers’ Classroom Practices During Reading Instruction. Status revised and resubmitted.

Boe, E., Sunderland, B., & Cook, L. (November, 2006). The supply of teachers from traditional and alternative routes to preparation. Annual Teacher Education Conference for the Council for Exceptional Children, San Diego, CA.

Brownell, M. Bishop, A., Gersten, R., Klingner, J., Dimino, J., Haager, D., Menon, S., Penfield, R., & Sindelar, P. (2007). Examining the Dimensions of Teacher Quality for Beginning Special Education Teachers: The Role of Domain Expertise.

Accepted with revisions in Exceptional Children. Brownell, M.T., Ross, D., *Colon, E., & *McCallum, C. (2005). Critical features of special education teacher preparation: A comparison with exemplary practices in general education . Journal of Special Education , 38, 242-252.

Brownell, M., Hirsch, E. & Seo, S. (2004). Meeting the demand for highly qualified special education teachers during severe shortages . Journal of Special Education , 38, 56-61.

References

    Griffin, C.C., Winn, J.A., Otis-Wilborn, A., & Kilgore, K. (2003). New teacher induction in special education . (COPSSE Document Number RS-5). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Center on Personnel Studies in Special Education.

Hoffman, J.V., Roller, C., Maloch, B., Sailors, M., Duffy, G., Beretras, S.N. (2005). Teachers’ preparation to teach reading and their experiences and practices in first three years of teaching. The Elementary School Journal, 105 (3), 267-287.

Ingersoll, R. & Kralik, J. M. (2004). retention: What the research says.

The impact of mentoring on teacher ECS Research Review, Denver, CO: Educational Commission of the States. Retrieved June 30, 2004 from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/50/36/5036.htm Seo, S., Brownell, M., Bishop, A., & Dingle, M. (2007). An Examination of Beginning Special Education Teachers’ Classroom Practices That Engage Elementary Students with Learning Disabilities in Reading Instruction . Status revised and resubmitted.

References

    Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M., & McDuffie, K. (in press). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A Meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children.

Strong, M. (2005). Mentoring new teachers to increase retention: A look at the research.

Research brief #05-01. New Teacher Center. Strong, M. (2006). Does new teacher support affect student achievement? Some early research findings.

Research brief #06-01. New Teacher Center Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. 122.

Review of Educational Research, 73 , 89-