Roles and Responsibilities of Secondary Special Education Teachers in an Age of Reform

Abstract

Special education teachers in today's workplace must show “competence at teaching everything” (Mastropieri, 2001). They work in different settings, teaching and adapting content across all levels. Added to this complexity are reform efforts that are driving major changes in the entire special education system, including service delivery models and teacher roles. However, without an understanding of teachers' current roles and responsibilities, we cannot know if such recommendations are feasible or how they would change the world of practice. This study surveyed high school special education teachers to investigate their daily work lives. In general, participants taught courses in several different content areas, primarily in self-contained settings. They also held numerous nonteaching roles. All roles and responsibilities were independent of the number of years taught and of teachers' educational backgrounds. Implications for transforming teachers' work lives in an effort to increase student outcomes are discussed.

Roles, duties and challenges of special/support teachers at secondary education: implications for promoting inclusive practices

“…Finally, the provision of instructional support, either individually or in small groups, and the constant monitoring of the progress of students with SEND were singled out as key work obligations that teachers are directly or indirectly accountable for across different national contexts (Forlin 2001;Wasburn-Moses 2005;Scanlon and Baker 2012;Ramberg 2013). The content of additional support places emphasis on core subject areas such as mathematics and language, at the expense of social, study or vocational skills, and predominantly involves either re-teaching the curriculum in an adapted or simplified way or diversifying and adjusting scholarly assignments to learners' needs (Forlin 2001;Wasburn-Moses 2005;Boutskou 2007).…”

“…The content of additional support places emphasis on core subject areas such as mathematics and language, at the expense of social, study or vocational skills, and predominantly involves either re-teaching the curriculum in an adapted or simplified way or diversifying and adjusting scholarly assignments to learners' needs (Forlin 2001;Wasburn-Moses 2005;Boutskou 2007). The drawbacks underpinning the operation of pull-out services have been well documented in Greece, as well as in other educational systems, and refer to the divergent teaching and learning practices applied in the two settings in addition to the oversimplified and sub-standard curriculum, which is delivered in resource settings -not to mention the stigma that the withdrawal of students frequently entails (Boutskou 2007;Todd 2012).…”

“…Under various titles and names (Todd 2012), special/support teachers have been considered key facilitators in tearing down barriers and developing approaches that accommodate the divergent needs of students (Emanuelsson 2001;Wasburn-Moses 2005;Ramberg 2013). They have been called upon to expand their traditional remedial role by adopting a more consultative focus through the establishment of collaborative working relationships with regular education colleagues.…”

Physical Education Teacher Candidates' Beliefs About Instructing Students With Disabilities in Adapted Aquatics

“…This will help teacher candidates challenge stereotypical beliefs or judgments about people different from themselves (Adams et al, 2005). In addition, course work in special education will provide learning opportunities with respect to performing administrative tasks (e.g., writing IEPs); teaching tasks (teaching content and skills) and modifications (making accommodations, managing behaviors, and consulting with students); as well collaboration with other teachers, parents, and administrators (Wasburn-Moses, 2005).…”

The Old Man and the Sea: Navigating the Gulf between Special Educators and the Content Area Classroom

“…In many content area classrooms, general education teachers provide lecture‐style instruction to large groups of students. The special educator who is “coteaching” may have little opportunity to use his/her skills to improve student learning (King‐Sears & Bowman‐Kruhm, 2011; Mastropieri et al, 2005; Scruggs et al, 2007; Wasburn‐Moses, 2005). This instructional configuration can frustrate both special and general educators because there is a lack of a shared language and experiences to guide practice for many coteaching teams.…”