Finite Resources, Increasing Demands: Rural Children Left Behind? Educators Speak Out on Issues Facing Rural Special Education

Abstract

Current legislative mandates for schools to bring all students to the proficient level on state content standards by 2014 have been both commended and criticized by stakeholders across the nation. Schools are expected to meet this challenge by employing only highly qualified teachers who are well versed in content and the use of evidence-based practices. They must document adequate yearly progress toward proficiency for all students, including those with disabilities. Most groups praise the accountability that accompanies these mandates; however, concerns have been voiced by some educators about their impact on rural schools as well as their implications for special education services. Various stakeholders in rural areas across the country were surveyed to examine the perceived impact of the NCLBA mandates for highly qualified teachers and adequate yearly progress. Qualitative research methods were used to analyze responses to open-ended questions asking participants to expand on special education issues related to qualifications of highly qualified teachers, documentation of adequate yearly progress and other general concerns. Some common themes emerged related to the unique circumstances of rural schools as well as the potential impact of NCLBA on rural special educators and special education programs.

Parent Connectors: A Parent-to-Parent Support Program Feasible for Rural Settings

“…School personnel in rural school settings face particular challenges when supporting students with EBD. For example, there is often difficulty securing teachers who are highly qualified, and special education teachers trained in working with students with EBD (Berry, Petrin, Gravelle, & Farmer, 2011; Mitchem, Kossar, & Ludlow, 2006). There are also difficulties with serving students with EBD in smaller rural communities, as often one of the only options is to be served within inclusive settings, with special education teachers providing services within the general education classroom, although many students often require more intensive supports (Jung & Bradley, 2006).…”

A Comparison of Urban, Suburban, and Rural Principal Leadership

“…These challenges have been exacerbated by rapid growth of English language learner populations in many suburban districts (Field, 2008;Howard, 2007). a In contrast, literature related to the rural principalship focuses on three challenges (Winn, et al, 2009a): retention of effective principals (Arnold, Gaddy, & Dean, 2004;Partlow & Ridenor 2008;Provasnik, Kewalramani, Coleman, Gilbertson, Herring, & Xie, 2007); difficult community relations (Cruzeiro & Morgan, 2006;Jimerson, 2005;Mitchem, Kossar, & Ludlow 2006); and pressure to meet standards with limited resources (Arnold et al, 2004;Warren & Peel, 2005). Thus, although urban, suburban, and rural school leaders face different obstacles, there is a pronounced need for effective, skilled leaders in each type of school.…”

Supporting Inclusive Education for Students with Severe Disabilities in Rural Areas

“…The challenges of educating students with low incidence disabilities in rural settings are well documented (Ludlow, Conner & Schechter, 2005;Jung, Gaylon-Keramidas, Collins & Ludlow, 2006;Larwood, 2005;Mitchem, Kossar & Ludlow, 2006;Rude et al, 2005). Rural schools experience difficulty hiring and retaining special educators.…”

“…Given the difficulty of attracting and maintaining highly qualified teachers to rural areas (McLeskey, Tyler, & Flippin, 2004;Mitchem et al, 2006), knowledge regarding inclusive practices and strategies of teaching students with severe disabilities needs to be brought to those currently holding teaching positions. Given the low numbers of these students, educating them with their nondisabled peers not only provides clear access to the core curriculum (an NCLB mandate), but also avoids the isolation that occurs when attempts are made to keep these students separated from their peers.…”