The Role of Special Education Training in the Development of Socially Just Leaders

Abstract

Over the past two decades, colleges of education along with a number of national organizations and specialized professional associations have sought to improve educational administration programs through the incorporation of a broad policy framework designed to develop socially just leaders. Central to the growth of these new leaders is a commitment to acknowledge and embrace difference and to create educational spaces within which all children can learn. As the notion of social justice within education has been evolving, certain students, particularly those with disabilities, have been railing against persistent inequities within schools. Special education has emerged as one of the most litigious issues that school leaders must confront in their daily practice. Nevertheless, content related to special education and special education law has been a long neglected area within university-based administrator preparation programs and has been strangely absent in conversations relevant to the creation of administrator preparation programs that embrace a social justice model of leadership. Beginning with the current literature base of social justice and leadership preparation in special education and special education law, and using the recently revised Educational Leadership Constituents Council Advanced Programs in Educational Leadership Standards for building-level administrators for context, this article proposes an imperative to include curriculum content and leadership training that embraces and honors the inclusion of students in K-12 special education programs and enables building-level administrators to fulfill their role as socially just leaders.

Untitled

“…However, notable departures in the narratives from much of the research literature were two themes 578 under 'doing social justice leadership': (a) 'Executing Justice', particularly through reparations and de-privileging through status exchange and (b) 'Repositioning the Marginalized' through particularly targeting mindsets.It may be that in the absence of specific policy to inform principals' actions within the Trinidad and Tobago context that these ways of doing social justice leadership emerged out of a pressing need to act in the face of injustice. Although reflective of context within the study, the social justice needs of aspirant and practicing school leaders were also found to be generally consistent with existing literature, particularly the need for principals to be conscious and self-reflective(Dantley & Tillman, 2010;Oplatka & Arar, 2015;Pazey & Cole, 2013).…”

Reviewing Cyber Security Social Engineering Training and Awareness Programs—Pitfalls and Ongoing Issues

“…The study by Luo et al [49] indicates that hackers may even use the technique of moral obligatory guilt to ensure that people act upon the bait. Additionally, the differences in personality of staff even influence the form of reaction that an employee may have to the attempt of social engineering exploits [50]. Reference [51] highlights neuroticism, which is the affinity to experience intimidating emotions easily, such as anxiety, anger, vulnerability, or depression, as being highly correlated to chances of responding to phishing emails.…”

“…The trusting nature of human beings can also be a huge challenge to awareness programs against social engineering threats. Physical and data security of individuals and organizations needs to be taken more seriously by individuals in an organization [48][49][50]. Because of the amount of trust individuals have in their organizations' IT infrastructures, employees do not consider security as a threat.…”

“…The trust challenge of staff can be prevented through effective and comprehensive information security training and awareness programs. However, in some cases, organizations provide limited resources to train their staff to cover the minimum harms that can be caused by social engineering attacks [50]. The concept of not needing more security training has become a major factor that challenges effective safety against social engineering threats.…”

Describing K-12 online teachers’ online professional development opportunities for students with disabilities

“…Administrators, functioning as representatives of Local Educational Authorities (LEAs) guarantee funding for the services promised in the IEP. In terms of the administrator's role in providing professional development for teachers of students with disabilities, Pazey and Cole (2013) suggested that administrators need to know about (1) social justice, (2) legalities, (3) support models, (4) referral, and (5) evaluation to effectively serve as an LEA.…”