Pub Date : 2024-08-30DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268582
Jolien Delafontaine, Laura Fluyt, Koen Aesaert, Sara Nijs
Effective teaching plays a vital role in promoting student learning across various domains, including reading comprehension which is an indispensable skill for all learners but difficult to master for most. Recent studies have shown that the effectiveness of teaching is context-specific, influenced by both student characteristics and the classroom setting. These variations in effectiveness underscore the differential impact of teaching behaviors across classroom settings, so-called contingency effects. Therefore, this scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature on effective teaching focused on improving reading comprehension outcomes for students with special educational needs (SEN). The primary objective is to identify both general and contingency effects, looking specifically at differences in effective teaching between inclusive, intermediate, and special education settings. Teaching behaviors were categorized according to three dimensions of the Great Teaching Toolkit: creating a supportive environment (CSE), maximizing opportunities to learn (MOL), and activating hard thinking (AHT). In total, 20 studies that met the inclusion criteria were reviewed. Most of these studies examined the effect of multiple teaching behaviors on reading comprehension outcomes of students with learning disabilities ( n = 13) in intermediate settings ( n = 10). Overall, many positive effects were found for teaching behaviors classified within the AHT dimension. However, investigating the effectiveness of CSE and MOL, a more nuanced and mixed picture was identified with some studies indicating nonsignificant effects on reading comprehension. Contingency effects were observed for the AHT dimension, favoring intermediate settings.
{"title":"Effectively Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students With Special Educational Needs in Inclusive, Intermediate and Special Classroom Settings: A Scoping Review","authors":"Jolien Delafontaine, Laura Fluyt, Koen Aesaert, Sara Nijs","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268582","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268582","url":null,"abstract":"Effective teaching plays a vital role in promoting student learning across various domains, including reading comprehension which is an indispensable skill for all learners but difficult to master for most. Recent studies have shown that the effectiveness of teaching is context-specific, influenced by both student characteristics and the classroom setting. These variations in effectiveness underscore the differential impact of teaching behaviors across classroom settings, so-called contingency effects. Therefore, this scoping review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature on effective teaching focused on improving reading comprehension outcomes for students with special educational needs (SEN). The primary objective is to identify both general and contingency effects, looking specifically at differences in effective teaching between inclusive, intermediate, and special education settings. Teaching behaviors were categorized according to three dimensions of the Great Teaching Toolkit: creating a supportive environment (CSE), maximizing opportunities to learn (MOL), and activating hard thinking (AHT). In total, 20 studies that met the inclusion criteria were reviewed. Most of these studies examined the effect of multiple teaching behaviors on reading comprehension outcomes of students with learning disabilities ( n = 13) in intermediate settings ( n = 10). Overall, many positive effects were found for teaching behaviors classified within the AHT dimension. However, investigating the effectiveness of CSE and MOL, a more nuanced and mixed picture was identified with some studies indicating nonsignificant effects on reading comprehension. Contingency effects were observed for the AHT dimension, favoring intermediate settings.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142100650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-28DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268747
Lindsey Kaler, Jessica Markham, Nathan D. Jones
In this systematic literature review, we examine the corpus of empirical studies in education that use administrative data (i.e., population-level data) to describe and estimate the impacts of service delivery models for specially designed instruction on outcomes for students identified with special education needs. We focus on studies that use quantitative data analysis—either descriptive or causal—to answer questions about the relationship between special education service delivery models and student outcomes. We analyze seven studies, each of which finds a positive relationship between more time spent in general education classrooms and outcomes for students with disabilities (SWDs). In our analysis, we discuss the affordances and limitations of this type of analysis and opportunities for the field to expand data collection and analysis of population-level data in a way that better illuminates the state of special education services, both in the present and longitudinally, for SWDs.
{"title":"Service Delivery Models and Outcomes for Students With Disabilities","authors":"Lindsey Kaler, Jessica Markham, Nathan D. Jones","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268747","url":null,"abstract":"In this systematic literature review, we examine the corpus of empirical studies in education that use administrative data (i.e., population-level data) to describe and estimate the impacts of service delivery models for specially designed instruction on outcomes for students identified with special education needs. We focus on studies that use quantitative data analysis—either descriptive or causal—to answer questions about the relationship between special education service delivery models and student outcomes. We analyze seven studies, each of which finds a positive relationship between more time spent in general education classrooms and outcomes for students with disabilities (SWDs). In our analysis, we discuss the affordances and limitations of this type of analysis and opportunities for the field to expand data collection and analysis of population-level data in a way that better illuminates the state of special education services, both in the present and longitudinally, for SWDs.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142089966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-27DOI: 10.1177/07419325241270044
Tuan D. Nguyen, Elizabeth Bettini, Allison F. Gilmour, Christopher Redding
U.S. schools have long experienced shortages of special education teachers (SETs), challenging the nation’s capacity to ensure qualified SETs for students eligible for special education services. Addressing SET shortages requires preparation programs supply sufficient numbers of new SETs to meet demand, yet prior research provides few insights into trends in the supply of new SETs. Thus, we examined how the supply of new SETs changed over time in relation to the characteristics of teacher preparation programs. We find decreasing supply of new SETs nationally, primarily driven by reduced supply of new SETs from small colleges. Results suggest the current SET shortage may be connected, in previously undocumented ways, to the broader decline of small- and mid-sized colleges. Finally, findings indicate the nation may be far more dependent on for-profit institutions for supplying new SETs, which has implications for the production of SETs by alternative certification and traditional teacher preparation programs.
长期以来，美国学校一直面临着特殊教育教师（SET）短缺的问题，这对美国确保为符合特殊教育服务资格的学生提供合格的特殊教育教师的能力提出了挑战。解决特殊教育教师短缺问题需要预备课程提供足够数量的新特殊教育教师以满足需求，但先前的研究对新特殊教育教师的供应趋势几乎没有提供深入的见解。因此，我们研究了随着时间的推移，新的特殊教育教师的供应是如何随着教师培养项目的特点而变化的。我们发现，在全国范围内，新 SET 的供应量在不断减少，主要原因是来自小型学院的新 SET 供应量减少。研究结果表明，当前的 SET 短缺可能与中小型学院的广泛衰落有关，而这种衰落是以前未曾记录在案的。最后，研究结果表明，全国可能更依赖于营利性机构来提供新的教师专业技术人员，这对通过替代认证和传统教师准备课程来培养教师专业技术人员产生了影响。
{"title":"Examining the Supply of New Special Educators: Variations by Institutional Characteristics and For-Profit Status","authors":"Tuan D. Nguyen, Elizabeth Bettini, Allison F. Gilmour, Christopher Redding","doi":"10.1177/07419325241270044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241270044","url":null,"abstract":"U.S. schools have long experienced shortages of special education teachers (SETs), challenging the nation’s capacity to ensure qualified SETs for students eligible for special education services. Addressing SET shortages requires preparation programs supply sufficient numbers of new SETs to meet demand, yet prior research provides few insights into trends in the supply of new SETs. Thus, we examined how the supply of new SETs changed over time in relation to the characteristics of teacher preparation programs. We find decreasing supply of new SETs nationally, primarily driven by reduced supply of new SETs from small colleges. Results suggest the current SET shortage may be connected, in previously undocumented ways, to the broader decline of small- and mid-sized colleges. Finally, findings indicate the nation may be far more dependent on for-profit institutions for supplying new SETs, which has implications for the production of SETs by alternative certification and traditional teacher preparation programs.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142084687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-27DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268563
Stephanie Al Otaiba, Wilhelmina van Dijk, Jennifer Stewart, Ashley A. Edwards, Dayna Russell Freudenthal, Jill Allor, Christopher Schatschneider, Paul Yovanoff
There is limited research with mixed results about student reading gains in Grades 1 to 5 within typical school-implemented Response to Intervention (RTI). As part of a larger study, we used school-administered screening data on a widely used computer-adaptive test (Measures of Academic Progress) to describe reading gains across one academic year. We observed relatively faster growth in the first grade than in the later grades. We found stronger growth for students not identified with a disability relative to students with low or high-incidence disabilities or a 504 plan. We explored moderation of gains for students receiving tiered interventions based on administrators’ interviews about RTI implementation. We observed that better ratings of administrators’ articulation about using the evidence-aligned RTI components of progress monitoring, data-based decision-making, and Tier 2 interventions were related to greater gains for students receiving Tier 2 or 3 intervention. We discuss implications, limitations, and directions for future research.
{"title":"Measuring Elementary Student Reading Gain in the Context of School-Implemented Multitiered Systems of Support","authors":"Stephanie Al Otaiba, Wilhelmina van Dijk, Jennifer Stewart, Ashley A. Edwards, Dayna Russell Freudenthal, Jill Allor, Christopher Schatschneider, Paul Yovanoff","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268563","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268563","url":null,"abstract":"There is limited research with mixed results about student reading gains in Grades 1 to 5 within typical school-implemented Response to Intervention (RTI). As part of a larger study, we used school-administered screening data on a widely used computer-adaptive test (Measures of Academic Progress) to describe reading gains across one academic year. We observed relatively faster growth in the first grade than in the later grades. We found stronger growth for students not identified with a disability relative to students with low or high-incidence disabilities or a 504 plan. We explored moderation of gains for students receiving tiered interventions based on administrators’ interviews about RTI implementation. We observed that better ratings of administrators’ articulation about using the evidence-aligned RTI components of progress monitoring, data-based decision-making, and Tier 2 interventions were related to greater gains for students receiving Tier 2 or 3 intervention. We discuss implications, limitations, and directions for future research.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142084718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-14DOI: 10.1177/07419325241265972
Elizabeth A. Stevens, Emily Tanner, Megan H. Mowbray
This systematic review synthesizes the effects of mathematics vocabulary interventions on the mathematics outcomes of students with mathematics difficulty (MD) in Grades K through 12. We evaluated methodological rigor using three indicators: research design, implementation fidelity, and instruction in the counterfactual. Six peer-reviewed studies and three unpublished dissertations between 1990 and 2022 met inclusion criteria. Results showed mathematics vocabulary interventions improved students’ vocabulary knowledge, particularly when instruction was explicit with multiple opportunities to practice. Findings were less conclusive on whether improved mathematics vocabulary knowledge led to improved performance on related mathematics content. Results suggest mathematics vocabulary intervention is beneficial for higher-level mathematics reasoning, such as word-problem solving. The seven group design studies received an M rating of at least acceptable for methodological rigor, and one of two single-case studies met What Works Clearinghouse design standards without reservations. We highlight promising instructional practices implemented across studies that resulted in improved vocabulary outcomes.
本系统性综述综述了数学词汇干预对 K 至 12 年级数学困难（MD）学生数学成绩的影响。我们使用三个指标对方法的严谨性进行了评估：研究设计、实施保真度和反事实教学。1990 年至 2022 年间的六项经同行评审的研究和三篇未发表的论文符合纳入标准。结果显示，数学词汇干预提高了学生的词汇知识，尤其是在教学内容明确、有多次练习机会的情况下。至于数学词汇知识的提高是否会导致相关数学内容成绩的提高，研究结果则不太明确。研究结果表明，数学词汇干预有利于更高层次的数学推理，如单词问题的解决。七项小组设计研究在方法的严谨性方面获得了至少可接受的 M 评级，两项单一案例研究中的一项毫无保留地达到了 What Works Clearinghouse 的设计标准。我们重点介绍了在各项研究中实施的有前途的教学实践，这些实践改善了词汇教学效果。
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Mathematics Vocabulary Interventions for Students With or At-Risk for Mathematics Difficulty","authors":"Elizabeth A. Stevens, Emily Tanner, Megan H. Mowbray","doi":"10.1177/07419325241265972","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241265972","url":null,"abstract":"This systematic review synthesizes the effects of mathematics vocabulary interventions on the mathematics outcomes of students with mathematics difficulty (MD) in Grades K through 12. We evaluated methodological rigor using three indicators: research design, implementation fidelity, and instruction in the counterfactual. Six peer-reviewed studies and three unpublished dissertations between 1990 and 2022 met inclusion criteria. Results showed mathematics vocabulary interventions improved students’ vocabulary knowledge, particularly when instruction was explicit with multiple opportunities to practice. Findings were less conclusive on whether improved mathematics vocabulary knowledge led to improved performance on related mathematics content. Results suggest mathematics vocabulary intervention is beneficial for higher-level mathematics reasoning, such as word-problem solving. The seven group design studies received an M rating of at least acceptable for methodological rigor, and one of two single-case studies met What Works Clearinghouse design standards without reservations. We highlight promising instructional practices implemented across studies that resulted in improved vocabulary outcomes.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141986216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-12DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268867
Douglas Fuchs
In this commentary, I reflect on the papers in this special issue that describe inclusion in five countries. More specifically, I highlight several themes among the authors’ descriptions of both progress and challenges as their respective countries try to provide students with disabilities a stronger, more inclusive educational experience. I compare and contrast this effort to efforts in the United States to properly understand and implement an inclusive education that benefits all children and youth with disabilities.
{"title":"The Elusive Meaning of Inclusive Education in Five Countries—and the United States","authors":"Douglas Fuchs","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268867","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268867","url":null,"abstract":"In this commentary, I reflect on the papers in this special issue that describe inclusion in five countries. More specifically, I highlight several themes among the authors’ descriptions of both progress and challenges as their respective countries try to provide students with disabilities a stronger, more inclusive educational experience. I compare and contrast this effort to efforts in the United States to properly understand and implement an inclusive education that benefits all children and youth with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141974290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-12DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268856
Christopher J. Lemons, Sharon Vaughn, Abdulaziz Alsolami
The United States will soon recognize the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. Considering the past 50 years in special education, we organized this special issue of Remedial and Special Education focused on inclusive education of students with disabilities in international contexts. Just as a broad array of educators in the US have grappled with improving how the education system might most effectively include students with disabilities, educational leaders in various countries across the globe have been addressing the same question: How can we design inclusive education for students with disabilities that effectively meets their needs? The manuscripts included in this special issue represent five countries—India, Japan, Norway, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea. Each paper presents background on the inclusion of students with disabilities within the focus country and highlights recent advances in and proposes next steps for policy, practice, and research. Collectively, we hope the issue expands readers’ thinking about what special education could be, encourages our community to set specific goals for our next ‘milestone anniversary,’ and ignites conversations about the specific steps we need to accomplish our goals.
{"title":"Inclusive Special Education: What Do We Mean and What Do We Want?","authors":"Christopher J. Lemons, Sharon Vaughn, Abdulaziz Alsolami","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268856","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268856","url":null,"abstract":"The United States will soon recognize the 50<jats:sup>th</jats:sup> anniversary of the signing of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. Considering the past 50 years in special education, we organized this special issue of Remedial and Special Education focused on inclusive education of students with disabilities in international contexts. Just as a broad array of educators in the US have grappled with improving how the education system might most effectively include students with disabilities, educational leaders in various countries across the globe have been addressing the same question: How can we design inclusive education for students with disabilities that effectively meets their needs? The manuscripts included in this special issue represent five countries—India, Japan, Norway, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea. Each paper presents background on the inclusion of students with disabilities within the focus country and highlights recent advances in and proposes next steps for policy, practice, and research. Collectively, we hope the issue expands readers’ thinking about what special education could be, encourages our community to set specific goals for our next ‘milestone anniversary,’ and ignites conversations about the specific steps we need to accomplish our goals.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141974303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-07DOI: 10.1177/07419325241268858
Allison F. Gilmour, Leanna Stiefel
The purpose of this special issue is to explain the advantages of using administrative data generated by states and school districts for research in special education, illustrate their use in special education policy studies, and encourage more such analyses. In this introduction to the special issue, we define and distinguish large administrative data sets, discuss types of special education policy questions that are appropriate for addressing with administrative data, provide a high-level overview of methods that are commonly used with such data, discuss examples of published analyses that use each method, note some of the limitations to using administrative data, and briefly introduce articles in the special issue.
{"title":"Leveraging Large Administrative Data for Special Education Policy Analysis: Recent Contributions and Future Directions","authors":"Allison F. Gilmour, Leanna Stiefel","doi":"10.1177/07419325241268858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241268858","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this special issue is to explain the advantages of using administrative data generated by states and school districts for research in special education, illustrate their use in special education policy studies, and encourage more such analyses. In this introduction to the special issue, we define and distinguish large administrative data sets, discuss types of special education policy questions that are appropriate for addressing with administrative data, provide a high-level overview of methods that are commonly used with such data, discuss examples of published analyses that use each method, note some of the limitations to using administrative data, and briefly introduce articles in the special issue.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141904267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/07419325241265979
Lisa Ruble, Christopher J. Cormier, John McGrew, David M. Dueber
Special education teacher (SET) stress and burnout is a significant problem. A total of 490 special education teachers were surveyed across the United States. The purpose of this study was to (a) assess and compare three measures of burnout/work engagement, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) and (b) examine change over the course of a school year that coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant measurement quality issues were observed for the MBI and OLBI, including questionable convergent validity. Burnout of SETs was found to be highly stable for the MBI and OLBI. Teachers experienced little mean change in burnout over the school year, and perceptions of the effects of COVID and demographic and school variables were generally not predictive of change in burnout for any measure. Implications are discussed.
特殊教育教师（SET）的压力和职业倦怠是一个重大问题。本研究对全美共 490 名特殊教育教师进行了调查。本研究的目的是：(a) 评估和比较三种职业倦怠/工作投入度量表，即马斯拉赫职业倦怠量表（Maslach Burnout Inventory，MBI）、奥登堡职业倦怠量表（Oldenburg Burnout Inventory，OLBI）和乌得勒支工作投入度量表（Utrecht Work Engagement Scale，UWES）；(b) 研究在 COVID-19 大流行的一个学年中的变化。观察发现，MBI 和 OLBI 存在严重的测量质量问题，包括值得怀疑的收敛有效性。在 MBI 和 OLBI 中，发现 SET 的职业倦怠高度稳定。在整个学年中，教师倦怠感的平均变化很小，对 COVID 影响的看法以及人口统计学和学校变量通常不能预测任何测量指标的倦怠感变化。本文讨论了其影响。
{"title":"A Comparison of Measurement of Stability and Predictors of Special Education Burnout and Work Engagement","authors":"Lisa Ruble, Christopher J. Cormier, John McGrew, David M. Dueber","doi":"10.1177/07419325241265979","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241265979","url":null,"abstract":"Special education teacher (SET) stress and burnout is a significant problem. A total of 490 special education teachers were surveyed across the United States. The purpose of this study was to (a) assess and compare three measures of burnout/work engagement, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) and (b) examine change over the course of a school year that coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. Significant measurement quality issues were observed for the MBI and OLBI, including questionable convergent validity. Burnout of SETs was found to be highly stable for the MBI and OLBI. Teachers experienced little mean change in burnout over the school year, and perceptions of the effects of COVID and demographic and school variables were generally not predictive of change in burnout for any measure. Implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141862102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/07419325241267240
Jessica Mercado-Anazagasty, Anacary Ramirez, Laura A. Alba, Austin H. Johnson
This study aimed to explore the experiences of parents ( N = 177; Spanish-speaking and English-speaking parents) of children with disabilities navigating the special education process. This descriptive study collected quantitative and qualitative data through an electronic survey. Results describe Spanish- and English-speaking parent’s experience during Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, challenges in attending IEP meetings, special education knowledge, participation during IEP meetings, feelings of discrimination, parental stress, and dissatisfaction with special education services. Spanish-speaking parents reported less special education rights knowledge and feeling more discrimination at IEP meetings in comparison to English speakers and reported language barriers and inadequate interpretation services as challenges to attending an IEP meeting. Findings highlight the need for equitable parent-school partnerships to support and empower all families. Awareness of the unique experiences of Spanish-speaking families may further equitable school efforts to serve this population and other linguistically diverse parents.
{"title":"Exploring Differences in Spanish- and English-Speaking Parents’ Experiences With Individualized Education Program Meetings","authors":"Jessica Mercado-Anazagasty, Anacary Ramirez, Laura A. Alba, Austin H. Johnson","doi":"10.1177/07419325241267240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241267240","url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to explore the experiences of parents ( N = 177; Spanish-speaking and English-speaking parents) of children with disabilities navigating the special education process. This descriptive study collected quantitative and qualitative data through an electronic survey. Results describe Spanish- and English-speaking parent’s experience during Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, challenges in attending IEP meetings, special education knowledge, participation during IEP meetings, feelings of discrimination, parental stress, and dissatisfaction with special education services. Spanish-speaking parents reported less special education rights knowledge and feeling more discrimination at IEP meetings in comparison to English speakers and reported language barriers and inadequate interpretation services as challenges to attending an IEP meeting. Findings highlight the need for equitable parent-school partnerships to support and empower all families. Awareness of the unique experiences of Spanish-speaking families may further equitable school efforts to serve this population and other linguistically diverse parents.","PeriodicalId":48042,"journal":{"name":"Remedial and Special Education","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141862347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：