Special Education Teacher Education: An Update

1

Special Education TeacherEducation: An Update

2

Topics and Presenters

Supply of Teachers from Traditional andAlternative Preparation Routes inSpecial and General Education

–Ed Boe, Univ of Pennsylvania

3


Special Education Teacher Attrition:What We Know, What We Can Do

– Bonnie Billingsley, Virginia Tech

4


Highly Qualified Beginning SpecialEducation Teachers: The Role ofClassroom Practice, TeacherKnowledge, Preparation, and SchoolContext

–Mary Brownell, Univ of Florida

5


Teacher Education’s Role in TechnologyApplication

–Sean Smith, Univ of Kansas

6


Alternative Route Programs in SpecialEducation: What We Know AboutProgram Design, Instructional Delivery,and Participant Characteristics

–Mike Rosenberg, Johns Hopkins

7


Cost Effectiveness and TeacherPreparation Routes

–Paul Sindelar, Univ of Florida

8

Tomorrow’s ScheduleCatalina 2

• 8 am Ed Boe and Lynne Cook, Cal StateDominguez Hills

• 9 am Paul Sindelar and Mike Rosenberg• 10 am Mike Rosenberg and Paul Sindelar• 11 am Sean Smith• 1 pm Mary Brownell, Anne Bishop, UF, and

Mary Dingle, Sonoma State• 2 pm Bonnie Billingsley

9

Ed Boe and Bob SunderlandUniversity of Pennsylvania

And

Lynne CookCalifornia State University, Dominguez Hills

TED ConferenceNovember 9, 2006

SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS: SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS: SUPPLY AND DEMAND SUPPLY AND DEMAND

10

Chronic shortage of specialeducation teachers,Due to:

Insufficient supply to satisfydemand.

Main Problem

12

National Data Sources

Data Sources:

OSEP’s Data Analysis System: 1987-88 through 2004-05

NCES’s Schools and Staffing Survey: 1999-00 and 2003-04

NCES’s Teacher Follow Up Survey: 2000-01

NCES’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

Caution:

Numbers reported are subject to sampling and other errors;therefore, numbers reported are an approximation.

13

Total Demand for Special Education Teachers

For Students Aged 6-21 Years with Disabilities

School Year

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

87-88 91-92 95-96 99-00 03-04

Source: OSEP Data Analysis System

Num

ber

of T

each

ing

Posit

ions

Total Demand: Teaching Positions

10-09-2006 S:\CRESP \Boe Tables and Figures \TQR-M\total demand.ppt

14

Growth in Total Demand forTeachers in Special Education

47% during the past 17 years

2.75% per year during the past 17 years

10,000 additional teaching positions created per year during the past 6 years

15

Annual Demand for New Hiresof Special Education Teachers

QUESTIONS:

How large is the annual demandfor new teacher hires?

What factors create the annualdemand for new hires?

16

Sources of Annual Demand for New Hires ofTeachers into Special Ed (Year 2000)

Annual Number of Teaching Positionsto be Filled by New Hires

•Sources: DANS (OSEP); 1999-01 SASS/TFS (NCES)

17

Annual Supply of New Hiresof Special Education Teachers

QUESTION:

What sources produce the annualsupply of new hires?

18

Sources of the Annual Supply ofNewly Hired SE Teachers

A. Entering Teaching Employment

1. Beginning Teachers

2. Experienced Teachers a. Reentering Experienced Teachers b. Migrants from Private to Public Schools

B. Employed General Ed Teachers Switching to Special Ed

19

Sources of Annual Supply of New Hires ofSpecial Education Teachers (Year 2000)

Annual Number of Newly Hired TeachersSources: DANS (OSEP); 1999-01 SASS/TFS(NCES)

20

Qualifications ofSpecial Education Teachers

QUESTION:

Do the sources of supply of SpEd teachersyield a sufficient number of teachers who arequalified to teach in special education?

Consider the shortage of fully certifiedteachers.

22

Degree Graduates WithTraditional Preparation

QUESTION:

Does the annual production of degreegraduates from traditional teacherpreparation programs satisfy the annualdemand for qualified teachers in specialeducation?

23

Degree Graduates in Special Education Teaching

24

Annual Degree Graduates with Majors in

Special Education Teaching : Year 2000

Employment Status Bachelor’s Master’s

at Time of Graduation Number % Number %

Not Employed as Teachers 9,300 97% 1,300 11%

Employed as Teachers 300 3% 11,000 89%

Total Graduates 9,600 100% 12,300 100%

Sources: IPEDS and SASS, NCES

25

Questions

• Why is the production of traditionallyprepared Special Education teachers at thebachelor’s level declining when the annualdemand is increasing?

• To what extent is the demand for newteacher hires satisfied by alternativelyprepared teachers and unpreparedteachers?

26

Types of TeacherPreparation

• TRADITIONAL TEACHER PREPARATION - Traditional Degree Programs (BA/BS & Master’s) - Other Traditional (e.g., fifth year programs)

• ALTERNATIVE TEACHER PREPARATION - Alternative Programs - Other Alternative (e.g., take courses)

• NO TEACHER PREPARATION

27

Percentage of Beginning Special EducationTeachers

Supply of Beginning Special Education TeachersWith 1 – 3 Years of Experience: By Type of Preparation

Source: 2003-04 SASS, NCES

28

Main Topics for Breakout Session

Comparisons of traditional and alternative routesof teacher preparation in terms of:

• Amount of preparation completed• Qualifications produced• Response to teacher shortage• Fidelity to alternative route policy intents

29

TEACHER TURNOVER INSPECIAL EDUCATION

Bonnie S. BillingsleyVirginia Tech

TED/TAM ConferenceNovember 9, 2006

30

RECENT NEWSPAPERHEADLINES

From Georgia:“Special ed teachers could leave

classroom due to No Child rules”

From Miami-Dade:“Teachers of special-ed students want

more help… special education isvery challenging field…”

31

Types of Teacher Turnover

• Switch or transfer to general education

• Move or migrate to other specialeducation positions

• Exit to non-teaching positions

32

SPECIAL EDUCATIONTURNOVER (in 2000-01)

Data from Boe, Cook, & Sunderland, 2006

33

COSTS OF TURNOVER

• Financial• School• Student• Teacher

34

EXODUS OF EARLY CAREERTEACHERS

NEW TEACHERS

High Risk

TEACHER TURNOVER

35

WHAT CONTRIBUTES TOTEACHER TURNOVER?

TEACHER TURNOVER

ENTERING TEACHERS

?

36

Linking Teacher Qualityand Preparation

Mary T. BrownellCenter on Personnel Studies in

Special Education

37

Demands of Current PolicyContext

• Strong emphasis on teacher quality andquestions about the ability of Colleges ofEducation to prepare high quality teachershas put incredible pressure on teachereducators to establish credible linkagesbetween teacher education, the quality of TEgraduates, and the achievement of studentstaught by TE graduates.

38

Considerations in MakingSuch Linkages

• Essential to establishing linkages between teachereducation, teacher quality, and student achievementare valid and reliable dependent measures– Dimensions of special education teacher quality are not well-

conceptualized and potentially vary considerably– Valid assessments of those dimensions are not available– Student assessment is inadequate for comparison across

groups of student with disabilities and most standardized,group administered tests are insufficiently sensitive togauge gains

39

Considerations in MakingSuch Linkages

• Program variability is enormous, making it moredifficult to link program elements with specificchanges in dimensions of teacher quality

• Special education teachers work in such variedcontexts requiring specific knowledge, makingcomparisons across these contexts challenging

• Students with disabilities are served by multipleprofessionals, making it difficult to link theirachievement with the special education teacher

40

Our First Attempt

• Focused mostly on understandingsome key dimensions of teacherquality, for both beginners andexperienced teachers, and to a lesserdegree, the contextual factors thatseem to support quality

41

What did we do?

• Quantitative studies of 30 beginningteachers and 60 of varied experience(Colorado, Florida, California)

• In-depth, qualitative studies of selectedbeginning and experienced teachersinvolving both interviews andobservations

42

Teacher BeliefsTeacher BeliefsAnd AttributesAnd AttributesTeacher Preparation Teacher Preparation

Teacher KnowledgeTeacher KnowledgeAnd PracticeAnd Practice

StudentOutcomes

43

Quantitative Findings

• Beginning special education teachersdemonstrated average generic practice;whereas, demonstrated reading practice wassomewhat below average.

• Overall classroom practice correlated withstudent gains in oral fluency

• Overall classroom practice correlated withknowledge of word attack

44

Qualitative Findings

• Most highly engaging teachers differed frommoderate to low engaging teachers on:– Instructional quality, including structure and

coherence of reading lessons as well asstrategies for engaging students in reading

– Responsiveness to student needs, both academicand behavioral

– Socio-emotional climate of classroom– Strategies for fostering student autonomy

45


• Knowledge of special education andknowledge of reading pedagogy are bothimportant, and most beginners feelunprepared to teach reading

• Opportunities to apply and practice teachereducation content influences sense ofefficacy and classroom practice

• Preparation in classroom managementinfluences a beginners’ ability to deliverinstruction

46


• Access to curriculum and relevanttraining influences instruction

• Service delivery model influencesability to provide instruction

• General administrative and collegialsupport plays a necessary, but notsufficient role in supporting beginners

47

Conclusions

Quality of the special education teachers’reading instruction matters in securingstudent achievement gains, particularly at thebasic skill level

Knowledge of how to teach reading (wordattack) relates to quality of instructionalpractice

Beginning teachers demonstrated a need tostrengthen reading instruction

48

Conclusions

The nature of preparation in reading seemsto matter good experience is necessary

Need to better understand the role ofcurriculum in supporting beginning teacherpractice

Uneven practice of beginners suggests astrong need for coherence betweenpreparation and induction

49

Questions to Consider

• Given the dramatic shortages of specialeducation teachers, and our subsequentneed to prepare teachers broadly, how canwe help special education teachers developthe sophisticated knowledge they need toteach reading well?– Or, the sophisticated knowledge they are

likely to need to teach other subject areaswell?

50

Technology & TeacherEducation

Panel Inclusion?• Reading and Teaching?• Behavior and Teaching?• State of Teacher Preparation

– Traditional– Alternative– Distance/Online

• State of Assistive/Instructional Technology– Meaningful Access to General Education Curriculum– Accommodations & Modifications

51

Technology & TeacherEducation

• Online/Distance/Alternative Prep– Delivery at a Distance– Supplementing Current Traditional Efforts

• BlackBoard - blackboard.com• WebCT - webct.com• Moodle - moodle.com• Podcasts - epnweb.org• iChats - apple.com/education/solutions/ichat• Live Messenger - microsoft.com• Bloggin - essdack.org• Interactive Video Conferencing - altec.org

52

Distance/Online Instruction

• Impact on Teacher Preparation– Meyen and colleagues– Spooner and colleagues– Collins and colleagues– Skylar, Higgins, Boone and colleagues

• Delivery Evaluation– Satisfaction– Achievement– Perceived Knowledge– Ability to Apply Knowledge?– Demonstrate capacity?

53

Distance/Online Education

• Faculty development - Leadership Prep– Evidence of preparation– Coursework for skill development– Coursework on implications

• Pedagogy• How to Apply?• When to apply?• Media/Format Implications?

54

Assistive/Instructional Technology

Why Technology & Teacher Education?– Body of research documents that it works

• Reading -

– access/decoding/comprehension• Writing -

– mechanics/quality/quantity• Adaptive development -

– self-determination

55

Assistive/Instructional Technology

• Technology Impact– CEO Forum

ceoforum.org– NCTI Information Dissemination

nationaltechcenter.org– NATRI Findings

natri.uky.edu– QIAT

qiat.org

56

AT/IT Teacher Education

• Teacher Education & AT/IT Research– How to we prepare future teachers?

• pt3.org– Edyburn and Gardner - JSET - 1999

• Individual to Group Visions– Collegial Study Groups w/ Shared Vision– Communities of Practice

• Selection• Acquisition• Implementation• Integration

57


• Preservice Examinations– Teacher Technology Skill Translate to

Adoption?– Does Skill Translate to Integration?– Do Preservice Students Value

Technology?– Self-efficacy tied to Technology Integration

• Computer-related teaching practices

58


• Faculty and Preservice StudentDevelopment– Reverse mentoring– Skill development– Communities of Practice– Knowledge dissemination

59


• Research indicates Teacher Education:– Pre-service teachers need to perceive AT is a tool that can:

• Expand Student Engagement• Promote equitable access to the general education

curriculum– Teacher Education Programs need to:

• Incorporate technology rich coursework• Observe classroom teachers integrating AT• Use AT in an inclusive setting (preservice student)• Access to multiple and frequent opportunities to practice

across the teacher education experience– Michaels & McDermott– Wetzel and colleagues

60


Next steps in Research1. Both qualitative and quantitative

methodologies are needed to providescientifically based evidence for thetechnology in teacher education community.

2. Research in education should use multiplemeasures for formative and summativeassessment. Reliance solely on eitherphenomenological evidence or standardizedtest scores should be avoided.

61


3. Researchers should be encouraged toidentify important new questions abouttechnology in teacher education. Progress inthe field will now permit such questions tobe researched.

4. Researchers should synthesize knowledgegained across PT3 projects around thecountry to identify what we have learnedand what we know about successfulpreservice preparation programs.

62


5. Researchers should collect data in waysthat permit it to be disaggregated by singleand multiple factors-e.g., LD Hispanicstudents-so that important differences intechnology access and use can be identifiedand addressed.

6. Researchers should track P- graduatingteachers into their induction year throughyear three and investigate the achievementof their students.

63

The Changing Mode of Production ofSpecial Education Teachers:

What We Know AboutWho’s Teaching Our Students

Michael S. RosenbergJohns Hopkins University

TED 2006

64

The Search For A Theme

• CSI?

65


• CSI?• Close To Home?

66


• CSI?• Close To Home?• Deal or No Deal

67


• CSI?• Close To Home?• Deal or No Deal• Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?

68



69



• Mosaic/Pieces of a Puzzle

70

Where We Were

• Shortage of special education teachers ischronic, long-term, and is worsening

• NCLB and IDEA encourage the developmentof teacher preparation alternatives

• In special education, we know little abouthow effective alternative routes are.

• What we do know suggests that not allalternative routes are created equal.

• Tendency to generalize from secondarycontent model to special education.

71

Where We Were

• Effective ARC programs can produce competentteachers, often as competent as graduates oftraditional teacher education programs

• Effective ARC programs are characterized by(Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2001; 2005):– Collaboration among program providers (LEA, SEA,

IHEs)– Program of adequate length and intensity– Substantial, rigorous, and coherent programmatic

content– Meaningful and frequent observation and mentoring

72

Where We Are:AR Indexing Study

• Development of Program Lists (n=235)• Final Sample (n=101)• Areas of Survey

– Program Infrastructure– Program length and intensity– Program Characteristics– Participant Characteristics

(Rosenberg, Boyer, Sindelar, & Misra, in press)

73


• General Themes– High IHE Involvement

• AR programs represent an effective means forIHEs to expand their offerings with littleadditional capital expenditure

– Length of Preparation and Support• Regardless of length of time before assuming

full teaching responsibilities most AR programsare more than 18 months

74


• Participants– Mid-Career Changers – 46%– Recent Bachelors - 29%

• 25% of Recent Bachelors Degrees areGeneral Educators

75

What We Need To Consider

• Actual Contribution To Supply– Cannibalizing Existing Program Recruits

• Sense of Profession and Professionalism• Cost Effectiveness

– Consideration of Attrition and Quality• Impact on IHE Faculty

– Roles and Responsibilities of Faculty• Most Important: Impact on Students

76

Break-Out Sessions

• Indexing Details• Cost-Effectiveness Study

77

Cost Effectiveness andTeacher Preparation Routes

Paul SindelarUniversity of FloridaMichael Rosenberg

Johns Hopkins University

78

Collaborators

• Economists from UF’s Bureau ofEconomic and Business Research– David Denslow– Jim Dewey– Chifeng Dai (now at Southern Illinois U)

79

The Problem

• Persistent, severe special education teachershortages

• Inadequate supply of new teachers fromtraditional teacher education programs

• Inadequate supply of teachers who areculturally and linguistically diverse

• Risk borne by high poverty schools

80

The Policy Context

• NCLB encourages states to developalternatives to traditional teacher preparation,and alternative routes of all kinds areincreasingly commonplace in SE(Rosenberg, Boyer, Sindelar, & Misra, in press)

• NCLB also encourages states to“streamline” pedagogical training and tomove teachers into the classroom on a “fasttrack basis.”

81

A Point of Logic

• NCLB: content mastery and verbal abilitymore important than pedagogical skill– Derives from secondary math/science

context• The same logic doesn’t fit special education

well at all– In teaching children who struggle to learn,

effective pedagogy is essential

82

The Policy Context

• Persistent Unmet Demand + FacilitativePolicy Context => Proliferation of PreparationAlternatives

• States are faced with the problem of decidinghow best to allocate training funds amongalternatives so as to maximize supply

83

Cost Effectiveness Model

• Cost Effectiveness = Total Costs/# Program Completers• Key Variables

– Costs– Output– Attrition– Quality– Unique Contribution to Supply

84

Costs and Attrition

• Initial costs (and cost effectiveness) isameliorated by high retention and inflated byhigh attrition

• Programs with high initial costs may provecost effective in the long run, provided thatattrition is low

• Programs with low initial costs may provecost ineffective in the long run if attrition ishigh

85

Costs and Attrition

• Program A: 20 graduates @$10,000/graduate, 95% annualretention

• Program B: 20 graduates @$7,500/graduate, 85% retention

• Which Program is more cost effective 5years out?

86

Costs and Attrition

• Program A: initial cost of $200,000,with 15 survivors: $13,333/survivor

• Program B: initial cost of $150,000,with 9 survivors: $16,666/survivor

87

Unique Contribution to Supply

• If new programs do not contributeuniquely to supply, they only add tototal cost of preparing a givenworkforce

• If new programs do not contributeuniquely to supply, they only diminishoverall cost effectiveness

88

Project INVEST

• OSEP field-initiated project• Purpose: To determine the costs and

benefits of special education teacherpreparation alternatives and to informstates’ decision making about how bestto allocate training funds to assure anadequate supply of diverse andcompetent special educators.

89

Phase I Data Collection

• Participant Recruitment• Interviews with Program Directors

– Conducted by telephone, recorded contemporaneously– Ask about monetary support, program and institutional

features, and participants• Analysis of Program Planners

– Gen and SE foundations and methods, field experiences• Cost Tables

– Excel Workbook, completed independently– Instructional and administrative costs, progress through and

attrition during the program

90

Phase II: Program CaseStudies

• Teaching observations (Pathwise)– Teacher Quality

• Prospective study of teacher attrition• Participant Interviews

– What training options were available toyou when you entered the program?

– Unique contribution to supply

91

Tomorrow…

• Presenting findings from Phase I of theproject, including– Common program types, our typology– Content analysis, by type– Preservice and on the job training, by type– Cost and costs/completer by type

92

Tomorrow’s ScheduleCatalina 2

• 8 am Ed Boe and Lynne Cook, Cal State Dominguez Hills

• 9 am Paul Sindelar and Mike Rosenberg• 10 am Mike Rosenberg and Paul Sindelar• 11 am Sean Smith• 1 pm Mary Brownell, Anne Bishop, UF, and

Mary Dingle, Sonoma State• 2 pm Bonnie Billingsley

Special Education Teacher Education: An Update

Documents

Transcript of Special Education Teacher Education: An Update